Vendor Questions - Government Responses J3-QA-Spreadsheet-CMC 9.12.22.pdf

Vendor Questions J3-+QA+Spreadsheet+CMC Atch J.3

Question Title Section Number Clarifying Question Government Comment

SF1449 - CLINs

A19-SOLICITATION-1605C3-22-R-00001-

FINAL+-+3.pdf, SF1449 pgs 5-6

The Period of Performance (PoP) for CLINs 3001 and 4001 needs correction. CLIN 3001 (SF1449 pg 5) has PoP 11/01/2026 to 10/31/2027 which should read 11/01/2025 to 10/31/2026; and CLIN 4001 (SF1449 pg 6) has PoP 11/01/2027 to 10/31/2028 which should read 11/01/2026 to 10/31/2027.

Correction made. CLIN 3001 is now 11/01/2025 through 10/31/2026. CLIN 4001 is now 11/01/2026 through 10/31/2027.

Required Documents

A19-SOLICITATION-1605C3-22-R-00001-

FINAL+-+3.pdf, PWS Section 7.2, page 43

It is our assumption that the identified Required Documents are to be provided post-award and not submitted with the proposal as these items are not included in the Section L, Instructions. Is this assumption correct? If not, please clarify.

Correction made to section L 'Instruction to Offerors' page number 122 and highlighted. Key personnel resumes are required with proposal.

Service Contract Labor clauses

A19-SOLICITATION-1605C3-22-R-00001-

FINAL+-+3.pdf, Section I.2, page 68

FAR 52.212-5(c), items 1 and 2 are checked and request removal of these clauses as This is a contract to be performed overwhelmingly by physicians, who are not “service employees.” In addition, Wage Determination(s) are not provided with the RFP.

Corrections made on page 68 to FAR 52.212-5(c) and highlighted because this IDIQ and anticipated Task Orders will not be subjected to wage determinations.

Service Contract Labor Clauses

A19-SOLICITATION-1605C3-22-R-00001-

FINAL+-+3.pdf, Section I.2, page 68

Please delete FAR 52.222-41, Service Contract Labor Standards. This is a contract to be performed overwhelmingly by physicians, who are not “service employees.” In addition, Wage Determination(s) are not provided with the RFP.

Please note that in response to the same question, the DOL stated it does not apply:

Solicitation Number 1605C3-21-R-00003, Amendment 0001, DOL response "The Government considers a Physician to be a “Professional Employee” in accordance with 29 CFR 541. The term “Professional Employee,” means any person meeting the definition of “employee employed in a bona fide . . . professional capacity”.

The the Service Contract Act (SCA) does not cover bona fide executive, administrative, or professional employees. As a result, Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) Part 52.222-41—Service Contract Act of 1965 and the corresponding Wage Determination requirement of FAR 22.1007 do not apply to Solicitation Number 1605C3-21-R-00003. "

Corrections made on page 68 to FAR 52.212-5(c) and highlighted because this IDIQ and anticipated Task Orders will not be subjected to wage determinations.

Volume III, Price/Discounts Instructions

A19-SOLICITATION-1605C3-22-R-00001-

FINAL+-+3.pdf, Section L.5.d, page 126

The instructions state "The Government will evaluate proposals to determine if prices/discounts meet the minimum go/no go requirements (Section L – Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders, 2. Mandatory Criteria, A. Pricing/Discount)." Please clarify this sentence and the references to Section L as they are not in the solicitation.

Correction made to page 126 regarding pricing. Updated language is highlighted.

Contract Medical Consultants Services Q&A Worksheet RFP 1605C3-22-R-00001

Volume III, Price/Discounts Instructions

A19-SOLICITATION-1605C3-22-R-00001-

FINAL+-+3.pdf, Section L.5.d, pages 125-

PWS states "offeror shall provide the Schedule of Supplies/Services page(s) of the Standard Form (SF) 1449, Continuation Sheet of the solicitation with net proposed discounts for the base and each option period." There does not appear to be a an option on SF1449 for any proposed net discounts. It is assumed any discounts proposed would be identified and included in the proposal Volume III - Price Discount.

Is this correct? If not please clarify.

Correction made to page 126 regarding pricing. Updated language is highlighted.

Physician qualifications

A19-SOLICITATION-1605C3-22-R-00001-FINAL+-

+3.pdf, Sections 1.2.3.5.d (page 11) and L.5.d (page 123)

RFP Section 1.2.3.5.d (page 11) states: "Physicians engaged in an active medical practice

- a minimum of 240 hours of direct patient care over the previous twelve (12) months."

Section L.5.d states all physicians must be engaged in an active medical practice- a minimums of 240 hours of direct patient care over the previous twelve (12) months to perform second medical opinion evaluations and referee medical opinion evaluations.

It is our assumption that the direct patient care requirement only pertains to second opinion and referee medical opinion evaluations. Is this assumption correct? If not, please clarify.

Additionally, It is our assumption that the 240 hours of direct patient care is not a requirement for physicians who will perform causation, impairment, diagnostic clarification, wage loss and pharmacy utilization case file review, referee file review and impairment file review. Is this assumption correct? If not, please clarify.

