ADDENDUM 6 SBM for Round 2 _Final.docx

OregonBuys Bid Number: S-DASOBO-00010624 – OREGON STATE-BASED ACA-COMPLIANT INSURANCE MARKETPLACE (“SBM”) SOLUTION Addendum No. 6

OregonBuys bid number: S-DASOBO-00010624

OREGON STATE-BASED ACA-COMPLIANT INSURANCE MARKETPLACE (“SBM”) SOLUTION

ADDENDUM 6

october 9, 2024

PURPOSE

The purpose of this addendum is to release the State’s responses to questions submitted by the Q&A deadline in Addendum 5, update B. Demonstration and Interview Agenda, update H. Proposal Delivery date and time, Demonstration and Interview Agenda extending the time and to replace Appendix 2 – Screening and Selection Criteria in its entirety.

ROUND 2 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

1. Consumer – up to 25 unique reviewers

1. Issuer/Carrier/Plans – up to 20 unique reviewers

1. Broker/Agent – up to 20 unique reviewers

1. Assister/Community Partner – up to 20 unique reviewers

1. Oregon Staff – up to 25 unique reviewers Each user type is intended to be a singular user type, even if it has a “/” in its name. An “issuer” is also known as a “carrier”, as well as a “plan”.

The state has 32 total planned sandbox participants. Some evaluators will review multiple user types, but not all evaluators will review all types. The numbers represent the number of evaluators that will review each type.

If present, any pre-existing test data should facilitate the evaluation of the widest range of features possible for each user role.

B. DEMONSTRATION AND INTERVIEW AGENDA

During Round 2, Proposers will each be provided a 5-hour opportunity to demonstrate their solution and answer interview questions. Within the time permitted, Proposers shall demonstrate an overview of each topic while covering each subtopic. The allotted time for each session includes 30 minutes of Q&A. Proposers shall present virtually and through the named Key Persons who will staff the Project. Proposers must demonstrate scenarios in a production-like environment. A high-level agenda template for each Proposer’s session is provided:

Online demonstrations (“Demonstration Day Webinars”) blocks are available as follows:

H. PROPOSAL DELIVERY

Required Round 2 submissions must be uploaded in OregonBuys via a Quote Revision. Round 2 Proposers will get a notification from OregonBuys when the Quote Revision is available. All components of the Round 2 proposal must be uploaded by noon Pacific Time October 14, 2024 noon Pacific Time October 17, 2024. For questions or issues related to submission in OregonBuys, please contact the OregonBuys Supplier Help Desk at support.oregonbuys@das.oregon.gov or 1-855-800-5046.

APPENDIX 2

Table 1.1: Scoring Guidelines

ROUND 2 SCREENING AND SELECTION CRITERIA

All Round 2 components will be independently evaluated by members of an Evaluation Committee (“Committee”). The Committee is comprised of scoring members (“Scorers”) and several technical and business subject matter experts (“Advisors”). Advisors will not score but will observations during the demonstration and interviews. Table 1.1: Scoring Guidelines. Scorers will have access to any Advisers notes for their discretionary reference before completing their scoring of Round 2 Proposer submissions, interviews, and demonstrations.

Committee members may change, and there may be additional or fewer evaluators for different aspects of Round 2 demonstrations and interviews. Scorers will assign a score from 0 to 100% based upon the guidelines listed above in Table 1.1: Scoring Guidelines. This table provides guidance to the Committee concerning their required qualitative assessment of how well a Proposer addresses the elements and essentials prescribed in each scored submission requirement.

The SPC will average all scores for each evaluation criterion. The average score becomes the final score and will be used as a percentage multiplier of the maximum possible points for that criterion. The SPC may request further clarification to assist the Committee in gaining additional understanding of Round 2 submissions. Unless requested, clarifications will apply to all Proposers. A response to a clarification request must be to clarify or explain portions of matters already submitted and may not contain new information not included in the original submission.

Specifically, Evaluation Committee will:

1. Evaluate Proposer’s proposed Key Persons and other personnel for demonstrated and perceived experience, expertise, performance, and potential fit.

2. Evaluate the proposed Solution’s technical quality, including without limitation demonstrated and perceived flexibility, ability to be scaled, maintained, and updated to evolve with technology, and configurability to meet Oregon-specific needs.

3. Evaluate Proposer’s proposed Key Persons and other personnel for the skills and background to elaborate OHA’s requirements.

4. Evaluate the proposed Solution’s usability (e.g., how a user interacts with the system, navigates pages, performs tasks, including self-service opportunities and automated tasks) and ability to improve service delivery.

5. Evaluate the maturity and suitability of Proposer’s approaches to development, project management, collaboration, and long-term relationship with the State.

a. Maturity (i.e., defined, optimized, and repeatable processes).

b. Suitability (includes without limitation alignment with State standards and applicable oversight requirements).

6. Partially validate Solution functionality as stated in Proposer’s Technical Proposal.

7. Evaluate the suitability and fit of Solution regarding long term operations and maintenance.

8. Evaluate the perceived quality of Proposer’s overall performance and potential best fit during its scheduled Demonstration Day Webinar.

9. DAS PS will: Evaluate Attachment E, Revised Pricing Proposal utilizing the following formula:

“L” divided by “X” times “A” = “B”…where:

A = Available Price Proposal points for the Proposer being scored (see example below);

L = Lowest Price Proposal submitted;

X = Price Proposal being scored;

B = Awarded Price Proposal score

Summary of Points Possible for RFP:

Example: Available Price Proposal Points will be based on the percent of points a Proposer is awarded for all other Round 1 and Round 2 combined points available. So based on the summary of Points Possible above, if Proposer ABC receives a score of 5,200 (80% of points possible) for Round 1 and Round 2, Proposer ABC can receive up to 2,000 points for its Price Proposal, which is 80% of the 2,500 total points available for price.

No.

There are 6,500 total points available for Round 2. The maximum available points are distributed in the listed fifteen scoring components.

-END OF APPENDIX 2-

10/9/2024 Page 1 of 2