rfp-2027-dph-09-ochse-qa-response.pdf

New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services Overdose to Action (OD2A) Clinician and Health System Engagement

RFP-2027-DPH-09-OCHSE

Official Q&A

OFFICIAL RESPONSES TO VENDOR QUESTIONS

RFP-2027-DPH-09-OCHSE

No. Section Reference and Question Answer

1. RFP, General

1. Does the Department currently have an incumbent contractor performing these or similar services? If so, where can vendors find the incumbent contractor information and contract value?

2. Because the resulting contract is contingent on continued federal Overdose Data to Action (CDC) funding and Governor & Council approval, can the Department describe how changes in federal funding levels would be handled?

Specifically, how would funding reductions affect scope or compensation, and what process would be used to adjust the Deliverables Rate Sheet?

3. Does the Department require vendors to separately disclose travel of mileage assumptions (e.g. in a footnote or narrative) even if these costs are already incorporated into the lump-sum pricing for deliverables?

1. The current contract is publicly available at the following link:

https://media.sos.nh.gov/govcouncil/2023/0823/023%20GC%20A genda%20082323.pdf

2. The Department may take actions including, but not limited to, amending the contract scope of work and/or Deliverables Rate Sheet, subject to Governor & Council approval.

3. No.

2. RFP, Section 1.2, and Section 6.4 Can the Department provide any estimated funding amounts or historical contract value to help vendors calibrate cost proposals?

Additionally, when the RFP notes that this is “not a low-cost award,” can the Department clarify the qualitative factors that inform value and whether there is a maximum OD2A budget or specified dollar amount available for this opportunity?

Vendors must submit proposed costs for to the provide the required services as described in the RFP. Cost proposals will be scored in accordance with RFP Section 3.4, Scoring of Cost Proposals.

3. RFP Section 2.2.1.

Could the Department clarify the correct appendix assignments, given the conflicting references to Technical Responses to Mandatory Questions, the Deliverables Cost Sheet, and the Program Staff List?

Appendix A: Scope of Services Appendix B: P-37 and Standard Exhibits Appendix C: Transmittal Letter and Vendor information Appendix D: Technical Response to Questions Appendix E: Program Staff List Appendix F: Deliverable Cost Sheet

RFP-2027-DPH-09-OCHSE

Official Q&A

No. Section Reference and Question Answer

4. RFP Sections 2.3.1.-2.3.2.

1. Given that monthly payments depend on completed deliverables, should pricing be structured as fixed monthly amounts, unit-based rates, or milestone-based lump sums?

2. In Appendix F, should each cell reflect the full annual cost for a deliverable, which would then be divided into monthly payments after award?

1. Pricing should be structured as annual milestone/deliverable-based.

2. Yes.

5. RFP, Section 6.3 Are there any page limits or formatting requirements for the Technical Response beyond what is outlined in Section 6.3?

No.

6. RFP, Section 8.2 Can the Department confirm if a separate CLAS Requirements form is missing from the appendix, or explain where the CLAS information should be included in our response?

This solicitation does not require CLAS Requirements. Please see Addendum #1.

7. Appendix A, Section 1.1.4.

How long of a review period does the Department typically need for materials submitted?

This review period varies.

8. Appendix A, Section 1.4 Can the Department confirm that a fully or primarily virtual delivery model is acceptable for all Scope of Services activities?

A predominantly virtual delivery model is acceptable for academic detailing sessions, provided engagement targets are met.

Operational support sessions may require in-person delivery when activities such as workflow observation or facilitated work group discussion are needed.

9. Appendix A, Section 1.5.

1. Will the Department provide a list of priority providers for recruitment?

2. Is the provider target a one-time cumulative goal or an annual target?

3. If the contract is renewed, will the target increase proportionally?

1. The Department will provide a list of priority geographical areas for recruitment, and the selected Contractor will be responsible for identifying specific providers within those areas.

2. It is a cumulative goal through the end of the contract term.

See Addendum #1.

3. If the contract is renewed, the target may be adjusted as determined by the Department.

RFP-2027-DPH-09-OCHSE

Official Q&A

No. Section Reference and Question Answer

10. Appendix A, Section 1.5. and Appendix F The core academic detailing target (300 providers, 100 practice settings) is cumulative through SFY 2028. Should vendors assume an even split across the two years, or does the Department prefer a specific ramp-up that affects how costs are distributed?

Vendors may propose to distribute engagement across the two years either evenly or through a ramp-up approach, based on their proposed staffing and performance plans.

11. Appendix A, Section 1.9

1. Must the twenty (20) CEU-approved academic detailing training sessions for community and healthcare agencies be delivered in person at agency sites, or may they be delivered virtually?

2. Is the Vendor responsible for securing CEU accreditation?

3. Which accrediting bodies are acceptable for CEU approval?

4. Must the contractor provide 20 one-hour CEU-approved sessions on 20 distinct topics, or may the same content be repeated across the 20 sessions?

5. Is the requirement 20 CEU-approved sessions total for both years combined, or 20 sessions each state fiscal year?

1. See Section 1.4. CEU-approved sessions may be delivered either in person or virtually, provided that virtual delivery is an approved format for the accrediting body and accepted by the relevant licensing boards for the CEU type offered.

2. Yes. The vendor is responsible for securing CEU accreditation. Please see Addendum #1.

3. Please see Addendum #1.

4. A single topic can be repeated more than once. However, CEU-approved sessions should cover as many of the topics outlined in Section 1.16, as possible.

5. See Section 1.9 of Appendix A, which states that the contractor must offer a minimum of twenty (20) CEU-approved sessions within on (1) year of the Effective Date of the resulting Agreement. Therefore, the requirement is 20 sessions in the first year, not cumulative across both years.

12. Appendix A, Section 1.15. and Appendix F

Some deliverables are listed as annual requirements. Should these be priced as the same annual lump sum each year, or does the Department expect the cost to change by year (for example, higher in year one and lower in later years)?

Vendors may propose to structure pricing to reflect differences in first-year development effort versus ongoing annual maintenance or updates. Costs should align with the level of work required for the annual deliverables.

13. Appendix A, Section 1.16.

Can the Department confirm that the contractor is responsible for developing materials that address all content areas outlined in Section 1.16, and that these materials will be used during one-on-one provider visits?

Yes.

14. Appendix A, Section 1.17

Advisory group meetings may be held virtually. The Department anticipates convening these meetings on an as-needed basis.

RFP-2027-DPH-09-OCHSE

Official Q&A

No. Section Reference and Question Answer

Could the Department clarify the anticipated frequency of advisory group meetings and confirm whether these meetings may be held virtually?

15. Appendix A, Section 1.19.

1. Paragraph 1.19 mentions ‘up to 10 participants’ for biweekly case conferencing. Should vendors price these sessions per session or per participant?

2. Are participants for the biweekly case-conferencing sessions drawn from the 300 providers referenced in Section 1.5?

3. Who is responsible for recruiting and scheduling these participants?

4. Are these case-conferencing sessions considered part of, or in addition to, the operational support hours described in the Scope of Work?

1. Pricing should be based on a per session rate. The number of participants (up to 10) does not change the pricing structure.

2. Yes.

3. The Contractor.

4. These biweekly case-conferencing sessions are in addition to the operational support hours outlined in the Scope of Work.

16. Appendix A, Section 1.23.4 Could the Department clarify what data will be provided to the Contractor to support assessment of ROI and changes in prescribing patterns, care utilization, and cost avoidance?

The Department will provide de-identified, aggregate county-level data from the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP), along with fatal and non-fatal overdose data and all-payer claims data. These datasets will support analysis of ROI, prescribing patterns, care utilization, and cost avoidance. Additional aggregate data may be provided as available and relevant.

17. Appendix A, Section 1.26, Sections 1.26.3 and 1.26.5

1. Could the Department clarify whether the Evaluation Expert and Provider Engagement Expert must be affiliated with UNH’s Institute for Health Policy and Practice, or whether staff with equivalent qualifications are acceptable?"

2. Could the Department clarify whether these expert positions are to be recruited by the contractor or appointed directly by

IHPP?"

1. Please see Addendum #1. The Evaluation Expert and Provider Engagement Expert do not need to be affiliated with UNH’s Institute for Healthy Policy and Practice. Staff with equivalent qualifications are acceptable.

2. Please see Addendum #1. These expert positions are to be recruited, hired, and supervised by the Contractor, not appointed by IHPP.

18. Appendix A, Section 1.28

1. Does the required two-day training with mock detailing sessions need to be delivered by a specific external provider, or is an equivalent vendor run program acceptable?

1. Vendor-run programs may be used. The Department does not require the two-day training with mock detailing sessions to be delivered by a specific external provider. An equivalent vendor-delivered training program is acceptable.

RFP-2027-DPH-09-OCHSE

Official Q&A

No. Section Reference and Question Answer

2. Does ‘retain’ indicate that the contractor must employ at least three academic detailers?

2. ‘Retain’ means that the Contractor must ensure at least three academic detailers are available to conduct academic detailing sessions as needed. These academic detailers may be full-time employees, part-time employees, or independent contractors.

19. Appendix A, Section 1.29.

What level of effort does the Department expect for the coordination mentioned in Section 1.29.?

Coordination under Section 1.29 will primarily involve information-sharing, such as aligning outreach to shared audiences, sharing or adapting materials, and ensuring consistent messaging.

Meetings may occur on an ad-hoc basis when needed to support shared work, but regular meeting attendance is not expected.

20. Appendix A, Section 2.1.6.

Is there any baseline or historical performance data from previous OD2A work that vendors can use to set realistic targets?

The historical information available is based on federal reporting timelines. From 02/02/2025 - 02/01/2026, there were 1713 Academic Detailing Sessions completed. No historical baselines exist for the new implementation, practice-change, or ROI-related measures.

21. Appendix A, Section 2.1.6.8.11 Will the Department provide PDMP trend data directly?

Yes. The Department will provide PDMP trend data directly to the contractor; vendors are not expected to obtain independent authorization or access to PDMP systems.

22. Appendix D Appendix D appears to be missing questions from the RFP, please clarify.

Please see Appendix #1.

23. Appendix E

1. Please clarify what the ‘Location’ field in Appendix E refers to.

2. Should vendors separately explain travel and mileage assumptions, even though those costs are already built into the lump-sum deliverable pricing?

1. Staff members’ primary work location at the City/State level i.e.

Concord NH.

2. Travel and mileage assumptions can be separately explained but they are not mandatory.

24. Appendix E and Appendix F Appendix E (staffing) and Appendix F (deliverables) use different cost models. Appendix E lists salary and fringe by position, while Appendix F requires lump sum deliverable pricing, and Section

2.3.1 says payment is based on the Deliverables Rate Sheet. Is Appendix E only meant to show staffing capacity and reasonableness, with Appendix F determining actual contract pricing and payment?

Appendix E is intended solely to demonstrate the Vendor’s staffing capacity and the reasonableness of proposed resources.

Appendix F is the section used to determine the actual proposed contract pricing.

25. Appendix F 1. No.

RFP-2027-DPH-09-OCHSE

Official Q&A

No. Section Reference and Question Answer

1. Should salary details for project personnel be included in Appendix F as part of the outcomes and ROI?

2. Appendix F’s Deliverables Cost Sheet shows multiple funding fields for certain deliverable outputs. Should each available dollar field be populated?

3. Is there a minimum or maximum number of deliverables expected each year versus the base period that vendors should use when preparing the cost sheet?

4. Should the cost sheet include pricing for the two optional renewal years?

5. Many ongoing deliverables have no defined units. Should these be priced as a flat monthly or annual fee, or does the Department want per unit pricing so payments can be adjusted based on actual volume?

6. The footnote says proposed costs may be negotiable. Does this mean unit prices could be renegotiated after award, or that scope and volume assumptions might change?

7. The Final Report is placed in the SFY 2028 column, but if the contract is extended, it wouldn’t be due until after SFY 2028.

How should vendors price or place the Final Report if the term is extended, since Appendix F doesn’t account for that?

2. Yes.

3. For the vendor to propose.

4. No.

5. These deliverables should be priced as annual costs per SFY (July 1-June 30).

6. No. The Department may negotiate the proposed cost per deliverable with the selected Contractor prior to finalization of the resulting contract.

7. In the event of renewal, the Final Report deliverable price would be moved to the next fiscal year’s column, and any funds previously allocated to that deliverable may be redirected to other deliverables. The vendor will be notified of intent to renew early enough in the state fiscal year to allow time for planning and obtaining approval for any reassignment.