REQUEST FOR QUOTES (RFQ) NO. 6217-25

Best Value Analysis Process for IQMS OHA Health Care Interpreter Scheduling Portal

Services: Independent Quality Management Services Issued to:

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

This IQMS Request for Quote No. 6217 (RFQ) seeks a single, qualified and eligible Consultant from the affected pool of Consultants to provide independent Quality Management Services (IQMS) for the Health Care Interpreter Scheduling Portal Project (Project). Interested Consultants must develop and submit Quotes in compliance with all RFQ requirements. Consultants are NOT eligible if they are providing other project support services or Information Technology Professional Services on that same project.

The Consultant selected for contract award (Awarded Consultant) must have enough capacity to apply IQMS to fundamental elements of the Project. Please see:

1. Attachment A for the Health Care Interpreter Scheduling Portal Project Charter,

2. Attachment B for the Health Care Interpreter Scheduling Portal Project Business Case Authorized Purchaser estimates the length of the Work Order Contract (“Contract”) to be 24 months or until all Deliverables have been submitted and accepted by Authorized Purchaser (Final Acceptance as defined in the Contract). Some Deliverables are currently listed as “OPTION RESERVED TO AUTHORIZED PURCHASER” and may later be activated through an amendment or change order to the Contract, as appropriate. In addition, as the project progresses into new phases, some Deliverables may need to be refreshed as more becomes known. The selected IQMS Consultant will need to maintain flexibility and be adaptable to the Authorized Purchaser implementation approaches and methodologies.

The purpose of the IQMS Consultant’s work is to comply with all applicable contractual requirements to assure that appropriate levels of quality planning, quality control, quality assurance, and independent solution testing (including monitoring and reporting), are performed for the Project. These Services must provide the Authorized Purchaser with appropriate visibility into the processes being used, and the products being built. They must be sufficient to assure that the Project satisfies the needs for which it was undertaken, and that project risks are well understood and appropriately mitigated or managed.

Authorized Purchaser intends to enter into a contract with its selected IQMS Consultant substantially in the form of the Sample Work Order Contract (WOC) attached to Consultant’s Master Price and Services Agreement (“MPSA”), as MPSA Attachment C or Attachment C2, as applicable.

2. DEFINITIONS AND RFQ ATTACHMENTS & EXHIBITS

A capitalized word has the meaning ascribed to the term in the MPSA and proposed WOC. Project-centric definitions include:

(a) “Authorized Purchaser” or “AP” means Oregon Health Authority (OHA).

(b) “DAS” means Department of Administrative Services. For more information about DAS please link to: https://www.oregon.gov/das/pages/index.aspx

(c) DAS SPS means Statewide Procurement Services.

(d) “EIS” means the Enterprise Information Services, previously designated as the Office of the State Chief Information Officer (“OSCIO”) for the State of Oregon. All references in the RFQ-related documentation to “OSCIO” refer to EIS. For more information about EIS please link to:

https://www.oregon.gov/das/oscio/pages/index.aspx

(e) “IQMS” means independent quality management services in the context of State’s 5 independent verification and validation Tasks of Risk Assessment and Management, Quality Planning, Quality Control, Quality Assurance, and Independent Solution Testing.

(f) “IQMS Consultant” or “Consultant” means IQMS Contractor currently covered under IQMS Master Price and Services Agreement.

(g) “MPSA” means the IQMS Master Price and Services Agreement that each Consultant currently has in force.

(h) “Offeror” means an IQMS Consultant that submitted a Quote.

(i) “PMBOK” means the current edition of the Project Management Body of Knowledge published by the Project Management Institute.

(j) “Project” means the Health Care Interpreter Scheduling Portal Project.

(k) “Quote” means an RFQ-responsive submission that describes a Consultant’s approach, experience, proposed personnel and cost for requested Services.

(l) “SI Contractor” or “Solution Contractor” means the Authorized Purchaser’s development team or a contractor responsible for solution implementation (SI) in the Project.

(m) “State” means the State of Oregon acting by and through DAS and Authorized Purchaser.

