The last GME software RFP your institution sent probably asked vendors to "support ACGME" and "export IRIS." The demos were polished. The contract got signed. The Accreditation Data System (ADS) Annual Update still started in a spreadsheet. That is not a purchasing failure so much as a drafting failure: the document scored features instead of requiring the records that actually run a Sponsoring Institution.
This guide is the operational how-to for designated institutional officials (DIOs), institutional coordinators, and procurement teams who have to write the next one. It covers who is in the room, which ACGME-year records to require, and how to score a proposal without invented weights. A downloadable section-by-section checklist and scoring sheet (branded Excel workbook, with a plain-CSV alternative) is linked at the end.
Verified September 1, 2026 against ACGME. Sources at the end.
| Owner | Clock | Artifact | Failure if skipped |
|---|---|---|---|
| DIO (decides); institutional coordinator (operations); procurement and IT (contract and security) | Named in the roles section before any requirement is typed | Working-group roster on the RFP cover | An IT document with GME in the title |
| Institutional coordinator plus program directors | Before the first requirement line is typed | Current CPR and Institutional Requirements edition, ADS Important Dates, named Annual Update owners | A wish list built on last year's FAQ PDF |
| DIO plus institutional coordinator, in the live session | Scored walkthrough with last year's files | ADS Annual Update source files, CCC packet, Annual Program Evaluation | A brochure scored as a platform |
| DIO, institutional coordinator, and procurement in the same room | Weights filled at that meeting, not copied from a brochure | Scoring sheet with a blank Local weight column | Invented percentages nobody can defend |
| DIO plus program director | Before vendors answer last year's template | Deleted Self-Study generation line | A software line for a packet ACGME will not ask for |
If you need the questions a program meeting should answer before anyone drafts, use Questions to Ask Before You Choose a GME Management Platform. If you need the ACGME year itself (the June rollover, the Annual Update window, the buffer before the date in ADS), use Managing ACGME Accreditation. If you are already comparing named platforms, use the site's comparison guide. The segment-agnostic RFP how-to lives separately; this page stays on graduate medical education.
Who sits on the working group, and who actually decides?
The DIO decides. The institutional coordinator runs the daily operation. Procurement and IT own the contract and the security review. A small set of program directors and coordinators, drawn from different program types, bring the work as it actually runs. That is this guide's own working group. It is not the Graduate Medical Education Committee (GMEC).
| Owner | Job | When it is named |
|---|---|---|
| DIO | Closes the process. Named on the RFP cover with authority to decide. | Before anyone types a requirement |
| Institutional coordinator | Runs the calendar and the records tests. | The same day the DIO is named |
| Procurement | Owns the contract path and the scoring meeting. | When the working group is seated |
| IT | Writes hosting, single sign-on, encryption, and the privacy rules counsel names. | Before the technical section is drafted |
| Program directors and coordinators from different program types | Bring the work as it actually runs. Surgical and medical (or equivalent) voices; not every program voting. | When the working group is seated |
| GMEC | Oversight, not line-by-line drafting. Briefed; minutes record that the RFP is in flight. | When the RFP is in flight |
A 30-second check. If the draft RFP does not name the DIO and the institutional coordinator in the roles section, stop typing requirements. You are writing an IT document with GME in the title.
The GMEC is a required body with its own membership rules. The Institutional Requirements effective July 1, 2026 require the Sponsoring Institution to identify a DIO who, in collaboration with a GMEC, has authority and responsibility for oversight of each ACGME-accredited program. For a Sponsoring Institution with multiple accredited programs, that GMEC's voting members include the DIO, a representative sample of program directors (minimum of two), a minimum of two peer-selected residents and fellows, and a quality improvement or patient safety officer or designee. The GMEC must meet at least once every quarter during each academic year and must keep minutes that document required functions. Do not wait for that body to vote on every requirement line. Use it for oversight. Use the working group to write.
What do we freeze before the first requirement is typed?
