9048_A1_HUD RFP.pdf

RFP #S-91400-00013635

Amendment No. 1

Level 3 - Restricted

HUD Contract Administration Software

BID AMENDMENT #1

SECTION 1: PURPOSE

The purpose of this Bid Amendment is:

1.1) Modify Section 1.2, Schedule, to change the timeline of demonstrations and scoring rounds.

1.2) Modify Section 4.11, Round 1 Point and Score Calculations, to correct a scrivener’s error in the maximum possible score for Solution Requirements Matrix.

1.3) Remove Section 4.14, Scoring and Ranking of Proposers for the Subsequent Round, as the scores in Round 2 will determine award.

1.4) Modify Section 5.1, Process Overview, to provide details on format and Proposer responsibilities, Proposer demo agenda, oral presentation, product demonstration, and questions and answers.

1.5) Add new Section 5.2, Demo Scripts, to provide details to the various functionality areas to be demonstrated.

1.6) Add new Section 5.3, Round 2 Evaluation Process, to provide details on Round 2 scoring methodology, Round 2 evaluation criteria, and Round 2 point and score calculation.

SECTION 2: MODIFICATIONS

2.1 MODIFICATION OF SECTION 1.2

Section 1.2 (Schedule) is modified as follows (new language is indicated by bold underlined font, deleted language is indicated by strikethrough font):

Event Date Time

Questions / Requests for Clarification Due November 14, 2025 3:00 PM

Answers to Questions / Requests for Clarification Issued (approx.)

November 17, 2025

RFP Protest Period Ends November 20, 2025

Bid Opening (Proposal Due) November 26, 2025 3:00 PM

Demonstrations January 5-7, 2026 December 15-19, Issuance of Notice of Intent to Award (approx.) January 21, 2026 January 5, 2025

2.2 MODIFICATION OF SECTION 4.11

Section 4.11 (Round 1 Point and Score Calculations) is modified as follows (new language is indicated by bold underlined font, deleted language is indicated by strikethrough font):

The Technical Proposal is scored by an evaluation committee. The evaluators will score each of the seven subcategories for Section 1 and the seven subcategories of Section 2, as set forth in Attachment D. Scores are the values (0 through 5) assigned by each evaluator for a cumulative total of 70 points. The points are then divided by the total max points possible and multiplied by the total points available, as shown in the table below, for the total points awarded.

(Example: Proposer A receives response scores of 32 and 30 for a total of 62 points. The SPC takes the total response points and divides by the maximum points possible, which is then multiplied by the 30 points of the overall total points score. 62 divided by the max score of 70 is 0.9. 0.9 multiplied by 30 is 27. Proposer A receives 27 points for that criterion.)

The Solution Requirements Matrix is scored as stated in RFP Section 4.10.3. The points are then divided by the total max points possible and multiplied by the total points available, as shown in the table below, for the total points awarded.

(Example: Proposer A receives a response score of 600. The maximum possible score is 853.94

866.56. The SPC takes the total response points and divides it by the maximum score possible, which is then multiplied by the 45 points of the overall total points score. 600 divided by 853.94

866.56 is 0.70 0.69. 0.70 0.69 multiplied by 45 is 32 31. Proposer A receives 32 31 points for that criterion.)

The Cost Proposal is scored as stated in RFP Section 4.10.4. The scores will be totaled together, and the points are then divided by the total max points possible and multiplied by the total points available, as shown in the table below, for the total points awarded.

2.3 REMOVAL OF SECTION 4.14

Section 4.14 of the RFP is deleted in its entirety.

2.4 MODIFICATION OF SECTION 5.1

Section 5.1 (Process Overview), including its respective subsections, are modified as follows (new language is indicated by bold underlined font, deleted language is indicated by strikethrough font):

In accordance with RFP Section 4.12, Shortlisted Proposers will advance to this Round 2 of competition. Proposers will provide an oral presentation and demonstration of the proposed Solution.

Note that Agency anticipates issuing an RFP Bid Amendment with the Notice of Competitive Range to provide the oral presentation agenda, demo scripts, and scoring methodology. Shortlisted Proposers will adhere to the demonstration format specified in the subsequent Bid Amendment.

Award Protest Period Ends 7 calendar days after Notice of Intent to Award

5.1.1 Format and Proposer Responsibility

Demonstrations will be hosted by Agency in a virtual setting for Proposer. Upon receipt of notice that Proposer is advancing to Round 2, Agency shall provide the virtual meeting details to the Proposer.

Agency shall record the demonstrations. Agency will use these recordings to assist Evaluators in recalling information presented during demos, as well as noting pertinent guarantees and warranties made by Proposer to discuss during Contract negotiations.

Once the demonstration setup is complete and the demo starts, no additional participants will be allowed to join from either Agency or Proposer.

5.1.2 Proposer Demo Agenda

Proposers shall adhere to the agenda below, and for leading the demonstration.