RFQ ATTACHMENTS & EXHIBITS INCLUDE:

(a) Exhibit No. 1: RFQ Pricing Sheet (embedded in RFQ).

(b) Exhibit No. 2: Client Reference Form (embedded in RFQ).

(c) Exhibit No. 3: Statement of Work[footnoteRef:2] (separate document). [2: The Statement of Work includes Appendices A to E, available on the State Chief Information Office Website at: https://www.oregon.gov/das/OSCIO/Pages/IndependentQA.aspx]

(d) Attachment A to Statement of Work, Project Charter (embedded in RFQ).

(e) Attachment B to Statement of Work, Project Business Case (embedded in RFQ).

3. DISCLAIMER:

As per ORS 279B.040, neither the Department of Administrative Services nor the Authorized Purchaser may accept any bid or proposal from the awarded Consultant with respect to any subsequent Request for Proposal(s) for any project related to those for which the Services provided by the awarded Consultant are utilized as a result of this Request for Quote.

4. PROJECT OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Background The Oregon Health Authority is the primary state agency responsible for improving and overseeing the public health system in Oregon. Established in 2009, OHA was created to consolidate several health-related functions under one umbrella to enhance coordination, efficiency, and outcomes. The agency oversees critical programs such as the Oregon Health Plan (Medicaid), public health services, mental health and addiction services, and health equity initiatives. Its overarching mission is to help all Oregonians achieve lifelong health and well-being through access to quality care and healthier communities.

OHA plays a key role in shaping health policy in Oregon, implementing reforms aimed at controlling costs, improving care delivery, and increasing access. It leads statewide efforts to address health disparities, social determinants of health, and the integration of behavioral and physical health services. The agency also responds to public health emergencies, manages disease prevention programs, and promotes wellness across diverse populations. Through collaboration with local health departments, community partners, and health care providers, the Oregon Health Authority works to build a more equitable and effective health system for the state.

Project Overview In 2024, the Oregon Legislature passed Senate Bill 1578, mandating OHA – among other things - to acquire, build, and maintain an health care interpreter (HCI) Scheduling Portal. This centralized portal will be designed to enable health care providers and CCOs to schedule Oregon-Certified or -Qualified HCIs for OHP members with Limited English Proficiency or who are Deaf or hard of hearing. Additionally, the legislation requires OHA to take the necessary steps needed to directly reimburse HCIs for their services.

The purpose of the Portal is to consolidate and improve the process of scheduling HCIs and to provide a claims submittal process, thereby eliminating many of the challenges faced by independent HCIs. By centralizing scheduling and transitioning to a simplified claims submittal process, the envisioned Portal will facilitate compliance with state and federal language access requirements while fostering trust and quality care for OHP members.

Additionally, the legislation requires OHA to contract with a non-profit to promote workforce development, and to fill last-minute appointments in the portal. The portal will generate data to inform the non-profit’s workforce development activities.

This project is directly aligned with the Governor’s vision to eliminate health inequities by 2030. The Portal is a multi-phase project with the initial implementation projected for completion by the first quarter of 2028. This timeline is aggressive, but aims to account for the complexity of system integrations and the development of essential features to ensure a robust and user-friendly platform. Following its launch, the Portal will require ongoing operations, maintenance, and future enhancements to ensure it continues to meet user needs, regulatory requirements, and technological advancements.

5. RESPONSIBILITIES

a. Weekly Project Team Meetings

b. Monthly Project Status Meetings

c. Quarterly Executive Steering Committee Meetings

6. RFQ TIMELINE

The table below represents a tentative schedule of events for this RFQ. All times are listed in Pacific Time. All dates and times are subject to change.

7. SCOPE OF SERVICES:

The Scope of Services includes the Services depicted in the MPSA Sample Contract and RFQ Exhibit No. 3, Statement of Work.

8. QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS FOR CLARIFICATION:

All questions and requests for clarification regarding this RFQ must be submitted in writing by e-mail to the Authorized Representative and must be received no later than the date and Time identified above in the “RFQ Timeline” section. E-mail subject line must read: IQMS RFQ #S-44300-00016125 Clarification.

