ESBD_368415_1722526740860_Addendum - Vendor Questions - RFP 739-SL3632122 Consulting Services - Epic Implementation.pdf

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Consulting Services - Epic Implementation

Addendum No. 1

RFP 739-SL3632122

Addendum No. 1

Consulting Services - Epic Implementation

RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS

The following responses to participant questions are fully incorporated into RFP 739-SL3632122.

Question TTUHSC Response

1. Is the $300k budget firm or is there an opportunity for an increased budget if more resources are required?

Tentative budget has been set at $300,000, however final allocation will be based on the outcome of the solicitation.

2. How many project resources will be included in this project from both UMC and Texas Tech Physicians?

TTUHSC will have 10 certified individuals UMC will have 89.

3. Are you planning to leverage internal resources for go-live support or will you need outside staffing?

Through TTUHSC’s connect agreement with University Medical Center (UMC), we have committed 10 Epic-certified analysts. TTUHSC will send a group of individuals for certification between October and December 2024.

Currently, TTUHSC doesn’t have Epic-certified individuals on our team, and if we fall short of the 10 certified individuals, we will look to use outside staffing.

4. How many offices are included in the scope of the project? How many total physicians are included in the scope of the project? How many specialties are included in the scope of the project? Is this project exclusively an ambulatory practice transition or will any inpatient or ambulatory hospital services be included?

About 400 providers.

TTUHSC has 14 different specialty departments that each have unique subspecialties within their departments. We also have an FQHC with multiple locations.

This project will include both hospital and ambulatory services.

5. How much travel are you expecting of these two individuals to be on site vs. remote?

TTUHSC would expect most of the work to be done remotely, but would want the individual available to come onsite as needed.

6. Do you want to see a fixed fee model over the course of the project, or would you like to see an hourly rate?

Provide a “not to exceed” fixed fee for each of the deliverables including associated fees (i.e. printing costs, attendance at meetings, travel), for the Consulting Services - Texas Tech Physicians Organizational Evaluation. A schedule should be included to document the level of effort used to derive the quoted fixed fee.

Provide a “blended hourly rate” for tracking time and materials run rate up to $100,000. See “Special Circumstances” in Section 5.4. of the RFP.

An hourly resource rate card by resource type (e.g., Project Manager, Analyst) valid through August 31, 2026 which will be used as the basis for change orders.

7. In 3.6 the RFP refers to an alternate proposal or secondary proposal that we could submit. Can you explain what this might look like? Are you suggesting we put together a different support model other than the FTE roles you are suggesting?

At a minimum, TTUHSC is seeking a response that contains all the content noted in the Submittal Checklist contained in page two of the RFP. Variations in the form of an alternate proposal are welcome, but should be clearly identified as outlined in 3.6 of the RFP. There is no intended suggestion or format here, we rely on the expertise of those in the industry to provide the “best” solutions to our described need.

8. In section 3.7, the Proposer is directed to prepare an HUB Subcontracting Plan (HSP) as part of our proposal.

a) Is the Proposer required to use HUB Subcontractors if we are able to fulfill the entire contract with our own resources?

b) Will a Proposer be penalized in the evaluation process for not utilizing HUB Subcontractors?

a) HUB Subcontractors are not required; the form permits the proposer to indicate that they will self-perform.

b) There is no penalty for not utilizing a HUB subcontractor

c) Any non-Proposer provider to the services would be considered a subcontractor.

c) For the purposes of this RFP, are Proposer consultants engaged in a 1099 capacity considered Subcontractors?

9. Does the Proposer need to provide an executed/signed version of the Consultant Services Agreement (Appendix A) as part of their response?

No.

10. Does the Proposer need to provide their Scope of Work in the exact form as listed in Appendix A (Page 24 of the RFP) or will including it in the body of the proposal under Services Specifications (Section 5.3.3) suffice?

No, inclusion in the body of the proposal is acceptable.

11. Does the Proposer need to provide an executed/signed version of the Business Associate Agreement (Also in Appendix A)

No.

12. For all documents requiring a digital signature, will a digital image of the signature suffice, or do you require proof of execution via a digital tool such as Docusign?

Digital image is acceptable (See 3.2.2 of the RFP) “By submitting their proposal online, proposers automatically qualify as having a valid signature.”

13. Section 4.8.5 states that TTUHSC is required under Texas Legislature House Bill 1295 (section 2252.908 of the Government Code) to request Ethics Commission Reporting from contractors with agreements that meet the two listed stipulations. Does this RFP fall under either of those stipulations? If so, does the Proposer need to state anywhere in the proposal that they have filed Form 1295 with the Texas Ethics Commission?

There is the potential that the Form 1295 will be required in relation to any resulting award to the RFP. This action would not be required until an awarded contract was near execution.

14. For Section 5.2 Minimum Requirements, what specific documentation is the Proposer required to include to meet the following:

a) Proposer is current with the State of Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts (if applicable) https://fmcpa.cpa.state.tx.us/tpis/

- will a screenshot stating “No vendor hold record was found for the search criteria” suffice to meet this requirement?

b) Proposer can provide Certificate of Franchise Tax status. (if applicable) https://ourcpa.cpa.state.tx.us/coa/Index.html -will a screenshot of the Proposer’s Business Entity information obtained in an entity search suffice to meet this requirement?

c) Proposer shall demonstrate evidence of certifications, permits, licenses and insurances as appropriate to provide the Services as required. What additional documents are deemed “as appropriate” for this RFP?

No specific documentation is being requested for the purposes of inclusion with the proposal. The intent here is to put Proposers on notice that TTUHSC may be precluded from making an award to any Proposer that is out of compliance with any potential hold or requirement.

15. In Section 5.4 Services Specifications, the Summary Scope of Work states the Proposer will “Help Texas Tech Physicians meet our project management requirements as a community connect partner...”

a) Are there specific areas of focus and/or objectives that you are looking for the Proposer to help you achieve here?

b) Are there gaps and/or resource constraints within TTUHSC’s project management infrastructure that you are looking for the Proposer to augment/support?

TTUHSC has shared an instance of Cerner with UMC for many years and have been on IDX for billing for many years as well; because of that, we don’t have individuals with experience converting EMR and billing systems. We are looking for a partner with experience helping academic medical practices implement Epic in a connected environment who can advise and coach us to help ensure a successful implementation. TTUHSC will have internal project management resources and Epic certified individuals, but are looking for a partner to advise and coach us on decision using their Epic implementation experience.

16. In Section 5.4 Services Specifications, the Project Deliverables specify in Deliverable 3: “Advisory and Project Management” for “Period 1 – Planning and Design, Period 2 – Configuration and Test, Period 3 – Implementation.” For the Project Management portion of this deliverable, to what extent would you want the Proposer’s consultant(s) serving in a high-level guidance/advisory capacity versus serving as a direct

Please see question #15.

contributor to specific efforts and day-to-day activities on the project?

a) If the Proposer’s consultant(s) are intended to make direct contributions to day-to-day efforts, can you provide further clarification on specific areas of focus that would be most helpful for you?

17. Section 6.1 “Pricing for Services Offered,” since you have requested a fixed fee inclusive of all associated fees such as travel, etc., what is the anticipated travel requirement/percentage for the project?

Please see question # 5.

18. What internal resources are allocated to the project and what level of Epic expertise do they possess?

a) What Epic resources will be provided by the Community Connect host organization?

Neither TTUHSC nor UMC have Epic certified staff on our teams. We will both be sending individuals to certification this fall. Also please see question #2.

19. Are there any specific credentials or certifications required for this role?

No, but TTUHSC is looking for someone with experience helping academic organizations implement Epic in a connect environment.

20. Any known risks or complexities that we should be aware of when reviewing candidate skill sets and experiences?

None at this time.

21. Could you please provide the following information regarding the scope of this Epic implementation project (as available):

a. Total number of physicians in scope for the Epic implementation project

b. Number of locations (clinics or other facilities)

c. List of specialties across the locations in scope

d. List of ambulatory Epic modules in scope

About 400 providers.

55 locations.

114 unique specialties EpicCare Ambulatory EHR, Orthopedics, Dermatology, Fertility, EpicCare

Link, Haiku for smartphone, Canto for tablet, & Limerick for Apple watch, Care Management & Value-Based Care inc. Healthy Planet Population, Health, Healthy Planet Link, & Compass Rose Comprehensive Care Coordination, Cadence Enterprise Scheduling & Prelude Registration, HIM Deficiency Tracking, ROI, Identity, Coding and Abstraction, Gallery, Patient Experience (MyChart Patient Experience Platform, MyChart Care, Companion, MyChart Bedside, Hello World SMS, & Welcome Patient Kiosk), PB, PB Claims, BID (Cogito Reporting).

22. Please confirm the anticipated project timeline for the engagement (kickoff through go-live), based on the information provided by University Medical Center

(UMC).

TTUHSC will send individuals for training this fall, with the project kick expected to be in January of 2025 and going live in February of 2026.

23. Please confirm the primary role of the requested consulting partner (i.e., augment internal TTUHSC project management resources, fill any gaps within the TTUHSC project management team, or oversee the entire engagement on behalf of TTUHSC).

Please see question #15.

24. Please provide the following information regarding project management resources allocated to this engagement (whether resources will be provided and the number of FTEs, if available):

a. Internal project management resources or technical resources allocated to the project by

TTUHSC

b. Project management resources provided by UMC (implementation project manager, application project managers, training manager, etc.)

Both TTUHSC and UMC will have internal project management resources, however the details of this structure are still being worked through. Also, please see question #3.

25. What is the expectation of on-site vs. hybrid and/or virtual work for the duration of the engagement(s)? If onsite required, which location(s)?

Please see question #5.

26. Are you expecting to award to a single bidder or multiple?

One award is anticipated.

27. Can additional clarity be provided on evaluation criteria weighting?

Weighting found in Section 4.3 of the RFP directly correlates to the requires information in Section 5.3 (Technical) and 6.1 (Costing)

28. If travel is required, what is TTUHSC expense reimbursement policy?

Travel Expenses. University shall only reimburse travel expenses pre-approved in writing, at rates not to exceed the most current rates set by the Texas Comptroller

(https://fmx.cpa.texas.gov/fmx/travel/textravel/rates/current.php). University may reimburse rental car expenses at rates not to exceed those set in University contracts. University will not reimburse for alcoholic beverages.

29. Are you able to share any additional information about the budget allocated for this project? Are there any constraints or limitations regarding budget that we should be aware of?

TTUHSC’s goal would be to stay close to the $300k set forth in the RFP.

30. Please provide more information on user base and scope of organization - how many practices, users, user types/groups, sub-configurations?

Please see question #21 and we estimate to have 106 concurrent users.

31. Who are the user groups? Is this confined to one department/group?

Please see Question #4.

32. Who are the key stakeholders involved in this project, and what are their roles and responsibilities?

TTUHSC will have physician leadership as well as key stakeholder on both the EMR and Practice Management side. We are working through everyone’s role but they will be providing leadership and decision making.

33. How many employees will be impacted by this Epic implementation / Epic go-live?

About 650 for Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center.

34. What Epic Modules are planned to be implemented?

(E.g Ambulatory, Inpatient, MyChart, etc.)?

Please see question #21

35. Does TTUHSC currently have an instance of EPIC - if not what is current EMR system in place?

We do not have an instance of Epic and currently use Cerner.

36. Can you provide more clarity on deliverables, objectives, outcomes on "advisory and coaching services"?

Please see question #15.

37. What resources or personnel will be available from TTUHSC to support this project and at what capacity?

We plan to have 10 certified Epic analysts, internal project management resources, and engagement from key stakeholders for decision making form key stakeholders.

38. What implementation tasks will be handled by TTUHSC resources (and from what teams) vs.

consultant?

Please see question #15.

39. What role/function would the proposer be providing coaching services for?

Please see question #15.

40. Confirm detailed scope of Deliverable 2 - Assessment and Analysis. Is this expected to include: Current state, future state, value proposition?

Yes

41. What are your PM requirements as a community partner? Have you gathered any requirements?

Technical? Regulatory/Compliance driven?

TTUHSC has committed to provide a partner PM and Project Sponsor and 10 certified analysists per our connect agreement.

42. What existing systems and software are currently in use, and how do they interact with each other?

We currently use Cerner for EMR as well as for scheduling/registration and IDX for billing. There is an interface between the two system to transfer data needed for billing to IDX.

43. Are there any systems or data that need to be migrated or integrated with Epic?

TTUHSC will be looking to do a conversion of some EMR data but don’t plan to convert any billing data from IDX.

44. Are there specific academic or research requirements that need to be considered in the implementation?

None that we are aware of at this point.

45. What requirements, design, or other systems selection work has be done to date?

There has been no design decision for the Epic system to date, but the teams have worked through third party vendor selection.

46. What are the expected outcomes and success criteria for this project?

To have a successful Epic project and implementation the hits the timeline.

47. Are there any dependencies on other ongoing projects or systems that we should be aware of?

No

48. Are there any known risks or challenges we should be aware of at the start?

None that we are aware of at this point.

49. Who is the executive sponsor for this project at Texas Tech Physicians (TTP)?

Marty Clay who is our Executive Associate Dean.

50. Please describe the anticipated composition of TTP’s internal project team for the Epic implementation (roles, responsibilities, etc.).

Please see question #37.

51. Has TTP selected its internal project manager for the Epic implementation?

TTUHSC is working to finalize the project teams roles, but haven’t finalized it yet.

52. Please describe the role of TTP’s internal project manager during the Epic implementation.

Will lead the organization of the project to ensure we are staying on and meet the requirements of our connect agreement with UMC and work closely with the UMC project manager. They will also work closely with the consultant to gain from their expertise.

53. Please describe TTP’s preference, if any, for the composition of the consultant’s project team.

TTUHSC is looking for individuals with prior experience implementing Epic in an academic center in a connect environment.

54. Has the proposal evaluation committee been selected?

If yes, what roles or departments do they represent?

Yes, it will consist of physician leadership as well as key stakeholders on the EMR and Practice management side.

55. What is the expected approach with respect to on-site work, remote work, and hybrid work?

Please see question #5.

56. Does TTP have a preferred collaboration platform (e.g., MS Teams, Zoom, etc.)?

TTUHSC preferred collaboration tool is zoom.

57. Please clarify the role you are seeking, is this an advisory role or a project management role? On page 13, it is stated that it is “Advising and coaching Texas Tech Physicians...”, then on Page 14 under Deliverable 3 it is stated as “Advisory and Project Management.”

Please see question #15.

58. In Section 5.4 of the RFP, what are the specific expectations of the selected consultant to “advise, coach, and assist”?

Please see question #15.

59. Please define the “run rate” mentioned in Section 6.1, Item 2 of the RFP.

TTUHSC is seeking a blended hour rate that can be used for anticipated invoicing purposes “run rate” as the budget value of $100,000 is consumed.

60. In the special circumstances on page 14, it states that consulting services expenditures are limited to $100,000 without formal BOR approval. Can you provide the period for the $100,000 (i.e. yearly)?

$100k, services to start September 1, 2024 and carry us through the BOR meeting in November of 2024, and anticipated approval of full budget allocation.

61. Does TTP expect that expenses would be included in the tentative budget of $300,000?

TTUHSC would expect this to include all cost. As noted above we would expect travel to be minimal.

62. Has TTP already hired its Epic analysts? Please see question number #3.

63. What is (or what will be) the size of TTP’s certified Epic analyst team?

We will have 10.