Solicitation_Questions_and_Answers_LVN_and_CNA.docx

Solicitation Questions W81K04-17-R-0004

1. Is there a requirement for the provider to be a “Certified” Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business and is desire for a team of SDVOSB providers or if that mattered.

RESPONSE: This requirement is set-aside for a Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB). Offerors may form teaming arrangements see Addendum 52.212-2 Teaming Arrangements and/or Letters of Intent.

2. The LVN and CNA position titles/CLIN descriptions in RFP Attachment 10 do not appear to align with the position titles provided in Exhibits C through U. Moreover, some position titles found in Attachment 10 do not appear to have corresponding Exhibits and vice versa. For example, in Exhibit 10 CLINS 0001AX-AZ, where there are multiple CNA positions listed, while the only Technical Exhibit, Exhibit U is for CNA - Inpatient Psychiatry which does not directly align with any CLIN descriptions. As Exhibit C through U provide minimum qualifications for positions, the Exhibits must align with Attachment 10 for offerors to determine the appropriate SCA occupational codes/titles and associated rates for each service. Will the Government provide all offerors with a complete list of Exhibits that directly map to the Exhibit 10?

RESPONSE: Amendment 0002 realigns the CLIN structure with the PWS and Technical Exhibits. Not all LVN specialties and in/outpatient clinics have a technical exhibit. There is no exhibit for CNA services only inpatient psychiatry.

3. SCA’s mandatory vacation benefits are based on length of service with a contractor or their successor. SCA requires prospective contractors who employ the same personnel (e.g. by offering right of first refusal to qualified incumbents) to provide the same vacation benefits as an incumbent contractor. Will the Government provide the percentage of the incumbent workforce with the following lengths of service?

- Less than 1 year of service

- 1 year of service

- 5 years of service

- 15 years of service

RESPONSE: This information is not available. Per the Service Contract Act, FAR Clause 52.222-41, paragraph (n), the seniority list will be provided approximately 10 days prior to the completion of the current contract. For proposal preparation purposes, the offeror should take into consideration that the current contract has been active since October 2016 and LVN and CNA contracted services have been provided for more than 10 years at SAMHS.

4. Factor 2 Performance Risk Paragraph (f) 1. On Page 237 - The Government has indicated that there are four levels of relevancy for past performance. All levels are limited to past performance providing only LVNs and CNAs on single contract or task order. This requirement dramatically limits the competition for this procurement. Will the Government consider changing this requirement to include past performance with nursing professionals, defined as RNs, LVNs, and CNAs to allow for reasonable competition on this procurement while still demonstrating an Offeror’s performance accomplishments in the nursing labor category?

RESPONSE: The definition for Relevancy has been revised and can be found in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

5. Is there a current contract in place for this SOW? If so, do the current employees have right of first refusal?

Response: Services are currently being performed under W81K04-16-D-0038. Yes, the current employees do have right of first refusal. See FAR 22.12 Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers Under Service Contracts and Executive Order 13495 of January 30, 2009, Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers Under Service Contracts.

6. Page 236 - 239, Factors and Subfactors to be Evaluated – Item 2.- Factor 2, Performance Risk (Past and Present Performance) In order for a SDVOSB to be rated for this procurement, the Evaluation criteria must be met. We believe that the criteria for this procurement is too restrictive. The relevancy criteria listed for Very Relevant, Relevant, and Somewhat Relevant is unduly restrictive to the set-aside socio economic status of $7.5M size company. It is unlikely that an SDVOSB with annual average revenues below the $7.5M NAICS threshold would qualify for any relevancy. This would make the past performance of the prime contractor weighted less than that of any major subcontractor proposed. Is it the government’s intent to assess performance risk of the prime contractor as a singular entity? The evaluation factors do not require the SDVOSB prime to have any relevant past performance.

Response: Reference factor 2 Performance Risk (Past and Present Performance) paragraph c. “Past and present performance information from the prime offeror’s major subcontractors, teaming or joint venture partners and key personnel will be treated the same as any prime contractor’s past and present performance information.”

We have provided additional pricing information which shows why we are concerned with the current evaluation criteria and the ability of SDVOSB’s meeting the $7.5M NAICS threshold. We request that the government change the evaluation criteria of requiring a single contract or TO for LVN/CNA services to a more appropriate size in order to allow more $7.5M companies to be able to compete for this procurement.

The tables below represent wage and health and welfare (H&W) minimums required by Wage Determination 2015-2521, Revision 4, Dated 12/30/2016. The rates do not include any taxes, insurance, or indirect costs that would be associated with contract performance. The rates used are lower than the Government provided statement of equivalent rates on page 131 of the solicitation.

Given the information provided below, how can the government anticipate a small business meeting the High Relevancy rating for past performance? See Amendment 0002 Wage and H&W minimums per FTE

Annual Wage and H&W minimums per Past Performance Relevancy requirements

Based on the Evaluation Criteria, a SDVOSB having a singular award of this size would already be at a revenue greater than $7.5M.

