ADDENDUM NO. 1

Request for Proposals: RFP 2027-01-VPA Accounts Payable Invoice Process Automation

Closing Date: August 25, 2026 @ 2:00 p.m.

Please see below for updates to the dates of this solicitation:

Proposals Due Date August 25, 2026 @ 2:00PM EST

The following questions and answers are provided for all offerors:

Q1. Custom-Built vs. Commercial Product

Section I states VPA seeks "qualified Accounts Payable software companies to transform the current accounts payable process by automating the end-to-end lifecycle of invoice processing." Exhibit C, Section II further states "The selected Offeror will design, implement and integrate a solution that enables end-to-end automation of Accounts Payable invoice processing." Will VPA accept a purpose-built solution designed, developed, and operated specifically for VPA's requirements, or does VPA require an existing commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) AP automation product with an established customer install base?

RFP Reference: Section I (Purpose); Exhibit C, Section II (Project Goals, Objectives, and Scope of

Work)

Answer. VPA would prefer an existing available off-the-shelf AP automation product with an established customer install base.

Q2. "Commence Work" Definition

The Estimated Schedule in Exhibit C, Section III indicates "Commence work: October 1, 2026." The

Transmittal Page states the contract term shall be "from the date of execution through the date of implementation or two (2) years whichever occurs first." Does "commence work" on October 1, 2026 refer to (a) the start of the gap analysis, requirements gathering, and design phase, or (b) a date by which the solution must be fully operational in production? If (a), what is VPA's target timeline for production go-live?

RFP Reference: Exhibit C, Section III (Estimated Schedule); Transmittal Page (contract term)

Answer. Commencement of work refers to the start of the gap analysis, requirements gathering, and design phase with VPA going live no later than April 2027.

Q3. Phased Implementation

The Scope of Work in Exhibit C, Section II identifies multiple distinct scope areas including Invoice

Capture & Ingestion, Data Validation, Data Mapping, Invoice to Voucher Conversion, Reporting &

Analytics, Compliance and Retention, Change Management & Training, and Support. Will VPA accept a phased implementation approach (e.g., Phase 1: PO invoice automation; Phase 2: non-PO invoice automation; Phase 3: advanced AI/ML optimization and analytics), or does VPA require full end-to-end automation to be delivered as a single deployment?

RFP Reference: Exhibit C, Section II (Scope of Work)

Answer. VPA is open to a phased approach as long as proposed time frame doesn’t extend past May

2027 or impede other project priorities such as PeopleSoft upgrade.

Q4. Down-Select Presentations Format and Demonstrations

The Estimated Schedule in Exhibit C, Section III indicates "Down-select of finalists and presentations/interviews: August 27, 2026." Please clarify:

(a) Will finalists be expected to provide a live product demonstration of a working AP automation system during this session?

(b) What is the expected format and duration of the finalist presentations?

(c) Will VPA provide specific evaluation criteria, topics, or questions for the presentations in advance?

(d) If product demonstrations are required, will VPA provide sample invoice data and format specifications to ensure demonstrations reflect VPA's actual operating environment?

RFP Reference: Exhibit C, Section III (Estimated Schedule); Section V (Evaluation and Award

Criteria)

Answer. VPA will shortlist the finalists and then request presentations/demos during the interview process that will have a separate set of criteria. The evaluation criteria, topics, or questions will be provided to the finalists at the time of or shortly after the down selection has been made.

Q5. PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2 Integration Method

The Scope of Work in Exhibit C, Section II references "Automated voucher creation for integration to

PeopleSoft" and Section V, Section 3 (Integration Capability — 20pts) asks "How are invoices converted to ERP (e.g., PeopleSoft) vouchers?" What is VPA's preferred or currently supported integration method for voucher creation in PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2: (a) PeopleSoft Component

Interfaces (CI), (b) Integration Broker, (c) flat file import (CSV/XML), (d) REST/web services API, or

(e) other? Does VPA have existing integration middleware or an Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) in place?

RFP Reference: Exhibit C, Section II (Scope of Work — Invoice to Voucher Conversion); Section V, Section 3 (Integration Capability — 20pts)

Answer. Flat file import (CSV/XML)

Q6. PeopleSoft Modules in Use

The Scope of Work references "PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2." Beyond the core Financials/Supply Chain

Management modules, which specific PeopleSoft modules are currently deployed at VPA, VIT, and

HRCP II (e.g., Purchasing, eProcurement, Supplier Contract Management, Asset Management, General Ledger)? This information will help Offerors understand the full integration landscape and propose the most effective integration approach.

RFP Reference: Exhibit C, Section II (Scope of Work); Section V, Section 3 (Integration Capability —

20pts)

Answer. Purchasing, Asset Management, General Ledger, eProcurement, Contracts, Supplier connection, Project Costing, Sourcing, and PeopleTools

Q7. Purchase Order Structure

Section V, Section 2 (Functional Fit — 25pts) asks "Can system support PO/non-PO invoices and auto coding?" For PO-based invoices, does VPA use PeopleSoft purchase orders exclusively, or are some purchase orders maintained outside of PeopleSoft in a separate system? Approximately what percentage of VPA's total invoice volume across all three entities is PO-based versus non-PO-based?

RFP Reference: Section V, Section 2 (Functional Fit — 25pts); Exhibit C, Section II (Scope of Work

— Data Validation)

Answer. VPA and HRCP uses only PeopleSoft purchase orders; VIT utilizes EAM for parts and services purchase orders. 35% (P.O.) and 65% (Non-P.O.) for FY25.; 34% (P.O.) and 66% (Non-

P.O.) for FY26.