When appropriate, as determined by Authorized Purchaser in its sole discretion, revisions, substitutions or clarifications of the RFQ will be sent electronically.

9. QUOTATION SUBMITTAL:

Quotes must be received on or before the Offer Due Date and Time at the location identified above to be considered. Quotes will not be accepted after the Offer Due Date and Time. Quotes will be accepted by e-mail to the Authorized Representative identified above. Submittals must be specified using the subject line: IQMS RFQ #S-44300-00016125 Submittal.

Authorized Purchaser may extend the Offer Due Date when it is in the best interest of Authorized Purchaser.

Authorized Purchaser may reject all Quotes or cancel this RFQ if in its sole determination, it is in the best interest of Authorized Purchaser.

10. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS:

Quotes must be submitted via email transmission to the Authorized Representative in searchable, electronic PDF format by the Offer Closing Date and Time listed in the RFQ Timeline.[footnoteRef:3] Quotes must include the following items: [3: Please note that the Authorized Representative’s email system will not accept an email transmission with attachments that exceed 15 MB in size; and will not accept zipped files. Quoting Consultants should separate oversized files for submission in two (2) or more transmissions. Unfortunately, the system does not alert the intended recipient of any email rejection. Therefore, a Quoting Consultant should always include in the transmitted email(s) a request for confirmation of receipt, and is responsible for otherwise following up in the event it does not receive timely confirmation, i.e., within 24 hours of submission.]

(a) Declaration of “No Conflict of Interest”.

(b) A detailed description of Consultant’s approach and methodologies for providing the Services in the Statement of Work (“SOW”). IQMS Consultant Offerors must submit their approach to accomplishing the Services, along with a timeline of activities and critical success factors necessary per the Project Timeline. Consultants may choose to submit the required information in draft Quality Management Plan and Baseline Work Plan formats (IQMS Deliverables 2.3 and 2.4), or in some alternative format they believe allows them to clearly and concisely communicate the required information.

(c) Identities and resumes for proposed personnel (designating which are “key” persons) through whom Consultant intends to deliver the required Services, and a staffing plan explaining how Consultant will maintain the demonstrated personnel credentials, qualifications, expertise and experience throughout the life of the Contract(s). Authorized Purchaser prefers Consultant’s deployment of personnel with a minimum of five (5) years’ experience. All deployed personnel must be able to pass a certified criminal background check.

(d) A description of past or current comparable[footnoteRef:4] projects within the last five (5) years for which Consultant has or is providing quality management services that were/are comparable to the Services described in the RFQ; and Client Reference Check Forms (Exhibit 2) for each. Forms must either be completed and signed by the reference, returned to the Consultant and submitted with the quote; or Consultants may submit the Exhibit 2 with Consultant’s name and Client Reference Contact Information entered, and items 1 through 5 completed from Consultant’s perspective as depicted in Exhibit No. 2 Reference Check Form. In either circumstance, The Authorized Purchaser reserves the right to follow up separately with Client References and may provide additional guidance to the Offeror concerning Client Reference Checks.[footnoteRef:5] [4: Comparable means similar in nature, complexity, scope and size to the Next Generation 9-1-1 Project.

] [5: If an Offeror has provided client reference check forms in connection with an IQMS opportunity in the past and intends to use those same client references for this IQMS opportunity, then that Offeror may submit copies of those previous references to satisfy the reference check requirement in this opportunity. Failure to meet the client reference requirement may result in rejection of the subject Quote from further consideration for contract award.

(e) A separate Pricing Sheet (Exhibit No. 1) that lists Fixed Prices by Deliverable and the Hourly Rate Card by personnel position used to develop the Fixed Prices. The Pricing Sheet must be signed by an authorized representative of the Consultant, or the Quote will be considered null and void.