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

7. This procurement is calling for approximately 250 LPN/ LVNs and CNAs. But my question for you is how many LPN/ LVN and how many CNAs are you looking for I did not see it in the Synopsis.

Response: The number of hours required for the LVN and CNA services are listed in the CLINS. These are all full time positions.

8. In response to the Evaluation criteria, ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2 - Evaluation – Commercial Items, specifically subsection Factor 2. Performance Risk (Past and present performance), pages 236 to 239 inclusive, the relevancy criteria is unduly restrictive of competition. With the relevancy criteria provide herein it is improbable that a SDVOSB with annual average revenues of less than $7.5M annual could provide any relevancy as a standalone entity. Additionally, it is assumed that the only way a response can grade other than Not Relevant would be reliance on subcontractor. Given that the Government does not require a Past Performance from the Prime and that the entire review of performance risk is not differentiated between that of the Prime or other entities the government is not assessing performance risk of the Prime as a standalone entity and allows for reliance by other entities to be a predictor of future success: subparagraph (c.) page 237 Past and present performance information from the prime offeror’s major subcontractors, teaming or joint venture partners and key personnel will be treated the same as any prime contractor’s past and present performance information.

We recommend a change to the relevancy criteria to allow for competition and less reliance on other entities.

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

9. Page 209 Paragraph (b) - Instructions state: Electronic files shall be submitted in a format that is compatible with Microsoft Office 2007 applications. We respectfully request that we can submit our technical in PDF format to ensure that any graphs, charts, or pages don’t move when opened by the government.

Response: Yes, PDF is an acceptable format.

10. Page 212 Volume II Intro paragraph - Instructions state: “The technical proposal shall not contain cost/pricing information”. Does this include salary data we discovered during our market research?

Response: The technical proposal shall not contain information called for in Volume IV - Price Proposal. Salaries discovered during market research maybe included in the technical proposal.

11. Page 214 Paragraph 5 - The solicitation states: A single performance assessment submission shall only include one (1) contract, TO or purchase order and MAY not include a combination of contracts, purchase orders, or TOs. We respectfully request the government to reconsider this requirement and allow offerors to combine TOs on a basic IDIQ contract.

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

12. Page 222 Attachment 9 - Will the government provide this in a word document?

Response: The Government will provide attachment 9 Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaire in a word document. See Amendment 01 to the solicitation.

13. Page 237 Para (b) -The solicitation states: To be considered a relevant contract reference, the offeror must have performed LVN and CNA services similar or greater in scope to the magnitude and complexity of the requirement. We respectfully request the government to include all Nursing Service or other non healthcare contract providers that have similar education and backgrounds.

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

14. Page 238 Relevancy Ratings - The number of LVN and CNAs assigned to the relevancy ratings is so restrictive that it limits the competition pool. If the prime contractor met the minimum of “somewhat Relevant” rating of 100 to 199 they would be over the size standard of $7.5 million. We respectfully request the government greatly reduce the number of FTE to meet the relevancy factors or broaden the labor categories to include labor categories other than LVN/CNAs.

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation

15. Page 237 (paragraph b) Will the Government amend the definition of recency to “performance or contract completion must not be older than 5 years from the issuance date of this RFP”?

Response: No, the government will not amend the definition of recency.

16. Page 238 adjectival ratings Given this procurement is set aside for SDVOBs with a size standard of $7.5M, the relevancy definitions requiring 100+ FTEs on a single TO or contract are not attainable for the majority of vendors. To prevent restricted competition, industry recommends changing relevancy definitions to: 1) encompass basic IDIQ contracts and all associated TOs, 2) replace “LVNs and CNAs” with “Healthcare Providers (HCPs),” and 3) lower the FTE threshold considerably.

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation

17. Page 166, paragraph 5.2 - Can you confirm that LVNs/CNAs are expected and qualified to perform charge nurse and team lead responsibilities as referenced in this section?

Response: LVNs may perform team lead responsibilities as needed by the unit. CNAs will not perform team lead responsibilities.

18. Page 183, Exhibit C - Can you clarify that PALS and ACLS are required for LVNs in the OR as RNs in this unit only require BLS?

Response: Exhibits have been revised and incorporated in Amendment 0002.

19. Page 190, Exhibit 1 - Can you clarify if the administration of the pediatric specific pharmacology exam is the responsibility of the MTF or the contractor?

Response: Yes, the pediatric specific pharmacology exam is the responsibility of the MTF.

20. Page 194, Exhibit M - The experience required for the LVN in the gastroenterology clinic will likely not be found outside of the incumbents working in the clinic. Would you consider modifying the experience required?

Response: Exhibits have been revised and incorporated in Amendment 0002.

21. Page 198, Exhibit Q - Can you clarify the specific certification required since LVNs are not eligible for all WOCN certifications?

Response: Exhibits have been revised and incorporated in Amendment 0002.

22. Page 145, iRAPT - What is the invoicing frequency? Biweekly?

Response: BiMonthly

23. Page 164, paragraph 3.5.2.1 - Is unit orientation billable?

Response: Since the government will provide the contract HCPs with a Government orientation during hours of operation to familiarize them with the policies and procedures of the MTF, assigned department and specific unit, the orientation shall be billed at the hourly rate for the HCP on the appropriate CLIN.

24. Page 180, Paragraph VACATION - What is each incumbent’s length of service or the average length of service by CLIN?

Response: See Response to question #3.

25. p. 238 - Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, (a), 2, f., (1) - The Past Performance Relevancy Ratings identify minimum numbers of LVNs/CNAs necessary on a prior effort in order for that effort to reach a certain Relevancy Rating. However, the minimum thresholds for achieving even Somewhat Relevant (“The number of LVNs and CNAs must have been between 100 and 199 on a single contract or TO within the recency period”) would be difficult for a SDVOSB firm with a size limit of $7.5M and are unduly restrictive of competition. Please explain how these relevancy thresholds are reasonably necessary to meet the Government’s needs. Given the limited universe of past performance references available to offerors within these thresholds, will the Government consider lowering the relevancy thresholds to allow for greater competition?

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

26. p. 237 Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, (a), 2, c. - Please confirm that the Government will evaluate past performance references from either the prime contractor or a major subcontractor for contracts or TOs in which the prime contractor or major subcontractor performed as a member of a joint venture.

Response: Yes this particular paragraph states: “Past and present performance information from the prime offeror’s major subcontractors, teaming or joint venture partners and key personnel will be treated the same as any prime contractor’s past and present performance information.”

27. p. 238,Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, (a), 2, f., (1) -Will the Government consider expanding the relevancy definitions at the “Very Relevant,” “Relevant” and “Somewhat Relevant” levels to include RNs or other Nursing positions?

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

28. p. 146 FAR 52.212-5 - The version of FAR 52.212-5 included in the RFP is the November 2016 version and not the current January 2017 version. Will you be updating this FAR clause before the solicitation closes?

Response: Amendment 0002 will update FAR Clause 52.212-5.

29. p. 219 Attachment 5 - The ST/P tables define location coverage “(list states).” All locations listed in the PWS are within the state of Texas. Please delete requirement or change to reflect locations to be supported (e.g., SAMMC, WHASC, TBHC, etc.) within PWS.

Response: Amendment 0002 changes the location of coverage to reflect SAMHS.

30. p. 238 Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, (a), 2, f., (1) and p. 140, 252.216-7006 ORDERING (MAY 2011)

(a) Under the Past Performance Relevancy ratings, the government distinguishes Very Relevant as a single contract or TO that involves providing 250 (or more) LVNs and CNAs at a military or veterans (VA) MTF. And Under FAR 252.216-7006 ORDERING. The government defines order of services under this contract as, “Any supplies and services to be furnished under this contract shall be ordered by issuance of delivery orders or task orders by the individuals or activities designated in the contract schedule. Such orders may be issued from 1 October 2017 through 30 September 2022.”

Furthermore, across the Federal Healthcare industry (to include Navy, AF and Army MTFs nationwide) procurement vehicles to provide Health Care Professionals (i.e., nursing services with LVNs and CNAs) are typically contracted using IDIQ task order based contracts. Such procurements as the AFMS CLASS IDIQ, Navy MATO contracts (by regions/state) and Army ADCMS contracts all use IDIQ task order based contracts for these services. The incumbent contract for SAMHS LVNs and CNAs also uses the IDIQ task order based procurement process.

Our reasoning is additionally supported by the fact that this procurement is IDIQ task order based and not all contracted hours for 250 HCPs will be under a single task order, but across multiple task orders under the basic IDIQ contract. We request that the government re-evaluate the relevancy requirements to allow multiple task orders under a single IDIQ basic contract to be counted as a single contract performance reference to support the FTE counts of 250 or more HCPs.

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

31. Attachment 10 – Price Matrix - What is the difference between CLIN 0001BB and 0001BC? Both are listed as - LVN – Emergency Room?

Response: Solicitation Amendment 0002 incorporates a revised CLIN structure and a revised attachment 10.

32. Attachment 10 – Price Matrix - What is the difference between CLIN 0001BD and 0001BE? Both are listed as - LVN – Family Practice

Response: Solicitation Amendment 0002 incorporates a revised CLIN structure and a revised attachment 10.

33. Attachment 10 – Price Matrix- What is the difference between CLIN 0001BH and 0001BJ? Both are listed as – LVN – Internal Medicine

Response: Solicitation Amendment 0002 incorporates a revised CLIN structure and a revised attachment 10.

34. Page 183-202 Exhibits C-U and Attachment 10 – Price Matrix - 2 Exhibits C-U provides labor categories not listed in Attachment 10 Pricing Matrix. In addition, Attachment 10 Pricing Matrix lists labor categories that are not included in 6.2 Exhibits. What is the purpose of 6.2 C-U labor categories? For those labor categories on the Pricing Matrix that are NOT included in the C-U exhibits, where are the certifications, education and experience for the labor categories listed on the Pricing Matrix?

Response: The exhibits have been revised to reflect labor categories in the CLIN structure and price matrix and are incorporated in Amendment 0002.

