RFP No. 26-2995-8LOC Addendum No. 1.pdf

COUNTY OF HENRICO, VIRGINIA – Department of Finance, Purchasing Division 8600 Staples Mill Road / P.O. Box 90775 / Henrico, VA 23273-0775

Phone: (804)501-5660 Version 4.13.26

Addendum No. 1

Date: September 16, 2026 Request for Proposal: 26-2995-8LOC - Community Corrections & Recovery Court Recidivism Study Receipt Date/Time: October 1, 2026/ 11:30 a.m.

Subject: Changes to: Receipt Date and Insurance Specifications; and Answers to Questions

Ladies/Gentlemen, Please make the following corrections, deletions and/or additions to the above referenced RFP:

Receipt Date changed to October 1, 2026

See Revised Attachment E - Insurance Specifications

See attached Questions and Answers

All other specifications and General Terms and Conditions shall remain the same.

Bidders must take due notice and be governed accordingly. Failure to acknowledge this addendum may result in your bid being declared non-responsive.

Sincerely, Leisel Collins, CPPB, VCO, VCA Purchasing Manager COL119@henrico.gov

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:

Signature: ________________________________

Print Name: ________________________________

Company: ________________________________

Date: ________________________________ mailto:COL119@henrico.gov

Questions and Answers

September 16, 2026

1. Could the County provide an estimated budget range or funding allocation for this Community Corrections & Recovery Court Recidivism Study? If a comparable study was conducted in the past, what was its contract value?

Answer: The funding allocation will be determined based on the applications and requests made therein.

2. What is the anticipated contract term for the Community Corrections & Recovery Court Recidivism

Study, including any potential renewal options?

Answer: This will be a one-time project, and the anticipated contract terms would be from December 2026 through June 2027.

3. The Background section notes that Recovery Court has graduated 310 participants over 22 years. Can the County provide approximate case counts specific to the study periods in Section II, meaning probation cases completed July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2022, and Recovery Court cases completed July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2022? For Recovery Court, does "completed" include unsuccessful terminations as well as graduations?

Answer: For probation, from 7/2019 to 6/2022, there were 4546 case closures. For Recovery Court, from 7/2017 to 6/2022, there were approximately 250 case closures.

4. Approximately how many local probation cases were completed between July 1, 2019 and June 30, 2022, and approximately how many Recovery Court cases were completed between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2022?

Answer: Same as above.

5. Does the County have an established definition of recidivism and specific outcome measures it expects the study to use, or is the contractor expected to propose the definitions, measures, and methodology?

Answer: No, Offerors are expected to propose their definitions, measures, and methodology.

6. For the interviews with past and current participants required in Section II.3, does the County have an anticipated number or range, and will the County assist with identifying and recruiting participants?

Answer: The County do not currently have a range number of participants, and the County will assist in identifying participants but not the recruitment of participants.

7. Will an IRB or human subjects review be required given the interviews with current/past participants, and if so, whose IRB applies?

Answer: No, this will not be required. Interviews will be completely voluntary.

8. For the participant interviews, do the County have a target sample size or expected response rate? Will the County assist with recruitment/contact information?

Answer: The County do not currently have a range number of participants, and the County will assist in identifying participants but not the recruitment of participants.

9. Should travel to Henrico for in-person presentations and oral interviews be built into the total price, or will it be reimbursed separately?

Answer: They should be built into the total price.

10. How many in-person presentations are anticipated, and to what audience(s) (e.g., Board of Supervisors, judges, CCP leadership)?

Answer: The number of participants for oral interviews will depend on the number of proposals the County receives and the Offerors’ evaluation ranking.

11. Does the County expect interviews and focus group studies to be in person, telephone or video? If so, does the County have space available at your facility, or any other local facility, that could be used? If not, is Zoom a potential tool to use? And if so, do you have an institutional subscription that could be used, or would you expect that to be provided by the Successful Offeror?

Answer: Interviews can be conducted at the discretion of the Successful Offeror. The County can provide space for interviews; however, would not provide Zoom subscriptions

12. Are there specific research questions you're trying to answer?

Answer: No.

13. Is it the County’s intent to publish any of the data outside potential presentation?

Answer: Yes, we will share this information as needed.

14. What data is available from both the probation department and the court system?

Answer: The name and numbers of closed participants for the study.

15. What format/system is CCP and Recovery Court case data currently stored in (e.g., case management software), and will the selected offeror receive raw data extracts, or will County staff pull and hand off datasets?

Answer: CCP uses PSLP database and Recovery Court uses DIMS. Data would be requested from the responsible entity for analysis.

16. Would the County like both quantitative and qualitative analysis performed on the data?

Answer: This should be based on the Offeror proposal on how they will conduct the study.

17. If the request is for quantitative analysis, what kinds of questions is the County hoping to answer?

Correlations between services and outcome that could be potentially generalizable to the broader population? Or would the County prefer rough percentages based on only the population?

Answer: Analysis shall be based upon the Offeror’s service approach proposal.

18. If the request is for qualitative analysis, would the County like content analysis for themes within data to tell stories about the County’s program compared to national guidance?

Answer: Analysis shall be based upon the Offeror’s service approach proposal.

19. What outcome measure(s) should "recidivism" be defined by (e.g., re-arrest, re-conviction, revocation, new supervision episode), or is defining this measure part of the deliverable?

Answer: Definition of recidivism is part of the deliverable.

20. Regarding Section II.6, are there existing data sharing agreements or prior approvals in place with

DCJS, the Office of the Executive Secretary, or the Virginia State Police for this purpose? If no, will the County submit those record requests with the contractor named as the recipient, or does the County expect the contractor to submit them directly once the County has authorized the release? What lead time does the County anticipate for those approvals?

Answer: The County does not currently have prior approvals in place to collect the records/data.

This will be completed after the contract is executed with the assistance of the Successful Offeror.

21. Section IV schedules oral interviews on October 21, 2026. Will those interviews be held in person in

Henrico or remotely?

Answer: The County’s preference is to conduct oral interviews in person.

22. Section VI.B.5 requests the Offeror's latest audited financial statement. If an offeror does not obtain audited financial statements in the ordinary course of business, will the County accept another form of financial documentation, such as accountant-prepared statements, a bank reference, or a letter from our accountant?

Answer: Yes, the County will accept an accountant-prepared statement and bank references.

23. Section VI.B.6 (Tab 5) asks for a minimum of three references that could attest to the Offeror's past performance. Will the County accept references for engagements performed by the proposed key personnel at prior employers, and references for engagements performed by a named subcontractor, where the individuals who performed that work are the individuals proposed for this study?

24. Section VIII.K states that a business not located in the County should include a copy of its current business license with the proposal. Our firm is located in Olathe, Kansas. Kansas issues no general state business license and our city licenses specific regulated industries rather than businesses generally, so a data and evaluation consultancy holds no document of that kind. What would the County accept in its place? We can supply a Kansas Secretary of State Certificate of Good Standing and our SAM.gov registration if either is useful.

Answer: As stated in the section, “If you have any questions, contact the Business Section, Department of Finance, County of Henrico, telephone (804) 501-4310”.

25. What performance period does the County anticipate, and are there target dates for the interim and final reports and the in-person presentations?

Answer: Final reports and presentations of findings should be in-person. The timeline will be based on the contract submission by the Offeror.

26. Are the optional services (client surveys, focus groups, national benchmarking of Recovery Court practices) referenced in the Scope of Services (section II.4.) expected to be priced separately as addons, or bundled into the base proposal?

Answer: The County will accept optional services price separately or as a bundle.

27. Given the Artificial Intelligence Systems Clause (Section VIII.C), can the County clarify expectations if standard analytic/statistical software with embedded AI-assisted features (rather than full autonomous AI systems) is used in the analysis workflow?

Answer: The information provided in this section of the RFP is the County’s expectations. Your firm shall list any exceptions taken to this section on Tab 8.

28. Has the County previously commissioned a similar recidivism study, and if so, can prior reports be shared as a baseline reference?

Answer: No, the County has not previously commissioned a similar recidivism study.

29. Has a comparison group already been identified?

30. Do you anticipate that more than one person should do this research? Or do you think it is able to be done by an individual contractor?

Answer: That would be at the discretion of the Offeror. If your firm intent to utilize more than one person for the research, explain in your proposal.