220000000125.pdf

STATE OF MICHIGAN PROCUREMENT

Department Technology, Management and Budget Central Procurement Services 320 S Walnut Street Lansing, MI 48933 P.O. Box 30026, Lansing, MI 48909

CONTRACT CHANGE NOTICE

Change Notice Number 13 to

Contract Number MA220000000125

C O

N

TR

AC

TO

R

Guidehouse Inc.

2941 Fairview Park Drive

Falls Church VA 22042

Jeffrey S. Bankowski

734-644-0595 jbankowski@guidehouse.com

CV0017579

ST

AT

E

Pr og ra m

M an ag er

Various Various

C on tr ac t Ad m in is tr at or Colleen West DTMB

517-730-8430

WestC6@michigan.gov

CONTRACT SUMMARY

SW Financial Auditing and Accounting Prequal Program

INITIAL EFFECTIVE DATE

November 1, 2021

INITIAL EXPIRATION DATE

October 31, 2024

INITIAL AVAILABLE OPTIONS

3 - 1 Year

EXPIRATION DATE BEFORE

October 31, 2027

PAYMENT TERMS

Net 45

DELIVERY TIMEFRAME

N/A

ALTERNATE PAYMENT OPTIONS

P-Card Direct Voucher (PRC) Other

EXTENDED PURCHASING

Yes No

MINIMUM DELIVERY REQUIREMENTS

N/A

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE NOTICE

OPTION LENGTH OF OPTION EXTENSION LENGTH OF EXTENSION

REVISED EXP. DATE

CURRENT VALUE

$29,078,371.80

VALUE OF CHANGE NOTICE

$693,890.00

ESTIMATED AGGREGATE CONTRACT VALUE

$29,772,261.80

DESCRIPTION

Please note the Program Manager or Contract Administrator may have changed, and are reflected on this Change Notice.

Effective August 04, 2026, the following amendment is hereby incorporated into the Contract for use by the State of Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity (LEO):

1. Schedule A - Statement of Work adds scope for Realizing Opportunity with Broadband Infrastructure Networks (ROBIN) Grant Program – Project Audit and Closeout Support.

2. Schedule B - Pricing adds respective pricing.

3. The contract is increased by $693,890.00 to support the additional scope.

All other terms, conditions, specifications and pricing remain the same. Per contractor and agency agreement, DTMB Central Procurement approval and the State Administrative Board approval on August 04, 2026.

CHANGE NOTICE NO. 13 TO CONTRACT NO. MA220000000125

Program Managers for

Multi-Agency and Statewide Contracts

AGENCY NAME PHONE EMAIL

DTMB Diana McFadden 517-241-9104 McFaddenD@michigan.gov

MDE Jenny Manar 517-335-0543 ManarJ@michigan.gov

LEO Eric Frederick 517-230-8510 FrederickE1@michigan.gov

LARA Brittanie Davis DavisB48@michigan.gov

Mich igan .gov/MiProcure ment

SCHEDULE A – Statement of Work

Contract No.220000000125, Change Notice 13 Amending Change Notice 9 Project Audit and Closeout of

Realizing Opportunity with Broadband Infrastructure Networks Grant Program (ROBIN)

Background The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program (BEAD) is a single investment in high-speed internet infrastructure and is administered by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). While BEAD is a national program, each state and territory implements BEAD within the federal guidelines of the program. BEAD is designed to ensure that every one of Michigan’s unserved and underserved homes and businesses can get connected to reliable high-speed internet infrastructure. The Michigan High-Speed Internet Office (MIHI) is the entity implementing BEAD in Michigan and administers grant programs such as Realizing Opportunity with Broadband Infrastructure Networks Grant Program (ROBIN) and BEAD to ensure that broadband resources are being utilized in the most effective and efficient manner possible for Michiganders.

The Michigan High-Speed Internet Office (MIHI) is carrying out 32 broadband deployment projects as a part of its Realizing Opportunity with Broadband Infrastructure Networks (ROBIN) Grant Program, which uses funds from the U.S. Department of Treasury’s American Rescue Plan Act’s Capital Projects Fund (CPF). These projects, awarded to 13 subgrantees, are slated to conclude by the end of 2026. This amendment provides for the audit/review and closure of the ROBIN grant program.

1.1.3. Requirement 3 – Provide Project Audit and Closeout of Realizing Opportunity with Broadband Infrastructure Networks Grant Program (ROBIN)

Period of Performance:

The proposed period of performance is from June 1, 2026 – December 31, 2026.

The Contractor and Subcontractor (Guidehouse and Integrated Tech Group (ITG)) can support the successful completion of the ROBIN Grant Program through four services to MIHI and its subgrantees:

1. Physical Project Audits

2. Optical Time Domain Reflectometer (OTDR) Test Reviews

3. Network Performance Reviews

4. Program /Project Closeout and External Audit Support Approach The four services will confirm whether the entire network has been properly constructed to service all locations in the project area and whether that service meets the standards required by MIHI.

In addition, the Contractor will provide support the project closeout phase for both MIHI and its subgrantees. This includes guiding subgrantees through closeout requirements, validating the completion of the financial reconciliation and support appropriate documentation, and confirming that record retention protocols are established in accordance with requirements. The Contractor will manage and track closeout progress, interface directly with subgrantees to https://www.michigan.gov/leo/bureaus-agencies/mihi/funding-opportunities/robin-grant https://www.michigan.gov/leo/bureaus-agencies/mihi/funding-opportunities/bead resolve outstanding items, and support audit readiness by reviewing closeout packages for completeness and consistency.

1.1.3.1. Sub-Requirement 1 - Physical Project Audits

Contractor will perform physical, in-the-field, audits of all projects. These field audits provide MIHI with an on-site verification mechanism to verify that funded buildouts align with reported locations, infrastructure, and service availability, confirming funded infrastructure is serving the intended unserved locations. These project audits have the added benefit of addressing “cross-program risk” in that many ROBIN subgrantees also participate in BEAD. Incomplete ROBIN projects could leave Broadband Serviceable Locations unserved, creating downstream eligibility, duplication, or compliance risks for BEAD.

