Q509--central texas AMB care locum tenens primary care physicians

CENTRAL TEXAS VHCS INTERNAL MED LOCUMS

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

RFQ: 36C25723Q0679

Q1: Are the positions for the three physicians currently filled or vacant?

A: These positions are for a new requirement currently vacant.

Q2: If there are incumbents, are they from a single contractor or are they physicians who represent themselves?

A: There are no incumbent physicians currently assigned.

Q3: Are you at liberty to reveal the name of the incumbent contractor and/or the contract number(s)?

A: No incumbent contractor.

Q4: Should each Volume be presented as a separate file?

A: Yes, please.

Q5: Please confirm whether Section 5.1 instructions regarding redacting the technical proposal refers to Volume I Technical?

A: Correct, only applies to the technical portion.

Q6: Please confirm whether the (*) Contractor shall provide one copy of the Technical Response for each Locum Tenens to be considered

A: The technical response for each locum should provide the documents required for each individual presented for consideration. This information can be included in ONE technical proposal easily identifiable as an individual candidate.

Q7:Â Â If the response to Q6 is correct, please advise whether each Locum Tenens candidate presented also requires a redacted version for a total of (6) Locum Tenens presentations?

A: Locum Tenens information can all be in one volume; must be easily identifiable as a candidate and redacted to remove any company information.

Q8: Confirm redacted information is ONLY for the offeror and/or offeror team member.

A: A copy of a redacted technical proposal is required to meet the requirement of the RFQ. The redacted requirement applies to the offeror and/or offeror team members, does not apply to the locum physicians unless your individual company logos/names/pictures are associated with those documents.

Q9: Considering the effects in healthcare staffing from the pandemic (primarily the shift from long-term to travel opportunities and unprecedented salary expectations) and the numbers of eligible candidates in Temple vs. Waco, the $6.5M contract cap to provide three physicians over a three-year period might limit attracting and retaining qualified physicians.Â

Would the government consider raising the $6.5M cap?

A: No, the $6.5M cap will remain in place.

Q10:Â Â Alternatively, if you retain the $6.5M cap, would you consider changing the period of performance to two years?

A: No, the requirement for this acquisition is for a base year and four one-year option periods. There is no guarantee the government will exercise any of the option periods.

Q11: The PWS lists after hours call coverage required but there is no line item on the pricing for call or callback. Is call required for this contract? If so, what is the call rotation and can we add line items to the pricing to account for call.

A: The contract is only for regular business hours; there is no requirement for call or callback. Please disregard section 3.1.3 3.1.3.2.

END OF QUESTIONS & ANSWERS