State of Maine RFP# 202512157 1 Rev. 10/1/2025 – DAFS/Office of State Procurement Services (DHHS Rev. 10/2025)

JANET T. MILLS

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

SARA GAGNÉ-HOLMES

COMMISSIONER

RFP # 202512157

Implementation Reviewer for Child Welfare Psychotropic Medication Performance Criteria

1. Purpose Through the subject RFP, the Department sought an Implementation Reviewer to evaluate and report on data related to Statewide practices concerning oversight of the administration of Psychotropic Medications to children and youth in the Department’s custody.

2. Evaluation Process An evaluation team was composed of four evaluators from the Department of Health and Human Services. The evaluation team performed individual evaluations of each eligible proposal and recorded individual notes, then met as a team to apply the consensus method for recording the team notes and assigning scores to each proposal for Qualifications and Experience and the Proposed Services sections. Cost was scored using a mathematical formula.

3. Conditional Awards As a result of the evaluation process, the evaluation team announced its conditional contract award to the following vendor:

Medical Review of North Carolina, Inc. dba Constellation Quality Health

Below are the key factors that resulted in the award selection(s) made through this evaluation process:

4. Qualifications & Experience The Conditional Awardee offered an accomplished, experience-laden portfolio demonstrating the ability to deliver the services required by the RFP and successfully perform under the prospective contract.

5. Proposed Services The Conditional Awardee provided a well-rounded response outlining an understanding of, and ability to meet, programmatic requirements of the RFP. Additionally, the Conditional Awardee demonstrated the means and skills necessary to meet the RFP’s performance requirements through its project teams’ competencies, subject matter expertise, and background.

file://atlas/tmlbran$/Word%20documents/images/seal.gif

State of Maine RFP# 202512157 2 Rev. 10/1/2025 – DAFS/Office of State Procurement Services (DHHS Rev. 10/2025)

JANET T. MILLS

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

SARA GAGNÉ-HOLMES

COMMISSIONER

6. Cost Proposal Medical Review of North Carolina, Inc. dba Constellation Quality Health submitted a cost of $35,962.00 and was the lowest cost proposed.

7. Conclusion Out of 100 possible points, the evaluation team awarded Medical Review of North Carolina, Inc. dba Constellation Quality Health a total score of 88.00. The strength of awarded proposal outweighed the other proposals through a combination of its qualifications and experience, proposed services, and proposed cost. The evaluation team determined that the proposal submitted by Medical Review of North Carolina, Inc. dba Constellation Quality Health represents the best value to the State of Maine.

file://atlas/tmlbran$/Word%20documents/images/seal.gif

Bidder Name Mathematica Inc.

Date of Team Evaluation February 4, 2026

State of Maine RFP # 202512157 pg. 1 Revised 10/01/2025 – DAFS/Office of State Procurement Services (DHHS rev 10/3/2025)

State of Maine

Department of Health and Human Services

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Implementation Reviewer for Child Welfare Psychotropic Medication Performance Criteria

TEAM CONSENSUS EVALUATION NOTES

RFA

Coordinator

Name Casandra Manson Title Procurement Administrator Email Casandra.R.Manson@maine.gov

Evaluation Team

Name Robert Blanchard Name Adrienne Carmack Name Daniel Dresser Name Rebecca Richarson mailto:Casandra.R.Manson@maine.gov

State of Maine RFP # 202512157 pg. 2

SUMMARY

Points Available Points Awarded

File 1 Preliminary Information N/A N/A

File 2 Organization Qualifications and Experience 30.00 29.00

File 3 Proposed Services 40.00 38.00

File 4 Cost Proposal 30.00 0

Total: 100 Total: 67.00

State of Maine RFP # 202512157 pg. 3

File 1 Preliminary Information

Team Notes Appendix A (Proposal Cover Page) 1. Provided Appendix B (Responsible Applicant Certification) 1. Provided

State of Maine RFP # 202512157 pg. 4

File 2 Organization Qualifications and Experience

Points Available Points Awarded

30.00 29.00

Section Team Notes Overview of the Organization 1. Headquarters in Princeton NJ, with an office in Boston.

Founded in 1960. More than 1,100 staff. Performs work for states of Missouri, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, and North Carolina. Experience in monitoring performance of consent decrees and settlement agreements, data collection, and review. Is a nationally recognized leader in research on policy, programs, and structural factors affecting youth in foster care. Has provided data driven technical assistance through the National Child Welfare Center for Innovation and Advancement. Recently completed analysis of psychotropic medication for foster care children. Provided three projects closely related to the services outline in the RFP.

