12_Attachment_H_-_Requirements_Response_Table_Amended.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 29 KB Posted
- Attached to
- SW1045 Emerging Technologies
- Solicitation number
- EV00000871
- Issued by
- Oklahoma County, Hobart City, Oklahoma
About this file
Summary of Attachment H – Requirements Response Table
This is a requirements response table for the State of Oklahoma and NASPO ValuePoint's Emerging Technologies Consulting and Services Master Agreement solicitation (EV00000871). The solicitation consists of two independent categories: Category 1 focuses on consulting services including advisory, planning, analysis, and implementation support for emerging technologies such as Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Quantum Computing, Blockchain, Robotic Process Automation, Natural Language Processing, Extended Reality/Spatial Computing, and Robotics; Category 2 focuses on implementation and services involving skilled professional resources for developing, implementing, integrating, and managing emerging technology solutions. Bidders may respond to one or both categories. The proposal deadline is October 15, 2026, with a questions deadline of August 28, 2026. Up to ten vendors per category will be awarded under Master Agreements with an initial one-year term and four optional one-year renewals by mutual agreement. The Master Agreement will be available to all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories through the cooperative purchasing arrangement.
The requirements response table provides detailed evaluation criteria across phased stages including Initial Responsiveness, Mandatory Minimum Requirements, Bidder Experience (100 points), Technical Criteria (200 points), and Cost Evaluation (200 points total). Category 1 experience requirements include documentation of three recent consulting engagements, establishment of governance frameworks, ET roadmaps, objectivity maintenance, approach tailoring, subcontractor networks, proprietary frameworks, AI application methodologies, stakeholder management, technology expertise demonstrations, and industry certifications. Category 2 experience requirements focus on custom development, implementation and integration, testing and quality assurance, managed services project examples, government sector experience, core technology platforms, success measurement in AI engagements, and organizational overview. Technical requirements for both categories emphasize understanding of ET strategy alignment, ethical implementation, workforce development, infrastructure capabilities, strategic planning, funding models for agencies of different sizes, success metrics, investment forecasts with cost-benefit analysis, bias mitigation techniques, risk management frameworks, and knowledge transfer approaches. Bidders must confirm national coverage capability by state and provide information regarding experience with contracting cooperatives and current cooperative contract portfolios with pricing restrictions.
View the file
Other files
Show all 25
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Cover
| Attachment H – Requirements and Response Table | |
| EV00000871 Emerging Technologies Consulting and Services | |
| Instructions | Requirements are organized for phased evaluation. Each Category has a Technical tab and an Experience tab. Requirements that apply to both Categories appear on the corresponding tab in both. Complete the yellow Response column on each tab. |
| Responding To (mark X) |
| Consulting (Category 1) |
| Services / Implementation (Category 2) |
| Bidder Name | |
| Tab Guide | |
| Cat 1 – Experience | Bidder experience evaluated for Consulting (Category 1) |
| Cat 2 – Experience | Bidder experience evaluated for Services / Implementation (Category 2) |
| Cat 1 – Technical | Technical requirements evaluated for Consulting (Category 1) |
| Cat 2 – Technical | Technical requirements evaluated for Services / Implementation (Category 2) |
Cat 1 – Experience
| Source Section | Req # | Requirement | Response |
| Bidder Experience – Consulting (Category 1) | 1 | Describe three (3) recent engagements, from the past three (3) years, in which you provide consulting services around ET. For each engagement provide: |
Client Name and Contract Information Brief Description of the Scope Desired Outcomes Any work product that can be shared
| Bidder Experience – Consulting (Category 1) | 2 | How have you assisted public or private entities with establishing ET governance frameworks? |
| Bidder Experience – Consulting (Category 1) | 3 | Share an example of a previously developed ET roadmap |
| Bidder Experience – Consulting (Category 1) | 4 | How do you maintain objectivity when you also have implementation capabilities or vendor partnerships? |
| Bidder Experience – Consulting (Category 1) | 5 | Describe how you tailor your approach based on the complexity, or type of public entity (e.g. Large State vs Small State or County Government vs School District) |
| Bidder Experience – Consulting (Category 1) | 6 | Provide a subcontractor network plan, including but not limited to: |
Who the subcontractors are Why the subcontractors are needed When are the subcontractors deployed How do you provide oversight of the subcontractors
| Bidder Experience – Consulting (Category 1) | 7 | Does your organization deploy any proprietary frameworks, methods, or strategies in the provision of ET consulting services? |
| Bidder Experience – Consulting (Category 1) | 8 | How do you approach the use of AI in the provision of your services? |
| Bidder Experience – Consulting (Category 1) | 9 | Describe a time when there was stakeholder resistance and how you worked through that resistance to produce the desired outcomes. |
| Bidder Experience – Consulting (Category 1) | 10 | Demonstrate your experience with the following list of technologies: |
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Machine Learning Quantum Computing Blockchain Robotic Process Automation (RPA) Natural Language Processing (NLP) XR/Spatial Computing Robotics Any technology not named, but could reasonably be defined as ET Bidder Experience – Consulting (Category 1) 11 Provide an example of a time you engaged with a client organization to scale their use of ET.
