MiPACS Licenses and Support OKC, Yukon & Norman Dental

Questions and Answers MiPACS Perpetual Site Licenses and Support Agreement The purpose of this amendment is to: Provide answers to previously received questions provided under previous solicitation. Extend the offer due date. All offers are to be emailed to eric.ayers@va.gov and received no later than 12:00pm MT on September 22, 2026. The Statement of Work (SOW) requires support for all active systems, including previously purchased licenses that are out of maintenance. Confirm the number of existing licenses and whether this quote covers them. ANSWER: The previously purchased site licenses are already covered under a service agreement previously awarded. The OEM requires these new licenses to have their own support agreement for the first year as part of this requirement. The SOW says the work involves PHI and requires a Business Area Agreement (BAA), but the referenced BAA is missing. Confirm expected PHI access and review the BAA before acceptance. Does the VA provide the BAA or are you asking if the vendor has one to provide? ANSWER: Because the support assistance calls will occur with local maintenance personnel accessing the system on a live phone call, there was no PHI access issue. Therefore, the PHI and BAA requirements were deleted from the announcement. The SOW requires an operational tool free of errors, resolution of reported defects, and error-free operation access across all clinics. Can the VA confirm these obligations are limited to Apryse s standard warranty and support commitments? ANSWER: The licenses are for software that is expected to be fully functional upon initial install. However, defect reports and resolutions, version updates, and other software changes are expected to require support from the OEM during warranty term and under the support agreement. As an authorized vendor, you are not expected to provide any error/defect resolution that is under warranty by the OEM, or for future issues/updates covered by the support agreement. The SOW begins September 1, before the quote deadline. Can the VA replace this with a prospective start date tied to award, delivery or activation? ANSWER: The date should have been updated in the SOW to adjust for the RFQ publication. The new version has updated these dates accordingly. Can the VA clarify if option years are needed? It conflicts with the quote SKUs and the SOW. ANSWER: The option year clause should have been removed prior to publication. The six-month service extension is standard to allow additional performance time if needed for some unforeseen reason. This updated RFQ version has the option year clause deleted.