Q8. Current Invoice Volume

Exhibit C, Section I states "The Port of Virginia has experienced significant growth during the last decade and today is the third largest general cargo port on the US East Coast." Section V, Section 2 asks "How does solution scale with volume?" What is VPA's approximate annual invoice volume across all three entities (VPA, VIT, HRCP II) combined? What is the current average processing time per invoice, and what is VPA's target processing time after automation?

RFP Reference: Exhibit C, Section I (Introduction and Background); Section V, Section 2 (Functional

Fit — 25pts)

Answer. 57,749 FY25 and 60,889 FY26 with average processing time per invoice of 7-10 days max.

We would like to target a processing time of less than 5 days after automation.

Q9. Current AP Process and Systems

The Scope of Work in Exhibit C, Section II describes the desired future-state capabilities but does not describe the current AP process. Beyond PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2, what systems, tools, or methods does VPA currently use in the AP process (e.g., email distribution rules, manual data entry, spreadsheets, existing OCR or scanning tools)? Is there an existing document management system currently used for invoice storage, and if so, what platform?

RFP Reference: Exhibit C, Section II (Scope of Work — Document Storage Management)

Answer. Outlook mailboxes, regular mail, Workflow folders on a shared drive (no OCR), PeopleSoft manual entry and excel upload, Fyle, Q10. Multi-Entity Configuration

Exhibit C, Section I identifies three entities: VPA, VIT, and HRCP II. Section V, Section 2 (Functional

Fit — 25pts) asks "Can it support multi-entity environments?" Please clarify:

(a) Does each entity maintain a separate PeopleSoft business unit, set of books, and chart of accounts?

(b) Will each entity require separate invoice capture mailboxes and approval workflows?

(c) Are there shared vendors (suppliers) across entities, or does each entity maintain its own independent vendor master?

RFP Reference: Exhibit C, Section I (Introduction and Background); Section V, Section 2 (Functional

Fit — 25pts)

Answer. Each entity is maintained separately in PS. B. Yes, each will need a separate mailbox and approval workflow. C. In PS all three entities have a shared vendor master file

Q11. User Count

Section V, Section 4 (Implementation Approach — 20pts) asks Offerors to identify "key personnel and number of personnel" to be assigned but does not indicate how many VPA users will interact with the solution. Approximately how many users across all three entities will use the AP automation solution, and what user role types exist (e.g., AP clerk, approver, manager, auditor, viewer)?

RFP Reference: Section V, Section 4 (Implementation Approach — 20pts); Exhibit C, Section II

(Scope of Work — Change Management & Training)

Answer. Currently the AP team consists of five ap coordinators and one ap manager. Due to cross training, there are an additional three associates that assist as needed. The need for reviewers and/or auditors may be required as well.

Q12. Cost Structure Preference

Section V, Section 5 (Cost — 15pts) requests a "Total Project Cost" and rate sheet. Does VPA prefer:

(a) a one-time fixed implementation fee plus ongoing annual subscription or SaaS fees, (b) a single fully fixed project cost encompassing all years including support, (c) time and materials pricing based on the rate sheet, or (d) a combination? Should Offerors break out implementation costs, software licensing or subscription costs, hosting costs, and ongoing support and maintenance costs as separate line items?

RFP Reference: Section V, Section 5 (Cost — 15pts)

Answer. VPA would prefer a one-time fixed implementation fee plus ongoing annual subscription or

SaaS fees. Implementation fees should be as detailed as possible with regard to the costs included.

Q13. Renewal Year Pricing

The Transmittal Page states the contract includes "three (1) year options to renew upon the mutual written agreement of the parties." Exhibit A, Section 35 (Price) states "The Price and/or rate includes all duties, charges, royalties, tariffs, fees, and other related costs as of the Effective Date of this

Contract." Should Offerors provide pricing for the three renewal option years in their initial proposal?

If so, are annual price escalations (e.g., based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics Employment Cost

Index) permitted for renewal years, or must pricing remain fixed at the initial contract rates?

RFP Reference: Transmittal Page (contract term); Exhibit A, Section 35 (Price)

Answer. Offerors should provide pricing for the three renewal years in the initial proposal, to include any annual price escalations for the renewal years.

Q14. SWaM Scoring Clarification

Section V, Section 6 awards 10 points for SWaM participation. Exhibit H (SWaM Business

Subcontracting Plan) provides three sections: Section A for Offerors who are themselves DSBSD-certified SWaM businesses, Section B for non-certified Offerors who plan to subcontract to SWaM businesses, and Section C for non-certified Offerors who cannot identify SWaM subcontracting opportunities. Please clarify:

(a) Will an Offeror that qualifies as a small business under applicable SBA size standards, but does not hold a Virginia DSBSD SWaM certification, receive full or partial credit under the 10-point SWaM criterion?

(b) Is DSBSD certification required to receive any SWaM points, or will VPA award points based on demonstrated SWaM participation practices and teaming with DSBSD-certified subcontractors?

RFP Reference: Section V, Section 6 (SWaM — 10pts); Exhibit H (SWaM Business Subcontracting

Plan)

Answer. (a) To receive 10 points for the SWaM section. The offeror must possess a valid SWaM

Certification issued by DSBSD. (b) businesses that are not DSBSD-certified small businesses will receive credit based on their Small Business Subcontracting Plan not to exceed 75% of the points assigned to this evaluation criterion i.e. 10 points X 75%= 7.5 points. Points will be assigned based on each offeror’s proposed subcontracting expenditures with DSBSD certified small businesses for the initial contract period as indicated in the offeror’s submitted subcontracting plan in relation to each offeror’s total price.

Q15. "Similar Projects" Definition

Section V, Section 7 (Support Model — 10pts) requires "at minimum three (3) references for similar projects." Does "similar projects" refer specifically to AP invoice automation implementations, or would VPA accept references for related financial system implementations such as enterprise-scale financial transaction processing, accounts payable workflow automation, general ledger integration with ERP systems, or regulated financial operations of comparable scope and complexity?

RFP Reference: Section V, Section 7 (Support Model — 10pts)

Answer. Preferably, the references are tied to projects that have implemented end-to-end AP automation and/or Accounts payable workflow automations even if not with PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2 as the ERP.

Q16. Page Limit Scope

Section VI states proposals "shall be limited to twenty (20) pages (not including Exhibits A-L, any submittals required by Exhibits A-L, and any Addenda issued to the RFP)." Please clarify whether the following items count toward the 20-page limit or are excluded:

(a) Table of Contents

(b) Cover letter or executive summary

(c) Resumes of key personnel

(d) Technical architecture diagrams and system schematics

(e) Project schedule, Gantt charts, or implementation timeline graphics

(f) Rate sheet or detailed pricing breakdown (beyond the single-line "Total Project Cost" in Section 5)

RFP Reference: Section VI (Specific Proposal Instructions)

Answer. Exclude those noted in “a” through “f”.

Q17. Proposal Submission via Multiple Emails

Section III states "VPA's mail exchange server has a limit of 50 MB for incoming proposals" and that

"VPA will not be responsible for responses not received due to these limitations." If the complete proposal package — including the signed RFP document, all completed Exhibits A through L, and supporting technical materials — exceeds 50 MB, may Offerors submit across multiple sequential emails, or does VPA prefer an alternative delivery method (e.g., secure file-sharing link)?

RFP Reference: Section III (Proposal Preparation and Submission Requirements)

Answer. Multiple emails are acceptable as well as secure file sharing links.

Q18. What is the current estimated annual invoice volume processed across VPA, VIT, and HRCP II combined, and what percentage represents PO-based versus non-PO invoices?

Answer. Reference Q8.

Q19. How many distinct email mailboxes, supplier portals, or physical ingestion points are currently used to receive invoices across the three legal entities?

Answer. 4 mailboxes separated by entity only; supplier portal does not currently accept invoice submissions

Q20. Is PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2 hosted on-premises or in a cloud environment, and what preferred integration architecture (e.g., Integration Broker, REST/SOAP APIs, Component Interfaces, or staging tables) should be utilized for voucher creation?

Answer. PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2 is currently on-premise. We prefer flat file integration that utilizes a staging table for voucher creation.

Q21. Does VPA currently utilize PeopleSoft Approval Framework (AWE) for voucher approvals, or will approval workflows reside entirely within the automated AP platform prior to voucher creation?

Answer. VPA does currently utilize PeopleSoft Approval Framework for voucher approvals. In addition to the ability to reassign workflow for non-budget holder approvers.

Q23. What optical character recognition (OCR) accuracy rates and line-item extraction benchmarks does VPA expect for complex or multi-page invoices?

Answer. 95%

Q24. Does VPA currently use a third-party document management repository (e.g., Perceptive

Content/ImageNow, SharePoint), or is the solution expected to serve as the long-term document store?

Answer. VPA does have a third-party document management repository – Laserfiche; however, it is not currently utilized for AP documents.

Q25. What specific multi-entity ChartField or GL combination rules, operating unit structures, and intercompany accounting rules exist between VPA, VIT, and HRCP II?

Answer. The GL chart of accounts is shared between all three entities, but each entity has their own unique department numbers. Additional fields include product code, fund, program, and project coding strings such as Project and Activity.

Q26. Are supplier portal user accounts expected to integrate with single sign-on (SSO) protocols such as SAML 2.0 / Azure AD, or will the portal manage native authentication?

Answer. Supplier portal users do not or will not use any SSO protocols, portal will be the native authentication. Sign-on for existing supplier portal requires MFA.

Q27. What specific payment terms, discount calculation rules, and Virginia sales tax exemption rules

(Form ST-12) must be auto-validated during invoice staging?

Answer. Cash discounts calculated for both expense and inventory POs (each are processed differently as expense uses the cash term and inventory is hard coded into the voucher). VIT/VPA are tax exempt and HRCP pays sales tax.

Q28. Does VPA require real-time 3-way matching against purchase orders and receipts in

PeopleSoft, or is asynchronous batch matching acceptable?

Answer. Either is acceptable

Q29. What specific SWaM participation goals or target percentages apply to this procurement, and how are non-Virginia certified SWaM firms evaluated if direct subcontracting is not utilized?

Answer. There are no specific goals or targets associated with SWaM. Non-DSBSD certified SWaM firms will not receive points. Businesses that are not DSBSD-certified small businesses will receive credit based on their Small Business Subcontracting Plan not to exceed 75% of the points assigned to this evaluation criterion i.e. 10 points X 75%= 7.5 points.

Q30. Will VPA provide dedicated PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2 technical and functional subject matter experts (SMEs) during the gap analysis, design, and testing phases starting October 1, 2026?

Answer. VPA will provide dedicated PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2 technical and functional subject matter experts during the gap analysis, design and testing phases starting October 1, 2026.

Q31. What specific post-go-live support SLAs (e.g., system uptime percentage, response and resolution times by severity level) does VPA require?

Answer. Response times for various leveled issues Level 1 within an hour, level 2 1-3 hours, level 3 within 24 hours. With system uptime 95-98% of time.

Q32. Are there any legacy electronic data interchange (EDI) formats currently in use by suppliers that must be migrated or supported by the new ingestion engine?

Answer. EAM

Q33. What is the current anticipated budget spend for this contract?

Answer. The budget information is not available at this time.

Q34. Approximately how many AP invoices are processed annually (or monthly) across all three entities?

Q35. Approximately what percentage of invoices are PO-based versus Non-PO?

Answer. Reference Q7.

Q36. Approximately how many active vendors are maintained in PeopleSoft?

Answer. As of 8/10/2026 there are 2202 active suppliers.

Q37. Approximately how many AP users and invoice approvers will require access to the solution?

Answer. AP users currently 9

Q38. Approximately how many invoice intake email mailboxes will be monitored?

Answer. Reference Q19.

Q39. Approximately how many legal entities, business units, and approval workflows will be included in the initial implementation?

Answer. There are three separate legal entities/business units and each have their own set of approvers and flows.

Q40. Are there any expected transaction growth projections that should be considered for sizing the solution?

Q41. Are there any anticipated integration requirements beyond PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2 (e.g., Active

Directory/SSO, ERP approval engine, email systems, or other third-party applications)?

Answer. Other potential areas of integrations would be our email systems, either Active directory or

Laserfiche for document management, and EAM.

Q42. May Offerors include a supplemental demonstration, such as a recorded video walkthrough or a live demo URL, as an exhibit or appendix outside the 20-page proposal limit, to illustrate platform capabilities relevant to the Functional Fit, Integration Capability, and Implementation Approach criteria? Specifically, would such supplemental material be treated the same as Exhibits A through L for purposes of the page limit, or would it count against the 20-page maximum?

Answer. It would count against the 20-page maximum. Video walkthroughs or live demo URLs will only be accepted after down selection.

Q43. PeopleSoft Integration

How is PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2 currently integrated with third-party applications at VPA?

• Integration Broker

• REST APIs

• Component Interfaces

• Flat files

• Database staging tables

• Other

Answer. there are no current integrations

Q44. Voucher Creation

Does the selected solution need to create vouchers directly in PeopleSoft, or produce files consumed by an existing import process?

Answer. Create files to be consumed by an import process.

Q45. Purchase Order Matching

Is the selected solution expected to perform purchase order and receipt matching, or is the expectation that matching will occur within PeopleSoft after invoice data is imported?

Answer. PO and receipt matching will be preferred

Q46. Supplier Portal

Is a supplier portal expected to be delivered as part of this project, or will existing supplier submission methods remain in place?

Answer. Supplier portal submission methods will remain in place.

Q47. Approval Workflow

Should invoice approvals occur:

• within the proposed solution,

• within PeopleSoft,

• or another workflow platform?

Answer. Approval should flow through PS

Q48. Document Repository

Where should invoices be stored after processing?

Examples:

• PeopleSoft

• SharePoint

• OnBase

• FileNet

• Documentum

• Azure Blob

• another ECM

Answer. PeopleSoft, Laserfiche and/or Active Directory

Q49. Invoice Volume

How many invoices are processed annually?

How many pages?

Peak daily volume?

Answer.FY26 7/1/2025-6/30/2026 - Total annual volume combined 60,889

HRCP1 - 1,939 (PO-401/NonPO-1,538)

VIT01 - 54,147 (PO-18,607/NonPO-35,540)

VPA01 - 4,803 (PO-1,982/NonPO-2,821)

Monthly Volume by Entity

July 148/3,942/448

Aug 166/4,400/417

Sept 150/4,623/373

Oct 230/4,536/483

Nov 131/3,204/430

Dec 168/4,400/348

Jan 156/4,369/347

Feb 173/4,070/337

Mar 150/5,164/386

Apr 171/4,810/366

May 143/4,637/398

June 153/5,992/470

FY25 7/1/2024-6/30/2025 - Total annual volume combined 58,509

HRCP1 – 2,238 (PO-465/NonPO-1,773)

VIT01 – 51,050 (PO-17,549/NonPO-33,501)

VPA01 – 5,221 (PO-2,295/NonPO-2,926)

Monthly Volume by Entity

July 212/4,430/378

Aug 184/4,473/462

Sept 180/5,315/402

Oct 173/3,594/370

Nov 149/3,856/462

Dec 214/3,737/411

Jan 200/3,962/401

Feb 153/4,052/429

Mar 210/4,844/468

April 150/3,800/412

May 192/4,507/571

June 221/4,437/455

Q50. Multi-Entity

How different are the workflows for

• VPA

• VIT

• HRCP

Shared workflow?

Separate workflows?

Separate vendors?

Answer. The workflows for each business unit will be different, and can vary by departments.

Business units can use the same vendors. Workflows will remain in PeopleSoft.

Q51. GL Coding

Is automatic GL coding expected to be rules-based, AI-assisted, or performed by AP users?

Answer. It will be a mixture of all.

Q52. Existing AI

Are they expecting the solution to supply OCR/AI, or should it leverage existing enterprise AI investments?

Answer. Would expect solution to supply OCR/AI.

Q53. Exception Rate

What percentage of invoices currently require manual intervention?

Answer.95%

Q54. Deployment Preference

Does VPA have a preferred deployment model (SaaS, private cloud, or on-premises), or are all deployment models considered equally?

Answer. All models will be considered equally.

Q55. AI Requirements

Are there any requirements or restrictions regarding the use of cloud-based AI services (e.g., Microsoft Azure, AWS, Google Cloud), or must all document processing remain entirely within VPA infrastructure?