Subcontractors 1. None Organizational Chart 1. Met requirement Litigation 1. Noted one case, not performance indicated Financial Viability 1. Provided three years of audited financials

State of Maine RFP # 202512157 pg. 5

File 3 Proposed Services

40.00 38.00

Individual Notes Proposed Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. Defined specific staff to be assigned, with detail of related qualifications and experience. Lead reviewer is the current principle providing support for the Missouri Settlement Agreement. Proposed staff are free of any conflicts of interest and offered a detailed process for vetting.

B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. Provided a comprehensive, detailed plan for drafting and issuing reports

2. Provided a comprehensive, detailed plan for collaborating with parties in developing plan for sampling and data collection and analysis

3. Met requirement

4. Proposed using the report template used in the Missouri project

5. Met requirement

6. Proposed a methodology for identifying and addressing issues related to collection and measurement of information necessary to measure Department’s performance

7. Met requirement

8. Met requirement

9. Met requirement C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Proposed meeting with the Department every other week for first year to discuss data collection and performance issues

D. Budget

1. Met requirement E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. – 14. Proposed a comprehensive, detailed description/plan of how each of the Department’s confidentiality requirements will be met or exceeded.

F. Reports

1. – 2. Proposed a detailed report-development and submission quality assurance methodology

Staffing Met requirement Implementation – Work Plan Provided a bulleted table of implementation steps for each task within the work plan

State of Maine RFP # 202512157 pg. 6

File 4 Cost Proposal

30.00 0.00

Scoring Formula Lowest Submitted

Cost Proposal / Cost Proposal Being Scored x Score

Weight = Pro-Rated Score

$35,962.00 / 0.00 x 30.00 = 0.00

Team Notes Appendix G – Cost Proposal Form did not adhere to the requirements outlined in the RFP or as clarified in multiple entries in the related Question & Answer Summary or Amendment 1, specifically by providing “an all-inclusive cost for conducting a review for a maximum of 90 cases over a 12-month period.” In addition, the Cost Proposal Form provided as part of this RFP process was not used and instead costs were provided for each contract period, equaling the cost for a 7-year period.

Per Part I, B.3. of the RFP, “All proposals must adhere to the instructions and format requirements outlined in the RFP…” As the Cost Proposal Form did not present the cost in the correct format, the pro-rated score could not be calculated using the mathematical formula described in Part V, B.3. of the RFP.

Bidder Name CertiSurv, LLC

Date of Team Evaluation January 16, 2026

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

RFP

Name Casandra Manson

Name Adrienne Carmack

SUMMARY

Points Available Points Awarded

File 1 Preliminary Information N/A N/A

File 2 Organization Qualifications and Experience 30.00 7.00

File 3 Proposed Services 40.00 12.00

File 4 Cost Proposal 30.00 14.98

Total: 100 Total: 33.98

File 1 Preliminary Information

Team Notes Appendix A (Proposal Cover Page) 1. Provided

File 2 Organization Qualifications and Experience

30.00 7.00

Overview of the Organization 1. Headquarters in TN. General experience in inspection, certification, and survey services for health care facilities.

Supports state human services departments by providing reviews of disability claims and medical consulting, typically in litigative situations. No reference to court oversight experience or psychotropic medication expertise. Provided three projects, none providing detailed descriptions of projects that reflect experience or expertise needed in performing the functions of the RFP

Subcontractors 1. None Organizational Chart 1. Provided organization chart, not specific to project Litigation 1. None indicated Financial Viability 1. Provided non audited, non CPA-reviewed financial statements

File 3 Proposed Services

40.00 12.00

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. Implementation reviewers currently on staff B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. – 9. Met requirement C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Met requirement D. Budget

1. Met requirement E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. – 14. Met requirement F. Reports

1. – 2. Met requirement Staffing Met requirement Implementation – Work Plan Did not provide timeline chart, tasks, or task assignee. Timeline chart did not indicate many of the required implementation tasks (tool development, State documentation review, negotiation with parties). Proposed Services and Implementation – Work Plan responses reflect a lack of understanding of project scope and requirements

30.00 14.98

Cost Proposal / Cost Proposal Being Scored x Score

Weight = Pro-Rated

$35,962.00 / $72,000.00 x 30.00 = 14.98

The Bidder’s Appendix G, Cost Proposal Form indicates the Proposed Cost as $800. The Department sought clarification of the Bidder’s cost form and discovered the Bidder submitted a cost for one (1) Case Review. Therefore, the Bidder’s cost was calculated at $800 times 90 Case Reviews equaling $72,000.

