Response to Offeror Questions document.doc

Department Of Health, Office of Lifespan Health

RFP No. 26-0904004-007 State of South Dakota 600 East Capitol Ave Pierre, SD 57501 605-773-4476

Update header

Date: December 15th, 2025 Subject: Questions and Answers for RFP No. 26-0904004-007 In accordance with the subject Request for Proposal (RFP), the following are answers to questions which have been submitted prior to December 12th, 2025De. These questions are for informational purposes only; they do not alter the requirements specified within the RFP. Any changes to the RFP will be accomplished by the Office of Procurement Management through the use of an addendum.

1. Question: Please confirm the proposal due date. On page one of the RFP, it is noted as January 13, 2025, while page two lists January 26, 2025.

Answer: January 26th, 2026 by 5pm CT

2. Question: The table that starts on page 6, (section 2.0 Standard Contract Terms and Conditions), are you wanting us to complete and include the table in our proposal?

Answer: Yes. The table in Section 2.0 should be completed by vendors and submitted as part of the proposal to confirm understanding and agreement with the standard contract terms and conditions.

3. Question: Is there a preference for an in-state vendor?

Answer: There is no requirement for the vendor to be located in South Dakota. While an in-state vendor may offer advantages related to local knowledge and accessibility. Physical location within South Dakota is not a requirement for this RFP. While in-state presence is not mandatory, evaluators should demonstrate the ability to effectively engage with South Dakota Department of Health staff, partners, and stakeholders, including availability for meetings, site visits, or travel as needed.

4. Question: Does the Department expect a standardized evaluation framework across all four programs (PREP, RPE, Title X, MCH), or program-specific approaches tailored to each grant?

Answer: SD DOH expects a hybrid approach. While a standardized evaluation framework is encouraged to enable cross-program analysis and shared metrics, program-specific approaches should also be employed to address the unique goals, requirements, and populations of each grant (PREP, RPE, Title X, MCH). The selected vendor should balance consistency across programs with flexibility to capture program-specific outcomes and funder requirements.

5. Question: What are the key themes (or shared metrics) SDDOH is most interested in assessing to understand the combined impact of all four programs, as mentioned in the Purpose?

Answer: To understand the combined impact of the four programs, the South Dakota Department of Health is primarily interested in cross-cutting. Key themes of interest include:

· Youth knowledge, attitudes, and skills related to healthy relationships, consent, communication, and boundaries

· Social-emotional learning and protective factors (e.g., respect, empathy, decision-making, help-seeking)

· Awareness of and access to supportive resources and services

· Prevention of dating violence, sexual violence, and unhealthy relationship behaviors

· Reach, and consistency of implementation across populations and settings

6. Question: What priority adolescent health outcomes (e.g., reduced risk behaviors, improved access to services) does SDDOH want to emphasize in analyses, reporting and technical assistance?

Answer: SDDOH prioritizes adolescent health outcomes that reflect both risk reduction and positive development. Key outcomes for emphasis in analyses, reporting, and technical assistance include:

· Reduction in risky behaviors, including early sexual activity, unprotected sex, and experiences of dating or sexual violence

· Increased access to and utilization of reproductive and preventive health services

· Development of social-emotional skills and protective factors, including healthy relationship skills, decision-making, and communication

· Awareness of available resources and supportive services

7. Question: Should the gap analysis focus only on program implementation fidelity, or also on systemic issues like workforce capacity and community partnerships?

Answer: The gap analysis should consider both program implementation fidelity and broader systemic factors. In addition to identifying gaps related to fidelity, reach, and consistency of program delivery.

8. Question: What is the existing format for documenting program implementation (see Section 3.1) that the contractor should follow?

Answer: Program implementation is currently documented using standard program reporting templates, which include measures of session delivery, participant attendance, and curriculum fidelity. The selected contractor should follow these existing formats while ensuring consistency, accuracy, and alignment with evaluation objectives. Where appropriate, the contractor may recommend refinements to improve usability or cross-program comparability, subject to SDDOH review and approval.

9. Question: What are the existing program assessment and data collection tools the selected vendor should expect to use (ex. surveys, implementation tracking measures), or will the vendor develop new instruments?

Answer: Existing program assessment and data collection tools such as participant surveys, implementation tracking measures, and reporting templates are currently used across the four programs, though tools and measures vary by program and funding source. The selected vendor should expect to review and incorporate existing instruments where appropriate and feasible.

10. Question: Does each program have an existing logic model, and how often does the Department expect revisions to the respective logic models beyond the annual review?

Answer: Yes, each program currently has an existing logic model; however, the level of detail and format may vary by program and funding source. The Department anticipates an annual review of logic models as part of routine evaluation and reporting. Revisions beyond the annual review are not expected on a regular basis but may occur as needed to reflect significant program changes, evaluation findings, or shifts in funding or priorities, in coordination with SDDOH.

11. Question: Are the current PREP Evaluation Plan and Logic Models available for review prior to the proposal submission?

Answer: No. The current PREP Evaluation Plan and Logic Models are not available for review prior to proposal submission.

12. Question: This project requires submission to the SDSU Institutional Review Board (IRB).

a. Will the SDDOH sponsor the IRB application, or is the contractor responsible for leading this submission process?

Answer: The selected contractor will be responsible for leading and preparing the SDSU Institutional Review Board (IRB) application, including required documentation and revisions. SDDOH will support the process as needed by providing program information, approvals, and coordination, but will not serve as the IRB sponsor.

13. Question: What data-sharing agreements will the selected vendor need to secure?

a. How will the Department support the selected vendor in securing these and in facilitating access to needed data?

Answer: At this time there is no data-sharing agreements for the Healthy Relationships Evaluation.

14. Question: Does the Department use a specific platform or system for survey administration, or should the selected vendor budget to host these surveys?

a. What is the estimated annual volume of entry and exit survey responses?

Answer: Currently in REDcap, SD DOH does not require the use of a specific platform for survey administration. yes, the vendor should budget to host these surveys. Based on current participation levels, vendors should anticipate a combined annual volume in the range of less than 1,000 responses across all four programs. Final volumes may fluctuate year to year.

15. Question: Section 3.5.2(g) requires "Spanish Translation of client satisfaction survey and results" for Title X. Do the other programs (PREP, RPE, MCH) to be evaluated also require multi-language support for surveys, or is this requirement exclusive to Title X?

Answer: While Section 3.5.2(g) references Spanish translation of the client satisfaction survey for Title X, this is not a strict Title X requirement. SD PLAN has implemented translations to ensure equitable access and engagement for non-English-speaking clients, consistent with Title X’s mandate to provide opportunities for community education, participation, and access to family planning services (42 CFR § 59.5(b)(3)). By providing translated surveys and materials, SD PLAN supports broader community understanding of program objectives, informs clients of available services, and promotes continued participation.

Currently, multi-language survey support is specific to Title X. PREP, RPE, and MCH do not have formal multi-language survey requirements, but vendors should consider culturally and linguistically appropriate practices to ensure equitable engagement as needed.

16. Question: Are virtual methods for surveys and presentations acceptable, or are in-person sessions required?

Answer: Surveys will be administered electronically, and virtual methods for presentations are acceptable for routine updates and internal briefings. In-person presentations are not required but may be requested for key stakeholder meetings or statewide events. The selected vendor should plan for both virtual and in-person delivery as appropriate.

17. Question: To administer a survey of adolescents, does the SDDOH require active consent of parents or is passive consent allowable?

Answer: SDDOH allows the organization conducting the survey and facilitating the curriculum to determine the appropriate consent approach. Either active (signed) consent or passive consent may be used, based on the organization’s policies, program requirements, and ethical considerations.

18. Question: How will SDDOH help to facilitate the survey data collection for PREP, Title X, Title V MCH Adolescent Domain?

a. Will the selected contractor be provided with email addresses for survey respondents?

Answer: Surveys are administered by curriculum facilitators, and currently, email addresses are not collected from survey respondents. The selected contractor will not be provided with email addresses for survey distribution under standard procedures

19. Question: The RFP mentions updating "5-year" plans for RPE (Section 3.5.3). Where is the RPE program in its 5-year plan (e.g., year 1 vs. year 4)?

Answer: year 2 ends January 31st, 2026

20. Question: What is the anticipated volume (and typical nature) of technical assistance requests from the SDDOH staff or grant partners?

Answer: The anticipated volume of technical assistance requests from SDDOH staff and grant partners is moderate and may fluctuate throughout the year based on program cycles, reporting deadlines, and emerging needs. Requests typically include guidance on data collection, reporting, interpretation of evaluation findings, program implementation questions, and coordination of cross-program activities. Vendors should anticipate providing responsive support via email, phone, or virtual meetings, with occasional in-person consultation as needed.

21. Question: Will the contractor be expected to provide direct, one-on-one TA to sub-recipients, or is the focus on developing TA tools/resources for SDDOH staff to disseminate?

