CE QuestionsandAnswers.pdf

Questions and Answers in response to solicitation TIRNO-11-R-00028

Q1. Due Date: Can the offer due date be revised to provide an additional one week for submission of a response, i.e. 7/29/11.

A1. No

Q2. Section II – Pricing: We understand that the selected vendor is to cover its cost and any profit by charging reasonable provider fees. The pricing template (Section II of the solicitation) only allows for one provider fee to be charged.

Continuing education contracts typically involve more than one fee charged to providers. For example, providers are usually charged a fee for application approval and renewal (annually, in this case) as well as fees for each course roster they submit. Is the IRS open to modifications to the pricing page to include these fees?

A2. No

Q3. Section II – Pricing: Is the selected vendor to bank rosters/CE credits for the IRS and transmit the information the PTIN registration system?

A3. The CE vendor will be required to electronically submit information collected from CE providers regarding programs PTIN holders took from the CE provider. The information would then be sent via secure file transfer to the Registration Vendor.

Q4. Section II – Pricing: Is the selected vendor to review provider applications for approval?

A4. The vendor will be expected to perform a set checklist review of mandatory elements included with registration during submission.

Q5. Section II – Pricing: It appears that the IRS is not seeking continuing education “course approval” services with this solicitation. Is the selected vendor expected to review courses for approval?

A5. No

Q6. Is the IRS open to modifications to the pricing page to include fees for course approval, should the IRS seek this service in the future?

A6. No

Q7. Section II – Pricing: It appears that the IRS is not seeking continuing education course instructor approval services with this solicitation. Is the IRS open to modifications to the pricing page to include fees for course instructor approval, should the IRS seek this service in the future?

A7. Same as in Q #5, IRS will be performing necessary program approvals.

Q8. Section II – Pricing: Is the selected vendor expected to review instructor qualifications for approval?

A8. No

Q9. Section IV – Proposal Instructions and Evaluation Factors for Award:

Paragraph 7.0 (pages 42-43) includes a table showing how the two volumes of the proposal should be organized. The second column of the table states that the SOO/PWS Compliance Matrix should be included in Tab 4, and that the Technical Reference Material should be included in Tab 5. However, Paragraph 6.10 (page 46) states that the Technical Reference material should be included in Tab 4, and that Subcontracting information should be included in Tab 5. Could the IRS please clarify what information belongs in Tabs 4, 5 and 6 of the Technical Proposal?

A9. The table shown on pages 42-43 has been corrected to include SOO/PWS Compliance Matrix in Tab 1, the Technical and Reference Material in Tab 4 and Subcontracting in Tab 5. A corrected page has been added to this posting.

Q10. Section I, "Statement of Objectives", 1.2 "CE Requirement": What is the IRS' confidence level in the estimate for the number of continuing education providers (2,200 - 3,000) that will register?

A10. This is our best estimate based on the number of current continuing education providers.

Q11. Section I, "Statement of Objectives", 1.3 "On-line Registration of CE Providers": Can first time approval letters be issued electronically in PDF format?

A11. Yes, we would expect the approval letter to be dropped in the secure e-mail box and the notification letter can be sent electronically in .pdf advising the applicant that their account information has been updated.

Q12. Section I, "Statement of Objectives", 1.3 "On-line Registration of CE Providers": What percentage of approval letters will be required to be issued via US Mail? Will they have to be sent certified or registered or is First Class adequate?

A12. An extremely small number and only for paper applications that come in without an e-mail address. First Class is fine.

Q13. Section I, "Statement of Objectives", 1.6 "System Interface": Can you provide more information about the anticipated interface with the Registration Vendor? Will this be a direct interconnection (i.e. API), some sort of flat file transfer, or other method?

A13. The preferred interface would be a batch file containing all course hours completed by return preparers. The file should be a single format regardless of how many different vendors reported the hours.

Q14. Section I, "Statement of Objectives", 1.6 "System Interface": Which of the Enterprise Life Cycle documentation are expected to be required for this effort?

A14. The complexity of a vendors technical solution will drive which ELC documentation will be required. Although it is not anticipated that every potential ELC document will be required past experience indicates that ELC documentation activities will be resource intensive through acceptance of the solution.

Q15. Section I, "Statement of Objectives", 1.7 "Back Office Functionality": How many different roles will be required by the IRS?

A15. We would expect a read only and the ability to make changes within the system. Any change functionality has to have the associated audit trail.

Q16. Section I, "Statement of Objectives", 1.9 "IRS Employee/TIGTA Access":

What is meant by unlimited remote access to the complete CE system? Does this intend root / system access to the machines or just unlimited access to the web-based CE components, information, data, etc?

A16. Would include unlimited access to the information/data and web-based system, not the machines.

Q17. Section I, "Statement of Objectives", 1.12 "Account Management": Is it anticipated that each CE provider will have a single secure user account or multiple user accounts? If multiple, is there a limit as to how many user accounts a CE provider can have?

A17. We anticipate each CE provider will have at least a single secure user account.

Q18. In Section I, "Statement of Objectives", 7.1, "Post-Implementation Evaluation" it states "Evaluation to include a summary of National and International implementation activities, key successes, barriers encountered, and recommended improvements and next steps." Can you confirm what "National and International implementation" means in the context of this solicitation?

A18. Must have National and International implementation. Identify any implementation activities difference between U.S. and international and evaluate accordingly.

Q19. In Section IV, "Proposal Instructions and Evaluation Factors for Award", 6.4, "Volume I, Tab 3: Past Performance", it states that past performance survey questionnaires are due to the IRS January 18, 2011, which appears to be incorrect.

Can you provide the correct date for return of these questionnaires?

A19. This should read July 18, 2011.

Q20. Will the IRS consider a cost plus model versus the recouping of fees through “provider fees”?

A20. No