J.3-A_ESRD_Proposal_Instructions_and_Evaluation_Criteria.docx

Attachment J.3-A

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

General Instructions for Task Order 0003 - “End Stage Renal Disease Quality Measure Development and Maintenance Support”

The following establishes the acceptable minimum requirements for the format and content of proposals.

A. The Offeror’s proposal submission shall consist of:

Each of the parts shall be separate and complete in itself so the evaluation of one may be accomplished independently of evaluation of the other. The technical proposal must not contain reference to price/cost; however, resource information such as data concerning labor hours and categories, subcontracts, etc., may be contained in the technical proposal so that your understanding of the scope of the work may be evaluated.

B. Question Submission:

All communications and questions concerning this Task Order Request for Proposal shall be submitted electronically via email and shall be received by the Contract Specialist by 3:00 p.m. Wednesday, June 5, 2013. CMS will answer relevant questions by amendment to this solicitation, with copies of both the questions and answers being supplied to all prospective Offerors via FedBizOpps, without reference as to the originating source. Questions submitted by telephone or verbally will not be honored.

As soon as an Offeror is aware of any problems or ambiguities in interpreting the specifications, terms and conditions, instructions or evaluation criteria of this solicitation, the Contracting Office shall be notified.

Offerors shall submit any questions they may have via electronic mail (E-mail) in the form of an electronic file attachment in at least Microsoft Word 2007 format to: MIDS_2013@cms.hhs.gov. The subject line of the submission shall specify Task Order 0003 questions.

Questions shall be submitted in the following format using Attachment J.6 (Do not use any elaborate features such as indexing, tables, columns, etc.)

Submission of Questions shall include at a minimum: Company Name, Address, Point of Contact and Phone Number and for questions submitted. The Offeror shall provide:

1. Statement of Work (SOW) section number or solicitation section being referenced;

2. Title of the SOW or solicitation section; and

3. Complete description of the question.

C. Intent to Submit a Proposal Submission:

Intent to Submit a Proposal: The Offeror shall indicate its intent to submit a proposal on the Task Order by June 17, 2013. This notice shall be submitted via e-mail with the subject title “MIDS Intent to Submit a Proposal for Task Order 0003” to the following address: MIDS_2013@cms.hhs.gov.

Please be advised that intent to submit a proposal is not binding on the Offeror and is for planning/scheduling purposes only. In addition, an Offeror that submits a negative intent to bid response is not precluded from actually submitting a proposal.

D. Proposals Submission:

For each proposal, the contractor shall submit:

· 1 hard-copy original plus 4 hard copies of Volume I Business Proposal;

· 4 electronic copy of Volume I Business Proposal on CD ROM;

· 1 hard-copy originals plus 4 hard copies of Volume II Technical Proposal;

· 4 electronic copies of Volume II Technical Proposal on CD ROM;

· 1 hard-copy originals plus 2 hard copies of Volume III Conflict of Interest Proposal;

· 2 electronic copies of Volume III Conflict of Interest Proposal on CD ROM.

Each hard copy and each CD ROM must be clearly labeled on its face or cover with the name of the organization submitting the proposal, the task order number and the title of the project for which the proposal is submitted.

All hard copy proposals shall be in locking 3 ring binders. A binder cover sheet shall be affixed to each volume.

Proposals shall be mailed or hand-delivered so that they are received by Kimberly Tatum, Contracting Officer, no later than 2:00 PM local prevailing time on June 27, 2013. The following address information is provided:

Mailing and Fed-Ex/UPS Address: Hand Delivery Address:

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Mailstop B3-30-03 7111 Security Boulevard7500 Security Boulevard Baltimore, MD 21244 Baltimore, MD 21244-1850 Attention: Kim Tatum, Contracting Officer (410) 786-7440

NOTE: Please be advised that CMS Security Guards will not accept proposals for CMS staff. If you are hand delivering your proposal, please contact Kim Tatum at Kimberly.Tatum@cms.hhs.gov at least 24-hours in advance of your anticipated delivery date. Proposal delivery must be made to the exact location stated in this solicitation on or before the date and time specified. The proposal is not considered to be delivered until it is in the hands of the Contracting Officer.