Activity Duration*

Demonstration Setup** 15 minutes

Oral Presentations 15 minutes

Demonstrate Functionality Areas 120 minutes

Questions and Answers 60 minutes

*The PCS shall ensure that Proposer is adhering to the time identified in the demo agenda and monitor time for activities.

**This time is allotted to ensure all Agency and Proposer representatives are present and accounted for, audio checks, screensharing checks, etc.

5.1.3 Oral Presentation

Proposer shall begin the demonstrations with an oral presentation. The oral presentation is intended to introduce the Proposer and Proposer’s product demonstration. The presentation should only cover the following:

• Introductions

• Solution/Product Overview

• Organization of Demonstration o Order of functionality areas during demonstration

5.1.4 Product Demonstration

Proposers shall provide a demo of the Solution using the demo scripts provided in RFP Section 5.2 below.

5.1.5 Questions and Answers

There is a specified duration set aside at the end to answer questions. Evaluators are permitted to request clarification on functionality at any time during the demos. Proposer may elect to answer the question during the scripted scenario (e.g., for quick and simple accommodations) or advise the Evaluator to ask the question again during the time allotted for Questions and Answers.

2.5 MODIFICATION OF SECTION 5.2

Section 5.2 (Demo Scripts), including its respective subsections, are modified as follows (new language is indicated by bold underlined font, deleted language is indicated by strikethrough font):

This demonstration is designed to provide Evaluators with a comprehensive understanding of the proposed Solution’s capabilities and constraints. Proposer should demo the requested features in the functionality areas below. The features below cover the minimum features that Agency expects to see during the demonstration. Proposer may demo additional features for each area, as time permits.

Proposer may demonstrate the functionality areas and items within in any order that it prefers; however, Proposer must specify which functionality area it is demonstrating clearly for Evaluators to follow along with.

Demonstrations must be conducted using test data that does not originate from live or production environments.

5.2.1 Functionality Area 1 – General Overview

Goal: To provide an overview of the Solution, its modules, and basic navigation.

Proposer shall demonstrate the following:

1. Basic navigation in the user interface. Please describe the structure of the application, such as various modules and how they may relate to each other.

2. System settings and management of core system records, such as property data, property owner contact information, and tenant data, if not covered in other portions of the demonstration.

5.2.2 Functionality Area 2 – Configurability of User Interface

Goal: To understand capabilities and limitations of system configuration—what can be configured without getting into custom code development.

Proposer shall demonstrate the following:

1. Configurability of modules/sections/pages, such as adding, modifying, or removing fields.

2. Capabilities and limitations of any conditional logic functionality.

3. Configurability of columns/fields, including available data types, character limits, limits on quantities of custom fields.

5.2.3 Functionality Area 3 – Workflow

Goal: To demonstrate how users track, report on, and move IBPS tasks through the system.

Proposer shall demonstrate the following:

1. Show how the system tracks workload through the life cycle of the task.

2. Demonstrate the software capabilities to notify employees at various levels of the organization when a task is coming due, including configuration of notifications.

3. Show how a task moves through the system, including any stations or checkpoints tasks may land in.

4. Discuss how the workflows allow more than one person to be able to track and work on a task, while reflecting to other employees that the request is being worked on or has been moved to a new station.

5. Discuss where workflows are available, i.e. workflows carry you through the process of doing rent adjustments, tenant complaints, contract renewals, etc.

Proposer may choose to show these as part of the demonstration of the actual work when focusing on the other functionality areas.

5.2.4 Functionality Area 4 – HAP Tenant Process

Goal: To demonstrate how the user processes HAP payments and tenant certifications.

Proposer shall demonstrate the following:

1. The process to import tenant certifications (different types) from a property owner.

2. The process to import HAP requests from a property owner.

3. Demonstrate how income limits are entered and stored.

4. Demonstrate how the HUD passbook rate is stored and updated.

5. Demonstrate how the system will flag issues with the transmitted tenant and HAP data imported into the system.

6. Demonstrate the process of submitting the tenant certification and HAP payment information to TRACS and properties.

7. Demonstrate how to upload and download to TRACS.

8. Demonstrate identifying errors and omissions identified by the TRACS system.

9. Demonstrate how to close out monthly HAPs.

10. Demonstrate how to process 811 individual property HAP requests.

11. Demonstrate how to generate an 811 parent voucher.

12. Demonstrate how to add miscellaneous adjustments and how to add/remove adjustments.

5.2.5 Functionality Area – ACH Payment

Goal: To demonstrate how users set up and complete payment transactions.

Proposer shall demonstrate the following:

1. Demonstrate how bank information is stored and updated in the solution.

Explain any security measures in place.

2. Demonstrate how monthly and out-of-cycle HAP payments are made.

3. Demonstrate how to complete an ACH test transaction (pre-note).

4. Demonstrate how solution differentiates between 811 and Project Based Rental Assistance (PBRA) payments.

5. Demonstrate any available ACH payment reports.

5.2.6 Functionality Area 6 – MOR & 811 PRA

Goal: To demonstrate how users schedule and complete an MOR.