Answer. We need to have the ability to toggle AI on and off.

Q56. Existing Solution

What solution or process is currently being used for invoice processing, and what are the primary business drivers for replacing it?

Answer. Currently manual entry by an AP coordinator is the primary avenue for AP, and we would like to automate the tedious manual process which should reduce errors and move the team from data entry into an analytical reviewer role. Efficiency and cost reduction.

Q57. Indexing Fields

Can VPA provide a the list of fields expected to be extracted and whether line-item extraction is required?

Answer. VPA does have a file layout that can be shared once the RFP is awarded, and gap analysis begins.

Q58. The contract term is stated as 'from the date of execution through the date of implementation or two (2) years whichever occurs first, with three (3), one (1) year options to renew.' Could VPA clarify what services are expected during the option years (e.g., ongoing SaaS licensing, support and maintenance, additional enhancements), and whether the option year pricing should be included in the Total Project Cost or presented separately?

Answer. Reference Q13.

Q59. The Scope of Work references 'Data Validation' including 'Vendor/Supplier Validation' and

'Duplicate Checks.' Could VPA clarify whether vendor validation requires real-time lookup against the

PeopleSoft vendor master table, or whether a periodic sync/extract of vendor data to the AP automation platform would be acceptable? Additionally, how many active vendors exist across the three entities?

Answer. Reference Q36.

Q60. Section 4 (Implementation Approach) asks about 'Deployment options (cloud/on-prem)' but does not indicate VPA's preference or any constraints regarding data residency, cloud provider requirements, or security certifications (e.g., FedRAMP, SOC 2, StateRAMP). Does VPA have a preferred deployment model, and are there specific security certifications or data residency requirements that the solution must meet?

Answer. We are open to suggestions on deployment options for best performance. We need SOC2 compliance.

Q61. The solicitation mentions three legal entities (VPA, VIT, and HRCPII, LLC) but does not specify the current invoice volume for each entity or the combined total. Could VPA provide approximate current monthly or annual invoice volumes (broken down by entity if possible), the percentage split between PO and non-PO invoices, and the number of unique vendors/suppliers across all entities?

Answer. Reference Q49.

Q62. Section 3 (Integration Capability) references PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2 integration including voucher creation, PO matching, and workflow integration with ERP approval engines. Could VPA provide additional details on the current PeopleSoft environment, including: (a) whether PeopleSoft is hosted on-premises or in the cloud (e.g., Oracle Cloud Infrastructure), (b) what integration methods are currently supported (e.g., Component Interfaces, Integration Broker, file-based, REST/SOAP APIs), and (c) the current PeopleTools version?

Answer. PeopleSoft is hosted on premises with various integration methods depending on the data source. We are utilizing PeopleTools version 8.6.

Q63. What is the volume of the invoices?

Q64. What is the total value AP Spend?

Answer. That information is not available at this time.

Q65. How many are PO backed vs Non-PO backed?

Q66. Do you perform 3-way match or 2-way match?

Answer. Both with majority being 3-way match

Q67. Do you make partial payments?

Answer. This solution is not expected to handle the processing of payments.

Q68. How do you pay the invoices? ACH, Checks, Corporate Card and/or P-Card?

Q69. Are all payments made in USD?

Q70. If you are able to move paying via ACH or Checks to a P-Card, you have the potential of receiving a significant cash back and the AP solution can be implemented with little to no additional cost. Are you open to receiving proposal for an all-in-one solution that offers AP Automation, Expense Management, Receipt Management, Purchasing Cards, Policy based & AI based granular controls?

Answer. Project will not include end-to-end (all-in-one) AP automation including ACH, P-Card or check payments. VPA will retain the payment portions of AP processing. Scope is for invoice processing methods.

Q71. What is VPA's approximate current invoice volume per month, and how is it split across the three entities (VPA, VIT, HRCP II)?

Q72. What is the approximate split between PO-backed and non-PO invoices?

Q73. How many invoice-receiving mailboxes exist today, and what is the approximate monthly volume per mailbox?

Answer. Four email boxes with varied volumes

Q74. How many AP staff process invoices today, and where are they located?

Answer. Nine (9) with a mix of remote and onsite work schedules.

Q75. What is the current average time from invoice receipt to payment?

Answer. 7-10 days max for entry into system and net 30 days for payment

Q76. What percentage of invoices require manual review or exception handling today, and what are the most common exception types (PO mismatches, GL coding errors, approval delays)?

Answer. MECC centralizes exceptions for review by an appropriate person depending on the exception. WF is built within the MECC. Most common exceptions are missing receipts.

Q77. Is there an incumbent AP automation or capture solution in place today, or is the current process manual within PeopleSoft? If an incumbent exists, when does its contract expire?

Answer. Process is currently manual within PeopleSoft.

Q78. Has VPA identified duplicate payment or overpayment issues that it expects the solution's duplicate-check capability to address?

Answer. Configuration within PSFT prevents the processing of duplicate invoices per BU

Q79. Do VPA, VIT, and HRCP II run separate PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2 instances or a shared instance?

Answer. It is a shared instance of PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2.51

Q80. For voucher creation, does VPA require direct API integration with PeopleSoft, or is a file-based

(e.g., CSV) voucher load acceptable?

Answer. API integration is not required, if solution provides the ability to create voucher load files and integrate file load through automation or integration broker through batch processes.

Q81. What are VPA's mandatory PeopleSoft voucher fields and GL coding rules the solution must map to?

Answer. Reference Q25.

Q82. Is 2-way, 3-way, or N-way matching required?

Answer. Reference Q66.

