Addendum 1 Final Questions and Answers (1) (1).docx

Questions and Answers Addendum 1 Recovery Solutions Questions – RFP #2026000157

When possible, beds remain open for house alone accommodations. The current agreement funds 78 occupied beds and access to 82 physical beds.

The current capacity of the program is for 78 patients and the program currently has five patients that may meet criteria for this need and an additional two patients that were admitted with existing court orders for medication. This need is highly variable and fluid, which should be accounted for in any proposals.

All procedures outlined in Colorado Statute are expected to be addressed including initiation of emergency medication, involuntary medication petitions, and subsequent petitions. This includes testimony, which may be virtual or in-person. In addition, the administration of the medication to the patient and subsequent monitoring required. This requires medical staffing and administrative staffing to be determined within your proposal and take into consideration program staff, contracted staff, and partner jail staff.

Yes. Testimony is likely for medication petitions, as well as intermittent testimony of any treatment team member regarding their respective role.

In person vs remote testimony varies and the vendor is expected to accommodate both.

Unfortunately, we are not able to publish these documents as they are drafted ideas that the Department would be in support of should they become viable. We do not have any formal policy or procedure in place for court ordered medications within these programs. The vendor’s proposals may differ and vary in likelihood of execution.

Within the bounds of Colorado Statute and the practice abilities of various disciplines, the vendor’s proposal should designate which staff will be responsible for each component of the process. The use of involuntary medication, patient responsivity, and behavioral control mechanisms are not reliably predicted to occur solely within the programs hours; therefore, consideration should be given to after hour’s needs, emergency needs, and coverage.

Our expectation is for the vendor to offer and financially account for medication that serves the client’s needs best, as opposed to medication selection driven by cost. Prescribers shall not be limited to a jail formulary. This often includes use of long acting injectables for our clients, as it better secures longer term stability and adherence.

We are currently able to uphold existing court orders for medication and renew. We would like to establish the ability to initiate court ordered medications as well. The current capacity of the program is for 78 patients and the program currently has five patients that may meet criteria for this need and an additional two patients that were admitted with existing court orders for medication. This need is highly variable and fluid, which should be accounted for in any proposals.

Should the vendor propose that initiation of court ordered medication must occur at an offsite location, their proposal shall include anticipated costs associated and/or a proposal that is fully contained within the program.

1. Whether initiation is expected to occur offsite at a behavioral health hospital (and under what circumstances). Offerors may propose either or both.

2. Whether the State anticipates that initiation would require the defendant to be temporarily released from ACSO custody and admitted under the receiving hospital’s custody/authority, and what approvals/process are required to do so. Offerors proposals may include temporary physical removal from the program; however, custody shall remain via court order to the CDHS and therefore bond status shall be considered, along with mitigating escape concerns.

3. Which party (Vendor vs. State vs. County) is responsible for arranging and funding private security, secure/private transportation, and EMS required to transfer the defendant to/from an offsite hospital for initiation (including the possibility of a multi-day window, e.g., up to 72 hours).

Offerors may propose a combination of cost allocations but it must be accounted for within the proposal.

4. Whether the Vendor is expected to identify and contract with an accepting behavioral health hospital(s), and if so, whether CDHS/OCFMH will provide support (e.g., preferred partners, contracting pathways, or letters of cooperation) to ensure bed access for this population.

Vendors may include this in a proposal and should a proposal be accepted, the CDHS will work with the vendor to support any needs for successful implementation.

5. How the State will define compliance with “as soon as possible after admission” for authorization/consent and initiation when offsite initiation is delayed by custody transfer limitations, hospital acceptance criteria, transport availability, or medical clearance requirements.

Compliance shall adhere to established Colorado statute and accepted policies and procedures. CDHS understands the potential delays associated with court orders and transportation. The proposal shall adhere to the legal thresholds established in Colorado Statute under the criminal code for access to involuntary medication via Medina and Sell standards, which should mitigate concern about acceptance to a hospital facility; however, if a proposal establishes partnership with a local behavioral health entity, it shall be tailored to the competency-specific population and include agreed upon acceptance criteria, including for Sell.

When clients are discharged from the program as restored, Statute requires the jail of origin to facilitate transportation. When clients are discharged from the program into the community, we expect the vendor to provide safe transportation.