UNSPSC 85901103: Dix-hallpike dynamic assessment

This classification denotes the group of activities that yields a physical rehabilitation intervention or procedure of dix-hallpike dynamic assessment. This intervention or procedure is listed in the World Health Organization's International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems or ICD-10 as code F15Z5ZZ

UNSPSC 85901103 Dix-hallpike dynamic assessment is a Commodity code, but the recent opportunities posted under this taxonomy show no alignment with the code's nominal scope. The opportunities consistently reflect sign language interpreting and broader special education contracted services—speech-language pathology, occupational therapy, physical therapy, educational diagnostician services, counseling, nursing support, and audiology—rather than vestibular diagnostic procedures. School districts and health plans are the primary issuing bodies, soliciting interpreting and related special education support on an as-needed basis with multi-year renewal options, typically requiring state licensure or certification (RID, BEI, EIPA credentials, or state professional licenses) and liability insurance.

Recent activity centers on Texas and Florida school districts. Katy Independent School District (Texas) issued RFP 2518YT in July 2026 for sign language interpreting services across a cooperative serving six districts, with proposals due July 8, 2026, requiring BEI or RID certification and hourly pricing by service category. Hillsborough County Public Schools (Florida) posted RFP 26041-DST in April 2026 for interpreting services across 235 schools with an estimated annual budget of $950,000 and proposals due April 15, 2026; the district noted a doubling of interpreter vacancies since 2021–2022. Tacoma Public Schools (Washington) and Eanes Independent School District (Texas) both solicited broader special education contracted services packages that include interpreting, with terms of three to four years and no guaranteed minimum volumes. The code shows little relevant recent procurement activity; the mismatch between the Dix-hallpike assessment taxonomy and the actual opportunities posted suggests possible cataloging inconsistency or that this code does not reflect current state and local buying patterns.