Exhibit C, Evaluation Tool.pdf
PDF 56 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Informal Dispute Resolution - Outsourcing
- Solicitation number
- HHS0017139
- Issued by
- Texas
About this file
This document is an evaluation tool for RFQ No. HHS0017139 issued by the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) for Informal Dispute Resolution outsourcing services. The solicitation seeks a qualified respondent to conduct unbiased Informal Dispute Resolution reviews for disputed regulatory matters concerning compliance with medicine, nursing, building, fire and life safety code requirements in long-term care facilities. The evaluation tool establishes a comprehensive scoring framework for assessing respondent qualifications, experience, work plan capabilities, and reporting abilities, with responses evaluated on a scale of 1 to 10 across multiple sub-criteria.
The evaluation criteria are weighted as follows: Qualifications (25%), Experience (30%), Work Plan (30%), and Reporting Capabilities (15%), for a total score of 100 points. Qualifications are assessed based on demonstrated work history with regulatory compliance matters and the respondent's ability to provide a Licensed Nurse with long-term care experience. Experience evaluation focuses on organizational capacity for conducting unbiased reviews and appropriate staff qualifications. Work Plan scoring addresses data processing, tracking, documentation capabilities, and demonstrated strategies to meet statutory timeframes while providing two levels of review and informal conference options at no charge to facilities. Reporting Capabilities are evaluated on written decision-making documentation demonstrating consistent, unbiased reviews and the ability to recommend revisions when HHSC determines outcomes violate federal law or CMS regulations. Scoring guidance ranges from "Unacceptable" (scores 1-3) through "Marginal" (scores 4-6) to "Acceptable" (scores 7-9) and "Exceptional" (score 10).
View the file
Other files
Show all 14
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
Evaluator Respondent
# Criteria Weight Score Comments
1.1 Evaluate the Respondent's demonstrated work history reviewing disputed regulatory matters concerning compliance with medicine, nursing, building, fire and life safety code regulatory requirements.
10%
1.2
Evaluate the Respondent's ability to demonstrate the qualifications of a Licensed nurse with long-term care experience ensuring a review with appropriate recommendations of compliance or non-compliance with applicable State and Federal requirements.
15%
25%
2.1 Evaluate the Respondent's demonstrated organizational experience in conducting unbiased Informal Dispute Resolution reviews.
15%
2.2 Evaluate the Respondent's staff experience and how it meets the requirements of this Solicitation.
15%
30%
3.1 Evaluate the Respondent's ability to process, track, retrieve and document all standard data related to Information Dispute Resolutions and addressing all disputed deficiencies and violations.
15%
3.2
Evaluate the Respondent's strategies that demonstrate Informal Dispute Resolutions will be completed within the statutory timeframes, a transparent review process sharing of information, two levels of review, and the option of an Informal Dispute Resolution conference at no charge to the facility.
15%
30%
4.1 Evaluate the Respondent's demonstrated written decision making documentation supporting a consistent and unbiased review of each Informal Dispute Resolution.
10%
4.2
Evaluate the Respondent's recommended revisions to an Informal Dispute Resolution outcome after HHSC determines that an Informal Dispute Resolution outcome violates a federal law or Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services regulation.
5%
15% 100%
Reporting Capabilities (15%)
Subtotal
TOTAL (%)
Subtotal
Subtotal
Subtotal
RFQ No. HHS0017139 Criteria, Subcriteria Sheet
Exhibit C, Evaluation Tool
Work Plan (30%)
Qualifications (25%)
Experience (30%)
Version 1.6 September 2023 1 of 3
Score Level
Unacceptable 1
Unacceptable 2
Unacceptable 3
Marginal. Fails to meet evaluation standards but failures are correctable. 4
Marginal. Fails to meet evaluation standards but failures are correctable. 5
Marginal. Fails to meet evaluation standards but failures are correctable. 6
Acceptable 7
Acceptable 8
Acceptable 9
Exceptional 10
For the purposes of this exhibit, “the agency” means the contracting state agency as specified in the solicitation.
Response satisfies requirements and has some benefits above requirement.
Response far exceeds all aspects of requirement.
Response addresses requirement, but response described does not allow the agency to fulfill mission.
Response meets fundamental requirements, however could not be implemented as described (would require both the agency and Respondent to make significant changes not currently anticipated).
Response meets fundamental requirements, however could not be implemented as described (implementation would require both the agency and Respondent to make minor changes not currently anticipated).
Response meets fundamental requirements, however could not be implemented as described (implementation would require changes to be made by Respondent only).
Response clearly satisfies requirement but has some minor weaknesses.
Response clearly satisfies requirement.
Response mentions requirement, but is not responsive to the elements of the requirement.
Exhibit C, Evaluation Tool RFQ No. HHS0017139
Evaluation Scoring Guide
Description
Response does not address requirement. Response is completely unacceptable.
Version 1.6 September 2023 2 of 3
No. Best Value Criteria Weight 1 Qualifications 25% 2 Experience 30% 3 Work Plan 30% 4 Reporting Capabilities 15%
GRAND TOTAL 100%
Exhibit C, Evaluation Tool RFQ No. HHS0017139
Version 1.6 September 2023 3 of 3
| Master Score Sheet Template |
| Scoring Guide |
| Evaluation Criteria |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .