Bidder Q & A RFP260000001280.docx
DOCX document 59 KB Posted
- Attached to
- ALLEGAN/BARRY FTBS CONTRACT
- Solicitation number
- RFP 491 260000001280 2
- Issued by
- Allegan County, Michigan
About this file
This is a Bidder Questions & Answers document for Request for Proposal No. 2600000001280 issued by the State of Michigan for Families Together Building Solutions (FTBS) Services in Allegan and Barry Counties. The document addresses ten clarifications submitted by bidders regarding service delivery requirements, staffing credentials, training timelines, organizational structure, caseload expectations, and budget allocations. Key determinations include confirmation that special topic trainings (FPS Domestic Violence Training, Working with Substance Affected Families, and Mental Health Training) must be completed within one year of hire; that supervisors can be designated as 0.5 FTE without also serving as direct workers if they supervise other programs; that the expected average caseload size for full-time workers is six families; and that specific assistance should average $100 per family with annual budgeting of $5,600 to serve approximately 56 families per year.
The document clarifies organizational and operational expectations for bidders, including that condensed organizational charts focusing on Family Preservation services are acceptable rather than agency-wide charts, and that the Family Preservation Contractor Data and Information Exchange SharePoint will replace monthly and quarterly cumulative summary reports. The State confirmed that bidders may reduce specific assistance and travel costs to align with their proposed staffing models and projected service volumes. The document also corrects references in the original RFP, including updating language related to Foster Care reunification services and removing erroneous references to "Team Leader" positions, with these corrections issued in RFP260000001280 Amendment 1.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Schedule B Pricing RFP 260000001280.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFP 260000001280 Ver2.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFP - 260000001280 Amendment 1.docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Michigan.gov/MiProcurement
BIDDER QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
Request for Proposal No. 2600000001280 Families Together Building Solutions Services in Allegan & Barry Counties
| Q # |
| Document and Section |
| Page # |
| Bidder Question |
| Answer (to be completed by the State) |
1.
1.1 General Requirements, A. Client Eligibility 1) Definition of Eligibility, a. 2.)
| 42 |
| Should ‘Family Reunification Program’ change to MFT since FRP will be changing to MFT? |
Yes, technically, but MFT is currently not available in every county.
The language will be updated to:
2.Foster Care reunification if reunification services are not able to accept the referral.
This has been updated in RFP260000001280 Amendment 1.
2.
1.1 General Requirements, E. Credentials, 3) Training Requirements
| 46 |
| Should the following special topic trainings: FPS Domestic Violence Training, Working with Substance Affected Families, and Mental Health Training be completed within one year of hire or within six months of hire as noted in other contracts? |
| FPS Domestic Violence Training, Working with Substance Affected Families, and Mental Health Training are to be completed within one year of hire. |
| 3. |
| 1.1 General Requirements, F. Services to be Provided, 2) Position Specific Requirements, a. 1 |
| 50 |
| It references Team Leader. Is this an error? |
| Yes, this is an error. |
This has been updated in RFP260000001280 Amendment 1.
4.
Category C. Staffing, Training, Agency Organization and Location, C4
| 68 |
| Should we only provide an organization chart with positions that have an allocation to the proposed FTBS Kalamazoo contract? The question notes an agency-wide organization chart; however, that is extremely large and will include irrelevant positions. |
| A condensed organizational chart with details of your Family Preservation services would be sufficient. If a manager oversees programs outside of Family Preservation, that would also need to be included on the provided organizational chart. |
5.
1.1 General Requirements, F. Services to be Provided, h
| 44 |
| Would the Protective Factors Survey Retrospective be an approved equivalent of the AAPI? |
| AAPI does not appear anywhere in this RFP. Protective Factors Survey Retrospective appears on pg 47 under “K”. |
6.
3. Project Management, 3.1 Reporting
| 52 |
| Will the Family Preservation Contractor Data and Information Exchange SharePoint replace the monthly and quarterly cumulative summary reports as it has in other contracts? |
| Yes, See reporting requirements. |
| 7. |
| F. Services to be Provided, 2. Volume of Service |
| 48 |
| What is the expected average caseload size for a full-time worker? |
| Six on average. |
8.
1.1 General Requirements, E. Credentials
| 45 |
| The funding would support 1 FTE worker; however, there is not enough funding for a 1 FTE Supervisor. The RFP notes, “part-time staff is only allowed in circumstances where the staff is 0.5 FTE designated as a Supervisor and 0.5 FTE designated as a FTBS Worker.” Is this only applicable to the direct worker? |
| A supervisor can be .5 FTE and not also be .5 FTE direct worker if they are also a supervisor in another program or another FTBS contract. |
9.
1.1 General Requirements, E. Credentials
| 45 |
| Can we have a .25 FTE Supervisor, overseeing 1 FTE Worker, who also oversees 3 FTE Direct Workers in other similar programs? |
| No. |
10.
1.1 General Requirements, F. Services to be provided, o
| 48 |
| The Statement of Work indicates that specific assistance should average $100 per family. Schedule B requires that $5,600 be budgeted for specific assistance, suggesting the bidder should serve 56 families per year. Would MDHHS consider reducing the specific assistance and travel costs? Alternatively, may the bidder reduce these costs to align them to the number of families that may be served by its proposed staffing model? |
| Yes. |
Version 2021-2 image1.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .