Agency Health Department

Contractor American Cancer Society

SWIFT Contract Number 144760

Project Name Sage System Change/CCCP Data Collection

Project Number (if applicable) 237387

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: To provide services to coordinate a Commission on Cancer (CoC) project team with the State’s Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (CCCP) staff to improve data collection for CoC accreditation standard 3.1 and to monitor progress on designated objectives in Cancer Plan 2025. Services also include collaborating with Sage Screening Program to implement an environmental change strategy campaign for breast cancer.

Project Duration

Start Date Sun, 07/01/2018 - 00:00

Original end date Mon, 06/29/2020 - 00:00

Actual end date Mon, 06/29/2020 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $70000

Amendments $-22500

Contract total $47500

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? H1238363 and H1238367

Is this a sole source contract? Yes

If this was a single source contract, explain why the agency determined there was only a single source for the services (if applicable) Funds were requested and approved from the U.S. Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to enter into a sole source contract with Minnesota’s American Cancer Society (ACS) for the two
MDH grant funded programs. These programs include: The MN Breast & Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (known as the Sage Program) and the MN Comprehensive Cancer Control Program.
ACS is a national partner of the CDC Division of Cancer Prevention and Control and a known and trusted partner in Minnesota in the area of cancer prevention and control. Given that the Commission
on Cancer (CoC) work proposed in this contract was initiated by the ACS in Minnesota in 2012, ACS remains the most knowledgeable and credible partner to further develop and implement this body
of work. The CoC Hospitals compete with one another, thus their staff cannot credibly facilitate this work. The work requires the facilitator to serve as liaison with the Minnesota Department of Health’s
Cancer Surveillance System to report on and work to reduce late stage cancers. Similarly, ACS Minnesota staff have worked with the Sage and Sage Scopes teams for the past ten years to implement
Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Roundtables with Minnesota’s health plans and clinical health systems towards achieving a statewide CRC screening rate of 80% by 2018 and clinical systems improvement
work. Based on this history of collaboration, funds were requested from CDC for the Sage and Sage Scopes Programs to work with ACS to jointly develop and implement a scope of work leading to
adoption of clinical systems improvement strategies as well as an environmental strategy that ultimately results in increased breast, cervical, and CRC cancer screening in Minnesota.

Evaluator Name Melanie Peterson-Hickey

Evaluator Email Address melanie.peterson-hickey@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Working with MDH staff, contractor completed partnering with health plan, completion of assessment, and implementation planning efforts in a timely manner. Adjustments were made to total contract amount to complete CCCP data collection efforts. ACS worked with MDH staff to organize and facilitate a CoC project team within timeline of contract.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Clarification was needed for meeting CCCP objectives. Contract amended in response. ACS completed an assessment for provider systems change efforts adequately including meeting with staff, writing and submitting an assessment, following up with provider to implement EBIs.

Evaluate the contractor's cost ACS worked within contract guidelines to carry out required terms. 144760

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance ACS continues to be an important partner in engaging health clinics, plans, and health systems to increase screening among targeted populations. ACS has an extensive network of clinics, community organizations, and health plans to implement this important work. They are a trusted partner and have a long history of reaching and building critical partnerships.

Would you engage the contractor's services again? Yes

Describe any negative action taken during the duration of this contract (i.e., termination, pursuit of suspension, etc.): There was some difficulty in communication between CCCP staff and ACS to complete data objectives. Contract was adjusted to reflect agreed upon final outcomes of the contract.

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 4 - satisfied