Q83. Are approval workflows and thresholds consistent across the three entities, or does each entity maintain its own approval hierarchy?

Answer. Reference Q10.

Q84. Does VPA have a deployment preference between cloud and on-premise?

Answer. We are open to suggestions for best performance.

Q85. Are there security, compliance, or data residency requirements beyond the insurance minimums stated in Exhibit B, given the port's critical-infrastructure status?

Answer. We need to have SOC2 compliance and if in a cloud environment, we prefer data centers to be located in the continental US.

Q86. Are there multi-currency or international vendor payment requirements?

Answer. Payment processing is not a part of this solution.

Q87. Approximately how many active vendors would be expected to use the supplier portal?

Q88. Does VPA expect the historical invoice archive to be migrated into the new document storage solution? If so, what approximate volume or number of years?

Answer. Historical invoice migration is not within the project’s scope.

Q89. Is there a budget ceiling or not-to-exceed amount established for this procurement?

Answer. The budget information is not available at this time.

Q90. What does VPA define as success in the first 90 days following go-live?

Answer. Success in the first 90 days following go-live would be defined in a number of ways.

Included but not limited to would be ease of application/user experience, percentage of issues/tickets, issue/ticket resolution, number of failed voucher loads, number of vouchers that require manual intervention, number of typographical errors in data read.

Q91. To help ensure our proposal fully addresses the critical details outlined in the RFP, would VPA consider extending the proposal submission deadline by four weeks? This would allow us to provide a more robust response that aligns with VPA's strategic objectives.

Answer. A four-week extension will not be provided.

Q92. What patch level is the PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2 environment on, and is Integration Broker available for inbound voucher staging?

Answer. Currently PeopleSoft is on PUM 51, and Integration broker is available for inbound voucher staging.

Q93. Will approvals remain in PeopleSoft workflow, or is VPA open to approval routing in the automation platform?

Answer. Approvals will remain in PeopleSoft workflow.

Q94. What voucher file format is used today, and is there an existing interface we should conform to?

Answer. Reference Q5.

Q95. Does the 20-page limit apply to the narrative only, with cover page, TOC and section dividers excluded?

Answer. Yes, the 20-page limit applies to the narrative only.

Q96. How many AP mailboxes exist today across the three entities, and are any shared?

Q97. Is any invoice automation or OCR tool currently in production?

Answer. No OCR tool is currently available in production.

Q98. What is the total number of invoices processed annually across all entities?

Q99. Can you provide a percentage breakdown of PO-backed invoices versus non-PO invoices?

Q100. How many active suppliers do you currently process invoices for?

Q101. How many users do you anticipate will leverage the new system and what types of roles (i.e., data entry, invoice reviewers, invoice approvers, etc.)?

Answer. Reference Q11.

Q102. What percentage of invoices leverage a 2-way (invoice matching with the purchase order) or

3-way matching (invoice, purchase order, and receipt match?)

Answer. Reference Q66.

Q103. The RFP mentions a "supplier portal" as a potential scope item. Is there an existing supplier portal, or is the expectation that the offeror proposes a new portal as part of the solution?

Answer. There is a supplier portal that is expected to be live at the time this project commences.

Q104. Are there any customizations in the current PeopleSoft system that impact the Voucher and

PO interface, configuration, and transaction tables?

Answer. Currently there are no customizations that would impact voucher loads or PO interfaces.

Q105. What is the scheduled batch processing window for AP Vouchers and POs (Budget Checking, Voucher posting, payments)?

Answer. Batch processes are scheduled as well as done manually by AP and Procurement staff.

Q106. What is the Average Annual Invoice Volume? (i.e. 45,000 invoices annually)

Q107. What is the Average Annual Invoice Dollar Amount processed (i.e. $750,000,000 annually)

Answer. That information is not available at this time.

Q108. What is the current number of AP Staff Supporting Accounts Payable? (i.e. 6 Dedicated AP

Support Staff)

Q109. What is the current or estimated cost and/or percentage of errors or discrepancies in handling invoices? (i.e. 37.5k in duplicate or incorrect payments/.0005% of total Accounts payable invoices)

Answer. Less than 2%

Q110. How many invoices are paid by check annually?

Answer. Reference Q68.

Q111. What EDI formats are used? And are any of them for international invoices?

Answer. No EDI formats are used.

Q112. What is the estimated number of vendors that submit invoices to the Port Authority?

Q113. What is the annual volume of invoices?

Q114. What percentage are PO-based?

Q115. What percentage are non-PO based

Q116. What functionality is needed for the Supplier Portal

a. Upload invoices?

b. Supplier Onboarding?

c. Supplier access to view status?

Answer. Supplier onboarding and supplier access will be accessible through an existing supplier portal commencing this project.

Q117. What is the number of AP staff that would be utilizing the platform?

Q118. How many Approvers (non-AP staff) would be utilizing the platform?

Answer. Undetermined until GAP analysis completed

Q119. How many invoices per channel is the VPA receiving per month?

Q120. What is the PO versus non-PO split, and roughly how many active suppliers do you currently have?

Q121. What is the expected interval/schedule of invoice ingestion – is it real-time as the invoices come into each channel; or is it a batch process (hourly, daily, weekly)?

Answer. The interval should be as close to real-time as possible.

Q122. Is it the VPA’s expectation that the invoices flow into PeopleSoft without manual approval and only exceptions where the software cannot create a voucher are touched by a user? Or, is each invoice approved manually before the voucher is created in PeopleSoft?

Answer. Yes, without manual approval and only review exceptions as the PO/receipt should serve as verification of approval.