Bidder Name Medical Review of North Carolina, Inc. dba Constellation Quality Health

Date of Team Evaluation January 29, 2026

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Name Casandra Manson

Name Adrienne Carmack

SUMMARY

Points Available Points Awarded

File 1 Preliminary Information N/A N/A

File 2 Organization Qualifications and Experience 30.00 26.00

File 3 Proposed Services 40.00 32.00

File 4 Cost Proposal 30.00 30.00

Total: 100 Total: 88.00

File 1 Preliminary Information

Team Notes Appendix A (Proposal Cover Page) 1. Provided

File 2 Organization Qualifications and Experience

30.00 26.00

Overview of the Organization 1. In business for more than 40 years. Headquarters in North

Carolina. Serves as the lead organization for patient quality improvement and as the external quality review entity in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Mississippi. Active contracts across a variety of support services in 16 states and the District of Columbia. Experience in monitoring settlement agreements. Provided three projects, with one related to RFP and describing its psychotropic medication review project in a South Carolina study involving evaluation of behavioral health services and psychotropic medication use among children in foster care

Subcontractors 1. One technical writer Organizational Chart 1. Provided Litigation 1. None indicated Financial Viability 1. Provided three years of audited financials

File 3 Proposed Services

40.00 32.00

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. Has current multidisciplinary staff, including experience in statistics and data analytics B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. Met requirement

2. Offered a comprehensive, well-detailed plan to develop the approach to sampling and data collection/analysis

3. Proposes a dedicated project team member to manage/coordinate all activities to ensure criteria of settlement are met

4. Provides a detailed process for developing a template for reviewer’s periodic report

5. Met requirement

6. Describes a comprehensive plan for problem solving and dispute resolution

7. Met requirement

8. Met requirement

9. Met requirement C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Met requirement D. Budget

1. Met requirement E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. – 14. Met requirement F. Reports

1. Quality assurance team will review reports to ensure reliability

2. Met requirement

Staffing Provides a detailed package of job descriptions, responsibilities, and qualifications. Evaluation Team notes the plan indicates a sufficient staff level, the time allocation for the project appears less than what may be necessary

Implementation – Work Plan Met requirement

30.00 30.00

Cost Proposal / Cost Proposal Being Scored x Score

Weight = Pro-Rated

$35,962.00 / $35,962.00 x 30.00 = 30.00

N/A

Bidder Name Quality Healthcare Solutions LLC

Date of Team Evaluation February 4 and 5, 2026

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Name Casandra Manson

Name Adrienne Carmack

SUMMARY

Points Available Points Awarded

File 1 Preliminary Information N/A N/A

File 2 Organization Qualifications and Experience 30.00 7.00

File 3 Proposed Services 40.00 22.00

File 4 Cost Proposal 30.00 5.48

Total: 100 Total: 34.48

File 1 Preliminary Information

Team Notes Appendix A (Proposal Cover Page) 1. Provided

File 2 Organization Qualifications and Experience

30.00 7.00

Overview of the Organization 1. Decades of experience in behavioral health, compliance, and child welfare systems improvement, while integrating clinical practice with organization and regulatory performance.

Single-person entity, board-certified psychiatrist and healthcare executive with experience guiding organizations through settlement agreements. Provided three projects, one related to RFP.

Subcontractors 1. Intends to utilize 2 subcontractors

a. Mosaic Strategy to serve as implementation reviewer.

Extensive experience directing and monitoring child and family behavioral health programs including oversight of psychotropic medication practices for youth in foster care and residential settings.

b. Ariel Analytics to provide advanced data analytics, evaluation, and performance measurement services

Organizational Chart 1. Met requirement Litigation 1. None indicated Financial Viability 1. Provided only Schedule C for two years

File 3 Proposed Services

40.00 22.00

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. Met requirement B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. – 9. Met requirement C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Met requirement D. Budget

1. Met requirement E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. – 14. Met requirement F. Reports

1. – 2. Offers a comprehensive, detailed plan for meeting reports requirements Staffing Implementation reviewer will perform as primary analyst

Offered a detailed, well defined 24-month work plan

30.00 5.48

Cost Proposal / Cost Proposal Being Scored x Score

Weight = Pro-Rated

$35,962.00 / $196,925.00 x 30.00 = 5.48

Bidder Name Jane Yoo dba Clarus Research

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Name Casandra Manson

Name Adrienne Carmack

SUMMARY

Points Available Points Awarded

File 1 Preliminary Information N/A N/A

File 2 Organization Qualifications and Experience 30.00 15.00

File 3 Proposed Services 40.00 31.00

File 4 Cost Proposal 30.00 5.53

Total: 100 Total: 51.53

File 1 Preliminary Information

Team Notes Appendix A (Proposal Cover Page) 1. Provided

File 2 Organization Qualifications and Experience

30.00 15.00

Overview of the Organization 1. Fifteen (15) years of experience. Headquarters in Hawaii.

Success leading/contributing to more than 150 performance monitoring and evaluation studies. No Psychotropic evaluation medication experience identified. Experience in child welfare practice quality improvement. Descriptions of experience offer background as a problem-solving, rather than a problem-finding organization. Provided three projects, all related to the RFP with one having been conducted by the subcontractor.