Project audits take place in three stages: 1) desktop reviews, 2) on-site verification, and

3) results delivery and remediation. In short, these field audits ensure that the network constructed is the same as the network the capabilities promised to MIHI. Contractor will coordinate with MIHI to make the site visit process as efficient as possible by grouping audits of neighboring completed projects.

1.1.3.1.1. Desktop Reviews

Before desktop reviews begin, subgrantees will supply MIHI and Contractor with the original construction designs as approved by MIHI, the diagrams of what has actually been constructed (i.e., as-built drawings), lists of locations to be served, and a point of contact to coordinate on behalf of the subgrantee.

During these reviews Contractor will assess whether the constructed network reaches all the locations slated to be passed in the approved designs, the architecture matches that proposed, and that the network as constructed should be able to provide requisite service to end users.

During this period, auditors will plan their route(s) for the physical audits and coordinate with the subgrantee representative to ensure they will have access to the facilities during the inspection. As an example, Contractor will ensure a representative of subgrantee will be available during the site visit to unlock cabinets and provide access to private property that contains deployed infrastructure.

Contractor will recommend to all subgrantees that they perform a detailed physical drive-through of the network before Contractor to reduce, or possibly eliminate, the need for remediation later. Reducing the amount of remediation in advance is the best way for MIHI to reduce time and costs associated with project audits.

1.1.3.1.2. On-Site Verification

At the time scheduled with the subgrantee and agreed to by MIHI, Contractor’s auditors will travel to a project area and travel the route planned during the desktop review. The auditor will inspect every mile of the project’s infrastructure. This includes inspecting physically accessible:

1. Fiber optic cables,

2. Cabinets,

3. OLTs,

4. Poles and accompanying features,

5. MSTs,

6. Fiber closures,

7. Completed drops,

8. Pedestals,

9. Handholes, and more.

Auditors will use tools and checklists to record their audits, track their driven routes and geotag, take pictures of, and note any discrepancies found.

Contractor’s engagement management team will maintain close contact with all deployed project audit teams and will receive daily reports from teams and issue timely guidance and direction to these deployed teams.

1.1.3.1.3. Results Delivery and Remediation

Once complete, auditors compile their standard-format reports and submit them to Contractor’s engagement management team. The engagement management team will debrief all auditors, file and synthesize auditor reports, and provide summary reports to MIHI.

Contractor can provide technical assistance and corrective action support to MIHI and its subgrantees if remediation is necessary. This may include, but is not limited to, explaining the findings to the subgrantee, outlining the deficiencies, or simply advising MIHI and the subgrantee(s) on best practices to resolve an issue. If agreed to in advance, Contractor can perform follow-up field audits to confirm remediation has taken place or review evidence provided by a subgrantee indicating such.

1.1.3.2. Sub-Requirement 2 - OTDR Test Reviews

When installing fiber optic cable, engineers perform optical time-domain reflectometer (OTDR) tests to confirm the glass strands inside the cables do not have microbends or other imperfections that could impact network performance. OTDR tests send light pulses through the cables and measure the returning light to detect these issues. The size of these strands and the protective sheath around fiber optic cables prevent other methods of confirmation. Additionally, network performance does not replace these tests because performance may not be degraded enough to show up on traditional speed/latency tests until after closeout. Subgrantees perform these tests and then Contractor reviews them to confirm proper damage-free fiber installation.

1.1.3.3. Sub-Requirement 3 - Network Performance Reviews

As a part of the ROBIN Grant Program, recipients perform and report on network performance prior to closeout. Contractor reviews these reports to confirm performance requirements are being met and that tests were performed in the manner prescribed by MIHI.

1.1.3.4. Sub-Requirement 4 - Program / Project Closeout and External Audit Support Approach

In addition to completing project audits, Contractor is also prepared to provide MIHI additional support to ensure full closeout of ROBIN projects. This includes meeting closeout requirements from Uniform Guidance (200.344) and U.S. Treasury guidance.

1.1.3.4.1. Closeout Requirements – MIHI

1.1.3.4.1.1. Oversee and verify closeout of individual projects (December 31, 2026)

1.1.3.4.1.2. Submit final report within 120 days of period of performance end (April 30, 2027)

1.1.3.4.1.2.1. Final financial reporting (obligations, expenditures, liquidated funds)

1.1.3.4.1.2.2. Final performance reporting (verifying project completion, impact, and metrics)

1.1.3.4.1.3. Organize and maintain program records (5-year timeline for ARPA)

1.1.3.4.2. Closeout Requirements - Subgrantees

1.1.3.4.2.1. Complete project construction – confirmed by project audits and other monitoring

1.1.3.4.2.2. Submit final financial and performance reports

1.1.3.4.2.3. Liquidate obligations before period of performance end

1.1.3.4.2.4. Resolve monitoring findings (if applicable)

1.1.3.4.2.5. Disposition of property and equipment in compliance with 2 CFR §200.311–200.313 (as needed)

1.1.3.4.2.5.1. Assets must continue to be used for the

authorized CPF purpose

1.1.3.4.3. Contractor is prepared to support MIHI’s closeout for the ROBIN program by –

1.1.3.4.3.1. Final verification of cost documentation

1.1.3.4.3.2. Documenting physical completion of projects (site audits).

1.1.3.4.3.3. Verifying subgrantee project completion

1.1.3.4.3.4. Supporting MIHI’s final Project & Expenditure Report (as-needed)

1.1.3.4.3.5. Conducting a comprehensive review of MIHI’s ROBIN recordkeeping to ensure:

1.1.3.4.3.5.1. Comprehensive completion

1.1.3.4.3.5.2. Accessibility and navigability

1.1.3.4.3.5.3. Resilience for future audits

1.1.3.4.3.6. Expanded 2027 Single Audit support

1.1.3.4.3.6.1. Review ROBIN project and cost records

and identify gaps prior to 2027 Single Audit

1.1.3.4.3.6.2. Assess and address concerns from

2026 Single Audit, including policies & procedures

4.2.1. Program Manager – Audit & Closeout:

The Program Manager for each party will monitor and coordinate the day- to-day activities of the Contract.

State Contractor Eric Frederick, Chief Connectivity Officer Michigan High-Speed Internet Office Michigan Dept. of Labor & Economic Opportunity

105 W. Allegan St.

Lansing, MI 48933 FrederickE1@michigan.gov

John Gianopoulos, Director State and Local Government Practice, Contractor

1001 Woodward Ave, Suite 500 Detroit, MI 48226 jgianopoulos@guidehouse.com

(757) 291-7536

SCHEDULE B - PRICING

Contract No.220000000125, Change Notice 13 Amending Change Notice 9

Project Audit and Closeout of Realizing Opportunity with Broadband Infrastructure Networks Grant Program (ROBIN)

The Contractor recommends billing based on time and travel/lodging costs. This is most efficient for MIHI because fixed-cost pricing does not consider the variability that each project has, including for time spent and travel/lodging (as discussed below).

• Time. The time spent is most directly related to each project’s size and the amount of equipment auditors need to examine across its distance. For fiber/HFC projects, the best proxy for this is miles of new build. The number of locations in each project is a less accurate measure for estimated time spent / level of effort because location density varies greatly. As an example, a city can serve more homes per mile of fiber than a rural area, even though a similar amount of construction has taken place.

• Travel/Lodging. It is Contractor’s intention to marshal, deploy, and recover auditors as few times as possible. As more information becomes available on project completion status, Contractor can develop a more detailed plan about grouping and sequencing project audits and thus a better estimate of travel and lodging costs.

Estimate of the costs per project audit using the number of new build miles listed in MIHI’s quarterly reports:

Project County Planned Miles of

Fiber

Locations Grant Amount

Project Auditor Hourly

Rate

Hours Total Cost/Fee

Allegan Countywide Allegan 250 11,024 $28,649,857 $315 32 $10,080

Ottawa County Ottawa 1,100 2,456 $8,836,467 $315 141 $44,415

Highline/Aspire Upper Peninsula Region

Chippewa, Marquette, Delta, Menominee, Dickinson, Schoolcraft, Luce, Mackinac

155 1,243 $11,203,232 $315 20 $6,300

Brightspeed/Bay County Bay 5 56 $67,899 $315 1 $315

Brightspeed/Missa ukee County Missaukee 29 254 $574,919 $315 4 $1,260

Brightspeed/Sanila c County Sanilac 5 79 $131,260 $315 1 $315

Benzie County Benzie 228 1,428 $2,858,188 $315 29 $9,135

DMCI-

Hillsdale/Branch Branch, Hillsdale 38 299 $2,293,539 $315 5 $1,575

Frontier North/Clinton County

Clinton 570 3,297 $14,975,732 $315 73 $22,995

Branch County Branch 350 4,690 $22,308,071 $315 45 $14,175

Kalkaska District

Antrim, Grand Traverse, Kalkaska, Otsego

487 3,660 $17,777,533 $315 62 $19,530

Scottville District Lake, Manistee, Mason, Oceana 834 3,384 $18,018,715 $315 107 $33,705

Waters District Crawford, Montmorency, Otsego

265 2,465 $10,839,408 $315 34 $10,710

Midland-Saginaw Bay, Gratiot, Midland, Saginaw

170 1,446 $6,388,110 $315 22 $6,930

MEC-VBCS

Berrien, Cass, St.

Joseph, Van Buren

710 15,846 $25,250,242 $315 91 $28,665

Leelanau County Benzie, Grand Traverse, Leelanau, 353 2,150 $4,998,637 $315 45 $14,175

Manistee, Wexford

Charter_Cheboyga n Cheboygan 193 669 $1,092,466 $315 25 $7,875

Charter_Montcalm Montcalm 77 1,481 $5,861,101 $315 10 $3,150

Charter_Kent Kent 56 792 $544,286 $315 7 $2,205

Charter_Newaygo Newaygo 93 1,911 $3,970,117 $315 12 $3,780

Charter_Kalamazo o Kalamazoo 62 917 $793,144 $315 8 $2,520

Charter/Mason County Mason 73 468 $1,045,297 $315 9 $2,835

Charter_Hillsdale Charter/Hillsdale County 81 555 $499,406 $315 10 $3,150

Charter/Ionia County Ionia 59 583 $1,816,745 $315 8 $2,520

Charter/Shiawasse e County Shiawassee 43 933 $3,220,529 $315 6 $1,890

Charter/Genesee County Genesee 187 793 $902,918 $315 24 $7,560

Charter/StJoseph County St. Joseph 184 457 $1,079,251 $315 24 $7,560

Charter/Roscomm on County Roscommon 28 262 $875,531 $315 4 $1,260

Charter Antrim County Antrim 136 1,023 $2,139,523 $315 17 $5,355

Eastern Chippewa County Chippewa 49 1,979 $15,871,164 $315 6 $1,890

Surf - Livingston Ingham, Livingston 246 3,562 $16,972,114 $315 32 $10,080

TEC Region Huron, Sanilac 91 1,286 $6,243,479 $315 12 $3,780

Total Hourly Fees for Project Auditors $291,690

Estimated Lodging and Travel for All 32 Projects $72,000

Program Management Fees $135,000

Total $498,690

OTDR Test Reviews

Pricing

Service Price /project # of Projects Total Cost OTDR Test Reviews $ 1,150 32 $ 36,800

Network Performance Reviews

Pricing

Service Price /project # of Projects Total Cost Network Performance Reviews $ 1,150 32 $ 36,800

Program / Project Closeout and External Audit Support Approach

Pricing

Service Price /project # of Projects Total Cost Program / Project Closeout and External Audit Support Approach

$ 3,800 32 $121,600

Pricing Summary

A. Overview

Contractor presents a time and materials price of $693,890 for the services requested by MIHI. The price is based on the estimate of the labor hours and labor mix that the Contractor believes are necessary to satisfy MIHI’s requirements given the current understanding of the office’s technical needs and operational environment as well as the experience providing similar services. A time and materials model will allow the work to evolve as tasks are prioritized and scaled up or down depending on the level of effort and staffing required.

Table 1. Summary of Services and Fees Service Fee

OTDR Test Reviews $36,800 Network Performance Reviews $36,800 Project Audits $498,690 Program /Project Closeout and External Audit Support Approach $121,600

Total $693,890

320 S Walnut Street Lansing, MI 48933 P.O. Box 30026, Lansing, MI 48909

STATE OF MICHIGAN PROCUREMENT

Department Technology, Management and Budget Central Procurement Services

CONTRACT CHANGE NOTICE

CONTRACT SUMMARY

SW Financial Auditing and Accounting Prequal Program

INITIAL EFFECTIVE DATE INITIAL EXPIRATION DATE INITIAL AVAILABLE OPTIONS EXPIRATION DATE

BEFORE

November 1, 2021 October 31, 2024 3 - 1 Year October 31, 2027

PAYMENT TERMS DELIVERY TIMEFRAME

ALTERNATE PAYMENT OPTIONS EXTENDED PURCHASING

MINIMUM DELIVERY REQUIREMENTS

N/A

P-Card Direct Voucher (PRC) Other Yes No

2941 Fairview Park Drive

Falls Church VA 22042

Jeffrey S. Bankowski

734-644-0595 jbankowski@guidehouse.com

CV0017579

Guidehouse Inc.

C O

N

TR

A C

TO

R

Colleen West

517-730-8430

DTMB

Various Various westc6@michigan.gov

C on tr ac t A dm in is tr at or

Pr og ra m

M an ag er

ST

A

TE

N/ANet 45

Change Notice Number 12

Contract Number MA220000000125 to

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE NOTICE

OPTION EXTENSIONLENGTH OF OPTION LENGTH OF EXTENSION REVISED EXP. DATE

CURRENT VALUE VALUE OF CHANGE NOTICE ESTIMATED AGGREGATE CONTRACT VALUE

$29,078,371.80 $0.00 $29,078,371.80

Please note the Program Manager or Contract Administrator may have changed, and are reflected on this Change Notice.

Effective November 21, 2025, this Contract is amended to reflect updated accessibility requirements. All prior references to ADA, Accessibility, and/or WCAG 2.0 are replaced and superseded with the following language:

Accessibility Requirements:

The State is required to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and has adopted standards and procedures regarding accessibility requirements for websites, applications, content, and electronic documents. Due to a change in the law, the State is required to comply with specific accessibility standards for websites, applications, content and documents.

Starting 4/24/2026, throughout the Term, all websites, applications, software, content, and electronic documents, including but not limited to mobile applications, text, images, sounds, videos, controls, animations, links, and documents (including files in the following formats: PDF, word processing, presentation, and spreadsheet), created, provided, or made available by the Contractor under this Contract, must comply with WCAG 2.1 Level AA.

All other terms, conditions, specifications and pricing remain the same. Per contractor and agency agreement, and DTMB Central Procurement approval.

AGENCY NAME PHONE EMAIL

TREA Jeff Guilfoyle 517-335-7505 guilfoylej@michigan.gov

DTMB Jordan Sherlock 517-897-1973 SherlockJ@michigan.gov

LARA Rebecca Mack MackR2@michigan.gov

DTMB Diana McFadden 517-241-9104 McFaddenD@michigan.gov

LEO Eric Frederick 517-230-8510 FrederickE1@michigan.gov

MDE Jenny Manar 517-335-0543 ManarJ@michigan.gov

DTMB Susan Watt-Smith 517-230-0535 WattSmithS@michigan.gov

Program Managers for

Multi-Agency and Statewide Contracts

CHANGE NOTICE NO. 12 TO CONTRACT NO. MA220000000125

STATE OF MICHIGAN

ENTERPRISE PROCUREMENT

DTMB

320 S Walnut Street Lansing, MI 48933 P.O. Box 30026, Lansing, MI 48909

CONTRACT CHANGE NOTICE

CONTRACT SUMMARY

SW Financial Auditing and Accounting Prequal Program

INITIAL EFFECTIVE DATE INITIAL EXPIRATION DATE INITIAL AVAILABLE OPTIONS EXPIRATION DATE

BEFORE

November 1, 2021 October 31, 2024 3 - 1 Year October 31, 2027

PAYMENT TERMS DELIVERY TIMEFRAME

ALTERNATE PAYMENT OPTIONS EXTENDED PURCHASING

MINIMUM DELIVERY REQUIREMENTS

N/A

P-Card Direct Voucher (PRC) Other Yes No

2941 Fairview Park Drive

Falls Church VA 22042

Jeffrey S. Bankowski

734-644-0595 jbankowski@guidehouse.com

CV0017579

Guidehouse Inc.

C O

N

TR

A C

TO

R

Colleen West

517-730-8430

DTMB

Various Various westc6@michigan.gov

C ontract

A dm inistrator Program M anagerSTA

TE

N/ANet 45

Change Notice Number 11

Contract Number MA220000000125 to

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE NOTICE

OPTION EXTENSIONLENGTH OF OPTION LENGTH OF EXTENSION REVISED EXP. DATE

CURRENT VALUE VALUE OF CHANGE NOTICE ESTIMATED AGGREGATE CONTRACT VALUE

0 Years

$29,078,371.80 $0.00 $29,078,371.80

DESCRIPTION

Effective July 31, 2025, the following amendment is hereby incorporated into the contract:

LEO MIHI will add an Intern for 2 months for 160 hours at a value of $7,5841.

Please note the Contract Administrator has been changed to Colleen West.2.

All other terms, conditions, specifications and pricing remain the same per contractor and agency request and DTMB Central Procurement approval.

