**STATE OF NEW MEXICO**

**DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH**

### BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES DIVISION

**P.O. BOX 26110**

**1190 ST. FRANCIS DRIVE**

**SANTA FE, NEW MEXICO 87502-6110**

***State Fiscal Year 2006***

***(December 1, 2005 -- June 30, 2006)***

**Request for Proposals**

**for**

**Substance Abuse Prevention Services**

#########  Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF SIG)

**Michelle Lujan Grisham, Secretary**

######## September 23, 2005

**[LEGAL NOTICE]{.underline}**

**[REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS]{.underline}**

The New Mexico Department of Health (DOH), Behavioral Health Services
Division (BHSD or Division) is soliciting sealed proposals from
qualified private and public entities to provide Alcohol, Tobacco and
other Drug Prevention Services in New Mexico beginning December 1, 2005.
The total amount available for contracting is approximately \$1,900,000.
All contracts awarded shall be subject to the DOH General Provisions for
Agency Contracts.

**If you are an individual with a disability and require assistance or
auxiliary aid, e.g., audio tapes, Braille, sign language interpreter, to
participate in any aspect of this RFP process, please contact Gary O.
Chavez at the New Mexico Department of Health/Behavioral Health Services
Division, 1190 St. Francis Drive, Room N3200, Santa Fe, New Mexico,
87502, telephone (505) 827-0153, fax (505) 827-0097. Telecommunication
Device for the Deaf (TDD) or Telecommunication Type (TTY) users may
access this telephone number through the New Mexico Relay Network
1-800-659-8331, voice and hearing operator at 1-800-659-1779. The RFP is
posted on the DOH web page at [www.health.state.nm.us.]{.underline}**

**Copies of the Request for Proposals will be provided in alternative
forms, e.g., audio tape, if requested by September 30, 2005.**

**Offerors interested in submitting a proposal should contact Gary O.
Chavez, (505)-827-0578. A proposal packet can also be obtained by
writing to the Behavioral Health Services Division, P. O. Box 26110,
Harold Runnels Building, 1190 St. Francis Drive, Santa Fe, New Mexico
87502-6110. The deadline for submission of completed proposals for
review at the above address is close of business on October 21, 2005.**

**The Procurement Code, Sections 13-1-28 through 13-1-199, NMSA 1978,
imposes civil and criminal penalties for its violation. In addition, New
Mexico criminal statutes impose felony penalties for bribes, gratuities
and kickbacks.**

## TABLE OF CONTENTS

**PAGE**

**LEGAL NOTICE** Cover

**PART I. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS**

A. Intent to Submit a Proposal 1

B. Proposal Submission 1

C. Notification of Outcome 2

D. Confidentiality of Proposals 2

E. Funding Availability 2

F. Term of Contract 2

G. Questions 3

> H. Penalties 3
>
> I. Clarification and Disclosure 3

**PART II. REQUIREMENTS**

A. Mission Statement 4

B. Substance Abuse Prevention Definition 4

C. Funding Availability 4

> D. Priorities for Services 4

**PART III. PROPOSAL NARRATIVE FORMAT AND WEIGHTED EVALUATION FACTORS**

A.
Assessment...............................................................................16

B.
Capacity....................................................................................17

C. Community Wide Planning 18

D. Approach, Program Description, and
Methodology...........................\...19

E. Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Methods 21

F. Organizational/Agency Capability 22

G. Budget Summary 23

**Appendix A:** Intent to Submit a Proposal Form

**Appendix B:** Cover Sheet 1 and Cover Sheet 2

**Appendix C:** Budget Forms and Instructions

**Appendix D:** Statement of Assurances

**Appendix E:** Problem Focused Planning Logic Model Worksheet and
Instructions

**Appendix F:** Draft General Provisions and Contract Language

**Appendix G:** Comprehensive Behavioral Health Services Standards

**Appendix H:** Certification Re: Environmental Tobacco Smoke
(Pro-Children Act of 1994)

**Appendix I:** Compendium: Evidence-Based Prevention Practices

**Appendix J:** Compendium: Environmental Approaches to Substance Abuse
Prevention

**Appendix K:** New Mexico State Epi Profile

**Appendix L:** New Mexico State Strategic Plan

**Appendix M:** Proposal Checklist and Contents

**I. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS**

The Behavioral Health Services Division (BHSD) of the Department of
Health is offering contracts for substance abuse ---alcohol, tobacco and
other drug abuse (ATODA)--- prevention services for State Fiscal Year
*06 (December 1, 2005 - June 30, 2006*). The BHSD has the discretion
under the New Mexico Procurement Code to award contracts that are more
than one year in length.

The schedule for the RFP process is as follows:

**[Action]{.underline} [Date]{.underline}**

1*.* Advertisement/Legal Notice September 18, 2005

2\. RFP Issued September 23, 2005

3\. Pre-Proposal Conference September 30, 2005

[Pre-Proposal Conference Location:]{.underline}

Presbyterian Hospital Professional Building

Savage Auditorium

201 Cedar S.E., Albuquerque, New Mexico

Friday, September 30, 2005 \-- Time: 10:00 am

4\. Deadline to Submit Additional Questions October 4, 2005

5\. Intent to Submit a Proposal September 28, 2005

6\. Response to Written Questions October 7, 2005

7\. Submission of Proposal October 21, 2005

8\. Proposal Review October 24 -- October 28

9\. Contract Finalizations November 14-18, 2005

10\. Contract Preparation November 14-22, 2005

11\. Notification of Outcome December 30, 2005

**A. [INTENT TO SUBMIT A PROPOSAL]{.underline}**

**Offerors are requested to return by mail, hand-delivery or Fax the
\"Intent to Submit a Proposal\" form (see Appendix A).** **Intent to
Submit a Proposal may be faxed to: Behavioral Health Services Division,
NM Department of Health (505) 827-0097, attention Gary Chavez.** The
form shall be signed by an authorized representative of the offeror\'s
organization, dated and returned by close of business (5:00 pm) on or
before September 28, 2005.

**B. [SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL]{.underline}**

Each offeror shall submit a separate bound original proposal with tabs,
along with two bound complete copies of the proposal with tabs and
attachments, plus an electronic copy with out attachments submitted on
data storage device or by e-mail are to be mailed or hand-delivered or
sent by e-mail to:

Behavioral Health Services Division, Department of Health Attention:
Gary O. Chavez

> Harold Runnels Building
>
> 1190 St. Francis Drive, Suite N3250, Rm N3251
>
> P.O. Box 26110
>
> Santa Fe, NM 87502-6110

E-mail: garyo.chavez@state.nm.us

The original proposal must contain original signatures and be marked
\"Original.\" Each proposal must be typewritten in a times new roman
font with no less than 11 point and on 8.5 x 11 white paper,
single-spaced and numbered sequentially from beginning to end. **The
deadline for submission of completed proposals is close of business
(5:00 pm) on Friday, October 21, 2005.** Proposals not received at the
above-specified address by mail, messenger delivery services, or hand
delivery on or before the specified deadline will not be considered for
review.

