Question:
Q1-What is Wide Bay HHS RIS PACS? are they on QRIS?

Q2-Could you please provide more detailed volume information for Lot 2? While you’ve included the percentage of activity outside business hours, it would be helpful to see the volume further broken down into evening and overnight periods and across the weekend

Answered on 06/May/2026 11:29 AM:


WBHHS uses QRiS and Enterprise PACS as its primary radiology informatics systems.

Question:
Question 1: more detailed data

Is it possible to get a 12 months data set of offsite reporting volume (Lot 2), by date, by time of day, by modality, by priority, by CMBS item? Any information table would be welcome as it's difficult to price for Lot 2 on existing data set provided in Part A. Without more detailed data, providers will be likely to add a buffer into pricing.

Question 2: Number of Lot 2 providers

Is WBHHS expecting to create a panel for Lot 2 or appoint only one provider (noting that the Service Agreement clause 2.9 specifies no exclusivity)?

Answered on 08/May/2026 03:25 PM:


Question 1: Further details of time-of-day examinations by modality, have been released via addendum 2 to assist Providers.

Question 2: WBHHS has not pre-determined a fixed outcome for Lot 2. WBHHS will take a flexible, outcome-focused approach with the objective of establishing a contracting arrangement that represents the best overall value for money.

Question:
The pricing schedule differentiates pricing by Lot, modality, and priority type. Will time-of-day factors (e.g., business hours, after hours, overnight, weekends, public holidays) also be considered?

Answered on 13/May/2026 09:51 AM:


All proposed pricing models, including time of day factors, will be considered in the overall value for money assessment.

Question:
Prioritisation

"the Provider agrees to prioritise:

(a)
the treatment of Patients under this Agreement; and

(b)
the performance of its obligations under this Agreement,

over any of its arrangements with other customers or its delivery of services to patients that have not been referred to it by WBHHS"

This clause is counter to medical ethics and codes of conduct which require medical professionals to act in the best interest of the patient regardless of the referral source. It de-prioritises clinical necessity. We highly recommend the inclusion of this clause is reconsidered.

Answered on 13/May/2026 09:53 AM:


As specified in Lot 1, it is a requirement that while onsite the nominated radiologist prioritises delivery of services to WBHHS referred patients.

Question:
Headline Billing

"Support the billing of eligible patients to Medicare and other funding sources by ensuring all radiologists reporting for WBHHS are registered with Medicare and have site-specific Provider numbers."

Please confirm if the headline biller model is accepted? Under this model, billing is submitted under a lead Medicare-registered radiologist holding the site-specific Provider number. This is preferable to every individual radiologist on a large-scale teleradiology roster maintaining individual site-specific numbers. This is the standard teleradiology operating model and is widely accepted across Queensland Health.

Answered on 13/May/2026 11:23 AM:


WBHHS confirms a headline biller model is acceptable.

Question:
Overseas reporting

Please confirm if overseas-based radiologists may continue to report WBHHS studies under the headline biller arrangement, provided they meet all necessary Australian regulatory and professional standards (including AHPRA registration, FRANZCR or equivalent, professional indemnity covering Australian reporting)?

Answered on 13/May/2026 09:54 AM:


Overseas reporting may be approved by WBHHS subject to a review of the privacy laws and ICT flows of the reporting location. Any radiologist would be required to meet all necessary Australian regulatory and professional standards and hold relevant insurance coverage. Regarding headline billing, it would be WBHHS understanding that most overseas reporting would be for after hours reports arising from the emergency department. Such imaging is not eligible to be billed to Medicare.

Question:
Private patients

Please confirm if WBHHS will continue to advise if Medicare billing is required for a private patient, to enable the successful teleradiology provider to dual report for billing purposes if the case was initially reported by an overseas radiologist?

Answered on 13/May/2026 09:57 AM:


WBHHS will advise if Medicare billing is required for a private patient. WBHHS would expect that the Provider would direct the reporting to a local radiologist who has an active location specific provider number rather than an overseas radiologist.

Question:
Report Review Addendums

"1.6 Report review addendum

Where additional information or an error in the report is identified post-authorisation, the radiology report shall include an addendum that updates the findings.

The addendum shall:

(a) be prominently displayed in the radiology report text;

(b) the original radiology report shall remain unabridged;

(c) the referring clinician/team shall be contacted directly and advised of the changed finding; and

(d) the Provider needs to ensure that the report addendum is uploaded into the WBHHS RIS and PACS and that the Director of Medical Imaging at the relevant facility is notified."

Current process, consistent with RANZCR standards, is to contact the referring clinician by phone only when the addendum contains a significant finding that impacts patient care. For non-significant addenda (e.g. typographical corrections, minor wording changes, or clarifications that do not alter clinical management), the issuance of the amended report into the WBHHS RIS/PACS serves as the notification, with the addendum prominently displayed as required under (a). Can WBHHS confirm that this tiered notification approach is acceptable under clause 1.6(c), or does WBHHS require direct referrer contact for all addenda regardless of clinical significance?

Answered on 13/May/2026 09:59 AM:


WBHHS can confirm that this tiered notification approach outlined is acceptable under clause 1.6 (c).

Question:
NAI Reporting

In alignment with RANZCR guidelines, we support the reporting of imaging in cases of suspected non-accidental injury (NAI), including acute studies such as CT brain and targeted imaging for suspected fractures, within the urgent teleradiology setting. However, comprehensive skeletal surveys represent a specialised examination requiring strict protocol adherence, high-quality acquisition, and expert interpretation. Consistent with best practice, we recommend that skeletal surveys be reported by paediatric subspecialty radiologists, ideally with dual review, and integrated into local multidisciplinary child protection pathways. As such, skeletal surveys are best deferred for next-day reporting at the local or nearest tertiary centre where appropriate paediatric expertise and governance frameworks are available. Can WBHHS confirm the requirements for NAI reporting as these cases would not fit within the normal teleradiology workflows?

