2- MPS RFP- Vendor Questions and SPO Answers- BW- 12-29-14.pdf

Page 1 of 16 Pages

RFP-CM-15-001 Managed Print Services (MPS) – Statewide

Vendor Questions and State Purchasing Office’s Answers

In accordance with the RFP Section 1.5, Schedule of Activities and 1.6, Vendor Inquiries and Questions, this document represents the compilation of Vendor questions received and the Colorado State Purchasing Office (SPO) answers. This is referred to as the “Q & A” process. Additionally, two changes resulted from Vendor questions, see below.

TAKE NOTE:

Note 1: Prospective Offerors must keep in mind that the resulting award(s) from this RFP will be made available as MPS State Price Agreement(s) issued by the State Purchasing Office that can be utilized by State Agencies, Institutions of Higher Education, Political Subdivisions, and certified Non-Profit Organizations. IDS represents only one user and may be the largest, single State Agency user of an established MPS price agreement.

(“As stated in Section 2.1, Background, “Integrated Document Solutions (IDS) … manages the IDS Multi-

Function Printer (MFP) Program [formerly the IDS Fleet Copier Program] that many Front Range State Agencies have participation.”)

Note 2: Exhibit F (OIT – Services Level Agreement Requirements) is being replaced with an updated version. (See answer to Question 56 for further explanation.)

Note 3: New Exhibit K, Sample IDS Billing Workbook is added. (See answer Question 45 and

Question 57 for further explanation,)

Q1: Would the State be open to a proposal for an Actual Cost Per Page Model basis? Since each model of printer has its own CPP (cost per page) there would be cost advantages for the State using “Actual” over “Blended” CPP. Included in these advantages would be no minimums, no overage charges, and allows end-user to see real cost for each model. It would also offer flexibility for the user to print when/where they want.

A1: State Purchasing Office (SPO) Response: No, an actual cost per page model would not be acceptable. As stated in RFP Section 3.16.D (Vendor Cost Proposal), a blended cost per page model is sought. As a value to our customers and the contracted vendor, a fixed rate allows for better budget forecasting.

Q2: Is the State asking for OEM, Remake, or Compatible toner?

A2: SPO Response: New OEM toner is a requirement for State Agencies that fall under IDS/OIT policy jurisdiction (by statute). (Research for the DPA/OIT Business Case revealed State Agencies want new OEM due to durability of their equipment and higher page yield per cartridge.)

However, to enable users such as Political Subdivisions that are not subject to IDS/OIT policies, such an end user may choose to accept non-OEM toner with the expectation of a reduced cost for services.

Page 2 of 16 Pages

Q3: (Reference 2.2 Overview) a) Requirements are for management of the MFDs and transition service, but no mention of support for networked or locally connected personal printers, please verify that these network and local print devices are also in scope for break/fix and consumable replacement services on a Cost per Impression basis, as requested in vendor response workbook? b) Are Non Networked Printers in-scope? Does the State want pricing for break/fix and supply services on the local devices? Or is the plan to optimize the local printers out of the environment?

A3: SPO Response:

a) In the case of IDS, its current print ecosystem would require a contracted MPS vendor to provide consumable replacement services and break/fix per a cost per impression basis for Network Printers.

b) No. Personal/local printers are not in this RFP’s scope. Therefore, break fix/supply services for local devices is not needed as part of an Offeror’s MPS solution. IDS intends is to retire local and personal printers after they are no longer functional; thus, migrating the print volume to a shared network device.

Q4: (Reference Section 3 - Statement of Work) The SOW indicates this “Managed Print Services is for services, it is not a lease or buying agreement” yet the following items imply new equipment, training, etc… are required.

A4: SPO Response: For clarification: Managed Print Services is for ONLY services. For State

Agencies, equipment is obtained through other State Price Agreement vendors. The training to be provided by the MPS awarded contractor is training to end users on the benefits of using the managed print service solution and on the web portal to submit service calls for the reactive service.

Q5: (Reference 3.4 - IDS MFP Program) a) Is the State looking for pricing on new MFD technology as part of this RFP response, or simply looking for proactive management and reporting of existing and potentially future placed MFDs ordered off of different contracts? b) Are you going to order equipment (new mfd’s and printers for new installations) through your current contracts or through this MPS contract? c) Is it the State’s intent to have only the IDS 475 MFD’s in scope or the 1003 MFD’s stated in the IDS-MFP Program Expansion Business case?

A5: SPO Response:

a) In the case of IDS, this RFP addresses an awarded contractor’s proactive management and reporting of existing and potentially future placed equipment obtained from other State Colorado Price Agreement vendors.

b) As the MPS awards are for services ONLY, in the case of IDS, IDS will continue to obtain equipment from other State Price Agreement vendors.

c) IDS intends to have the current 475 MFD’s in the IDS MFD Program fleet and the other 528 devices located in other State Agencies not currently participating in the IDS MFP Program, eventually become part of the IDS MFP Program. Thus, resulting in an estimated total of 1003 devices.

