Office of Finance - Financial Management Support Service - RFI
The purpose of this notification is to post the Questions and Answers from the Request for Information and to inform interested parties that the Government intends to solicit this effort as Full and Open on General Services Administration Professional Services Schedule contract holders under North American Industry Classification System code 541211 under Special Item Number 520 7.B VA is anticipating posting the solicitation late-May this fiscal year.B B B B
FMSS RFI Vendor Questions and Answers
Question/Recommendation
Response
1
Release on a large business contracting vehicle
VA will make the decision on the appropriate contract vehicle after the analysis is completed from the RFI responses.
2
Require an Independent Public
Accounting (IPA) firm with either federal or commercial audit experience
VA requires an IPA with federal or state government audit experience to assist with audit remediation.
3
Include Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA)-specific requirements to allow for holistic VA solutions
VBA s specific needs vary from VHA and therefore, VA is not seeking a holistic solution.
4
For RFP, create a single award IDIQ to provide the necessary support, flexibility and efficiency for Office of Finance.
VA seeks a firm fixed price contract for most of the tasks with time and materials support for the remaining tasks.
5
For RFP, limit competition to Certified Public Accounting firms with an active Federal Cabinet level audit.
VA seeks CPA firms with recent federal or state government audit experience. Active audit experience is desired, but not mandatory.
6
The draft PWS does not appear to address requirements for innovative models (i.e., SAAS). We recommend to include a task and/or evaluation criteria regarding the Service Level Agreement (SLA) for delivering the SOW requirements. Furthermore, the VA would benefit in both cost and time to
implement, by requiring a demonstration as part of the solicitation (pre-award) process.
VA does not require: SAAS; a task regarding the SLA for delivering the SOW requirements; or a demonstration as part of the solicitation process.
7
Resumes should not include PII and provides Name as an example. VA should confirm within its requirements if key personnel names should or should not be specifically included within resumes. Without names, VA will not be able to confirm or corroborate any information provided within the resumes.
Key personnel names should be redacted from the resumes.
8
VA should clarify which of the 240 findings from FY2018, 212 findings from FY2017, and 308 findings from FY2016 are currently open versus those that have been remediated. VA should also clarify how many of these findings relate to VHA, OCC, DMC, and FSC as that can impact level of effort (LOE) and contractor pricing for those tasks.
The PWS Findings Chart categories the audit findings into Audit Areas. If the Audit Area is applicable only to a particular VA organization, it is titled as such. Otherwise, the Audit Area is applicable to all of VA.
9
To receive comparable LOE and price information from contractors in responding to the RFP, VA should consider providing historical audit information, such as number of staff, number of FTEs, number of stakeholder offices, and point of contacts (POCs) who have previously supported the financial statement process.
VA does not believe that this level of detail is necessary to receive comparable LOE.
10
To receive comparable LOE and price information from contractors in responding to the RFP, VA should consider providing the number of controls within its A123 catalog for each office, and to confirm how many of those controls were determined to be designed and operating effectively within the last assessment period.
VA does not believe that this level of detail is necessary to receive comparable LOE.
11
VA should consider making work-stream leads for OF, VHA and OCC key personnel in addition to the key personnel already listed in the PWS.
VA will take this under consideration.
12
From a vendor perspective, we suggest providing additional clarity on the expected work product to support Internal Controls over Financial Reporting. VA currently operates a separate A-123 Internal Controls IDIQ contract. The draft PWS includes language around the assessment and evaluation of the effectiveness and efficiency of internal controls over financial operations. Historically this contract has not conducted formal internal controls testing. Further clarification around assessment and evaluation would be helpful.
References made regarding support for internal controls over financial reporting are contained in the PWS Background and Scope sections and are included to provide general information and guidance. The specific Financial Reporting deliverables are described in the Financial Reporting Deliverables section of the PWS.
13
The draft outline does not address VA s efforts under the Financial Management Business Transformation (FMBT) to move to a new financial management system (iFAMS). What impact does OF envision the implementation and migration waves from FMS to iFAMS will have on the remediation of audit findings?
VA has separate contracts for FMBT. The implementation and migration waves from FMS to iFAMS needs to be considered as part of the PWS Audit Remediation Analysis and Plan Deliverables.
14
Are these services currently being performed? If so, can you tell me the incumbent name and contract number?
These requirements consist of both current work performed by the incumbent as well as new anticipated future requirements. The incumbent for the current work is KPMG under Contract Number VA118-14-D-0054, Task Order VA118-0054-0005.
15
Is this for a cloud-based solution or on-premise?
The requirements contain both on premise and contractor site personnel support, please note, there is no cloud-based solution applicable to these requirements.
Amy Schmalzigan
Amy.Schmalzigan@va.gov
amy.schmalzigan@va.gov