Answered on 13/May/2026 10:03 AM:


WBHHS advises that NAI skeletal survey reporting would be marked as next-business day for reporting. The Provider can then manage the best practice reporting process.

Question:
Subspecialty reporting

"The Provider will establish and maintain subspecialty reporting services. In doing so:

(a) some studies may be automatically sent to a subspecialist for reporting; and/or

(b) the referring clinician may request a report from a specific subspecialist radiologist"

Can WBBH confirm the list of sub-speciality reports required and also confirm if there is the ability, depending on the type of sub-specialty reporting required, for alternate pricing and timeframes?

Answered on 13/May/2026 10:04 AM:


WBHHS requires subspeciality reporting applicable to the current and future modality requirements as detailed in the Specification(s). TATs could accommodate subspeciality reporting, with the applicable relevant pricing.

Question:
Overflow Services

The service requirement provides for overflow reporting services to be requested at any time. We seek clarification on how overflow volumes will be managed operationally to ensure contracted Turnaround Times (TATs) remain achievable. Is it possible to tender only for urgent after-hours services and not provide overflow services?

Specifically:

1) Volume forecasting - Will WBHHS provide indicative overflow volumes (daily, weekly, peak/seasonal) at contract execution, with reasonable notice of any sustained increase, to enable the successful provider to forecast capacity and roster accordingly?

2) Notice and request protocol - What is the expected notification process for overflow requests (e.g. minimum lead time, designated WBHHS contact, request channel, batch size limits)? Will ad hoc same-day requests be capped at an agreed volume, with larger or sustained overflow subject to advance notice?

3) TAT application to overflow - Will contracted TATs apply uniformly to overflow cases regardless of volume or notice, or will TAT clocks for bulk overflow batches (e.g. exceeding an agreed threshold, or received without prior notice) be subject to a revised commencement time agreed between the parties?

4) Routine vs surge overflow - Does WBHHS distinguish between routine overflow (predictable daily/weekly volumes absorbed within standard rostering) and surge overflow (e.g. backlogs, system outages, staff absences at WBHHS), and are different commercial or TAT terms intended for each?

5) Capacity protection - Where overflow volumes risk compromising TAT performance for both overflow and contracted in-scope work, can a mutually agreed escalation and prioritisation protocol be established to protect overall service performance?

Clarity on the above will enable accurate capacity planning, appropriate pricing, and protection of TAT compliance for both parties.

Answered on 13/May/2026 10:06 AM:


Provision of overflow services in the agreement is to accommodate growth and change over time.

WBHHS recognises that Providers have considerable experience in managing such workflows for overflow services. Given that WBHHS wants to partner with Providers, Providers may propose workflows, mechanisms and communication processes which would be of mutually benefit. Such a proposal may be included in the Providers response to question 4.6 in the response schedule.

Question:
Turnaround Time Definition and Timestamping

"Turnaround Time means the time taken from the receipt of the completed study on the local PACS or remote PACS (for offsite reporting) to a verified radiology report being available in the Customer's RIS or equivalent. All timestamps will be in Queensland time."

We seek clarification and refinement of the TAT definition to ensure it reflects the operational realities of teleradiology reporting and provides an auditable, defensible measurement framework for both parties. Can WBHHS confirm agreement to the following operational definition:

1) TAT commences at the later of: (i) receipt of the completed order in the Provider's RIS, and (ii) receipt of all study images on the destination PACS (local or remote, as applicable); and

2) TAT concludes at the time of successful transmission of the verified ORU (report) message back to the WBHHS RIS, evidenced by acknowledgement (ACK) from the receiving system.

This framing recognises that reporting cannot commence until both the order and the complete image set are available, and that the Provider's contractual responsibility ends once the verified report has been successfully transmitted, not when WBHHS internal systems display it.

Answered on 13/May/2026 10:05 AM:


The turnaround time definition and timestamping outlined here relates to Lot 2 services and in that context the operational definition provided is acceptable.

Question:
Transmission issues outside the Provider's control

How does WBHHS propose to treat TAT impacts arising from circumstances outside the Provider's control, such as:

1) WBHHS network, RIS, or PACS outages or degraded performance;

2) HL7/DICOM transmission failures originating from WBHHS-side infrastructure;

3) VPN, interface engine, or integration faults at the WBHHS end;

4) Delayed or failed ACK responses from the WBHHS RIS?

TAT measurement should exclude any period where transmission delay is attributable to WBHHS-side infrastructure or third-party systems engaged by WBHHS.

Answered on 13/May/2026 10:08 AM:


WBHHS recognises that issues may occur in teleradiology practice and careful monitoring of external data flows is required. However, should issues arise persistently WBHHS would require the Provider to work closely with its teams to resolve such issues and mitigate clinical risks. TAT impacts attributable to WBHHS-side infrastructure or third-party systems engaged by WBHHS shall be excluded.

Question:
Workflow and documentation-related delays

Can WBHHS confirm that TAT measurement will be paused or excluded in the following circumstances, consistent with standard teleradiology practice and RANZCR reporting standards:

Non-availability of clinically required prior imaging on the PACS or accessible remote PACS;

Missing or incomplete current study images requiring re-acquisition or re-transmission;

Missing referral, worksheet, or clinical history required to report the study;

Incorrect patient demographics, modality coding, or order routing requiring correction prior to reporting;

Any other human-workflow error originating outside the Provider's control?

Answered on 13/May/2026 10:09 AM:


WBHHS recognises that issues may occur in teleradiology practice and careful monitoring of information flows is required. However, should issues arise persistently WBHHS would require the Provider to work closely with its teams to resolve such issues and mitigate clinical risks.

