Addendum 1 RFP 30-25005R-DSDHH TRS Final.docx

Solicitation Number: 30-25005R-DSDHH Page 2 Addendum Number: 1

ROY COOPER • Governor KODY H. KINSLEY • Secretary CHARLES E. INGOLD • Assistant Secretary KEN DAHLIN • Director

Solicitation Addendum

02:00 PM Eastern Standard Time

Anthony.Benzor@dhhs.nc.gov

1. Return one properly executed copy of this addendum with bid response or prior to the Bid Opening Date/Time listed above.

2. FOLLOWING ARE QUESTIONS RECEIVED FOR THE SOLICITATION AND THE STATE’S RESPONSE TO THE QUESTIONS

Will the State please provide the current rate it is paying for TRS, Speech to Speech and RCC?

The state does not release this information.

Will the State please provide traffic data by month for the past two years, including the following:

· The number of session and conversation minutes for Intrastate TRS calls

· The number of session and conversation minutes for Interstate TRS

· Can this data be broken out to show Spanish and STS usage and RCC?

See attached.

This does not apply to this RFP and service.

The State amends the language defining “interLATA as a call within the same state”.

For these reasons, will the State please amend this section of the RFP to read as follows:

Should the Vendor’s proposal result in an award, the Vendor shall be required to agree that it will not substitute key personnel assigned to the performance of the Contract without prior written notification by the Contract Lead. Vendor shall ensure that replacement personnel have comparable training, experience, and abilities as the person originally proposed for the position.

This is standard language and will stay as it is.

Under no circumstances will the liquidated damages exceed the revenue for the day for any one or combination of the above.

This is standard language and will stay as is.

As required by FCC’s Regulations 47 CFR 64.604(c)(7) TRS vendor shall provide for the transfer of TRS customer profile data from the outgoing TRS vendor to the incoming TRS vendor. Such data must be disclosed in usable form at least 60 days prior to the provider’s last day of service provision.

The language as written will remain as is. The State’s contract award timeline provides at least 60-days prior to the outgoing TRS vendor’s last day of service provision.

Will the State please confirm that this is still the case?

Yes – the state confirms that this is still the case.

3. The solicitation is hereby modified as follows:

2.9 DEFINITIONS, ACRONYMS, AND ABBREVIATIONS

Relevant definitions for this RFP are provided in 01 NCAC 05A .0112 and in the Instructions to Vendors found in the Sourcing Tool, which are incorporated herein by this reference. (all other definitions remain unchanged) The following definitions, acronyms, and abbreviations are also relevant to this RFP:

Interstate Call: A between two states Intrastate Call: A call within the same state

3.4 Evaluation Criteria

BEST VALUE: "Best Value" procurement methods are authorized by N.C.G.S. §§143-135.9 and 143B-1350(h). The award decision is made based on multiple factors, including: total cost of ownership, meaning the cost of acquiring, operating, maintaining, and supporting a product or service over its projected lifetime; the evaluated technical merit of the Vendor's offer; the Vendor's past performance; and the evaluated probability of performing the specifications stated in the solicitation on time, with high quality, and in a manner that accomplishes the stated business objectives and maintains industry standards compliance. The intent of "Best Value" procurement is to enable Vendors to offer and the Agency to select the most appropriate solution to meet the business objectives defined in the solicitation and to keep all parties focused on the desired outcome of a procurement.

A ranking method of source selection will be utilized in this procurement using evaluation criteria listed in order of importance in the Evaluation Criteria section below to allow the State to award this RFP to the Vendor(s) providing the Best Value and recognizing that Best Value may result in award other than the lowest price or highest technically qualified offer. By using this method, the overall ranking may be adjusted up or down when considered with, or traded-off against, other non-price factors.

EVALUTION METHOD: Narrative and by consensus of the evaluating committee, explaining the strengths and weaknesses of each proposal and why the recommended awardee(s) provide the best value to the State.

All qualified proposals will be evaluated, and award made based on considering the following criteria listed in descending order of importance, to result in an award most advantageous to the State:

1. Vendor Technical Approach (Section 5.2)

1. Cost (Attachment A)

Failure to acknowledge receipt of this addendum may result in rejection of the response.

Check ONE of the following options:

Execute Addendum:

Offeror:

Authorized Signature:

Name and Title (Typed):

Date:

image1.jpeg