DCY-C-2627-0111Q Coaching for Technical Assistance

DCY is issuing this RFQ to solicit competitive proposals from qualified Offerors to provide coaching training for DCY staff who deliver Technical Assistance (TA) to local providers. The local providers support a broad range of programs and agencies, including public children’s services agencies, Title IV‑E courts, early care and education programs, early intervention and home visiting programs, professional development initiatives, and licensing specialists in early childhood education and foster care.As a relatively newer state agency, DCY is taking the opportunity to better align the coaching strategies used by staff who provide TA across its programs. Through this RFQ, DCY seeks proposals to develop and/or deliver a comprehensive, coaching-based, interaction-style training curriculum. The curriculum must follow an evidence-based framework consistent with the model proposed by the Offeror and must include fidelity monitoring components that support coaching, staff development, technical assistance, and training activities. The Contractor must provide an existing curriculum or develop a new curriculum using an evidence-based framework and a DCY-authorized authoring tool. The Contractor must also provide train the trainer sessions and all related materials needed for DCY staff to deliver the training independently while maintaining fidelity to the approved model.
To participate or submit an inquiry for this solicitation, prospective Offerors must be registered via the OhioBuys Supplier Portal. Click the following link to initiate this process Selling to the StateOhioBuys training materials can be located at Supplier Resources
Vocational training
Inquiries Inquiry 93473 | The RFQ number is inconsistent throughout the posted documents — the file names reference "DCY-C-2728-0111Q" while the body of the RFQ, the Cost Proposal Form file name, and the Contract signature block all reference "DCY-C-2627-0111Q." Please confirm the correct, official RFQ number for submission purposes. There appears to be an inconsistency in the labeling of Part 5 forms. Section 2.H and Section 3.I.2–3 of the RFQ refer to the "Preference Certification Form" as Form 5c and the "Offeror Redaction Justification Form" as Form 5d. However, the Part 5 form listing labels them differently: Form 5b — Preference Certification Form, Form 5c — Offeror Redaction Justification Form, Form 5d — Proposed Pre-Existing Materials and Commercial Software Form. Please clarify the correct form lettering so Offerors submit the correct forms under the correct labels. In Part 1, Section E (Timeline), Deliverables item 1 lists sub-items a through f, but sub-item "e" contains no content. Please clarify what requirement was intended for item "e," or confirm it was omitted in error. In Part 1, Section I.1.b (Work Plan requirements), the RFQ states the Work Plan must include "a high-level overview of the following subsidiary project management plans," but no subsidiary plans are listed. Please clarify which subsidiary project management plans the State requires the Work Plan to address. The Cost Proposal Form (DCY-C-2627-0111Q Coaching for Technical Assistance Cost Proposal.xlsx) labels the third fiscal year's QTY, Unit Cost, and Total columns as "SFY28," duplicating the labels already used for the second fiscal year, even though the column header above them correctly reads "SFY29 (Optional Renewal)." Please confirm whether a corrected Cost Proposal Form will be issued, or whether Offerors should treat the third set of columns as SFY29 despite the column labels. | Answer: The RFQ number is inconsistent throughout the posted documents — the file names reference "DCY-C-2728-0111Q" while the body of the RFQ, the Cost Proposal Form file name, and the Contract signature block all reference "DCY-C-2627-0111Q." Please confirm the correct, official RFQ number for submission purposes. DCY-C-2627-0111Q There appears to be an inconsistency in the labeling of Part 5 forms. Section 2.H and Section 3.I.2–3 of the RFQ refer to the "Preference Certification Form" as Form 5c and the "Offeror Redaction Justification Form" as Form 5d. However, the Part 5 form listing labels them differently: Form 5b — Preference Certification Form, Form 5c — Offeror Redaction Justification Form, Form 5d — Proposed Pre-Existing Materials and Commercial Software Form. Please clarify the correct form lettering so Offerors submit the correct forms under the correct labels. Form 5a – Affirmation and Disclosure FormForm 5b – Preference Certification FormForm 5c – Offeror Redaction Justification FormForm 5d – Proposed Pre-Existing Materials and Commercial Software Form In Part 1, Section E (Timeline), Deliverables item 1 lists sub-items a through f, but sub-item "e" contains no content. Please clarify what requirement was intended for item "e," or confirm it was omitted in error. e was inadvertently left in the document after editing. In Part 1, Section I.1.b (Work Plan requirements), the RFQ states the Work Plan must include "a high-level overview of the following subsidiary project management plans," but no subsidiary plans are listed. Please clarify which subsidiary project management plans the State requires the Work Plan to address. Disregard, that is template language. The Cost Proposal Form (DCY-C-2627-0111Q Coaching for Technical Assistance Cost Proposal.xlsx) labels the third fiscal year's QTY, Unit Cost, and Total columns as "SFY28," duplicating the labels already used for the second fiscal year, even though the column header above them correctly reads "SFY29 (Optional Renewal)." Please confirm whether a corrected Cost Proposal Form will be issued, or whether Offerors should treat the third set of columns as SFY29 despite the column labels. Yes, that is SFY29 | Answered: 7/30/2026 Inquiry 93750 | This RFP references both