C.  **[NOTIFICATION OF OUTCOME]{.underline}**

The BHSD will notify each offeror of the outcome of the award process in
writing by December 30, 2005, or upon completion of the procurement
process, whichever is sooner. This date may change due to the review and
approval process within the Department of Health.

**D. [CONFIDENTIALITY OF PROPOSALS]{.underline}**

Pursuant to Section 13-1-116, NMSA 1978 of the Procurement Code, the
contents of any proposal are considered confidential and shall not be
disclosed to competing offerors during the negotiation process.

**E. [FUNDING AVAILABILITY]{.underline}**

Contract awards are contingent upon funds appropriated by federal and
state funding agencies. BHSD reserves the right to adjust any proposed
allocations to offerors based on the review of all the competitive
proposals and any federal mandates included in the appropriations. Total
funding available under this RFP is approximately \$1,900,000. Funds are
targeted for community-level implementation of the five-step Strategic
Prevention Framework, which in New Mexico means an alcohol, tobacco and
other drug abuse (ATODA) assessment regarding alcohol-related car
crashes among 15 to 24 year olds; building capacity to address this
need; community prevention planning including planning for a
comprehensive range of prevention programs, policies, and practices
designed to impact the intervening variables, causal factors, and risk
and protective factors that affect usage patterns clearly related to the
problem behavior; implementation of evidence based prevention programs,
policies and practices in accordance with the Strategic Prevention
Framework State Incentive Grant requirements and that have, as a whole,
the potential of community wide impact; and evaluation of this
comprehensive range of programs, policies, and practices. Funding
amounts for contract awards will vary in range depending on the quality
of the proposal and projected size of the population to be addressed by
the initiative. Smaller capacity-building grant awards will be offered
to communities who exhibit high need but low capacity to implement a
rigorous community wide problem focused strategic plan.

This funding may not be used for substance abuse treatment or DWI law
enforcement activities, although integrated community planning efforts
that are inclusive of these activities as part of a continuum with
prevention are encouraged, so as to better leverage these related
activities and support more significant outcomes.

**F. [TERM OF CONTRACT]{.underline}**

The BHSD has the discretion under the New Mexico Procurement Code to
award contracts that are more or less than one year in length. Funds
appropriated by the BHSD for contracting are available for only one
State Fiscal Year (December 1 - June 30). Therefore, offerors awarded
contracts in excess of one year will be allocated funding not to exceed
one fiscal year. At the end of the state fiscal year, a contract
amendment may be negotiated to reflect funding of services for the next
year of the contract.

**G. [QUESTIONS]{.underline}**

All questions must be submitted in writing to Don Maestas, Chief,
Prevention Services Bureau, BHSD, 1190 St. Francis Drive, Room N3200,
Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Written questions will be accepted through close of
business on October 4, 2005. Responses will be mailed on October 7, 2005
to all RFP recipients who submit an "Intent to Submit a Proposal" form
(Appendix A) on or before September 28, 2005*.*

#######  {#section .unnumbered}

####### H. [Penalties]{.underline}  {#h.-penalties .unnumbered}

The Procurement Code, Sections 13-1-23 through 13-1-199, NMSA 1978,
imposes civil and criminal penalties for its violation. In addition, the
New Mexico criminal statutes impose felony penalties for illegal bribes,
gratuities and kickbacks.

**I.** **[Clarification and Disclosure]{.underline}**

Offerors submitting proposals may be afforded an opportunity for
discussion and revision of proposals. Revisions may be permitted after
submission of proposals and prior to award for the purpose of obtaining
best and final offers.

###### II. REQUIREMENTS

**A. [SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION MISSION STATEMENT]{.underline}**

The Behavioral Health Services Division (BHSD) is dedicated to providing
a comprehensive system of prevention services that are community driven,
strategically focused, research based and culturally relevant to
individuals, families and communities in New Mexico. These services are
designed to contribute to the health, safety and economic well being of
people in New Mexico by reducing the incidence of alcohol, tobacco and
other drug abuse and other related problems.

**B. [SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION DEFINITION]{.underline}**

Alcohol, tobacco and other drug abuse prevention is an active process
that promotes the personal, physical and social well-being of
individuals and families not in need of treatment and communities to
reinforce positive behaviors and healthy lifestyles and reduce the
incidence and prevalence of alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use.

**C. [FUNDING AVAILABILITY]{.underline}**

Approximately \$1,900,000 will be competitively awarded to eligible
entities. This funding is available through the State's Strategic
Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant. This funding was awarded to
the State of New Mexico through a competitive process by the Department
of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration's Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (DHHS, SAMHSA,
CSAP).

**D. [PRIORITIES FOR SERVICES]{.underline}**

The State's selected priority of alcohol-related motor vehicle deaths,
and effective community based responses to assessing need, building
capacity, planning, implementing and evaluating prevention efforts to
reduce alcohol-related injury and death among youth and young adults
aged 15 to 24 will be required as a focus for these resources. Community
initiatives will be required to address this problem with evidence based
programs, policies, and practices.

Within New Mexico's communities, applications to address the State's
priority from counties with high need, alcohol-related motor vehicle
crash deaths will be given preference in the proposal scoring process.

-   Applicants from the top one third of counties with high death rates
    or the top one third of counties with the highest number of deaths,
    based on data collected in the New Mexico State Epi Profile, will be
    given preference through assignment of additional points to the
    proposal score.

-   In addition, consequences described in the Profile indicate that
    Native American males and Hispanic males aged 15 to 24, suffer
    inordinately from the consequences of acute alcohol use patterns,
    particularly alcohol-related motor vehicle injury and death.
    Proposals representing broad community initiatives targeting these
    particular population groups will be assigned additional points in a
    similar manner.

Other priorities to be scored in the review process include:

-   a proposed community-wide impact on the selected indicator(s);

-   a broad range of collaborators representing the major segments of
    the community who may reasonably impact the problem when working
    together;

-   a flexible, problem-focused planning model that can successfully
    identify and address intervening variables and causal factors;

-   a preliminary plan to address multiple intervening variables and
    causal factors across several domains, including a substantial
    emphasis on environmental strategies;

-   sufficient capacity identified in the proposal to implement
    rigorous, evidence based initiatives;

-   a plan to leverage other initiatives to maximize outcomes across the
    community;

-   a proposed work-plan that identifies several intermediate outcomes
    that may reasonably impact the problem and related indicators;

-   a sound plan to identify and measure baseline and periodic
    indicators that may impact the problem;

-   demonstration of "readiness to act" within the context of broad,
    community-wide problems that must be addressed comprehensively in
    order to expect measurable change; and

-   Finally, a per capita evidence-based prevention "funding index,"
    that includes state directed substance abuse prevention funding from
    the SSA, from the state's Underage Drinking Program authority, from
    DWI prevention programs funded by the state, and from Drug Free
    Communities funds will be developed and applied to the counties.
    Those counties with inordinately low per capita expenditures for
    prevention will have points added to their score.

