This message is to announce the release of the Michigan Primary Care Association’s (MPCA) Request for Proposals (RFP) for an Integrated Data System. The objective of this process is to acquire a solution that will fill the various needs of the Michigan Primary Care Association, the Michigan Quality Improvement Network (Michigan’s Health Center Controlled Network), the Michigan Community Health Network (a clinically and financially integrated network) as well as our member Health Centers themselves.
While MPCA has made every effort to make the RFP as comprehensive as possible, we expect that questions will arise during the process. To this end we have established an email address, RFP-Responses@mpca.net. Any and all questions or requests for clarification should be sent to this address. MPCA staff will be monitoring this address and will be maintaining a frequently asked questions (FAQ) document that will be sent to all respondents.
MPCA requests that all vendors who would participate in the RFP send an email to RFP-Responses@mpca.net with a Notice of Intent to Participate no later than 8/19/2016 at 11:59 PM ET.
Assessment and scoring of the proposals received will be carried out by an ad hoc committee of the MPCA Board of Directors. The committee is comprised of staff from Health Centers across the state with experience in clinical, care management, finance, operations, informatics, health information technology and executive backgrounds. A proposed scoring rubric is attached to this message, however it should be noted that the committee reserves the right to modify it as needed. A current version will be maintained with the FAQ.
| Proposal Release
| Notice of Intent to Participate Due
|| 8/19/2016 at 11:59pm ET
| Proposal Responses Due
|| 8/25/2016 at 11:59pm ET
| Vendor Demonstrations
|| 9/27/2016 and 9/28/2016
| Final Committee Decision / Request for Contract
| Contract Due to MPCA
| Presentation to Board of Directors for Approval
Frequently Asked Questions - version 1 (8/17/2016)
- Does a sample contract count against the 50 page maximum proposal.
- No, the sample contract DOES NOT count against the page total.
- Can you confirm that the platform you envision will ingest and harmonize clinical, administrative and other data from as many sources as possible as a basis for valid analytics and resulting actions from multiple stakeholders across Centers?
- How important is access to analytics and related workflow from within existing EMRs to Center staff involved in clinical management?
- It is not imperative that access to tools/solutions happen from within the electronic health record.
- With how many unique instantiations of EHRs will this platform need to interface? (for example, if four Centers have GE Centricity and three share one instantiation, only two interfaces would be required)
- Each Health Center has its own distinct EHR instance; none are shared across Health Centers.
- Is MPCA able to provide a comprehensive list of the specific number and types of non-Center EHR source systems (claims systems, state immunization and/or disease registries, CareConnect360, PHIPs, HIEs, etc.) with which it envisions this platform interfacing?
- We do not have a comprehensive list at this point. We need to determine what is feasible and the Integrated Data System Committee will help us determine priorities.
- Which legal entity will own the contract for this platform?
- Michigan Primary Care Association
- Does MPCA intend to augment the recent HHS grant award for Health Center Controlled Networks with additional capital and operational funds for this initiative?
- Yes. Funding will be provided by the Michigan Primary Care Association itself, the Health Center Controlled Network and the Health Centers themselves.
- What is the budget for this platform each year?
- The budget will be dependent upon the number of Health Centers who are implemented at that point in time.
- Will it be the decision and responsibility of each Health Center to participate and invest in this initiative?
- Yes, it will. However, Health Centers will have varying levels of incentives to participate in this opportunity depending on their participation in programs (MQIN, MCHN) and current solutions/technologies in use at the Health Center level.
- Does MPCA envision different groups of Centers selecting their own vendor(s) for the desired functionality or is the MPCA’s intent to purchase a platform/platform components on behalf of all Centers?
- Ultimately the Michigan Primary Care Association and its member Health Centers are seeking a single analytics/reporting platform to consolidate and align information across organizations.
- How many and how will MQIN and MCHN personnel be involved in the following activities related to implementing and managing this platform on behalf of the Centers:
- Project oversight and management
- Interface development with EHRs
- Functional requirements development, including requirements for clinical management roles and related business rules, workflow and user interface designs
- Reporting specification development
- User acceptance testing
- On-going functionality evolution including development of additional business rules (alerts, quality measures, prospective care gap closure, for example), work flow, reports and roles
- Project Management
- We are looking for the proposals to tell MPCA what number and type of resources would be necessary. Different vendors have very different philosophies on implementation and ongoing maintenance. We can say with certainty, however, that MPCA plans on its staff to function as the "super users" for this resource and be the primary point of contact for the Health Centers throughout the course of the program.
- What expectations does MPCA have for implementation timeframes?
- MPCA would expect that Health Centers would be adopted in a staggered manner, based on the requirements of the stakeholder groups (MPCA, MQIN, MCHN) and the Health Centers themselves.
- How many expert users will require in-depth financial modeling and performance monitoring support?
- 3-4 at MPCA; to be determined at the Health Center level.
- How many expert users will require in-depth clinical modeling and performance monitoring support?
