**REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL: AHRQ-04-0016**

**TITLE: HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE CENTER (HITRC)**

**PROPOSAL DUE: JULY 29, 2004, 12:00 PM (NOON)**

**AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO RFP**

**ISSUE DATE OF AMENDMENT: JULY 8, 2004**

This amendment provides responses to 101 questions as follows:

+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| \ | QUESTION              | ANSWER                              |   |
| # |                       |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 1 | Is there an incumbent | These services have not been        |   |
|   | for this award or who | provided previously. This is a new  |   |
|   | has provided these    | effort and there is no incumbent.   |   |
|   | services to date?     |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 2 | Do all the small      | AHRQ does not understand the        |   |
|   | business partners     | question and does not know what the |   |
|   | need to be under      | offeror means by small business     |   |
|   | 6m/yr?                | "partners" (i.e., subcontractors or |   |
|   |                       | prime contractors?). Therefore, we  |   |
|   |                       | cannot fully respond. Perhaps the   |   |
|   |                       | response to some of the other       |   |
|   |                       | questions along this line will be   |   |
|   |                       | beneficial.                         |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 3 | If the Prime          | No.                                 |   |
|   | contractor is a small |                                     |   |
|   | disadvantaged 8(a)    |                                     |   |
|   | company who is over   |                                     |   |
|   | 6m/yr, will they      |                                     |   |
|   | fulfill any of the    |                                     |   |
|   | small business        |                                     |   |
|   | requirements?         |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 4 | Do you have a current | AHRQ has not predefined the         |   |
|   | location for the      | location for the Service Center.    |   |
|   | Service Center or     | AHRQ prefers recommendations for    |   |
|   | would you prefer      | the site.                           |   |
|   | recommendations for   |                                     |   |
|   | the site?             |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 5 | Can we assume that    | Task 10 defines the details of the  |   |
|   | AHRQ will provide all | AHRQ provided infrastructure        |   |
|   | the infrastructure    | (hardware and software) for the     |   |
|   | (hardware and         | secure extranet.                    |   |
|   | software) for the     |                                     |   |
|   | secure extranet       |                                     |   |
|   | (Subtasks 9.19, 9.22, |                                     |   |
|   | 9.24)?                |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 6 | Regarding Subtask     | The HITRC may provide both          |   |
|   | 7.13 -- "Serve as a   | information sharing and data        |   |
|   | central link between  | sharing, where appropriate and      |   |
|   | AHRQ and the HIT      | reasonable. The central link        |   |
|   | grantees and projects | function is for addressing both     |   |
|   | to facilitate         | grantee-to grantee issues and       |   |
|   | information sharing   | grantee-to AHRQ issues. Certain     |   |
|   | and assistance." What | grantee-to-AHRQ issues, however,    |   |
|   | is meant by           | will be addressed most              |   |
|   | "information          | appropriately only between the      |   |
|   | sharing?" Do you mean | grantee and AHRQ.                   |   |
|   | "data," information   |                                     |   |
|   | sharing or both as    |                                     |   |
|   | detailed in the other |                                     |   |
|   | sections of Task 7?   |                                     |   |
|   | Is this central link  |                                     |   |
|   | function required to  |                                     |   |
|   | address               |                                     |   |
|   | grantee-to-grantee    |                                     |   |
|   | issues, as well as    |                                     |   |
|   | grantee-to-AHRQ?      |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 7 | Regarding Subtask 7.5 | Surveys conducted by grantees as    |   |
|   | -- "Select and        | part of their grant efforts will    |   |
|   | develop surveys and   | not need OMB clearance, even if the |   |
|   | data collection       | HITRC provides some technical       |   |
|   | instruments." Will    | assistance to the grantee. However, |   |
|   | this task involve     | if AHRQ requests the HITRC to       |   |
|   | surveys that could    | conduct a survey of all the         |   |
|   | require OMB           | grantees, as part of this task, for |   |
|   | clearance?            | which OMB clearance is required,    |   |
|   |                       | then the HITRC will have to obtain  |   |
|   |                       | the necessary OMB clearance.        |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 8 | Regarding Task 13 --  | AHRQ provided an estimate of the    |   |
|   | "Plan and Implement   | number of grantees and projects to  |   |
|   | HIT Annual Conference | be supported by the HITRC in the    |   |
|   | and Meetings, "can    | RFP Part 1 Section C (Statement of  |   |
|   | AHRQ provide an       | Work), Sub-Section D (Specific      |   |
|   | estimate of the       | Requirements), second paragraph,    |   |
|   | number of             | Page 20. AHRQ anticipates that from |   |
|   | representatives of    | 1 to 4 representatives of a grant   |   |
|   | grantees and other    | or project may attend the annual    |   |
|   | HIT projects expected | conference. Although more may       |   |
|   | to attend this        | attend, when needed and             |   |
|   | meeting?              | appropriate, particularly for       |   |
|   |                       | grants and projects with a large    |   |
|   |                       | number of partner organizations.    |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 9 | Where does AHRQ       | AHRQ is not specifying nor          |   |
|   | envision the          | requiring a location near AHRQ's    |   |
|   | contractor-provided   | offices for the contractor's HITRC  |   |
|   | HITRC office space to | office space. A location for the    |   |
|   | be ideally located    | HITRC in close proximity to AHRQ's  |   |
|   | (i.e., proximity to   | offices in Rockville Maryland would |   |
|   | AHRQ\'s offices)?     | be ideal to facilitate more         |   |
|   |                       | face-face meetings between the      |   |
|   |                       | HITRC and AHRQ staff, and perhaps   |   |
|   |                       | reduce some HITRC travel costs.     |   |
|   |                       | However, the HITRC location may be  |   |
|   |                       | anywhere which is reasonable,       |   |
|   |                       | appropriate and cost-effective to   |   |
|   |                       | perform the Statement of Work, and  |   |
|   |                       | serve the needs of the HIT grantees |   |
|   |                       | and projects.                       |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 1 | Reference Subtask     | Many HIT grantees will need IRB     |   |
| 0 | 9.9, page 31: Please  | approval to perform their approved  |   |
|   | explain how the IRB   | grants. The HITRC may be asked by   |   |
|   | fits into the greater | certain grantees to help them       |   |
|   | scope of work.        | identify, document, provide and     |   |
|   |                       | maintain processes for IRB approval |   |
|   |                       | of proposed HIT research. Also, the |   |
|   |                       | HITRC may publish information about |   |
|   |                       | IRB approval processes in the HITRC |   |
|   |                       | extranet knowledge management       |   |
|   |                       | repository, for general access by   |   |
|   |                       | all HIT grantees and projects.      |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 1 | Reference Subtask     | AHRQ will provide office space for  |   |
| 1 | 10.2, page 35: How    | as many contractor IT staff, either |   |
|   | many contractor staff | full-time and/or part-time, onsite  |   |
|   | supporting the IT and | at AHRQ, as may be needed and       |   |
|   | web server tasks can  | justified. The number must be       |   |
|   | be accommodated in    | appropriate, reasonable, and        |   |
|   | AHRQ\'s office space? | cost-effective to support IT and    |   |
|   |                       | web server tasks specified in the   |   |
|   |                       | statement of work.                  |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 1 | Reference Task 11,    | No. The Steering Committee will     |   |
| 2 | page 43: Will the     | provide advice to the contractor,   |   |
|   | HITRC Steering        | therefore is not subject to FACA.   |   |
|   | Committee be subject  |                                     |   |
|   | to the Federal        |                                     |   |
|   | Advisory Committee    |                                     |   |
|   | Act (FACA)?           |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 1 | Reference L.7.c, page | No. The 150 page limit applies to   |   |
| 3 | 110 and L.8, page     | the Technical Proposal.             |   |
|   | 112: The RFP states   |                                     |   |
|   | that the Technical,   |                                     |   |
|   | Past Performance,     |                                     |   |
|   | Small Disadvantaged   |                                     |   |
|   | Business              |                                     |   |
|   | Participation Plan,   |                                     |   |
|   | and Business Proposal |                                     |   |
|   | shall all be separate |                                     |   |
|   | documents. The RFP    |                                     |   |
|   | also states that the  |                                     |   |
|   | technical proposal is |                                     |   |
|   | limited to150 pages   |                                     |   |
|   | not including resumes |                                     |   |
|   | or bibliographies.    |                                     |   |
|   | Are Past Performance  |                                     |   |
|   | and the SDB           |                                     |   |
|   | Participation Plan    |                                     |   |
|   | included in the 150   |                                     |   |
|   | pages?                |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 1 | Reference C, page     | Yes.                                |   |
| 4 | 115: Will letters of  |                                     |   |
|   | commitment be         |                                     |   |
|   | excluded from the     |                                     |   |
|   | page count along with |                                     |   |
|   | resumes and bios?     |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 1 | Reference D, Key      | Tasks 3, 6 and 16 require           |   |
| 5 | Personnel, page 115:  | evaluation efforts.                 |   |
|   | Evaluators are        |                                     |   |
|   | mentioned here as key |                                     |   |
|   | personnel. This was   |                                     |   |
|   | the only reference we |                                     |   |
|   | found to              |                                     |   |
|   | "evaluators." Please  |                                     |   |
|   | provide context for   |                                     |   |
|   | their role in the     |                                     |   |
|   | project.              |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 1 | Reference D, page     | Yes, offerors may name other        |   |
| 6 | 115: Section D states | personnel as key                    |   |
|   | that the Project      |                                     |   |
|   | Director, Project     |                                     |   |
|   | Manager, and          |                                     |   |
|   | evaluators are        |                                     |   |
|   | classified as key     |                                     |   |
|   | personnel. May        |                                     |   |
|   | offerors name other   |                                     |   |
|   | personnel as key?     |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 1 | Section L.8.D states  | No. The evaluators will be required |   |
| 7 | that evaluators are   | only for selected tasks, and not to |   |
|   | key personnel. Can    | manage all task areas. The          |   |
|   | the offeror assume    | evaluators will be required         |   |
|   | that evaluators are   | primarily for Task 16, but also for |   |
|   | the key medical,      | Tasks 3 and 6.                      |   |
|   | education and         |                                     |   |
|   | technical personnel   |                                     |   |
|   | required to manage    |                                     |   |
|   | the task areas?       |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 1 | Reference D.2, page   | Offerors should describe their      |   |
| 8 | 116: Additional       | complete project team and designate |   |
|   | personnel (medical,   | "key personnel" within the team.    |   |
|   | education, and        | Offerors should provide for each    |   |
|   | technical personnel)  | "key personnel" the information     |   |
|   | are described. Are    | requested in Reference D, page 115  |   |
|   | these considered key  | and 116. Offerors may designate any |   |
|   | personnel? Are        | personnel within their project team |   |
|   | offerors to describe  | as "key personnel", in addition to  |   |
|   | here other personnel  | the Project Director, Project       |   |
|   | proposed who are not  | Manager and evaluators, who are     |   |
|   | technically           | key.                                |   |
|   | considered key per    |                                     |   |
|   | the Key Personnel     |                                     |   |
|   | clause? Please        |                                     |   |
|   | provide context for   |                                     |   |
|   | how these personnel   |                                     |   |
|   | fit into the project. |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 1 | Reference D, page 115 | Resumes of non-key personnel may be |   |
| 9 | -- 116: Resumes are   | submitted. Resumes may be an        |   |
|   | mentioned on page     | attachment to the Technical         |   |
|   | 112, but are not      | Proposal.                           |   |
|   | mentioned here. Where |                                     |   |
|   | should resumes be     |                                     |   |
|   | placed in the         |                                     |   |
|   | proposal? Should      |                                     |   |
|   | resumes of only key   |                                     |   |
|   | personnel be          |                                     |   |
|   | submitted, or may     |                                     |   |
|   | offerors present      |                                     |   |
|   | resumes of non-key    |                                     |   |
|   | personnel?            |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 2 | Reference L.9, page   | The assumption is correct.          |   |