Question:
Source of truth for timestamps

Given that the receipt of images and supporting documentation occurs within the teleradiology provider's RIS and PACS environment, and is not visible within the WBHHS system, can WBHHS confirm that the Provider's RIS/PACS timestamps will be the agreed source of truth for TAT measurement? These can be supported by auditable system-generated logs, monthly TAT reporting with case-level timestamp detail provided to WBHHS, and reasonable audit access for WBHHS to validate timestamps on request.

Answered on 13/May/2026 10:10 AM:


For Lot 2 the timestamps will be from the Providers RIS and PACS. For Lot 1 onsite services the timestamps will be from the WBHHS systems, QRiS and Enterprise PACS.

Question:
Notification of critical results and unexpected findings

We fully support the documentation requirements set out in the clause and confirm that all four data points (date/time, individual contacted and designation, person making contact, and nature of discussion) are captured for every critical result notification. We seek clarification on the mechanism of documentation. To support fast turnaround in urgent settings, our system captures critical result notifications in a dedicated, auditable contact log maintained outside the report body. This approach has several benefits. It avoids the radiologist having to re-enter and re-authorise the report solely to add notification details, which would delay report availability to the referring clinician. It also produces a fully auditable, system-generated record of every contact event, with all four required data points. We can provide a monthly Critical Notification Register to WBHHS appended to KPI reporting, with on-demand access available for any individual case. Can WBHHS confirm that this approach satisfied the document requirement?

Answered on 13/May/2026 10:11 AM:


WBHHS requirements alignment with the "RANZCR Clinical radiology critical results and adverse outcomes notification" section 3.2 (5) which notes "the imaging report is more likely to follow the patient as their care is transferred from team to team, and therefore it is approriate that the documentation occur in the report."

Additionally, the provision of a monthly report such as Critical Notification Register would be welcomed by WBHHS.

Question:
Addendum 2 did not provide more detailed data for the Offsite reporting (Lot 2). Is it possible to get more detailed data for Table including by time of day, by modality, by priority (routine or urgent) for Table 5 and 6 (both Offsite category)?

Answered on 13/May/2026 10:12 AM:


Addendum 2 provided additional data for providers. In Part A - ITO Section 2.2, Tables 3 and 4 relate to outside business hours activity, which would relate to Lot 2 services. Tables 5 and 6 relate to full offsite services (Lot 3) where the whole end-to-end imaging event is performed at the Providers premises. Priority information is not available.

Question:
It is noted that in the briefing and explanatory material it is WBHHS preference for Provider's responses to be contained within the response schedule. Part C Response Schedule section 4.6 requires gantt charts and registers, can these be added as annexures, as this is not specified for this section and is in others.

Answered on 13/May/2026 10:13 AM:


Yes, the transition in plan may be provided in the form of an annexure.

Question:
In question 4.3 Part C Response Schedule, there is a request for CVs, - In addition, provide curriculum vitae (CVs) for all key personnel nominated in the organisation chart who have a material role in the delivery, oversight or governance of the Services. Is this a requirement? Given the size of the proposed organisation structure, would the Principal accept brief personnel profiles for key stakeholders/personnel in place of full CVs, with additional information to be provided on request during evaluation if required, noting that compiling full CVs for all nominated personnel would be a substantial administrative task?

Answered on 13/May/2026 09:39 AM:


The Customer confirms that providers should exercise their own judgement regarding the level of detail provided for CVs in response to Part C – Returnable Schedules, Question 4.3.

The level of detail can be proportionate to each individual’s role in delivering, overseeing, or governing the Services. More detailed information is appropriate for personnel with material involvement, while brief profiles may suffice for those with limited roles.

Providers must, however, include sufficient information to enable the Customer to assess submissions against the relevant evaluation criteria.

Question:
1.4 (e) Service Requirements

The Lot 1 Service Specification requires onsite radiologist(s) to be present at Bundaberg and Hervey Bay Hospitals during Business Hours for reporting, meetings, education and clinical consultation, defined as Monday to Friday 8:00am to 5:00pm.

A span of 8:00am to 5:00pm represents nine (9) consecutive hours. Under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) and applicable enterprise agreements, a full-time standard working day is 7.6 hours (38-hour week), with an entitlement to an unpaid meal break, typically 30 to 60 minutes, which does not count toward ordinary hours.

Can WBHHS please clarify:

1. Whether the 8:00am to 5:00pm obligation is intended to represent a continuous nine-hour clinical presence, or whether it is intended to accommodate a standard 7.6-hour working day inclusive of an unpaid meal break?

2. If a meal break is expected, how does WBHHS intend for clinical coverage and TAT obligations to be managed during that break period, noting that a single onsite radiologist model cannot simultaneously take a break and maintain TAT compliance?

3. Whether WBHHS would consider amending the specification to either: (a) confirm that the onsite obligation is 7.6 hours of clinical service within the 8:00am to 5:00pm window, with a mutually agreed break arrangement; or (b) acknowledge that continuous nine-hour coverage requires a two-radiologist rostering model, with corresponding recognition in the fee structure.

Clarity on this point is essential for accurate workforce planning, pricing and compliance with employment obligations.

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:05 PM:


There is an obligation under the agreement for 8:00am to 5:00pm coverage.

The working conditions and commercial arrangements of the radiologists contracted by the Provider are for the Provider to administer.

Question:
1.9 (c) 5. Clinical Governance Arrangement

“Mentoring, teaching and training of radiographers, nurses and medical teams on a regular basis (and International Medical Graduates (IMG) radiologist, should it be implemented during the Term of the Agreement)”

Seeking clarification whether the IMG Radiologist is a Provider or QHealth employee.

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:07 PM:


IMG radiologists may be employed by the provider or by QH as long as the supervision requirements align with the Specialist Recognition Outcome - Pathway Requirements required by RANZCR for the specific IMG.

Question:
1.15 (a) Informatics

“The Provider will utilise WBHHS’ RIS and PACS while on-site at Bundaberg and Hervey Bay Hospitals.”