Answer: The contractor’s primary focus is on providing technical assistance to SDDOH staff and developing tools and resources to support program implementation and evaluation. While direct, one-on-one TA to sub-recipients is not the primary responsibility, the contractor may provide targeted support to sub-recipients on an as-needed or consultative basis, in coordination with SDDOH.

22. Question: How many staff and partners will participate in training, and should training be delivered in-person, virtually, or both?

Answer: The number of staff and partners participating in training will vary by program and year, but vendors should anticipate sessions including SDDOH staff, program coordinators, and sub-recipient partners across the four programs. Training may be delivered in-person, virtually, or using a hybrid approach, depending on participant location, public health guidance, and program needs. The selected contractor should be prepared to accommodate multiple delivery formats as appropriate.

23. Question: The RFP requires several end-of-year or annual evaluation reports. Can these reports be combined into a single, comprehensive Health Relationships Evaluation Report, or are separate reports required for each program area?

Answer: SDDOH requests that program-specific requirements be addressed and shared with the respective grant stakeholders and utilized in promotion of the program. In addition, the contractor will develop a comprehensive Healthy Relationships Evaluation Report that integrates findings across all programs.

24. Question: Does SDDOH require reports to be prepared in traditional Technical Reports (Word/PDF formats), or are alternative formats, such as presentations, acceptable?

Answer: Word/PDF

25. Question: Specific program reports:

· FPAR data briefs (Section 3.5.2): Who is responsible for the compilation and submission of the Federal Program Annual Report (FPAR) data, and what is the contractor's specific role (analysis, data brief development, etc.)?

Answer: FPAR data collection and submission is a shared responsibility between SD PLAN subrecipients and SD PLAN grantee staff. SD PLAN subrecipients collect data and submit on a quarterly basis into the Health-e-Link data system for analyzation by SD PLAN grantee staff. During the months of January and February, SD PLAN grantee staff work with subrecipients to ensure clean data. SD PLAN grantee staff (SD PLAN Nurse Consultant) submits the full FPAR data to OPA within the stated deadline.

The contractors specific role in FPAR data includes assistance with analyzing the data and implementing new strategies to improve data collection or patient trends. The contractor also prepares FPAR data briefs for individual clinics and an overall data brief for the entirety of the SD PLAN program.

26. Question: Rape Prevention Education (RPE) Grant (Section 3.5.3): What is the existing template or standard scope/content for the "Sexual Violence in SD Data Report/Summary," and what are the primary data sources anticipated for this report?

Answer: The previous Sexual Violence Data Reports can be found here - https://doh.sd.gov/health-data-reports/sexual-violence-data-reports/

27. Question: Maternal Child Health (MCH) Adolescent Domain (Section 3.5.4): What is the specific nature and level of assistance expected (e.g., content drafting, data analysis, formatting, or strategic planning)? Who is the primary author/owner of these documents within the SDDOH?

Answer: The selected contractor is expected to provide support across multiple areas, including content drafting, data analysis, formatting, and, as appropriate, strategic planning to ensure reports and deliverables are accurate, clear, and actionable. SDDOH retains primary ownership of all documents and is responsible for final review, approval, and dissemination. The contractor will collaborate closely with SDDOH staff throughout the development process to align content with Department priorities and stakeholder needs.

28. Question: What level of functionality is expected for statewide data mapping tools (ex. simple visualization dashboards, or interactive, partner-accessible platforms)?

a. Does the department have a preferred platform for these dashboards?

Answer: At this time, statewide data mapping tools have not yet been developed. The level of functionality—ranging from simple visualization dashboards to more interactive, partner-accessible platforms—will be determined collaboratively between SDDOH and the selected contractor based on project needs, data availability, and intended use.

SDDOH does not have a preferred platform for these dashboards. The selected contractor may propose appropriate tools or platforms for SDDOH review and approval.

29. Question: What is the estimated total number of presentations required annually?

Answer: The estimated total number of presentations required annually may vary depending on program activities, reporting periods, and stakeholder needs. Vendors should anticipate preparing and delivering several presentations per year, including internal briefings for SDDOH staff, updates for grant partners, and presentations at statewide or national meetings. Exact numbers will be determined in collaboration with SDDOH during project planning. Estimated 3 per grant per year.

30. Question: Regarding the requirement that the contractor "lead monthly evaluation meetings for each program grant": Does this mean a minimum of four separate monthly meetings (one for PREP, one for Title X, one for RPE, and one for MCH Adolescent Domain)?

Answer: Yes, that does.