Proposer shall demonstrate the following workflows and features:

1. Demonstrate creating an MOR work plan.

2. Demonstrate any tracking features for MORs and 811 PRA reviews.

3. Demonstrate how an MOR report is completed.

4. Demonstrate how an 811 PRA report is completed.

5.2.7 Functionality Area 7 – Special Claims

Goal: To demonstrate how users will process special claims.

Proposer shall demonstrate the following workflows and features:

1. Create the following special claims:

a. Unpaid rent/damages

b. Vacancies during rent up

c. Regular Vacancies

d. Debt Service

2. Show how to post an approved or adjusted special claim to a HAP voucher.

3. Demonstrate any tracking feature available for special claims.

5.2.8 Functionality Area 8 – IBPS Fees

Goal: To demonstrate how the users will calculate, and track earned IBPS fees.

Proposer shall demonstrate the following workflows and features:

1. Demonstrate how the following fees are calculated and tracked:

a. Basic Fees

b. Disincentives

c. MOR & Contingency Fees

2. Demonstrate AQLs. Run one or more reports that demonstrate fee invoicing for HUD payment.

3. Demonstrate how FMRs are stored and updated

5.2.9 Functionality Area 9 – HUD Reporting

Goal: To demonstrate the reporting capabilities and use for HUD reporting.

Proposer shall demonstrate the following workflows and features:

1. Provide an overview of reports available for Project-based Section 8 Contract Administration.

2. Run one or more reports for the following tasks:

a. Management and Occupancy Reviews

b. Processing Rental Adjustments

c. Review, Verify and Authorize Monthly Vouchers

d. Special Claims

e. Life-threatening health & safety issues

f. Non-life-threatening health & safety issues

g. Public Housing Agency audit

h. Renewals of Expiring HAP contracts

i. General Reporting requirements

3. Demonstrate how AQL requirements are tracked and reported. Include what dates are tracked for each IBPS and what days are counted against the CA’s AQL.

5.2.10 Functionality Area 10 – Other Reporting Capabilities

Goal: To demonstrate the reporting capabilities and allow evaluators to gain a better understanding of the data sets and limitations.

Proposer shall demonstrate the following workflows and features:

1. Provide an overview of the pre-built property level and portfolio level reports available.

2. Run one or more pre-built property level and portfolio level reports.

3. Demonstrate report-building capabilities of the system that are available to the end user, if applicable.

4. Discuss when a report would need to be built by your company, and average timelines for custom reporting.

5.2.11 Functionality Area 11 – Extensibility

Goal: To demonstrate how the software and company are being proactive, preparing for changes to government regulations and programs.

Proposer shall demonstrate the following:

1. Discuss an example of a use case when your company had to adapt quickly to a rapidly changing regulatory environment, how client needs were met, and whether the required deadlines were achieved.

2. Please explain your company’s approach to program changes such as implementation of asset limitations, updates to elderly/disabled deductions and updated form HUD-50059.

2.6 MODIFICATION OF SECTION 5.3

Section 5.3 (Round 2 Scoring Methodology) including its respective subsections, are modified as follows (new language is indicated by bold underlined font, deleted language is indicated by strikethrough font):

Agency will only score Shortlisted Proposer demos. Evaluators will assign scores as follows:

SCORING RUBRIC FOR RFP SECTION 5.3

SCORE EXPLANATION

5 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 project. The Proposer provides insight into its expertise, knowledge, and understanding of the subject matter. Where applicable, the Solution meets most or all of the requirements and State’s needs.

4 VERY GOOD – Response provides useful information, while showing experience and knowledge within the category. Response demonstrates above average knowledge and ability with no apparent deficiencies noted. Where applicable, the Solution meets many or most of the requirements.

3 ADEQUATE – Response addresses all prompts in an adequate manner. Response demonstrates an ability to comply with guidelines, parameters, and requirements with no additional information put forth by the Proposer. Where applicable, the Solution meets some of the requirements, but not many.

2 FAIR – Proposer meets minimum requirements or expectations but does not demonstrate sufficient knowledge of the subject matter.

Where applicable, the Solution meets little-to-some of the requirements.

0-1 POOR – An unacceptable response that does not meet the requirements set forth in the RFP. Proposer has not demonstrated knowledge of the subject matter. Where applicable, the Solution meets little-to-none of the requirements.

5.3.1 Round 2 Point and Score Calculations

ROUND 2 SCORING FRAMEWORK

Points Available

Functionality Area 1 5

Functionality Area 2 5

Functionality Area 3 5

Functionality Area 4 5

Functionality Area 5 5

Functionality Area 6 5

Functionality Area 7 5

Functionality Area 8 5

Functionality Area 9 5

Functionality Area 10 5

Functionality Area 11 5

Organization and Flow of Demonstration 5

TOTAL POINTS: 60