Addendum#2 Q&A AGY-27-036-SR 7.21.26.pdf

6 Saint Paul Street, Baltimore, MD 21202-1614 | 410.539.5000 | 1.866.RIDE.MTA | TTY 410.539.3497 | mta.maryland.gov

TO: All Prospective Offerors

FROM: Maryland Transit Administration

SUBJECT: Questions and Answers

TORFP NO. AGY-27-036-SR

Third Party Administrator Audit Services

DATE: July 21, 2026

Effective this date is Addendum No. 2 to the subject above TORFP. This addendum includes responses to Offerors questions.

Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of this Addendum by completing and returning this form with the Technical and Financial Proposal submission.

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

Sincerely, Michele Jones Procurement Officer

MDOT MTA

Acknowledgement of receipt of Addendum No. 2 to TORFP No. AGY-27-036-SR

Vendor Name: _______________________________

Authorized Representative’s Signature:__________________________ Date:____________

Addendum #2 TORFP: Third Party Administrator Audit Services

AGY-27-036-SR

Questions and Answers

Q1. Would the State consider extending the proposal due date by two weeks following the release of the Q&A responses to allow Offerors sufficient time to incorporate the clarifications into their proposals?

A1. The MTA requires a contract to provide these services and the minimum requirement for advertisement is 10-15 calendar days.

Q2. How many healthcare vendors and third-party administrators are currently included in scope (medical, pharmacy, dental, vision, etc.)?

A2. The MTA currently has one vendor administering Medical, Dental, Vision, and Prescription (RX) benefits. All audit activity in this TORFP pertains to this single vendor.

Q3. Approximately how many invoices, claims, and covered members are expected to be reviewed annually?

A3. The MTA employs 3,500 active employees, 2,500 retirees, and covers eligible dependents, totaling approximately 10,000–12,000 covered lives.

• Invoices: Reviewed monthly.

• Claims: Periodic audits of random samples and/or targeted sampling as needed.

• Covered members: Reviewed periodically through random audits; not all members audited annually.

Q4. Is the contractor expected to perform recurring audits throughout the contract term or primarily special projects initiated by MTA?

A4. The contractor will perform both recurring audits (monthly invoice audit/reconciliation) and special projects initiated by MTA as issues arise.

Q5. Is the contractor expected to perform monthly reconciliations of each plan during the scope period, or is the contractor expected to examine MTA’s processes and procedures in place to perform monthly reconciliations.

A5. The contractor is expected to review and validate monthly plan reconciliations. The contractor may also examine MTA’s internal reconciliation processes and recommend improvements.

Q6. Can MTA provide an estimate of the anticipated number of audit engagements or work orders expected each contract year?

A6. The MTA anticipates 3–6 engagements or work orders per contract year, including recurring invoice reviews and special audits.

Q7. What level of effort is anticipated for consulting engagements versus traditional audit engagements?

A7. The TORFP anticipates audit work as the primary effort, with consulting engagements occurring as needed to address findings, inefficiencies, or compliance concerns. Consulting work may represent 20–30% of annual effort depending on issues uncovered.

Q8. Will the contractor be responsible for quantifying recoveries and overpayments, or only identifying them?

A8. The contractor will be responsible for identifying overpayments and, where feasible, quantifying recoveries. Final recovery actions will be coordinated with MTA and the vendor.

Q9. Are vendor contract compliance reviews limited to financial provisions, or are operational performance metrics also expected?

A9. Reviews will include both financial provisions (pricing, discounts, rebates, pass-through requirements) and operational performance metrics.

Q10. Does MTA anticipate audits of all healthcare vendors every year, or will audits be risk-based?

A10. Audits will be risk-based. Not all vendor components will be audited every year. Priority will be driven by utilization, invoice irregularities, and performance guarantees.

Q11. The TORFP states that work should be performed using "generally accepted auditing standards." Please clarify which professional standards apply (AICPA GAAS, Government Auditing Standards/Yellow Book, AICPA Attestation Standards, Agreed-Upon Procedures, Internal Auditing Standards, or another framework).

A11. The MTA accepts work performed under:

• AICPA GAAS,

• Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS),

• AICPA Attestation / Agreed-Upon Procedures standards, or

• A hybrid approach aligned with internal audit professional standards.

The contractor may propose the most appropriate applicable standards.

Q12. Will engagements be performed as Agreed-Upon Procedures, consulting engagements, examinations, or financial statement audits?

A12. Engagements may be Agreed-Upon Procedures, consulting engagements, examinations, or audit reviews, depending on the work order. MTA will clarify engagement type in each task order.

Q13. Can MTA provide sample audit reports?

A13. Yes. The MTA can provide sample audit report formats upon request during onboarding or after award.

Q14. What is MTA's review timeline for draft reports?

A14. Draft reports will typically be reviewed within 10–15 business days.

Q15. What constitutes formal acceptance of deliverables for payment?

A15. Formal acceptance occurs upon:

•MTA review of the deliverable,

• Completion of required revisions, and

• Written acceptance by the Director, Deputy Director, Benefits Manager or designee.

Q16. Will data extracts be provided or obtained directly from vendors?

A16. Data extracts will generally be obtained directly from the vendor. The MTA will assist in coordinating extract specifications and transfers.

Q17. Can MTA provide an estimated annual budget or Not-to-Exceed amount?

A17. The MTA does not publish a Not-to-Exceed amount at this stage. Pricing will be evaluated using Attachment B labor categories and proposed rates.

Q18. If applicable, is historical spending under the prior contract available?

A18. Historical spending is not available

Q19. Are there required completion dates for annual audits?

A19. Annual audit timing will be defined in each task order. Generally audits should be completed within 90–120 days of initiation.

Q20. Will contractor personnel receive remote access or onsite-only access?

A20. Contractor personnel will have hybrid access. Remote access is permitted for most procedures; onsite access may be required for specific tasks.

Q21. Are background checks or fingerprinting required?

A21. The company selected for this TORFP award will be required to complete Security Clearance / Criminal Background Check per the Audit Services for Maryland State Agencies Master Contract RFP Section 3.7.2. prior to Contractor Personnel providing any services under the Contract.

https://dbm.maryland.gov/contracts/Documents/StatewideContracts/AuditServicesContract2020/ Audit%20Services%20RFPFinalwith%20amendments2020.pdf

Please copy and paste the above link.

Q22. What categories of PHI will be accessed?

A22. Contractors may access eligibility data, claims data, invoice-level PHI, and limited clinical details necessary for claim accuracy review.

Q23. Will de-identified data be available where feasible?

A23. Where feasible, de-identified data may be provided; however, full PHI access may be required for claim-level testing.

Q24. Are there Maryland-specific privacy requirements beyond HIPAA?

A24. Contractors must comply with HIPAA, Maryland privacy laws, and MTA internal data-security policies.

Q25. Will work primarily be onsite, remote, or hybrid?

A25. Work will be hybrid, with remote work permitted for most analytics and onsite activity required for meetings and sensitive review.

https://dbm.maryland.gov/contracts/Documents/StatewideContracts/AuditServicesContract2020/Audit%20Services%20RFPFinalwith%20amendments2020.pdf https://dbm.maryland.gov/contracts/Documents/StatewideContracts/AuditServicesContract2020/Audit%20Services%20RFPFinalwith%20amendments2020.pdf

Q26. What percentage of work is expected onsite?

A26. Onsite work is expected to be 10–20% of total engagement hours.

Q27. Attachment B pre-sets specific labor hour allocations across all six labor categories (e.g., 2,328 hours annually for the Subject Matter Expert category), but the TORFP does not specify the number of Third Party Administrators to be audited, the size or complexity of each TPA's operations, or the basis on which individual audits will be prioritized or sequenced during the task order term. Could MTA please clarify: (a) how many TPAs are currently under contract and subject to audit under this task order; (b) the approximate size or annual invoice volume of each TPA's plan(s); and (c) whether MTA intends to prioritize certain plan types (medical, vision, dental, prescription) or TPAs in the initial contract year?

A27.

(a) The MTA has one TPA/vendor responsible for all Medical, Dental, Vision, and RX plans.

(b) Annual invoice volume is 12 monthly invoices, plus supplemental detail files.

(c) Initial-year prioritization will focus on medical and pharmacy, followed by dental and vision.