Physicians who will see or examine a claimant directly, the physician must be engaged in an active medical practice – a minimum of 240 hours of direct patient care over the previous twelve months, this is not applicable to physicians who only provide file reviews, although all CMC physicians must maintain an active physician’s license in the state they are conducting their file review or patient interactions (as stated in 1.2.3.5b). This clarity is provided in the solicitation (page 11) and highlighted.

Physician qualifications

A19-SOLICITATION-1605C3-22-R-00001-FINAL+-

+3.pdf, Sections 1.2.3.6.a (page 11)

CMCs must possess certification by American Board of Independent Medical Examiners (ABIME) or International Academy of Independent Medical Evaluators (IAIME) or a successor entity in the field of impairment evaluation that establish the physician as a qualified expert.

According to the Federal (EEOICPA) Procedure Manual (Version 6.0, Published April 4, 2022), Chapter 21, Section 4.c(2)(b) (page 212) states iff a physician does not possess ABIME or IAIME certification, the physician must submit a statement certifying and explaining his/her familiarity and years of experience in using the AMA Guides.

It is assumed that the American Academy of Disability Evaluating Physicians (AADEP) is still an acceptable certification for impairment ratings. Is this assumption correct? If not please clarify.

The AADEP was replaced by the IAIME in 2018. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure all CMC physicians are appropriately credentialed. This clarity is provided in the solicitation (page 11) and highlighted.

Volume I, Technical Approach instructions

A19-SOLICITATION-1605C3-22-R-00001-

FINAL+-+3.pdf, Secion L, Section 5.c, page

The table entry for Volume I, Technical Approach under the Proposal Part column contains “Basic Services (Except Security Requirements)” and a list of 5 bullets. These items do not align with Section 5.d content for Volume I. It is our assumption that the content requirements in Section 5.d and not the Proposal Part content in Section 5.c is to be used for Volume I. Is this assumption correct? If not, please clarify.

The items required to be submitted in Volume I are found in Sections 5.c (page 121) and 5.d (page 122).

Pricing Spreadsheet entries

J5-CMC-PRICING+SPREADSHEET.xlsx Attachment J5, Pricing Spreadsheet contains columns for Materials and associated prices. Please clarify the instructions for these entries as Section L does not explain these cells.

Correction made to J5 pricing sheet. The word "Material" has been removed from the base and all option years.

Pricing Spreadsheet entries

J5-CMC-PRICING+SPREADSHEET.xlsx

There are no subtotal calculations (Column G) for CLINs 0012 - Diagnostic Testing, 0013 Interpreter Services, and 0014 Medical Records Translation Services. The same is for all Option Periods 1-4. It is assumed that these CLINs are based on the OWCP Fee Schedule and pricing for these CLINs are not required. Is this correct, if not please clarify.

No subtotals provided because each subtotal will be based on proposed quantity from each offeror

Pricing Spreadsheet Estimated Max Quantities

J5-CMC-PRICING+SPREADSHEET.xlsx

CLIN 0003 - Diagnosis Clarification estimated Max Quantity is 250 for Base Period and all Option Periods (1-4). However, the Performance Work Statement Section 1.4.4 (PWS page 15) states "up to 500 file reviews." Please clarify if the Max Quantity for Diagnosis Clarification is 250 or 500 annually.

Estimated maximum of up to 500 per year. This change has been made to attachment J5 Pricing Spreadsheet.

Pricing Spreadsheet Estimated Max Quantities

J5-CMC-PRICING+SPREADSHEET.xlsx

CLIN 0010 - Referee Impairment File Review estimated Max Quantity is 10 for Base Period and all Option Periods (1-4). However, the Performance Work Statement Section 1.4.3.a states "up to 100 per year." Please clarify if the Max Quantity for Referee Impairmen File Reviews is 10 or 100 annually.

Estimated maximum of up to 100 per year. This change has been made to attachment J5 Pricing Spreadsheet.

Pricing Spreadsheet entries

J5-CMC-PRICING+SPREADSHEET.xlsx

Pricing for Option Periods 1-4 appears to automatically include a three (3) percent annual increase. We assume this is for cost of living increase which lately has exceeded three percent. Would the Government consider removing this requirement and allow offerors to enter pricing based on anticipated cost of living adjustments?

Correction made and three (3) percent increase was removed. All offerors are expected to provide their best pricing.

Past performance evaluation criteria

J6-Techinical+Evaluation+Criteria.pdf, Volume II, page 3

Please clarify how the following will be evaluated "Offeror's understanding of the Contractor's role and responsibilities under the proposed Contract." Where should this information be provided within Volume II as Section L, Instructions does not identify this as required content.

The said information is found on page one (1) of attachment J6 (Technical Evaluation Criteria), last bullet under SubFactor one (1). Further, note that Volume I, Subfactor 1 (Offeror’s Technical Approach to Project Management) states on page 122 of the solicitation, "An offeror’s understanding of the work will be shown through its ability to demonstrate that it can perform the work described in the PWS and the extent to which potential risks are identified and mitigated." Therefore, this information should be provided in Volume I and the technical evaluation team will evaluate the Offeror's understanding of the Contractor's role and responsibilities under the proposed Contract per the information provided in Volume I, Subfactor 1 in the solicitation.