Subcontractors 1. Four subcontractors indicated Organizational Chart 1. Provided Litigation 1. None indicated Financial Viability 1. Provided Profit and Loss statements, not audited or CPA-reviewed statements

File 3 Proposed Services

40.00 31.00

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. Notes subcontractor experience in settlement agreements and oversight of psychotropic medication B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. Proposes reports to include findings from analysis on identified strengths and challenges in meeting the Performance Criteria

2. Offers a comprehensive and detailed approach to sampling and data collection and analysis

3. – 9. Met requirement C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Detailed plan for addressing corrective activities that have a strong focus on communication

D. Budget

1. Met requirement E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. – 14. Minimally responsive F. Reports

1. – 2. Met requirement Staffing Met requirement

Met requirement

30.00 5.53

Cost Proposal / Cost Proposal Being Scored x Score

Weight = Pro-Rated

$35,962.00 / $195,055.00 x 30.00 = 5.53

Evaluator

Title Associate Director Department DHHS: OCFS

Bidder Name Mathematica Inc

Date of Individual Evaluation 1/22/2026

DHHS Rev. 10/2025

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

INDIVIDUAL EVALUATION NOTES

File 1 - Preliminary Information

Appendix A (Proposal Cover Page) • Provided

Certification) • Provided

File 2 – Organization Qualifications and Experience

Overview of the Organization Met

P-Missouri, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, and North Carolina These projects focus on topics related to child welfare and overseeing the administration of psychotropic medication.

I-Data focused, provide data-driven technical assistance P- Direct experience with settlement agreement regarding psychotropic medication (Missouri)

Subcontractors None Project Team Organizational Chart

Met- very specific

Litigation Met- one case not associated with a project Financial Viability Met- independent auditors' reports

File 3 – Proposed Services

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. Met

P- Direct experience providing the requested service in Missouri P-All internal staffing P- Lead reviewer was involved in the Missouri service.

N- No identified staff with Psychotropic medication experience

1a. Met P - A very large organization with significant resources and nationwide services.

B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. Met

1ai. Met 1aii. Met 1b. Met 1bi.Met 1c. Met 1ci. Met 1cii. Met 2a. Met P- very detailed including a written Methodology Plan 2b. Met 2c. Met

3. Met 3a. Met 3b. Met

4. Met I-will provide a template from Missouri project

5. Met

6. Met 6a. Met

7. Met – provided a good example 7a. Met 7b. Met

8. Met

9. Met 9a.Met P- a written plan (“Methodology Plan”) with components that describe sampling, data collection, and data analysis, and P- will include a supporting matrix of exit criteria and data sources used to estimate performance.

C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Met 1.

a. Met D. Budget

1. Met E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. Met

2. Met

3. Met

4. Met

5. Met

6. Met

7. Met

8. Met

9. Met

10. Met

11. Met

12. Met

13. Met

14. Met F. Reports

1. Met – very detailed process

2. Met – very detailed process

Staffing Plan 2a. Met 2b. Met 2c. Met N- No psychiatrist or medical practitioner with experience in psychotropic medication.

Implementation

– Work Plan

1.Met

Name Adrienne Carmack Title Medical Director Department DHHS:OCFS

Date of Individual Evaluation 01/24/26

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Appendix A (Proposal Cover Page) Provided

Certification) Provided

Overview of the Organization Provided detailed summary of qualifications and experience of the organization- gave three examples of projects, one of which is psychotropic med oversight for MO

Subcontractors none Project Team Organizational Chart

Provided with detail

Litigation Provided that one lawsuit erroneously listed Mathematicia Financial Viability Provided audited financial statements

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. Provided detailed descriptions of qualifications and experience of team and members- many with direct of experience with similar subject matter B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. Detailed response in paragraph, not bulleted

2. Description of plan in paragraph- identified data source, plan ot meet criteria, and ensure sample size is accurate

3. Described plan for use of secure servers and sharing sites for information

4. Described plan for template for reporting

5. Responded with plan for requests of additional documents or information

6. Knowledgeable response to issues that may need dispute resolution

7. Gave an example and explained understanding

8. Expressed understanding that the reviewer is able to speak separately to all parties

9. Recommended posting reports on webpage

C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Described plan for corrective action, meeting regularly to be ahead of concerns D. Budget

1. provided E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. Understands and plans to fully comply with requirements

2. Well described plan for IT use of devices and security awareness

3. Insurance held for all work

4. Mathematica’s policies and practices ensure they protect confidentiality

5. Plan to comply with Maine IT service contract

6. Will not use/consume any state applications

7. Will comply with all standards

8. Will comply with HIPAA, organization’s information security manual available on request

9. Will treat all PHI with high level of sensitivity

10. Will safeguard information in compliance with standards

11. Will comply with privacy and security laws

12. Agree to meet to track data security and compliance

13. Outlined plan for action should breach occur

14. Plan to collaborate with department

F. Reports

1. Explained with detail, plan for creating reports and meeting deadlines

2. Explained in detail plan to submit all required reports- created helpful info graphic with timeline Staffing Staffing- included a detailed staffing plan, outlining

Implementation Reviewer staff and their position title, time allocation, and responsibilities in fulfilling the contract requirements.

Detailed listing of job description, chart with roles and hours

Implementation

Detailed work plan and Gannt chart included

Title Management Analyst II Department DHHS/OCFS

Date of Individual Evaluation 1/14/2026

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Overview of the Organization -Bidder has helped Federal & State agencies study and improve programs since 1960 -Over 1,300 staff across multiple offices

- 3 projects attached

Subcontractors None to be used Project Team Organizational Chart

Detailed Project Team Org chart attached

Litigation Attached Financial Viability Audited financial documents attached

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. Implementation reviewer will be Dr. Joanne Lee.

Dr. Lee has led a team in partnership with Univ of Missouri to collect, sample, and analyze data as required by Missouri Settlement Agreement for the past 4 years

a. Bidder has confirmed with its legal counsel the proposed team is free from any conflict of interest.

Bidder states should any conflict of interest arise in the future; they will notify department immediately and implement mitigation plan that satisfies department.

B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. Bidder met minimum requirements

a. Bidder met minimum requirements

b. Bidder met minimum requirements

c. Bidder met minimum requirements

2. Describes the written plan as Methodology Plan

a. No direct response

b. Data source identification will be included in methodology plan. Bidder may propose other sources of data.

c. Margin of Error +-5% with a 90% confidence level

3. Bidder met minimum requirements

a. Bidder states due to complexity of the data they will maintain constant communication to ensure accuracy and consistency.

b. Bidder proposes a SharePoint site or other cloud-based method for those who need regular access to data

4. Bidder will co-develop a reporting template to prevent inconsistencies and ensure alignment with the parties’ expectations

5. Bidder met minimum requirements

6. Bidder met minimum requirements

a. Bidder agrees

7. Bidder agrees and will collaborate with department regarding other options for measuring performance

a. Bidder met minimum requirements

b. Bidder met minimum requirements

8. Bidder met minimum requirements

9. Bidder met minimum requirements

C. Corrective Action Plan During year 1, bidder will hold calls every other week with the department to prepare for the first report.

Subsequent years monthly calls are proposed.

a. Bidder met minimum requirements D. Budget

1. Bidder met minimum requirements E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. Bidder met minimum requirements

2. Bidder met minimum requirements a.i. - a.vi. Bidder met minimum requirements

3. Bidder met minimum requirements

4. Bidder met minimum requirements

5. Copy of bidder’s Information Security Manual which describes data privacy

& security protocols & practices is available upon request.

6. Bidder met minimum requirements

7. Bidder met minimum requirements

8. Bidder met minimum requirements

9. Bidder met minimum requirements

10. Bidder met minimum requirements

11. Bidder met minimum requirements

12. Bidder met minimum requirements

13. Bidder met minimum requirements

14. Bidder met minimum requirements

F. Reports

1. Bidder met minimum requirements

Staffing Detailed staffing plan attached.

Implementation

Detailed work plan attached.

Name Rebecca Richardson Title Child Welfare Manager of Strategy and Policy Implementation

Date of Individual Evaluation 1/22/26

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Overview of the Organization Established 1960. Large staff over 1,100. Experience monitoring states performance of consent decrees and settlement agreements, data collection and review. Nationally recognized leader in research on policy, programs and structural factors affecting youth in foster care. Provided data drive tech assistance to states through the National Child Welfare Center for Innovation and Advancement. Recently completed analysis of psychotropic medication for foster care children.

Project 1- Missouri Department of Social Services. Settlement agreement for psychotropic medications to children in foster care. In year 5.

Project 2- NC DHHS- Developed a QA and performance monitoring systems for transitions to community living and Olmstead programs. TCL settlement agreement with the US department of Justice Project 3- Iowa DHHS- improve community based services for access to high quality behavioral health, disability and aging services in own communities. Under a consent decree.

Developed a transformation plan to support change. Separate settlement agreement on this.

Subcontractors Provided. none Project Team Organizational Chart

Chart provided.

Litigation Provided. Erroneously named, should be for discovery purposes only.

Financial Viability Provided official documents.

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. Large organization with staff with relevant experience can start immediately. Recent experience with a similar settlement agreement for psychotropic meds. Defined specific staff and what experience each of them have and what their role will be.

2. No conflicts- described process for vetting B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. Met requirement. Outlined plan to develop and provide reports in the timeframe requested.

2. Met requirement. Outlined data collection methods, sample selection, can quickly scale and adjust staffing based on the needs.

3. Met requirements

4. Met requirements

5. Met requirements. Will use a methodology plan for shared understanding.

6. Met requirements. Outlined plan for communication and dispute resolution.

7. Met requirements

8. Met requirements

9. Met requirements

C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Met requirements. proposed meeting every other week for the first year.

D. Budget

1. Met requirements. Based on 90 case reviews

E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. Met requirements

2. Met requirements

3. Met requirements

4. Met requirements

5. Met requirements

6. Met requirements

7. Met requirements

8. Met requirements

9. Met requirements

10. Met requirements

11. Met requirements

12. Met requirements

13. Met requirements

14. Met requirements

** each section met requirements and provided enough details to understand what the provider plans to do.

F. Reports

1. Met requirements. Outlined plan for 3 phases, report planning phase, conduct case review phase, data collection, cleaning and analysis phase

2. Met requirements.

Staffing Met requirements for staffing plan. Includes name, job title and key responsibilities and projected hours.

Job descriptions complete and detailed.

Implementation

Work plan presented with details to understand their plan

Bidder Name CertiSurv, LLC.

Date of Individual Evaluation 1/15/2026

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Overview of the Organization Provided

N- No reference to court oversight experience or psychotropic medication expertise.

N- No detailed descriptions of projects that reflect experience and expertise needed in performing the functions of the scope of services. There is no information as to what was performed in each reference.

Subcontractors None listed Project Team Organizational Chart

Provided, no medical staff is included on the organizational chart

Litigation None listed Financial Viability Bidder did not provide the three (3) most recent years of

Financial Statements audited or reviewed by a Certified Public Accountant. They provided internal statements.

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience Met the requirement– N- No Psychotropic medication experience identified.

1a. Met the requirement B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. Met the requirement– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

1ai. Met the requirement– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

1aii. Met the requirement– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement 1b. Met the requirement– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement 1bi.Met the requirement– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement 1c. Met the requirement– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement 1ci. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement 1cii. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement 2a. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement 2b. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement 2c. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

3. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement 3a. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement 3b. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

4. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

5. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

6. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement 6a. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

7. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement 7a. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement 7b. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

8. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

9. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

9a.Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

1a. Met the requirements – The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

D. Budget

1. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

2. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

3. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

4. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

5. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

6. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

7. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

8. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

9. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

10. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

11. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

12. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

13. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

14. Met the requirements – The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

F. Reports

1. Met the requirements– The Bidder simply restated the requirement and added no specific details as to how they would meet the requirement

Staffing plan 2a Met requirement – Provided Psychiatrist not on org chart.

2b Subcontractors not used 2c. N- only one ¼ time employee for the entire project?

Implementation

– Work Plan

1. Did not Meet the requirements–No details and did not provide information to meet the requirements of the RFP. The Bidder Implementation timeline does not reflect all of the preliminary steps that were required in the scope of service deliverables.

Date of Individual Evaluation 01/14/2026

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Overview of the Organization Thorough overview Subcontractors none Project Team Organizational Chart

Included with detail

Litigation none Financial Viability 3 years provided

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. 12 Reviewers with experience and education

B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. The plan will meet a/b/c services

2. The plan will meet a/b/c criteria

3. A- will communicate

B- will have access to information

4. Will collaborate

5. Will request documents needed

6. A- will resolve issues

7. A- will provide a copy of the explanation B- will deem if Dept has met criteria

8. included

9. included

C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Described the CAP as requested

D. Budget

1. Will provide E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. meets

2. Met criteria

3. Will obtain insurance per requirement

4. Will comply

5. Will comply

6. Will not consume any state application

7. Will provide annual compliance

8. Will comply with HIPAA

9. Will regard PHI as confidential

10. Will safeguard confidential information

11. Will comply

12. Will meet quarterly

13. Will notify dept of a breach

14. Will collaborate with dept if there is a breach

F. Reports

1. Will supply draft report and final report

Staffing Supplied job descriptions of staff positions Implementation

Brief work plan with non-specific task assignments

Date of Individual Evaluation 1/12/2026

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Overview of the Organization Bidder does not give any history of the organization.

Bidder attached 3 projects with 1 sentence descriptions.

Lacks any detail

Subcontractors None to be used on this project Project Team Organizational Chart

The organizational chart appears to be for entire company, not project specific

Litigation Bidder states no litigation Financial Viability Bidder attached 3 years of internally produced financial statements. None of the submitted financial statements have been audited or reviewed by a Certified Public Accountant.

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. Minimal response. Bidder responded with current review process

a. All staff disclose all potential conflicts of interest upon hire. What happens with unknown future conflicts at time of hire?