Is it WBHHS intent to change from current reporting/RIS configuration? Is there an opportunity to show benefits from maintaining current configuration i.e. access to priors, system redundancy and access to offsite reporting.

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:08 PM:


WBHHS' intent is as correctly referenced in the question. Should providers propose an alternative methodology, this may be done so using Response Schedule B. With respect to access to priors etc., this would be addressed within the Transition-In plan.

Question:
With reference to Clause 1.4 in the Service Specifications for Lot 3, Provider is seeking clarification regarding the definition of “acceptance.” Specifically, does “acceptance” refer to when the patient is scheduled for the examination, or when Provider acknowledges receipt of the referral?

Additionally, for urgent outpatient studies, could WBHHS please clarify the definition of an “urgent” study within the context of these specifications?

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:09 PM:


For Lot 3, acceptance metric is the time between the provider receiving a request to the time that provider confirms that the request has been accepted.

There are two urgent metrics as outlined in the table in Lot 3, 1.4.

1. Inpatient urgent performance- service performed within 2 business days of acceptance

2. Outpatient urgent performance - service performed within 5 business days of acceptance

Question:
Further to Lot 3, clause 1.4 - Provider seeks clarification as to whether it is WBHHS’ intention for the turnaround time (TAT) for urgent outpatient studies to be set at close of business (COB) on the day of attendance. For example, if Provider accommodates an urgent outpatient study after 4:00 pm and the findings are normal, would the expectation still be for the report to be finalised by COB that same day?

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:10 PM:


The turnaround time would stand. This situation would be highlighted as outlier in the monthly KPI report.

Question:
Routine After-Hours Volumes by Modality

The Lot 2 specification requires routine reporting outside Business Hours and 24/7 on weekends and public holidays, but provides no volume data to support resourcing or pricing. Currently this is not an operational requirement and routine scans are reporting within business hours.

Can WBHHS provide information on the volume of studies by modality that will be reclassified from historic data that will now be required to be reported after-hours?

It is not possible to resource or price routine after-hours routine reporting without this information.

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:12 PM:


All x-ray images acquired after hours may be reported as routine in Business Hour's time periods.

Question:
TAT Commencement: "Completed" vs "Received"

The TAT definition states:

"Turnaround Time means the time taken from the receipt of the completed study on the local PACS or remote PACS to a verified radiology report being available in the Customer's RIS."

However, the routine TAT framework in the 'Timeframes for Reporting' defines windows based on when the study was completed (i.e., scanned):

"All routine studies completed between 12:00 midnight and 8:00am are to be reported no later than 6:00pm same day."

These are two different events. A study completed (scanned) at 1:00am may not be received on the Provider's PACS until 2:15am or later, depending on transmission time. Can WBHHS confirm:

(a) Whether TAT commences at the time of scan completion at the WBHHS site, or at the time the completed study is received and available on the Provider's remote PACS?

(b) Whether transmission delays between WBHHS PACS and the Provider's system are excluded from TAT measurement, consistent with the Q&A confirmation that system outages outside the Provider's control are excluded?

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:17 PM:


As per previous responses to RFIs, responses are as follows:

1. Source of truth for timestamps

For Lot 2 the timestamps will be from the Providers RIS and PACS. For Lot 1 onsite services the timestamps will be from the WBHHS systems, QRiS and Enterprise PACS.

2. Workflow and documentation-related delays

WBHHS recognises that issues may occur in teleradiology practice and careful monitoring of information flows is required. However, should issues arise persistently WBHHS would require the Provider to work closely with its teams to resolve such issues and mitigate clinical risks.

3. Transmission issues outside the Provider's control

WBHHS recognises that issues may occur in teleradiology practice and careful monitoring of external data flows is required. However, should issues arise persistently WBHHS would require the Provider to work closely with its teams to resolve such issues and mitigate clinical risks. TAT impacts attributable to WBHHS-side infrastructure or third-party systems engaged by WBHHS shall be excluded.

Question:
Routine TAT: Coverage Gap and "Same Day"/"Next Day" Ambiguity

The routine TAT framework contains the following windows:

• Routine/SD: completed midnight–8:00am ? due 6:00pm same day

• Routine/NBD: completed 6:00pm–midnight ? due 12:00 noon the next day

The Provider has identified three issues requiring clarification:

(a) Coverage gap: No routine TAT is specified for studies completed between 8:00am and 6:00pm on a weekend or public holiday. What TAT applies to routine studies completed during this 10-hour window on weekends and public holidays?

(b) "Same day" on weekends: A routine study completed at 12:00am Saturday falls in the SD window and is due 6:00pm Saturday, a non-Business Day. A routine study completed at 7:00pm Saturday falls in the NBD window and is due 12:00 noon the following day. This means a study scanned 7 hours earlier carries a significantly tighter reporting deadline. Can WBHHS confirm whether "same day" refers to the calendar day or the next Business Day when the study is received on a weekend or public holiday?

(c) "Next day" vs "Next Business Day": The KPI label reads "Routine/next Business Day" but the operative TAT text reads "12:00 noon the next day," which on a literal reading means the next calendar day (e.g., Sunday after Saturday). The Lot 1 equivalent explicitly reads "12:00pm next Business Day." Can WBHHS confirm which interpretation governs and amend the Lot 2 operative text to match Lot 1?

Answered on 22/May/2026 04:45 PM:


This has been clarified via revised working in Part B - Annex A - Lot 2 Specification, section 1.4.

Question:
MRI Routine: Modality Table Contradicts the TAT Framework

The modality table states routine MRI is "reported in business hours." Under the SD TAT framework, a routine MRI completed at 3:00am Saturday would be due by 6:00pm Saturday, which is not business hours.

(a) Which provision governs for routine MRI received overnight on a weekend, the modality table (business hours delivery) or the SD TAT framework (6:00pm same calendar day)?

(b) If the modality table principle (business hours delivery) applies to MRI, does the same principle extend to all routine modalities, X-ray, CT and ultrasound, received outside business hours? If so, can WBHHS amend the TAT table to reflect this and confirm that routine studies received overnight may be reported at the commencement of the next business day, within the applicable TAT window?

Answered on 22/May/2026 04:46 PM:


This has been clarified via revised working in Part B - Annex A - Lot 2 Specification, section 1.4.

Question:
Routine TAT on Public Holidays

Under the SD framework, a routine study completed between midnight and 8:00am on a public holiday is due by 6:00pm the same public holiday. Can WBHHS confirm:

(a) Whether this is the intended obligation, i.e., routine studies scanned on Christmas Day before 8:00am must be reported by 6:00pm Christmas Day?

(b) If not, what TAT applies to routine studies received on public holidays, and will WBHHS amend the specification to reflect this?

Answered on 22/May/2026 04:52 PM:


This has been clarified via revised working in Part B - Annex A - Lot 2 Specification, section 1.4.

Question:
Overflow Services: Definition, Priority, Volumes and Trigger

The Lot 2 specification requires "overflow reporting services at any time" at WBHHS's sole and absolute discretion, but contains no definition of overflow, no trigger mechanism, and no volume guidance. Can WBHHS provide clarity on:

(a) Definition: How does WBHHS define an overflow study for the purposes of Lot 2? Specifically, is an overflow study one that:

(i) the onsite Lot 1 radiologist does not have capacity to report during Business Hours;

(ii) requires subspecialty reporting the onsite provider cannot deliver;

(iii) is sent offsite for any reason at WBHHS's discretion; or some other definition?

(b) Priority: Will overflow studies sent during Business Hours carry the priority designation assigned in the WBHHS RIS at the time of transmission, i.e., will a routine overflow study retain a routine TAT rather than being treated as urgent by virtue of being sent as overflow?

(c) Trigger: What is the mechanism by which WBHHS will activate overflow, for example, a call to the Provider, a RIS worklist push, or another system event? Will a minimum notice period be provided before overflow is activated?

(d) Volumes: Can WBHHS provide an indicative volume of studies expected to be sent to the after-hours providers as overflow during Business Hours, broken down by modality, priority and facility? Without this data, we cannot resource or price the overflow obligation.

(e) Demarcation with Lot 1: When the onsite Lot 1 radiologist is present, what determines whether a study is reported onsite or sent as overflow to the Lot 2 Provider? Is there a defined capacity threshold, a modality rule, or is the decision entirely at WBHHS's discretion on a study-by-study basis?

(f) Batch Send Risk: We would like to flag the risk involved with batch sending cases via an integration during urgent after-hours service delivery. There is no ability to prioritise image transfer once sent, meaning if 20 cases are sent at once and the 15th case sent is a critical stroke case, this case needs to wait for transmission of all previous images sent before that case is received. A well-defined, clear workflow is imperative to maintain patient safety.

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:27 PM:


As per a previous response: 

Provision of overflow services in the agreement is to accommodate growth and change over time.  

WBHHS recognises that Providers have considerable experience in managing such workflows for overflow services. 

Given that WBHHS wants to partner with Providers, Providers may propose workflows, mechanisms and communication processes which would be of mutually benefit. Such a proposal may be included in the Providers response to question 4.6 in the response schedule.

Question:
Alignment Between Service Requirements and Minimum Hours Table

Section 1.3 of the Lot 2 specification states the Provider must deliver "routine reporting outside Business Hours and 24/7 on weekends and public holidays." However, the minimum hours of service table in the same section lists only "remote reporting, urgent clinical consultation", routine is not listed as a minimum service hour obligation.

(a) Can WBHHS confirm whether routine reporting is a binding minimum hours obligation outside Business Hours and on weekends and public holidays, or whether it is a capability that must be available but is not required to be actively delivered overnight?

(b) If routine overnight reporting is a binding obligation, can WBHHS update the minimum hours table to reflect this so that the operative table and the prose are consistent?

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:13 PM:


Routine reporting may be undertaken in Business Hours. There is no requirement for active overnight routine reporting.

Question:
Subspecialty Reporting - Required Disciplines, TAT and Pricing

Recommend: Public

The Lot 1 and Lot 2 specifications require the Provider to establish and maintain subspecialty reporting services but do not define which subspecialties are required or what volume of subspecialty studies is anticipated.

(a) Can WBHHS provide a defined list of the subspecialty disciplines it requires the Provider to maintain for Lots 1 and 2, for example: paediatrics, neuroradiology, cardiac, musculoskeletal, obstetric, vascular/interventional?

(b) Can WBHHS provide anticipated volumes of studies to be sent for subspecialist reporting, broken down by subspecialty discipline, modality and procedure name?

(c) The Q&A confirmed that alternate pricing can accommodate subspecialty reporting. Will WBHHS confirm whether the pricing schedule will be updated to include a subspecialty pricing line, or whether Providers should incorporate subspecialty pricing within the table provided?

(e) If a referring clinician requests a subspecialist in a discipline not covered by the Provider's panel, what is the agreed process, and will the Provider be in breach of contract if it cannot fulfil a subspecialty request that was not specified in the tender?

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:28 PM:


WBHHS seeks comprehensive radiologist services. 

The scope of subspecialty services is not known. 

It will not be known until the ITO responses are received and the skill sets of the proposed radiologists are assessed.  

Providers being aware of these proposed radiologist skillsets, may highlight what offsite subspecialty reporting will be provided to fill gaps related to the experience/subspecialities of its proposed onsite radiologists.

Question:
Clinical Governance Arrangement - Lead Radiologist Role in After-Hours Teleradiology

Recommend: Private

The Lot 2 specification requires the Provider to nominate a lead radiologist responsible for five governance functions. The Provider notes that several of these functions are not operationally compatible with an after-hours teleradiology model and seeks clarification on the following.