Communities with high need but low capacity demonstrated in their
proposals will be integrated into this initiative through a sustained
capacity-building program. These communities will receive smaller SPF
capacity-building grants to participate in a range of training,
technical assistance, and coalition-building programs. In the second
funding year some of these communities will be sufficiently prepared to
successfully receive SPF implementation funding.

These services are intended to further the directions of the BHSD in
terms of enhancing the quality of services and increasing the likelihood
of substantial outcomes and impact. To that end, BHSD puts forth the
following principles and expectations. Additional information on many of
the prevention terms and frameworks that follow can be obtained from the
Resource Center of the Behavioral Health Services Division, Department
of Health, (505) 827-2625, (505) 827-2601. Many of these terms and
frameworks, and lists of useful reference materials and resources, are
also included in the document, *Evidence-based Prevention Practices*
(2003), prepared by the BHSD (see Appendix I).

The services requested through this RFP are directly related to the New
Mexico Department of Health Strategic Plan (July 2007), specifically
addressing the following program area, goal and objective:

> Goal 3: Improve Behavioral Health
>
> Objective 3.3: Improve access, quality and value of mental health and
> substance abuse services.

All OFFERORS are strongly encouraged to, in collaboration with Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and New Mexico Welfare to Work
Contractors, to train and employ TANF recipients who are seeking
employment opportunities. The OFFEROR is also strongly encouraged to
train and employ populations enrolled in supported employment programs.
The DEPARTMENT will receive quarterly reports documenting efforts to
comply with this provision.

**Successful applicants will implement the Strategic Prevention
Framework. There are both state and local requirements within the
Framework, as follows:**

Moving SAMHSA's Strategic Prevention Framework from vision to practice
is a strategic process that State and community stakeholders must
undertake in partnership. Through the SPF SIG, States will provide the
requisite leadership, technical support and monitoring to ensure that
identified communities are successful in implementing the five steps of
the framework listed below. These steps are required, and all targeted
communities must implement all five steps. States and communities are
encouraged to build on existing infrastructure/activity, where
appropriate. States are expected to use the SPF framework to guide all
prevention activity through-out the State, whether funded though the SPF
SIG grant or through other sources.

1)  **[Profile population needs, resources, and readiness to address the
    problems and]{.underline}**

**[gaps in service delivery]{.underline}**

> [State Role]{.underline}: SPF SIG state-level grantees must conduct a
> statewide needs assessment, through collection and analysis of
> epidemiological data, that includes the following:

-   assessment of the magnitude of substance abuse and related mental
    health disorders in the State,

-   assessment of risk and protective factors associated with substance
    abuse and related mental health disorders in the state,

-   assessment of community assets and resources,

-   identification of gaps in services and capacity,

-   assessment of readiness to act,

-   identification of priorities based on the epidemiological analyses,
    including the identification of target communities to implement the
    Strategic Prevention Framework, and

-   specification of baseline data against which progress and outcomes
    of the Strategic Prevention Framework can be measured.

> [In order to complete the statewide assessment, SPF SIG state-level
> grantees are **required** to form and manage a State Epidemiological
> Workgroup]{.underline}. SAMHSA expects that these data collection
> efforts will support on-going monitoring and evaluation throughout the
> five-year project period, as described in Step 5, below.
>
> [Community Role]{.underline}: Communities must accurately assess their
> substance abuse-related problems using epidemiological data provided
> by the State as well as other local data. The epidemiological data
> must identify the magnitude of the problem to be addressed, where the
> problem is greatest, and risk and protective factors associated with
> the problem. Communities must also assess community assets and
> resources, gaps in services and capacity and readiness to act.

2)  **[Mobilize and/or build capacity to address needs]{.underline}**

> [State Role]{.underline}: The SPF SIG state-level grantees must engage
> stakeholders across the State, as a complement to parallel engagement
> activities occurring within the target communities that are selected
> for implementation activities.
>
> [Community Role]{.underline}: Engagement of key stakeholders at the
> State and community levels is critical to plan and implement
> successful prevention activities that will be sustained over time. Key
> tasks may include, but are not limited to, convening leaders and
> stakeholders; building coalitions; training community stakeholders,
> coalitions, and service providers; organizing agency networks;
> leveraging resources; and engaging stakeholders to help sustain the
> activities.

3)  **[Develop a Comprehensive Strategic Plan]{.underline}**

> [State Role]{.underline}: Using data from the statewide needs
> assessment, SPF SIG state-level grantees must develop a State
> strategic plan that:

-   identifies the priorities that will be targeted in the State's
    Strategic Prevention Framework,

-   articulates a vision for prevention activities to address critical
    needs,

-   describes necessary infrastructure development and/or evidence-based
    policies, programs and practices (or a process for selection) to be
    implemented within the broader service system and specifies
    timelines for implementation,

-   identifies/coordinates/allocates resources and sources of funding
    for the plan,

-   identifies appropriate funding mechanism(s) to allocate resources to
    targeted communities,

-   identifies any training required,

-   includes key policies and relationships among stakeholders,

-   involves public and private service systems in creating a seamless
    continuum of planning and services,

-   includes plans for sustaining the infrastructure and services that
    are implemented,

-   identifies key milestones and outcomes against which to gauge
    performance, thereby allowing for system improvement and
    accountability of all parties involved, and

-   includes plans for making adjustments, based on on-going needs
    assessment activities.

[Community Role]{.underline}: Communities must develop a strategic plan
that articulates not only a vision for the prevention activities, but
also strategies for organizing and implementing prevention efforts. The
strategic plan must be based on documented needs, build on identified
resources/strengths, set measurable objectives and include the
performance measures and baseline data against which progress will be
monitored. Plans must be adjusted as the result of ongoing needs
assessment and monitoring activities. The issue of sustainability should
be a constant throughout each step of planning and implementation and
should lead to the creation of a long-term strategy to sustain policies,
programs and practices. The strategic plans must be data-driven and
focused on addressing the most critical needs in the State.

4)  **[Implement evidence-based prevention programs and infrastructure
    development]{.underline}**

**[activities]{.underline}**

> [State Role]{.underline}: Once the State's Strategic Plan is approved
> by the SAMHSA/CSAP Government Project Officer, implementation may
> begin. SPF SIG state-level grantees must provide the infrastructure
> and other necessary support to local stakeholders in selecting and
> implementing policies, programs, and practices proven to be effective
> in research settings and communities. States must ensure that
> community implementers make culturally competent adaptations without
> sacrificing the core elements of the program.
>
> [Community Role]{.underline}: Similarly, local stakeholders will use
> the findings of their needs assessments to guide selection and
> implementation of policies, programs and practices proven to be
> effective in research settings and communities. Community implementers
> must ensure that culturally competent adaptations are made without
> sacrificing the core elements of the program. SAMHSA especially
> encourages the selection and adaptation of programs contained in the
> National Registry of Effective Programs and Practices (NREPP).