1. Offerors/Consultants may add a signature line to the pricing sheet exhibit, or

2. Include a signed cover letter addressing all submission components, including the Cost Quote.

(f) Work examples of, or detailed Deliverable Expectation Documents (“DED”) for:

0. Deliverable 1.1, Risk Assessment Report,

0. Deliverable 2.6, Project Evaluation and Lessons Learned Report,

0. Deliverable 3.1, Quality Control Review Report (and related Deliverable 2.2, Quality Checklist) and,

0. Deliverable 4.1, Quarterly QA Status and Improvement Reports.

(g) Submitted Quotes are subject to disclosure as public records. If an Offeror/Consultant includes information and data with its submitted Quote that Offeror/Consultant regard as proprietary, privileged, or otherwise confidential; Offeror/Consultant must identify such information in a separate document submitted with its Quote and provide a redacted submission along with the original submission. Otherwise, State will assume that Offeror/Consultant consents to public disclosure of the original submission.

11. EVALUATION AND AWARD:

Quote submissions will be reviewed to determine if all Submittal Requirements have been met. Those meeting the Submittal Requirements will be evaluated to determine the “Best Value” for the State. “Best Value” is based solely on the evaluator’s determination of what best meets the needs of Authorized Purchaser considering price as well as the following considerations:

(a) Independence (no conflict of interest).

(b) Perceived quality of submitted detailed approach and schedule.

(c) Consultant’s Experience.

(d) Credentials, qualifications, expertise and experience of proposed Consultant personnel.

(e) Perceived quality and efficacy of proposed Staffing Plan.

(f) Consultant references; and

(g) Perceived quality of submitted Work Examples or DEDs.

The initial scored evaluation round includes assessment of all required initial submissions. Scoring categories and their related “maximum points” are listed in Figure 1. Each non-price category will be scored based on the information provided in the Quotes in the context of the Rating Scale set out in Figure 2.

Figure 1: Quote Evaluation Criteria

POINTS

The Authorized Representative will average the final scores for each Quote (calculated by totaling the points awarded by each Evaluation Committee member and dividing by the number of members). The calculated average is the final score.

2. Deliverable 2.6, Lessons Learned Report,

3. Deliverable 3.1, Quality Control Review Report (and related Deliverable 2.2, Quality Checklist),

4. Deliverable 4.1, Quality Assurance Status and Improvement Report.

cost being scored

Authorized Purchaser may decide to defer calculation of cost points until Round 2 evaluation, limiting such calculation to the top-ranking Offerors who will compete in that round.

Figure 2: Rating Scale

90 – 100% OUTSTANDING - Response meets all the requirements and has demonstrated in a clear and concise manner a thorough knowledge and understanding of the subject matter and opportunity. The Offeror provides deep and meaningful insight into its expertise, knowledge, and understanding of the subject matter.

The rating scale at Figure 2 provides guidance to Evaluation Committee members concerning their required qualitative, subjective assessment of how well an Offeror addresses the elements and essentials prescribed in each scored submission requirement in terms of the Offeror’s demonstrated knowledge and likely capacity and capability to develop, deliver, and perform in the context of the relevant Tasks and Deliverables at issue in a submission requirement.

DAS and AP may establish additional rounds of evaluation for Interviews and presentations involving two (2) or more of the top-ranking Offerors. The actual number of invited Offerors to any additional rounds of evaluation depends upon scoring results from the preceding round; and the Evaluation Committee may determine not to carryover scores from the preceding round to the additional round. Alternatively, but may determine to award a WOC at the conclusion of the first evaluation round to the highest-scoring Offeror[footnoteRef:6] (successful Consultant with the best value quote). The awarded WOC will be in a form substantially similar to the Sample Contract attached to the awarded Consultant’s IQMS Master Price and Services Agreement (“MPSA”) and the proposed Statement of Work (RFQ Exhibit 3). DAS may negotiate contract terms and conditions with the successful Consultant. [6: In such event, State Parties may still conduct an interview/presentation session onsite with the highest-scoring Offeror.

CONTRACT AWARD DETERMINATION IS FINAL BASED ON THE SCORES PROVIDED BY THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE, SUBJECT TO A TIMELY, COMPLIANT AWARD PROTEST FROM AN ADVERSELY AFFECTED OFFEROR. AP will not award a WOC to any Offeror that the evaluation committee determines to have an actual or apparent conflict of interest.

AWARD PROTEST OPPORTUNITY CONSISTENT WITH ORS 279B.410. DAS and AP will provide a seven (7) calendar day period following release of any Notice of Intent to Award (“Notice”) during which an adversely affected Offeror may protest such award. An Offeror who claims to have been adversely affected by the selection of a competing Offeror shall have seven (7) calendar days from the date of such Notice in which to deliver a signed protest to DAS PS through the SPC. The SPC will deliver the Notice to all Offeror via email transmission to the Offerors’ named representatives. Adversely affected Proposers will have until 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time, on the protest deadline date to submit a protest in accordance with the requirements in ORS 279B.410.

The submitted protest must bear the signature of a company official authorized to represent Offeror’s interests. Offerors may use an electronic signature copy via email to satisfy the protest submission deadline, provided they mail the original protest to the SPC postmarked no later than the protest submission deadline. To be adversely affected, an offeror must demonstrate that all higher ranked quotes were ineligible for selection. DAS and AP will not consider a protest submitted after the deadline. Protests will be resolved according to Oregon Administrative Rules. DAS and AP will not consider protests that do not include the information required under ORS 279B.410.

EXHIBIT NO. 1

RFQ PRICING SHEET

TASK 1: RISK ASSESSMENT

TASK 2: QUALITY PLANNING

(Updated by the Parties as needed to reflect mutually agreeable adjustments, if any, to QMS deliverables.)

(Funds allocated for special requests may be reallocated to other deliverables through the WOC change control process.)

TASK 3: QUALITY CONTROL

Deliverable 3.1: Quality Control Review

· Architecture design documentation

· Security architecture documentation

· Integration and interoperability documentation

· Scalability and performance documentation

· Change management documentation

Related information used to support this review may include:

· Authorized Purchaser’s Project Charter

· Authorized Purchaser’s Business Case

· Solutions Analysis *For major systems, non-functional / technical requirements would include data model (including entity relations), database design (including tables and the use of primary and secondary keys), interfaces and integration with existing and legacy systems, data conversion and migration of data in existing systems or databases, use of public cloud infrastructure, system redundancy and high availability features, disaster recovery, etc.

Prior to RFP release.

As agreed to and documented in the approved Baseline QMS Work Plan.

$0.00

Related information to support this review may include:

· Updated Authorized Purchaser Project Plan or Project Plan

· Updated Authorized Purchaser Business Case Prior to contract execution with Solution Contractor.

As agreed to and documented in the approved Baseline QMS Work Plan.

$0.00

As agreed to and documented in the approved Baseline QMS Work Plan.

$0.00

Deliverable 3.2: Security Review (Consult with EIS Cyber Security Services.)

Deliverable 3.3: Quality Status Reporting

For up to 8 Instances

6 weeks after start of the reporting quarter + 5 Business Days As agreed to and documented in the approved Baseline QMS Work Plan.

$0.00

($0.00 per Instance)

TASK 4: QUALITY ASSURANCE

Deliverable 4.1: Quality Assurance Status and Improvement Reporting

For up to 8 Instances *Note: The exact dates of the End of Quarter will be specified in the Baseline QMS Work Plan.

End of the reporting Quarter + 10 Business Days*

$0.00

($0.00 per Instance)

TASK 5: INDEPENDENT SOLUTION TESTING (Consult with EIS Cyber Security Services.)

Assumptions:

Assumptions:

Type of test: <Ex. Penetration Test: black box, white box, gray box> Areas tested: <Ex. Network, Application, Web Application> Testing Duration: <# of weeks or months> Final Assessment Report

RATE CARD

EXHIBIT NO. 2

REFERENCE CHECK FORM

PLEASE RESPOND TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS.

1. Provide a description of your (Client Reference) engagement with the Offeror, along with the services provided.

2. Who were the Offeror’s Key Persons involved in the contract work?

Score 1-5 for each response (5 being high)

3. How would you (Client Reference) rate the overall quality of services provided and your overall relationship with the Offeror?