What was the clients’ existing use of ET, and what was the goal?
What tools were utilized to determine readiness, needs, or viability?
Was there any build vs. buy analysis done as part of the scaling efforts?
| Bidder Experience – Consulting (Category 1) | 12 | Describe a time where you advised a client to pursue a pilot? Why was this the approach that was recommended? |
| Bidder Experience – Consulting (Category 1) | 13 | Provide any industry-relevant certification your organization possesses |
Cat 2 – Experience
| Source Section | Req # | Requirement | Response |
| Bidder Experience – Implementation/Services (Category 2) | 1 | Provide a project example from the past three (3) years, where you provided custom development (as outlined in 02 – Scope of Work II. 2. a. i.). | |
| Bidder Experience – Implementation/Services (Category 2) | 2 | Provide a project example from the past three (3) years, where you provided Implementation and Integration (as outlined in 02 – Scope of Work II. 2. a. ii.). | |
| Bidder Experience – Implementation/Services (Category 2) | 3 | Provide a project example from the past three (3) years, where you provided Testing and Quality Assurance (as outlined in 02 – Scope of Work II. 2. a. iii.). | |
| Bidder Experience – Implementation/Services (Category 2) | 4 | Provide a project example from the past three (3) years, where you provided Managed Services (as outlined in 02 – Scope of Work II. 2. a. iv.). | |
| Bidder Experience – Implementation/Services (Category 2) | 5 | Provide any industry-relevant certification your organization possesses | |
| Bidder Experience – Implementation/Services (Category 2) | 6 | Describe your experience working with government or public sector entities. Highlight any unique challenges addressed (e.g., procurement constraints, data privacy, legacy systems). | |
| Bidder Experience – Implementation/Services (Category 2) | 7 | Outline the core technologies, platforms, and tools your organization regularly uses (e.g., cloud providers, ML frameworks, LLMs). Indicate any partnerships or certifications that support these capabilities. | |
| Bidder Experience – Implementation/Services (Category 2) | 8 | Describe how you measure success in AI engagements. Provide examples of quantified outcomes (e.g., cost savings, efficiency gains, improved service delivery). | |
| Bidder Experience – Implementation/Services (Category 2) | 9 | Share key lessons learned from past ET implementations and how those lessons have improved your delivery approach, if applicable. | |
| Bidder Experience – Implementation/Services (Category 2) | 10 | Provide an overview of your organization including history, capabilities, recent growth areas, or other important organizational factors. |
Cat 1 – Technical
| Source Section | Req # | Requirement | Response |
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 1 | Discuss your understanding and alignment with the broader Emerging Technologies (ET) strategy throughout the Country, and Oklahoma, including ethical ET implementation, workforce development, economic growth, and technological leadership. |
See AI Usage Standard (oklahoma.gov) and NIST Framework for Artificial Intelligence
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 2 | Discuss your efforts in the private sector and how ET is being used in contrast to public sector efforts. |
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 3 | Discuss how your strategies emphasize the importance of training and workforce development to prepare government employees for an ET-centric future. This includes retraining programs, educational initiatives, and organizational change management. |
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 4 | Discuss your capability to assist in developing or enhancing Emerging Technology infrastructure, including data management, cybersecurity, on-premise systems, data governance and existing systems such as enterprise systems and data platforms. Vendor agnostic solutions are preferred. |
See AI Usage Standard (oklahoma.gov)
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 5 | Demonstrate your company expertise in strategic planning, including the ability to develop a comprehensive actionable roadmap for ET implementation within a public entity. |
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 6 | Provide your approach that would enable agencies of different sizes to fund these types of strategy initiatives. For example, different models for different size agencies. |
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 7 | Include clear metrics and methods for evaluating the success and impact of the implemented ET strategy. |
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 8 | Provide examples of detailed investment forecasts and plans that include cost benefit analysis and clear value metrics. |
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 9 | What techniques do you use to ensure your solution’s results are not biased? How often do you engage in these techniques? |
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 10 | Describe your organization’s experience assisting public or private sector clients in developing ET strategy, governance frameworks or policies, workforce development plan, and/or other relevant organizational guardrails. |
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 11 | Demonstrate your organization’s knowledge and applied experience with the AI risk management frameworks. Specifically, please identify the following: |
Detail your understanding of the core principles of the framework and how they apply to public sector ET governance and policy.
