CRISP COVID-19 Scheduling Tool RFP

All responses due no later than Friday, December, 18, 2020, at 5pm EST

You are invited to submit a proposal for COVID-19 patient scheduling and site logistics management tool where patients can securely schedule, and sites can manage the flow of patients. Your proposal should describe how it will meet Chesapeake Regional Information System for our Patients (CRISP) requirements as described herein.

All proposals should be submitted electronically to:

Should you have any questions concerning the preparation of your proposal, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Contact: Mandy Williams

Please note that this Request for Proposal does not constitute a guarantee on the part of CRISP that a contract will be awarded. No payment will be made for costs incurred in the preparation and submission of a Proposal in response to this Request for Proposal.

CRISP COVID-19 Scheduling Tool RFP

Frequently Asked Questions


  1. Who built this tool initially?
    1. Mazik Global built the tool.
  2. Does CRISP have a Microsoft license?  How did CRISP acquire Microsoft CRM and power Apps?
    1. Yes, we have a Microsoft license
      • tenant org license: Dynamics 365 Customer Service Enterprise
      • End-user license: Microsoft Power apps plan 1
      • Microsoft Power apps plan 2
  3. How much does CRISP utilize Microsoft/does CRISP use 365?
    1. Yes, we use Microsoft 365 as a company
  4. Who is the incumbent?
    1. Mazik Global
  5. Is the relationship with Mazik good?
    1. Yes – we simply wanted to give everyone a fair shot at providing the ongoing support
  6. Will Mazik bid on this RFP as well?
    1. They were included on the RFP notification – whether they bid or not, we don’t know.
  7. How many organizations do you anticipate bidding on this RFP?
    1. We can’t say with certainty but best guess is ~10
  8. What is the relationship between CRISP and Leap Orbit?
    1. Leap Orbit is a staffing vendor that provides support to CRISP
  9. Can CRISP provide a reverse demo of the tool so the bidding vendors can see how it works today (before taking over what someone else built)? i.e. What’s the best practice/what’s possible?
    1. Reverse Demo Videos
  1. Do testing sites currently use CRISP for scheduling information or do they have their own scheduling software that CRISP needs to integrate with to maintenance up to date information on scheduling capacity?
    • . The sites use CRISP as their scheduling tool.  CRISP manually enters the week’s schedule on behalf of the site, there is not integration with a third party scheduler.
  2. Are testing labs currently integrated with CRISP?
    • . In progress:  we are working to setup an HL7 Orders interface to labs that perform PCR testing. This will enable demographics and related test/specimen information can go directly to the lab, mitigating the need for manual data entry by the lab staff. Even without direct integration, we populate printable pdf lab requisitions.
  3. Approximately, how many are there of each of the following?

Not sure about daily, but we’ve got somewhere around 8000 scheduled slots per week (not counting walk ins), 15ish test sites, currently working with 2 labs, although we know 4 of them are good with our process (Labcorp, Quest, CIAN, Mako).

  • Users per day scheduling tests and inquiring about results of tests: ~ 8k scheduled slots per week and are currently at near capacity; unable to respond to the second part of this inquiry because results delivery is separate. Patients can reach out to their Primary Care Provider, Health Department, Lab etc. to obtain their results.
  • Number of Covid-19 patient testing sites: ~15 testing sites currently
  • Number of Labs processing test data: We’re currently using 2 labs but have worked with a total of 4 (Labcorp, Quest, CIAN, Mako)  

4. In the Project Deliverables, Scheduling Tool Performance section of the RFP, for numbers 1a – 1e, 2a – 2b, 3a-3c, 4a-4c, and 5a-5h, could you specify for each line item whether the functionality exists today (and the request is for support) versus which ones are requests for new development?

Every line item sections 1-4 are currently in production and need to be supported with the exception of (in section 5):

  • Integrate with CRISP infrastructure, which includes but may not be limited to:
    • SAML 2.0 Integration (ULP) and OAuth 2.0 Integration

    • A: Not applicable at this time
  • Not applicable at this time
    • Integrations with RESTful Application Programming Interfaces

    • A: Applicable at this time, the system has several API’s called by other systems.
  • Ability to capture and expose audit logs based on access in a manner that conforms with Accounting of Disclosure Standards
    • A: Applicable at this time.
  • Conforms to CRISP security policies, performance standards and code review
    1. A: Applicable at this time.
      d) Provide an audit log of access
      e) Conform to CRISP security policies, performance standards, and code review
      f) Use industry accepted User Experience Guidelines and must include:
      •           Mobile first design
      •           Responsive design
      g) Ability to show that code base was tested for any known bugs based on industry standards
      h) Provide the following documentation artifacts:
      •           User Guide
      •           API Documentation
      •           Any workflow and other diagrams as applicable

Is the tool fully functioning at this moment in time?

Which areas would the vendor be focusing on primarily at this time?Mostly support personnel but also developing new features and support roll outs

Are all API and SMS accounts set up already (for example, Geolocation etc.)?