Q123. How many users in each of the legal entities of the VPA are expected to participate in the AP process?

Q124. Would the VPA grant an extension to the proposal submission deadline of one week?

Answer. No.

Q125. Will VPA accept a software provider's standard commercial subscription terms in lieu of

Exhibit B, Section 14 (Product Support)?

Answer. No

Q126. Do exceptions to Exhibit B, Sections 14, 18, and 20 specifically risk a non-responsive determination?

Answer. Yes

Q127. Does "Total Project Cost" cover the base term only, or the base term plus all three renewal option years?

Answer. Pricing should include both.

Q128. Does VPA want one-time implementation cost broken out from recurring subscription or license cost, and in what format?

Answer. Reference Q12.

Q129. Will a supplemental pricing schedule be accepted outside the 20-page limit?

Q130. Is historical invoice migration within the project’s scope, and what retention period applies to stored documents?

Answer. Historical invoice migration is not within the project’s scope.

Q131. Section 7 asks for a minimum of three references; Exhibit K requires four accounts. Please confirm four satisfies both.

Answer. Yes, four will satisfy both.

Q132. Are Exhibits J (hazardous substance) and L (safety checklist) applicable to a remote engagement?

Answer. No, these are not applicable to remote engagement.

Q133. Do the rate sheet, resumes, warranty copy, and reference details count toward the 20-page limit?

Answer. No.

Q134. May the Cyber and Technology E&O coverage be carried by the software partner rather than the prime?

Answer. No, the prime needs to have this coverage.

Q135. Does the Crime and Employee Dishonesty requirement apply where the contractor never has access to VPA funds or payment execution?

Q136. Is the AP process automation for all the three 3 entities expected to be simultaneously or is it only for VPA?

Answer. It is expected to be simultaneously.

Q137. Does VPA currently use any AP automation, OCR, IDP, document management, or workflow solution, and is the expectation to replace or coexist with it?

Answer. VPA does not currently use any AP automation for ingesting invoices and creating vouchers, OCR, and IDP. All approval workflows currently reside in PeopleSoft and should remain there. VPA has document management with Laserfiche and would prefer to utilize this or an active directory to store invoice documentation.

Q138. What are the average and peak monthly invoice volumes processed for each of the three entities (VPA, VIT, and HRCP), and what is the estimated split between PO-backed vs. Non-PO invoices?

Answer. Reference Q49. and Q7.

Q139. How many AP mailboxes are in scope, and what percentage of invoices arrive via email, EDI, supplier portal, scanned images, PDF attachments, and other formats?

Answer. Four (4) mailboxes with 95-97% of invoices coming in through the mailboxes.

Q140. Could you share the invoice volumes processed by AP over the past two years?

Q141. Are VPA, VIT, and HRCP operating on a shared AP process?

Answer. Yes, the AP process is consistent with minimal exceptions.

Q142. Does each entity require separate workflows and business rules?

Answer. Will determine during GAP analysis

Q143. Are approval hierarchies different for each entity?

Answer. Approvals will remain in PeopleSoft, but will allow GAP to determine final steps

Q144. Are there intercompany invoices?

Answer. Yes.

Q145. What is the projected invoice growth over the next 3-5 years?

Answer. We have seen a 4% increase from FY25 to FY26 and would expect similar increases in years to follow.

Q146. How many active suppliers exist today?

Q147. What is VPA's preferred integration method with PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2 for automated voucher creation and data exchange (e.g., REST/SOAP APIs, web services, or flat-file/CSV transfer)?

Q148. Besides the required integration with PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2, are there any other third-party systems the solution will need to integrate with

Answer. If the solution does not provide its own document management solution, then it will be required to integrate with Laserfiche in addition to PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2.

Q149. Do you have a target timeline for implementation and go-live?

Answer. No later than April 2027.

Q150. What are VPA's target success metrics for this implementation (e.g., desired first-pass match rate, target invoice cycle time reduction)

Answer. 30-90 days reduction in manual processing by 50%, 90-120 days reduction by 70%, greater than 80% after 120 days depending on rollout approach

Q151. Are there any specific hosting restrictions (e.g., Cloud-only vs. Hybrid) or strict data residency mandates (e.g., data must remain in the Continental US or the Commonwealth of Virginia)? Do we need to consider Gov Cloud for hosting the solution?

Answer. We do not need Gov Cloud as of now. We prefer that all cloud data hosts be in the

Continental US.

Q152. Could VPA confirm whether all invoices are expected to be in English, or whether the solution should support invoices in additional languages? If multilingual support is required, please identify the expected languages and approximate percentage of invoice volume by language

Answer. All are expected to be in English.

Q153. What is the current team size responsible for invoice processing, and how is the team structured?

Q154. There has been mention of REMOTE on the first page. Is it related to delivery model? Is VPA open for an offshore delivery model?

Answer. VPA’s preference is for an onshore or mix of on/offshore delivery model.

Q155. Has VPA engaged with or received product demonstrations from any companies prior to the release of the RFP? If yes, could you please share the names of those companies?

Answer. Yes, Hyland Software, Zenapp and MCCi.

Q156. We understand that Section C of Exhibit H is intended for Offerors that are neither SWaM-certified nor proposing SWaM-certified subcontractors. Could you please confirm whether completing Section C is mandatory in such cases? If an Offeror does not complete Section C, will its proposal still be considered responsive and eligible for evaluation? Additionally, what impact would this have on the 10-point SWaM evaluation criteria?

Answer.

Q157. Is a phased implementation preferred by VPA or a single go-live ?

Answer. Reference Q2.