Describe how they is incorporated into your methodologies.
Provide examples of applying frameworks and/or strategies within regulated or public environments, including integration with cybersecurity requirements, procurement controls, or enterprise policy structures.
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 12 | Describe your organization’s approach to incorporating ET risk methodologies and data governance into client support engagements. | |
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 13 | Outline philosophies, methodologies, or principles utilized in your service delivery that focuses on responsible ET design and strategy. | |
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 14 | Based on 02-Scope of Work and the specific consulting activities identified in II. b-f, what artifacts or deliverables are produced during your engagements? Please provide examples. | |
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 15 | How do you ensure compliance with AI policy evolution, industry regulations, and emerging legal/legislative requirements? | |
| Technical Requirements – Category 1 | 16 | What is your approach to knowledge transfer to ensure long-term sustainability after consulting engagement completion? | |
| Category 1 & 2 – National Coverage | 1 | Bidders must check the box for each State and/or territory for which they can currently provide services in: | PROVIDE RESPONSE AS PART OF NATIONAL COVERAGE SHEET |
| Category 1 & 2 - Implementation and Promotion of the NASPO ValuePoint Master Agreement | 1 | Describe your company’s experience working with contracting cooperatives. | |
| Category 1 & 2 - Implementation and Promotion of the NASPO ValuePoint Master Agreement | 2 | List the cooperatives through which you currently have a contract, and provide sales volume information for each. Identify any restrictions on pricing and sales (e.g., most-favored nation clauses) imposed by your other cooperative contracts. |
Cat 1 - National Coverage
| State / Territory | Check | State / Territory | Check |
| Alabama | ☐ | New Hampshire | ☐ |
| Alaska | ☐ | New Jersey | ☐ |
| Arizona | ☐ | New Mexico | ☐ |
| Arkansas | ☐ | New York | ☐ |
| California | ☐ | North Carolina | ☐ |
| Colorado | ☐ | North Dakota | ☐ |
| Connecticut | ☐ | Ohio | ☐ |
| Delaware | ☐ | Oklahoma | ☐ |
| Florida | ☐ | Oregon | ☐ |
| Georgia | ☐ | Pennsylvania | ☐ |
| Hawaii | ☐ | Rhode Island | ☐ |
| Idaho | ☐ | South Carolina | ☐ |
| Illinois | ☐ | South Dakota | ☐ |
| Indiana | ☐ | Tennessee | ☐ |
| Iowa | ☐ | Texas | ☐ |
| Kansas | ☐ | Utah | ☐ |
| Kentucky | ☐ | Vermont | ☐ |
| Louisiana | ☐ | Virginia | ☐ |
| Maine | ☐ | Washington | ☐ |
| Maryland | ☐ | West Virginia | ☐ |
| Massachusetts | ☐ | Wisconsin | ☐ |
| Michigan | ☐ | Wyoming | ☐ |
| Minnesota | ☐ | Puerto Rico | ☐ |
| Mississippi | ☐ | Guam | ☐ |
| Missouri | ☐ | US Virgin Islands | ☐ |
| Montana | ☐ | District of Columbia | ☐ |
| Nebraska | ☐ | American Samoa | ☐ |
| Nevada | ☐ | Northern Mariana Islands | ☐ |
Cat 2 – Technical
| Source Section | Req # | Requirement | Response |
| Technical Requirements – Category 2 | 1 | Discuss your understanding and alignment with the broader Emerging Technologies (ET) strategy including ethical ET implementation, workforce development, economic growth, and technological leadership. | |
| Technical Requirements – Category 2 | 2 | Discuss your experience in implementing ET solutions in public sector, private sector or similar environments focusing on efficiency, innovation, and ethical use of ET. | |
| Technical Requirements – Category 2 | 3 | Provide your company’s guiding principles when implementing ET to a live production environment. | |