| 0 | 116: The RFP asks for |                                     |   |
| \ | \"all contracts and   |                                     |   |
| . | subcontracts          |                                     |   |
|   | currently in          |                                     |   |
|   | process\". May we     |                                     |   |
|   | assume you mean \"all |                                     |   |
|   | similar or relevant   |                                     |   |
|   | contracts and         |                                     |   |
|   | subcontracts\"? We    |                                     |   |
|   | are a large, diverse  |                                     |   |
|   | company, and all      |                                     |   |
|   | projects would        |                                     |   |
|   | represent a very long |                                     |   |
|   | list.                 |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 2 | Reference A.1, page   | L.11.A.1, 2, and 3 (page 119) was   |   |
| 1 | 119: Certified labor  | included by mistake. Please delete. |   |
|   | rates are requested   | L.11.A. should read as follows:     |   |
|   | for "on-site"         |                                     |   |
|   | personnel.  Does this | A. Cost/Price Proposal              |   |
|   | mean "government      |                                     |   |
|   | site?" Can we assume  | A cost proposal shall be submitted  |   |
|   | that certified rates  | in accordance with FAR 15. The      |   |
|   | for all personnel,    | business proposal must contain      |   |
|   | whether on or off     | sufficient information to allow the |   |
|   | site are required?    | Government to perform a basic       |   |
|   |                       | analysis of the proposed cost or    |   |
|   |                       | price of the work. The proposal     |   |
|   |                       | costs should be provided by task,   |   |
|   |                       | per project year, for each of the 5 |   |
|   |                       | years, in addition to a cumulative  |   |
|   |                       | cost by task. As appropriate, cost  |   |
|   |                       | breakdowns shall be provided for    |   |
|   |                       | the following cost elements:        |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   |                       | \(a\) Direct Labor....              |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   |                       | (NOTE: Items (a) through (g) remain |   |
|   |                       | unchanged.                          |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 2 | Reference A. (a)      | Reference A. (a) states this is to  |   |
| 2 | Direct Labor, page    | cover all employees.                |   |
|   | 119: The name and     |                                     |   |
|   | title of all          |                                     |   |
|   | employees to be used  |                                     |   |
|   | are to be included.   |                                     |   |
|   | Are we bound only to  |                                     |   |
|   | supply the key        |                                     |   |
|   | personnel designated  |                                     |   |
|   | in the bid or all     |                                     |   |
|   | employees listed in   |                                     |   |
|   | the cost proposal?    |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 2 | Do the small          | See Question #24.                   |   |
| 3 | businesses selected   |                                     |   |
|   | as subcontractors     |                                     |   |
|   | need to conform to    |                                     |   |
|   | NAICS code 541611     |                                     |   |
|   | with a size standard  |                                     |   |
|   | of \$6M in order to   |                                     |   |
|   | be counted toward the |                                     |   |
|   | small business goal?  |                                     |   |
|   | Page 1 includes the   |                                     |   |
|   | NAICS in the          |                                     |   |
|   | paragraph about the   |                                     |   |
|   | small business goals. |                                     |   |
|   | Pages 120-121 do not  |                                     |   |
|   | mention it.           |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 2 | Other NAICS codes,    | Yes, provided the product or        |   |
| 4 | such as 541511 or     | service being provided falls        |   |
|   | 541512, are           | primarily under that code.          |   |
|   | appropriate to part   |                                     |   |
|   | of the effort being   |                                     |   |
|   | performed. Will small |                                     |   |
|   | businesses who        |                                     |   |
|   | conform to these      |                                     |   |
|   | NAICS codes be        |                                     |   |
|   | counted toward the    |                                     |   |
|   | small business goal?  |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 2 | Must a business be a  | No, unless you are claiming status  |   |
| 5 | small business        | as a small disadvantaged business   |   |
|   | certified by the SBA  | concern in which case SBA           |   |
|   | to count toward the   | certification is required.          |   |
|   | small business goal?  |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 2 | Reference M.3 B, page | Please delete this sentence from    |   |
| 6 | 127: The RFP states   | M.3.B. A draft work plan and draft  |   |
|   | "The offeror's draft  | evaluation plan is not required to  |   |
|   | work plan and draft   | be submitted with your proposal.    |   |
|   | evaluation plan shall |                                     |   |
|   | be evaluated on how   |                                     |   |
|   | clearly they          |                                     |   |
|   | demonstrate the       |                                     |   |
|   | offeror's             |                                     |   |
|   | understanding of the  |                                     |   |
|   | Scope of Work."       |                                     |   |
|   | Please clarify the    |                                     |   |
|   | requirement for a     |                                     |   |
|   | draft work plan and   |                                     |   |
|   | draft evaluation      |                                     |   |
|   | plan. Are these       |                                     |   |
|   | required with the     |                                     |   |
|   | proposal or after     |                                     |   |
|   | award? Please provide |                                     |   |
|   | additional            |                                     |   |
|   | information on        |                                     |   |
|   | necessary content if  |                                     |   |
|   | required with the     |                                     |   |
|   | proposal.             |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 2 | SubTask 2.2 suggests  | The plan and ranking due within 4   |   |
| 7 | that within 4 weeks   | weeks of EDOC should be based on    |   |
|   | of EDOC, we provide a | criteria developed under SubTask    |   |
|   | plan for providing    | 2.3, and any other reasonable       |   |
|   | assistance and        | criteria and assumptions proposed   |   |
|   | resources to those    | and specified by the contractor.    |   |
|   | grantees "likely to   | The plan and rankings may be        |   |
|   | benefit most" from    | refined later, based on real-world  |   |
|   | those services". Upon | experience obtained in Task 3.      |   |
|   | what would we base    |                                     |   |
|   | this ranking after    |                                     |   |
|   | only four weeks into  |                                     |   |
|   | the project and not   |                                     |   |
|   | having conducted      |                                     |   |
|   | on-site evaluations   |                                     |   |
|   | conducted in Task 3?  |                                     |   |
|   | Is this to be based   |                                     |   |
|   | on ranking criteria   |                                     |   |
|   | to be developed under |                                     |   |
|   | SubTask 2.3           |                                     |   |
|   | (recognizing that     |                                     |   |
|   | these might require   |                                     |   |
|   | refinement based on   |                                     |   |
|   | the real-world        |                                     |   |
|   | experience in Task    |                                     |   |
|   | 3)?                   |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 2 | Task 2 - Are there    | Yes, the offeror may propose and    |   |
| 8 | any                   | use various software tools to best  |   |
|   | suggested/required    | describe the processes, strategy    |   |
|   | tools to be used to   | and work plan. However, the offeror |   |
|   | create and publish    | shall include at a minimum within   |   |
|   | the processes?        | their submission a work plan        |   |
|   | Strategy? work plan?  | prepared using Microsoft Project    |   |
|   | Can/should the        | 2003, and also Access 2003          |   |
|   | offeror propose       | appropriate database and reporting  |   |
|   | software tools to be  | features, to store and describe all |   |
|   | used for this         | tasks, resource allocations, staff, |   |
|   | purpose?              | planned budget and expenditures,    |   |
|   |                       | proposed resource utilization by    |   |
|   |                       | task, costs by resources, costs by  |   |
|   |                       | tasks, timelines, milestones and    |   |
|   |                       | other meaningful project planning   |   |
|   |                       | and management information.         |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 2 | SubTask 3.1 refers to | Approval will occur, and the        |   |
| 9 | "the approved process | process and strategy will become    |   |
|   | and strategy". How    | available, within approximately 1   |   |
|   | long will the         | -2 weeks after completion of Task   |   |
|   | approval take after   | 2.                                  |   |
|   | task 2.1-4 has been   |                                     |   |
|   | completed? When will  |                                     |   |
|   | the approved process  |                                     |   |
|   | and strategy become   |                                     |   |
|   | available?            |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 3 | SubTask 3.1 -- If     | AHRQ does not anticipate that the   |   |
| 0 | uniform data is to be | HITRC will be required to collect   |   |
|   | collected from all    | additional new information from the |   |
|   | the grantees (up to   | grantees via standardized surveys   |   |
|   | 200 or more           | requiring OMB clearance.            |   |
|   | respondents), will    |                                     |   |
|   | OMB review be         |                                     |   |
|   | required? If so, how  |                                     |   |
|   | does this impact the  |                                     |   |
|   | project schedule?     |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 3 | Task 4 - Are there    | We are not aware of any AHRQ        |   |
| 1 | any AHRQ standards to | standards for creating or           |   |
|   | be followed in the    | publishing the reports or           |   |
|   | creation or           | assessments. The HITRC shall        |   |
|   | publishing of the     | propose the standards they wish to  |   |
|   | reports or            | use as part of                      |   |
|   | assessments? Should   |                                     |   |
|   | the execution plan    | Task 2.1, for review and approval   |   |
|   | identify grantee      | by AHRQ. Both grantee and HITRC     |   |
|   | resources required or | resources should be identified.     |   |
|   | only HITRC resources? |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 3 | Subtask 5.2 - What is | Information on AHRQ funded HIT      |   |
| 2 | the media and         | related grants over the past 10     |   |
|   | availability of       | years can be provided in Word       |   |
|   | information on the    | format electronically. AHRQ will be |   |
|   | previous 10 years of  | able to provide only very limited   |   |
|   | AHRQ projects focused | information on HIT projects funded  |   |
|   | on planning,          | by Federal and other sources. The   |   |
|   | implementing and      | contractor will be responsible for  |   |
|   | determining the value | gathering this information, and     |   |
|   | of IT? Will AHRQ be   | should not rely on AHRQ inputs.     |   |
|   | able to supply any    |                                     |   |
|   | existing collection   |                                     |   |
|   | or compendia of       |                                     |   |
|   | information on        |                                     |   |
|   | "projects funded by   |                                     |   |
|   | Federal or other      |                                     |   |
|   | sources that focus on |                                     |   |
|   | planning,             |                                     |   |
|   | implementing and      |                                     |   |
|   | determining the value |                                     |   |
|   | of HIT to improve     |                                     |   |
|   | patient safety and    |                                     |   |
|   | quality."             |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 3 | Task 6.1 - Are there  | No. AHRQ does not have at this time |   |
| 3 | any preferred or      | any predefined measures for the     |   |
|   | required instruments  | HITRC to assess satisfaction of the |   |
|   | or measures to be     | HIT grantees and projects with the  |   |
|   | used to measure       | HITRC services. The HITRC shall     |   |
|   | satisfaction?         | propose and submit these measures   |   |
|   |                       | for review and approval by AHRQ as  |   |
|   |                       | part of its Task 2.1 submission.    |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 3 | Task 6.1-- If uniform | See Question #30.                   |   |
| 4 | data is to be         |                                     |   |
|   | collected from all    |                                     |   |
|   | the grantees (up to   |                                     |   |
|   | 200 or more           |                                     |   |
|   | respondents), will    |                                     |   |
|   | OMB review be         |                                     |   |
|   | required? If so, how  |                                     |   |
|   | does this impact the  |                                     |   |
|   | project schedule?     |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 3 | Task 6 - Are there    | No. AHRQ does not have at this time |   |
| 5 | any suggested/        | any suggested/ required             |   |
|   | required format/tools | format/tools to create and publish  |   |
|   | to be used to create  | the reports. The Offeror should     |   |
|   | and publish the       | propose and submit for approval by  |   |
|   | reports?              | AHRQ, as part of its Task 2.1       |   |
|   |                       | submission, the particular format   |   |