Q6: (Reference 3.11 - Training for Equipment End User) The State is requesting “Training for

Equipment End User” including key operator one week after delivery? If new equipment is not part of this contract, is Training a requirement?

A6: SPO Response: See answer to Question 4 (“Q4”).

Page 3 of 16 Pages

Q7: (Reference 3.4 - IDS MFP Program) Please verify, the State is requesting pricing for MPS services (monitoring, supply replacement, break/fix) for the existing and potentially future networked printers ordered off of different contracts? Please clarify.

A7: SPO Response: Yes, the State is requesting a solution and pricing for MPS services (monitoring, supply replacement, break/fix) for the existing and potentially future networked printers. (State Agencies are required to purchase IT-related equipment such as printers and copiers through State Price Agreements awarded to other Vendors. In the case of IDS, IDS and OIT leverage statutory authority to enforce IT-related equipment and process standards.)

Q8: (Reference 3.5. Services Requirements., A. IDS Related Services) Job Accounting for Copy/Print usage; Is job accounting for print and copy impressions by user a requirement for all printing, including the personal printers, networked printers, and MFDs?

A8: SPO Response: Prospective Offerors must keep in mind that IDS represents the largest, single

State Agency user of a resulting awarded State Price Agreement(s) from this RFP. (Other possible users, such as local government or Institutions of Higher Education entities, may have other needs and/or requirements.) In the case of IDS, IDS requires an MPS contractor to provide job accounting for network printers and MFD’s. The need will vary in each of the State’s Agencies.

Q9: (Reference 3.5 Services Requirements., 3. Mobile Print Services) Is Mobile Print required for print jobs to be submitted and retrieved at all networked printers or just the MFDs?

A9: SPO Response: Yes, IDS mobile print is required for both Network Printers and MFD’s.

Q10: Can the State provide a an inventory list of the existing printers, including the printers serial number, make and model, and the physical address including zip code of where the printers are located, as well as monthly average volume for each print device, if known?

A10: SPO Response: The State does not have an inventory at the level requested. We can only offer the demographics for State Agencies that are participants in the IDS MFD Program which are contained in the IDS Business Case – March 2013 (Exhibit C), the IDS Business Case – Metrics Summary (Exhibit D) and the IDS Program Equipment and Printer Metrics (Exhibit E).

Q11. (Reference 2.1) Please provide clarity on whether this data provided is “annual” or “36” month period?

A11: SPO Response: Data provided in the “Historical Usage” section is based on annual data.

Q12: (Reference 2.1) With the intent to put the following printers under contract and to create a single price for mono and color for the following devices: 1. MFP, 2. Single Function.

A12: SPO Response: The expected result is a single price for mono and for color for MFP and Single Function Network Printers. In the case of IDS, IDS intends to place all printers under one MPS Price Agreement contract for its IDS MFP Program fleet.

Page 4 of 16 Pages

Q13: (Reference 2.1) Will the state accept proposals proposal for pricing based on different printer engines?

A13: SPO Response: No. See answer to Q1.

Q14: (Reference 2.1) [We] request the data per copier/printer collected in the data analysts. Please also provide the location where each of these copiers/printers are located.

A14: SPO Response: See answer to Q10.

Q15: (Reference 2.1) Is the 123M pages an annual page volume number for both the MFP’s and

Single Function devices? Or just the MFP devices? If it’s just for the MFP’s can the state provide estimates for the entire printer fleet?

A15: SPO Response: In the “Historical Usage” section, IDS provided data where the 123M page is an annual figure for all printing output devices within its current IDS MFP Program fleet. The 123M pages was an estimate based on the extrapolation data provided in the business case (refer to Exhibit C and Exhibit D).

Q16: (Reference 3.3) Please provide a list of state departments that would require 24x7x365 day support?

A16: SPO Response: There are a number of End Users that are on a 24-hour a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year schedule. For State entities, they include, but are not limited to: the Governor’s Office, Colo. Dept of Public Safety (i.e. Division of Emergency Management, Colo. Bureau of Investigation, Colo. State Patrol – offices), Colo. Dept. of Corrections (i.e. correctional facilities), and etc. It is likely that Political Subdivisions (local government) users of a resulting contract would have similar needs for their jurisdictions.

Q17: (Reference 3.3) The industry standard support model is 8am to 5pm Monday thru Friday – would this be an acceptable response time for the State of Colorado?

A17: SPO Response: The requirement is a minimum of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (Mountain Standard time) and is acceptable for most End Users. However, there are a number of End Users that are on a 24-hour a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year schedule (see answer to Q16).

Q18: (Reference 3.4 IDS Multi – Function Printer) Please provide clarity on how the State of Colorado intents to create an optimization strategy with a multi-vendor award?

A18: SPO Response: The State intends to make awards to multiple vendors.

Prospective Offerors must keep in mind that the resulting award(s) from this RFP will be made available as MPS State Price Agreement(s) issued by the State Purchasing Office that can be utilized by State Agencies, Institutions of Higher Education, Political Subdivisions, and certified Non-Profit Organizations.

IDS represents only one user and may be the largest, single State Agency user of an established

MPS price agreement. IDS intends to select and contract with only one MPS Price Agreement vendor to provide for its needs.