5)  **[Monitor process, evaluate effectiveness, sustain effective
    programs/activities,]{.underline}**

**[and improve or replace those that fail]{.underline}**

> [State Role]{.underline}: SPF SIG state-level grantees are accountable
> for the results of the SPF SIG grant projects. SPF SIG state-level
> grantees are, therefore, expected to play a critical role in providing
> on-going monitoring and evaluation of all SPF SIG activities, as well
> as training and technical assistance regarding evaluation and
> performance measurement to local communities. Through these efforts,
> the SPF SIG state-level grantees will assess program effectiveness,
> ensure service delivery quality, identify successes, encourage needed
> improvement, and promote sustainability of effective policies,
> programs, and practices. The SPF SIG state-level grantees will be
> expected to provide performance data to SAMHSA on a regular basis. SPF
> SIG state-level grantees must be prepared to adjust their
> implementation plans based on the results of monitoring/evaluation
> activities.
>
> [Community Role]{.underline}: Ongoing monitoring and evaluation are
> essential to determine if the outcomes desired are achieved and to
> assess program effectiveness and service delivery quality. Communities
> must provide performance data to the State on a regular basis, so that
> the State can monitor, evaluate, sustain and improve the Strategic
> Prevention Framework activities.

[Inclusion of Underage Drinking:]{.underline} Recent studies---including
a major undertaking by the National Academy of Science---indicates a
severe and persistent problem with the use of alcohol by children and
youth under the age of 21. The Department of Health and Human Services,
through SAMHSA/CSAP, is committed to bringing down the rates of underage
drinking and is working toward a target of \$30 million in FY 2004
funding for communities to address this problem. The SPF SIG grant
offers an excellent vehicle for supporting the goals of this underage
drinking initiative. State applicants must therefore include the
prevention of underage alcohol consumption as part of their SPF SIG
project and provide a comprehensive strategy that addresses this
problem, along with other SPF SIG priorities. This will mean addressing
underage drinking and other substance abuse. Underage drinking must be
included in all five steps of the Strategic Prevention Framework
implemented by each SPF SIG grantee.

**Progress to Date**

As is clear from the above expectations of states and of communities,
there are multiple levels of accountability and performance benchmarks.
As for the state-level requirements, New Mexico has formed and directed
its Epi Workgroup, which has been operating since last winter. Its first
New Mexico State Epidemiological Profile is completed and included as an
appendix with this RFP. This assessment process concluded with a
prioritization of indicators detailed in the Profile. The selected
priority is Alcohol-related Motor Vehicle Crash Death. A second
priority, Alcohol-related Chronic Disease Death, is expected to be
addressed through other prevention funding mechanisms. A strategic plan
(appendix L) to strategically allocate funding and resources to support
capacity building was prepared by the State and submitted to CSAP. This
plan was recently approved, which now provides the opportunity to
solicit proposals for this funding.

**State Priority**

Four substance abuse outcome indicators are described in detail in the
State's Epi Profile (appendix K). For the New Mexico Strategic
Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant, twenty-eight individuals
with strong professional substance abuse backgrounds participated in the
State's prioritization process. The four indicators are:

-   Alcohol-Related Chronic Disease Death

-   Alcohol-Related Injury Death

-   Drug-Related Death

-   Smoking-Related Death

A consensus in this prioritization process developed in the numeric
scores that identified two indicators as possible priorities for the SPF
SIG, Alcohol-Related Chronic Disease Death and Alcohol-Related Injury
Death.

The key criteria items with data provided from the State Epi Profile and
used during the prioritization process include:

-   Severity -- state ranking within nation

-   Severity -- rate per 100,000

-   Burden -- number of persons/size of problem

-   Trend Characteristics -- increasing, decreasing, stable, and
    compared to national trend

The five-year span of the project limits the potential impact on chronic
disease death rates and the life-long consumption patterns that cause
New Mexico's high rates of death. On the other hand, alcohol-related
injury death rates, and the related consumption patterns, especially
binge drinking, that contribute to these rates, are more readily
impacted in a shorter time frame. Consequently, the State will focus on
Alcohol-Related Injury and Death, which in New Mexico is primarily the
result of DWI crashes. New Mexico already has a broad policy focus on
DWI, and this is a very opportune moment to help focus on that indicator
with effective and comprehensive community-wide planning to prevent DWI.
In addition, there has substantial encouragement from CSAP to focus on
underage drinking, which is a major contributor to binge drinking and
DWI problems in the state.

New Mexico will focus its SPF SIG on Alcohol-Related Injury and Death,
and further prioritize this consequence as DWI, which is by far the
leading contributor to this indicator in New Mexico. An examination of
the data contained in the State's Epi Profile shows that Motor Vehicle
death rates are particularly high among those aged 15 to 24, with more
than a quarter of all of these deaths striking this age category in
every ethnic group. Therefore the primary focus of these DWI prevention
efforts will be on individuals in the 15 to 24 year old age group, which
suffers an inordinate burden due to the *risky drinking patterns of
underage youth and young adults*.

Each sub-recipient community will study and assess the usage patterns
related to alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes among 15 to 24 year
olds in their community as part of the competitive proposal process.
This will be followed by a much more extensive assessment process that
will occur during the early award period, where numerous local factors
will be studied and assessed related to these problem usage behaviors
and their consequences.

**The Strategic Prevention Framework and Evidence-based Prevention
Programs, Policies, and Practices focused on changing Community
Indicators**

BHSD is focusing its purchase of services toward the implementation of
the Strategic Prevention Framework, which includes the five-step process
outlined by the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (SAMHSA). The
Strategic Prevention Framework includes intensive assessment of the
problem at the local level, building capacity, planning, implementing
evidence based programs, policies, and practices that impact the
prioritized community indicator, and evaluation of the prevention
activities.

**Eligible offerors** are community-based organization's, faith based
organizations, schools or universities, and other public entities
(including tribal entities, schools, local government, etc.), and
private non-profit organizations and coalitions/consortia thereof.

Applicants are expected to bring together community stakeholder groups
and practice a flexible and responsive planning and prioritization
process that responds to changing data and new information to impact
problem behaviors in the community. New and promising technologies such
as GIS mapping of problems and indicators related to the priority focus
of this funding are encouraged as methodologies to support this
responsive, data-driven planning function.

This funding is intended to purchase the implementation of an array of
evidence-based programs, policies, and practices, focused on one problem
indicator but on numerous intervening variables, causal factors, and
risk and protective factors. This array of proposed offerings must
demonstrate sufficient potential to produce successful outcomes and
change community indicators, such as programs, policies and practices
aimed at preventing underage drinking that might also be likely to
reduce drinking and driving behaviors. The successful offeror will
direct activities towards the community at large as well as to targeted
sub groups who contribute to the risk of drinking and driving

Emphasis should be given to serving high-risk communities or areas
within larger communities, which may include risks such as:

-   High Alcohol outlet density;

-   High community tolerance;

-   High death rates;

-   High incidence of underage drinking and driving patterns;

-   High incidence of traffic crashes or fatalities that are
    alcohol-related; and

-   High availability of and ease of access to alcohol or substances.

Successful offerors are expected to address and impact a community wide
problem indicator to the extent possible. Your assessment, capacity,
planning, implementation and evaluation approaches should therefore have
a community wide focus to the problem prioritized in this solicitation.

The service population therefore will be "universal" targeting the
population at large in high-risk communities. The proposed "array" of
programs, policies, and practices should be intensive and long-term in
nature and utilize evidence-based environmental prevention strategies
and a comprehensive range of logic-driven strategies that are based on
best practices and promising approaches.

Offerors are required to coalesce as many partners as possible as well
as adding under-aged drinking and DWI programming to current
evidence-based programming. This can be done by working with other
providers to maximize appropriate services for your target population.

The amount of each award will depend upon:

-   The quality of proposal;

-   The projected size of the population to be addressed by the
    initiative; and

-   The extent to which the offeror has coordinated and leveraged other
    local prevention initiatives that may contribute to the successful
    effort described in this proposal.

Proposals must use a new planning model advanced by CSAP as part of this
initiative that New Mexico refers to as Problem Focused Planning Logic
Model Worksheet (appendix E). This model requires a focus on the
prioritized indicator, usage patterns related to the indicator that
contribute to the prioritized problem behavior, and then an
identification of a broad range of behaviors, circumstances, times and
locations, norms, policies, risk and protective factors, etc., that
collectively are known as intervening variables and causal factors.

-   Community norms,

-   Community bonding, and

-   Community policies.

Short-term outcomes (the immediate results of the proposed activities)
must be demonstrated in terms of changes in these causal factors,
intervening variables, and risk and protective factors. These short-term
outcomes should be addressed in your program description in terms of the
immediate changes you expect to see as a result of your program
activities.

Environmental strategies must be the primary focus of the proposed
services, and must specifically be addressed in the weighted evaluation
factors of the proposal. Environmental strategies should focus on
changing norms, substance use policies, or to strengthen enforcement of
existing regulations. See Appendix J: *Environmental Approaches to
Substance Abuse Prevention* for additional information. Examples of
environmental strategies include:

-   Writing zoning ordinances specifically to address such concerns as
    public decorum, litter, noise, traffic, loitering, harassment,
    underage access to alcohol, alcohol and drug-related crime and
    violence, and public intoxication;

-   Establish and modify laws and policies that govern alcohol and
    tobacco distribution methods, alcohol and tobacco taxes, happy-hour
    policies, and licensing of alcohol and tobacco outlets;

-   Enforce and modify laws and policies by working closely with local
    law enforcement, county commissions, tribal councils, city councils,
    public school administrators, and college and university
    administrators;

-   Enact public ordinances and regulations for special events, such as
    sporting events, and for public locations, such as city parks and
    other city-owned facilities;

-   Take part in local planning and zoning efforts to manage the
    distribution of alcohol retail outlets, including the use of
    conditional use permits, which require individual review of each
    application for an alcohol sales permit; and

-   Alcohol merchant education.

Strong evaluation components are mandatory, and participation in a
state-level evaluation initiative is required for recipients. Offerors
are encouraged to enlist the assistance of professional evaluators to
design and implement evaluation strategies. A projected four meetings of
local project evaluators will be held during the year. The state-level
evaluation coordinator and local evaluators will, as a group, review,
and revise as necessary, data collection, reporting, and other
evaluation standards and procedures.

Local evaluators will also be expected to participate with local
community initiatives in significant data-driven planning during the
assessment, capacity, and planning period of New Mexico's SPF SIG
initiative, and to be an active participant in the design of on-going
community planning and decision-making processes.

Many evidence-based programs that may be chosen for replication or
adaptation already have strong evaluation components, and applicants are
encouraged to obtain detailed information about those evaluation
strategies as part of the selection of programming. Include as much
information as possible about these already developed evaluation
strategies in the evaluation plan submitted with this proposal. Local
evaluation initiatives are in addition to this participation in the
statewide evaluation. The local evaluation should also address the
design to monitor progress with environmental strategies and outcomes
related to these strategies.

The proposed initiative should replicate or adapt existing,
evidence-based programs that have demonstrated significant outcome
results, or be based on current research and best practices, and should
propose a number of likely evidence-based practices, strategies and
policies to impact multiple intervening variables, causal factors, and
risk and protective factors. Information on the program(s), practices
and strategies proposed should be included with the proposal to the
extent possible. To review possible programs, practices and strategies,
there are many resources available. A compendium of information about
evidence-based programs, principles, and prevention research findings,
including descriptions of specific programs, **[*Evidence-based
Prevention Practices* (2003),]{.underline}** has been prepared by the
Behavioral Health Services Division and is attached to this RFP (see
Appendix I). It is also advisable to review the programs in
Science-Based Prevention Programs and Principles, 2002: Effective
Substance Abuse Prevention and Mental Health Programs for Every
Community (Department of Health and Human Services/Substance Abuse and
Mental Health Services Administration Publication No. SMA03-3764),
available for viewing or downloading at

**http://modelprograms.samhsa.gov**

Additional excellent resources on specific programs, policies, and
practices are available from several websites including:

-   the Southwest Center for the Application of Prevention Technology,
    **http://www.captus.gov**,

-   the Western Center for the Application of Prevention Technology
    (Western CAPT), **http://www.captus.gov**, and

-   Blueprints for Violence Prevention Model Programs,

> **http://www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints/model/overview.html.**

Additional links are available from the above websites.

Successful applicants will follow the CSAP Strategic Prevention
Framework. This framework includes the following steps: assessment,
capacity, planning, implementation, and evaluation. New Mexico's
framework will be implemented as follows: A 90- to 120-day readiness
phase will begin upon the initiation of the contract period. During this
period, one meeting per month (for a total of three) will be held that
addresses, in order, assessment, capacity, and planning. Successful
offerors will be expected to develop products during each month and
present them at these day-long meetings. During this period, no
full-scale initiatives will be implemented. Instead, the activity during
this time will be around developing assessment studies, creating
expanded capacity for local action, and developing a detailed strategic
plan. It is during this period that local evaluators will be expected to
play a larger than normal role in shaping the data-driven decision
processes underlying this initiative. In addition, during the assessment
phase, evaluators will be expected to devote substantial efforts to
supporting new and innovative approaches to identifying, obtaining,
developing, and utilizing local primary data related to intervening
variables, causal factors, and risk and protective factors that can
ultimately be targeted by intervention strategies.

During this readiness phase, numerous training opportunities will be
provided by BHSD's training contractor. Successful applicants will be
expected to participate in as many of these as possible, and to send
appropriate members of their coalitions, task forces, and implementation
teams. It is important to understand that during this 90 to 120 day
readiness phase, the emphasis will be on defining and completing
assessment, capacity, and planning tasks, not on the implementation of
your initiative. Therefore participation in these training programs and
any needed technical assistance efforts will be a primary emphasis of
your initiative during this period. All of these should be accounted for
in your prevention plan, and in your projected budget and resource
allocations for this initial period of the project.

At the end of this readiness phase, projects will submit their plans to
the Project Director, Don Maestas of the Prevention Services Bureau, for
review. Once a plan is approved, the implementation phase of the grant
period will begin. Those plans not approved in the initial review must
be resubmitted after a month-long revision process for approval before
major activities may begin.

Upon approval of the action plan, local initiatives will enter the
implementation phase for the remainder of the contract period, and
continue in successive years upon contract renewal. More routine
evaluation activities will be conducted throughout the implementation
phase, with less emphasis upon evaluators' roles as supporters of local
planning, instead focusing on data collection and analysis.

During the implementation phase, program directors and/or appropriate
prevention staff will be required to participate in quarterly meetings
of the Sub-recipient Council, which is made up of all recipients of BHSD
prevention funds. These daylong meetings will be held in Albuquerque.
The purpose of the meetings is to address implementation issues as a
group, while functioning as much as possible as a learning community for
the participants. The meetings are scheduled from 10:00 to 3:00,
allowing most participants to travel to and from the meeting in one day.
In addition, implementation team planners and decision members funded by
New Mexico's SPF SIG will meet during the term of the contract, to focus
on issues related to the implementation of the Strategic Prevention
Framework. In addition to these program meetings, during the
implementation period, local project evaluators must attend an estimated
four meetings with the statewide Evaluation Team during each fiscal
year. Expenses for both series of meetings should be included in
proposed budgets.

#####  

##### III. PROPOSAL NARRATIVE FORMAT AND

**WEIGHTED EVALUATION FACTORS**

All responsive proposals received by BHSD will be evaluated according to
an established set of weighted evaluation factors. All proposals must be
organized according to the order of the specific factors described
below. Failure to follow this format or furnish information as requested
will result in rejection or decreased competitiveness of the proposal.

Each offeror shall submit a single proposal containing information
identified in this document for all support being requested under this
Request for Proposals (RFP).

Each offeror shall submit a separate bound original proposal with tabs,
along with two bound complete copies of the proposal with tabs and
attachments. Each proposal must be typewritten in times new roman with
no less than 11 point font and on 8.5 x 11 white paper, single-spaced
and numbered sequentially from beginning to end.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **ALL PROPOSALS SHALL BE DIVIDED INTO THREE (3) SECTIONS:**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Clear and concise presentation of information is essential for maximum
points.

**Section I: FORMS AND ASSURANCES (REQUIRED ---WEIGHT: NO POINTS)**

**Cover Sheet 1 (see Appendix B)**

**Cover Sheet 2 (see Appendix B)**

**Statement of Assurances (see Appendix D)**

**Certification Regarding Environmental Tobacco Smoke (see Appendix H)**

**Proposal Checklist and Contents (see Appendix M)**

**Section II: WEIGHTED EVALUATION FACTORS (TOTAL WEIGHT: 100 POINTS)**

A.  **Assessment (15)**

B.  **Capacity (20)**

C.  **Community Wide Planning (15)**

D.  **Approach, Program Description and Methodology (15)**

E.  **Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Methods (15)**

F.  **Organizational/Agency Capability (15)**

G.  **Budget Summary (5)**

**Section III: ATTACHMENTS, including but not limited to these required
documents:**

-   **Memorandums of Agreement/Understanding from collaborative
    partners**

-   **Additional outcome evaluation instruments**

-   **New Offeror: Sample evaluation report with outcome data**

-   **Letters of Reference**

-   **Fiscal Audit**

A.  **[ASSESSMENT (Weight: 15)]{.underline}**

i\. Statement of Need

> Define and describe the community to be served by your initiative
> (e.g. a defined geographic area such as a neighborhood, municipality,
> county or other area, or a "community of interest" such as
> "Hispanic/Latino community"). Provide a needs assessment of the
> community/population that you have identified and prioritized,
> including, at a minimum, substance use/abuse prevalence data and
> identification of major risk and protective factors in the community.
> The needs assessment must have been conducted within the last two
> years. Describe the community representation involved in prioritizing
> your needs. Describe how the needs assessment captures culturally
> specific diversity and demographic characteristics. Are there gaps in
> the needs assessment data available to you, and if so, how can these
> gaps be met in the future?

ii\. Problem Focused Assessment

> The problem focus of this solicitation is Alcohol-related crash deaths
> among 15 to 24 year olds.
>
> a\. Provide here data supplied in the NM State Epi Profile (appendix
> K) that relate to your county.
>
> b\. Provide any local data available that can describe that problem
> more thoroughly for the community represented in your proposal, using
> any local alcohol crash and death available.
>
> c\. Provide here usage data supplied in the State Epi Profile that
> relate to your county.
>
> d\. Provide any local usage data that relates to the selected
> population for the community represented in your proposal. Where there
> are not sufficient data available that represent your community,
> provide a list of the usage indicators you believe to be relevant to
> the selected population and community, and that over time could in
> theory be collected to comprehensively describe all of the usage
> patterns that contribute to the problem in your community.
>
> e\. Describe comprehensively all of the "intervening variables,"
> "causal factors," and risk and protective factors that lead to the
> usage indicators described in d. above. There will likely be only a
> few data items actually available for this comprehensive list. Please
> nonetheless describe as a narrative all of the likely "intervening
> variables," "causal factors," and risk and protective factors that may
> contribute to the usage patterns described above and that may be
> relevant in your community. These may include commonly defined risk
> and protective factors, and, in this context, intervening variables
> and causal factors such as locations of crashes, times of high risk
> use, specific norms in a neighborhood, community, or campus, etc.

iii\. Resource Scan

Offerors are expected to conduct a local assessment of other alcohol,
tobacco and other drug abuse prevention activities. Please identify who
else is working in your community, the programs and services offered,
and the population(s) targeted.

> iv\. Service Population

Describe the population(s) you have selected to serve, including the
rationale for your selection. Use verifiable statistics, i.e. community
or school surveys, New Mexico Health Statistics Report, Office of the
Medical Examiners Annual Report, and data from local sources, etc. Data
must be particular to the service population you have selected. What
risk and protective factors within your service population are related
to these indicators? Describe the *service* population comprehensively
in terms of risk and protective factors.

> v\. Projected Outcomes
>
> What specific changes in risk and protective factors (immediate
> outcomes), intervening variables, and causal factors do you expect as
> a result of your proposed initiative? What long-term outcomes (changes
> in behavioral health indicators) do you anticipate will ultimately
> result from these immediate outcomes? How do these changes (results or
> outcomes) logically relate to the problem focused assessment described
> earlier in this section?

B.  **[CAPACITY (Weight: 20)]{.underline}**

This solicitation is designed to elicit broad-based initiatives that
integrate multiple partners into a single, problem-focused enterprise
that will support more effective community problem-solving capacity.
These networks will ideally integrate local government policy-makers,
existing prevention and intervention agencies, including Drug Free
Communities Programs, law enforcement officials, schools and colleges,
business organizations, community groups and advocates. The initiative
will not fund new or duplicative organizations where high capacity is
already present in a community, but will instead seek to build on
existing capacity where there is evidence of potential to implement the
required SPF steps in a desirable fashion. Drug Free Communities Program
grantees, already funded by SAMHSA, and other state-funded prevention
coalitions will be expected to participate in SPF SIG initiatives where
they are present in the applicant community, whether as the lead agency
or as a partner with the lead agency in implementing the community-level
SPF steps effectively.