Q28. Attachment B lists specific labor hour quantities by category and contract year (e.g., 100 hours/Partner, 467 hours/Manager, 2,328 hours/Subject Matter Expert annually), with hourly rate fields left blank for offerors to complete. Section 4.3.3.2 states that the technical proposal work plan hours must equate to the total hours noted in Attachment B. Could MTA please confirm: (a) whether the pre-set hour quantities in Attachment B are MTA's fixed allocations that all offerors must price as shown, or whether offerors are expected to propose their own hour estimates by labor category; and (b) if the hours are MTA's estimates for evaluation purposes only, whether offerors may propose different hour distributions provided the total evaluated price is based on offeror-proposed quantities?

A28.

(a) The labor hour quantities in Attachment B are MTA’s estimates and offerors are expected to propose their own estimates.

(b) Hours are for MTA’s evaluation. Offerors may change/recommend different hour distributions so long as the amount does not exceed contract maximum

Q29. The Subject Matter Expert (SME) labor category carries the highest allocated hours of any category on this task order (2,328 hours annually), reflecting MTA's recognition that specialized domain knowledge is central to this engagement. However, the TORFP does not define the specific qualifications, certifications, or areas of expertise that qualify a proposed individual as an SME for purposes of this procurement. Could MTA please clarify what specific expertise or credentials are required or preferred for the SME role? For example, is the SME expected to hold qualifications in healthcare benefits administration, actuarial analysis, pharmacy benefit management (PBM) operations, ERISA compliance, workers' compensation, or another area?

Additionally, does the SME need to meet the minimum qualifications established in the Master Contract for any specific labor category, or is the SME classification separately defined for this task order?

A29. The SME should have specialized expertise in healthcare benefits administration, PBM operations, claims auditing, rebate/discount validation, or actuarial/financial analysis. The SME must meet the minimum qualifications established in the Master Contract

Q30. The TORFP title references "Third Party Administrator Audit Services" and Section 2.3 states that the TOA Contractor shall conduct audits using "generally accepted auditing standards." Section 1.5 references agreed-upon procedures as one possible framework for documenting the scope of services. However, it is unclear whether MTA expects engagements to be conducted under: (a) Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS); (b) Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS); (c) AICPA Agreed-Upon Procedures (AUP) standards; or (d) a custom MTA-defined framework. Additionally, could MTA clarify the expected format and level of detail for required deliverables, including draft and final audit reports, summary reports, and monthly progress reports? Specifically, does MTA have existing report templates or format requirements that the selected contractor should follow?

A30. Audits may be conducted under GAAS, GAGAS, or AUP depending on task order. MTA will provide report expectations, but contractors may use standard professional report formats.

Existing templates may be provided post-award.

Q31. The Key Information Summary Sheet states that Non-Routine Travel is "No" (not allowed), and Attachment B notes that "This TORFP does not include a Not-To-Exceed Non-Routine Travel cost reimbursement." However, Attachment B Line 7 contains an active field for "NTE Non-Routine Travel" where offerors are instructed to enter zero dollars if no travel is proposed.

Additionally, Section 1.5 of the TORFP requires on-site reviews with Vendor Contractors, which may necessitate travel to vendor contractor locations outside of the Baltimore metropolitan area.

Could MTA please clarify: (a) whether any travel costs — including travel to vendor contractor sites for on-site reviews — are reimbursable under this task order; (b) if travel is required for on-site vendor reviews, how those costs are to be handled given the Non-Routine Travel "No" designation; and (c) whether the Line 7 entry on Attachment B should be $0.00 for all offerors?

A31.

(a) Travel is not reimbursable under this TORFP.

(b) On-site visits must be priced into hourly rates.

(c) Line 7 (“NTE Non-Routine Travel”) on Attachment B should be $0.00.

Q32. Can you confirm that we are to submit two technical files, one in Word and one in Adobe PDF? If so, how would you like us to submit the forms with the Word version since they are in

PDF?

A32. Yes. Submit the technical proposal in both Word and PDF. PDF-based forms may be inserted as appendices within the Word version.

Q33. Would you please provide a copy of Appendix 2 – Master Contractor Information Sheet?

The link in the main document does not work and sends me to an error message.

A33.

https://procurement.maryland.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2018/04/Appendix2- Bidder_OfferorInformationSheet.pdf

Please copy and paste the above link.

https://procurement.maryland.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2018/04/Appendix2-Bidder_OfferorInformationSheet.pdf https://procurement.maryland.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2018/04/Appendix2-Bidder_OfferorInformationSheet.pdf

Q34.