DTMB Diana McFadden 517-241-9104 McFaddenD@michigan.gov

DTMB Susan Watt-Smith 517-230-0535 WattSmithS@michigan.gov

MDE Jenny Manar 517-335-0543 ManarJ@michigan.gov

LEO Eric Frederick 517-230-8510 FrederickE1@michigan.gov

Program Managers for

CHANGE NOTICE NO. 11 TO CONTRACT NO. MA220000000125

Department of Technology, Management, and Budget 320 S. Walnut Street 2nd Floor Lansing, MI 48933

P.O. BOX 30026 LANSING, MICHIGAN 48909

CONTRACT CHANGE NOTICE

CONTRACT SUMMARY

SW Financial Auditing and Accounting Prequal Program

INITIAL EFFECTIVE DATE INITIAL EXPIRATION DATE INITIAL AVAILABLE OPTIONS EXPIRATION DATE

BEFORE

November 1, 2021 October 31, 2024 3 - 12 Months October 31, 2027

PAYMENT TERMS DELIVERY TIMEFRAME

ALTERNATE PAYMENT OPTIONS EXTENDED PURCHASING

MINIMUM DELIVERY REQUIREMENTS

N/A

P-Card Direct Voucher (PRC) Other Yes No

2941 Fairview Park Drive

Falls Church VA 22042

Jeffrey S. Bankowski

734-644-0595 jbankowski@guidehouse.com

CV0017579

Guidehouse Inc.

C O

N

TR

A C

TO

R

Susan Watt-Smith

517-230-0535

DTMB

Various Various wattsmiths@michigan.gov

C ontract

A dm inistrator Program M anagerSTA

TE

N/ANet 45

Change Notice Number 10

Contract Number MA220000000125 to

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE NOTICE

OPTION EXTENSIONLENGTH OF OPTION LENGTH OF EXTENSION REVISED EXP. DATE

CURRENT VALUE VALUE OF CHANGE NOTICE ESTIMATED AGGREGATE CONTRACT VALUE

$28,803,371.80 $275,000.00 $29,078,371.80

DESCRIPTION

Effective December 17, 2024, this Contract is hereby increased by $275,000.00 for use by DTMB Financial Services to extend the ERM Consulting Services Scope of Work from Change Notice 4, per attached Schedule A – Statement of Work.

All other terms, conditions, specifications, and pricing remain the same. Per contractor and agency agreement, DTMB Central Procurement approval, and State Administrative Board approval on December 17, 2024.

DTMB Michael Gilliland 517-335-1557 GillilandM@michigan.gov

DTMB Susan Watt-Smith 517-230-0535 WattSmithS@michigan.gov

MDE Jenny Manar 517-335-0543 ManarJ@michigan.gov

LEO Eric Frederick 517-230-8510 FrederickE1@michigan.gov

Program Managers for

CHANGE NOTICE NO. 10 TO CONTRACT NO. MA220000000125

SCHEDULE A – STATEMENT OF WORK CONTRACT

ACTIVITIES

Guidehouse Contract No.220000000125, CN 10 Enterprise Risk Management Consulting Services

Background To complete the comprehensive Statewide Risk Profile, the State of Michigan (SOM) is extending its existing scope of services with the Contractor to continue working on the Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Consulting Services project from Change Notice 4. This additional scope includes the development of risk profiles for the remaining 16 principal departments, support in ERM training for SOM executives using a webinar series of up to six sessions, and workshop facilitation support around integrating enterprise risks into strategic planning. Providing leaders with focused training will further develop a shared, comprehensive understanding of risk mitigation. The combination of these additional activities will provide the State with a more detailed risk profile, allowing executives across all departments to engage in more standardized and intentional risk-informed decision making.

The Contractor is able to accomplish this work for the fixed firm price of $300,000 ($25,000 in remaining funds from the previous phase and $275,000 additional funds) which will cover the planned interviews, training, support, and analyses necessary to accomplish the expanded project goals over the course of 9 months. The approach from previous phases of work is included in the appendix for reference.

Approach to Work The Contractor’s approach to accomplishing this phase of work will include three workstreams which will run concurrently with one another as depicted in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1 Proposed Timeline

Workstream 1: Department Risk Profiles Description ERM Strategy & Advisory For this phase of work, the Contractor will leverage the methodology that was developed together with the State in 2023. In July 2023, the Contractor was engaged by the State of Michigan, Office of Internal Audit Services (OIAS) to support the State’s Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) program through the development of risk profiles. The State’s Risk Committee (SRC) chose to pilot the development of department-level risk profiles using four targeted departments. OIAS and the Contractor also worked together to create a high-level statewide risk profile, and to develop and document a uniform methodology for creating and maintaining risk profiles going forward. The Committee’s ERM Working Group was created to oversee and support this process. The Contractor will continue to assist with Michigan’s risk profile construction whereby existing inputs including stakeholder interviews, the results of various agency audits, surveys and other reports will be evaluated to identify new or potentially existing enterprise risks and risk statements.

The effort will primarily consist of conducting interviews, workshops, and additional on-site and virtual sessions with each of the 16 additional in-scope Departments. These departments include: MDARD, AG, CSC, MILEAP, MDCR, DOC, MDE, DIFS, LEO, LARA, DMVA, DNR, MDOS, MSP, MDOT, and Treasury. The process will occur simultaneously with 5-6 departments in parallel for each review cycle and will include Contractor SMEs.