Q158. How many users from VPA requires Training and is Train the Trainer acceptable to VPA ?

Answer. Train the trainer is acceptable, but role-based training is preferred. Up to 25 associates.

Q159. We assume the selected vendor be responsible for all the third-party integration development and VPA will facilitate required integration support from third parties?

Answer. That is correct, all integrations will be vendor responsibility, and we will facilitate.

Q160. The RFP requests total project and a rate sheet cost but does not define the expected pricing format. Should the total cost represent the full 2-year initial term, or be broken out by Year 1 and

Year 2? For rate sheet does VPA expect an itemized description i.e., software licensing, implementation, hosting, integration, training and support?

Answer. Reference Q12.

Q161. Does PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2 support automatic posting logic for automated voucher creation and related workflow steps?

Q162. What is the quality of the invoice data being ingested, and will data cleansing or remediation be required before automation can be effective?

Answer. Yes, we would want to address any outstanding issues before moving into PS. We have been working to standardize the attachments and invoices received from vendors but may require further review.

Q163. Is AWS a compatible deployment / hosting technology stack for a solution integrated with

PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2?

Answer. We currently use Azure and would prefer to host in Azure.

Q164. What is the expected period of performance for implementation and post-go-live support?

Answer. Mutual agreed upon by selected party.

Q165. Is the current invoice process significantly varied by entities, vendor and invoice types?

Answer. AP processes are the same across all three entities with minimal exception.

Q166. What is the anticipated invoice volume and average number of pages per invoice within scope?

Q167. The RFP references AI/ML capabilities. Are respondents permitted to propose solutions that incorporate agentic AI and/or large language models (LLMs)? If so, does VPA have any AI governance, acceptable use, data residency, or security requirements, including restrictions on transmitting invoice data to third-party or cloud-hosted AI services, or a preference for private/in-tenant AI model deployments?

Answer. We welcome respondents to include this as an option. We may require the option to toggle off the AI in case of an issue.

Q168. Can the Port provide current and projected annual and monthly invoice volumes across VPA, VIT, and HRCP?

Q169. Approximately what percentage of invoices are PO-based, non-PO, credit memos, and recurring invoices?

Q170. Approximately how many active suppliers does the Accounts Payable organization support?

Q171. What percentage of invoices are received through each channel (email, PDF attachment, paper/mail, EDI, supplier portal, other electronic formats)?

Q172. Is the Port replacing an existing Accounts Payable automation or invoice processing solution? If so, please identify the current solution and describe any expectations for migration of workflows, configurations, historical documents, metadata, or other solution assets.

Answer. No existing Accounts Payable solution or invoice processing solution.

Q173. Are there any existing integrations or APIs available for voucher creation, supplier validation, and purchase order matching, or should respondents assume integration through PeopleSoft

Integration Broker or other interfaces?

Answer. There are no current integrations

Q174. Has PeopleSoft FSCM 9.2 been customized for Accounts Payable, purchasing, or voucher processing in ways that respondents should consider?

Answer. No current customizations

Q175. Approximately how many Accounts Payable users (processors, approvers, and managers) are expected to use the proposed solution?

Q176. Can the Port provide a high-level overview of the current AP approval workflow, including the number of approval paths and business units involved?

Answer. Information will be provided during GAP analysis

Q177. Are there specific business rules for GL coding, tax determination, or payment terms that the solution must automate?

Answer. Reference Q51.

Q178. Does the Port currently utilize an enterprise document management or records management solution that the AP automation platform should integrate with, or is the selected solution expected to provide document repository capabilities?

Answer. Preferably we would want the solution to utilize our current document management solution

– Laserfiche.

Q179. Does the Port have a preferred deployment model (cloud, on-premises, or hybrid), and are there any security or hosting requirements that would influence the proposed architecture?

Answer. Reference Q54.

Q180. What are the primary business outcomes or success metrics the Port will use to measure project success (e.g., touchless processing rate, processing time, accuracy, productivity improvements)?

Answer. Reference Q90.

Q181. What is the business function of the supplier portal and what does the portal support?

Answer. Currently, the business functions of the supplier portal are new supplier registration, new supplier user registration, PO acknowledgements and viewing, receiver information viewing, and payment viewing. Do not have Esettlements module to submit invoices (vouchers). Supplier portal is new to the port and in the infancy stage.

Q182. Please describe if the Supplier Portal is to be utilized or if you prefer to have a new supplier portal? If existing, please indicate what data is to be used and/or document types that need to be attached and preferred method to retrieve the data and documents.

Q183. Please indicate the volumes of PO, Non- PO, and invoices from the different ingestion points such as supplier portal, and email?

Q184. What PeopleSoft integration method is available for portal transactions, such as Integration

Broker, API/web service, Component Interface, database view, or file exchange?

Q185. Will you be able to provide a vendor master table? If a discrepancy, how would it like to be handled if a vendor is not on the table?

Answer. Sent to a workflow for further review

Q186. How much historical data would we need to review when checking duplicate invoices?

Answer. Reference Q78.

Q187. Is 3-way matching expected for purchase orders (POs)?

Answer. Yes.

Q188. For validation and exception handling, are approval rules and approver roles dependent on the exception type, such as duplicate invoice suspects, price variances outside tolerance, quantity overages, vendor mismatches, or missing POs?

Answer. Yes. MECC will direct the exception to the user's role that can correct the exception.

Q189. Once an invoice clears all matching, validation, and approval steps, what is the expected process for ingesting it into PeopleSoft?

Answer. Reference Q137.

Q190. What KPIs would you like to report on?

Answe…