35. Attachment 10 – Price Matrix - During a comparison of Attachment 10 and the SF1449 Continuation Sheets, CLIN 000AL is absent from Attachment 10, and CLIN 0001AQ is duplicated. There is also a discrepancy in the Service Description and hours for CLINS 0001AM and 0001AN. Will the Gov’t please provide a revised Attachment 10?

Response: Solicitation Amendment 0002 incorporates a revised CLIN structure and a revised attachment 10.

36. Solicitation Page 141 - 252.237-7032 Continuation of essential contractor services section references a Mission-Essential Contractor Services Plan. In what proposal volume should the Mission-Essential Contractor Services Plan be submitted?

Response: Submit with proposal Volume I Business Proposal. See updated Proposal Table of Contents found in FAR Clause 52.212-1 Addendum.

37. Solicitation PWS 1 General - The performance of health care services by the individual Health Care provider under a personal services contract are subject to day-to-day supervision and control by health care facility personnel comparable to that exercised over military and civil service HCPs engaged in comparable health care services. Does the Government ultimately decide the shift assignments and schedules of the HCPs?

Response: Yes the Government will assign the schedules. See PWS Para 1.16.1 for examples of common shifts

38. Solicitation PWS 1 General - The performance of health care services by the individual Health Care provider under a personal services contract are subject to day-to-day supervision and control by health care facility personnel comparable to that exercised over military and civil service HCPs engaged in comparable health care services. Is the Government supervisor responsible to approve leave/vacation requests from the HCPs?

Response: The HCP would have to coordinate their leave with the contractor program manager in addition to coordinating with the government supervisor. Ultimately it is the contractors responsibility to make sure they have a HCP there to cover the shift.

39. Solicitation PWS 1 General . The performance of health care services by the individual Health Care provider under a personal services contract are subject to day-to-day supervision and control by health care facility personnel comparable to that exercised over military and civil service HCPs engaged in comparable health care services. Is the Government supervisor also responsible to ensure leave/vacation absences are communicated to the Contractor so a replacement can be provided?

Response: No it is the HCPs responsibility to coordinate with the contractor. The contractor must then backfill with POOL.

40. Solicitation PWS 1 General - The performance of health care services by the individual Health Care provider under a personal services contract are subject to day-to-day supervision and control by health care facility personnel comparable to that exercised over military and civil service HCPs engaged in comparable health care services. Does the Government ultimately decide the shift assignments and schedules of the HCPs?

Response: Yes

41. Solicitation PWS 1.11.1 - Completed credentials or profile packages shall be submitted at least 10 days prior to in-processing. Will the Government require the incoming Contractor to credential the incumbent workforce during the transition of contractors?

Response Yes

42. Solicitation PWS 1.11.1 - Completed credentials or profile packages shall be submitted at least 10 days prior to in-processing. Does the Government consider the credentials for the incumbent workforce to be valid at the time of award?

Response Yes

43. Solicitation PWS 1.12 - All HCPs, to include pool and replacement HCPs, performing services under this contract shall comply with the health and immunization requirements identified below at the time of initial request for clinical privileges and annually thereafter. Will the Government require the incoming Contractor to repeat all Health and Immunization Requirements for the incumbent workforce during the transition of contractors even if these items have been completed within 12 months?

Response No, Health and Immunization Requirements shall be verified during credential process.

45. Solicitation PWS 1.13 - Criminal History Background Check Requirement. Will the Government require the incoming Contractor to conduct Background Checks on the incumbent workforce during the transition of Contractors?

Response: No, the Government will not require background checks during the transition period for the incumbent workforce. All HCPs are required to get local background check during badge renewal.

46. Solicitation PWS 1.17.3 - In the event overtime is incurred; it shall be billed to an appropriate overtime line item. Will the Government negotiate overtime rates with the incoming contractor after award or will the Pricing Matrix be updated with overtime CLINS?

Response: The Pricing Matrix already includes overtime CLINs as indicated by the abbreviation “OT”. Overtime will be billed on the appropriate overtime CLIN at the rates specified in the award.

47. Solicitation PWS 1.17.4 Pool HCPs - Is there a limit to the number of Pool HCPs the Government will accept?

Response: No

48. Solicitation PWS 1.17.4 Pool HCPs - Does the Government require a minimum number of Pool candidates for each labor category?

Response: No

49. Solicitation PWS 1.21.5.8 - The HCP may be required to submit to drug/alcohol testing. Does the Government intend for the Contractor to pay for this drug/alcohol testing if the Government supervisor directs it?

Response: Yes

50. Solicitation PWS 4.4 - The Contractor shall furnish and ensure all contractor HCPs have the appropriate uniforms/smocks to perform nursing services under this contract. Will the Government provide a list of the minimum uniform items and quantities required to be provided by the Contractor to the HCP workforce?

Response: Exhibit Q BAMC Memorandum 600-50 Wearing of Uniforms, Civilian Attire and Hospital Specific Items of Clothing is incorporated in amendment 0002.