Score:

Comments:

4. Did the Offeror deliver what was required per contract, was it on time, and did the deliverables meet your (Client Reference) quality standards?

Score:

Comments:

5. How would you (Client Reference) rate the working relationship with the Offeror? Were they easy to work with? Were they responsive to customer service issues and special requests?

Score:

Comments:

6. If given the opportunity, how likely would you (Client Reference) use Offeror’s services again?

EXHIBIT NO. 3

IQMS STATEMENT OF WORK

Embedded Microsoft Word Document Object Below

ATTACHMENT A

PROJECT CHARTER

Embedded PDF Document Object Below

ATTACHMENT B

BUSINESS CASE

Embedded PDF Object Below

IQMS RFQ No. 6217 Page 22 of 22 image1.png image2.emf

EXHIBIT_3_IQMS_SOW.docx

IQMS RFQ EXHIBIT 3

STATEMENT OF WORK FOR QMS

FOR

OHA Health Care Interpreter Scheduling Portal

Table of Contents

Appendix A – Oregon Quality Standards1......................................................................... A-1

Appendix B – Project Evaluation and Close-out Report Template ................................... A-16

Appendix C – QA Status and Improvement Report Template2 ........................................ A-27

Appendix D – Status and Improvement “Sample” Report ............................................... A-31

Appendix E – OSCIO Project Assessment Report and Project Budget & Schedule Variance Report .............................................................................................................................. A-40

1 The OSCIO developed the Oregon Quality Standards from review and analysis of the Project Management Institute’s Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) in the context of the International Standards Organization (ISO) standard ISO12207 for system life cycle management and traditional software development projects. Depending upon the nature of an IT project’s underlying solution, these Oregon Quality Standards may be modified, omitted or supplemented with additional, applicable quality standards.

2 Appendices C through E provide guidance for QMS Task 4, Deliverable 4.1, Quality Assurance Status and Improvements Report. Authorized Purchaser will work with Consultant to finalize agreeable format(s).

1. Introduction to Quality Management Services

1.1 Purpose

The purpose of the QMS Consultant’s work is to assure that appropriate levels of Quality Management Services are performed for the Health Care Interpreter Scheduling Portal Project (or “Project”). These Services must provide the Authorized Purchaser with appropriate visibility into the processes being used, and the products being built. They must be sufficient to assure that the Project satisfies the needs for which it was undertaken, and that Project risks are well understood and appropriately mitigated or managed.

1.2 Quality Management Approach

The approach to ensure that the appropriate quality management and risk management activities are conducted must be based, as necessary and appropriate in the context of a particular project, on the Project Management Institute’s (PMI) Standard described in the current edition of the Project Management Body of Knowledge (“PMBOK” https://www.pmi.org/pmbok-guide-standards); and the International Standards Organization standard ISO12207 for system life cycle management. This includes Quality Management Services that determine the quality policy, objectives, and responsibilities; and implements them by means such as quality planning, quality control, and quality assurance.

Quality Management is a subset of project management that includes the process required to ensure that the Project satisfies the needs for which it was undertaken. Quality Management consists of activities in quality planning, quality assurance, quality control (including independent testing) and risk management. Together, these activities constitute the Authorized Purchaser’s independent verification and validation (IV&V) requirements. They are independent in the sense that they are conducted independently of the development Consultant or systems integrator.

The term “Quality Standards” refers to a project’s “process” and “product” quality standards. “Process” quality standards cover organizational influences, management support, decision drivers, project management, scheduling, resourcing, experience, and so on. “Product” quality standards cover product content, design, development, deployment, environment, technology, security, maintainability, and so on.

The quality management approach for the Project must adhere to and include, but not be limited to, work activities in support of the following Quality Management Services that constitute the Authorized Purchaser’s IV&V requirements:

1. Task 1 - Risk Assessment

2. Task 2 - Quality Management Planning

3. Task 3 - Quality Control

4. Task 4 - Quality Assurance

5. Task 5 - Independent Solution Testing

Together, the satisfactory performance of these Tasks by the QMS Consultant helps ensure the application of best practices in project management, including quality management, and the delivery of technical work products that meet or exceed project requirements for schedule, cost, functionality, reliability, security, and other relevant quality standards.