B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. Bidder met minimum requirements

2. Bidder met minimum requirements

3. Bidder met minimum requirements

4. Bidder met minimum requirements

5. Bidder met minimum requirements

6. Bidder met minimum requirements

7. Bidder met minimum requirements

8. Bidder met minimum requirements

9. Bidder met minimum requirements C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Bidder met minimum requirements Bidder met minimum requirements D. Budget

1. Bidder met minimum requirements E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. Bidder met minimum requirements

2. Bidder met minimum requirements

3. Bidder met minimum requirements

4. Bidder met minimum requirements

5. Bidder met minimum requirements

6. Bidder met minimum requirements

7. Bidder met minimum requirements

8. Bidder met minimum requirements

9. Bidder met minimum requirements

10. Bidder met minimum requirements

11. Bidder met minimum requirements

12. Bidder met minimum requirements

13. Bidder met minimum requirements

14. Bidder met minimum requirements

F. Reports

1. Bidder met minimum requirements

Staffing Job descriptions attached Propose 1 part time employee

Implementation

– Work Plan

Work Plan attached, lacks detail. Based on submitted workplan, the bidder appears to have little understanding of key development steps required scope of services deliverables.

Date of Individual Evaluation 1/9/2026

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Overview of the Organization Inspection, certification and survey services to Healthcare facility agencies for long term care, acute and continuing care and CLIA laboratories. Support for State Human Services by reviewing disability claims and providing medical consulting. Do reviews of work products to ensure all required elements are present.

Experienced in report writing. Child Psychiatrists on staff for consultation.

3 projects Georgia, reviews medical records to assessment foster youth treatment and disability determinations. Illinois Independent dispute resolution, New Jersey, complaint surveys of state funded assisted living facilities. No details of projects provided or reflect experience or expertise needed to meet the scope of this RFP.

Subcontractors none Project Team Organizational Chart

Provided

Litigation None Financial Viability Provided balance sheets and profit and loss statements. No official documents provided, such as tax returns, which stated may be requested.

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. 12 QA reviewers on staff with compliance backgrounds and requested experience. Review process outlined and IT support noted.

1.a. no conflicts

1. Has a tracking system, experience providing progress and summary reports. Met the requirements

2. Met the requirements

3. Met the requirements

4. Met the requirements

5. Met the requirements

6. Met the requirements

7. Met the Requirements

8. Met the requirements

9. Met the requirements

C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Met the requirements

D. Budget

1. Met the requirements

E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. Met the requirements. They noted they work primarily with PII and have extensive systems in place to protect information

2. Met the requirements

3. Met the requirements

4. Met the requirements

5. Met the requirements

6. Met the requirements

7. Met the requirements

8. Met the requirements

9. Met the requirements

10. Met the requirements

11. Met the requirements

12. Met the requirements

13. Met the requirements

14. Met the requirements

F. Reports

1. Met the requirements

2. Met the requirements

Staffing Staffing and job descriptions are provided

Implementation Work plan was not provided in a timeline chart, was very brief and did not contain details.

Bidder Name Constellation Quality Health

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Overview of the Organization Provided –

I- serves as the lead organization for patient quality improvement and as the external quality review entity in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Mississippi, with active contracts across 16 states and the District of Columbia P- psychotropic medication review projects - South Carolina study involved evaluating behavioral health services and psychotropic medication use among children in foster care

Subcontractors Yes – Technical writer Project Team Organizational Chart

Provided

Litigation None listed Financial Viability Provided

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. Met the requirements-

P-included Psychotropic Medication Expertise 1a. Met the requirements- B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. Met the requirements 1ai. Met the requirements 1aii. Met the requirements 1b. Met the requirements 1bi. Met the requirements

1c. Met the requirements 1ci. Met the requirements 1cii. Met the requirements

2. Met the requirements- P -will develop a comprehensive written plan with the parties 2a. Met the requirements- P very detailed plan 2b. Met the requirements- P very detailed plan 2c. Met the requirements- P very detailed plan

3. Met the requirements- P dedicated Project Lead 3a. Met the requirements 3b. Met the requirements

4. Met the requirements – P Provided a detailed process for development

5. Met the requirements

6. Met the requirements 6a. Met the requirements

7. Met the requirements 7a. Met the requirements 7b. Met the requirements

8. Met the requirements

9. Met the requirements 9a. Met the requirements C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Met the requirements D. Budget

1. Met the requirements E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. Met the requirements

2. Met the requirements

3. Met the requirements

4. Met the requirements

5. Met the requirements

6. Met the requirements

7. Met the requirements

8. Met the requirements

9. Met the requirements

10. Met the requirements

11. Met the requirements

12. Met the requirements

13. Met the requirements

14. Met the requirements

F. Reports

1. Met the requirements

2. Met the requirements Staffing Plan a Met the requirements – very detailed b Met the requirements c Met the requirements

