40DHHS-S3183 - Q_and_A Final 2025-05-08.pdf

QUESTION_NBR CREATED_BY QUESTION_SUBJECT QUESTION_TEXT ANSWER_TEXT

1 JKUZHIPPALA Pricing To ensure the best value and alignment with project goals, we're exploring different pricing structures. Would the state be open to a deliverable-based pricing structure instead of hourly-based pricing?

No, hourly billing ensures clear visibility into resource allocation, flexibility as requirements evolve, and continuous quality oversight. We recommend retaining hourly rates supplemented by defined performance milestones and a not-to-exceed cap to align incentives and control costs.

2 JKUZHIPPALA Attachments To confirm, the Business Associate Addendum and the Business Continuity Agreement are not meant to be included in the proposal, correct?

Correct. These documents will be included as part of the contract.

3 CMCBRIDE

The RFP states that the vendor needs to "Work with DHCFP Data Analytics and each MCO as needed to extract information". This implies that some of the data required for calculating the 21 quality measures for QIP may reside within the systems of the individual MCOs. What metric data comes from the MCOs? What is the format / coding standards and cadence?

DHCFP Staff with work with the selected vendor for the data alylitca and mco coordination. The quality incetive methodolgy can be found here.

https://dhcfp.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/dhcfpnvgov/content/Pgms/CC BHC/QualityIncentivePaymentMethodology3.07.22.pdf

4 CMCBRIDE In addition to providing a HIPAA compliant solution, are there any other security requirement (e.g. FedRamp, HITRUST) that the solution must meet?

HIPAA compliance is required for all solutions supporting the CCBHC Data Project. While not required, additional compliance with or certification under other recognized security frameworks—such as HITRUST CSF, NIST 800-53, or FedRAMP Moderate or High—is welcome and may be taken into consideration during technical review. Vendors are encouraged to disclose any such certifications or alignment as part of their proposal to demonstrate the security posture and maturity of their solution.

5 CMCBRIDE

Is there any expectation that the Vendor own the intellectual property of the solution that we build, and license it to NV in a traditional SaaS model? Who would host the solution NV or vendor?

The State is open to various models, including vendor-owned and licensed solutions (e.g., SaaS) or solutions developed for and owned by the State of Nevada. Vendors should clearly specify the proposed ownership and licensing structure, as well as the associated rights and responsibilities.

If proposing a SaaS or vendor-hosted model, the proposal must include details on:

- The hosting environment (including geographic location),

- Security certifications or controls in place,

- Data ownership and access rights, Business continuity and transition plans, including how the State would receive or migrate data and services if the agreement ends.

Regardless of the hosting model, the State requires that Nevada retain full ownership of its data and maintain access to it throughout and following the term of the contract.

6 CMCBRIDE

We understand that the 'Consumer Satisfaction Survey' is integral to calculating 2 QIP measures, and that the Vendor would supply the survey collection tool to each CCBHC to gather data annually. Is there a minimum number of survey responses needed by site to calculate measure performance? The survey itself does not request a patient identifier, suggesting survey participation is optional.

The survey is implemented via a TEAMS form. The state manages this. The vendor will process the information. No minimum however it is in the best interst of the provider to gain as many as possible.

7 CMCBRIDE What is meant by the statement "Vendor to have access to Software as a Service (SaaS)" in relation to the Scope of Work? Related to line #5, SaaS

8 CMCBRIDE Are there any expectations of 24/7 support of the environment or analytics / reporting covered in the scope of work?

No, only standard business hours for the State 8 am (PST) - 5 pm (PST) Monday - Friday

Bid 24VS-S3183 Q&A

9 CMCBRIDE

"Is the expectation that the solution be integrated with NV's existing Identity and Access Management System to support user access and permissions for data and reporting?

If so, can you provide details on your Identity & Access Management System."

Yes, the State expects the solution to support integration with its existing Identity and Access Management (IAM) infrastructure, where feasible, to enable centralized control over user authentication, access rights, and role-based permissions.

Vendors should design their solution to be compatible with standard IAM integration methods such as SAML 2.0 or OAuth 2.0

Details regarding Nevada’s specific IAM platform, protocols, and integration requirements will be provided to the awarded vendor during the planning and design phase. Vendors should describe their system’s capabilities for federated identity, single sign-on (SSO), and support for multi-factor authentication (MFA) as part of their proposal.

10 CMCBRIDE

Is NV comfortable with offshore resources supporting this project in a development, testing and / or production phase? Recognizing that data will be held in the United States. Provide details on resourcing requirements.

The State may consider offshore resources but would prefer project development in the United States.

11 CMCBRIDE

The RFP requires that the vendor: "Schedule meetings with individual CCBHCs to review results and correct any data quality issues with CCBHC EHR extracts at intervals directed by the state." How does NV define 'data quality' in this context? More specifically, does 'data quality' refer to identifying and resolving failed data ingestion jobs or working with CCBHCs to identify and correct issues related to data completeness, value conformance, data plausability, etc?

NV defines “data quality” for CCBHC EHR extracts across two complementary dimensions:

Technical Integrity

Ingestion Success: Identifying and resolving failed or partial ETL jobs, extract errors, record count mismatches and other pipeline failures.

Timeliness: Verifying that each extract arrives within the state-directed window.

Content Validity

Completeness: Ensuring all required fields and records are present (e.g. demographic, encounter, diagnosis tables).

Value Conformance: Checking that fields adhere to approved code sets, formats and schema definitions (e.g. ICD-10, LOINC, date formats).

Plausibility & Consistency: Flagging out of range values (e.g.

future dates, implausible ages), duplicate records, or logical inconsistencies across tables (e.g. encounter dates preceding birth date).

12 CMCBRIDE

The RFP requires that the vendor: "Provide analysis including recommendations and corrections." as it relates to providing a "Dashboard with all 21 Quality Measures, comparing cost of providing services individually compared to under an encounter rate." Can you elaborate on the types of analysis expected?

There is not a specific analysis expected other than what the vendor may feel beneficial for the State to assess.

13 CMCBRIDE Is the DHCFP seeking a bid on the Cloud Platform Consumption costs for the designed solution? The State is not seeking to bid on this solution.

14 CMCBRIDE Does the DHCFP have existing Cloud contract(s) with any hyperscalers (e.g Google Cloud, Azure, AWS) that should be leveraged to host this solution ? The State is not seeking to bid on this solution.

15 CMCBRIDE How many users need access to licenses for analytics and reporting tools? N/A

16 CMCBRIDE

"""The Vendor must provide the following within 30 days of contract signing or signing of this agreement"" - Business Continuity Plan (BCP) and Disaster Recovery Plan (DRP).

Can you provide more guidance on timeline of BCP and DRP to be delivered? How does this 30 days fit into the larger program? We would want proper discovery and solutioning completed prior to constructing BCP and DRP."

This is the intention of the BCP for vendors to determine based on the scope of the project.

The intent of the 30-day requirement is to ensure that the vendor is proactively considering business continuity and disaster recovery planning early in the engagement. We understand that a fully detailed BCP and DRP may not be feasible until after discovery and solution architecture are completed.

Within 30 days of contract signing, the State expects the vendor to submit initial framework documents or draft plans that outline:

The vendor’s standard BCP/DRP approach, Key assumptions, Roles and responsibilities, Planning methodology, Preliminary RTO/RPO targets (as applicable).

These documents will serve as a baseline for planning and will be refined throughout the discovery and implementation phases.

Finalized BCP and DRP documents, aligned with the completed solution design, will be required prior to go-live and must reflect the actual architecture, hosting, and data handling processes of the deployed solution.

17 CMCBRIDE

The proposed solution will have multiple systems, stakeholders, and domains of responsibilty.

Please provide thoughts around the domains that you you see as Client owned, and Vendor owned.

Vendor requested information will not be answered at this point in the solicitation process. Vendors are encouraged to provide their best solution

18 CMCBRIDE

"Can you provide details around your Medicaid Claims dataset? There is mention of this being submitted quarterly by CCBHCs.

Where is it hosted today? How is connectivity established? Is the schema / full data dictionary available? Any sharable details to consider for data ingestion to our solution appreciated."

The Medicaid Claims data is hosted in two locations for Managed Care Organizations and Fee-For-Services. The State will supply the vendor with the requested data.

19 CMCBRIDE

"Can you provide details around your Electronic Health Records dataset? There is mention of this being submitted quarterly by CCHBCs.

Where is it hosted today? How is connectivity established? Is page 81-90 the full schema / data dictionary? Any sharable details to consider for data ingestion to our solution appreciated."

EHR data is obtained by the individual providers EHR systems.

These are uploaded to the States dedicated SFTP site where they can be retrieved.

20 CMCBRIDE

"Can you provide details around your Eligibility dataset? There is mention of this being submitted quarterly by Nevada Medicaid.

Where is it hosted today? How is connectivity established? Is the schema / full data dictionary available? Any sharable details to consider for data ingestion to our solution appreciated."

The Eligibility data is hosted in two locations for Managed Care Organizations and Fee-For-Services. The State will supply the vendor with the requested data.

21 CMCBRIDE

"Can you provide details around your Pharmacy Data dataset? There is mention of this being submitted quarterly by Nevada Medicaid.

Where is it hosted today? How is connectivity established? Is the schema / full data dictionary available? Any sharable details to consider for data ingestion to our solution appreciated. "

The Pharmacy data is hosted in two locations for Managed Care Organizations and Fee-For-Services. The State will supply the vendor with the requested data.

22 CMCBRIDE

Can you provide dataset sizing references for the latest quarterly submissions? For data sourced from the EHR, can you describe dataset sizes for by each CCBHC? Can you confirm there are 7 in-scope CCBHCs (source)?

The data varies depending on activity. There are currently 7 enrolled CCBHCs.

23 CMCBRIDE Through the RFP process, would we be able to meet for one or two discovery meetings? No.

24 CMCBRIDE The Technical Handbook is dated as 2019. Is it up to date and safe to assume these are accurate for our implementation project? If not, how should we look at our solution approach?

The Technical Handbook dated 2019 is the most current document.

25 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Attachment â?? Scope of Work, Project Related Meetings, Row 22

Page: N/A This section indicates meeting attendance may be in person. How many in-person meetings does the State anticipate?

To be determined at a later date by the State.

26 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Attachment -- Scope of Work, Knowledge Transfer Plan, Row 61

Page: N/A This section indicates a Knowledge Transfer Plan to ensure the State can operationalize the system independently. Can the State please clarify if it anticipates the vendor will only be needed for technical support once the QIP calculations are established? For example, after implementation, will State staff collect the consumer surveys and summarize on their own?

Will the State collect the claims datasets to review for accuracy and complete the QIP calculations independently?

See Scope of Work in the RFP.

27 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Attachment -- Scope of Work and Cost Schedule, Calculate Quality Measures, Row 84, Page: N/A This section indicates the vendor will calculate the quality measures. Can the State please confirm this means the vendor will determine the appropriate numerator and denominator for the metric based on claims and provider data (rather than collecting the numerator and denominator from providers)?

Vendor can recommend metric calulations but will be approved by the State.

28 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Attachment -- Scope of Work and Cost Schedule, Calculate Quality Measures, Row 84

Page: N/A If the vendor will determine the appropriate numerator and denominator for the metric based on claims and provider data, the CCBHC Technical Manual includes 21 quality measures;

however, the Cost Schedule indicates that a total of eight measures will be calculated for each fiscal year. Can the State please confirm if the vendor will be responsible for calculating a numerator and denominator for all 21 measures, or only 8 measures?

The QIP is based on 8 measures. However 21 measures are collected for data purposes.

29 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Attachment -- Scope of Work, Rows 69-

Page: N/A It is noted that vendor should convert the Consumer Satisfaction Surveys for Adult-Youth- Parent/Child to an online system of data collection and coordinate reporting with CCBHC staff.

Can the State please clarify the responsible party for coordinating with consumers to complete the survey. Does this responsibility remain with the CCBHC?

The providers get the surveys to the consumer. The vendor manages the TEAMS submissions and QR codes as needed.

30 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Attachment -- Scope of Work, Calculate CCBHC and State-Led Quality Measures, Rows 84-87

Page: N/A It is noted that the calculation of quality measures is to be based on the methodology documented in the current edition of the Nevada CCBHC Measures Technical Manual. If omissions or recommendations for clarifications to the manual are identified, please clarify whether this will be the responsibility of the vendor to complete.

The vendor would provide updates to the manual as needed.

31 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Attachment -- Scope of Work, Calculate CCBHC and State-Led Quality Measures, Rows 84-97

Page: N/A Does a report submission, or similar operational guide, currently exist outside the CCBHC Measures Technical Manual? If one does exist, can the State please share this resource or resource link for review?

It does not.

32 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Request for Proposal, 4.2 Vendor Response to RFP

Page: 5

4.2 discusses vendor use of a subcontractor and indicates that vendor responses shall be limited to no more than five pages per task, not including appendices, samples, and/or exhibits.

Can the State please confirm whether the page limit applies to all vendor tasks, or subcontractors only?

If the page limit applies to all vendor tasks, does that refer to all tasks listed under 4.2 (i.e., 4.2.1-4.2.8)? If not, please clarify which tasks in Section 4.2-by reference.

Please refer to SOW

33 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Request for Proposal, 4.2 Vendor Response to RFP and 10.2 Technical Proposal

Page: 5-6, 12 Can the State please clarify its preference for where vendors should provide responses to Section 4 in their technical proposal response, as outlined in Section 10.2?

The State does not have a preference other than what is descrbed in 10.1.1 and that it's clearly labled.

34 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Attachment --Requirements Matrix and RFP 4.3 Vendor Response to RFP

Page: 7 Item 4.3.2.D states that vendors must â??Tie each data element/function to the vendorâ??s project plan by task number.â?? Can the State please clarify whether Column A â??Categoryâ?? in the Requirements Matrix should be identified as the task in the project plan (i.e., product overview; design & integration; system administration functionality; reporting functionality; network capability; and security and data rights; training and consultation)? If not, please clarify the data element/function that should be tied to the task number. Is the task number created by the vendor in our response?

This is correct as the question describes.

35 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Attachment --Scope of Work and RFP

4.3 Vendor Response to RFP

Page: 7 Item 4.3.2.D states that vendors must â??Tie each data element/function to the vendorâ??s project plan by task number.â?? Can the State please clarify whether Scope of Work headings should be identified as the task in the project plan (i.e., Planning and Project Management;

Provide Technical Assistance to and Collect High-Quality Data from the CCBHCs in Nevada;

Calculate Quality Measures for CCBHCs in Nevada; Build Infrastructure to Support Data Collection from CCBHCs in Nevada)? If not, please clarify the data element/function that should be tied to the task number?

The Scope of Work may be used but not limited to those identifiers.

36 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Attachment â?? Requirements Matrix and RFP 4.3 Vendor Response to RFP

Page: 7 Item 4.3.2.D states that vendors must â??Tie each data element/function to the vendorâ??s project plan by task number.â?? Can the State please clarify what it considers to be the â??taskâ?? that is to be tied to the project plan?

Tasks are services performed by the vendor based on the Scope of Work.

37 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Attachment â?? Requirements Matrix, Column D

Page: N/A In the vendorâ??s technical proposal narrative, is it expected that we provide a narrative response that aligns and expands upon the response indicated in the Requirements Matrix, Column D? Or does the Requirements Matrix satisfy the response?

The expectation is that a narrative will be provided with each activity.

38 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Request for Proposal, 2.4.2 Project Overview, Software and Ownership Rights

Page: 2 This item references language in 45 CFR 95.617 Software and Ownership Rights. If a vendor has a proprietary SaaS system available, does the State agree that it would be exempt from this CFR and waive any rights to claim ownership of the existing intellectual property?

The state agrees. Part C exempts proprietary software.

39 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Request for Proposal, 2.7.1 Vendor Required Functions, QIP Calculations

Page: 3 Is the vendor expected to use EHR, eligibility, Medicaid claims, and pharmacy data to calculate the numerator and denominator values or work with the CCBHC providers to properly supply those self-reported values? If the vendor is expected to calculate the measures, can the State estimate the yearly size of data that would be exchanged between the State and providers to the vendor?

It varies too much to provide a meaningful value.

40 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Request for Proposal, 2.7.6 Vendor Required Functions, Client Portal

Page: 3 Regarding implementing a client portal for the satisfaction survey completions, does the State expect a separate portal to be developed for this work, or could a licensed third-party survey service be used and incorporated into a unified platform?

The State currently uses the Microsoft application suite for satisfaction surveys via Teams.

41 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Request for Proposal, 2.7.9 Vendor Required Functions, Reducing Administrative Burden

Page: 3 Can the State expand upon what top priority administrative barriers exist today?

The primary barrier for the State is the lack of technical expertise at the provider level.