Page 5 of 16 Pages

Q19: (Reference 3.4 IDS Multi – Function Printer) What is the transition schedule for moving to an optimized environment, 1 year, 2 years etc?

A19: SPO Response: IDS intends to implement a plan that will be a 2-4 year strategy to optimize the print environment for its IDS MFP Program fleet.

Q20: (Reference 3.4 IDS Multi – Function Printer) With the intent to move to a 6:1 ratio for printing – does the State of Colorado intend to purchase or lease network and personal printers?

A20: SPO Response: In the case of IDS, IDS will continue to obtain network/local printers for the participants in its IDS MFD Program fleet, as needed.

Q21: (Reference 3.4 IDS Multi – Function Printer) Optimization to reduce printers – with requirement to reduce and optimize printers, is the State of Colorado willing to provide resources to meet this need or does the state expect the supplier to support the optimization?

A21: SPO Response: In the case of IDS, IDS will assign a Multi-Function Printer Manager (IDS staff) to coordinate with an MPS contractor to support IDS’ optimization. The contracted MPS vendor will carry out the optimization for the IDS MFP Program as addressed in Section 3.5.A.4.

(“Comprehensive onsite assessment services…”).

Q22: (Reference 3.4 IDS Multi – Function Printer) Roadmap to optimization, will the State of Colorado accept proposals to manage existing printers under a MPS contract, with a 2-5 year strategy to identify and reduce the number of printers in each state agency?

A22: SPO Response: See answer to question Q7.

Q23: (Reference 3.16 Cost Proposal – Pricing) Please provide clarity on what justifies Cost adjusted after 12 months?

A23: SPO Response: As stated in Section 3.16, B (Price Increase), “An awarded Contractor may amend pricing once in each 12-month period thereafter the initial term of the contract. The awarded Contractor shall request any price increase in writing to the SPO at least 60 days prior to the anticipated increase, and such request shall justify the increase by describing verifiable awarded Contractor cost increases. Such requests shall contain complete documentation, and cost justifications may be based on Consumer Price Index, or similar industry pricing guides.

Such price changes must be accepted by the SPO and become effective by amendment to the awarded contract.” The intent is to consider a Contractor’s overall cost of operations changes; it is not designed to improve a vendor’s profit margin.

Q24: (Reference 3.16 Cost Proposal – Pricing) State of Colorado has requested a “blended rate - one cost model for color or monochrome.” Based on the RFP, there are over 10,000 printers with different printing engines and a cost for a blended rate may not be in the best interest for the State of Colorado. Will the State of Colorado accept alternative pricing models that would provide an industry “standard page rate per engine/model?”

A24: SPO Response: An alternate is not acceptable. See answer to Q1.

Page 6 of 16 Pages

Q25: (General) Does the State of Colorado value OEM parts and supplies? Will the State of Colorado be requiring OEM toner?

A25: SPO Response: See answer to question Q2.

Q26: With multiple awards being granted, can we provide the overall monitoring, but work in individual departments? (RFP Section 1.1)

A26: SPO Response: See answer to Q18.

Q27: The current MFP contract includes toner and services. Will the new one also include that or will the awarded contract include toner and services for the new devices as well. (RFP Section 3.5.1)

A27: SPO Response: In the case of IDS, participants in the IDS MFP Program will continue to receive toner and services for existing and any added devices. The MPS vendor (that IDS contracts with) will be responsible for managing the IDS MFP Program fleet to include monitoring, supply replacement, break/fix for MFD’s and future MFD’s. Further, an awarded MPS contractor is required to provide monitoring, supply replacement, break/fix for MFD’s to State Agencies not currently participating in the IDS MFP Program; that may potentially participate. It is important to note that all copiers/MFD’s are procured from other State Price Agreement equipment vendors.

Therefore, consumables, service, and parts are included in the equipment contract.

Q28: Can we extend the page limit of the Executive Summary? ( RFP Section 4.3.2)

A28: SPO Response: No, the purpose of the Executive Summary is for the Offeror to provide an overview of their MPS solution. The details of the solution must be addressed using the Section 3, Statement of Work requirements.

Q29: RFP Section 3, p. 10, states in bold, “Managed Print Services is for services, it is not a lease or buying agreement.” Please clarify what are the specific product and services covered under this contract.

A29: SPO Response: The services required are addressed in Section 3.1 through 3.15. As briefly stated in Section 2.2 (Overview) “The State seeks proposals from qualified manufacturers and/or vendors/resellers in providing comprehensive Managed Print Services (MPS) to Ordering Entities statewide, whereby reducing print cost and increasing efficiencies. Services include management of multi-function devices (MFD’s) and related services, and providing a solution for transition.”

Q30: RFP p. Section 3, p. 10, states in bold, “Managed Print Services is for services, it is not a lease or buying agreement.” Please clarify what are the specific product and services covered under this contract. Specifically:

a. Is this contract requesting us to manage your existing fleet of MFDs and printers (no new equipment) or,

b. Will this include a replacement of the existing fleet? If refresh: Please provide the configuration requirements (finishing, paper requirements, etc.) of the replacement fleet.

What is the replacement schedule?

A30: SPO Response: For a) and b) - See answer to Q5.

Page 7 of 16 Pages

Q31: RFP Section 2.2 states, “The State may award all or part of this RFP…” If awarded in part, how does the State anticipate dividing up the scope of the contract?

A31: SPO Response: Depending on Offerors’ MPS solutions submitted as responses to this RFP, the State may consider if solutions meet all of our needs sufficiently or if only up to an acceptable “compromise” of expected services.

Q32: RFP Section 3.4: Are supplies to include toner and staples?

A32: SPO Response: See answer to Q3 and Q27.

Q33: Exhibit H – Please provide quantities and volumes of your current printer fleet.

A33: SPO Response: This has been addressed in Exhibit E, IDS Program Equipment and Printer Metrics.

Q34: RFP p. 24, Question #7. What type of upgrade flexibility is the State looking for?

A34: SPO Response: If the Inquirer meant Section 4.3.4 Cost Proposal, B.7; then it means flexibility for the software analytics tool supporting the proposed MPS solution; not the equipment.

Q35: Will State agencies be mandated to purchase off this contract, or will they be able to purchase off of the WSCA and IPA contracts?

A35: SPO Response: State Agencies under the Executive branch of government and under the jurisdiction of IDS and OIT requirements (by statute) are required (mandatory) to obtain services from a resulting contract from this RFP for MPS needs. WSCA awards are not applicable here as the Colorado State Purchasing Office has not engaged in contracts/price agreements with Vendors for State entities’ use. The SPO cannot address “IPA contracts” as it is not known what the Inquirer is referring to. Further, State entities not under IDS/OIT jurisdiction may choose to use or not use the resulting MPS State Price Agreement(s) for their MPS needs.

Q36: General: Will bidders be given the opportunity for follow-up questions if further clarification is required to the first round of Q&As?

A36: SPO Response: No. The State will not provide an opportunity to submit further questions.

Q37: Exhibit A, Terms and Conditions document has an effective date of August 8, 2008. Is this the most recent version?

A37: SPO Response: Yes, “August 8, 2008” is the current version. With the recent move to the State’s new accounting system (CORE) and its impact on the solicitation, accounting, and procurement processes, the State Purchasing Office intends to revise Exhibit A in the near future.

Q38: Will there be an opportunity to discuss requirements and work flow for software solutions?

A38: SPO Response: There will not be an opportunity during this RFP process to discuss requirements and work flow for software solutions. Not beyond information provided in Sections 2 (Background, Overview, and General) and Section 3 (Statement of Work) such as Section 3.3 through 3.5, for example; in the case of IDS for its IDS MFP Program Fleet. Such “requirements

Page 8 of 16 Pages and work flow for software solutions” discussions would take place after awards are made with Offerors as a result of this RFP, after a State Price Agreement is issued, and only then during the negotiation phase of a contract between the User (IDS or other Users) and their choice of MPS State Price Agreement vendor.

Q39: Will there be a Proof of Concept? If so, how long and what is the State’s expectation?

A39: SPO Response: Yes. In the case of IDS, as part of its contracting with a MPS State Price Agreement vendor, “Proof of Concept” will take place in Phase I of MPS implementation. (Refer to Exhibit E – Tab2, where Phase I involves the Governor’s Office and the Colo. Dept. of Personnel and Administration.) Non-State entities and State users not participating in the IDS MFP Program, a “Proof of Concept” may be required.

Q40: Will there be a phase approach to the implementation?

A40: SPO Response: Yes. This has been addressed in Exhibit E, Tab 2 of the IDS Program Equipment and Printer Metrics.

Q41: Will there be an opportunity to discuss standard requirements for the MFP Fleet (copier integration with third party software solutions)?

A41: SPO Response: There will not be an opportunity during this RFP process to discuss standard requirements for IDS’s MFP Fleet beyond information provided in Sections 2 (Background, Overview, and General) and Section 3 (Statement of Work) such as Section 3.3 through 3.5, for example. Such “standards requirements” discussions would take place after awards are made with Offerors as a result of this RFP, after a State Price Agreement is issued, and only then during the negotiation phase of a contract between IDS and their choice of MPS State Price Agreement vendor.

Q42: Will Vendors be able to negotiate alternate pricing based on actual devices and volumes in each entity’s fleet?

A42: SPO Response: No. See answer to Q1.

Q43: Can you please expand on any established guidelines for an agency to migrate from a desktop printer to an MFP device?

A43: SPO Response: State Agencies under the executive branch of government and under the jurisdiction of IDS and OIT policies and practices (by statute) are required (mandatory) to obtain services from a resulting MPS State Price Agreement(s) from this RFP for MPS needs. IDS has statewide authority over State Agency office print needs and practices. In the process of printer/copier procurement, State Agencies are advised and educated on best business practices.

In this instance, IDS makes the determination.

Q44: "Statewide, several resources work on CDPS contracts for copiers that vary from 30 - 70 per month." Please clarify this sentence as we are unclear what the terms "work on" and "30-70" refer to.

Page 9 of 16 Pages

A44: SPO Response: If the Inquirer is referring to Exhibit C, IDS Business Case – March 2013 (Section 3.1, page 10), it refers to the number of multi-page documents CDPS prints out on personal printers. It illustrates the high volume of printing that could be produced from a personal printer. For example, most State contract documents average between 20 to 50 pages each and requires 3 to 5 copies for execution; thus, generating as much as 250 pages for one contract documents set. Printing out as many as 70 contract documents sets a month could generate about 17,500 pages.

Q45: Exhibit F – CO OIT Service Level Agreement Requirements

a. 11. Contractor Compliance Considerations. Invoicing. Contractor shall maintain timely, accurate invoicing as defined below. Failure on the Contractor’s part to maintain these defined levels shall result in a $50.00 per instance credit, in the next invoice cycle.

Please confirm that vendors are permitted a 30 day cure period as is customary

A45: SPO Response: Yes, an awarded MPS contractor will have a 30-day cure period for each erroneous invoice.

Q46: Is the State open to the selected vendors to replace older printers with a more cost effective device should it be determined that the area continues to require an output device?

A46: SPO Response: One of the purposes of MPS is to replace older equipment with more cost effective devices. The function of a MPS contractor is to perform an assessment of the User’s equipment needs. The User is the party who will determine what action to take on a MPS contractor’s recommendations for equipment replacement. However, in the case of participants in the IDS MFP Program; IDS will make equipment procurement from other equipment State Price Agreement vendors.

Q47: Does the State prefer a fixed monthly fee for services (based on monthly allocated volume) or a monthly fee based on actual usage?

A47: SPO Response: In the case of IDS, as part of its contracting with a MPS State Price Agreement vendor for its IDS MFP Program fleet, IDS would require a monthly fee based on actual usage.

However, non-State entities and other State users not participating in the IDS MFP Program may have a different preference; therefore, both options may be applicable. For the purpose of providing a response to this RFP, the Offeror is to propose a fixed monthly fee for services.

Q48: What is the expected timeline of implementation by Phase?

A48: A SPO Response: If the Inquirer meant for IDS specifically, Exhibit E, Tab 2 shows 5 Phases (IDS Program Equipment and Printer Metrics). Each Phase has approximately 4 State Agencies and calculating 30 days implementation per State Agency, plan for 120 days per Phase.

Q49: Would the State provide a list of printer servers by department?

A49: SPO Response: At this time, the State does not track printer servers. For IDS, one of the tasks for a contracted MPS vendor will be to develop such a list.

Page 10 of 16 Pages

Q50: In order to ensure billing accuracy, many States permit the electronic gathering of meter information. Will CO allow vendors to remotely access meter reads?

A50: SPO Response: In the case of IDS, remote access meter reads will be allowed for IDS MFP Program fleet devices.

Q51: Section 3.16 Cost Proposal – States "An awarded Contractor is required to hold its pricing for the first 12 months of its initial award. Pricing must include all delivery, shipping, service costs associated with the service..." Is it the State's intent to receive a product [cost] schedule for equipment or is this a "Services only agreement"?

A51: SPO Response: See response to Q4.

Q52: (Section 3.16 Cost Proposal) If equipment is not contemplated, please explain how delivery and shipping are involved in the performance of this agreement.

A52: SPO Response: An awarded contractor is required to deliver consumables and replacement parts to end users as part of its MPS solution. It is the cost associated with the logistics of delivering consumables. See answer to Q3 (network printers consumables and break/fix) and Q27 (MFD consumables and break/fix).

Q53: Exhibit B - Page 23 - Section 15, Remedies: States "Contract Early Termination in the Public

Interest - The State is entering into this Price Agreement for the purpose of carrying out the public policy of the State of Colorado, as determined by its Governor, General Assembly, and/or Courts.

If this Price Agreement ceases to further the public policy of the State, the State, in its sole discretion, may terminate this Price Agreement, and any Order, in whole or in part." Please confirm that any cancellation of a statewide price agreement impacts the master agreement and does not impact Purchase Orders that have been placed pursuant to the agreement.

A53: SPO Response: Such a cancellation will impact the awarded MPS State Price Agreement (vendor contract) AND orders placed by Ordering Entities. Once a cancellation occurs, only orders that are already in progress at the date of the cancellation will be completed. No new orders can occur. Please refer to Exhibit B - Page 23 - Section 15, Remedies in its entirety.

Q54: In order to accommodate the pre-planned holiday time off, we would appreciate some additional time to create a comprehensive written and price proposal that meets the state’s requirements.

Will the State of Colorado consider extending the due date for the responses?

A54: SPO Response: The State had allowed for the holiday schedule and planned this RFP for a 42-day publication. (The standard RFP publication is 30 days.) Therefore, the State will not extend the due date, at this time.

Q55: General Question – In order to provide the state the most cost effective response, we request a listing of all print device models, locations, quantities and volumes for networked and personal printers.

A55: SPO Response: See answer to Q10.

Page 11 of 16 Pages

Q56: RFP, 3.6-IDS Accounting Office Requirements indicates that the Contractor billing is due to IDS the first business Friday of every month via email. It also refers vendor to Exhibit F for additional information. Exhibit F, Page 3, Item 11 States that the measure for timely invoicing is the invoices will be submitted no later than the 25th of the month immediately following the close of the billing period. These two areas of the bid contradict each other. Please confirm which is correct and which is the measure for the SLA.

A56: SPO Response: In Exhibit F (OIT – Services Level Agreement Requirements), it should read “10th of the month” and a corrected Exhibit F will be posted. For IDS, billing is due to IDS the first business Friday of each month for the previous month’s services. This due date enables IDS to timely and subsequently bill the individual State Agencies participating in the IDS MFP Program.

Q57: RFP, 3.6-IDS Accounting Requirements - states that the format for the invoice is a spreadsheet.

The section also refers vendors to Exhibit F for more information. Exhibit F, Page 3, Item 10- Other Contractor Responsibilities states that Contractor will provide monthly invoices to IDS for each functional area until contractor and IDS can review invoice process and determine if adjustment should be considered. Please clarify how vendors are to provide the invoice and in what format.

A57: SPO Response: In the case of IDS, as part of its contracting with a MPS State Price Agreement vendor, IDS would require a monthly Excel workbook (see attached new Exhibit K, Sample IDS Billing Workbook - Excel with detailed and itemized devices under the MPS contracted group) and a Summary invoice with the total dollar amount (i.e. December 2014 for 12/1/14 through 12/31/14 MPS services, total $190.50) for the billed month services which matches the total of the Workbook detailed report. Non-IDS MFP Program entities may have different preferences; such as receiving a digital invoice or hard copy invoice, individual invoicing, or a combination summary invoice/detailed report.

Q58: Exhibit A, Section 4.3.A.2-Commerical General Liability - Would it be acceptable for a vendor to strike “purchasing additional policies or limits if our aggregate is reduced” and add at the end of the paragraph “or maintain an aggregate limit that is twice the per occurrence limit” instead?

A58: SPO Response: No. The State’s requirements for such insurance coverage are not negotiable.

Q59: Exhibit A, Section 4.3.B, First line - Would it be acceptable for the vendor to state that the State of

Colorado shall be “included” as an additional insured vs. “named” as an additional insured.

A59: SPO Response: No. The State’s requirements for such insurance coverage are not negotiable.

Any certificate of insurance must include in the “Description Block” of a standard ACORD form, “The State of Colorado is named as additional insured” and provide an endorsement with the certificate.

Q60: Exhibit A. Section 4.3.c - We cannot agree to the 45 day of notice in event of cancellation of policy. Would it be acceptable to strike that requirement and add: “Contractor agrees that its insurance policies and certificates shall contain standard cancellation language. Should any of the referenced policies be canceled prior to the expiration thereof, notification shall be provided in accordance with policy provisions.”

A60: SPO Response: Once the State establishes a contract (price agreement) with an awarded Offeror, the contract takes precedence over the insurance requirements. The State can agree to

Page 12 of 16 Pages consider negotiating a reduced time of notification in a resulting contract; contingent upon the approval of the State’s Risk Management unit. Refer to Exhibit B, Sample OIT Model Contract.

(excerpt) “13. INSURANCE B. Contractors – Subcontractors

viii. Cancellation. The above insurance policies shall include provisions preventing cancellation or non-renewal without at least 30 days prior notice to Contractor and Contractor shall forward such notice to the State in accordance with §16 (Notices and Representatives) within seven days of Contractor’s receipt of such notice.”

Q61: Exhibit A, Section 4.3.D. - Would it be acceptable for the vendor to add: “does not agree to waive right of subrogation for the actions or omissions of the State of Colorado, its agencies, institutions, organizations, officers, agents, employees or volunteers.”

A61: SPO Response: Once the State establishes a contract (price agreement) with an awarded Offeror, the contract takes precedence over the insurance requirements. Therefore, the State cannot agree to your requested change. Refer to Exhibit B, Sample OIT Model Contract.

B. Contractors – Subcontractors

ix. Subrogation Waiver. All insurance policies in any way related to this Price Agreement and secured and maintained by Contractor or its Subcontractors as required herein shall include clauses stating that each carrier shall waive all rights of recovery, under subrogation or otherwise, against Contractor or the State, its agencies, institutions, organizations, officers, agents, employees, and volunteers.”

Q62: Exhibit A, Section 4.3.F - Would it be acceptable for a vendor to replace “No later than 15 days prior to expiration date” with “Within ten (10) days after the inception of renewal policies for”. We would need this change because we are part of a consolidated insurance program with the other Corporate U.S. entities and coverage is not bound until middle to end of September (sometimes just days before expiration) so when the broker runs our certificates for issue it is not until the last week of September to the first week of October and we have 8,000 certificates on file for issuance.

A62: SPO Response: Once the State establishes a contract (price agreement) with an awarded Offeror, the contract takes precedence over the insurance requirements. The State can agree to consider negotiating a reduced time of notification in a resulting contract; contingent upon the approval of the State’s Risk Management unit. Refer to Exhibit B, Sample OIT Model Contract.

C. Certificates. Contractor and all Subcontractors shall provide certificates showing insurance coverage required hereunder to the State within seven business days of the Effective Date of this Price Agreement. No later than 15 days prior to the expiration date of any such coverage, Contractor and each Subcontractor shall deliver to the State certificates of insurance evidencing renewals thereof. In addition, upon request by the State at any other time during the term of this Price Agreement or any subcontract, Contractor and each Subcontractor shall, within 10 days of such request, supply to the State evidence satisfactory to the State of compliance with the provisions of this §13.”

Q63: Exhibit B, Section 13 B. ii. Commercial General Liability: Could a vendor add: at the end of the last sentence add “Or maintain an aggregate limit that is twice the per occurrence limit.”

A63: SPO Response: See answer to Q58.

Q64: Exhibit B, Section 13 B. iv. Cyber Privacy Insurance- Please allow vendors to change last sentence change per “occurrence” to per “claim”. Reason is that our insurance for this is included in our Technology E&O policy which is claims made.

Page 13 of 16 Pages

A64: SPO Response: The State can agree to consider negotiating a “claims made” versus “occurrence” in a resulting contract; contingent upon the approval of the State’s Risk Management unit.

If a policy written on an occurrence form is not commercially available, the claims-made policy shall remain in effect for the duration of this State Contract and for at least two years beyond the completion and acceptance of the work under such contract, or, alternatively, a two-year extended reporting period must be purchased by the Vendor. Such proof of coverage would be required for the Vendor to provide to the State and it is NOT cancellable.

Q65: Exhibit B, Section 13 B v. Professional Liability: Please allow vendors to change line 4 to “claim” instead of “occurrence”.

A65: SPO Response: See answer to Q64.

Q66: Exhibit B, Section 13 B. v. Professional Liability: Please allow vendors to change line 5 to “claim” instead of “occurrence”

A66: SPO Response: See answer to Q64.

Q67: Exhibit B, Section 13 B.vi. - Additional Insured: Please allow vendors to change “name” as an addition insured to “include” as an additional insured.

A67: SPO Response: See answer to Q59.

Q68: Exhibit B. Section 13 B, viii. Cancellation Would it be acceptable for a vendor to delete “amend the policy to include a 30 day notice in the event of cancellation of the policy to “ Vendor agrees that its insurance policies and certificates shall contain standard cancellation language. Should any of the referenced policies be canceled prior to the expiration thereof, notification shall be provided in accordance with policy provisions.”

A68: SPO Response: See answer to Q60.

Q69: Exhibit B. Section 13 B. ix- Subrogation Waiver Please allow the following language addition at the end of the last sentence “unless such loss or damage is caused by the negligence or omission of the State of Colorado, its agencies, institutions, organizations, officers, agents, employees or volunteers.”

A69: SPO Response: See answer to Q61.

Q70: Exhibit B. Section 13 C. Certificates, 3rd line: Would it be acceptable for a vendor to replace “No later than 15 days prior to expiration date” with “Within ten (10) days after the inception of renewal policies for”?. We request this change because we are part of a consolidated insurance program with the other Corporate U.S entities and coverage is not bound until middle to end of September (sometimes just days before expiration) so when the broker runs our certificates for issue it is not until the last week of September to the first week of October and we have 8,000 certificates on file for issuance

A70: SPO Response: See answer to Q62.

Page 14 of 16 Pages

Q71: Exhibit J. – 15. Attachment J- Reporting - Please remove the following reporting requirements:

a. Total list price-companies do not have list prices for MPS services as the model mixes vary. We also do not have list pricing for leasing as this would vary by the lease rate and term.

b. Total Savings-We could not provide this since we do not have a list price for MPS service or lease pricing.

c. Total paid by credit card-companies do not track total credit card charges by agency or customer. This is something that the State could easily get from their credit card statement.

A71: SPO Response: The purpose of obtaining spending demographics is to ascertain the value of having the Price Agreement in place and if is saves the State (and Ordering Entities) money.

Tracking list price versus our cost shows the savings generated. “List” is used loosely in the case of MPS as it means what the “standard or commercial” cost is compared to the reduced pricing offered to the State for volume business. There is a similar “savings and value-add” purpose of having a “State procurement card” program. The Reporting requirements will remain as stated.

a. “Total List Price.” Vendors do have a “standard” pricing for such services and a proposal offers an anticipated reduced pricing for said services. Therefore, vendors are expected to provide a “list” price. (There is no equipment leasing involved in a resulting MPS contract.

MPS is for services only.)

b. “Total Savings”. Vendors are expected to provide a “Savings” figure.

c. “Total Credit Card Payments”. Most vendors have an accounting system that can track purchases made by various payment methods. If a MPS awarded vendor does not have such a capability, it can be negotiated in a resulting contract.

The Inquirer has made an incorrect conclusion on the ability for the State to collect data from “our credit card statement”. First, the State’s new accounting system (CORE) collects data from only Executive branch Departments and not all such Departments are participating (i.e.

Transportation uses SAP, not CORE). State entities that are not Executive branch have their own accounting systems where the State Purchasing Office has no access, such as the Secretary of State, the Governor’s Office, and Judicial, to name a few. Further, State-funded Institutions of Higher Education are not on CORE. And further still, Political Subdivisions and eligible non-profit organizations have their own unique, autonomous (and non-accessible) accounting systems. The credit card program the State uses which is downloaded into CORE does identify vendor and commodity code; however, not all vendors use the same commodity codes for the same items. Also, not all State entities participate in the “procurement card program”. Therefore, only the selling Price Agreement vendor has the complete information and can provide the required sales data regarding method of payment, by customer type, and by individual customer.

Q72: Attachment 4 – Vendor Response Workbook – Please define IT Analyst Services. Are there specific IT Services that this covers or is it open for any managed IT service needed by the agency?

A72: SPO Response: “IT Analyst Services” means a MPS contractor’s tasks include performing an asset inventory for each agency location and includes identifying all printers and multi-function devices at each location; evaluate consolidation of print resources in order to function more efficiently; then use such data to create a network print plan and recommendation of the User to consider.

Page 15 of 16 Pages

Q73: Attachment 4 – Vendor Response Workbook – Is end user training only for the software (not hardware) provided by the vendor?

A73: SPO Response: Training to End Users by the MPS contractor is for the software and the solution. Training will explain the benefits of using the managed print service solution and on using the web portal to submit service calls for the reactive service.

Q74: Attachment 4 – Vendor Response Workbook – Please define “Software Maintenance on Analytics

Tool.”

A74: SPO Response: “Software Maintenance on Analytics Tool” means the modifications made by the vendor on the analytic tool software product provided in your response post initial installation. Such modifications include, but are not limited to, correct faults, provide technical patches, security patches, improve performance or other attributes.

Q75: Attachment 4 and RFP Section 3.5. A., Vendor Response Workbook – Please provide more detail about the “Account and Security Audit with Travel Paid by the Awarded Vendor.” Also, how many people are to be included in the visit to our MPS Monitoring Center on a quarterly basis? How much time will be required for the audit?

A75: SPO Response: The State Purchasing Office (SPO) who issues an award(s) as a result of this RFP and who issues a State Price Agreement(s) would not perform any technical audits. The SPO limits its audits to financial and vendor performance issues.

A User of the State Price Agreement, such as IDS would require such on-site technical audits.

Due to on-going IT security compliance, IDS intends to have on-site visits up to 4 times a year (likely quarterly basis) and additional visit(s) if needed for a Security breach as an example. IDS intends to have three (3) staff from IDS/OIT travel to the contracted MPS State Price Agreement vendor’s managed print service center. Such staff are likely to be the IDS Program Manager (contract’s manager), an OIT IT Security Manager, and an OIT IT Project Manager (assigned to IDS for IDS’s contract with the selected MPS vendor).

A typical trip would include a minimum of two (2) days to perform project implementation review and meeting IDS/OIT requirements, verify from the vendor’s side the security controls in place, and review print quality aspects. This also allows time for business relationship reviews and planning for continuous improvement of the service for both parties.

Account audit would focus on how the terms of the contract (the User’s contract with the vendor, not the State Purchasing Office’s contract) are being met by the vendor and a review of the billing and service costs.

Security audit would include review of raw log data, any data retained, verification of encryption and scheduled data wipes, firewall rule sets, IP address information, the future of the project, authentication methods, data retained by those authentication systems, review of rights levels, and account auditing.

Q76: Exhibit A - 1.7 Alternative Bids or Offers/Affiliated Vendors – This section states that “Unless otherwise permitted by the Procuring Agency, alternative bids or proposals by any vendor are not permitted.” Will the state accept alternative proposals for vendors to provide our best solution?

Page 16 of 16 Pages

A76: SPO Response: Please note that “Exhibit A” refers to the general instructions for “State of Colorado Solicitation Instructions/Terms and Conditions.” It reads “Unless otherwise permitted...”, and in the case of this specific RFP, alternative bids are not permitted in the sense that an Offeror is expected to use the background information imparted in Section 2 (Background, Overview, and General) and the specific requirements addressed in Section 3 (Statement of Work) to provide a response, as your “best solution”.

Q77: RFP, Section 1.25 - Are the Process Audits described in this section the same as the Security

Audits described in RFP, Section 3.5 A. The two show different auditing frequencies (every three years vs. quarterly). Can you clarify the difference?

A77: SPO Response: The “audit process” referred to in RFP Section 1.25 (Audit) is for the primary “contract”, the State Price Agreement with the State Purchasing Office and is for financial information purposes. It can include but is not limited to Ordering Entity spend and payment method compliance (such as accepting credit cards). Section 3.5.A (Services Requirements – IDS Related Services) addresses IT-related security audits of the MPS work product and is for specifically IDS incompliance with the contract they would engage in with an MPS Price Agreement vendor. Additionally, other non-IDS users may have similar security audit requirements.

---end---