Proposals delivered by a mail carrier service other than the U.S. Postal Service or Federal Express are not accepted in the CMS mailroom and, therefore, Offerors’ proposals may not be delivered timely to the location and person specified in this solicitation. Offerors are advised to take that possibility into consideration in determining when and how a proposal must be received at the specified location to meet the date and time requirements

E. Award Description: CMS intends to award a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) Task Order for this effort. However, the Contracting Officer retains the right to award any other type of Task Order pricing arrangement.

F. Period of Performance

The period of performance for this task order has a base period of twelve (12) months from date of contract award with four (4) twelve (12) month option periods.

BUSINESS PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

A written business proposal is required for the Task Order. The number of pages for the business proposal is unlimited. The Offeror shall submit, at a minimum, a cost or price proposal supported by cost and pricing data adequate to establish the reasonableness of the total proposed costs for one (1) base period and for four (4) one (1) year optional periods.

The Offerors shall submit the following information in its written business proposal:

A. Direct Labor: Include all direct labor categories broken out by individuals, to be utilized on the Task Order. For each labor category please show the “number of labor hours times hourly labor rate equals resultant total dollar amount” by year. Subcontract direct labor shall be shown in the same manner, however, under the subcontract line item.

B. Fringe Benefits (as appropriate): Please provide the fringe benefit calculations applicable to the Task Order. If the fringe benefit rates in Section G of the umbrella contract have changed, please provide a copy of the most current rate agreement so that we can adjust the umbrella contract accordingly. Provide detailed breakdown separately for the Prime Offeror and Subcontractors as well as one overall summary table of items and cost. The proposed labor positions must directly track to the Technical Proposal and must be essential to the success of the work. Position titles and salaries should correlate with www.salary.com.

C. Subcontracts and Consultants (as appropriate): The Contractor’s proposal shall include supporting documentation regarding the rationale, methodology and basis for how the proposed costs were developed. In addition, the following subcontract information shall be evaluated:

1. The subcontract agreement which includes, at a minimum:

a. The supplies or services to be subcontracted, i.e., SOW;

b. Identification of the type of subcontract to be used;

c. Proposed subcontract price; and,

d. Flow down of appropriate FAR and prime contract clause from prime contractor.

2. Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data; as appropriate,

3. Subcontract Negotiation Memorandum reflecting:

a. The principal elements of the subcontract price negotiations;

b. The most significant considerations controlling establishment of initial or revised prices;

c. The reason cost or pricing data were or were not required;

d. The extent, if any, to which the Contractor relied on the subcontractor’s cost or pricing data in determining the price objective and in negotiating the final price;

e. The extent to which it was recognized in the negotiation that the subcontractor’s cost and pricing data were not accurate, complete or current; the action taken by the Contractor and the subcontract; and the effect of any such defective data on the total price negotiated;

f. The reasons for any significant difference between the Contractor’s price objective and the price negotiated; and,

g. A complete explanation of the incentive fee or profit plan when incentives are used. The explanation shall identify each critical performance element, management decision used to quantify each incentive element, reasons for the incentives, and a summary of all trade-off possibilities considered.

4. Extent to which adequate price competition was obtained, or justification for its absence.

5. Statement as to whether the proposed subcontractor is on the List of Parties Excluded from Federal Procurement and Non-procurement Programs.

Note: All proposed subcontractors shall submit a complete cost proposal in the same format as the Contractor’s cost proposal. Subcontractors may submit their business proposal spreadsheet showing the breakdown of costs to CMS in a separately sealed package.

D. Travel: All travel costs proposed shall be reimbursed on a cost reimbursement basis in accordance with the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR). The Contractor shall consolidate travel costs into one line item. However, a separate excel spreadsheet shall be provided for travel cost breakdown, to include number of trips, mileage, per diem, air fare, miscellaneous expense, etc. The Contractor shall provide a brief explanation of how travel costs are reimbursed to employees within its organization, i.e. per diem allowance versus submitting receipts, etc.

E. Other Direct Costs (ODCs): These include materials, equipment, etc. The Contractor shall consolidate ODCs into one line item. However, a separate excel spreadsheet shall be provided to breakdown ODCs. The schedule shall provide a detailed itemization of each ODC. The Contractor shall also provide rationale for the need for each item of ODC.

F. G&A/Indirect Costs (as appropriate): The Contractor shall provide the indirect cost rate percentages used for the Task Order assumption. In addition, if the indirect cost rates in Section G of the contract have changed, the Contractor shall provide a copy of the most current indirect cost rate agreement.

G. Leave (as appropriate): The Contractor shall provide the leave rate percentages used for the Task Order assumption. In addition, if the leave rates in Section G of the contract have changed, the Contractor shall provide a copy of the most current leave rate agreement.

H. Fee: The Contractor shall provide each fee separately along with the relative percentages on the business proposal spreadsheet.

I. Property: It is DHHS policy that Contractors provide all equipment, materials, facilities, etc., necessary for performance of a contract except for those items defined as government furnished property in the Statement of Work.

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

A written technical proposal is required for the Task Order. The five (5) sections combined shall be no more than thirty five (35) single-spaced (single-sided) pages. Type font should be no smaller than Times New Roman 12 point and all page margins must be at least one (1) inch. The 35 pages may be allocated across sections 1 thru 5 as the offeror may determine.

Technical Proposal Format:

Technical Approach Past Performance

A. Technical Approach

Proposals which merely offer to conduct the work in accordance with or to meet the Government’s requirements as set forth in the Task Order Statement of Work will not be eligible for award. The proposal must explain the proposed technical approach in conjunction with the project objectives, the tasks to be performed, and the expected outcomes (and/or deliverables).

1. Environmental Scan and Empirical Review.

a. Describe the relationship between Environmental Scans and Empirical Reviews to the development or reevaluation of Quality Measures.

b. Describe the Quality Measure Development and Re-Evaluation Life Cycle.

c. Describe the Environmental Scan and Empirical Review methods and approach.

2. Quality Measure Development and Re-Evaluation.

a. Describe the role of Technical Expert Panels in developing and/or re-evaluating Quality Measures.

b. Describe the use of standardized measure selection criteria.

c. Describe the quality measure development and reevaluation process in relation to national priorities, including the application of Electronic Health Records and Meaningful Use criteria.

d. Describe data sources particularly those related to electronic Clinical Quality Measure (eCQMs) and ESRD clinical and administrative data

3. Instrument/Item Development.

a. Describe instrument and data item information technology standards and how these affect development or modification of existing health assessment instruments or other data collection vehicles.

b. Describe the approach for supporting instrument and data item development and maintenance.

4. Testing/Validation

a. Describe the statistical standards the Offeror has relative to validation, risk adjustment and risk adjustment models, reliability, etc.

b. Describe role of validation in measure development, measure maintenance, and implementation in relevant programs

c. Describe prior experience in performing field tests, dry runs, etc.

5. Implementation & Production

a. Describe the process which the Offeror would employ to implement health assessment instruments or other data collection vehicles into existing systems.

b. Describe experience, process and minimum statistical standards in the calculating and providing public reporting of quality measures.

c. Describe processes for quality assurance of data calculations and measure production

d. Describe processes for coordination with other relevant contractors

e. Explain how your organization will apply LEAN methodologies (or an alternate reasonable approach) to accomplish the tasks, requirements and sub-tasks as described in the Statement of Work.

f. Explain the organization’s experience and application of LEAN methodologies (or an alternate reasonable approach) to the proposed business processes.