an evidence based framework and developing a new curriculum. Can the state clarify the extent to which a framework must be evidence-based if it is developing new curriculum? | Answer: If an offeror is creating new training or curriculum, the offeror should clearly identify the research, proven methodologies, or empirical findings that support the framework from which the new materials will be developed. This ensures the new curriculum is grounded in evidence even if its specific content is newly designed. The evidence cited should be relevant to the curriculum’s goals, the target audience, and the anticipated outcomes. | Answered: 8/6/2026 Inquiry 93754 | Our coaching framework is based on research and best practices. Would this qualify as an evidence-based framework? | Answer: Offerors should explicitly cite the research, studies, and best practices that inform their coaching framework. Providing this documentation enables the state to confirm that the proposed approach is grounded in credible, evidence‑based sources and reflects methods demonstrated to be effective. Citations should clearly show how the underlying research and best practices support the principles and practices incorporated into the framework, ensuring a transparent connection between the evidence base and the framework’s design. | Answered: 8/6/2026 Inquiry 93759 | How many total staff require coaching training? | Answer: Approximately 60 staff members are expected to participate in the coaching training. | Answered: 8/6/2026 Inquiry 93762 | How much time do TA staff spend assisting organizations in child welfare organizations (PCSAs, Title IV-E Courts) vs. assisting organizations in early childhood education organizations? | Answer: TA staff divide their time evenly between supporting child welfare organizations (including PCSAs and Title IV‑E courts) and supporting early childhood education organizations. Approximately half of the team—about 30 of the 60 staff members—primarily dedicate their work hours to child welfare, while the other half focus their time on early childhood education. This distribution reflects an overall 50/50 allocation of TA effort across the two sectors. | Answered: 8/6/2026 Inquiry 94136 | 1. What is the estimated/available budget or not-to-exceed amount for this contract?2. Is there an incumbent contractor currently providing coaching/TA training to DCY?3. Is delivery centralized at one location or across multiple sites statewide?4. Is this a single training cycle, or recurring cohorts through June 30, 2027?5. Please confirm: is the 6-12 hour total training requirement inclusive of both in-person and virtual/follow-up sessions combined?6. Which software/system (LMS and authoring tool) do you want us to use to build the training curriculum and fidelity monitoring tools? | Answer: 1. DCY will not disclose the budget allocated for this project. Offerors are expected to rely on their professional expertise and industry knowledge to develop and submit a fair, reasonable, competitive bid that reflects the resources necessary to successfully complete the project. Proposed pricing should be clearly justified and aligned with the requirements outlined in the Scope of Work.2. Centralized at one location.4. Could be either based upon vendor’s proposal; a total of 60 staff will be included in the training, with a smaller number of staff (5-10) to receive the training of trainer session(s). 5. This is dependent upon the vendor’s curriculum for the in-person training and the virtual/follow sessions and proposal.6. Contractor to work with the DCY LMS systems contractor to create a SCORM package to be placed in the DCY designated LMS system(s) which currently include Cornerstone LMS system and Brightspace LMS. The authoring tool is Articulate. | Answered: 8/12/2026 Inquiry 94652 | Should the Offeror assume the training participant count will be 60 for the SFY28 and SFY29 optional renewal years? | Answer: Yes | Answered: 8/14/2026 Inquiry 94667 | Is there a page limit or minimum font size for the Work Plan narrative that isn't stated in the sections we've reviewed? | Answer: No, if there were, it would be clearly indicated. | Answered: 8/14/2026 Inquiry 94668 | Has DCY established a budget range or not-to-exceed amount for this engagement? | Answer: DCY will not disclose the budget allocated for this project. Offerors are expected to rely on their professional expertise and industry knowledge to develop and submit a fair, reasonable, competitive bid that reflects the resources necessary to successfully complete the project. Proposed pricing should be clearly justified and aligned with the requirements outlined in the Scope of Work. | Answered: 8/14/2026 Inquiry 94669 | When does DCY expect training to begin and end within SFY27, given that the contract start date depends on the award/execution date? | Answer: All requirements in the Scope of Work must be completed no later than June 30, 2027. | Answered: 8/14/2026 Inquiry 94713 | Where will in-person training take place, and should Offerors assume participant travel to a central location, or Contractor travel to multiple regional sites? | Answer: Any in-person training would be held at a central location in central Ohio. | Answered: 8/17/2026 Inquiry 94714 | Does the proposed framework need to meet a specific evidence-based standard (e.g., a recognized clearinghouse, state-approved list, or federal registry)? | Answer: No. | Answered: 8/17/2026 Inquiry 94715 | Does DCY prefer that the Contractor adapt an existing evidence-based coaching framework/curriculum, or develop a new model specifically for DCY? Are there existing DCY coaching approaches or to incorporate? | Answer: DCY does not have a preference and will evaluate all proposals based on the merits of the proposal. The RFP does not require incorporating any existing approaches? | Answered: 8/17/2026