- 3-4 at MPCA; to be determined at the Health Center level
- What types of value based contracts do Centers already support? Are these contracts between payers and individual Centers or between payers and the Michigan Community Health Network (MCHN)?
- MCHN has not begun the contracting process with payers as yet. There are very few individual Health Centers with value-based contracts in place already but there is an expectation with a variety of State of Michigan programs that assumption of risk and value-based programs will be adopted.
- Is MCHN open to an investment partnership that jointly funds the expertise and technology needed to manage reasonable financial risk in clinical management contracts with multiple payers?
- While it is beyond the scope of this process to negotiate any potential partnerships of this regard, any such opportunities presented in received proposals could be taken into consideration.
- In order to help us prize the scope of services, can you please prioritize what top 3 goals you are trying to achieve within 6 months, 12 months, 24 months of project starting? In general, what are must-have vs nice-to have features from your list of requirements and for whom?
- MCHN will have immediate requirements to facilitate contracting with payer organizations. MQIN will have needs for aggregate quality metrics. The Integrated Data System committee will guide prioritization of projects once a vendor has been selected and the effort required can be determined.
- We understand the MPCA is looking for an analytics solution that can help the MPCA and MCHN analyze data across all clinics in their network. To what degree should the vendor also provide dashboards and workflow tools to individual clinics and providers inside those clinics vs a network solution only? Is the initial focus more on improving performance metrics at the clinic level or perform financial risk modelling for contract negotiations at the network level?
- While MPCA/MQIN/MCHN has needs at the aggregate level, vendors that are able to offer tools/technologies to Health Center staff as well will have an advantage.
- For each FQHC listed in the pricing matrix, please list which EHR vendors (e.g. NextGen, Centricity, Greenway, etc) they work with and where the EHR is hosted (MPCA, third party, EHR vendor). Besides major medical EHRs, are there are any dental, behavioral health and other EHRs we will connect to in these clinics? Please also describe what accounting systems (for general ledgers) you would like to connect the vendor to, if any. What other major systems (e.g. payer systems, data warehouses) do you currently have available and need the vendor to integrate with?
- This has been completed for the EHRs and the pricing matrix will be updated on 8/18/2016. Updates will be forthcoming for dental records as well, but what the committee will be looking for is the ability to connect to different systems and, overall flexibility.
- To help price this project, please prioritize the non-clinical data requirements under the “data section” from most important to least important, ideally explaining what data is already available to the FQHCs and MPCA: (1) Data from Direct Secure Messaging, (2) Claims data, (3) Other Payer data, (4) General Ledger data, (5) HIE/ADT data
- 5 (or 1), 2, 3, 4. HIE or Direct we are expecting to deliver the CCDA. Claims data will need to flow for MCHN (as well as value-based and risk analysis)
- Is there anything unique about the set-up of the FQHCs in Michigan why “merging duplicate and identifying dropouts” is required as a significant requirement in the RFP?
- This feature we see as potentially necessary down the road, however it is possible that the Michigan Health Information Exchanges will fill some of the gaps in this area.
- You name a list of risk stratification methodologies (e.g. HCC, ACG) as well as DRG and SMG classification requirements (e.g. H-Cup, Bereson Egger). To what degree do the payer contracts that the MCHN and FQHCs have currently rely on these classifications? What are the main methodologies in your contracts today or anticipated in the next 3 years? Does MCHN or MPCA currently have care managers at the IPA level that use risk stratification methodologies to follow up with patients or will these methodologies mainly be used for contract negotiations?
- Health Centers do not rely on these classifications at this moment. As the value-based payment contracts come into place it will be important to use these classification groups to mark inclusions/exclusions as allowed by eCQM / National Quality Forum. Also, these classifications will allow the members a part of MPCA to manage risk and the health of a population better by helping to analyze different practices and outcomes of Health Centers. This is not in the immediate plans of the MCHN, however we anticipate this being a requirement in the near future.
- To what degree do you want the statistical analyses mentioned (e.g. ANOVA, multiple regression, Pearson correlation etc) as a self reporting tool vs vendor support to run these more sophisticated analyses?
- It will depend on the options available. We anticipate MPCA/MQIN/MCHN staff taking on certain roles/responsibilities and the vendors others. The Integrated Data System Committee will help guide development in this regard.
- What programs is Michigan Primary Care Association a part of? (MSSP ACO? PCMH? HEDIS, etc.)
- MPCA member Health Centers will have a variety of different needs, but the proposal should allow for data and analysis for all of the above mentioned programs/metrics.
- What types of analytics are MPCA hoping to do? (Cost/utilization, HEDIS, PCMH, other?)
- How many covered lives are in the network?
- Today Michigan Health Center organizations provide quality, affordable, comprehensive primary and preventive health care for more than 600,000 Michigan residents at over 250 delivery sites across the state. More details are available at http://www.mpca.net
- Who are the major payers?
- Meridian, Molina, McLaren, United and Priority have the largest patient populations. There are 11 payers in the Michigan environment, however.