|   |                       | and tools it desires to use for     |   |
|   |                       | Task 6. In addition, the contractor |   |
|   |                       | shall include all report            |   |
|   |                       | information resulting from Task 6   |   |
|   |                       | within the HIT extranet for access  |   |
|   |                       | by all HIT grantees and projects.   |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 3 | Subtask 7.9 asks that | The HIT extranet, web conferencing, |   |
| 6 | we provide web based, | and other web-based tools to be     |   |
|   | real-time, one-on-one | used by the HITRC will include the  |   |
|   | assistance; is        | capability for providing real-time, |   |
|   | real-time a serious   | one-on-one assistance, instant      |   |
|   | requirement or a      | messaging, discussion boards,       |   |
|   | figure of speech?     | collaboration portals, sharing of   |   |
|   | What is the           | white-boards, on-line training,     |   |
|   | availability          | sharing remote pc desktops remotely |   |
|   | requirement for the   | to facilitate troubleshooting       |   |
|   | assistance service?   | software and system operation       |   |
|   | 24/7? 8-8 CST? 9-5    | problems, etc. The HITRC will be    |   |
|   | EST? Scheduled or     | expected to make use of these       |   |
|   | on-demand?            | web-based tools, where appropriate  |   |
|   |                       | and cost-effective. The HITRC will  |   |
|   |                       | be expected to provide technical    |   |
|   |                       | assistance and support during the   |   |
|   |                       | HIT grantees' and projects' normal  |   |
|   |                       | business hours. The HITRC shall     |   |
|   |                       | provide support both on-demand,     |   |
|   |                       | when possible, as well as           |   |
|   |                       | scheduled, when more appropriate    |   |
|   |                       | and cost-effective. The HITRC's     |   |
|   |                       | goal should be to provide a very    |   |
|   |                       | high level of quality support to    |   |
|   |                       | the HIT grantees and projects.      |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 3 | Task 7 - Are there    | The suggested / required tools are  |   |
| 7 | any                   | defined in Tasks 9 and 10.          |   |
|   | suggested/required    |                                     |   |
|   | tools to be used to   |                                     |   |
|   | visualize the         |                                     |   |
|   | accumulated           |                                     |   |
|   | knowledge? For the    |                                     |   |
|   | repository? For       |                                     |   |
|   | collaboration?        |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 3 | Task 7 - Are there    | The extranet tools are described in |   |
| 8 | any standard or       | Task 10. Offerors may suggest and   |   |
|   | suggested/required    | provide other tools (e.g. Remedy,   |   |
|   | tools to be used to   | Peregrine Service Center {currently |   |
|   | create and publish    | used by HHS/AHRQ}, etc.) to augment |   |
|   | the technical         | those in Task 10 for purposes of    |   |
|   | assistance requests   | creating and publishing technical   |   |
|   | on the extranet?      | assistance requests on the          |   |
|   |                       | extranet.                           |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 3 | Tasks 20 and 21 --    | Task 20 is a one-year effort, to be |   |
| 9 | These tasks are not   | completed by end of September 2005. |   |
|   | mentioned in the      | Task 21 is a multi-year effort, as  |   |
|   | listing of tasks to   | described in SubTask 21.7.          |   |
|   | be undertaken during  |                                     |   |
|   | the option years (p.  |                                     |   |
|   | 56). However, there   |                                     |   |
|   | is one option-year    |                                     |   |
|   | deliverable (21-OP,   |                                     |   |
|   | p. 68) that refers to |                                     |   |
|   | Task 21. Please       |                                     |   |
|   | clarify whether       |                                     |   |
|   | either/both of these  |                                     |   |
|   | tasks will continue   |                                     |   |
|   | in the option         |                                     |   |
|   | periods.              |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 4 | The Technical         | The Small Disadvantaged Business    |   |
| 0 | Proposal Instructions | Participation Plan should be        |   |
|   | (L.8, pp. 112 ff)     | submitted as a separate volume.     |   |
|   | state that "The       |                                     |   |
|   | technical proposal    | Past Performance should be          |   |
|   | described below shall | submitted as a separate volume.     |   |
|   | be limited to 150     |                                     |   |
|   | pages not including   | Therefore, the proposal should      |   |
|   | resumes or            | consist of 4 parts: Technical       |   |
|   | bibliographies,.."    | Proposal, Small Disadvantaged       |   |
|   | and under L.8.a(4)    | Business Participation Plan, Past   |   |
|   | the following are     | Performance, and Business Proposal  |   |
|   | listed as part of the | (including cost/price proposal, the |   |
|   | Technical Proposal:   | Small Business Subcontracting Plan, |   |
|   |                       | Section K certifications, and other |   |
|   | "A) Understanding the | administrative data).               |   |
|   | Problem               |                                     |   |
|   |                       | The 150 page limit only applies to  |   |
|   | B\) Technical         | the Technical Proposal. There is no |   |
|   | Approach              | page limit for the other sections.  |   |
|   |                       | However, the Agency expects         |   |
|   | C\) Management Plan   | offerors to honor its intent to     |   |
|   |                       | keep proposals succinct and to the  |   |
|   | D\) Key Personnel     | point. Unnecessary pages are not    |   |
|   |                       | well received.                      |   |
|   | E\) Facilities        |                                     |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   | F\) Past Performance  |                                     |   |
|   | (See Section L.9)     |                                     |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   | Small Disadvantaged   |                                     |   |
|   | Business              |                                     |   |
|   | Participation Plan    |                                     |   |
|   | (See Section L.10)"   |                                     |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   | However, section      |                                     |   |
|   | L.7.c, "Separation of |                                     |   |
|   | Technical, Past       |                                     |   |
|   | Performance           |                                     |   |
|   | Information, Small    |                                     |   |
|   | Disadvantaged         |                                     |   |
|   | Business Plan, and    |                                     |   |
|   | Business Proposal" on |                                     |   |
|   | p.110 implies that    |                                     |   |
|   | Past Performance and  |                                     |   |
|   | Small Disadvantaged   |                                     |   |
|   | Business Plan are to  |                                     |   |
|   | be submitted as       |                                     |   |
|   | separate volumes.     |                                     |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   | Does the 150 page     |                                     |   |
|   | limit include the     |                                     |   |
|   | Past Performance and  |                                     |   |
|   | Small Disadvantaged   |                                     |   |
|   | Business Plan         |                                     |   |
|   | information?          |                                     |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   | If not, is there any  |                                     |   |
|   | page limit that       |                                     |   |
|   | applies to these      |                                     |   |
|   | sections/documents?   |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 4 | The RFP states that   | No. The contractor should plan for  |   |
| 1 | the estimated total   | and propose what it believes to be  |   |
|   | cost of the           | the most appropriate resource       |   |
|   | procurement over the  | allocation per year based on its    |   |
|   | base period plus      | expected work load to perform the   |   |
|   | three option years    | tasks defined in the Statement of   |   |
|   | will be \$18,600,000  | Work.                               |   |
|   | (p.5). Can AHRQ       |                                     |   |
|   | provide any guidance  |                                     |   |
|   | on expected           |                                     |   |
|   | allocation of         |                                     |   |
|   | resources across the  |                                     |   |
|   | base period and the   |                                     |   |
|   | option years?         |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 4 | With regard to the    | B.4 lists items unallowable unless  |   |
| 2 | required              | authorized in writing by the        |   |
|   | authorization for     | Contracting Officer. Therefore,     |   |
|   | consultant rates over | consultants may be authorized over  |   |
|   | \$500 per day (p.     | the \$500 per day limit with        |   |
|   | 5-6, B.4 Provisions   | approval of the Contracting         |   |
|   | Applicable To Direct  | Officer. If a consultant is         |   |
|   | Costs): Task 6        | included in the proposal for an     |   |
|   | requires the HITRC to | amount higher than \$500 per day,   |   |
|   | engage "researchers,  | and if the proposal is accepted,    |   |
|   | research program      | then the higher rate would be       |   |
|   | directors and other   | considered approved. If there are   |   |
|   | HIT experts" to       | any questions on the rates, they    |   |
|   | provide consultation. | will be discussed during            |   |
|   | If a consultant whose | negotiations.                       |   |
|   | established billing   |                                     |   |
|   | rate for government   |                                     |   |
|   | clients exceeds \$500 |                                     |   |
|   | per day is included   |                                     |   |
|   | in the proposal (with |                                     |   |
|   | documentation of      |                                     |   |
|   | their rate made       |                                     |   |
|   | available), will such |                                     |   |
|   | rates be authorized   |                                     |   |
|   | upon award and        |                                     |   |
|   | acceptance of the     |                                     |   |
|   | offer? Would there be |                                     |   |
|   | any possibility that  |                                     |   |
|   | documented rates      |                                     |   |
|   | could be disallowed   |                                     |   |
|   | after award?          |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 4 | With regard to the    | Based on a 2080 hour work year, the |   |
| 3 | salary cap (p. 75,    | hourly rate would be \$84.47.       |   |
|   | H.6 Salary Cap Guide  |                                     |   |
|   | Notice), what would   |                                     |   |
|   | be the hourly rate    |                                     |   |
|   | equivalent to the     |                                     |   |
|   | 175,700 annual cap?   |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 4 | With regard to small  | AHRQ apologizes for the confusion.  |   |
| 4 | and disadvantaged     |                                     |   |
|   | subcontracting goals, | Goals should be stated as a         |   |
|   | the RFP cover letter  | percentage of total planned         |   |
|   | states:               | subcontract dollars for the entire  |   |
|   |                       | contract (including option          |   |
|   | "For this             | periods).                           |   |
|   | acquisition, the AHRQ |                                     |   |
|   | recommended goal (as  |                                     |   |
|   | a percentage of total |                                     |   |
|   | planned subcontract   |                                     |   |
|   | dollars for the base  |                                     |   |
|   | period) is 30% for    |                                     |   |
|   | Small Businesses,     |                                     |   |
|   | which shall include   |                                     |   |
|   | at least 11% (as a    |                                     |   |
|   | percentage of total   |                                     |   |
|   | contract value for    |                                     |   |
|   | the base period) for  |                                     |   |
|   | Small Disadvantaged   |                                     |   |
|   | Businesses, ... "     |                                     |   |
|   | (emphasis supplied)   |                                     |   |
|   | while Page 121        |                                     |   |
|   | states:               |                                     |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   | "g. For this          |                                     |   |
|   | particular            |                                     |   |
|   | acquisition, the AHRQ |                                     |   |
|   | recommended goal (as  |                                     |   |
|   | a percentage of total |                                     |   |
|   | contract value for    |                                     |   |
|   | the base period) is   |                                     |   |
|   | 30% for Small         |                                     |   |
|   | Businesses, which     |                                     |   |
|   | shall included at     |                                     |   |
|   | least 11% (as a       |                                     |   |
|   | percentage of total   |                                     |   |
|   | planned subcontract   |                                     |   |
|   | dollars for the base  |                                     |   |
|   | period) for Small     |                                     |   |
|   | Disadvantaged         |                                     |   |
|   | Businesses,..."       |                                     |   |
|   | (emphasis supplied).  |                                     |   |
|   | Please clarify which  |                                     |   |
|   | is the appropriate    |                                     |   |
|   | base for calculating  |                                     |   |
|   | each of these         |                                     |   |
|   | requirements.         |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 4 | The Business Proposal | See response to Question #40.       |   |
| 5 | Instructions (L.11,   | Please submit your proposal as      |   |
|   | p. 119) states: "The  | follows:                            |   |
|   | Business Proposal     |                                     |   |
|   | shall include the     | Technical Proposal (Original and 12 |   |
|   | Cost/Price Proposal,  | copies)                             |   |
|   | the Small Business    |                                     |   |
|   | Subcontracting Plan,  | Past Performance (Original and 3    |   |
|   | and Other             | copies)                             |   |
|   | Administrative Data   |                                     |   |
|   | ..." This seems to be | Business Proposal (Original and 4   |   |
|   | in conflict with L.7, | copies)                             |   |
|   | which seems to imply  |                                     |   |
|   | that the              | Small Disadvantaged Business        |   |
|   | subcontracting plan   | Participation Plan (Original and 4  |   |
|   | is to be submitted    | copies)                             |   |
|   | separately (and       |                                     |   |
|   | L.10.A, p. 118, which |                                     |   |
|   | indicates a different |                                     |   |
|   | number of copies from |                                     |   |
|   | the cover letter.)    |                                     |   |
|   | Please clarify the    |                                     |   |
|   | submission            |                                     |   |
|   | requirements.         |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 4 | The Business Proposal | Yes, the Offeror shall provide in   |   |
| 6 | Instructions (L.11,   | the business proposal a cost        |   |
|   | p. 119 ff) does not   | breakdown by year and by Task for   |   |
|   | specify a cost        | each year. Cost breakdown by        |   |
|   | breakdown by task or  | SubTask is not required, but may be |   |
|   | by time period.       | provided.                           |   |
|   | Section B.2 requires  |                                     |   |
|   | only total cost and   |                                     |   |
|   | fee by year. Is any   |                                     |   |
|   | breakdown of costs by |                                     |   |
|   | task or year required |                                     |   |
|   | in the business       |                                     |   |
|   | proposal?             |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 4 | SubTask 2.4 -- Under  | AHRQ cannot provide further         |   |
| 7 | Section D - Specific  | guidance on budgeting assumptions   |   |
|   | Requirements, the     | for average level of effort         |   |
|   | Government indicates  | expected to be required for         |   |
|   | that the number of    | individual grants per year. The     |   |
|   | grants and projects   | Offeror must use its best judgment  |   |
|   | will range from 125   | to estimate average level of effort |   |
|   | in Year 1 to 200 in   | for individual grants. AHRQ cannot  |   |
|   | Year 5. The level of  | provide further information (than   |   |
|   | effort required to    | already provided in Sections B, C,  |   |
|   | support grants may    | and D) about anticipated changes in |   |
|   | vary over their       | the types of grants anticipated to  |   |
|   | lifespan, and the     | be solicited and awarded during the |   |
|   | level of effort       | base period or option years of the  |   |
|   | required to support   | HITRC contract that might impact on |   |
|   | grants may vary if    | budgeting for support activities.   |   |
|   | different types of    |                                     |   |
|   | grants are being      |                                     |   |
|   | awarded. Can AHRQ     |                                     |   |
|   | provide budgeting     |                                     |   |
|   | assumptions for       |                                     |   |
|   | average level of      |                                     |   |
|   | effort expected to be |                                     |   |
|   | required for          |                                     |   |
|   | individual grants per |                                     |   |
|   | year (including       |                                     |   |
|   | changes over the term |                                     |   |
|   | of the grant)? Can    |                                     |   |
|   | AHRQ provide any      |                                     |   |
|   | information about     |                                     |   |
|   | anticipated changes   |                                     |   |
|   | in the types of       |                                     |   |
|   | grants anticipated to |                                     |   |
|   | be solicited and      |                                     |   |
|   | awarded during the    |                                     |   |
|   | base period or option |                                     |   |
|   | years of the HITRC    |                                     |   |
|   | contract that might   |                                     |   |
|   | impact on budgeting   |                                     |   |
|   | for support           |                                     |   |
|   | activities?           |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 4 | General: If the       | Yes                                 |   |
| 8 | contractor uses an    |                                     |   |
|   | 11" x 17" fold out    |                                     |   |
|   | page to depict a      |                                     |   |
|   | chart/illustration    |                                     |   |
|   | will it be counted as |                                     |   |
|   | one page?             |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 4 | General: In reviewing | An SF 33 is not required.           |   |
| 9 | the AHRQ website and  |                                     |   |
|   | FedBizOps for this    |                                     |   |
|   | procurement, it was   |                                     |   |
|   | noticed that the SF33 |                                     |   |
|   | was not attached to   |                                     |   |
|   | the procurement       |                                     |   |
|   | documents. Can we     |                                     |   |
|   | assume that this is   |                                     |   |
|   | not a requirement for |                                     |   |
|   | AHRQ?                 |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 5 | Section A, 2nd        | See Question #44                    |   |
| 0 | Paragraph, Page 1     |                                     |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   | Section L.11, B, g,   |                                     |   |
|   | Page 121              |                                     |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   | Attachment 4, Page    |                                     |   |
|   | 140: Section A states |                                     |   |
|   | "AHRQ recommended     |                                     |   |
|   | goal (as a percentage |                                     |   |
|   | of total planned      |                                     |   |
|   | subcontract dollars   |                                     |   |
|   | for the base period)  |                                     |   |
|   | is 30% for Small      |                                     |   |
|   | Businesses", Section  |                                     |   |
|   | L states "AHRQ        |                                     |   |
|   | recommended goal (as  |                                     |   |
|   | a percentage of total |                                     |   |
|   | contract value for    |                                     |   |
|   | the base period) is   |                                     |   |
|   | 30% for Small         |                                     |   |
|   | Businesses", and      |                                     |   |
|   | Attachment 4 refers   |                                     |   |
|   | to FAR 19.7 and uses  |                                     |   |
|   | percentage of total   |                                     |   |
|   | planned subcontract   |                                     |   |
|   | dollars. It is our    |                                     |   |
|   | assumption that the   |                                     |   |
|   | small business goal   |                                     |   |
|   | for this acquisition  |                                     |   |
|   | is 30% of total       |                                     |   |
|   | planned subcontract   |                                     |   |
|   | dollars, is this      |                                     |   |
|   | correct?              |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 5 | L.9 of the RFP        | See Question #20.                   |   |
| 1 | requests "A list of   |                                     |   |
|   | the last five (5)     | There is no limit on the number of  |   |
|   | contracts and         | contracts that should be listed and |   |
|   | subcontracts          | for which questionnaires should be  |   |
|   | completed during the  | submitted.                          |   |
|   | past three years and  |                                     |   |
|   | all contracts and     |                                     |   |
|   | subcontracts          |                                     |   |
|   | currently in          |                                     |   |
|   | process." Should      |                                     |   |
|   | offerors submit a     |                                     |   |
|   | list of all contracts |                                     |   |
|   | or can this be        |                                     |   |
|   | condensed to only     |                                     |   |
|   | contracts that are    |                                     |   |
|   | relevant to the       |                                     |   |
|   | proposed scope of     |                                     |   |
|   | work? Is there a      |                                     |   |
|   | limit on the number   |                                     |   |
|   | of contracts that     |                                     |   |
|   | should be listed and  |                                     |   |
|   | for which             |                                     |   |
|   | questionnaires should |                                     |   |
|   | be submitted?         |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 5 | Section C, Page 8,    | The HITRC will be neither a         |   |
| 2 | Page 35: Throughout   | physical center located within AHRQ |   |
|   | the RFP, AHRQ refers  | spaces, nor a solely "virtual"      |   |
|   | to the Health         | service center. The physical        |   |
|   | Information           | location of the HITRC staff and     |   |
|   | Technology Resource   | service center will be proposed by  |   |
|   | Center. Is it correct | the contractor. The HITRC will      |   |
|   | to assume that this   | provide a variety of service center |   |
|   | is a virtual Center   | technical assistance and support    |   |
|   | as depicted in Tasks  | functions to HIT grantees and       |   |
|   | 9 and 10 and not a    | projects. As only one of the HITRC  |   |
|   | physical center that  | service center tools and            |   |
|   | is within the         | capabilities, the HITRC will        |   |
|   | confines of the       | provide a "virtual -- web-based"    |   |
|   | AHRQ's space in       | HIT extranet and knowledge          |   |
|   | Rockville, MD?        | management repository, hosted on    |   |
|   |                       | servers located in AHRQ's computer  |   |
|   |                       | center, and accessed via the        |   |
|   |                       | internet. Also, a key HITRC         |   |
|   |                       | function will be to provide         |   |
|   |                       | technical assistance and support    |   |
|   |                       | onsite at HIT grantee and project   |   |
|   |                       | organizations, and remotely from    |   |
|   |                       | the HITRC staff locations, as       |   |
|   |                       | appropriate and cost-effective.     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 5 | Section C.4., Current | Awards are expected to be made by   |   |
| 3 | AHRQ HIT Initiatives, | September 30, 2004                  |   |
|   | Page17: What is the   |                                     |   |
|   | anticipated award     |                                     |   |
|   | date for the State    |                                     |   |
|   | and Regional          |                                     |   |
|   | Demonstrations in HIT |                                     |   |
|   | (AHRQ-04-0015)?       |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 5 | Section D, Specific   | The increased number of estimated   |   |
| 4 | Requirements, Page    | HIT grants/projects (from 108 to    |   |
|   | 20: AHRQ-04-0016      | 125) is due to the following: (1)   |   |
|   | indicates that the    | as indicated in Section C.4, page   |   |
|   | HITRC will support up | 17, AHRQ anticipates the NLM may    |   |
|   | to 35 planning        | elect to fund some number (to be    |   |
|   | grants, 48            | determined) of additional HIT       |   |
|   | implementation        | grants which will be supported by   |   |
|   | grants, 20            | the HITRC; (2) as indicated in      |   |
|   | demonstration grants, | Section D, Task 18, page 51, the    |   |
|   | and 5 state/regional  | HITRC will support HIT projects     |   |
|   | demonstration grants. | involving HRSA / HC and IHS EHR     |   |
|   | This totals 108       | implementation efforts, and (3) as  |   |
|   | grants, however, AHRQ | indicated in Section C.4, page 17,  |   |
|   | estimates that HITRC  | AHRQ anticipates that the HITRC may |   |
|   | shall be responsible  | be required to support some of the  |   |
|   | for supporting up to  | HIT grants funded by HRSA's Office  |   |
|   | 125 HIT               | of Rural Health Policy (ORHP), the  |   |
|   | grants/projects       | Bureau of Primary Health Care       |   |
|   | during the first      | (BPHC) and possibly other HRSA      |   |
|   | contract year. Since  | offices.                            |   |
|   | the release of this   |                                     |   |
|   | RFP (AHRQ-04-0016),   | Also, as indicated in Section D,    |   |
|   | has AHRQ identified   | page 20: the offeror should be      |   |
|   | additional            | aware that (1) the yearly estimates |   |
|   | grants/projects to be | of HIT grants and projects to be    |   |
|   | supported by the      | supported by the HITRC may vary     |   |
|   | HITRC?                | based on available HIT funding and  |   |
|   |                       | interest from AHRQ and other        |   |
|   |                       | organizations collaborating with    |   |
|   |                       | AHRQ on various HIT initiatives;    |   |
|   |                       | and (2) the HITRC shall be prepared |   |
|   |                       | to easily scale its resources and   |   |
|   |                       | staff during the contract period,   |   |
|   |                       | as may be required to support       |   |
|   |                       | additional or fewer HIT grantees    |   |
|   |                       | and projects.                       |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 5 | Section D, Subtask    | The 20 initial site visits number   |   |
| 5 | 3.1, Page 23; Each    | for difficult assessments, is       |   |
|   | HIT grantee is        | perhaps a conservative estimate.    |   |
|   | comprised of at least | This low number was provided as an  |   |
|   | 3 partner             | estimate because it was felt that   |   |
|   | organization.         | for these initial assessments: (1)  |   |
|   | Assuming that the     | not much time would be available    |   |
|   | initial assessment    | for planning, arranging, scheduling |   |
|   | will include          | and conducting many onsite visits   |   |
|   | approximately 108 or  | (to be all completed by 10 weeks    |   |
|   | 125 grants; a minimum | EDOC and probably not started until |   |
|   | of 324 grantee        | week 5 from EDOC); and (2) phone,   |   |
|   | participants will be  | web-conferencing and other methods  |   |
|   | assessed. How was the | might be more productive,           |   |
|   | upper limit of 20     | cost-effective and sufficient for   |   |
|   | initial site visits   | these initial assessments, except   |   |
|   | for difficult         | for the most difficult assessments. |   |
|   | assessments           | However, the HITRC should propose   |   |
|   | determined?           | and conduct as many initial onsite  |   |
|   |                       | visits as it feels is necessary and |   |
|   |                       | cost-effective to perform Task 3 by |   |
|   |                       | 10 weeks from EDOC. In addition,    |   |
|   |                       | the HITRC may propose and perform   |   |
|   |                       | as many other onsite visits as it   |   |
|   |                       | believes will be needed as part of  |   |
|   |                       | the Task 6 three month follow-on    |   |
|   |                       | assessment efforts.                 |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 5 | Section D, Subtask    | No more information is available.   |   |
| 6 | 7.3 Page 25 ; Is more | The "other Federal project"         |   |
|   | information available | mentioned in Subtask 7.3 is a       |   |
|   | about the other       | generic reference to any other      |   |
|   | Federal project       | Federal projects or organizations   |   |
|   | mentioned in this     | from which grantees may need to     |   |
|   | Subtask 7.3?          | obtain data needed to conduct their |   |
|   |                       | research projects, e.g. CMS, etc..  |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 5 | Section L.8,          | The request is for individual       |   |
| 7 | Subsection - a(4)C.4, | person hours for each Task.         |   |
|   | Page 115 ; Does "the  |                                     |   |
|   | number of person      |                                     |   |
|   | hours" requested      |                                     |   |
|   | represent total task  |                                     |   |
|   | hours or per          |                                     |   |
|   | individual hours per  |                                     |   |
|   | task?                 |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 5 | Section L.8,          | The request is for "hours per       |   |
| 8 | Subsection - a(4)C.8, | person" and "loading per task".     |   |
|   | Page 115 ; What level |                                     |   |
|   | of detail is expected |                                     |   |
|   | in the person-level   |                                     |   |
|   | task-loading          |                                     |   |
|   | chart"? - Hours per   |                                     |   |
|   | person, or percentage |                                     |   |
|   | of full time          |                                     |   |
|   | equivalent?           |                                     |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   | \- Loading per task   |                                     |   |
|   | or for the total      |                                     |   |
|   | project?              |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 5 | Section L.8,a.(1),    | All companies on the proposing      |   |
| 9 | Page 112; The RFP     | team.                               |   |
|   | specifies information |                                     |   |
|   | to be contained on    |                                     |   |
|   | the cover page of the |                                     |   |
|   | Technical Proposal    |                                     |   |
|   | including "author(s)  |                                     |   |
|   | of the technical      |                                     |   |
|   | proposal". Does the   |                                     |   |
|   | reference to          |                                     |   |
|   | author(s) refer to    |                                     |   |
|   | the prime contractor, |                                     |   |
|   | all companies on the  |                                     |   |
|   | proposing team, or    |                                     |   |
|   | the individuals from  |                                     |   |
|   | the companies?        |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 6 | Section K.15.I, Pages | Section L.11.A .1 through 3 has     |   |
| 0 | 95 -- 96, and Section | been deleted. (See Question #21).   |   |
|   | L.11.A. (1-3) Page    |                                     |   |
|   | 119; Up until this    | Submissions of indirect rate        |   |
|   | time our company has  | agreements with your cognizant      |   |
|   | been exempt from      | audit agency is requested.          |   |
|   | submitting a          |                                     |   |
|   | disclosure statement  |                                     |   |
|   | since we have not     |                                     |   |
|   | supported CAS-covered |                                     |   |
|   | contracts. It is our  |                                     |   |
|   | interpretation that   |                                     |   |
|   | in order to comply    |                                     |   |
|   | with Section          |                                     |   |
|   | L.11.A.1,2, and 3 the |                                     |   |
|   | vendor may submit its |                                     |   |
|   | provisional rate      |                                     |   |
|   | package concurrently  |                                     |   |
|   | with it business      |                                     |   |
|   | proposal in           |                                     |   |
|   | accordance with       |                                     |   |
|   | K.15.I.c(1) and       |                                     |   |
|   | remain compliant with |                                     |   |
|   | the RFP requirements. |                                     |   |
|   | Is this assumption    |                                     |   |
|   | correct?              |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 6 | Section M, B, Page    | See Question #26. This requirement  |   |
| 1 | 126; The RFP states   | has been deleted.                   |   |
|   | that "The offeror's   |                                     |   |
|   | draft work plan and   |                                     |   |
|   | draft evaluation plan |                                     |   |
|   | shall be evaluated on |                                     |   |
|   | how clearly they      |                                     |   |
|   | demonstrate the       |                                     |   |
|   | offeror's             |                                     |   |
|   | understanding of the  |                                     |   |
|   | Scope of Work. "      |                                     |   |
|   | Instructions on the   |                                     |   |
|   | submission of the     |                                     |   |
|   | draft work plan were  |                                     |   |
|   | not contained in      |                                     |   |
|   | Section L. The        |                                     |   |
|   | Offeror assumes that  |                                     |   |
|   | the draft work plan   |                                     |   |
|   | is to be submitted as |                                     |   |
|   | an appendix to the    |                                     |   |
|   | Technical Proposal    |                                     |   |
|   | outside of the page   |                                     |   |
|   | count. Is this        |                                     |   |
|   | correct?              |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 6 | Are there any         | AHRQ is not aware at this time of   |   |
| 2 | potential conflicts   | any potential conflicts of interest |   |
|   | of interest, or       | or potential exclusions from other  |   |
|   | potential exclusions  | bids for the successful offeror(s)  |   |
|   | from other bids, for  | on this procurement (other than     |   |
|   | the successful        | already specified in the RFP).      |   |
|   | offeror(s) on this    |                                     |   |
|   | procurement? For      | AHRQ is not aware of any HRSA, NLM, |   |
|   | example, would this   | CMS, VA etc. effort for which the   |   |
|   | contract preclude the | successful Offeror of the HITRC     |   |
|   | Prime or              | would be precluded from working on  |   |
|   | Subcontractors from   | grants and contracts subject to     |   |
|   | doing other technical | oversight by this contract.         |   |
|   | support work for      |                                     |   |
|   | HRSA, NLM, CMS, VA,   |                                     |   |
|   | etc.? Would the       |                                     |   |
|   | successful Offeror be |                                     |   |
|   | precluded from        |                                     |   |
|   | working on grants and |                                     |   |
|   | contracts subject to  |                                     |   |
|   | oversight by this     |                                     |   |
|   | contract?             |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 6 | Reference L.8, page   | Yes.                                |   |
| 3 | 112: The RFP states   |                                     |   |
|   | that the majority of  |                                     |   |
|   | the text should be    |                                     |   |
|   | double-spaced. May    |                                     |   |
|   | the Past Performance  |                                     |   |
|   | project descriptions  |                                     |   |
|   | be single-spaced?     |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 6 | Reference L.8, page   | All materials submitted must be at  |   |
| 4 | 112: The RFP states   | least 11 point pitch                |   |
|   | that proposal must be |                                     |   |
|   | "no less than 11      |                                     |   |
|   | point pitch." For     |                                     |   |
|   | purposes of           |                                     |   |
|   | appearance and        |                                     |   |
|   | presentation, will    |                                     |   |
|   | the Government allow  |                                     |   |
|   | tables to be in       |                                     |   |
|   | 10-point pitch with   |                                     |   |
|   | single spacing?       |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 6 | Reference L.10.A.4:   | L.10.A.4 should read: Realism for   |   |
| 5 | The RFP states        | the use of SDB in the proposal.     |   |
|   | "Realist for the use  |                                     |   |
|   | of SDB in the         |                                     |   |
|   | proposal." Please     |                                     |   |
|   | clarify.              |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 6 | I submitted a         | No. It means that if your grant is  |   |
| 6 | proposal to the       | funded then you can't also          |   |
|   | \"Demonstrating Value | participate in the HITRC effort.    |   |
|   | of HIT\" RFA. I see   | You can be part of a HITRC          |   |
|   | that PI\'s of grants  | proposal, if the proposal includes  |   |
|   | awarded under this    | an alternative, or substitute       |   |
|   | RFA are ineligible to | person, for your HITRC involvement, |   |
|   | participate as part   | in the event that you can't         |   |
|   | of a HITRC proposal   | participate in the HITRC effort     |   |
|   | or contract. Does     | because both your grant was funded, |   |
|   | that mean that I am   | and the HITRC proposal that you are |   |
|   | not allowed to be a   | part of, also was funded.           |   |
|   | part of one of the    |                                     |   |
|   | HITRC proposals, even |                                     |   |
|   | though the likelihood |                                     |   |
|   | of me actually        |                                     |   |
|   | receiving funding for |                                     |   |
|   | my proposal is very   |                                     |   |
|   | small due to the high |                                     |   |
|   | number of             |                                     |   |
|   | submissions? This     |                                     |   |
|   | seems odd, since the  |                                     |   |
|   | HITRC proposals are   |                                     |   |
|   | due before we will    |                                     |   |
|   | find out who the      |                                     |   |
|   | funded PI\'s for the  |                                     |   |
|   | HIT Demonstrating     |                                     |   |
|   | value RFA are         |                                     |   |
|   | announced.            |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 6 | Is a small business   | The Department of Health and Human  |   |
| 7 | goal being set for    | Services has not yet set a goal for |   |
|   | disabled veteran?     | disabled veteran.                   |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 6 | Is there an           | There is no incumbent. This is a    |   |
| 8 | incumbent?            | new initiative.                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 6 | I would like to       | There is no such list.              |   |
| 9 | express our interest  |                                     |   |
|   | in being a            |                                     |   |
|   | subcontractor and     |                                     |   |
|   | wonder if there is a  |                                     |   |
|   | list we should be on? |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 7 | Are the past          | See Question #40.                   |   |
| 0 | performance           |                                     |   |
|   | information and the   |                                     |   |
|   | SDB Participation     |                                     |   |
|   | Plans to be submitted |                                     |   |
|   | as stand-alone        |                                     |   |
|   | documents (as implied |                                     |   |
|   | by p.2 of the R FP)   |                                     |   |
|   | or should they be     |                                     |   |
|   | presented as parts F  |                                     |   |
|   | and G of the          |                                     |   |
|   | technical proposal    |                                     |   |
|   | (p. 113 of the RFP)?  |                                     |   |
|   | If the latter, do     |                                     |   |
|   | these sections count  |                                     |   |
|   | toward the 150 page   |                                     |   |
|   | limit for the         |                                     |   |
|   | technical proposal?   |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 7 | Instructions for the  | See Question #20.                   |   |
| 1 | past performance      |                                     |   |
|   | section (p. 116)      |                                     |   |
|   | indicate that we are  |                                     |   |
|   | to provide            |                                     |   |
|   | information for all   |                                     |   |
|   | contracts and         |                                     |   |
|   | subcontracts          |                                     |   |
|   | currently in          |                                     |   |
|   | progress, as well as  |                                     |   |
|   | the last five         |                                     |   |
|   | completed. Our        |                                     |   |
|   | organization has more |                                     |   |
|   | than 100 contracts in |                                     |   |
|   | progress. Is it       |                                     |   |
|   | permissible to select |                                     |   |
|   | only those relevant   |                                     |   |
|   | to this solicitation? |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 7 | Page 115 of the RFP   | Yes, a masters degree and relevant  |   |
| 2 | indicates that the    | substantive and management          |   |
|   | Project Director must | experience may be substituted for   |   |
|   | have a doctoral       | this requirement.                   |   |
|   | degree and/or medical |                                     |   |
|   | degree. Can a masters |                                     |   |
|   | degree and relevant   |                                     |   |
|   | substantive and       |                                     |   |
|   | management experience |                                     |   |
|   | be substituted for    |                                     |   |
|   | this requirement?     |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 7 | The goal for the      | As stated on page 114, the full     |   |
| 3 | small business        | time core personnel may be lower    |   |
|   | subcontracting is 30% | than 70%, only if Offeror provides  |   |
|   | of the total contract | a detailed explanation of how the   |   |
|   | amount, while the     | proposed staffing plan ensures that |   |
|   | percentage of         | the work is conducted by            |   |
|   | full-time core        | individuals with a mastery of the   |   |
|   | personnel is supposed | technical requirements of the       |   |
|   | to be at least 70% of | Statement of Work.                  |   |
|   | the total time        |                                     |   |
|   | allotted, including   | Also, page 114 states that the      |   |
|   | consultants and       | Management Plan shall address the   |   |
|   | subcontractors (p.    | percentage of full time core        |   |
|   | 114). This would seem | personnel (if a ratio of less than  |   |
|   | to leave no room for  | seventy percent full time core      |   |
|   | subcontractors and    | staff to thirty percent consultants |   |
|   | consultants who are   | / subcontractors is proposed,       |   |
|   | not small businesses. | Offeror shall provide a detailed    |   |
|   | Can AHRQ please       | explanation of how the proposed     |   |
|   | clarify and reconcile | staffing plan ensures that the work |   |
|   | these two             | is conducted by individuals with a  |   |
|   | requirements?         | mastery of the technical            |   |
|   |                       | requirements of the Statement of    |   |
|   |                       | Work).                              |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   |                       | The goals for small business        |   |
|   |                       | subcontracting is based on the      |   |
|   |                       | total planned subcontracting        |   |
|   |                       | dollars (see Question #44); not the |   |
|   |                       | total contract amount as was        |   |
|   |                       | erroneously stated in the RFP.      |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   |                       | In addition, other portions of work |   |
|   |                       | other than labor could be           |   |
|   |                       | subcontracted to small business     |   |
|   |                       | (i.e., travel, equipment,           |   |
|   |                       | materials, supplies, etc.).         |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 7 | Paragraph H.8 -       | See answer to question 66.          |   |
| 4 | Eligibility           |                                     |   |
|   | Statement: Under H.8, |                                     |   |
|   | it states that any    |                                     |   |
|   | Principal             |                                     |   |
|   | Investigators of      |                                     |   |
|   | grants awarded under  |                                     |   |
|   | the listed RFAs are   |                                     |   |
|   | ineligible to         |                                     |   |
|   | participate as part   |                                     |   |
|   | of the HITRC          |                                     |   |
|   | proposal. If an       |                                     |   |
|   | individual has been   |                                     |   |
|   | proposed as a PI on   |                                     |   |
|   | one of the grants     |                                     |   |
|   | listed and the grant  |                                     |   |
|   | has not yet been      |                                     |   |
|   | awarded, is that      |                                     |   |
|   | individual eligible   |                                     |   |
|   | to participate on     |                                     |   |
|   | this solicitation and |                                     |   |
|   | subsequent award?     |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 7 | Paragraph L.9 ? Past  | See Question #20                    |   |
| 5 | Performance           |                                     |   |
|   | Information: \"A list |                                     |   |
|   | of the last           |                                     |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   | five (5) contracts    |                                     |   |
|   | and subcontracts      |                                     |   |
|   | completed during the  |                                     |   |
|   | past three years and  |                                     |   |
|   | all contracts and     |                                     |   |
|   | subcontracts          |                                     |   |
|   | currently in          |                                     |   |
|   | process.\" Should     |                                     |   |
|   | offerors submit all   |                                     |   |
|   | current contracts and |                                     |   |
|   | subcontracts or only  |                                     |   |
|   | those contracts and   |                                     |   |
|   | subcontracts relevant |                                     |   |
|   | to the proposed scope |                                     |   |
|   | of work?              |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 7 | Paragraph L.7.c ?     | Yes - See Questions #40 and #45.    |   |
| 6 | States \"The proposal |                                     |   |
|   | shall be in 3         |                                     |   |
|   | parts\". Should       |                                     |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   | this read \"The       |                                     |   |
|   | proposal shall be in  |                                     |   |
|   | 4 parts\", to account |                                     |   |
|   | for (1) Technical     |                                     |   |
|   | Proposal (2) Past     |                                     |   |
|   | Performance           |                                     |   |
|   | Information (3) Small |                                     |   |
|   | Disadvantaged         |                                     |   |
|   | Business              |                                     |   |
|   | Participation Plan;   |                                     |   |
|   | and (4) Business      |                                     |   |
|   | Proposal.             |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 7 | Contractor has direct | Since this is a cost-reimbursement  |   |
| 7 | and indirect rates,   | contract, only actual costs will be |   |
|   | which have been       | reimbursed. Therefore, actual       |   |
|   | approved by           | salaries of personnel should be     |   |
|   |                       | proposed. For proposal and billing  |   |
|   | our DCMA ACO and DCAA | purposes, your approved indirect    |   |
|   | Auditor. These rates  | rate agreement will be used for     |   |
|   | include labor         | indirect costs.                     |   |
|   | category averages for |                                     |   |
|   | direct labor to be    |                                     |   |
|   | used for building     |                                     |   |
|   | cost proposal and     |                                     |   |
|   | bidding purposes. Is  |                                     |   |
|   | it acceptable for     |                                     |   |
|   | contractor to use     |                                     |   |
|   | these approved rates  |                                     |   |
|   | for labor category    |                                     |   |
|   | averages as opposed   |                                     |   |
|   | to actual salaries of |                                     |   |
|   | personnel?            |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 7 | Paragraph H.3 -       | The use of any subcontractor        |   |
| 8 | Subcontracts: This    | identified in your proposal would   |   |
|   | paragraph states      | be approved if your proposal is     |   |
|   | \"Award of any        | accepted. However, after award you  |   |
|   |                       | would need to submit a copy of the  |   |
|   | subcontract is        | subcontract agreement with each     |   |
|   | subject to the        | subcontractor for our review and    |   |
|   | written approval of   | approval prior to award of the      |   |
|   | the Contracting       | subcontract                         |   |
|   | Officer upon review   |                                     |   |
|   | of the supporting     |                                     |   |
|   | documentation as      |                                     |   |
|   | required by FAR       |                                     |   |
|   | Clause 52.215-12,     |                                     |   |
|   | Subcontractor Cost or |                                     |   |
|   | Pricing Data, of the  |                                     |   |
|   | General Clauses       |                                     |   |
|   | incorporated into     |                                     |   |
|   | this contract.\" Are  |                                     |   |
|   | subcontractors        |                                     |   |
|   | included within a     |                                     |   |
|   | proposal              |                                     |   |
|   | automatically         |                                     |   |
|   | approved if the Prime |                                     |   |
|   | contractors proposal  |                                     |   |
|   | is selected as the    |                                     |   |
|   | winning proposal?     |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 7 | Is the organization   | No. As described on page 1 of the   |   |
| 9 | that is awarded the   | RFP, only Principal Investigators   |   |
|   | HITRC contract        | of grants awarded under the RFAs    |   |
|   | prohibited from       | listed below are ineligible to      |   |
|   | applying for any AHRQ | participate as part of the HITRC    |   |
|   | grants or other       | proposal or contract: RFA HS-04-012 |   |
|   | contracts pertaining  | {Demonstrating the Value of Health  |   |
|   | to HIT? If yes, does  | Information Technology}; RFA        |   |
|   | this restriction      | HS-04-011 {Transforming Healthcare  |   |
|   | apply even if the     | Quality through Information         |   |
|   | proposed              | Technology (THQIT) --               |   |
|   | investigators and/or  | Implementation Grants}; RFA         |   |
|   | staff to be named in  | HS-04-0010 {Transforming Healthcare |   |
|   | response to future    | Quality through Information         |   |
|   | grants or contract    | Technology (THQIT) -- Planning      |   |
|   | solicitations are not | Grants}                             |   |
|   | part of the staff     |                                     |   |
|   | working on the HITRC? | Organizations and agencies          |   |
|   |                       | (including their subcontractors)    |   |
|   |                       | being awarded grant(s) under the    |   |
|   |                       | above listed RFAs may be a prime or |   |
|   |                       | subcontractor on a HITRC proposal   |   |
|   |                       | or contract.                        |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 8 | Section L.7.3,        | See Question #40 and #45.           |   |
| 0 | Separation of         |                                     |   |
|   | Technical, Past       |                                     |   |
|   | Performance           |                                     |   |
|   | Information, Small    |                                     |   |
|   | Disadvantaged         |                                     |   |
|   | Business Plan, and    |                                     |   |
|   | Business Proposal     |                                     |   |
|   | states, "The proposal |                                     |   |
|   | shall be in 3 parts:  |                                     |   |
|   | (1) Technical         |                                     |   |
|   | Proposal; (2) Past    |                                     |   |
|   | Performance           |                                     |   |
|   | Information; (3)      |                                     |   |
|   | Small Disadvantaged   |                                     |   |
|   | Business              |                                     |   |
|   | Participation Plan;   |                                     |   |
|   | and (4) Business      |                                     |   |
|   | Proposal. Each of the |                                     |   |
|   | parts shall be        |                                     |   |
|   | separate and complete |                                     |   |
|   | in itself so that     |                                     |   |
|   | evaluation of one may |                                     |   |
|   | be accomplished       |                                     |   |
|   | independently of, and |                                     |   |
|   | concurrently with,    |                                     |   |
|   | evaluation of the     |                                     |   |
|   | other. " Whereas      |                                     |   |
|   | Section L.8a.         |                                     |   |
|   | (4)Proposal           |                                     |   |
|   | Instructions          |                                     |   |
|   | Technical Discussion  |                                     |   |
|   | states, "The offeror  |                                     |   |
|   | shall prepare a       |                                     |   |
|   | technical discussion  |                                     |   |
|   | which addresses       |                                     |   |
|   | evaluation criteria   |                                     |   |
|   | A, B, C, D, E and F   |                                     |   |
|   | below. The evaluation |                                     |   |
|   | criteria are as       |                                     |   |
|   | follows:              |                                     |   |
|   | A)Understanding the   |                                     |   |
|   | Problem; B)Technical  |                                     |   |
|   | Approach;             |                                     |   |
|   | C)Management Plan;    |                                     |   |
|   | D)Key Personnel;      |                                     |   |
|   | E)Facilities; F)Past  |                                     |   |
|   | Performance (See      |                                     |   |
|   | Section L.9); G)Small |                                     |   |
|   | Disadvantaged         |                                     |   |
|   | Business              |                                     |   |
|   | Participation Plan    |                                     |   |
|   | (See Section L.10)".  |                                     |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   | Can the contractor    |                                     |   |
|   | assume that the AHRQ  |                                     |   |
|   | would like submission |                                     |   |
|   | of 4 separate (rather |                                     |   |
|   | than 3 separate       |                                     |   |
|   | parts) that will      |                                     |   |
|   | include: (1)          |                                     |   |
|   | Technical Proposal;   |                                     |   |
|   | (2) Past Performance  |                                     |   |
|   | Information; (3)      |                                     |   |
|   | Small Disadvantaged   |                                     |   |
|   | Business              |                                     |   |
|   | Participation Plan;   |                                     |   |
|   | and (4) Business      |                                     |   |
|   | Proposal.             |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 8 | Do you have a         | See Question #9                     |   |
| 1 | preference for the    |                                     |   |
|   | Service Center        |                                     |   |
|   | location?             |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 8 | In addition, Section  | See Question #40 and #45            |   |
| 2 | L.8.A.4.g and h list  |                                     |   |
|   | the Past Performance  |                                     |   |
|   | Information and Small |                                     |   |
|   | Disadvantaged         |                                     |   |
|   | Business Plan as part |                                     |   |
|   | of the Technical      |                                     |   |
|   | Discussion within the |                                     |   |
|   | Technical Proposal.   |                                     |   |
|   |                       |                                     |   |
|   | Can AHRQ confirm that |                                     |   |
|   | the Past Performance  |                                     |   |
|   | Section and Small     |                                     |   |
|   | Disadvantaged         |                                     |   |
|   | Business Plan are NOT |                                     |   |
|   | part of the Technical |                                     |   |
|   | Proposal Technical    |                                     |   |
|   | Discussion Section    |                                     |   |
|   | but rather separate   |                                     |   |
|   | and distinct parts?   |                                     |   |
|   | Further, can AHRQ     |                                     |   |
|   | confirm that the Past |                                     |   |
|   | Performance           |                                     |   |
|   | Information and Small |                                     |   |
|   | Disadvantaged         |                                     |   |
|   | Business Plan are not |                                     |   |
|   | included within the   |                                     |   |
|   | 150-page              |                                     |   |
|   | double-spaced page    |                                     |   |
|   | limit?                |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 8 | D.1.a and b, pages    | No difference. They are the same.   |   |
| 3 | 115-116:  Section (a) |                                     |   |
|   | requires that         |                                     |   |
|   | offerors describe how |                                     |   |
|   | the education and     |                                     |   |
|   | experience of the PD, |                                     |   |
|   | PM, and \"other key   |                                     |   |
|   | technical personnel\" |                                     |   |
|   | relate to the SOW.    |                                     |   |
|   | Section (b) requires  |                                     |   |
|   | a description of the  |                                     |   |
|   | length and currency   |                                     |   |
|   | of the overall        |                                     |   |
|   | education of the PD,  |                                     |   |
|   | PM and \"other key    |                                     |   |
|   | technical             |                                     |   |
|   | personnel.\"  Section |                                     |   |
|   | (d) requests a        |                                     |   |
|   | description of the    |                                     |   |
|   | ability of the PD, PM |                                     |   |
|   | and \"others\" to     |                                     |   |
|   | address issues.  How  |                                     |   |
|   | do these \"key\"      |                                     |   |
|   | personnel differ from |                                     |   |
|   | the \"key medical,    |                                     |   |
|   | education, and        |                                     |   |
|   | technical personnel\" |                                     |   |
|   | described in D.2?     |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 8 | Section L.8,          | See Question #64.                   |   |
| 4 | Technical Proposal    |                                     |   |
|   | Instructions states,  | The table of contents and cover are |   |
|   | "The technical        | not included in the 150-page        |   |
|   | proposal described    | restriction.                        |   |
|   | below shall be        |                                     |   |
|   | limited to 150 pages  |                                     |   |
|   | not including resumes |                                     |   |
|   | or bibliographies,    |                                     |   |
|   | with no less than a   |                                     |   |
|   | 11 point pitch, with  |                                     |   |
|   | the majority of the   |                                     |   |
|   | text double-spaced    |                                     |   |
|   | (lists of             |                                     |   |
|   | deliverables, person  |                                     |   |
|   | loading charts, and   |                                     |   |
|   | similar materials     |                                     |   |
|   | need not be           |                                     |   |
|   | double-spaced, so     |                                     |   |
|   | long as they are      |                                     |   |
|   | legible)." Can        |                                     |   |
|   | contractor use        |                                     |   |
|   | smaller than 11 point |                                     |   |
|   | pitch for tables,     |                                     |   |
|   | charts and other      |                                     |   |
|   | graphics as long as   |                                     |   |
|   | they are clear and    |                                     |   |
|   | legible? Are the      |                                     |   |
|   | table of contents and |                                     |   |
|   | cover included in the |                                     |   |
|   | 150-page restriction? |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 8 | L.8.C requests a PERT | A PERT chart should not be provided |   |
| 5 | Chart as a staffing   | for the staffing plan. The format   |   |
|   | plan. Pert charts are | of the Staffing Plan shall be a     |   |
|   | typically presented   | document which clearly displays,    |   |
|   | as network diagrams,  | ideally in a table format, at a     |   |
|   | as shown below, and   | minimum the following information   |   |
|   | do not include        | for each HITRC staff person: Name,  |   |
|   | staffing information. | Degrees, Position / Title, Name of  |   |
|   | Please clarify the    | Employer (Prime/ Sub-Contractor/    |   |
|   | desired format of the | Consultant), Work Location for      |   |
|   | "Staffing Plan        | HITRC efforts (address/city/state), |   |
|   |                       | Brief Job Description, List of      |   |
|   |                       | HITRC Tasks (by number) to be       |   |
|   |                       | worked on, Estimated hours per      |   |
|   |                       | month to be billed, Background      |   |
|   |                       | summary description which justifies |   |
|   |                       | that person has necessary           |   |
|   |                       | experience and skills mastery of    |   |
|   |                       | technical requirements of tasks to  |   |
|   |                       | be worked on. In addition, the      |   |
|   |                       | staffing plan shall include an      |   |
|   |                       | organization chart which describes  |   |
|   |                       | and displays all HITRC staff and    |   |
|   |                       | their supervisory / reporting       |   |
|   |                       | relationships.                      |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 8 | Is it the             | Yes, all work will be performed at  |   |
| 6 | Government's intent   | the contractor site, except for     |   |
|   | that all work         | some IT technical work to support   |   |
|   | associated with a     | the HITRC secure extranet,          |   |
|   | contract award as a   | knowledge management repository and |   |
|   | result of this        | associated IT tools which will be   |   |
|   | request for proposal  | performed at the AHRQ computer      |   |
|   | is going to be        | center site. For further discussion |   |
|   | performed at the      | on the location of the Contractor   |   |
|   | Contractor site? Can  | site, see answers to #4, #9, #11    |   |
|   | you provide us with   | and #52.                            |   |
|   | an estimate of how    |                                     |   |
|   | many AHRQ on-site     | Yes, any AHRQ provided office       |   |
|   | general office        | accommodations for HITRC IT         |   |
|   | accommodations for    | technical staff approved to be      |   |
|   | contract staff are to | onsite at AHRQ will include a       |   |
|   | be made available? Do | desktop pc, internet connection,    |   |
|   | these accommodations  | phone w/ long distance, and may be  |   |
|   | include computer,     | used of course only for contract    |   |
|   | Internet connection,  | purposes.                           |   |
|   | phone w/long          |                                     |   |
|   | distance?             |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 8 | Item B.4a.(11)        | Item B.4 lists items unallowable    |   |
| 7 | identifies            | unless authorized in writing by the |   |
|   | Information           | Contracting Officer. Therefore,     |   |
|   | Technology hardware   | Information Technology (IT) will be |   |
|   | or software as        | allowable if the Contractor submits |   |
|   | unallowable as a      | a request for the specific IT       |   |
|   | direct cost. However, | procurement prior to purchase, and  |   |
|   | C identifies the      | the request is authorized in        |   |
|   | potential for the     | writing by the Contracting Officer. |   |
|   | contractor to         |                                     |   |
|   | procure/provide       |                                     |   |
|   | software/licenses.    |                                     |   |
|   | Can the Government    |                                     |   |
|   | describe the method   |                                     |   |
|   | by which it intends   |                                     |   |
|   | to have the           |                                     |   |
|   | Contractor procure    |                                     |   |
|   | these items?          |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 8 | Are steering          | The costs may be reimbursable as an |   |
| 8 | committee travel/per  | ODC.                                |   |
|   | diem costs cost       |                                     |   |
|   | reimbursable as an    |                                     |   |
|   | ODC or is the prime   |                                     |   |
|   | expected to enter     |                                     |   |
|   | into a subcontract    |                                     |   |
|   | with these            |                                     |   |
|   | individuals?          |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 8 | Task 9.2.7: Will      | The task states "the WebEx Meeting  |   |
| 9 | there be a need to    | Center Pro (or equivalent)". The    |   |
|   | perform other such    | contractor may propose another      |   |
|   | tool evaluations      | equivalent tool to be evaluated.    |   |
|   | similar to WEBEX?     |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 9 | Task 10.2: Will AHRQ  | The contractor may propose          |   |
| 0 | consider alternative  | alternatives, however AHRQ's plan   |   |
|   | tools/strategies as   | at this time is to use the tools    |   |
|   | part of the proposal  | and strategy specified in Task      |   |
|   | response? Will AHRQ   | 10.2. AHRQ will provide the         |   |
|   | provide operations    | infrastructure as specified in Task |   |
|   | support staff to      | 10.2. The contractor will setup,    |   |
|   | manage the technical  | maintain, support and operate the   |   |
|   | environment?          | extranet and related systems as     |   |
|   |                       | specified in Task 10.               |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 9 | Task 10.3.2: Please   | The next version of the intranet    |   |
| 1 | provide details and   | will most likely use Plumtree       |   |
|   | scheduling around the | technology. There are no other      |   |
|   | "next version of its  | details on design, strategy,        |   |
|   | Intranet". Please     | technology, schedule or             |   |
|   | share the strategy,   | functionality that can be provided  |   |
|   | technology being      | at this time. The HITRC extranet is |   |
|   | implemented, and      | being developed as a separate       |   |
|   | functionality to be   | initiative from the intranet. At    |   |
|   | provided and          | this time, the only commonality     |   |
|   | deployed.             | between the intranet and extranet   |   |
|   |                       | is that they both are planning to   |   |
|   |                       | use Plumtree technology as one of   |   |
|   |                       | the system components.              |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 9 | If we develop         | The contractor may propose other    |   |
| 2 | surveys, do we have   | custom solutions for certain survey |   |
|   | to always use the     | requirements. However, the proposed |   |
|   | Ultimate Survey       | solutions must be cost-effective    |   |
|   | Enterprise Edition    | and approved by AHRQ.               |   |
|   | Software, or can we   |                                     |   |
|   | custom program some   |                                     |   |
|   | forms that have an    |                                     |   |
|   | optimal appearance,   |                                     |   |
|   | logic control, and    |                                     |   |
|   | database structure?   |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 9 | G.4(2) . Some vendors | Yes. Also, please include a copy of |   |
| 3 | DCAA-approved rates   | rate agreements with your proposal. |   |
|   | do not include a      |                                     |   |
|   | segregation of fringe |                                     |   |
|   | costs from labor,     |                                     |   |
|   | overhead or G&A. Is   |                                     |   |
|   | it correct to assume  |                                     |   |
|   | that the Government   |                                     |   |
|   | will only require     |                                     |   |
|   | those components of a |                                     |   |
|   | Contractor's costs    |                                     |   |
|   | which are separately  |                                     |   |
|   | identified/costed in  |                                     |   |
|   | its Data Disclosure   |                                     |   |
|   | Document vis-à-vis    |                                     |   |
|   | its CAS Disclosure    |                                     |   |
|   | Statement?            |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 9 | G.4(2)(f) Where a     | For purposes of proposal            |   |
| 4 | subcontractor may be  | submission, the subcontractor must  |   |
|   | on a cost-basis with  | submit their cost breakdown         |   |
|   | the prime contractor, | information directly to the         |   |
|   | subcontractors will   | Contracting Officer if they do not  |   |
|   | often submit cost     | want the prime to have privy to     |   |
|   | breakdown information | proprietary information. This can   |   |
|   | directly to the       | be a separate submission directly   |   |
|   | Government due to the | from the subcontractor to the       |   |
|   | proprietary nature of | Contracting Officer, or it can be   |   |
|   | cost data. In these   | in a sealed envelope with the       |   |
|   | cases, the prime      | prime's business proposal           |   |
|   | contractor will be    | submission.                         |   |
|   | provided (and provide |                                     |   |
|   | to the Government in  | For invoice purposes, fully         |   |
|   | its voucher) the      | burdened cost information from      |   |
|   | fully burdened cost   | subcontractors will be acceptable.  |   |
|   | information from the  |                                     |   |
|   | subcontractor. Is     |                                     |   |
|   | this acceptable to    |                                     |   |
|   | the Government?       |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 9 | Section I, Contract   | For purchases of commercial IT,     |   |
| 5 | Clauses: 52.225-1 Buy | applicable laws in effect at the    |   |
|   | American Act --       | time of the purchase will prevail.  |   |
|   | Supplies (June 2003)  | For all other supplies, the Buy     |   |
|   | and Section K.13,     | American Act applies. Therefore,    |   |
|   | 52.225-2 -- Buy       | the clauses should remain as stated |   |
|   | American Act          | in the solicitation.                |   |
|   | Certificate (June     |                                     |   |
|   | 2003): This vendor    | Also, this is not a task order      |   |
|   | proposes that in lieu | contract.                           |   |
|   | of the Buy American   |                                     |   |
|   | Act Clauses, the      |                                     |   |
|   | Trade Agreement Act   |                                     |   |
|   | clauses (52.225-3 and |                                     |   |
|   | -5 and their          |                                     |   |
|   | certification at      |                                     |   |
|   | 52.225-6) should      |                                     |   |
|   | apply to the          |                                     |   |
|   | solicitation, since   |                                     |   |
|   | the total value of    |                                     |   |
|   | the acquisition is    |                                     |   |
|   | anticipated to exceed |                                     |   |
|   | the TAA threshold     |                                     |   |
|   | (currently            |                                     |   |
|   | \$169,000).           |                                     |   |
|   | Solicitations over    |                                     |   |
|   | the TAA threshold are |                                     |   |
|   | exempt from the Buy   |                                     |   |
|   | American Act (see     |                                     |   |
|   | prescription clause   |                                     |   |
|   | at 25.1101, paragraph |                                     |   |
|   | (c)). Additionally,   |                                     |   |
|   | in the FY 2004        |                                     |   |
|   | Consolidated          |                                     |   |
|   | Appropriations Act,   |                                     |   |
|   | PL 108-199, Section   |                                     |   |
|   | 535, the restrictions |                                     |   |
|   | of the Buy American   |                                     |   |
|   | Act were removed for  |                                     |   |
|   | commercial IT. Though |                                     |   |
|   | the regulations have  |                                     |   |
|   | not yet been          |                                     |   |
|   | promulgated           |                                     |   |
|   | incorporating this    |                                     |   |
|   | legislation, does the |                                     |   |
|   | Government agree that |                                     |   |
|   | Commercial IT is      |                                     |   |
|   | exempted from the     |                                     |   |
|   | provisions of the Buy |                                     |   |
|   | American Act for      |                                     |   |
|   | purposes of task      |                                     |   |
|   | orders which may be   |                                     |   |
|   | released under a      |                                     |   |
|   | contract resulting    |                                     |   |
|   | from this             |                                     |   |
|   | solicitation.         |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 9 | K.2 Certificate of    | We agree. The requirement for this  |   |
| 6 | Independent Price     | certification is deleted.           |   |
|   | Determination (April  |                                     |   |
|   | 1985) (FAR 52.203-2): |                                     |   |
|   | The prescription      |                                     |   |
|   | clause for this       |                                     |   |
|   | certification         |                                     |   |
|   | identifies that this  |                                     |   |
|   | certification is to   |                                     |   |
|   | be used in            |                                     |   |
|   | solicitations and     |                                     |   |
|   | contracts for         |                                     |   |
|   | firm-fixed price or   |                                     |   |
|   | fixed price with      |                                     |   |
|   | economic price        |                                     |   |
|   | adjustment clauses.   |                                     |   |
|   | As this contract is   |                                     |   |
|   | anticipated to be     |                                     |   |
|   | cost plus fixed fee   |                                     |   |
|   | (CPFF), will the      |                                     |   |
|   | Government consider   |                                     |   |
|   | its deletion?         |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 9 | K.16 Certificate of   | While we hope to receive adequate   |   |
| 7 | Current Cost or       | price competition, we will not know |   |
|   | Pricing Data (FAR     | for certain until after proposals   |   |
|   | 15.406-2). Since      | have been evaluated. We routinely   |   |
|   | initial proposals     | include the certificate should it   |   |
|   | should be exempt from | be required after submission of the |   |
|   | the requirement to    | initial proposal.                   |   |
|   | submit cost and       |                                     |   |
|   | pricing data, since   |                                     |   |
|   | this procurement is   |                                     |   |
|   | based on adequate     |                                     |   |
|   | price competition     |                                     |   |
|   | (FAR 15.403-1(b)      |                                     |   |
|   | prohibition on        |                                     |   |
|   | obtaining cost or     |                                     |   |
|   | pricing data) is the  |                                     |   |
|   | intent of the         |                                     |   |
|   | Certificate of        |                                     |   |
|   | Current Cost or       |                                     |   |
|   | Pricing Data related  |                                     |   |
|   | solely to follow-on   |                                     |   |
|   | work which may be     |                                     |   |
|   | requested by the      |                                     |   |
|   | Government following  |                                     |   |
|   | the initial award?    |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 9 | Please clarify        | Site visits to an HIT grantee may   |   |
| 8 | reference to site     | be requested by the AHRQ project    |   |
|   | visits in Task 13.8,  | officer for the grant, to review    |   |
|   | page 45. How does     | grant progress and problems, or for |   |
|   | AHRQ plan to use      | other necessary program purposes.   |   |
|   | these visits and what | There is no relationship between    |   |
|   | is the relationship,  | these site visit meetings and the   |   |
|   | if any, to the annual | annual conference.                  |   |
|   | conference?           |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 9 | Instructions for      | It refers to the client's project   |   |
| 9 | completion of Past    | officer (technical lead).           |   |
|   | Performance           |                                     |   |
|   | Information on page   |                                     |   |
|   | 117 ask for the name  |                                     |   |
|   | and phone number of a |                                     |   |
|   | \"program manager.\"  |                                     |   |
|   | Is this a reference   |                                     |   |
|   | to the client\'s      |                                     |   |
|   | project officer       |                                     |   |
|   | (client technical     |                                     |   |
|   | lead) or does it      |                                     |   |
|   | refer to the          |                                     |   |
|   | contractor\'s project |                                     |   |
|   | director?             |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 1 | There is a            | The goals are based on the total    |   |
| 1 | discrepancy between   | planned subcontracting dollars (not |   |
| 0 | the recommended small | of the total contract value).       |   |
| 0 | business goals on     | Therefore, each of the four         |   |
|   | page 1 and page 121   | categories of small businesses are  |   |
|   | of the RFP.  Is it    | also a percentage of the total      |   |
|   | the Government\'s     | planned subcontracting dollars (not |   |
|   | intention that 30% of | of the total contract value).       |   |
|   | the total planned     |                                     |   |
|   | subcontracting        |                                     |   |
|   | dollars (not of the   |                                     |   |
|   | total contract value) |                                     |   |
|   | be subcontracted to   |                                     |   |
|   | small businesses?  If |                                     |   |
|   | yes, then are each of |                                     |   |
|   | the four categories   |                                     |   |
|   | of small businesses   |                                     |   |
|   | (i.e., small          |                                     |   |
|   | disadvantaged         |                                     |   |
|   | businesses,           |                                     |   |
|   | women-owned small     |                                     |   |
|   | businesses, Hubzone   |                                     |   |
|   | small businesses, and |                                     |   |
|   | veteran-owned small   |                                     |   |
|   | businesses) also a    |                                     |   |
|   | percentage of the     |                                     |   |
|   | total planned         |                                     |   |
|   | subcontracting        |                                     |   |
|   | dollars (not of the   |                                     |   |
|   | total contract        |                                     |   |
|   | value)?               |                                     |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+
| 1 | To assist in          | Selection of the specific HIT       |   |
| 1 | estimating level of   | grantees and projects to be awarded |   |
| 0 | effort for Task 3,    | and supported by the HITRC has not  |   |
| 1 | please provide a      | occurred yet. The FY-04 selection   |   |
|   | brief description and | decisions will occur by end of      |   |
|   | location of the       | September 2004. The Contractor      |   |
|   | current HIT grantees  | should assume that the locations of |   |
|   | and project           | these grantees and projects will be |   |
|   | initiatives.          | dispersed throughout the US. A      |   |
|   |                       | description of the HIT grants RFAs  |   |
|   |                       | and potential other HIT projects    |   |
|   |                       | are provided in the Statement of    |   |
|   |                       | Work.                               |   |
+---+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+---+

ALSO, L.8.D.2 PAGE 116 IS HEREBY REVISED. Please substitute the
following words (to manage and implement a comprehensive health IT
resource center and perform the tasks described in the statement of
work) in place of (to conduct a comprehensive state IT integration
program).

END OF AMENDMENT