This initiative requires a focused effort to reduce one problem
indicator, with an expectation of eventual community wide impact that is
measurable. Capacity should be conceptualized as those organizations and
individuals who have made a commitment to contribute in meaningful ways
to the proposed efforts. That can be accomplished in numerous ways. A
community coalition may include policy makers, who commit to strongly
support policy recommendations to a City or Tribal Council, or to
strengthen local ordinances. Law enforcement may commit to work with a
task force to respond effectively to "hot spots" identified by the task
force. A university-based initiative may enlist as collaborative members
the campus Student Services office to work with dormitory residence
counselors to identify underage parties and create intervention
strategies to prevent underage drinking and driving. Judges may be core
members of a coalition to develop strong local court-based measures to
combat repeat offenses. Much capacity must be created to be effective,
and plans to create appropriate capacity should be described here.
Numerous other strategies may be envisioned based on the capacity of the
participating members and allies. Those types of capacity should be
described in detail in this section. It is not necessary to define the
ultimate strategies to be implemented by these stakeholders here, only
to identify logical partners and resources to help create and implement
effective strategies that will impact the priority indicator and your
selected target population.

i.  Describe how you will build capacity in your community to implement
    the strategic prevention framework. Include how you intend to create
    enhanced capacity to plan effectively for your selected geographic
    area(s).

ii. What is the current capacity of your community to impact community
    level indicator changes? Include, where they exist, discussions of
    relevant capacity from local DWI Councils, Enforcing Underage
    Drinking Law initiatives funded by Children Youth and Families
    Department, Drug Free Communities programs, Mothers Against Drunk
    Drivers initiatives, high school or college-level prevention
    efforts, and other prevention programs and activities funded by the
    Department of Health.

iii. What key stakeholders have agreed to participate in your
     initiative? How will they participate in the initiative? How will
     they provide resources and effort to your initiative?

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
C.  **[COMMUNITY WIDE PLANNING (WEIGHT: 15)]{.underline}**

Offerors are required to demonstrate that their proposed initiative is
part of a community-wide planning effort. The State of New Mexico is not
requiring offerors to develop new planning groups where they already
exist; rather, offerors are asked to participate in existing community
planning efforts where they exist, and broaden these to include all
related program initiatives and stakeholders. Offerors must address the
following:

i\. Current Planning Efforts

> What community-wide planning efforts are currently in place or were
> initiated as part of this proposal? Is there a community-wide plan, or
> what efforts are being made to produce such a plan?

ii\. Participants and Stakeholders

> Who is involved in the planning? Are the following stakeholders
> participating?
>
> Local Collaboratives
>
> Community-based Human Service Agencies
>
> Community-based Mentoring Programs, such as Big Brothers Big Sisters
>
> Community-based Youth Programs, such as Boys and Girls Clubs
>
> Delinquency Prevention Coalitions
>
> DWI Prevention Programs, including DWI Planning Councils
>
> Health Planning Commissions or Councils (City or County)
>
> Law Enforcement Agencies
>
> Maternal and Child Health (MCH) Councils
>
> Public Health District and Local Offices, especially Health Educators
>
> Safe and Drug Free Schools Programs
>
> School-based Mentoring and Tutoring Programs
>
> School-based Health Programs
>
> Substance Abuse Coalitions
>
> Underage Drinking Enforcement or Prevention programs
>
> Note: Offerors who provide health-related services that impact Grant
> County will include a written statement and assurance that the offeror
> is familiar with the Grant County Community Health Council (GCCHC)
> health plan and will cooperate with the GCCHC.

iii\. Priorities

> What are the priority need areas identified to date in the planning
> related to having an impact on community indicators ie. Underage
> drinking, DWI, etc.

iv\. Current Resources

> Have current resources been mapped in terms of these priorities, i.e.,
> is it clear which agencies are providing prevention services? Describe
> what these priorities, resources and services are, and how your
> current and proposed programs and activities complement them in your
> community.

**D. [APPROACH, PROGRAM DESCRIPTION, AND METHODOLOGY (WEIGHT:
15)]{.underline}**

i.  Describe your proposed program in terms of goals,
    measurable/quantifiable objectives, and activities. For each
    objective, describe the anticipated changes for your service
    population in terms of changes in intervening variables, causal
    factors, and risk and protective factors in the community domain.
    Create one or more objective for each specific service population.

ii\. Provide a [narrative]{.underline} and [logic model]{.underline}
which describe the underlying "program theory" or "program logic" for
the initiative. Specifically, describe why you expect the changes within
the service population(s) in risk and protective factors, i.e., why they
will result from the proposed prevention services and activities.
Complete one or more logic model worksheets and refer to them in your
narrative to describe your program theory. See Appendix E for logic
model worksheet.

> iii\. Describe how your program will use multiple prevention
> strategies (CSAP Strategies), delivered through multiple domains,
> targeted at underage drinking and DWI. Describe how various universal
> prevention activities/strategies (Institute of Medicine
> Classification) were chosen and how they relate to one another to meet
> the needs of the target population(s).

iv\. Describe your proposed approach in terms of the array of programs,
policies, and practices that comprehensively address all of the
intervening variables, causal factors, and risk and protective factors
described earlier in your response in the problem focused assessment
section. If you have not identified evidence based approaches to all of
these, please describe in general terms how you might approach these in
a comprehensive way to create sufficient enough impact to reduce the
usage patterns that lead to the identified and prioritized problem.

v\. Describe your plan to implement environmental strategies as the
primary focus of your comprehensive program design. These environmental
strategies should complement other program components by working in the
school or community (or neighborhood) domain to impact your service
population. These strategies can focus on norms, policies and
regulations, availability, enforcement, etc.

vi\. Provide a management plan (task/timeline) for the proposed project.
For each activity, specify target population(s), setting(s), duration
and intensity, timeline with target dates for major
activities/benchmarks, and assignment of organizational and/or staff
responsibility.

vii\. Cultural competence: Describe how the underlying program theory
demonstrates an understanding and relevance to culturally diverse
communities in New Mexico and indicate whether this theoretical
framework was designed or endorsed by the cultural groups to be
impacted. Describe how the programmatic activities are culturally
appropriate and competent (e.g., use of family members and natural
support systems, use of familiar language and customs, non-traditional
outreach, etc.).

viii\. Document how your project is using evidence-based interventions,
or research-based/research-proven activities evidenced by employing
prevention research findings and general prevention principles (see
attached Compendium of *Evidence-Based Prevention Practice* in Appendix
I) or specific programs identified by CSAP or equivalent agency or
agencies. A listing and description of model prevention programs can be
found in *Science-Based Prevention Programs and Principles, 2002:
Effective Substance Abuse Prevention and Mental Health Programs for
Every Community* (Department of Health and Human Services/Substance
Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Publication No.
SMA03-3764), available for viewing or downloading at
**http://modelprograms.samhsa.gov/template.cfm?page=pubs_2002report.**

ix\. Leveraged Services and Collaborative Processes: Describe how this
program will interface with other prevention/early intervention efforts
within the community. Of particular interest are collaboration,
integration, and leveraging of other initiatives and funds with schools,
community and neighborhood centers, and other community public and
private service providers including Public Health prevention programs.
Explain in detail what services, resources, and other supports will be
provided by other groups to compliment those provided by the applicant
organization.

x\. Submit signed memoranda of agreement (MOA) or memoranda of
understanding (MOU) from your collaborative partners in this initiative.

