EBP_RFP_32901-31468_Amendment_1.pdf

09-20-18 RFP-AMEND

RFP # 32901-31468 – Amendment # 1 Page 1 of 7

STATE OF TENNESSEE

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECT

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS # 32901-31468

AMENDMENT # 1

FOR EVIDENCE-BASED PROGRAMMING

DATE: APRIL 29, 2026

RFP # 32901-31468 IS AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:

1. This RFP Schedule of Events updates and confirms scheduled RFP dates. Any event, time, or date containing revised or new text is highlighted.

EVENT

TIME

(central time zone)

DATE

1. RFP Issued March 30, 2026

2. Disability Accommodation Request Deadline 2:00 p.m. April 6, 2026

3. Pre-response Conference 2:00 p.m. April 7, 2026

4. Notice of Intent to Respond Deadline 2:00 p.m. April 8, 2026

5. Written “Questions & Comments” Deadline 2:00 p.m. April 15, 2026

6. State Response to Written “Questions & Comments”

April 29, 2026

7. Response Deadline 2:00 p.m. May 13, 2026

8. State Completion of Technical Response Evaluations

May 20, 2026

9. State Opening & Scoring of Cost Proposals 2:00 p.m. May 21, 2026

10. State Notice of Intent to Award Released and RFP Files Opened for Public Inspection

2:00 p.m. May 22, 2026

11. End of Protest Period May 26, 2026

12. State sends contract to Contractor for signature

June 2, 2026

13. Contractor Signature Deadline 2:00 p.m. June 16, 2026

2. State responses to questions and comments in the table below amend and clarify this RFP.

Any restatement of RFP text in the Question/Comment column shall NOT be construed as a change in the actual wording of the RFP document.

RFP # 32901-31468 – Amendment # 1 Page 2 of 7

RFP

SECTION

PAGE

QUESTION / COMMENT STATE RESPONSE

Attachment 6.3 1 a) Should the Cost per Scheduled Weekly Class cover time needed for pre-and post-assessments, data entry, quality assurance, trainings, PTO and sick time for staf f , and management meetings?

b) Would the DOC consider changing ATTACHMENT 6.3 to allow Contractors to list a differing price for each of the 5 contract years? Without an annual Cost-of -Living-Adjustment (COLA), Contractors will have to estimate how much expenses will increase over the full 5-year contract term and incorporate those future costs into their pricing.

Thus, the DOC would pay more in the earlier years of a multi-contract to reimburse a Contractor’s estimated costs for future years that have not yet materialized. A f ixed price for 5 years requires a signif icantly larger funding increase request over the current contract year compared to allowing for annual increases.

TDOC Answer:

1.a. Yes. The Cost per Scheduled Weekly Class is a fully burdened, all-inclusive rate. It must include all costs necessary to perform the services described in the RFP, including but not limited to staffing, training, pre- and post-assessments, data entry, quality assurance, supervision, administrative overhead, and leave time. No additional compensation will be provided beyond the proposed unit rate.

1.b. The State has revised RFP Attachment 6.3 (Cost Proposal & Scoring Guide) to allow Respondents to propose a Cost per Scheduled Weekly Class for each year of the potential contract term, including the base term and all four renewal option periods.

For evaluation purposes, the State will calculate a total evaluated price by summing the proposed annual Cost per Scheduled Weekly Class rates across all contract years. This total will be used in the cost scoring formula as set forth in Attachment 6.3, as amended.

Because maximum liability amounts are f ixed and pre-established by the State, the price evaluation methodology is designed to compare respondents based on their proposed unit pricing, with lower unit pricing resulting in an ability to deliver a greater

RFP # 32901-31468 – Amendment # 1 Page 3 of 7

PAGE

QUESTION / COMMENT STATE RESPONSE

number of Scheduled Weekly Classes, within the established maximum liability.

The draf t Pro Forma has been updated to ref lect the maximum liability amounts for each contract year. These amounts are f irm and non-negotiable.

A.4. Program Delivery

Requirements

2 Please clarify whether this requires physically separate proposal packages for DRC and TDOC CS, or if both may be included as clearly labeled sections within a single submitted response package.

2. Yes, both may be included as clearly labeled sections within a single submitted response package.

A.5. Facilitator Training, Coaching &

Requirements

3 Is the vendor required to purchase computers through TDOC? If so, please provide the specif ications needed for computer hardware.

3.No. TDOC will not provide, sell, or require the purchase of computers through TDOC.

As stated in Section A.5.5, the Contractor is solely responsible for furnishing all supplies and equipment necessary to perform the required work, including computers. The RFP does not prescribe specif ic hardware specif ications.

However, any equipment used must be compatible with applicable TDOC systems and comply with all State security and access requirements.

A.7.

Documentation, Reporting, Data

Collection, and Handling of

Recording

Materials

4 Section A.7.3 requires the contractor to administer pre- and post-assessments for each curriculum; however, the RFP does not specify required assessment instruments. May respondents propose and utilize assessments of their choice, or does TDOC prefer or require the use of specific assessment tools? If TDOC intends for agency-selected

4. Respondents may propose the assessment instruments associated with their proposed Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) curricula.

TDOC does not prescribe

RFP # 32901-31468 – Amendment # 1 Page 4 of 7

PAGE

QUESTION / COMMENT STATE RESPONSE

assessments to be used, please identify the required assessment instrument(s) for each curriculum.

specif ic pre- or post-assessment tools within this RFP. As outlined in RFP Attachment 6.2, Section C, Respondents are responsible for proposing the full curriculum they intend to implement, including any required assessment components. Where the curriculum developer specif ies pre- and post-assessments, those should be utilized to maintain fidelity.

If no such assessments are prescribed, Respondents should propose appropriate assessment methods to measure participant progress and program ef fectiveness.

C.3. Payment

Methodology

5 Please confirm that Contractors will be paid over the annual minimum classes of 4,615.

5. Yes. As described in Section C.3, the Minimum Guarantee establishes a f loor, not a ceiling. The Contractor will be compensated at the contracted rate for all Scheduled Weekly Classes authorized and performed. If the total number of classes in a given 12-month period exceeds the Minimum Guarantee, those additional classes are payable, subject to the maximum liability established in Section C.1.

Attachment 6.6. 6 Under the current contract, TDOC participant enrollment ref lects that approximately 40% engage in evidence-based programming (EBP) through self -directed digital programming. This RFP’s scope of work appears to describe program delivery exclusively through in-person and facilitator-led virtual classroom models, without requiring self -directed digital programming. However, Attachment 6.6 includes a “Digital Programming Summary” that

6. The scope of work for this RFP is limited to instructor-led service delivery, including in-person and facilitator-led virtual classroom models, as described in the RFP. Self -directed digital programming is not required under this RFP. Attachment 6.6 is provided for historical

RFP # 32901-31468 – Amendment # 1 Page 5 of 7

PAGE

QUESTION / COMMENT STATE RESPONSE

references digital programming under the “Digital Programming Summary” tab. Can TDOC conf irm whether it is the intent of this RFP to eliminate the currently utilized self -directed digital programming model, or whether respondents should continue to propose and support this modality?

reference and pricing context only. It ref lects prior service delivery models and volumes but does not establish requirements for this solicitation.

Attachment 6.7 Pro Forma Contract D.5.

Termination for

Convenience

7 Would the State consider mutual termination?

7. The State will not modify this RFP to include a mutual termination provision.

Attachment

6.7.3

8 Is a professional licensure required for a Relapse Prevention group facilitator for the DRCs? If so, what level of licensure is expected?

8. The RFP does not prescribe specif ic minimum education, licensure, or f ixed staf f ing positions (including specif ic FTE roles).

Respondents are responsible for proposing a staf f ing model, including facilitator qualif ications, that is sufficient to successfully deliver the proposed Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) curricula, meet all service requirements, and maintain program f idelity. Where curriculum developers specify facilitator qualif ications, certif ications, or training requirements, those must be followed. Otherwise, Respondents should propose appropriate qualifications and staf fing structures to support ef fective service delivery. As outlined in Attachment 6.2, Sections B.13 and C.3, Respondents must provide a personnel roster, resumes, and job descriptions, including minimum qualif ications, for all proposed positions. Proposed staf f ing and qualif ications will be

RFP # 32901-31468 – Amendment # 1 Page 6 of 7

PAGE

QUESTION / COMMENT STATE RESPONSE

evaluated as part of the technical proposal.

9 a) Staffing Degree Requirements - Will group facilitators be required to possess a minimum of a bachelor’s degree?

b) Staffing Requirements - The current contract requires four FTEs (f idelity and quality assurance, statewide manager, statewide coordinator, and HR/administrative assistant). Will these positions be required under this RFP?

TDOC Answer- Same for 9 a and 9 b

The RFP does not prescribe specific minimum education, licensure, or f ixed staf f ing positions (including specif ic FTE roles). Respondents are responsible for proposing a staf f ing model, including facilitator qualifications, that is suf f icient to successfully deliver the proposed Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) curricula, meet all service requirements, and maintain program f idelity.

Where curriculum developers specify facilitator qualif ications, certif ications, or training requirements, those must be followed.

Otherwise, Respondents should propose appropriate qualif ications and staf f ing structures to support effective service delivery. As outlined in Attachment 6.2, Sections B.13 and C.3, Respondents must provide a personnel roster, resumes, and job descriptions, including minimum qualifications, for all proposed positions. Proposed staf fing and qualifications will be evaluated as part of the technical proposal.

10 The RFP requires the delivery of an evidence-based program (EBP), including implementation within a def ined timeframe. Can the State clarify expectations regarding implementation readiness at contract start? Specifically, is the selected contractor required to have staff fully trained and prepared to deliver the EBP on Day 1 of the contract, or is there an allowable transition/implementation period for

TDOC Answer:

10. The State intends to provide a transition and implementation period prior to full contract performance;

however, the exact duration of this period will depend on the timing of contract award.

The State anticipates awarding the contract in advance of the current contract end date of

RFP # 32901-31468 – Amendment # 1 Page 7 of 7

PAGE

QUESTION / COMMENT STATE RESPONSE

staf f training and onboarding while maintaining service continuity?

September 30, 2026.

Therefore, Respondents must propose a transition and implementation plan that ensures continuity of services and timely readiness to deliver the proposed Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) curricula, including the number of days required to achieve full operational capability. The Contractor will be expected to achieve full operational capability within a reasonable timeframe following award.

3. Delete RFP # 32901-31468 in its entirety and replace it with RFP # 32901-31468, Version 2, attached to this amendment. Revisions of the original RFP document are emphasized within the new release. (any sentence or paragraph containing revised or new text is highlighted):

4. RFP Amendment Effective Date. The revisions set forth herein shall be effective upon release. All other terms and conditions of this RFP not expressly amended herein shall remain in full force and ef fect.