51. Page 215, Volume IV-Price Proposal, Section 1 - The requirements states to complete proposed prices in the SF1449 inclusive of all contract line items, which we are assuming means to fill out the CLIN Pages on the SF1449 continuation sheet. However, this contradicts the Proposal Table of contents (Page 211) which only list the Price Matrix as what is included with Volume IV. Can the Government please confirm that the Price Matrix is the only document required for Volume IV?

RESPONSE: Volume IV shall include both prices on the SF 1449 (fill out the CLIN Pages on the SF1449 continuation sheet) and complete Attachment 10 “Price Matrix LVN and CNA Services”.

52. Page 219, Attachment 5, 6, 7 and 9 - Please provide an editable version of this attachment in Microsoft Word.

RESPONSE: The Government will upload the solicitation in a Microsoft Word version.

53. Page 238, Relevancy Table -This is a Small Business set-aside for offerors qualifying under a $7.5M size standard. The number of FTEs required to achieve the relevancy standard of even “Somewhat Relevant” appears to indicate preference to the incumbent, as there are very few federal prime contracts or task orders for similar magnitude of providers on a single order in DOD or VA. Please kindly consider revising the relevancy standard for number of FTEs to that which would be achievable by a small business. A company that had three qualifying “relevant” submissions would not fit under the relevant size standard for qualifying small businesses. Recommend that the standard for “Very Relevant” be revised to 100+ FTE on a single contract, “Relevant” be revised to 50 to 99 FTE on a single contract, and the standard for “Somewhat Relevant” be revised to 10-49 FTE on a single contract.

RESPONSE: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

54.Page 238, Relevancy Table - Please consider expanding the relevancy standard to include all types of nursing providers under a single contract/task order – e.g. LPNs, CNAs, RNs, NPs, CRNA, Nurse Educator, CNM, etc. Offerors with demonstrated capabilities providing large quantities of multiple nursing specialties would certainly be capable in performing the services associated with this requirement.

RESPONSE: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

55. Page 1 (SF 1449) Given the assumed size of the existing contract, and the $7.5 Million size standard limitation with no language within the solicitation implying "full & open competition", is the incumbent even eligible for award of this solicitation since they exceed the size standard of $7.5M (assuming the existing contract is of similar size)?

RESPONSE: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

56. What is the contract number and dollar value of the existing contract?

RESPONSE: Services are currently being provided under contract W81K04-16-D-0038. The dollar value of the contract is $25,843,031.44 (1 Year period of performance) .

57. What was the estimated hour requirement on the existing contract as compared to the estimated hour requirement in the solicitation? Is the existing contract an IDIQ as well?

RESPONSE: The current requirement is an IDIQ contract. The number of hours required for the LVN and CNA services are listed in the CLINS of this solicitation.

58. PG 156 PARA 1.20.1 - Would the government consider adding a CLIN for the Project Manager position since it is specified as a requirement?

RESPONSE: No

59. Paragraph 3.2 (pg. 163) states “the government will provide administrative support…” does this provided administrative support extend to assisting the contractor in tracking HCP license & training renewal requirements?

RESPONSE: Yes

60. CLIN 0001BB and 0001BC appear identical – is this a duplication error or intentional?

RESPONSE: Solicitation amendment 0002 incorporates a revised CLIN structure and a revised attachment 10.

61. Page 209, Para 5 (Section c.1) - Section states that Volume II is limited to 50 pages and that tables of contents, cross reference matrices, and glossaries don’t count against the page limit. This being the case, does the government intend that three Volume II files (Quality Control Plan, Management Capabilities, and Recruitment and Retention) add to a total of 50 pages between the three files?

Response: The page limit for volume II technical proposal is 50 which consist of technical capability (subfactors: quality control plan, management capabilities and recruitment and retention).

62. Page 212, Para 1 (Section 5) - Does the Government require the entire SAM Reps & Certs to be included or is the Summary printout adequate?

Response: The offerors shall submit the entire SAM Reps & Certs.

63. Page Vol I, Para 6 RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION –

a. Regarding Offeror/Contractor financial responsibility: What documentation is required to support the amounts of external funding identified in dated letter from the source?

Response: Offeror/Contractor shall submit documentation showing financial capability in accordance with FAR 9.104-1

b. Regarding maximum lines of credit available: May resources/credit lines of a teaming partner be submitted/counted as additional evidence of internal working capital to perform?

Response: Reference Addendum to 52.212-1 Paragraph 6 RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION 3rd sentence “If the Offeror plans to rely on financial support from other sources, evidence of availability and maximum lines of credit that may be available must be identified and must be based upon the inclusion of this contract effort.

c. What criteria is used to determine if the offeror has “sufficient information” for an affirmative responsibility determination?

Response: The Contracting Officer will use criteria in Addendum to 52.212-1 Paragraph 6 RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION. See FAR Part 9.104-1.

64. Page 214, VOL III, Para 2a) - Is the government differentiating between a Prime/Subcontractor vs. a Teaming Arrangement and if so, does the government require a written explanation of the Prime/Subcontractor relationship as well?

Response: No, this paragraph only applies to Teaming Arrangements

65. Page 218, VOL III Document Titles - Did the government leave out “VOL III (Company Name) Performance Assessment Information DDMMMYY” as described on Page 214, Para 11 (Section 4)?

Response: Amendment 0002 adds Performance Assessment Information to Volume III in Attachment 2 Proposal Naming Convention.

66. VOL III - Will incumbent employee need to be re-credentialed if the following conditions exist?

a) they are hired into the same position and there is no increased clinical competency requirement; Response: No

b) when there is no significant change in the scope of clinical practice of the HCW; Response: No.

c) when there is no gap in performance between the contracts Response: No.

d) when the HCW has had acceptable performance evaluations. Response: No.

67. Page 167, Para 5.3.14 - The Government will expect HCP contract personnel to attend various conferences. Will the Government consider this as duty time in a paid status? Response: Yes, this will be considered duty time in paid status.

Will the Government provide travel funds or reimbursement for mileage between MTF locations in San Antonio?

Response: No, the government will not provide travel funds or reimbursement for mileage between MTF locations in San Antonio.

68. Attachment 10 - Attachment 10 has a single column for Unit Price and five columns for the base and option year amounts. Is it the Government’s intention that a single Unit Price be used for all five contract years with no escalation for the option years?

Response: Attachment 10 has been revised. Please see Amendment 0002.

69. Page 212, para 6 - What is the Government’s established financial capability threshold for this effort?

Response: See Response to question 70.

70. Page 240, para 4.b. Responsibility Determination - What is the Government’s established dollar threshold for minimum financial capability?

Response: The Government will not identify a minimum financial capability because we understand that it will be unique to each offeror. Per the solicitation, the offeror shall demonstrate financial capability sufficient to cover the proposed price for 60 days of contract performance. To determine 60 days of contract performance, the Government will consider the total of 1/30th the maximum quantity of hours identified on CLINS 0001 -0004 and subCLINS on the schedule of supplies/services beginning on page 3 of this solicitation, rounded up to the next whole number.

71. Page 214, para 5. Performance Assessment - Page 237, para. 2.f.(1) - Will the Government consider past performance of an offeror performed as a subcontractor?

Response: Yes, See FAR 52.212-1 Performance Risk Proposal which states past performance submissions may include work performed by the prime Offeror and major subcontractor(s).

72. Page 237, para. 2.f.(1) - Would the government consider reducing the number of HCP provided on a single contract or task order?

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

73. Would the Government consider allowing HCP performance on multiple task orders for the same location under an ID/IQ contract?

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

74. As the government is aware, even the current incumbent on this contract would not have “Relevant Past Performance” in that while providing 120 nurses as a Prime they are spread over 25 Task Orders or on average 10 per task order.

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

75. Page 214, para 3 Page 240, para 4.c. - 52.212-1 Instruction to Offeror, section 2 (General Instructions) page states: If the Offeror is part of a Joint Venture, the Offeror shall provide a copy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) approved Joint Venture Certification documentation. Would the Government confirm that, SBA approved Joint Venture Certification documentation is only required when the offeror is being considered for contract award and not part as part of offerors initial submission of proposal? SBA is asserting that IAW 13 CFR 124.513, means that a Joint Venture must be approved by the SBA prior to award of the contract, not at the time of submission of proposal.

Response: SBA approval of the joint venture agreement is required prior to award of the contract.

76. Page 214, para 3 Does the Government distinguish between SBA Mentor-Protégé Joint Ventures and Joint Ventures for this effort? Does the Government distinguish between a prime contractor-subcontractor relationship and members in a SBA approved Mentor Protégé Joint Venture? Will the Government confirm that the SBA approved Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture is in fact the Prime offeror and not one of the JV members?

Response: For purpose of evaluating past performance, the government does not make a distinction between SBA Mentor-Protégé' Joint Venture and other joint ventures. The government does make a distinction between prime contractor-subcontractor relations and members in a SBA approved Mentor Protégé Joint venture. The SBA Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture is considered the prime offeror and not one of the joint venture members.

77. Page 237, para 2.c. Does the Government consider all past performance by members in a SBA approved Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture to be prime Past Performance?

Response: Yes; the government will consider the past performance information of the mentor, the protégé, and the joint venture.

78. Page 211, para 2. Vol IV. Can the Government clarify the requirement for Part B submission as it applies to page limits?

Response: There are no page limits to the price proposal.

79. Page 209, Para 1.c.(2).c. Can the Government clarify its intent for the Summary Section, which is not mentioned anywhere else in the solicitation?

Response: The Summary Section is just an example of a possible section that could be included in Volume II. If you choose to have a Summary Section it will not be counted in the page count.

80. p.154 of 258, Section 1.16.1 "Clinics have designated operating hours and their normal hours of operation will be outlined in the task orders." Will the Government please provide the operating hours for each of the clinics/specialties/CLINs so that the offerors can propose more competitive pricing?

Response: See response to question 37.

81. Page 215 of 258, Volume IV - Price Proposal (Factor 3), Section 1. Completed proposed prices in the SF1449 inclusive of all contract line items." Please confirm that the Government wants us to submit a total price on page 1 of the SF1449 and does not want the offerors to submit completed pages 3 through 102.

Response: Offerors are required to submit a total price on page 1 of the SF1449 and complete pages 3 through 102 and attachment 10.

82. p. 239 of 258, 3. Factor 3 Price - "If Schedule B Pricing and Attachment 10 are not submitted for each of the labor categories for each contract period, the offeror may not be considered for award." Can the Government please identify where Schedule B is in the solicitation?

Response: Schedule B are the CLINS located on pages 3 – 102 of the solicitation (SF1449).

83. Attachment 10 Price Matrix - There is only 1 column on the pricing table for a unit price. Is the Government requesting that the offeror provide 1 average unit price over the 5-year period?

Response: Please see the revised Attachment 10 in Amendment 0002

84. Page 150, 1.8. The requirement for ACLS, PALS, and NRP for specialized departments applies to all HCPs in this solicitation, including LVNs and CNAs. Can you clarify why these advanced certifications would be required by LVNs and CNAs since these emergency procedures are outside of the scope of practice for these HCPs.

Response: Exhibits have been revised and incorporated into Amendment 0002.

85. Page 153, 1.14. For incumbent contractors retained, will a complete profile applicant packet be required to be submitted?

Response: Yes

86. Page 183 Exhibit C. The requirement for unit specific experience in the specialty units designated in this Exhibit (in addition to general experience in an acute care setting) presents a challenge as the private sector in San Antonio usually does not have LVNs in these specialty units. Our market research has shown that of five major health systems in the local market surveyed, 4 do not use LVNs in specialty departments, including University, Texsan, Christus Santa Rosa and Methodist. Only one of the five systems utilizes LVNs across all departments, that being the Baptist system that has its own LVN school. This may present significant difficulties in recruiting the HCPs with the required specialty experience delineated in this exhibit. Would you consider modifying the experience requirements in Exhibit C to 2 years of current LPN experience?

Response: Exhibits have been revised and incorporated into the amendment.

87. Page 187, Exhibit F - Can you clarify what clinical duties and responsibilities the LVN has in the management of central lines, PICCS, implanted ports and catheters?

Response: Exhibits have been revised and incorporated into the amendment.

88. Page 196, Exhibit O - Can you clarify the clinic duties of the LVN that require 5 years’ experience whereas the other clinical locations require 1-3 years’ experience?

Response: Exhibits have been revised and incorporated into the amendment.

89. Page 131, Paragraph (4) Does this paragraph only pertain to minimum wage under the Executive Order 13658?

Response: This is FAR Clause 52.222-55 – MINIMUM WAGES UNDER EXECUTIVE ORDER 13658 (DEC 2015). Please read the entire clause as the clause list additional items covered under this clause in conjunction with minimum wages under executive order 13658.

90. Page 214, 5. Performance Assessment - The word contract is defined as a single contract, purchase order or TO on an IDIQ contract. Can you please confirm that a single award contract to one contractor with multiple TOs counts as a single contract?

Response: See our changes to this section and the relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

91. Page 240, (b) Responsibility Determination - Is a letter stating our line of credit sufficient? If so, does the government require a minimum amount available?

Response: See answer to question 70.

92. CLIN 0003 - 0102 Structure - Clarify the max quantity of hours of either being a calculation 1880 or 1920 hours for the base year and the four ordering periods.

Response: 1920

93. CLIN 0003 - 0102 Structure - What is the percentage breakout of the LVNs and CNAs of 250?

Response: Refer to CLIN breakdown to calculate the percentage.

94. Pg 175 and 176 Wage Determination - It is not clear to what the occupational title/rate the government is using on the CLIN structure. Please clarify for example LPN I, II, III to the corresponding CLIN.

Response: See FAR Clause 52.222-42 Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hire

Pg 238 Adjectival rating matrix - Is the government willing to revise the relevant ranges per category:

for example, in order to be considered relevant (1) The number of LVNs and CNAs provided must have been between 200 and 249 on a single contract or TO within the recency period specified.

Note: The reasonable expectation of any service-disabled veteran-owned small business’ that have a single award or single task order of that volume is not realistic.

The language appears to be restrictive and in favor of the incumbent thus limiting the competition pool of offerors. The relevant criteria that is being stated contradicts the method of award (IDIQ).

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

Pg 238 Adjectival rating matrix

Clarify for the relevant, Somewhat Relevant that states: Performance must have been in a MTF (military/veterans, other federal agencies, or civilian to include clinics).

Is the government willing to include non MTF performance for both categories?

Recommend the government revise the language to prevent restrictive past performance to offerors.

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

95. With the submission of these questions and clarifications will the government extend the proposal due date to allow offerors to submit a timely responsive proposal?

Response: The solicitation closing date was extended to 22 March 2017 at 4 p.m. on Amendment 0001

The requirements to achieve even a “Somewhat Relevant” past performance relevancy rating will likely be challenging for small businesses under the required $7.5M size standard.

Will the Government consider revising Past and present performance Relevancy Ratings criteria to levels that a small business can more reasonably be expected to achieve?

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

Can relevancy of past performance include similar size contracts with other labor categories within the medical field? Recommend the Government not restrict the labor category for relevant past performance to LVN/CNA.

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

96. Page 124 Order Limitations - 52.216-19 Order Limitations on this page states “Any order for a combination of items in excess of $32,000,000.00” .This is contradicting with Page 118 where the Minimum/Maximum states “The maximum amount is $151,000,000.00 and applies to the full duration of the contract.” Please clarify from the Government on a consistent Minimum/Maximum of award.

Response: FAR Clause 52.216-19 Order Limitations- The contractor is limited to receiving a combination of task orders totaling $32,000,000.00 within 15 calendar days. Page 118 Is the maximum value of the contract.

97. Page 210 Proposal Table of Contents - Submission of Final Proposal, Would the Government like any other parts than the SF1449 and SF30 (if applicable) submitted in printed hard copy?

Response: No Only the SF1449 and SF30 with original signatures.

98. Page 173 Since the release of the RFP, there has been a revision on the WD dated 12/30/2016.

Which revision would the government want us to use for pricing this proposal?

Response: The Government will incorporate the revised wage determination 2015-2522, revision 4 dated 12/30/16.-.Offerors shall propose pricing using the revised wage determination.

99. Page 217 Attachment 2 - Can the government clarify if each document title are to be submitted as a separate .pdf or word file, for all volumes? Can the government please provide the delivery method and address for this submission?

RESPONSE: Each document title maybe submitted as a separate .pdf or word file.The Offeror shall submit to the office indicated in block 9 of the Standard Form (SF) 1449, Solicitation/Contract Award, Attention Mr. David Robledo, Contracting Officer and Ms. Maria Fidone, Contract Specialist.

100. Page 212 Responsibility Determination – If an offeror’s team member/subcontractor submit confidential documents re Responsibility Determination separately to the Government, would the Government the prefer the team member/sub to send such documents via a separate CD-R or email?

RESPONSE: The Government would prefer documents re Responsibility from the offeror’s team member/subcontractor submit documents be submitted via a separate CD-R.

101. Page 213 3 (Management Capabilities) - Given the level of effort required to manage this requirement, we recommend the Government invite offerors to provide resumes (no more than 2, totaling no more than 2 pages each) to demonstrate that they have the capability of executing the management capabilities necessary to perform this requirement.

Response: The offerors are not required to submit resumes and can demonstrate management capabilities by addressing Adddendum to FAR 52.212-1 subfactor 1B Management Capabilities paragraphs 3(a), (b), (c) and (d).

102. Page 213 3(d) - In the sentence “Define how your organization intends to manage effective interface with USG personnel beneficiaries and subcontractors…”, can the Government confirm that it is referring to “beneficiaries” of the MHS? Could the Government also elaborate on what type of interface it anticipates the contractor to have with beneficiaries outside of the clinical contact by contract LVNs and CNAs?

Response See Revised Addendum FAR 52.212-1 and Addendum 52.212-2

Page 214 Past Performance Recency – We will be able to achieve recency for a past performance reference at the Very Relevant level within five years but not within three, and we believe it will benefit the Government to have increased competition for this complex requirement. Would the Government adjust the recency threshold for Past Performance to five years?

Response: No, the government will not amend the definition of recency.

Page 238 Past Performance Relevancy - Would the government adjust the threshold for Somewhat Relevant to references to cover 50-199 FTEs. Because not all 240 FTEs covered under this contract are at a single MTF, adjusting the relevancy rating should aid the Government in getting a more accurate picture of an offeror’s ability to perform meaningful parts of the this requirement. Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

Page 238 Past Performance Relevancy - “A single performance assessment submission shall only include one (1) contract, TO or purchase order and MAY not include a combination of contracts, purchase orders, or TOs.”

Please confirm that a “contract” *MAY* be a combination of TOs on a single contract. Other DoD contracts, especially the Navy, tend to issue dozens of TOs on an IDIQ contract, whereas single, large TOs seem only to exist on MEDCOM contracts. Moreover, we cannot find any other contract aside from the current SAMHS LVN contract that would meet this criteria.

Response: See our changes to relevancy definition in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

103. Page 209 Para 3 "(1) Submit price proposals on Attachment 10 Price Matrix must remain in Excel format and all pre-loaded formulas shall remain intact."

Can the government please confirm that the only pre-loaded formulas are those on Excel Attachment 10’s row 46 labeled “TOTAL”?

Response Attachement 10 has been revised in Amendment 0002 of the solicitation. There are several pre-loaded formulas that should not be changed. If an error is found, please contact the Contracting Officer so that an amendment can be done to correct the formula.

104. Page 209 Para 3 - "The Offeror may submit with their price proposal pricing rationale in Microsoft Word format. "Is the pricing rationale optional or required? How will it be evaluated?

Response: Pricing rationale is optional since the offeror may submit this information. See addendum to 52.212-2 factor 3 Price.

105. Page 215 paragraph 7 & page 218 Volume IV Table Compensation Plan Volume IV Price Proposal shall not include compensation plan.