Sponsor: Social Services
Title
title
Extension of Select Contracts for Aging and Disability Case Management Services
end
Recommendation
recommendation
1. Approve contract extensions of 24 Social Services contracts for aging and disability case management services through March 31, 2022.
2. Authorize the County Manager to execute the contract extensions, in a form approved by the County Attorney’s Office.
end
Background and Rationale
body
The Social Services department is seeking approval of an extension of selected contracts beyond the five-year term limit as set forth in the Ramsey County Administrative Code. The reason for this request is two-fold. To prevent service interruption with nearly 7,000 residents who are receiving services on current contracted service agreements; and to thoroughly engage with residents who experience the case management services and the social services system in the current and ongoing Request for Proposal (RFP) for aging and disability case management services.
Social Services anticipates that multiple new providers could be selected during the current RFP evaluation process. Given that over 7,000 aging and disability service clients are currently being served through our contracted service providers, it is imperative that service interruption is prevented, a smooth client transition plan is developed, and match process occurs if a change in service providers is needed upon the completion of the current RFP process.
Social Services expects the client transition process will need to occur over a period of several months to take into account client needs, provider transitions, new staff hiring, and development of processes and procedures, all which need to occur in the midst of the ongoing pandemic. The requested contract extension will allow Social Services to ensure there is no interruption of services during the remaining RFP contract selection process and client transition period.
In terms of the current competitive solicitation RFP for aging and disability case management services, an unusually large number of responses were received. The increased interest by service providers resulted in the submission of 42 proposals. The large RFP response reflects a concerted outreach effort by Social Services to expand the number of proposals from a wide range of organizations, including culturally specific agencies, community-based organizations, as well as existing providers of aging and disability case management services.
Social Services was responsive to input from the community to allow for more extensive community participation into the procurement process. As a result, Social Services purposefully reached out to members of the aging and disability services community to obtain their input, engagement, and participation with the solicitation process. This included conducting virtual town hall meetings to get input into future service delivery, increased community outreach to publicize the RFP, and the selection of nine evaluators from diverse backgrounds and lived experiences related to disability services to review the proposals. The resulting RFP evaluation panel includes representatives of the community receiving services, caregivers, individuals with experience providing aging and disability case management services, and county staff with relevant programmatic experience.
In order to adequately review the large number of proposals received, and incorporate input from the evaluation panel in an engaging, respectful and responsible manner, an extended proposal review, discussion and evaluation period has been necessary. Multiple evaluation panel meetings have been established to allow adequate time to score all proposals received. The proposals are being reviewed with a resident-first lens and in a manner that ensures race and health equity issues are thoroughly addressed. In addition, Social Services has found that convening a large evaluation panel for multiple meetings throughout the COVID-19 pandemic has required being more adaptive and flexible in standard business processes and planning.
The following is a list of selected contracts that have been identified for contract extensions:
(approximately $652,745 annually)
Alternative Care / Elderly Waiver Services:
1. Keystone Community Services, 2000 St. Anthony Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55104
2. Pinnacle Services, Inc., 724 Central Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55414
3. Shakir Consulting Services, LLC, 310 E. 38th St., Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 55409
4. Thomas Allen, Inc., 1550 Humboldt Avenue, West St. Paul, MN 55118
Disability Case Management Services:
1. AXIS Healthcare, LLC, 710 East 24th St., Suite 400, Minneapolis, MN 55404
2. Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, 1200 2nd Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55403
3. Dungarvin Minnesota LLC, 1444 Northland Drive, Suite 100, Mendota Heights, MN 55120
4. Fraser, 2400 West 64th Street, Minneapolis, MN 55423
5. HandyHelp LLC, 500 Grotto Street North, St. Paul, Minnesota, 55104
6. Jewish Family Services of St. Paul, 1633 West 7th Street, St. Paul, MN 55102
7. Keystone Community Services, 2000 St. Anthony Ave., St. Paul, MN 55104
8. Meridian Services, Inc., 9400 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN 55427
9. Minnesota Brain Injury Alliance, 2277 Highway 36 West, Suite 200, Roseville, MN 55113
10. People Incorporated, 2060 Centre Pointe Blvd., Suite 3, St. Paul, MN 55120
11. Phoenix Service Corporation, 330 Maria Avenue East, West St. Paul, MN 55118
12. Pinnacle Services, Inc., 724 Central Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55414
13. Redeemer Services, Inc., 6053 Hudson Road, #170, Woodbury, MN 55125
14. Thomas Allen, Inc., 1550 Humboldt Avenue, West St. Paul, MN 55118
Culturally Specific Disability Case Management Services:
1. Bestview Care Options, LLC, 1241 Matilda St., St. Paul, MN 55117
2. Hekima Cultural and Consulting Services, LLC, 2225 White Bear Avenue North, Suite 3, St. Paul, MN 55109
3. Hmong American Partnership, 1075 Arcade Street, St. Paul 55106
4. Kindred Services, LLC, 1552 White Bear Ave., St. Paul, MN 55106
5. Minnesota Care Counseling Services, Inc., 3355 Hiawatha Ave., Minneapolis, MN 55406
6. Shakir Consulting Services, LLC, 310 E. 38th St., Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 55409
end
County Goals (Check those advanced by Action)
☒ Well-being ☒ Prosperity ☒ Opportunity ☐ Accountability
Racial Equity Impact
Contracted client services help support the county’s goal to strengthen individual, family and community health, safety and well-being through effective safety-net services, innovative programming, prevention and early intervention, and environmental stewardship. The contract extension will provide an additional opportunity to design community-centered contracts and allow the further development of a network of culturally responsive providers to meet the needs of residents disproportionately impacted by race.
Community Participation Level and Impact
The contracted client services provide essential services to address the needs of residents. The original solicitation and development of several of these contracts had limited involvement from the community when they were initially completed. This contract extension allows for more community participation into the RFP evaluation and selection process and will provide adequate time for an orderly client transition phase as a result of changes in contracted service providers.
☒ Inform ☒ Consult ☒ Involve ☐ Collaborate ☐ Empower
Fiscal Impact
The identified contracted services are included in the Social Services department’s 2021 Operating Budget. The total approximate annual budget for these services is $652,745. This extension does not impact the budget for these services.
County Manager Comments
No additional comments.
Last Previous Action
On December 3, 2019, the County Board approved entering into agreements as a result of solicitations and executing amendments to the agreements provided the amounts were within the budget (Resolution B2019-284).
On December 18, 2018, December 20, 2016 and December 22, 2015, the County Board approved the issuance of solicitations, entering into resulting agreements, and executing amendments to agreements provided the amounts were within budget (Resolutions B2018-339, B2016-335 and B2015-415).
Attachments
1. None