Competency Restoration RFI - Amendment A 7 17 26.pdf
PDF 88 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Request for Information: Competency Restoration
- Solicitation number
- BD-27-1022-DMH08-8210C-130916
- Issued by
- Massachusetts
About this file
This Amendment A to the Request for Information (RFI) issued by the Massachusetts Department of Mental Health (DMH) clarifies and expands upon the original RFI submission for competency restoration training services, with responses due July 24, 2026 at 3:00 pm through COMMBUYS (Bid #BD-27-1022-DMH08-8210C-130916). The amendment organizes inquiries into three primary sections addressing evidence-based competency restoration models, training program design and implementation support, and associated costs. Section 1 requests information on evidence-based interventions for individuals with serious mental illness, assessment measures, population subgroups with differential responsivity, and the disciplines that deliver these interventions. Section 2 seeks clarification on optimal staff training modalities (in-person, virtual, or asynchronous), training duration and structure, competency evaluation methods, recommended implementation supports including consultation services, train-the-trainer options, fidelity indicators, and documentation guidance. The DMH seeks responses limited to five pages that include the RFI title, submitting entity name, business affiliation, and contact information. Written questions were required to be submitted by July 10, 2026 at 3:00 pm, with DMH responses posted by July 17, 2026.
Section 3 of the amendment addresses comprehensive cost information, requiring vendors to provide pricing for treatment license fees, measurement tool usage, staff training, training materials, ongoing consultation services, and external fidelity reviews. All costs incurred by respondents in preparing RFI submissions are the vendor's sole responsibility with no reimbursement from DMH. All responses become public record under Massachusetts General Law Chapter 66, Section 10, regardless of any confidentiality notices included by vendors. Dr. Amam Saleh, Deputy Commissioner for Clinical and Professional Services, serves as the primary contact for the RFI at Amam.Saleh@Mass.Gov. The initiative aims to address capacity constraints in the department's Continuing Care Units and reduce average length of stay for individuals undergoing competence to stand trial evaluations.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Competency Restoration - RFI.pdf | ||
| QA RFI - Competency Restoration.pdf |
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
7/17/2026 AMENDMENT TO COMMBUYS Bid #: BD-27-1022-DMH08-8210C-130916
The following lists of questions expand on and clarify the original RFI submission. We invite all respondents to address these questions directly in addition to primary RFI material:
SECTION 1: What model of competency restoration has a solid evidence base, for which populations, and delivered by which disciplines?
1. What evidence based competency restoration interventions (both individual and group modalities) are well suited to people with serious mental illness?
2. What measures are used to assess impact of competency restoration interventions, individual level, unit/facility level?
3. Are there defined subgroups with different responsivity to competency restoration interventions and/or different interventions better suited to different subgroups?
4. Which disciplines deliver competency restoration interventions? Do different disciplines provide different components of the interventions for different subgroups?
SECTION 2: Clarifying what a training program and implementation support would look like:
1. Best modalities for training staff?
a. In person, virtual, asynchronous
2. How many hours? How many sessions? How many trainees per session? Booster sessions?
3. How is Competency to deliver the intervention evaluated/measured?
4. What Implementation supports are recommended, e.g. consultation calls
5. Train the trainer options?
6. Fidelity indicators/measures/process
7. Consultation re medical records documentation/data collection?
SECTION 3: Costs involved?
1. Cost of license/permission to provide the treatment
2. Cost for using measurement tools?
3. Cost for training?
4. Cost for training materials?
5. Cost for ongoing consultation?
6. Cost for external fidelity reviews?
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .