Iowa Bids > Bid Detail

Operating Room Scheduling and Analytics software and services

Back Print
Agency: University of Iowa
Level of Government: State & Local
Category:
  • 65 - Medical, Dental, and Veterinary Equipment and Supplies
  • 70 - General Purpose Information Technology Equipment (including software).
  • D - Automatic Data Processing and Telecommunication Services
Opps ID: NBD18081592494170602
Posted Date: Sep 29, 2023
Due Date:
Solicitation No: RFP 18130

Bid Information

Type Request for Proposal - Sealed
Status Awarded
Number RFP 18130 (Operating Room Scheduling and Analytics software and services)
Issue Date & Time 7/14/2023 05:00:01 PM (CT)
Close Date & Time 8/4/2023 03:00:00 PM (CT)
Duration 20 days 21 hours 59 minutes 58 seconds
Notes
The University of Iowa (hereafter, The University/University) located in Iowa City, Iowa, desires to obtain written proposals from qualified Suppliers who are currently providing operating room scheduling efficiencies software and analytics services.
Please be aware that this is an extensive bid. All Suppliers are cautioned to allow ample time for the submittal of RFP responses well before the due date time requirement. Bids must be submitted via the eBid system.
Questions regarding the bid may be submitted by registered Suppliers via the Questions tab within eBid prior to the question cutoff date. All Supplier questions and the University answers to those questions will be published sometime after the Questions close deadline for all interested Suppliers to review.
Contact Information
Name Doris Vaske
Address 202 PCO
Iowa City, IA 52242-2500
Phone 319 (335) 0113
Fax 319 (335) 2443
Email doris-vaske@uiowa.edu
Awarded Suppliers
Supplier Name Award Line Count Award Amount
Data pager
Data pager
Page size:
PageSizeComboBox
select
Your browser does not support inline frames or is currently configured not to display inline frames.
  • 10
  • 15
  • 20
  • 50
1 items in 1 pages
Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc. 7
Bid Documents
Document name Format
Data pager
Data pager
Page size:
PageSizeComboBox
select
Your browser does not support inline frames or is currently configured not to display inline frames.
  • 10
  • 15
  • 20
  • 50
2 items in 1 pages
Bid Invitation Acrobat / PDF
Public Question & Answer Acrobat / PDF
Bid Attachments
File Name Description File Size
Data pager
Data pager
Page size:
PageSizeComboBox
select
Your browser does not support inline frames or is currently configured not to display inline frames.
  • 10
  • 15
  • 20
  • 50
3 items in 1 pages
Standard Terms and Conditions(2023-05-15).pdf University of Iowa Standard Terms and Conditions 211 KB
Trade_Secret_Affidavit_Process.pdf Please complete if applicable. 158 KB
UIHC_HCIS_IT_Assessment_20220805.docx UIHC HCIS IT Assessment document Revised 8-05-2022 52 KB
Bid Questions
Question Do you currently have available any visualization tools other than Tableau or Epic (even if they are not currently used for OR/Surgical Services)?
Answer Yes
Submitted 7/21/2023 01:24:31 PM (CT)
Question Would you consider awarding components of this RFP to multiple Service Providers (i.e., scheduling tool(s), analytics tool(s), professional services, etc. would each be awarded to a different Supplier)?
Answer Per Attributes 6 and 33 the University reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals, waive irregularities, accept any part of a proposal, to withhold the award, and to make no award as is deemed to be in the best interests of theUniversity, or to issue multiple awards at its sole discretion.
Submitted 7/21/2023 01:21:10 PM (CT)
Question What are your current pain points or limitations in the Epic/Optime scheduling functionality?
Answer Matching open OR time supply with surgeon/patient case demands
Submitted 7/21/2023 01:07:13 PM (CT)
Question If procedures or other scheduled events are performed in ORs that should not be considered surgical cases do you already have these flagged with a technical tool, or do you have logic identified to distinguish them?
Answer Yes
Submitted 7/21/2023 12:57:18 PM (CT)
Question Do you already have defined and governed benchmarks for your operations as well as related metrics and KPIs that you have named as in scope for this engagement?
Answer Yes
Submitted 7/21/2023 12:56:56 PM (CT)
Question Do you already have defined and governed definitions for the metrics and KPIs that you have named as in scope for this engagement?
Answer Yes
Submitted 7/21/2023 12:56:25 PM (CT)
Question What are your pain points with the existing Epic and Tableau reports?
Please consider operational processes, data inputs, data prep, visualization, usability or user experience, as well as governance & stewardship in your response.
Answer Data inputs and data prep are pain points - labor intensive to manage and maintain
Submitted 7/21/2023 12:55:47 PM (CT)
Question What is the degree of trust that is expected of Surgical Services Reporting?

If you don’t already have your own “trust-type” benchmarks you can use the following:

1. Great for exploratory purposes and directionally correct. Highest risk of inaccuracy. Quick turnaround and low LOE.
2. Addresses targeted questions but may not generalize. Some risk of inaccuracy. Moderate turnaround & LOE.
3. Enterprise re-usable. Well validated and characterized. Low risk of inaccuracy. Longer turnaround and high LOE.
4. Widely reusable over time. ongoing validation and certification of Level 3. Automated, longitudinal QA. Very low risk of inaccuracy (e.g., trusted enough that they could be shared publicly).
Answer 4 Widely reusable over time. ongoing validation and certification of Level 3. Automated, longitudinal QA. Very low risk of inaccuracy (e.g., trusted enough that they could be shared publicly).
Submitted 7/21/2023 12:55:08 PM (CT)
Question What is the degree of trust in the existing Epic and Tableau based reports?

If you don’t already have your own “trust-type” benchmarks you can use the following:

1. Great for exploratory purposes and directionally correct. Highest risk of inaccuracy. Quick turnaround and low LOE.
2. Addresses targeted questions but may not generalize. Some risk of inaccuracy. Moderate turnaround & LOE.
3. Enterprise re-usable. Well validated and characterized. Low risk of inaccuracy. Longer turnaround and high LOE.
4. Widely reusable over time. ongoing validation and certification of Level 3. Automated, longitudinal QA. Very low risk of inaccuracy (e.g., trusted enough that they could be shared publicly).
Answer 3 Enterprise re-usable. Well validated and characterized. Low risk of inaccuracy. Longer turnaround and high LOE.
Submitted 7/21/2023 12:54:40 PM (CT)
Question Are you generally open to an iterative approach to the development and delivery cycle?
Answer No
Submitted 7/21/2023 12:53:21 PM (CT)
Items 1 - 10 shown of 25 • Page 1 of 2 shown First 1 2 3 > Last

TRY FOR FREE

Not a USAOPPS Member Yet?

Get unlimited access to thousands of active local, state and federal government bids and awards in All 50 States.

Start Free Trial Today >