1.3 Definitions

“Independence” or “Independent”: The delivery of services by a third party free from real or perceived conflict with the interests of the Authorized Purchaser and its contractors involved in project planning, design, development, implementation, deployment, and operational activity, and as otherwise defined in Statewide Policy 107-004-030.

“Independent QA Act”: Chapter 77, A 2014 ACT HB 4122, codified at ORS 291.035.

“Independent QA Program”: The program that uses the group of pre-qualified IT Quality Management Services providers under statewide Master Price and Services Agreements for delivery of diverse, Independent Quality Management Services. DAS and the OSCIO cooperatively administer the program. Each Independent QA Program consultant has executed a Master Price and Services Agreement with the State that includes negotiated provisions, such as standard contract terms and conditions, established hourly rate cards, and the Independent QA Program enterprise Scope of Services.

“Independent Verification and Validation” or “IV&V”: Interchangeable terms that have the meaning set out in the latest edition of ISO 12207. “Verification” relates to evaluation that establishes the compliance of project work products with approved business requirements, technical requirements, architecture, and design. “Validation” relates to determining that project work products fulfill intended business needs. “Independent” has the meaning set out above in connection with the defined term, “Independence” or “Independent”.

“Information Technology Initiative” or “IT Initiative”: A project to develop or provide, with an Authorized Purchaser’s own personnel and resources, or to obtain by means of a procurement or set of related procurements: (i) New hardware, software or services for data processing, office automation or telecommunications; (ii) An overhaul, upgrade or replacement of a substantial portion of the hardware or software in an existing data processing, office automation or telecommunications system; or (iii) A substantial expansion of existing data processing, office automation or telecommunications services.3

3 Information Technology Initiative does not include: (i) A procurement for preliminary quality assurance services or quality management services; (ii) A routine update to or purchase of hardware or software within an existing data processing, office automation or telecommunications system; (iii) A renewal of an existing contract for data processing, office automation or telecommunications services under terms and conditions that are substantially the same as in the existing contract; or (iv) A replacement of a component of an existing data processing, office automation or telecommunications system that is not essential for the system to function as designed or that occurs at the end of the component’s anticipated life cycle.

NAME OF Project IQMS RFQ SOW

“Preliminary Quality Assurance Services” means a set of services in which a Consultant provides an independent and objective review of an Authorized Purchaser’s plans, specifications, estimates, documentation, available resources, and overall purpose for an information technology initiative, including services in which the Consultant evaluates a proposed information technology initiative against applicable quality standards and best practices from private industry and other sources.

“Quality Management Services” or “QMS” means a set of services in which a Consultant provides an independent and objective review and evaluation of a state contracting agency’s, a public corporation’s or another Consultant’s performance with respect to an information technology initiative, such as services in which the Consultant: (A) Identifies quality standards that apply or should apply to the information technology initiative; (B) Suggests methods and means by which the state contracting agency, the public corporation or the other Consultant may meet quality standards identified in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph; (C) Reviews and evaluates the state contracting agency’s, the public corporation’s or the other Consultant’s performance regularly as the information technology initiative progresses from start to finish;

(D) Identifies omissions or gaps in the state contracting agency’s, the public corporation’s or the other Consultant’s planning, execution, control, methodology, communication or reporting as the information technology initiative progresses from start to finish; (E) Identifies risks in the state contracting agency’s, the public corporation’s or the other Consultant’s plans or approach to designing, developing or implementing the information technology initiative and suggests methods to reduce, mitigate or eliminate the risks; (F) Assists the state contracting agency or the public corporation in testing or otherwise evaluating the hardware, software or services that are developed, provided or obtained as part of an information technology initiative to determine whether the hardware, software or services conform with the quality standards identified in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph; (G) Advises the State Chief Information Officer, the state contracting agency or the public corporation as to whether the hardware, software or services that are developed, provided or obtained as part of an information technology initiative meet the contracting agency’s or the public corporation’s needs, specifications or expectations and otherwise enable the state contracting agency or the public corporation to achieve the objectives for the information technology initiative; or (H) Identifies unsatisfactory performance and suggests methods the State Chief Information Officer, the state contracting agency, the public corporation or the other Consultant might use to eliminate the causes of unsatisfactory performance.