| Technical Requirements – Category 2 | 4 | Provide examples of the ET solutions your company can provide. Describe how your company could provide an end-to-end ET solution. | |
| Technical Requirements – Category 2 | 5 | Discuss your efforts in the private sector and how ET is being used in contrast to public sector efforts. | |
| Technical Requirements – Category 2 | 6 | Discuss how you and your partners globally can provide a more comprehensive solution that emphasizes fostering of potential public-private partnerships in the state ET strategy and can aid in establishing and managing these potential partnerships. | |
| Technical Requirements – Category 2 | 7 | Discuss how solutions offered by your company can be customizable to the specific needs of an agency and scalable to adapt to future technological advancements. | |
| Technical Requirements – Category 2 | 8 | Detail how your company can ensure compliance with standards and ethical guidelines, including data privacy and human oversight in ET decision-making. | |
| Technical Requirements – Category 2 | 9 | Discuss your organization’s approach to quality management of implemented solutions, including: |
Risk and Compliance Technology, Data, and AI Lifecycle Management Continuous Process Improvement
| Technical Requirements – Category 2 | 10 | Provide your approach that would enable agencies of different sizes to fund these types of implementation initiatives. For example, different models for different size agencies. | |
| Technical Requirements – Category 2 | 11 | How does your organization define success and impact of implemented ET solutions. If available, provide clear metric and methods that would be utilized. | |
| Technical Requirements – Category 2 | 12 | Describe the approach your company will take to involve and communicate with stakeholders, including government employees, citizens, and other relevant parties post implementation. | |
| Category 1 & 2 – National Coverage | 1 | Bidders must check the box for each State and/or territory for which they can currently provide services in: | PROVIDE RESPONSE AS PART OF NATIONAL COVERAGE SHEET |
| Category 1 & 2 - Implementation and Promotion of the NASPO ValuePoint Master Agreement | 1 | Describe your company’s experience working with contracting cooperatives. | |
| Category 1 & 2 - Implementation and Promotion of the NASPO ValuePoint Master Agreement | 2 | List the cooperatives through which you currently have a contract, and provide sales volume information for each. Identify any restrictions on pricing and sales (e.g., most-favored nation clauses) imposed by your other cooperative contracts. |
Cat 2 - National Coverage
| State / Territory | Check | State / Territory | Check |
| Alabama | ☐ | New Hampshire | ☐ |
| Alaska | ☐ | New Jersey | ☐ |
| Arizona | ☐ | New Mexico | ☐ |
| Arkansas | ☐ | New York | ☐ |
| California | ☐ | North Carolina | ☐ |
| Colorado | ☐ | North Dakota | ☐ |
| Connecticut | ☐ | Ohio | ☐ |
| Delaware | ☐ | Oklahoma | ☐ |
| Florida | ☐ | Oregon | ☐ |
| Georgia | ☐ | Pennsylvania | ☐ |
| Hawaii | ☐ | Rhode Island | ☐ |
| Idaho | ☐ | South Carolina | ☐ |
| Illinois | ☐ | South Dakota | ☐ |
| Indiana | ☐ | Tennessee | ☐ |
| Iowa | ☐ | Texas | ☐ |
| Kansas | ☐ | Utah | ☐ |
| Kentucky | ☐ | Vermont | ☐ |
| Louisiana | ☐ | Virginia | ☐ |
| Maine | ☐ | Washington | ☐ |
| Maryland | ☐ | West Virginia | ☐ |
| Massachusetts | ☐ | Wisconsin | ☐ |
| Michigan | ☐ | Wyoming | ☐ |
| Minnesota | ☐ | Puerto Rico | ☐ |
| Mississippi | ☐ | Guam | ☐ |
| Missouri | ☐ | US Virgin Islands | ☐ |
| Montana | ☐ | District of Columbia | ☐ |
| Nebraska | ☐ | American Samoa | ☐ |
| Nevada | ☐ | Northern Mariana Islands | ☐ |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .