15-RFP 09 Word Version - Software Functionality Matrix.docx
DOCX document 52 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Grants Management Software
- Solicitation number
- RFP26-02
- Issued by
- Los Alamos County, New Mexico
About this file
The document is a Software Functionality Matrix for a Grants Management Software (GMS) Request for Proposal (RFP) issued by the Incorporated County of Los Alamos Procurement Division in New Mexico. The county is seeking a comprehensive grants management software solution to streamline grant application, review, approval, and reporting processes. The software must integrate with the county's Tyler Munis ERP system, support single sign-on capabilities, accommodate unlimited users, provide customizable dashboards, enable document storage, and facilitate compliance with federal grant regulations such as CFR Part 200.
The software functionality matrix outlines detailed technical requirements including the ability to track grant statuses, generate federal financial reports like SF425 and SF270, create custom reports, design performance measures, provide workflow approvals, search external grant opportunities, and maintain audit histories. The county requires the solution to be accessible for people with disabilities, compliant with Section 508 standards, and capable of tracking grant-related activities across different departments with granular user permissions. While specific pricing details are not included in this document, the county emphasizes that software enhancements, user permissions, and report customization should be provided at no additional cost.
View the file
Other files
Show all 22
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
SOFTWARE FUNCTIONALITY MATRIX
Incorporated County of Los Alamos Procurement Division 101 Camino Entrada, Building 3 Los Alamos, NM 87544
Offeror Company Name:
Solicitation No.:
Solicitation Title:
Instructions for Offerors: The following are minimum features and functionality requested by the County. For each line item, indicate if the functionality is provided as described below in the legend and provide a description of how the Solution provides the requested feature or if an alternate solution is proposed. County reserves the right to award to any Offeror whose combination of functionality or proposed alternate solutions best meets the County’s needs. Offerors should prepare to, at a minimum, present all of the features and functionalities below during their scheduled demonstrations, if selected as Finalist(s) for Step 2.
Legend:
S = Standard functionality out-of-the-box or meets requirement fully
M = Modification required (i.e. standard script or other work-around)
T = Provided by a third-party. Name the third-party and describe Offeror’s relationship with this third-party.
C = Requires customization to the base code/API
N = Unable to currently provide this feature or requirement
Ref.
No.
| Functionality: Please indicate with an X, using the legend above, to indicate how Offeror’s Software provides the following features and functionality. |
| S |
| M |
| T |
| C |
| N |
| Description of Solution |
| 1 |
| Integrations With County Systems |
| 1.1 |
| Ability to input data exported from County's ERP - Tyler Munis which includes, but is not limited to, revenue and expenditure data, the General Ledger, Project Ledger, Budget, Accounts Receivable, and Accounts Payable modules. Provide a data dictionary, data schema, and sample data exchange format. |
| 1.2 |
| Provides Single Sign On capabilities to integrate with County’s MS Azure Active Directory. |
| 1.3 |
| Describe any and all system integration methodologies your system offers. |
| 2 |
| General Functionality |
| 2.1 |
| Software will have the ability to grant access to an unlimited number of users at no additional cost. Minimum number of users must be at least fifty (50). |
| 2.2 |
| Offeror will provide Software enhancements free of charge whenever released. |
| 2.3 |
| System should have the ability to enter data manually, such as grant budget information used in the generation of the Budget to Actual Report, grant term dates, amendment dates, report dates, etc. Data should be customizable to each division or grant, and not just a basic template. Data input should be easy, simple, and not time consuming. |
| 2.4 |
| Ability to assign users with limited permissions, as determined necessary by the County, at no additional cost, as “read-only” without the ability to edit the data contained therein. |
| 2.5 |
| Ability for users to create customized dashboards easily without having technical knowledge and without having to contact vendor. |
| 2.6 |
| User-centric design (ability for each user to customize their own screens and layouts with ability to save user custom configured settings) |
| 2.7 |
| Ability to store grant documents, such as grant agreements, amendments, reports, etc. |
| 2.8 |
| System should provide the ability to configure, add new fields, and the ability to immediately run reports against the new fields created. |
| 2.9 |
| Software should be designed to comply with any applicable regulations defined in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards and facilitate grant management in accordance with said requirements. |
| 2.10 |
| Software should be designed to be accessible for people with disabilities and verifiably compliant with applicable standards and laws, which may include but is not limited to, sections of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or equivalent, which defines standards for electronic and information technology and web-based applications, and Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, which defines how to make Web content more accessible to people with disabilities. |
| 2.11 |
| Ability to research external grant opportunities and incorporate searches into a prospecting clearinghouse accessible by all system users. These searches should take advantage of system-to-system web-based utilities such as that offered by Grants.gov. Ideally, the system should link the search function to the grants approval process and eventually the grants application and award process. |
| 2.12 |
| Roles can be assigned using custom departments and divisions as defined by the County and custom roles and permissions can be assigned to various users or groups within those departments and divisions. For example, Fire Department is not able to view Police Grant information. Only the Department Head can view certain information while other users cannot. |
| 2.13 |
| Ability to create workflow approvals for pre-grant application authorization, per County Policy. Also, ability to create workflow approvals for execution of grant agreements, such as legal review first, etc. |
| 2.14 |
| Ability to internally search and generate reports on grant information, including name and address of granting agency contact, Assistance Listing Numbers (ALN), for federal grants. |
| 2.15 |
| Ability to track grant status, such as in Pending, Awarded, Active, Closed, etc. |
| 2.16 |
| Software should be able to keep and track audit history by User. |
| 2.17 |
| Ability to design meaningful performance measures, as defined by the County, unique to each grant and ability to track and report performance measures, milestones, etc. For example, program in certain target dates, secure match funding dates, planning completion dates, design completion, implementation dates. |
| 2.18 |
| Ability to generate reports to granting agencies, including but not limited to SF425 and SF270 Federal Financial Reports |
| 2.19 |
| Ability to track and alert Grant Managers by email when a grant agreement is nearing expiration, or a report is due |
| 2.20 |
| Should generate the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) Report which includes at a minimum, the following: |
· Grant agreement and notice of the award, as applicable
· Type of grant (e.g., reimbursement basis or structured payments)
· Program name and cluster title (if applicable)
· Name of federal funding agency
· Pass-through entity (if applicable)
· Assistance listing number (formally known as the CFDA number)
· Pass-through entity identifying number (if applicable)
· Amount passed through to each subrecipient (if applicable)
· Award amount
· Award date
· Match requirement (if applicable)
· Period of performance
| 2.21 |
| Reporting: Software should be able to export all reports into a CSV or XLS/XLSX file, word document, PDF. Describe any other formats offered. |
| 2.22 |
| System should provide the ability for end users to easily create saved reports and ad-hoc reports. |
| 2.23 |
| System should have the ability to allow users to create custom reports as needed without any additional costs with support as needed. |
| 2.24 |
| Ability to run Budget to Actual Report |
Free unlimited online training resources throughout the term of an agreement.
| 3 |
| Additional or Optional Features and Technical Specifications |
Describe any additional or optional features and technical specifications not already stated that may be relevant or offered to County. Use a separate document if more space is needed.
Describe whether the feature is provided as part of the standard base proposal or if it is offered optionally for free or for a fee. Include all costs for these additional or optional features in the Cost Proposal
RFP No. 24-15 Issued by Procurement Division: J. Kephart image1.jpeg
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .