Attachment_I_-_Instructions_for_Offerors.pdf

ATTACHMENT I

The following are additions to paragraph (b) of 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors:

SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

On letterhead or business stationary, the following information is required:

12. The offeror shall also submit the Business Management Questionnaire (Attachment V) and provide the contact information for a financial reference. The offeror shall utilize the

Sample Bank Notification Letter provided in Attachment VI, or a similar letter, to send to their bank references. Also, please provide a copy of the letter with your proposal;

13. If applicable, the offeror must submit a Subcontracting Plan (Attachment IV) along with their proposal;

14. Since the proposal is not submitted on the SF 1449, include a statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation.

Offerors that fail to furnish required representations or information, or reject the terms and conditions of the solicitation may be excluded from consideration.

Additionally, delete and replace paragraph (c) Period for acceptance of offers with: "The offeror agrees to hold its offer firm for 60 calendar days from the date specified for receipts of offers."

Lastly, the following sections, Content of Proposals, Evaluation of Proposals, and Administration are addendums to 52.212-1.

All proposals must be received at the following address of the issuing contracting office: Federal

Bureau of Prisons, National Acquisitions & Systems Section, 500 First Street, NW, Room 5005, Washington, DC 20534, Attention: Ronda J. Morrow. Proposals must be received no later than 12:00 p.m. EST. on Friday, September 19, 2014. Questions regarding this requirement may be directed in writing to Ronda J. Morrow, Contracting Officer, at rmorrow@bop.gov. The Contracting Officer may also be contacted by phone at (202) 616-6150.

BUREAU OF PRISONS MEDICAL CLAIMS ADJUDICATION ADDENDA TO

INSTRUCTIONS FOR OFFERORS

Proposals submitted in response to this RFP shall be formatted in accordance with the instructions provided in this section. Vendors shall furnish proposals in electronic versions. Proposals shall meet the following specifications:

CONTENT OF PROPOSALS

A. General – Applies to Entire Proposal

Paper proposals shall be separate bound volumes (spiral binding or 3-hole punch binders) in the quantities specified under the Technical Proposal heading. Paper proposals shall be submitted in two (2) separate, clearly-marked volumes; one for Price and Past Performance and one for

Technical and Experience.

Each volume should include an electronic copy in Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) on

CD-ROM. The offerors shall provide the paper proposals and an electronic version on CD-ROM to the address located in Block 9 on the first page of this solicitation and shall be received by the

Contracting Officer no later than the time and date shown on the SF 1449, First page, Block 8, unless a subsequent amendment is issued changing the due date.

Non-price factors (Technical, Experience and Past Performance), when combined, are significantly more important than Price. Between the non-price factors, Technical and

Experience are more important than Past Performance. Although Price is of lesser importance than Technical, Experience and Past Performance as these factors (non-price) become more equal in rating, the more important Price will become in selecting the best value for the Government.

All proposals shall be typewritten in 12-point font and double spaced, each PART shall be separately identified and each factor shall be individually tabbed within the volume.

B. Technical Proposal (One Original plus Two Copies)

The Contractor will provide a description of the Contractor’s resources and capabilities to perform the required services and address each section as specified in the Statement of Work

(SOW). The Contractor shall clearly describe the overall plan for organizing, managing, and delivering the various resources and services outlined in the SOW. All technical aspects of the

SOW must be addressed. The maximum number of pages that will be accepted for a submitted

Technical Proposal is limited to three hundred double-sided pages.

Technical Approach to Delivering Services

The Contractor must provide the name and contact information (phone number, fax number, e-mail address, and mailing address) of the person who will be responsible for resolving questions and/or issues that may arise during the course of the project.

C. Experience

The contractor must ensure medical claims are adjudicated in accordance with current National

Correct Coding Initiative edits in conjunction with Medicare/CMS claims processing guidelines and/or negotiated fee schedules, as applicable to underlying contracts.

The contractor shall also incorporate internal and systemic controls in the adjudications process to preclude duplicate payments and ensure that the BOP complies with the requirements of the

Prompt Payment Act and SFFAS.

The contractor must have specific experience in medical claims adjudication services required and requested in the SOW. The contractor shall have a minimum of five years of proven, past experiences in this field to perform the services in accordance to the SOW.

The contractor shall provide a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) compliance plan, and designate a compliance officer with an extensive background/training regarding this requirement.

The contractor shall describe how they will integrate a preauthorization process into their claims adjudication system to include a .pdf of the form. The contractor shall include specific details on how preauthorization would be delivered, entered into their system, and tracked.

The contractor shall describe how the BOP will have access to the data collected during the adjudication process, and include any costs for providing this service.

The contractor shall provide technical documentation regarding all data files and formats. The contractor shall describe and submit surveillance programs for detection and tracking of deliberate waste, fraud, and abuse.

The contractor shall describe their customer support service program for institutions questions and concerns, as well as for healthcare providers regarding incorrect claims.

The Contractor shall describe how it would implement its services and train BOP staff in the use of the bill adjudication system.

All necessary permits and licenses required by federal, state, and local authorities shall be acquired and maintained by the Contractor and any subcontractors (as applicable) for the life of the contract. Contractor must provide copies.

The contractor shall employ staff whose qualifications are commensurate with job responsibilities and the authority level of the corresponding conditions.

The Contractor must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM), an online system that replaces CCR/FedReg, ORCA, and EPLS. Contractors should now go to www.sam.gov to find their information. Contractors shall maintain a current and accurate record in the SAM database, annually. SAM updates are required annually. Registration in no way guarantees that a contract will be awarded.

D. Price Proposal

Provide a Firm Fixed Price proposal for all services as priced per claim.

EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

The Government will assign a color/adjectival rating to each of the technical factors, as well as assign an overall color/adjectival rating to the technical area. The color/adjectival rating depicts how well the offeror meets the solicitation requirements. The technical proposal shall provide a detailed technical plan describing how the requirements of the SOW will be accomplished and a detailed time line which demonstrates the offeror’s understanding of the requirements. The technical color/adjectival definitions are defined below:

1. Technical Rating. The Government will assign a color/adjectival rating to each of the technical sub-factors identified as well as assigning an overall color/adjectival rating to the technical evaluation factor. The color/adjectival rating depicts how well the offeror meets the evaluation areas/sub-factors and solicitation requirements. The technical color/adjectival definitions are defined below:

BLUE-Outstanding: Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal contains multiple strengths and no deficiencies.

Purple-Good: Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains at least one strength and no efficiencies.

Green-Acceptable: Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal has no strengths or deficiencies.

Technical Risk Rating. The Government will assign one of the Technical Risk ratings described below to each of the technical sub-factors identified as well as assigning an overall risk rating to the technical evaluation factor. The risk rating considers the risk associated with the technical approach in meeting the requirement. For any weakness identified, the evaluation shall address the offeror’s proposed mitigation and why that mitigation approach is or is not manageable. The risk definitions are defined below:

Low - Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate - Can potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High - Is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring. performance/quality results

2. Past Performance Rating. Past Performance will be reviewed and rated according to the

Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). The PPIRS ratings are as follows:

Exceptional

· Met all performance requirements / Exceeded 20 % or more

· Minor problems / Highly effective corrective actions / Improved performance/quality results

Very Good

· Met all performance requirements / Exceeded 5% or more

· Minor problems / Effective corrective actions

Satisfactory

· Met all performance requirements

· Minor problems / Satisfactory corrective actions

Marginal

· Some performance requirements not met

· Performance reflects serious problem / Ineffective corrective actions

Unsatisfactory

· Most performance requirements are not met

· Recovery not likely

The Government will award one contract from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer is conforming to the solicitation and determined to be most advantageous to the

Yellow–Marginal: Proposal does not clearly meet requirements, and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Red-Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies and is not awardable.

Government, price and non-priced factors considered. The following non-price factors shall be used to evaluate offers: Technical and Past Performance. Technical is significantly more important than Past Performance. When combined, the non-price factors are significantly more important than Price.

Offerors are cautioned about taking exception to any of the terms in this solicitation.

Normally, award may not be made to an offeror that takes exception to any term. If any exception does not meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation, the offeror’s proposal may be eliminated from award consideration. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions but intends to make award on initial proposals. Offerors may not have the opportunity to submit a revised proposal removing exceptions.

3. Pricing. The Offerors’ price will be a factor in the award decision. However, the

Government reserves the right to make an award, based on best value to the Government

(considering technical and past performance), to an offeror having other than the lowest price quotation. The BOP will evaluate the Offeror’s price to ensure it is reasonable. In making the award of this contract, the Contracting Officer’s objective will be to determine the specific combination of price, technical, and past performance that are most advantageous to the Government. The Government is evaluating the overall total cost proposed within the technical and management oversight evaluation factors. Offeror’s evaluated prices will be assessed along with evaluation results of the Non-price factors in conducting possible tradeoff analysis and determining the best value to the Government.

Offerors are specifically advised that under this evaluation method the lowest priced proposal may not necessarily receive the award.

ADMINISTRATION

Authority to negotiate changes in the terms, conditions, or amounts cited in this contract is reserved to the Contracting Officer (CO). After award, this responsibility may be delegated to an

Administrative Contracting Officer(s) (ACOs) by the Contracting Officer. In accordance with

FAR 42.202 and 42.302, the Contracting Office as stated in Block 16 of the SF1449, is assigned to be the Contract Administration Office (CAO) for this contract. This assignment carries with it the authority to perform all normal contract administration functions listed in FAR 42.302(a), items (1) through (71); to the extent those functions apply to this contract. This assignment also includes delegation of authority to perform functions specified in FAR 42.302(b), items (1) through (11).