2. Quality Management Services (“QMS”)

2.1 Task 1: Risk Assessment

The Risk Assessment Task defines how the QMS Consultant will support a project’s overall risk management efforts. The QMS Consultant should refer to the project’s Risk Management Plan if one exists. Authorized Purchaser’s project team retains the primary responsibility for executing the project’s risk management activities, while the QMS Consultant provides a supporting role through its independent efforts. Within the QMS Consultant’s role of completing Task 2 Quality Planning, Task 3 Quality Control (including Task 5 Independent Solution Testing), and Task 4 Quality Assurance; it must identify risks and provide recommendations for risk avoidance and mitigation strategies related to work product, process, and the overall project. Risk management includes the identification of risks, the thorough assessment of the probability and the impact for the occurrence of risks, and the planning of viable responses that include, but are not limited to, mitigation, contingency, and avoidance strategies. Identification of Information Security risks should also be an essential part of the scope of the QMS Consultant’s initial and on-going risk assessment.

The QMS Consultant performs Task 1 through the following Deliverables:

1. Deliverable 1.1: Risk Assessment

The QMS Consultant shall conduct a Risk Assessment of the project to identify the current status of the project, identify risks and their likelihood of occurring, and provide an independent evaluation of the planned schedule, fiscal and personnel resources, and processes. If Consultant conducts a Risk Assessment early in the project lifecycle, Consultant may be requested to refresh the Risk Assessment one or more times throughout the project. At minimum, in developing or refreshing its Risk Assessment Report, the QMS Consultant must evaluate the project’s Integrated Project Plan for reasonableness, validity, thoroughness and accuracy with emphasis on the following:

1. Project Plan including State Resource Plan;

2. Project Requirements Management Plan;

3. Project Change Management Plan;

4. Project Issue Management Procedure;

5. Communication Plan;

6. Other critical Project processes; and

7. Any authorized Task 3 Quality Control Reviews.

As applicable and available, the QMS Consultant should perform a risk assessment on the project’s most recent Software Development Plan, Facility Plan, Configuration Management Plan, Data Conversion Strategy, Testing Strategy, Post-Implementation Support Strategy (for on-going operations and maintenance), Training Strategy, and Certification Checklist. For projects that are not for the purpose of traditional software development, the Risk Assessment should include artifacts that are comparable to those listed in this section within the context of the project’s actual purpose. This Risk Assessment should take into account work product and project-level considerations, including at a minimum:

1. Feasibility of the technical solution;

2. Sufficiency of security controls to safeguard protected or confidential information and to meet security requirements;

3. Sufficiency of project components and processes; and

4. Sufficiency of project budget, schedule, and resources.

To satisfactorily produce this Deliverable, the QMS Consultant should be well versed in all aspects of the project, gaining such basic project knowledge through its review of the project’s available:

1. Business Case, Charter;

2. Work Plan and Work Breakdown Structure;

3. Approved (original or current) baseline project budget and schedule;

4. Integrated Project Plan and related supporting plans; and

5. Other major project deliverables produced by the Authorized Purchaser or its other project consultants that relate to the project’s functional, non-functional, and security requirements.

The Deliverable should include:

1. Risk Identification (providing a description, level of impact, probability of occurrence, and measurable threshold to trigger the risk);

2. Risk Avoidance Plan (recommending specific solutions to avoid the triggering of each risk);

3. Risk Mitigation Plan (recommending specific risk mitigation solutions for each identified risk, including a cost-benefit analysis for each mitigation option along with specific recommendations); and

4. For projects under the oversight of the OSCIO, the OSCIO Project Assessment Report (completing a “forward view” column for all metrics identified therein). (See Appendix E.)

2. Deliverable 1.2: Risk Notification

As needed between periodic reports, the QMS Consultant should immediately verbally report to the Authorized Purchaser’s…