There will be a total of 3 review cycles throughout the year. The process is as follows:

Phase 1 Activities and Deliverables Activities Outputs Step 1.1 Align to Mission, Vision, Goals and Objectives

• Validate goals/objectives with department leadership and respective ERM workgroup members

• Identify department leaders to participate in risk profile development

• Collect and review relevant reference information

1. Collective understanding of risk profile construction effort and structure, including identification of ties to State of Michigan mission and strategic objectives

Step 1.2 Risk Identification

• Facilitate discussions on key risks/challenges to achieving objectives and goals

2. The beginning of departmental risk profiles with draft risk statements, risk owners, and potentially other key factors (if available)

• Identify existing and emerging risks with departmental level impacts

• Draft initial risk statements Step 1.3 Risk Assessment

• Review risk statements with Department leaders

• Update and finalize based on leadership feedback

• Develop and execute risk assessment survey

• Calculate risk scores

3. Scoring of risks based on agreed upon risk rating criteria (e.g., likelihood and impact)

Step 1.4 Risk Prioritization

• Prioritize risks based on assessment results and calibration with leaders

4. Selection of top risks requiring resource allocation in a specified timeframe

Step 1.5 Risk Response

• Determine appropriate risk response type

• Identify existing mitigation strategies in place

• Document and develop plans if necessary for additional mitigation

5. Documentation of existing and proposed risk mitigation strategies

Step 1.6 Department Risk Profile

• Develop and Present Department Risk Profiles

• Map risks to Statewide Strategic Goals and Objectives

• Identify risks that should be elevated to Statewide Risk Profile

6. Completed Departmental Risk Profiles

7. Updated Statewide Risk Profile

Outputs of Engagement During the course of the engagement, the Contractor will leverage templates created during risk profile development for the initial four departments to begin populating information with existing risk information and information discovered in subsequent departmental interviews. Upon concluding each meeting series, the Contractor will provide each department’s leader team with their Risk Profile populated with the following information:

o Risk Statements describing the nature, cause, and potential impact of each risk.

o Quantitative Risk Scores based on impact and likelihood ratings.

o Risk Response Type.

o Descriptive information on current mitigating activities.

o Mapping of risks to both department-level and statewide goals.

o Determination if a department-level risk should be elevated and included on the Statewide Risk Profile.

Workstream 2: ERM Education and Training Description The Contractor’s will lead the development of a webinar series aimed at improving the efficiency of state government services, and the effectiveness of critical enterprise risk management functions. The webinars will provide training to department leadership on Enterprise Risk Management methodology and execution. The webinar series will consist of up to six webinars to be facilitated by a team of Contractor and State of Michigan ERM leads.

This series will provide focused guidance and specific examples on the following topics based on the COSO ERM Framework shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2 COSO ERM Framework

1. Introduction to Enterprise Risk Management:

o What ERM is and how is it different from traditional Risk Management o Overview of COSO Framework o High-level explanation of how ERM fits into the bigger picture- strategy, performance and budget o Why are we doing this now, what are the benefits o What is the role of department leaders in supporting and executing ERM

2. Governance and Culture: ERM Governance and Establishing a Risk-Aware culture o Board Risk Oversight

Overview of SRC Charter and any related governance bodies o Established Operating Structures

Introduction to SoM ERM methodology ERM Maturity Model, where SoM is and timeline for progression o Desired Culture and Commitment to Values Clarify expectations for leaders, and what they can do to encourage a risk-aware culture Provide examples and stories or speaking points leaders can use to inform their staff about ERM Communicate feedback mechanisms on ERM program o Attracting, Developing and Retaining Capable individuals How can leaders develop their teams to support a risk-aware culture

3. Strategy and Objective Setting: Understanding business context to define risk appetite, evaluate strategies, and formulate business objectives o Content to be determined in collaboration with DTMB team

4. Performance: Identifying and Assessing Portfolio View of Risks o Identifying and Prioritizing Risks Tools and approaches that can be used to scan for risks o Techniques to assess and rate risks Risk Rating tools o Introduce the risk treatment options and when each may be used o Process for developing and evaluating response strategies o Implementing response strategies and integrating them into operations

5. Review and Revision: Ongoing assessments and risk awareness o Assessing Changes o Reviewing Risks and Performance o Maturing and Improving ERM

6. Information, Communication and Reporting: Ensuring risk strategy & performance is integrated with regular reporting cycles and decision making o Communicating Risk Information o How to use ERM to inform decision-making

In addition to the webinar series, the Contractor will conduct Knowledge Transfer activities with department or OIAS designees to ensure State of Michigan has the skills and knowledge to continue evaluating and updating risk profiles in upcoming years.

Phase 2 Activities and Deliverables Activities Outputs Step 2.1 Develop Webinar Series on ERM o Create outlines for each webinar o Develop training deck and additional reference materials

7. Up to 6 ERM trainings developed

Step 2.2 Record and Share Webinars o Identify learning platform for recording and posting webinars o Establish initial training schedule o Work with state LMS contact to publish and communicate trainings

8. Live ERM webinar series presented over six-month period

9. Recorded ERM Webinar Series on Statewide LMS

Step 2.3 SoM ERM Department Lead Shadowing o Identify designee who will facilitate ERM profile discussions in subsequent years o Include designee in process from beginning to end for knowledge transfer o Provide reference material to designee as needed

10. Risk Profile Development and Assessment Knowledge Transfer

Workstream 3: SME Risk Coaching Description During Phase 3 of this work, the Contractor will provide coaching to State leaders on how best to incorporate ERM into strategic planning and budgeting in meaningful and sustainable ways. A key focus will be ensuring that the State is prepared to monitor and measure how ERM strengthens the organization’s ability to achieve its goals and prevent risks from turning into unexpected issues. Understanding this connection can increase buy-in from leadership, as it may shift the view from solely focused on what can go wrong, to how proactive planning and informed decision-making at the enterprise level drives progress and successful execution of the strategic plan. The Contractor will provide an expert panel discussion with ERM Solution lead and COSO principal contributor, Kate Sylvis, to engage leaders in these discussions. The Contractor will provide pointed recommendations to department leaders in response to their specific questions and challenges in integrating risk into strategy, budget, and performance.

Phase 3 Activities and Deliverables Activities Outputs Step 3.1. Up to 3 ad-hoc Workshop(s) with SMEs

11. Recommendations on implementing the tools and tactics covered in Workshops

SCHEDULE B – PRICING

Guidehouse Contract No.220000000125, CN 10

Enterprise Risk Management Consulting Services

Pricing Proposal The Contractor’s proposal to complete this work for the firm fixed price of $300,000 ($25,000 in remaining funds from the previous phase and $275,000 additional funds) is based on the following assumptions:

• Project timeline of 9 months is based on commitment and participation from department leaders.

• OIAS team will take the lead on identifying availability and scheduling sessions with each department.

• Weekly status meetings with the State and 1 on-site presentation to share findings and conclude the project.

• An estimate of up to 60 total stakeholder interviews over the course of the project;

with OIAS / DTMB to assist with identifying suitable points of contact for stakeholder entities.

• Engagement and participation from senior department leadership (Director and Deputy Director) levels was key in getting insight on the challenges departments face in achieving strategic goals and objectives; to develop the most valuable output, Senior Department Leadership must commit to allocating time to this engagement.

• Meeting schedule and agendas will be scheduled out for duration of profile development process and sent to impacted departments prior to each review cycle.

• DTMB / OIAS will endeavor to provide data, documents, and feedback in a timely fashion (e.g., 1 week turnaround).

Department of Technology, Management, and Budget 320 S. Walnut Street 2nd Floor Lansing, MI 48933

P.O. BOX 30026 LANSING, MICHIGAN 48909

CONTRACT CHANGE NOTICE

CONTRACT SUMMARY

SW Financial Auditing and Accounting Prequal Program

INITIAL EFFECTIVE DATE INITIAL EXPIRATION DATE INITIAL AVAILABLE OPTIONS EXPIRATION DATE

BEFORE

November 1, 2021 October 31, 2024 3 - 12 Months October 31, 2027

PAYMENT TERMS DELIVERY TIMEFRAME

ALTERNATE PAYMENT OPTIONS EXTENDED PURCHASING

MINIMUM DELIVERY REQUIREMENTS

N/A

P-Card Direct Voucher (PRC) Other Yes No

2941 Fairview Park Drive

Falls Church VA 22042

Jeffrey S. Bankowski

734-644-0595 jbankowski@guidehouse.com

CV0017579

Guidehouse Inc.

C O

N

TR

A C

TO

R

Susan Watt-Smith

517-230-0535

DTMB

Various Various wattsmiths@michigan.gov

C ontract

A dm inistrator Program M anagerSTA

TE

N/ANet 45

Change Notice Number 9

Contract Number MA220000000125 to

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE NOTICE

OPTION EXTENSIONLENGTH OF OPTION LENGTH OF EXTENSION REVISED EXP. DATE

CURRENT VALUE VALUE OF CHANGE NOTICE ESTIMATED AGGREGATE CONTRACT VALUE

$19,913,476.80 $8,889,895.00 $28,803,371.80

Effective November 19, 2024, the attached Schedule A - Statement of Work is added to the Contract for use by the State of Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity (LEO). Additionally, this contract is hereby increased by $8,889,895.00 for these activities.

Please note the Program Manager for this project is Eric Frederick, 517-230-8510, fredericke1@michigan.gov

All other terms, conditions, specifications, and pricing remain the same. Per contractor and agency agreement, DTMB Central Procurement approval, and State Administrative Board approval on November 19, 2024.

DTMB Michael Gilliland 517-335-1557 GillilandM@michigan.gov

MDE Jenny Manar 517-335-0543 ManarJ@michigan.gov

LEO Eric Frederick 517-230-8510 FrederickE1@michigan.gov

Program Managers for

CHANGE NOTICE NO. 9 TO CONTRACT NO. MA220000000125

Michigan.gov/MiProcurement

Version 2021-2 Page 1 of 37

SCHEDULE A - STATEMENT OF WORK

CONTRACT ACTIVITIES

Change Number 9, Contract 220000000125

Financial Accounting, Integrity Oversight Monitoring or Auditing service by BEAD Program Compliance and Monitoring Support

BACKGROUND

The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program – most often called “BEAD” – is the largest single investment in high-speed internet infrastructure in our nation’s history and is administered by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). While BEAD is a national program, each state and territory will be implementing BEAD in their own way within the federal guidelines of the program. The Michigan High- Speed Internet Office (MIHI) is the entity implementing BEAD in Michigan.

BEAD will be implemented as a geographically competitive grant program. Applicants will propose projects to build reliable high-speed internet infrastructure to connect unserved and underserved locations. Successful applicants will be awarded BEAD funding to construct those projects and provide service. BEAD will take some time given the scale and ambition of the program. MIHI anticipates opening the subgrantee selection process in mid-2024. We then have one year to select subgrantees and finalize the use of funds.

Approval of Michigan’s final list of subgrantees and the locations to be served is anticipated to occur in mid-2025. After final approval, subgrantees will have four years to complete their infrastructure projects and begin delivering service. BEAD also allows for a one-year extension on the construction time, if needed. BEAD grant closeout will occur at the end of 2030.

In order to support the Subgrantee Selection Process, MIHI is seeking a contract with a qualified vendor to develop subgrantee risk assessments, establish monitoring plans and reports, develop compliance policies and procedures and corrective action plans, and provide overall monitoring and compliance support for BEAD subgrantees. Ensuring subgrantee compliance with state and federal BEAD-relevant regulations is critical to the success of the program and ensuring BEAD-funded projects adhere to program guidelines and regulations. Knowing the monitoring and compliance requirements before the end of the subgrantee selection process will ensure potential subgrantee’s are aware of and can account for these requirements in their applications. The work is expected to begin immediately. Implementation of the subgrantee monitoring and compliance plan is expected to be implemented and continue for the entirety of the BEAD period of performance.

SCOPE

This project contains the following scope:

Version 2021-2 Page 2 of 37

A. Provide financial accounting, integrity oversight monitoring or auditing services as required by this Tier 2 SOW issued by Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity. Services may include, but not be limited to, the following:

1. Cash Management

2. Forensic Accounting/Auditing (e.g. investigative engagements designed to detect fraud or misuse of funds, general auditing procedures to evaluate program operations and financial and other compliance requirements.

3. Budgeting (e.g. evaluating program needs and ensuring proper budgeting, forecasting and related monitoring controls)

4. Financial Forecasting (e.g. Assist with the coordination and development of multiyear financial plans and models.)

5. Internal Controls (e.g. evaluating sufficiency of the design and/or operating effectiveness of controls for business processes and associated IT systems)

6. Managing Debt/Issuing Public Debt (e.g. Assist as needed with the development of debt management strategies including but not limited to cost analysis of outstanding debts and refunding analysis, develop potential rating agency strategies, or develop a plan of finance. Including additional bond related services as requested by the local unit of government or the State, see C below for more information)

7. Applying for Grants/Administering Grant Monies (e.g. associated with COVID-19 federal relief funds)

8. Cybersecurity (e.g. focused at evaluating information security objectives)

9. Information Technology Systems (e.g. evaluating proper design of IT in support of critical business processes designed to ensure achievement of business objectives and related compliance requirements)

1. Requirements

1.1. General Requirements

1.1.1. Requirement 1 – BEAD Knowledge

1.1.1.1. Sub-Requirement 1 - Must have experience with BEAD and knowledge of all program requirements

1.1.1.1.1. Leverage existing BEAD materials

Through the Contractor’s experience planning, designing, and executing various processes for BEAD Programs across the nation, the Contractor possess a library of BEAD-specific resources.

Because of their familiarity with state BEAD Programs and associated boilerplate processes, the Contractor can quickly adapt their monitoring approach to meet Michigan’s demands. This involves developing and continuously updating a consolidated

Version 2021-2 Page 3 of 37 inventory of documents, templates, and other resources aligned to Michigan’s needs and awarding agency requirements. The Contractor will leverage these resources to co-develop deliverables with the MIHI Office, including subgrantee document preparation, applicant scoring matrices, deploying a comprehensive risk assessment framework, and establishing monitoring processes and procedures (e.g., Michigan BEAD Compliance Monitoring User Guide and associated compliance documents). and the subsequent narrative highlight our understanding of Michigan’s BEAD Program current positioning and future steps where the Contractor can provide valuable assistance.

• Challenge Process: As Michigan completes the final determination phase of its challenge process, the Contractor will assist the State with collecting all communication attempts with eligible challengers and other relevant publicly available information to demonstrate a comprehensive and accessible challenge process took place.

• Subgrantee Selection: While the BEAD program has a stated preference for fiber given its higher speeds and greater reliability when compared to Digital Subscriber Line or fixed wireless, this technology is more costly and may not be a feasible solution for more rural parts of the state. From experience, the Contractor knows that the subgrantee selection process offers an opportunity for the State to ascertain the optimal balance of technologies that are tailored to the needs of each community, as well as incorporate its own considerations and unique circumstances. For example, while several large, national, and well-known ISPs will participate in the program, the State also has an opportunity to incentivize home-grown service providers. The Contractor facilitates MIHI’s subgrantee selection process in line with the State’s strategic objectives.

• Subgrantee Outreach and Technical Assistance: To facilitate compliance with NTIA requirements for the Subgrantee Selection Process, communicating information and delivery of technical assistance to potential BEAD Program applicants. The Contractor assists MIHI with outreach and technical assistance through drafting content for websites, conducting webinars, developing presentations, Version 2021-2 Page 4 of 37 compiling FAQs, creating technical task guides, and furnishing the Michigan BEAD Compliance Monitoring User Guide with associated compliance documents.

• Grant Management: The Contractor will support MIHI on obtaining awardee status reports, reviewing awardee deliverables/supporting documentation, and conducting site visits at project-completion intervals to approve disbursements, identifying risks and enacting risk mitigation techniques. The Contractor’s approach includes managing instances of contract breach (as applicable), monitoring and compliance reporting, fraud risk management, and more through program closeout.

• Final Proposal: While official guidance on the Final Proposal has yet to be released, draft guidance indicates that NTIA acceptance of the Final Proposal will be predicated on 16 requirements on Form and Content. The Contractor will work collaboratively with MIHI to support compliance with these requirements along with any state-specific requirements.

1.1.1.1.2. Coordinate with Community Building and Investment

Center of Excellence The Contractor is supported by a centralized group of experts who provide management and technical subject matter expertise to all grants management related workstreams. This nationwide team of professionals, the Community Building and Investment Center of Excellence (CBI CoE), have been closely monitoring the BIL and BEAD legislation from its infancy through ultimate passage and are now engaged in tracking and analyzing each subsequent release of guidance and how it affects our state and local government partners across the country. The CoE disseminates the most up-to-date Federal, state, and local requirements to aid and enrich the State’s implementation of BEAD. This team has enabled the Contractor to create tools ready for deployment such as funding and policy tracking, coordination of benefits mapping, cost capture and projections, application guides, and compliance monitoring manuals. MIHI will directly benefit from this esteemed group’s output throughout the BEAD Program’s period of performance.

Highlights of the Contractor’s CBI CoE include:

• Access to a team of specialists with expertise and strong relationships in federal agencies (Treasury, FEMA, Health and

Version 2021-2 Page 5 of 37

Human Services (HHS), Housing and Urban Development

(HUD), CDC, NTIA)

• Active tracking of new programs, guidance, and policies issued by the Federal government and their applicability to state and local government

• Centralized repository of resources to deploy on Federal grants related projects (e.g., tools, templates, reference guides)

• Continual knowledge sharing of lessons learned from on the ground activities and decision making from state and local governments across the country.

The MIHI team will benefit from the skills and passion of hundreds of consultants across the country currently supporting dozens of states, counties, and cities. The Contractor will continuously monitor, and track updates released on the NTIA website. In conjunction, they will attend various broadband conferences, including recurring State Broadband Leaders Network meetings and summits. Where appropriate, the Contractor will coordinate with the State to clarify updates and identify downstream repercussions on subgrantees. The Contractor will consolidate this information and share with MIHI, along with any recommended programmatic changes. The Contractor will also consider downstream impacts on relevant stakeholder groups and push forward any program updates and associated implications.

1.1.1.1.3. Iterate with the MIHI team

Contractor will continuously monitor, and track updates released on the NTIA website, attend various broadband…