31. Question: Should the selected vendor plan for in-person presentations of findings or are remote meetings and presentations preferable?

Answer: The selected vendor should plan for both remote and in-person presentations as appropriate. Remote meetings and virtual presentations are generally preferred for routine updates and internal briefings, while in-person presentations may be requested for key stakeholder meetings, statewide events, or project milestones. The approach should balance accessibility, engagement, and travel considerations.

32. Question: The South Dakota State University (SDSU) has already conducted a Healthy Relationships Cross-Program Evaluation. How does this RFP differ from, or build on SDSU's Healthy Relationships Cross-Program Evaluation?

Answer: South Dakota procurement rules require state agencies to periodically re-compete contracts to ensure transparency, fairness, and responsible use of public funds. Long-term contracts generally cannot be renewed indefinitely without competition every 5 years. This RFP is designed to continue and expand upon the foundation laid by SDSU’s Healthy Relationships Cross-Program Evaluation. While SDSU’s evaluation provided valuable insights into statewide implementation and outcomes of existing programs, this RFP moves the work forward by applying those findings to strengthen strategies, enhance program delivery, and introduce innovative approaches. Vendors will build on the evaluation’s data and recommendations to implement forward-looking solutions, integrate advanced evaluation methods, and ensure ongoing quality improvement and community engagement.

33. Question: Is SDSU eligible to bid for this RFP? If so, would SDSU be considered a preferential bidder?

Answer: Yes, South Dakota State University (SDSU) is eligible to submit a proposal for this RFP, provided they meet all requirements outlined in the solicitation. However, SDSU will not be considered a preferential bidder. Under South Dakota procurement law, all proposals are evaluated based on the published criteria to ensure fair and open competition; no preference is given to state institutions or any other entity beyond what is explicitly stated in the RFP.

Answer:

34. Question: For the required one dedicated FTE, can this be met through a combination of staff (e.g., 0.6 FTE + 0.4 FTE = 1.0 FTE), or does the State require a single, named full-time individual?

· Should the evaluator be physically based in South Dakota, or is remote support coupled with in-person site visits acceptable?

· Can the State provide a breakdown of the FTE's expected time allocation across each program?

Answer: Position can be combined with another staff but preference is to have one full time staff. At this time the state does not have a breakdown of FTE’s expected time allocation across each program but could be something the state provides if needed once awarded.

35. Question: What level of direct communication with HRSA, FYSB, CDC, etc. is expected (ex. liaison support, joint reporting, or formal presentations)?

Answer: Joint reporting and Formal presentations as requested. For CDC– Evaluator participates in monthly Project Officer calls, the rest of the grants are as needed.

36. Question: Is SDDOH requiring an evaluator to be physically based in South Dakota?

Answer: Physical location within South Dakota is not a requirement for this RFP. While in-state presence is not mandatory, evaluators should demonstrate the ability to effectively engage with South Dakota Department of Health staff, partners, and stakeholders, including availability for meetings, site visits, or travel as needed.

37. Question: How many vendors have indicated that they will be submitting a proposal?

Answer: We do not require a letter of intent, so we are unsure how many vendors have indicated that they will be submitting a proposal.

38. Question: The cost proposal requires a budget for four in-state travels and one out-of-state travel. Is the out-of-state travel reserved for the National Conference, or is this travel to be considered in addition to the travel for the National Conference?

· Can the SDDOH specify the intended purpose of the four in-state travels (e.g., kick-off meeting, quarterly reviews)?

· Can the SDDOH specify which "National Conference" is the expected destination for the one out-of-state travel (e.g., National Sexual Assault Conference, FYSB, HRSA, CDC)?

Answer: At this time, we don’t have a specific purpose of the four in-state travels. In the past, there has been a variety of reasons for in-state travels. Some examples include the evaluator attending an annual subrecipient meeting, SDDOH Office of Lifespan Health meetings, and travel to conduct focus groups. We currently have not decided which out-of-state conference the evaluator will attend. This can vary based upon conference agendas.

39. Question: Is the total contract amount ($150,000) defined as the full negotiated cost, or is this rate applied only to a specific base (e.g., personnel costs)?

· If a vendor’s prepared cost proposal exceeds the $150,000 limit, would that proposal be immediately rejected, or would there be an opportunity to negotiate a reduced scope/cost refinement?

· What is SDDOH's intended allocation of the $150,000 budget across program areas?

· Does SDDOH anticipate similar annual budgets for potential continuation years for the evaluation?