B. Past Performance (Page count: unlimited but limited to the past 3 years of past performance)

1. The Offeror shall demonstrate satisfactory performance on current and completed contracts. For purposes of this section, contracts referenced shall be related to the Statement of Work. Offerors shall submit the following information as part of their proposal for both the Offeror and proposed significant subcontractors (“significant” is defined as those subcontractors who are performing at least 25% of the contract effort).

2. A list of all contracts and/or subcontracts for same or similar work (completed and/or currently in progress) for the prime contractor and any subcontractors for the last three (3) years.

Contracts listed may include those entered into with the Federal Government, agencies of state Governments and commercial customers.

3. CMS utilizes the Contractor Past Performance Retrieval System (CPARS) for recording and storing all CMS Contractor performance evaluations. CMS will access the CPARS for all relevant CMS performance history, if available. However, the Offeror must identify for CMS in its written proposal, which evaluations are being referenced for this solicitation.

When providing non-CPARS information, the Contractor shall provide the following:

4. A joint venture having no past performance history itself may provide references based on the constituent companies. In addition, Offerors having no organizational past performance record may provide references for proposed “key personnel.”

5. Past Performance information will be used for both the responsibility determination and as an evaluation factor against which Offerors’ relative rankings will be compared to assure best value to the Government. Attachment J.5, Past Performance Questionnaire, must be submitted directly by the references listed in your proposal. Attachment J.5 includes a sample cover letter and the questionnaire that should be submitted to each reference. References shall be asked to submit their responses directly to the Contracting Officer no later than 2:00 PM EST June 27, 2013. References other than those identified by the Offeror may be contacted by the Government with the information received used in the evaluation of the Offeror’s past performance. Past performance responses from those individuals/entities may be used in the evaluation of the Offeror’s past performance.

C. Key Personnel and Essential Staff

The Offeror shall define the responsibilities and qualifications/prior experience to do the proposed duties of each Key Personnel and Essential Staff. The Key Personnel shall include a Program/Project Manager as well as the Principal Investigator. In addition, the Offeror will indicate which, if any are subcontractors. The Offeror will indicate roles fulfilled by Key Personnel. The offeror should provide information on manpower to support project management needs, key personnel experience with public reporting as well as expertise in a broad spectrum of issues-

D. Management Plan and Corporate Capacity

1. Individual Task Order needs will dictate specific management, quality assurance and staffing plans, but the Offeror shall describe a reasonable approach to spanning all settings of care and domains of care, taking into consideration that individual Task Order needs will dictate specific management, quality assurance and staffing plans.

2. Discuss how you propose to provide an efficient and effective proposal to maintain communications and coordination with Government representatives to assure maximum effectiveness and minimum interference with Agency operations.

3. Discuss in appropriate detail all lines of authority and communication for the proposed organization.

4. Address the method to be employed for obtaining labor for additional work.

5. Clearly identify and discuss the extent to which work will be accomplished by subcontract, based on the Task Order Statement of Work. Work to be performed by the subcontractor should include a detailed rationale.

6. Describe methods and processes for tracking project progress, risks, and issues.

7. Provide a clear communication strategy.

8. Provide a plan for completing public reporting of ESRD quality measures beginning in January 2014.

E. Small Business Utilization (Not include in page count)

Small Businesses for NAICS code 541690 proposing on this solicitation shall be exempt from this evaluation criterion.

In order to obtain credit under Section M, Small Business (SB) Utilization evaluation factor, the Offeror shall address the following: (see below). Any proposal identifying SB participation must document that the concern proposed has been certified by the SBA or demonstrates that the concern meets the size standard related to the NAICS Code related to the work being performed by the subcontractor. The Offeror must show the extent of firm commitments to use SB concerns, how the concern will be actively involved in tasks awarded under the resulting IDIQ contract over its entire life, and the complexity and variety of the work the concerns would be expected to perform.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

Volume III shall include the following:

TAB A: Organizational Conflict of Interest – Summary List of Contracts The Offerors or Contractors must disclose all contracts, both government (local, state and federal) and non-government currently held with CMS, other government health care agencies, or with non-government entities, as a Prime and/or as a Subcontractor, for itself, its parent company, subsidiaries or other affiliated entities. For each Task Order, Offerors or contractors must provide any additional information that differs from the Umbrella IDIQ Organizational Conflict of Interest- Summary List of Contracts, Section L.17. If the following information duplicates any of the information from the Umbrella IDIQ, your response may refer to your proposed response for the base:

(a) Identify contract as a Prime, Subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary or other affiliated entity

(b) Contract Number

(c) Period of Performance

(d) Point of Contact (Project Officer and Contracting Officer)

(e) Contract Amount

(f) Short Description of Work or Service Performed

(g) For each contact listed under this category, the Offeror or contractor must provide a statement to the effect whether or not the identified entity has an actual, potential or apparent organizational conflict of interest (OCI) for each OCI type: 1) Unequal Access to Information, 2) Biased Ground Rule, and/ or 3) Impaired Objectivity. If an actual, potential or apparent OCI is identified, then the Offeror or contractor must submit a mitigation plan.

All proposed subcontractor(s) must disclose to the Prime contractor all contracts, both government (local, state and Federal) and non-government, currently held as Prime and/or as a Subcontractor, at the same level of detail required under (a) through (g) as stated above.

Sample Disclosure Format for TAB A

*If answer in block (g) is “yes”, see TAB A paragraph (g) for instructions (i.e., mitigation plan).

TAB B: Conflict of Interest – Information and Detail In order to be eligible for award of a Task Order, the Government must ensure that an Offeror or contractor is free, to the greatest extent possible, of all conflicts of interest. Therefore, the Offeror or contractor is required to submit the disclosure of information contained in Section H.2 Conflict of Interest Certificate, in order to be considered for award. Failure to submit the required Conflict of Interest Certificate information may deem an Offeror’s or contractor’s proposal to be non-responsive to the solicitation.

Examples of methods an Offeror or contractor may use to mitigate conflicts of interest, including conflicts created as a result of the financial relationships of officers, directors and managers within the organization are provided below. The examples are not intended to be an exhaustive list of all the possible methods to mitigate conflicts of interest. Further, the Contracting Officer is not obligated to approve a mitigation method that uses one or more of these examples. An Offeror’s or contractor’s method of mitigating conflicts of interest will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis during the proposal evaluation process.

TAB C: Compliance Program As required in the Umbrella IDIQ award, Section L.17, the Offeror or contractor must have in place a compliance program that is acceptable to CMS. The documentation required under the Umbrella award will be evaluated at the IDIQ level; however, the acceptability of the compliance program applies to this Task Order.

As stated in the Umbrella IDIQ, failure to submit the required documentation may deem the Offeror’s proposal to be non-responsive to this solicitation. For additional guidance, Offerors may reference the compliance guidance located at:

https://www.cms.gov/MedicareContractingReform/Downloads/compliance.pdf TAB C: Compliance Program Attestation In order to be eligible for award of a Task Order, the Offeror or contractor must have in place a compliance program that is acceptable to CMS. The compliance program shall cover the MIDs SOW. The Offeror or contractor shall submit a compliance program Attestation at the time of the proposal in the format specified by CMS.

TAB D: Contractor Integrity/Misconduct The acceptability of CMS’s review of all available information relating to administrative misconduct, under Section L.17 of the Umbrella IDIQ, including review of any and all available information relating to integrity violations, and contractual or administrative misconduct applies to this Task Order.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

BUSINESS PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

The business proposal will not be point scored. CMS will evaluate the Business Proposal to assess CMS' level of confidence in the Offeror's ability to deliver efficient, risk free performance at a fair and reasonable cost. CMS will evaluate cost in this procurement by evaluating the costs of the Task Order cost proposals, including indirect rate history and accounting system adequacy. Cost is not the most important evaluation factor. However, as the degree of the equality of the non-cost factors increase then cost may be the determining factor. Further, after evaluation of the other factors cost may be the deciding factor for selection, depending upon whether a highly evaluated technical proposal warrants the evaluated cost differential. Award will be made using cost-technical tradeoffs and will be made to the Offeror whose proposal represents the best value. CMS will conduct a cost realism analysis in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(d) on the cost proposal for the Task Order. Cost realism will be considered, if appropriate, when evaluating individual Task Orders for award among the qualified pool of IDIQ contractors.

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

Evaluation Criteria for the Task Order Award – The following technical evaluation criteria will be applied to the technical evaluation of each proposal. The Government will evaluate the factors listed below based on the Offeror’s written technical proposal. The written materials provided in the written Technical Proposal will be reviewed and scored with the respective sections.

TECHNICAL APPROACH EVALUATION

Offerors will be evaluated based on their technical approach to areas contained in the Task Order SOW including the extent to which the Offeror provides evidence of:

· The evaluation will consider the extent to which the offeror understands the background, purpose, and goals relative to CMS programs and our National Quality Strategy.

· The evaluation will consider the extent to which the offeror provides a clear understanding of the need for measure and instrument development, endorsement and maintenance, stakeholder input on national priorities and measure selection, and promotion of EHRs, as outlined in the Umbrella Task Domains.

· The Contractor must demonstrate specific experience and knowledge of the Consensus Endorsement Entity’s (currently, that is the National Quality Forum’s) endorsement process

· The Contractor must demonstrate knowledge of the Quality Incentive Program and Dialysis Facility Compare.

· The Contractor must demonstrate familiarity with existing ESRD quality measures owned and supported by CMS.

· The evaluation will consider proposed environmental scan strategy and conceptual framework strategies;

· The evaluation will consider identification of potential data analysis options, including their strengths, limitations, data sources, and feasibility;

· The Contractor must demonstrate potential measure development and testing barriers and challenges and mitigation plans;

· The Contractor must demonstrate selecting, convening and leading the technical expert panels; and criteria for selection of TEP members by area of expertise and a moderator; and questions for potential discussion at each of the technical expert panel meetings

· The Contractor must demonstrate strategies for communication, collaboration, and coordination of components internal and external to CMS, other contractors, and stakeholders.

· The evaluation will consider a plan for accessing national data required to support development and maintenance of ESRD quality measures

· The Contractor must demonstrate strategies for producing measures for quality reporting beginning with January 2014 Dialysis Facility Compare release

· The Contractor must demonstrate strategies for assuming responsibility for ongoing measure maintenance, development and consensus endorsement efforts

· The Contractor must demonstrate strategies for handoff from previous ESRD quality measure contractor regarding existing work processes and deliverables

PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

The Offeror will be evaluated on its past performance history. This should not be misconstrued as corporate experience. The Government’s evaluation will be a subjective assessment based on the past performance information obtained by the questionnaires. The evaluation of past performance will be based on the Offeror’s demonstrated ability, under contracts of a similar nature, scope, and complexity, to successfully meet the requirements of the Task Order SOW in this solicitation. CMS will also search on-line databases such as Duns and Bradstreet and the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS).

Offerors should note that CMS will evaluate the past performance of an Offeror based upon the past performance information contained in the initial Umbrella IDIQ proposal response to this solicitation, including past performance questionnaires. CMS may utilize information contained in CPARS or otherwise obtained from sources inside or outside of CMS. An Offeror that states it has no past performance history will neither be favorably nor unfavorably rated in regards to past performance.

KEY PERSONNEL AND ESSENTIAL STAFF EVALUATION

The evaluation will assess the proposed Project Directors’, support staffs’, and consultants’ relevant experience and qualifications for conducting the work described in the Task Order Statement of Work, including their expertise, education, experience, qualifications and training.

• Project team resumes/curricula vitae, per key staff member or consultant: Does the Offeror have the appropriate level of manpower to support CMS’ needs?

• If so, are the personnel appropriately credentialed to provide the greatest level of quality performance under this contract?

• Does the Offeror have experience in developing, endorsing and maintaining performance measures and convening multi-stakeholder groups?

• Is the Offeror familiar with CMS quality programs and their implementations?

• Does the Offeror provide sufficient manpower to support project management needs?

• Do the key personnel have experience with clinical quality measurement as well as expertise in a broad spectrum of issues-

MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CORPORATE CAPACITY EVALUATION

CMS will review the Offeror’s capability to execute the project effectively, including access to requisite resources including staff, expert consultants, computers and technical equipment.

CMS will review the work plan for specificity, nature of the responsibility, and authorities of key personnel and the extent to which the plan is comprehensive, specific and feasible.

Other criteria relative to the Project Management Plan and project timeline include:

• Does the Offeror have a justifiable and appropriate work plan that supports the needs of CMS and HHS?

• Does the Offeror have a process to develop timelines to communicate and take into account (relative to both effort and budget) adequate time for CMS advance review and clearance, legislative review and clearance and other key milestones?

• Does the Offeror have in depth and successful experience in developing, endorsing and maintaining performance measures and convening multi-stakeholder groups?

• Does the Offeror have a process for developing a comprehensive plan for management of the contract’s resources and coordinating with the Government Task Lead, including primary points of contact, regular status updates, and updating the work plan regularly?

SMALL BUSINESS UTILIZATION EVALUATION (not applicable to small businesses)

CMS will perform a subjective assessment based on consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances. The Government is seeking to determine whether the Offeror has demonstrated a commitment to use Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Businesses concerns for the work that it intends to perform as the prime Contractor.

Offerors will be evaluated on the following sub-factors:

• The extent to which small business (SB) and small disadvantaged business (SDB) concerns are specifically identified;

• The extent of an Offeror’s commitment to use SB and SDB concerns. Are subcontract arrangements already in place, letters of commitment, etc.? Is proof of SDB certification provided?

• The complexity and variety of the work SDB concerns are to perform. Greater weight will be given for arrangements where the SDB(s) are performing work of a greater variety and complexity.

• The realism of the proposal; and,

• The extent of participation of SDB concerns in terms of the value of the total acquisition.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST CERTIFICATION AND COMPLIANCE PROGRAM EVALUATION

Conflict of Interest Certificates will be reviewed in accordance with contract section H.2 and Section L.17 of the Umbrella IDIQ. The Government will review the Offeror’s or contractor’s Conflict of Interest (COI) submission of information required in Section H.2 and Section L.17 of the Umbrella IDIQ and make a determination if the Offeror or contractor meets the COI requirements. CMS will not enter into a Task Order contract with an entity that CMS determines has, or has the potential for, an unresolved organizational conflict of interest unless CMS determines that the risk can be sufficiently mitigated. If the Offeror’s or contractor’s proposal is determined to be in the Competitive Range and if the Contracting Officer determines a COI exists, the Offeror or contractor will be informed of the conflict and be provided an opportunity to submit clarifications before the final best value determination is made. Failure to submit the required Conflict of Interest Certificates will determine the Offeror or contractor to be non-responsive to the solicitation requirements and therefore, ineligible for award of the Task Order.

OCI Responsibility determinations will be made in accordance with FAR PART 9.

COMPLIANCE PROGRAM

The Offeror’s or contractor’s proposal will be evaluated to determine the degree to which its compliance program incorporates the elements, personnel, processes and procedures it intends to utilize to ensure that all Federal, State, local laws and regulations and all terms and conditions of the contract are observed by the Offeror or contractor and any of the Offeror’s or contractor’s business associate(s) or subcontractor(s) of the Offeror or contractor.

CONTRACTOR INTEGRITY/MISCONDUCT

CMS shall review the Offeror’s proposal to determine the relevance and severity of any misconduct and/or integrity identified.