Implementation

Met the requirements- very detailed

Date of Individual Evaluation 01/14/26

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Overview of the Organization Detailed information on experience and qualifications Subcontractors One- Technical writer Project Team Organizational Chart

Included- named, small team, has SME but no child psychiatrist

Financial Viability Included financial audit reports since 2022

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. Extensive experience on team, with child welfare experience

B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. A. b. c.- all with detail of process to meet criteria- timely, transparent and responsive

2. Proposed a plan for reviews and clearly laid out plan for reviews and reports

3. Will assign lead to ensure all criteria of settlement are met

4. Will develop a plan to work collaboratively to design template for reporting

5. Will utilize formal request process

6. Described plan for problem solving and dispute resolution

7. Described process for handling circumstance out of the dept’s control

8. Detailed description of communication plan

9. Will ensure that confidential information is redacted- described plan for confidentiality C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Proposed a CAP and a plan to evaluate the CAP for clarity and completeness

D. Budget 1.

E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. Meet

2. Met criteria

3. Will obtain insurance per requirement

4. Will comply

5. Will comply

6. Will not consume any state application

7. Will provide annual compliance

8. Will comply with HIPAA

9. Will regard PHI as confidential

10. Will safeguard confidential information

11. Will comply

12. Will meet quarterly

13. Will notify dept of a breach

14. Will collaborate with dept if there is a breach- listed steps that would be taken in detail F. Reports

1. Created timeline for reports Staffing Provided detailed descriptions of job positions, necessary job qualifications, and roles.

Implementation

Descriptions of work hours, and work plan with detail

Date of Individual Evaluation 1/13/2026

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Overview of the Organization -Bidder is a non-profit, health quality consultancy & quality improvement organization.

-Founded in 1983 by physicians -Certified by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid -3 projects attached

Subcontractors Bidder will subcontract a Technical Writer - Project Team Organizational Chart

Bidder met minimum requirements

Litigation Bidder responded with N/A Financial Viability Audited financial documents attached

Services

A. Implementation Reviewer Qualifications and Experience

1. Constellation will act as Implementation reviewer.

-Bidder states more than 30yrs experience

a. Bidder states that after initial review, there was no conflict of interest found amongst the proposed team.

B. Implementation Reviewer Required Services

1. a. i. Bidder met minimum requirements

a. ii. Bidder met minimum requirements

b. Bidder acknowledges the reporting periods

b. i. Bidder acknowledges subsequent reporting periods

c. Bidder met minimum requirements for c, c. i, & c. ii

2. Plans to utilize structured work sessions to develop framework

a. Bidder will collaborate with all parties to determine best method of case review

b. Bidder identified potential sources of data

c. Bidder will achieve 95% confidence level. Margin of error will be determined later

3. No mention of gathering data within 60 days of the end of reporting period

a. Bidder will maintain open communication with the department

b. Bidder understands the information is accessible by plaintiffs

4. Bidder met minimum requirements

5. Bidder met minimum requirements

6. Bidder met minimum requirements

7. Bidder met minimum requirements

8. Bidder met minimum requirements

9. Bidder met minimum requirements

C. Corrective Action Plan

1. Bidder met minimum requirements

D. Budget

1. Bidder met minimum requirements

E. Confidentiality Requirements

1. Bidder met minimum requirements

2. Bidder met minimum requirements

3. Bidder met minimum requirements

4. Bidder met minimum requirements

5. Bidder met minimum requirements

6. Bidder met minimum requirements

7. Bidder met minimum requirements

8. Bidder met minimum requirements

9. Bidder met minimum requirements

10. Bidder met minimum requirements

11. Bidder met minimum requirements

12. Bidder met minimum requirements

13. Bidder met minimum requirements

14. Bidder met minimum requirements

F. Reports Bidder met minimum requirements

Staffing -Staffing plan attached with job descriptions Implementation

-work plan attached with detailed descriptions

File 4 – Cost Proposal and Budget Narrative

Office of Child and Family Services

RFP 202512157

Overview of the Organization From NC. 4+ decades improving quality of health care processes. QI consultant work, program eval, compliance reviews and audits, independent monitoring for settlement agreements, data validation, predictive analytics, compliance reporting, CAP development. Direct hands on experience with settlement agreements. Specific experience with foster care programming in SC. Project 1 reviews of transitions to community living for NC DHHS. Project 2 SC Foster care focused study to evaluate healthcare services to children in FC that included psychotropic medication oversight and behavioral health review. Project 3 CMS quality improvement Organization.

Supporting healthcare providers that serve Medicare beneficiaries through targeted QI activities. Extensive details provided for all 3 projects

Subcontractors Katie Augustus senior technical grant write, experience with writing particularly in the health care field.

Project Team Organizational Chart provided

Litigation none Financial Viability Report by independent auditor for years 22 and 23, 23 and 24, 24 and 25

A. Implementation Reviewer…