Answer: There is an option to negotiate after the cost proposal is submitted, and the agency is not immediately rejected. There is a specific budget for each program area. Yes, SDDOH anticipates similar annual budgets for continuation years for evaluation.

40. Question: If reductions or stoppage of federal grant dollars were to occur, would state funding be used to continue funding these programs and this evaluation?

Answer: Not at this time.

41. Question: Can SDDOH provide approximate weighting for proposal evaluation criteria?

Answer: SDDOH does not provide specific point weighting for proposal evaluation criteria in this RFP. Vendors are encouraged to address all criteria thoroughly to demonstrate their capacity to meet project goals and objectives.

42. Question: What performance metrics will determine eligibility of the selected evaluator for continued funding beyond FY 2027?

Answer: Eligibility for continued funding beyond FY 2027 will be based on clear performance metrics that demonstrate impact and accountability. These include timely and accurate reporting, achievement of agreed-upon evaluation deliverables, and evidence of actionable insights that inform program improvement. Additional considerations will include responsiveness to stakeholder feedback, effective communication of findings, and measurable progress toward stated outcomes. The successful vendor will be involved in the creation of the contract which will outline performance expectations.

43. Question: Is there a page limit for the proposal?

Answer: No

44. Question: How many sub-recipients/grantees are currently funded under each program (PREP, RPE, Title X, MCH Adolescent)? Can you provide a breakdown by program?

Answer:

PREP – 1 sub-recipient, this sub-recipient provides oversight for multiple sites providing Healthy Relationships Curriculum

RPE – 3

Title X – 5 MCH Adolescent – 1 sub-recipient, this sub-recipients provides oversight for multiple sites providing Healthy Relationships Curriculum

45. Question: The RFP states: "The Contractor will provide ongoing technical assistance and coordination, including with the following federal funding agencies: Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Family and Youth Services Bureau (FYSB), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and other program funding organizations."

Could you please explain this requirement? Does this mean the vendor will be responsible for providing services to these federal departments?

Answer: These agencies are the primary federal funders for the Healthy Relationships Evaluation programs. As part of the evaluation work, the contractor may need to coordinate with the grantee to support or respond to federal reporting requirements, guidance, data requests, or technical assistance expectations established by these funding agencies. The contractor’s role is supportive and collaborative, helping ensure compliance and alignment with federal requirements as needed.

46. Question: The RFP states: "To facilitate consistency across programs and sub-recipients' data collection processes, the evaluation team will manage collected survey data for the sub-recipients of PREP funding."

Are the sub-recipients of PREP funding required to conduct their own individual site evaluations?

Answer: PREP Facilitators of the PREP Curriculum will conduct the survey.

47. Question: Regarding "Provide continuous oversight of data collection/management processes for PREP funding": Is this oversight provided to the sub-recipients' individual site evaluators? In other words, is this an evaluation TA activity?

Answer: Under the PREP grant, there is one primary sub-recipient that oversees multiple facilitation sites. Continuous oversight of data collection and management is primarily provided at the sub-recipient level. This oversight includes monitoring data quality, consistency, and reporting processes. While the primary role is not to provide ongoing evaluation technical assistance to individual site evaluators, targeted technical assistance may be provided to individual sites as needed, in coordination with the sub-recipient.

48. Question: The RFP states: "Data collection also includes implementation data tracking, such as reach and dosage of programs."

Answer: Yes

49. Question: What is the current survey administration platform (electronic/paper)? If electronic, what system is being used?

Answer: REDCap

50. Question: Are there costs associated with IRB submissions that should be budgeted?

Answer: No

51. Question: The RFP states: "Client satisfaction survey data briefs for each clinic outlining client satisfaction survey results twice/year."

At how many clinics is this satisfaction data collected?

Answer: 7 clinical service sites, with potential of 1-3 additional sites through the 5 year term of this RFP.

52. Question: The RFP states: "Develop a full annual evaluation report (implementation report) that will summarize the evaluation efforts and findings over the grant year."

Are the data included in this report collected by the grantees?

Answer: Yes, the data is collected at each site that facilitates the healthy relationships curriculum.

53. Question: With regards to Section 3.4, can you confirm if the “one full-time employee (FTE)” requirement means that someone will need to be hired, someone already on staff will need to be paid for 12 months of work OR we can spread out 12 months of work among multiple people?

Answer – While SDDOH prefers that the one full-time employee (FTE) be a single individual, the Department is open to distributing the total 12-month effort across multiple staff members, as long as the combined commitment equals one full-time position for the project period. It is not required to hire a new staff member specifically for this role, and existing staff may fulfill the FTE requirement.