Three things: which edition of the requirements the tracking is built on, which date sits in each in-scope program's ADS Important Dates view, and who owns the Annual Update inside those programs. Without those, every later section is a wish list.
| Freeze | What you write into the RFP | Whose clock |
|---|---|---|
| Requirements edition | Current Common Program Requirements and Institutional Requirements pulled from acgme.org. Diff against the edition last year's tracking used. | ACGME: four posted versions (Residency, Fellowship, One-Year Fellowship, and Post-Doctoral Education Program), each with Program Requirements and FAQs effective July 1, 2026. The Institutional Requirements landing page posted the Institutional Requirements as effective July 1, 2026. |
| FAQ source | Stop citing a standalone FAQ PDF. Work from the current requirements PDF with FAQs in the appendix. | July 6, 2026 e-communication: standalone FAQ documents have been removed from the ACGME website, and that relevant FAQs have been integrated into an appendix |
| ADS Important Dates | Each in-scope program's date from ADS, not a copied national window. | The Academic Year 2026-2027 Annual Update is collected between July and September 2026. The June 22, 2026 e-communication stated that those timeframes would appear in the ADS Important Dates column by July 1. |
| Annual Update owner | Named data owners inside each in-scope program. Not a one-person August project. | Institutional Requirements: the DIO to oversee submissions of the Annual Update for each program and the Sponsoring Institution to the ACGME |
Pull those PDFs from acgme.org. A requirement line that still cites a saved FAQ PDF will silently drift. Each program gets its own Annual Update timeframe, and an initial notification email at the start of the reporting window lists the requirements and their deadlines. Write the dates from ADS into the RFP's background. Do not paste a national window copied from last year.
Which ACGME-year records should every vendor have to open?
The records you already have to produce this year: the ADS Annual Update source files, the Clinical Competency Committee (CCC) packet, and the Annual Program Evaluation. If a vendor cannot open those with your data, the rest of the proposal is a brochure.
| Record | What the live session must open | Failure if skipped |
|---|---|---|
| ADS Annual Update source files | Last year's files, with your data. The DIO can see sponsored-program status before approval, without impersonating a coordinator. | Spreadsheet archaeology scored as a platform |
| CCC packet | A packet a new committee member can open without emailing the coordinator. All resident evaluations the committee must review are in one place. | Milestone theater with no file |
| Annual Program Evaluation | Last year's APE produced from current records, including the action plan. | "Generate APE reports" as a feature heading |
Clinical Competency Committee
Review who needs discussion, capture notes, then freeze the period.
Academic period
Not finalized
Showing 4 of 4
Medium flags hidden
Show medium flagsDemonstration data. The CCC packet a new member can open is the records test. Standing evaluations in one system of record, not IRIS production or self-study generation.
The CCC packet a new member can open is the records test. A vendor who cannot walk that file with your data is selling a brochure, not a system of record.
The Institutional Requirements effective July 1, 2026 require the DIO to oversee submissions of the Annual Update for each program and the Sponsoring Institution to the ACGME. The FAQ in that PDF states that the DIO, with the institutional coordinator(s), is expected to document this oversight by approving programs' Annual Update submissions in ADS. Your RFP should ask how a DIO sees sponsored-program status before that approval, without impersonating a coordinator.
The Residency Common Program Requirements effective July 1, 2026 require the program director to appoint a Program Evaluation Committee to conduct and document the Annual Program Evaluation as part of continuous improvement. The Annual Program Evaluation, including the action plan, must be distributed to and discussed with the residents and the members of the teaching faculty, and be submitted to the DIO. Write the requirement as "show us last year's Annual Program Evaluation produced from current records," not "generate APE reports."
How should evaluations, the CCC, and Milestone submissions appear as RFP sections?
As the same record, walked from the assignment that ran, through the committee, to ADS. Not as three feature headings.
| Step | What you require | Whose clock |
|---|---|---|
| Assignment that ran | Evaluation documented at the completion of the assignment. For block rotations of greater than three months, at least every three months. Longitudinal experiences at least every three months and at completion. | CPR Residency 5.1 |
| CCC synthesis | Objective performance evaluation based on the Competencies and the specialty-specific Milestones, from multiple evaluators, provided to the CCC. The committee reviews all resident evaluations at least semi-annually. | CPR Residency 5.3 |
| Milestone submission | A walk from one resident's committee judgment to the ADS submission, with the evaluation evidence still attached. Do not score a "Milestones module" separately from that walk. | June 22, 2026 e-communication: that year-end window closed June 26, 2026; submissions via ADS |
The Residency Common Program Requirements effective July 1, 2026 require that evaluation be documented at the completion of the assignment. For block rotations of greater than three months, evaluation must be documented at least every three months. Longitudinal experiences must be evaluated at least every three months and at completion. The program must provide an objective performance evaluation based on the Competencies and the specialty-specific Milestones, from multiple evaluators, to the CCC for that synthesis. The program director must appoint a CCC. That committee must review all resident evaluations at least semi-annually, determine each resident's progress on the specialty-specific Milestones, meet prior to the residents' semi-annual evaluations, and advise the program director regarding each resident's progress.
How should clinical and educational work hours appear?
Against the schedule that actually ran, using the terms the current Common Program Requirements use. Do not paste "duty hour alerts" from last year's template.
| Clock | What it is | What it is not |
|---|---|---|
| Clinical and educational work hours | Limited to no more than 80 hours per week, averaged over a four-week period, including all in-house clinical and educational activities, clinical work done from home, and all moonlighting. | A "duty hours" heading copied from an old template |
| Completeness against last block | Completeness and exceptions against last block's real assignments. Named attester when the log and the schedule disagree. | A screenshot of an alert |
| Terms in the RFP | The CPR uses "clinical experience and education," "clinical and educational work," and "clinical and educational work hours." | Product language that still says "duty hour alerts" |
The Residency Common Program Requirements effective July 1, 2026 use the terms "clinical experience and education," "clinical and educational work," and "clinical and educational work hours" in place of "duty hours." Clinical and educational work hours must be limited to no more than 80 hours per week, averaged over a four-week period, including all in-house clinical and educational activities, clinical work done from home, and all moonlighting.
Ask the vendor to show completeness and exceptions against last block's real assignments, and who attests when the log and the schedule disagree. A screenshot of an alert is not a record.
Where does IRIS belong?
In the RFP only if someone at your institution can name the owner and the path from last block's rotations to the file finance used. This is this guide's own operational question. It is not an ACGME requirement, and this page does not cite federal cost-report rules or invent reimbursement figures.
| Question | Write this | Do not write this |
|---|---|---|
| Who owns the file? | A named owner, or omit the section. | An "IRIS button" nobody in the room can test |
| What is the current path? | If the honest answer is "we export from the scheduler and then fix it in Excel," write that down as the current state. | CMS formatting, CMS-ready FTE, or Medicare cost recovery |
| What does the vendor show? | The schedule-to-file path as you actually run it. | A federal citation this page does not make |
What leftover lines should we delete from last year's template?
Anything that treats a program Self-Study as a current, monitored requirement, and anything that promises an accreditation outcome. Pull those lines before vendors answer them.