1. Definition and availability of the lead radiologist

The specification requires a single nominated lead radiologist for clinical consultation with requesting clinicians. In an after-hours teleradiology model, clinical consultations occur across a reporting roster of multiple radiologists, each of whom is the responsible clinician for the studies they report.

Can WBHHS confirm:

Whether the lead radiologist is required to be personally available for all clinical consultations outside Business Hours, or whether any credentialled radiologist on the active reporting roster may provide clinical consultation for studies they are reporting or whether this is a drafting error?

2. Protocol leadership

The specification requires the lead radiologist to provide protocol leadership, direction and advice to radiographers and sonographers. In a teleradiology model, protocol guidance is typically distributed across the reporting team based on modality expertise and is not concentrated in a single individual. Can WBHHS confirm:

(a) Whether protocol leadership may be delivered collectively by the reporting team rather than by a single named lead radiologist or if this is a drafting error?

3. Communication of significant findings

The specification lists communication of significant findings as a responsibility of the lead radiologist. Standard clinical practice, and the Lot 2 specification itself in the notification clause, places this responsibility with the reporting radiologist, not a separate lead. Can WBHHS confirm:

(a) Whether significant findings communication is intended to be the responsibility of the individual reporting radiologist, consistent with standard RANZCR practice and the notification clause elsewhere in the specification?

(b) If WBHHS intends the lead radiologist to have a separate oversight role for significant findings, what does that role entail in practice, and how does it operate when the lead radiologist is not the reporting radiologist?

4. Identification of disproportionate ordering patterns

The specification requires the lead radiologist to identify disproportionate ordering patterns. This is an analytical and operational function typically performed using data extracted from the RIS by operational or administrative staff, not a function requiring real-time clinical availability. Can WBHHS confirm:

(a) Whether this function may be performed by the Provider's operational or management staff, with findings escalated to a radiologist for clinical review where clinically relevant?

(b) The frequency and format in which WBHHS expects disproportionate ordering pattern identification to be reported, for example, as part of the monthly activity report?

5. Comparison with Lot 1 lead radiologist obligations

The Lot 1 specification contains detailed and specific obligations for the lead radiologist, including minimum onsite days, governance attendance and named individual requirements, obligations that are operationally appropriate for an onsite model. The Lot 2 specification applies the same governance heading without equivalent specificity for a teleradiology context. Can WBHHS clarify whether the Lot 2 lead radiologist obligations are intended to mirror the Lot 1 obligations, or whether an appropriately aligned governance model is more appropriate for an after-hours teleradiology service, and if so, can WBHHS specify what that model requires?

Answered on 22/May/2026 11:41 AM:


The intent of the lead radiologist for Lot 2 is to have a medical escalation point for clarifications which can accommodate both after hours and overflow reporting.

Question:
KPI 4 - Radiology Report Availability: Critical and Urgent

1. The definition reads "Number of radiology reports delivered within three times the applicable timeframe" but the threshold is expressed as "=99% compliance." A percentage threshold cannot be applied to an absolute number. The Lot 1 equivalent correctly reads "% of radiology reports." Will WBHHS correct the Lot 2 definition to read "% of radiology reports"?

2. The footnote example refers to "101 routine reports provided outside of 4.5 hours." This KPI expressly applies only to Critical and Urgent, routine is outside its scope. The Lot 1 equivalent correctly references "urgent reports." Will WBHHS confirm this is a drafting error and correct the footnote to read "urgent (and/or critical) reports"?

3. The 4.5-hour figure represents 3× the urgent TAT (3 × 90 minutes). What is the equivalent ceiling for critical studies, 90 minutes (3 × 30 minutes)? Can WBHHS confirm this and include it in the KPI definition?

4. Where KPI 4 is triggered, will service credits be applied in addition to those already applied under KPI 1 or KPI 2 for the same study? This is essentially a double penalty.

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:44 PM:


1. Yes.

2. Yes, both critical and urgent are to be incorporated

3. Yes.

4. Yes. A small number of items related to KPI 4 is not likely to impact the quantums in KPIs 1 and 2

Question:
KPI 5 - Monthly Activity Reporting

1. What constitutes "non-compliance" for KPI 5, is the $1,000 penalty triggered by late submission, incomplete data, or both? Does a report submitted on time with one missing data field constitute non-compliance?

2. What is the due date for the monthly report? The contract references 15 Business Days after month end, will this be confirmed in the KPI schedule?

3. Will WBHHS provide a report template specifying the required fields and format so that "compliance" has an objective definition?

4. Can WBHHS confirm that a KPI 5 breach (deficient monthly report) and a KPI 6 breach (missing addenda data) cannot both be applied in the same month for the same report submission?

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:29 PM:


1. Non-compliance would be triggered by late submission and/or incomplete data.

2. Date due is as per the contract is currently within 15 days of the end of each month. It is the intention that the contract, schedules and KPIs will work in unison.

3. Yes, WBHHS will provide the template headings and structure it requires during the transition in period. Providers may supply samples of monthly reports and WBHHS will provide feedback on such examples at part of the response to Part C Response Schedules 4.6.

4. Yes. This is possible.

Question:
KPI 7 - Notification of Urgent/Unexpected Findings

The Service Specification uses "all reasonable endeavours to communicate directly with the referrer." KPI 7 imposes 100% compliance. These standards are inconsistent. Will WBHHS align KPI 7 with the "all reasonable endeavours" standard in the specification?

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:33 PM:


The Service Specification outlines a notification and escalation pathway. This aligns with the RANZCR Standards of Practice for Clinical Radiology. It is an expectation that the Provider's radiologist will communicate each issue with WBHHS.

Question:
KPI 8 - Clinical Integration (Radiologist Availability)

1. WBHHS is the sole reporting party for KPI 8, with no objective measurement standard. How will WBHHS record and evidence a non-compliance event, and what opportunity does the Provider have to dispute a finding before the $1,000 penalty is applied?

2. The KPI 8 threshold is 100% compliance, making it part of the point-based structure (KPIs 1–8 & 11). This means a single unavailability event triggers a 1pp breach = $1,000. Is this the intended penalty structure for a single missed consultation in a given month?

Answered on 22/May/2026 04:50 PM:


1. Where the Provider's Radiologist is not available for clinical consultation after hours, and this is escalated to the contract management team, the occurrence will be recorded. The monthly Joint Governance Committee is the mechanism for such discussions.

2. Yes.

Question:
KPI 9 - Clinical Incidents

1. "Reported immediately" has no defined timeframe. What is the maximum time allowed between an adverse event occurring and the Provider notifying WBHHS, for example, within 4 hours, or by the start of the next Business Day for overnight incidents?

2. WBHHS is the reporting party for KPI 9. Will the $5,000 penalty apply only where the Provider failed to report an incident it was aware of, and not where the incident was identified and managed by WBHHS independently of the Provider and is there also mutual obligations around reporting timeframes for incidents identified by WBHHS

3. Where a clinical incident is partly or fully attributable to WBHHS's clinical management of the patient post-report, will the Provider's KPI 9 reporting obligation still apply, and will the $5,000 penalty be assessed against the Provider?

Answered on 22/May/2026 04:53 PM:


1. The maximum time allowed between an adverse event occurring and the Provider notifying WBHHS is 4 hours.

2. $5,000 penalty will be where the Provider failed to report an incident.

3. Yes.

Question:
KPI 11 - Invoice Data Accuracy

1. The threshold of 100% accuracy applied via a point-based penalty structure is operationally unachievable for a service of this scale. CMBS coding in radiology is clinically complex — the same imaging acquisition can give rise to legitimate coding disagreement between reasonable and qualified billers, depending on the clinical indication, the structures reported, and the applicable CMBS rules. Will WBHHS consider amending the threshold to =99% accuracy, consistent with industry standards for high-volume medical billing, and acknowledge that a zero-tolerance threshold at this volume will generate routine financial exposure for disputes that are not errors?

2. The definition of "incorrectly billed" is not stated. Can WBHHS confirm what constitutes a billing inaccuracy for the purposes of KPI 11? Specifically:

• Where WBHHS's referral or RIS order contains incomplete or incorrect clinical information that results in a coding decision the Provider later cannot defend, will the resulting discrepancy be attributed to the Provider for KPI 11 purposes?

• Where a study is directed by WBHHS for a patient or circumstance that has no directly applicable CMBS rebateable item, and the Provider applies the closest attributable MBS value as the billing reference (as provided for in the pricing framework), will this be treated as a billing inaccuracy?

(c)What is the process for identifying and disputing an alleged billing inaccuracy before a service credit is applied? Given that billing disagreements in radiology frequently arise from clinical coding complexity rather than error, we request that the contract include a formal dispute and remedy mechanism, will WBHHS confirm that no service credit for invoice inaccuracy will be applied to items that are under active dispute?

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:36 PM:


1. It is WBHHS' expectation that radiology service providers have comprehensive systems for ensuring invoice accuracy. Any request to change the threshold may be raised as a departure.

2. Section 8.2 of the agreement outlines invoice and billing practice. 

(a) For billing to occur, an examination will have been completed. For Lot 1 and Lot 2, mapping will be provided by WBHHS. For Lot 3, mapping will be by the Provider within the appropriate radiology industry standards.

(b) use of an attributable MBS item and value will be treated as accurate billing in the case of a CMBS item not eligible for rebate.

(c) process is outlined in Section 8 of the agreement.

Question:
KPI 12 - Plans and Evidence of Compliance

1. KPI 12 is "measured monthly" but the plans referenced (commissioning, implementation and risk management plans) are annual documents. Does the monthly measurement mean the penalty applies every month the plan is absent, or only in the month a plan is due?

2. What is the complete list of plans required under the contract, and what are their respective submission deadlines? "As per the contract" is insufficiently specific for an operative KPI.

3. Where a plan is submitted on time but WBHHS considers it inadequate, is the $2,000 penalty applied immediately or is a remedy period provided?

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:37 PM:


1. Status of Plans will be reviewed monthly and KPI abatement will be applied when the plan is not provided in the timelines as specified in the agreement or when an additional revision, requested by WBHHS is not provided.

2. See section 6 Plans for the requested list.

3. See section 6.8 (b) of the agreement.

Question:
Service Credit Framework - Drafting Errors

1. The worked example at Section 3.1 states: "Total Service Credit KPIs 1–4, 12: $15,000." This appears to be an error, KPI 12 uses a separate $2,000 per-plan penalty and is not part of the point-based calculation illustrated. The example total of $15,000 is derived from KPIs 1, 3 and 11 only. Will WBHHS correct the example to accurately reference the KPIs included in the calculation?

2. The service credit calculation table lists KPIs 1–8 & 11 as operating under the point-based structure ($1,000 per point). KPIs 5, 6, 7 and 8 each have a 100% threshold, meaning any breach results in 1pp below = $1,000. Can WBHHS confirm that the intent for these KPIs is a flat $1,000 per non-compliance event, and that the point-based calculation is not applied on a percentage-of-studies basis for these KPIs?

3. The schedule states "Service Credits will undergo periodic reviews." What is the review frequency, what triggers a review, and can service credit thresholds or rates be changed unilaterally by WBHHS during the review process?

Answered on 22/May/2026 04:54 PM:


1: WBHHS notes the drafting error referenced for the worked examples. Addendum 3 contains changes to reflect corrected errors with respect to the Part B - Sch 3, Section 3.1 for both Lots 1 & 2.

2. Assuming this query relates to Lot 2:

- flat for KPI 5,6 and 8.

-per event for KPI 7.

-percentage rate is not applied.

3. Over the term of the agreement, there may be a need for periodic review of Service Credits. Service Credits will be processed according to the terms in the Service Agreement.

Question:
10.1 Term and Termination

Extensions are at WBHHS's absolute discretion and fees carry over unchanged. For a 5+3+3 = 11-year contract, there is no fee review or CPI/indexation mechanism referenced. Is the expectation that fees are fixed for up to 11 years?

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:38 PM:


Since 1 July 2020 Diagnostic imaging services have been indexed by the Commonwealth. Such indexation is included in the fee structure.

Question:
Seeking clarification on whether the Lot 3 Service Specifications and associated KPIs are intended to apply within a non-exclusive agreement framework.

The Contract Details document states:

“No exclusivity – The Provider acknowledges that this Agreement does not entitle the Provider to be the exclusive provider of medical imaging services to WBHHS.”

However, Provider has been unable to identify similar wording within the Lot 3 Service Specifications themselves and would appreciate clarification as to whether the Service Specifications and KPI requirements are intended to operate on a non-exclusive basis.

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:39 PM:


For Lot 3, WBHHS may enter into one or more service agreements for the provision of full offsite services. As such, the Service Specifications and KPI requirements will apply to each agreement.

Question:
We note Part C Attachment 2 Third party Sec document. The document is headed as Third Party Security Questionnaire: Cloud Computing.

Whilst we understand the intent of this questionnaire, is it specifically geared towards a cloud service provider to the Qld Government, or should we be looking at it through the lens that you are interested in our Cyber Security environment? Should we be answering the questions that are relevant to our offering and environment, or is it specifically for Cloud services providers?

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:40 PM:


WBHHS are interested in the Cyber Security environment and the ICT environment, including whether Providers utilise Cloud services and where those services are located.

Question:
We are seeking an extension of the tender submission due date.

We’ve had key staff away this week and into next week, which has impacted the timing, coordination, and review of our submission. We would appreciate some additional time to complete and submit a thorough and considered tender response.

Answered on 20/May/2026 01:46 PM:


Unfortunately, WBHHS are unable to grant an extension to the ITO close date.

Question:
Our reading of clause 16.1(b)(iv) is that Provider would be unable to provide a copy of patient records to a patient without notifying WBHHS. Subclause (iv) would also limit Providers ability to provide a patient a copy of their medical records if they are outside Australia. Seeking clarification on these provisions and whether these are the intended interpretations?

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:40 PM:


ITO Part B - Draft Contract contains the proposed agreement for successful Providers. Should Providers wish to depart from this, including proposed drafting for interpretation, this must be included within Response Schedule D - Contract Departures.

Question:
Is the intention of clause 11.1(a)(x) that a copy of all patient records created by Provider over the course of the contract be provided to WBHHS at the end of the contract term even though these records will have already been provided to WBHHS during the term of the Agreement?

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:41 PM:


The intention of this clause is to ensure that there is a reconciliation at the end of the agreement to ensure all the contemporary records are complete prior to Provider's transition out.

Question:
Seeking clarification as to whether images and reports created by Provider under this Agreement fall within the definition of "WBHHS Patient Record".

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:41 PM:


Images and reports are within the definition of "WBHHS Patient Record".

Question:
Seeking clarification on the definition of "WBHHS Patient Records" and "Contract Intellectual Property". Do reports created and delivered by Provider under this Agreement fall within one or both of these definitions?

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:42 PM:


Reports created and delivered by the Provider fall within both of those definitions.

Question:
Seeking clarification on ownership of reports generated by Provider. Clause 7.4(b) indicates ownership by WBHHS however clause 5.4 indicates that Provider owns the medical records we create.

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:42 PM:


WBHHS has ownership of WBHHS' Patients Record.

Question:
In order to provide the best value for HHS, we require to know the split of urgent/routine cases. We appreciate you have provided a split of modalities and time of day, but not the urgency status. We are also aware you posted an addendum stating "Priority information unavailable" Is it possible you can source this info from the HHS RIS/PACs

Answered on 21/May/2026 04:43 PM:


For Lot 2, WBHHS advises that all after hours and weekend CTs and Ultrasounds will require urgent reporting.

All x-ray will be reported as routine in Business Hours.

Question:
Q1: Clarification on Urgent vs Critical priority selections:

What currently constitutes a critical study?

What is the current breakdown by modality of each priority: ie: of all the offsite reported CT's, how many are critical, urgent, routine SD/NBD.?

Is there a minimum number of studies that need to be performed per priority for abatements to apply? ie: if 9 studies for the month were critical, and 1 not reported 30 minutes, KPI would be 89% so a $1000 credit would apply for that month for a total of 9 studies?

Q2 Question would be around the flexibility of the 30 minute TAT, particularly mutli-accession studies. Ie: CT Trauma scan including CT Head, Chest, Abdomen, Pelvis, and 3 Region Spine would take on average atleast 30 minutes to review and report. What concessions are there for mutli region critical CT"s?

Answered on 22/May/2026 04:56 PM:


1. Critical is a new category for WBHHS. WBHHS intends to work with the successful provider during the transition in period to establish a limited list of clinical presentations which would be treated as critical. Notification mechanisms would also be clarified during this phase.

Critical category relates to CT examinations. Quantums for Critical are not current known.

All Lot 2 after hours, weekend, public holiday CTs and Ultrasounds are to be treated as urgent. Lot 2 x-ray are to be reported in Business Hours, next business day as routine.

2. WBHHS respects the requirement for considered quality radiology reports and as such would take into consideration aspects such as multi -accession studies in the determination of the Critical category.

Question:
Good morning,

May a copy of the Specifications mentioned within Specifications Lot 1, point 1.15.1(g) please be provided?

(g) Integration will be according to the current QRIS to RIS Specification and the External Radiology Reporting Interface Specifications and workflows.

Answered on 25/May/2026 01:30 PM:


The specifications are managed by a central entity in Queensland Health. The details will be provided to short listed Providers on request.