**E. [PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND EVALUATION METHODS (WEIGHT:
15)]{.underline}**

NOTE: Offerors are required to allocate **20%** of the funding requested
to evaluation. Preference will be given to those initiatives that employ
the services of professional evaluators. Include the resume of your
evaluator if already selected.

> The evaluation of environmental strategies will be enhanced with a
> uniform framework to be utilized by all sub-recipients. The structure
> of this framework consists of categories of qualitative and
> quantitative measures for process and immediate indicators, for short,
> mid, and long-term indicators, and for impact indicators, particularly
> as related to intervening variables, causal factors, and risk and
> protective factors in communities. Progress towards outcomes would be
> measured with benchmarks against the qualitative and quantitative
> measures for the various levels of indicators (see Appendix J:
> Environmental Approaches to Substance Abuse Prevention).

i.  Provide both a [process]{.underline} and an [outcome]{.underline}
    evaluation plan for this initiative. Submit copies of any additional
    outcome evaluation instruments that may be utilized as they relate
    directly to the goals and objectives of the proposed prevention
    plan.

In your plan, address the questions in the three areas identified below
(process, immediate and long term outcomes).

> [Process Monitoring]{.underline}: Offerors are required to use the
> web-based Minimum Data Set (MDS) to enter and forward to the BHSD all
> required data about the number of participants, demographic
> information, frequency and dosage of encounter, etc. What procedures
> do you have in place to monitor program implementation, and quality of
> the services or activities? Please describe your plan for collecting
> and reviewing these data. Training in the web-based MDS will be
> provided to sub-recipients.
>
> [Immediate Outcome Evaluation and Performance Monitoring]{.underline}:
> What immediate changes do you expect as a result of your program?
> Please describe these changes in terms of changes in behavior,
> decreases in community risk factors increases in protective factors,
> and changes in intervening variables and causal factors. How will you
> collect and analyze all relevant immediate outcome data? How will you
> measure these outcome data (please include any instruments you plan to
> use, or those you may be considering at this time, and describe what
> they will measure)?
>
> [Long-Term Outcome Evaluation and Performance Monitoring]{.underline}:
> What are the long-term outcomes you expect as a result of your program
> activities? The SPF SIG must make efforts to impact community-wide
> indicators. Please describe the community wide indicators you believe
> can be impacted by your proposed approach. Please describe these
> expected outcomes in time frames from six months to several years. Be
> sure to relate these outcomes to long-term changes in health and
> related indicators. How will you collect, analyze, and forward to the
> funding agency all relevant long-term outcome data? How will you
> measure these outcome data? Include any instruments you plan to use,
> or those you may be considering at this time, and describe what they
> will measure. Please provide a description of how community wide
> indicators might over time be collected to demonstrate the expected
> outcomes, and discuss whether this is a realistic expectation of this
> initiative, and what resources would be necessary to collect this
> data.

ii. Describe how the evaluation will be managed. Describe how much time
    and resources will be utilized in providing a comprehensive
    evaluation. Describe who will be responsible for administering the
    outcome evaluation instruments, data collection and analysis,
    preparation of quarterly outcome evaluation reports, and the final
    outcome evaluation report.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
iii. Provide evidence of your organization's ability to conduct
     evaluation activities. If CURRENT BHSD contractor, BHSD will
     conduct an audit of quarterly outcome evaluation summaries and
     monthly process data reports submitted in FY05. If a NEW offeror,
     please submit sample evaluation reports and outcome data from other
     initiatives and services.

**F. [ORGANIZATIONAL/AGENCY CAPABILITY (WEIGHT: 15)]{.underline}**

i.  Describe your organization\'s mission/philosophy and purpose in
    relation to the activities you are proposing, and their relation to
    the intent of this RFP. Describe any written agency policies
    regarding needs assessment, prevention plans, maintenance of
    prevention service delivery records, evaluation, and cultural
    competence.

ii. Describe and provide evidence of your organization's ability to
    bring together many community groups, advocates, policy and decision
    makers, and stakeholders to focus efforts and resources on a
    particular problem. Provide a description of a particularly
    successful effort in bringing together multiple partners to address
    one issue, including a description of the intervention or task then
    implemented. Describe the ultimate success of this effort, and
    describe the weaknesses and strengths discovered about how you
    convened this group. What did you learn and how will you effectively
    bring together a broad and diverse group of strong partners to
    address the problem focus of this initiative?

iii\. Provide evidence of your organization's management capability and
fiscal solvency, as well as your internal management and financial
controls, and describe how these are sufficient to implement the
proposed initiative and provide accountability.

iv\. Provide a description of your organization's recent history of
demonstrated accomplishments in realms similar to this proposed
initiative, as well as accomplishments working with schools, faith
communities, law enforcement, community policy makers, businesses,
community stakeholders, etc.

v\. Describe your organization's capacity to monitor the ongoing
implementation of activities of the initiative and its capability to
analyze and report on this data.

vi\. Submit three letters of reference that provide evidence of previous
successful work, community mobilization, collaboration with other
prevention organizations and knowledge of substance abuse prevention.

vii. Provide assurances that your agency will comply with the
     Department\'s General

> Provisions (Appendix F) and with the Comprehensive Behavioral Health
> Standards/Prevention Standards for Non-Network Providers (Appendix G,
> Section 22).

viii. Identify the principle service delivery personnel, their
      responsibility in implementation, their experience and expertise
      working with the target populations and their cultures, their time
      dedicated to the initiative, their competency in substance abuse
      or related prevention, and any plan your organization has to
      support personnel in becoming certified as prevention
      professionals.

ix. Identify the date that prevention standards were adopted by your
    agency/organization. If your agency/organization does not have a
    standing policy for prevention standards, describe the process for
    adopting prevention standards as agency/organizational policy.

x.  Describe how you will work in collaboration with TANF and New Mexico
    Welfare to

> Work contractors, to train and employ TANF recipients who are seeking
> employment opportunities as well as populations enrolled in supported
> employment programs.

**G. [BUDGET SUMMARY (WEIGHT: 15)]{.underline}**

Complete Appendix C and a separate narrative justification sheet to
explain expenditures.

The budget projection and budget narrative must detail all costs by
category. Include

evaluation costs (20% of the budget, including four statewide evaluation
meetings to be

held in Albuquerque) and expenses for participation in statewide
meetings by program

staff, including three statewide Sub-recipient Council meetings during
the initial readiness

phase, and bi-monthly meetings thereafter. No more than 8% of the
proposed budget may

be allocated for indirect costs.