42 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Request for Proposal, 2.7.10 Vendor Required Functions, EHRs

Page: 3 Can the State clarify if 2.7.10 is referring to a CCBHC providersâ?? EHR systems and that the vendor is assisting with their EHR systems? If so, is this only in regard to the template necessary for EHR data extraction, or is the vendor expected to develop an interface with the EHR system for a direct data exchange?

The providers use their own EHRs and there is no template.

43 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Request for Proposal, 2.8.1 System Requirements and 2.10.1 Products and/or Alternatives

Page: 4 Regarding the separation of business rules from core programming and the availability of business roles in both human and machine-readable format, does the State have existing licensing to a product supplying this separation? There are licensable third-party products that support it; however, this would seem to conflict with 2.10.1, which prohibits vendors from proposing an alternative that would require the State to acquire hardware and/or software or change processes to function properly.

The vendor is responsible for providing services/licenses need to support the successful execution and delivery of this contract.

44 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Request for Proposal, 2.14.1 CCBHC QIP Vendor Services and Transition Period

Page: 5 Should a vendor choose to offer a proprietary SaaS solution, would the State accept a transition plan that included all client data, documentation/user guides, and customizations made during the life of the contract but not the actual SaaS system?

Yes, the state would accept.

45 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Attachment â?? Scope of Work, Semi- Monthly Status Reports, Row 37

Page: N/A When outlining accomplishments to be provided during semi-monthly status reports, Joint Application Development (JAD) sessions are identified. Can the State please clarify if the vendor will be responsible for leading the JAD sessions, or merely reporting on the notes received from state led JAD sessions?

The vendor should lead the JAD sessions. This is a technical development activity and the vendor needs to get the requirements from the state to determine what is needed for development. This is a vendor led process to determine what is needed by the state.

46 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Attachment â?? Scope of Work, Providing QRs Summarizing Survey Data, Survey Languages, Row 72

Page: N/A It appears the Consumer Satisfaction Survey is currently in English and Spanish. The SOW indicated the survey needs to be available in the more prominent spoken languages in the state. Are there other prominent languages the survey currently does not support?

Not at this time, however, the vendor should be prepared to make the survey available in other languages if a more prominent language emerges over the course of the contract term.

47 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Request for Proposal, 9.8.7 Client References

Page: 11-12 Does the State have a preferred or minimum number of client references required? The State would like a mimimum of 3.

48 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM

Request for Proposal, 10. Submission Checklist

Page: 12 Should vendors submit the completed Attachment â?? Requirements Matrix as part of its Technical Proposal, as outlined in 10.2, or as a separate document? If part of 10.2, does the State have a preference for where it is included in the order provided in 10.2?

Yes ,the vendor should submit the completed Requirements Matrix with the Tecnical Proposal.

49 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM General

Page: N/A Does the State have an anticipated budget, or does not exceed, for this scope of work that it can share with potential vendors to aid in the preparation of sufficient technical and cost proposals?

The state prefers Vendors provide a competitive cost while meeting the requirements of the project. Vendors are encouraged to provide their best solution.

50 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM General

Page: N/A Do CCBHCs currently meet to discuss questions or concerns regarding submission protocols?

If meetings currently occur, can the State please share the name of the meeting, frequency, and whether meetings include all CCBHCs for technical assistance, or occur separately with individual CCBHCs?

The state meets with CCBHCs regularly. The awarded vendor would be expected to provide technical assitance to CCBHCs as needed to fulfill the terms of this contract."

51 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM General Page: N/A

Please confirm whether the vendor will support submission of any form of federal reporting.

The vendor will provide support in data but not for form submission for federal reporting.

52 BIDS@MSLC.C

OM General

Page: N/A Please confirm whether dashboards are expected to be interactive, and the expected number and types of users. Are CCBHCs required to have access to dashboards, or are dashboards meant to be made available to State staff only?

Dashboards are expected to be interactve to allow dynamic data filtering and public facing. The CCBHC dashboard is owned/updated by DHCFP and the Office of Analystics, there is minimal vendor input on this other than to assist with the specs Please see the provided link for the current dashboard for CCBHCs:

https://dhhs.nv.gov/Programs/Office_of_Analytics/OFFICE_OF_A

NALYTICS_-_DATA___REPORTS/

Bid Q&A for Export Report