| Leftover line | What the current record says | What you do |
|---|---|---|
| Generate self-study reports | The Site Visit FAQ page states that effective July 1, 2025, the Self-Study requirements for Sponsoring Institutions (Institutional Requirement 1.5) and programs (Common Program Requirement 5.5.h) are no longer being monitored. Accreditation Field Representatives and Review Committees will not ask for or review any information related to those requirements. | Delete the software line before anyone budgets a packet |
| 5.5.h still printed | The Residency Common Program Requirements PDF effective July 1, 2026 still prints 5.5.h (the program must complete a Self-Study and submit it to the DIO) with a note that enforcement is suspended pending the outcome of the major revision of the Common Program Requirements. | Confirm on acgme.org. Do not score "self-study generation." |
| Program 10-Year visit | The same Site Visit page states that the program 10-Year Accreditation Site Visit was discontinued in October 2023, while the Sponsoring Institution 10-Year Accreditation Site Visit remains an institutional requirement. | Confirm both on acgme.org before anyone budgets a packet |
| Accreditation-outcome promise | Not an ACGME requirement. This guide's own rule. | Remove any line that promises citations avoided or a visit passed |
| Duty-hour-alert language | CPR uses clinical and educational work hours. | Replace with hours against the schedule that ran |
All site visits require information collected via ADS, and Sponsoring Institutions and programs should make sure all data in ADS is updated prior to the due date in the Site Visit Announcement letter. Minimum notice is approximately 30 days, and can be less. Write that as a records test (can we update ADS from living records), not as a citation-avoidance feature. The purpose of an accreditation or recognition site visit is collection and aggregation of relevant data into a Site Visit Report used by Review and Recognition Committees; Accreditation Field Representatives are not the decision makers.
Which RFP sections actually change a vendor's answer?
Background they cannot fake, then the records tests above, then implementation with named roles, then the leave path. Feature taxonomies change almost nothing.
This guide recommends a short document:
| Section | What belongs | What does not |
|---|---|---|
| Introduction | Sponsoring Institution structure, program types in scope, why you are buying. | A novel. Counts that are not already public. |
| Scope | Replace versus consolidate, which programs are in the first wave, which integrations your IT will actually test. | "All standard GME functions." |
| Records requirements | ADS Annual Update, CCC packet, Annual Program Evaluation, evaluations against the assignment that ran, clinical and educational work hours against the schedule that ran, and IRIS only if you have a named owner. | Feature taxonomies. |
| Technical | Hosting, single sign-on, encryption, and the privacy rules your counsel names. Let IT write this section. | GME-invented security language. |
| Implementation and support | Who trains coordinators, faculty, and residents and fellows. What happens in the first week versus the third month. | A slide about change management. |
| Submission and scoring | How to respond, what a live session must show, and how you will score (local weights, agreed in the room). | Percentage weights copied from a brochure. |
| Exit | Export formats, who on staff opens the files, and how long access continues after the contract ends. | Silence. |
Do not write "all standard GME functions." That sentence is how vendors hide.
How do we score without theater?
You set the weights in the room, on categories that match the records tests, after you agree what a low score and a high score look like. You do not copy a percentage table from a brochure.
This guide does not invent scoring weights. The downloadable sheet has a blank Local weight column. Fill it at the meeting where the DIO, the institutional coordinator, and procurement are all present.
| Category this guide recommends | Who can test it | What a comment must name |
|---|---|---|
| ACGME-year records walkthrough | DIO plus institutional coordinator | Which ADS source files, CCC packet, and APE they opened |
| Evaluation and CCC same-record test | Program director plus CCC chair | The walk from assignment to committee to ADS |
| Clinical and educational work hours against the schedule that ran | Coordinator plus program director | Last block's real assignments; named attester |
| Implementation and training | Institutional coordinator plus procurement | Named roles; first week versus third month |
| Export and leave path | Institutional IT plus DIO | Staff opened the files |
| Security and institutional IT | IT | IT's own rubric |
| Total cost as procurement defines it | Procurement | Procurement's own total-cost definition |
Add rows your counsel requires. Delete rows nobody in the room can test. A score without a comment is theater. Require one sentence of evidence per category: which record they opened, and what was missing. If two reviewers cannot explain why they gave different scores on the same category, the scale is not defined yet. Stop scoring.
What must a live session show that a slide deck cannot?
Your data, one program, last block, with the people who own the records in the room. If the vendor will not do that, you are not evaluating a platform yet. You are evaluating a story.
| Bring this | Ask them to open this | Why it is not a slide |
|---|---|---|
| Last year's Annual Update source files | Missing evaluation; DIO view of sponsored-program status | Your files, not a demo tenant |
| Last CCC's packet | The packet a new member would read | Evidence still attached |
| Last block's assignments | Completeness against the schedule that ran | The log and the roster have to be the same record |
| Unconfirmed roster work | Status after academic-year conversion | ACGME Cloud, ADS, and the Case Log System converted to Academic Year 2026-2027 over the June 26-27 weekend. After that conversion, every resident and fellow had an Unconfirmed status that programs need to update. |
The companion questions list is the diligence script. This RFP should require that script as a scored live session, not as an appendix nobody reads.
What happens if we leave, and did we write that into the RFP?
You get an export your next system can read, with the owners and dates still attached, or you do not. Find out which before you sign, in writing, in this RFP.
Ask for export formats for evaluations, Milestone history, and the accreditation artifact set. Then have someone on staff, not the vendor, open the files. This guide's own rule is that a platform you cannot leave is not an operating record. It is a hostage.
The checklist
Download the GME RFP checklist and scoring sheet (Excel), or the plain CSV if you would rather import it into Google Sheets or your own tracker. Every section above is a row, grouped by phase, with columns for the suggested owner, what "good" looks like, a blank local-weight field, status, and notes. Import it, put real names in the owner column at your next GME and procurement meeting, and fill the weights there. Do not copy weights from a vendor.
The workbook is a scoring handoff into a standing process, not the system of record. Named owners run the records tests; the sheet is how you walk that process in.
Where a platform fits
Named owners run the records tests in the RFP: people first, then a written scoring sheet, then a platform that keeps those standing records from going stale when a coordinator leaves.
The scoring sheet above is how you walk that process in. Several of the failure points are records problems. Medtrics is one such platform: Enrollment, evaluations, and outcomes live in one system of record with a governed KPI layer and exportable analytics. See GME Leaders for how those standing records sit with the rest of the GME year. The workbook is a scoring handoff, not a second source of truth.
None of this replaces the operating model. The working group, the DIO's decision, and the live session still do the work. A platform makes that boring structure durable when people leave.
Sources and status
This guide was verified on September 1, 2026 against the following sources. After publication, the current documents on acgme.org remain the only authoritative statement of any requirement.
- ACGME Common Program Requirements page: four posted versions (Residency, Fellowship, One-Year Fellowship, Post-Doctoral Education Program), each with Program Requirements and FAQs effective July 1, 2026. acgme.org/what-we-do/accreditation/common-program-requirements
- ACGME Common Program Requirements (Residency) including FAQs, effective July 1, 2026: CCC, evaluation timing, Annual Program Evaluation, clinical and educational work hours, and the suspended enforcement of 5.5.h. CPR Residency PDF
- ACGME Institutional Requirements and Application page: Institutional Requirements and FAQs effective July 1, 2026. acgme.org/programs-and-institutions/institutions/institutional-requirements-and-application
- ACGME Institutional Requirements including FAQs, effective July 1, 2026: DIO identification, GMEC collaboration and membership, DIO oversight of Annual Update submissions. Institutional Requirements PDF
- ACGME e-communication, June 22, 2026: academic-year conversion over the June 26-27 weekend; after conversion, all residents and fellows have Unconfirmed status; Annual Update timeframes posted to the ADS Important Dates view by July 1; Milestones year-end reporting window closing June 26, 2026. June 22, 2026 e-communication
- ACGME e-communication, July 6, 2026: Academic Year 2026-2027 Annual Update collected July through September 2026; standalone FAQ documents removed and FAQs integrated into requirements PDFs. July 6, 2026 e-communication
- ACGME Site Visit page: Field Representatives collect data for a Site Visit Report used by Review Committees; ADS must be updated before the visit; Self-Study requirements for Institutional Requirement 1.5 and Common Program Requirement 5.5.h no longer monitored effective July 1, 2025; program 10-Year Accreditation Site Visit discontinued October 2023; Sponsoring Institution 10-Year Accreditation Site Visit remains an institutional requirement. acgme.org/programs-and-institutions/programs/site-visit
ACGME is named descriptively. This article is an independent RFP guide from Medtrics, not ACGME guidance, and nothing here promises any accreditation outcome. The work does that, or nothing does.