Solicitation Reference

Section Page Question

Key Information Summary Sheet

Technical and Financial Proposals due Date and Time

2 Q. Would MTA consider extending the proposal submission deadline to allow for at least five business days between the Q&A response posting and the proposal deadline?

A. MTA will consider extending the deadline to ensure at least five business days after Q&A posting.

1.1.1 2.3

Purpose Auditing Standards

1 and 5 Q. The second paragraph in section 1.1.1 states, “The contractor shall also be tasked to fully conduct an audit, investigation, special review or consulting engagement (i.e.

planning, testing, reporting and follow-up).”

Section 2.3 states, “The TOA Contractor shall conduct the audit using generally accepted auditing standards…”

Due to the difference in performance standards in these techniques cited in these two sections, would MTA prefer the contractor recommend the type of audit procedure that would be best suited to achieve the goals for the services requested?

A. Contractors may recommend the audit procedure best suited to meeting the TORFP goals.

1.2 Background 1 Q. Would MTA provide a list of the current

Third-Party Administrators (TPAs) for each medical, vision, dental and prescription plan?

Would MTA advise if there are different plans offered by a single TPA?

What are the covered lives and claims dollars by TPA and/or plan for a recent plan year?

Would MTA be willing to provide the TPA contracts? (Occasionally, the audit language in the TPA contract may limit the number of samples that may be reviewed and/or the lookback period.)

A. MTA has one TPA for all plans and will provide contracts post-award.

1.4 Requirements 2 Q. Can MTA confirm if this section is

complete, or is it missing the list of requirements that would follow “The Master

Reference

Section Page Question

Contractor will complete the requirements as indicated to meet the Agency’s goals through the following objectives:”?

A. The Section 1.4 requirement list is complete as published.

1.5 Additional

Requirements

2 Q. The TORFP states, “Audits of claims (accuracy, timing, consistent with the plan design, etc.);”

There are various ways to accomplish the objectives of an audit of claims. This can include a statistically valid random sample, a data-driven review of all claims, or a combination thereof. Does MTA have a particular approach in mind, or would you prefer the bidder propose an approach they believe will best meet MTA’s objectives and explain why they have done so?

A. Claim audit methodology (sampling vs.

full-file review) may be proposed by the bidder.

1.5 Additional

Requirements

3 Q. The TORFP states, “Preparatory work prior to on-site reviews and meetings: review of the Vendor Contractor contract terms, data exchange testing, data exchanges, etc.”

Would MTA provide the location(s) of each TPA where on-site work would be performed?

A. On-site locations are limited to the single TPA’s operational site; details provided post-award.

1.7 State Facilities

Provided

3 Q. The TORFP states, “At the State’s facility, the following will be provided.

• Office/cubicle space

• Access to the agency network solely for necessary electronic files, records and systems.”

Section Page Question

Would MTA confirm if they will require our staff and/or subcontractors to regularly perform their work from a State facility? If so, how frequently? Will MTA allow performance of the procedures virtually?

A. Most of the work will be performed virtually with some work on site related to audits/sensitive meetings

2.2.1 Reporting and

Presentations under the ASC for the TORFP

4 Q. Would MTA advise how many draft reports are being requested? One report per TPA or one report per TPA and plan?

A. MTA requires one draft report per TPA and per major plan component if separately reviewed.

2.3 Auditing

Standards

5 Q. The TORFP states, “The TOA Contractor shall conduct the audit using generally accepted auditing standards and accordingly, include such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as are considered necessary, and documenting the standards utilized in their reports.”

Would the MTA accept conducting the engagement under attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants? Would this be a requirement?

A. AICPA attestation standards are acceptable if proposed.

3.20 Non-Disclosure

Agreement

17 Q. Do any of the TPAs or PBM require an NDA for audit?

A. Some TPAs may require NDAs.

4.3.3.1 Technical

Submission

21 Q. The TORFP states, “The proposed work plan shall provide a detailed discussion of capabilities and approach to address this TORFP’s requirements outlined in Section 3, General TOP Requirements and Section 1, Scope of Work. All tables must be totaled.”

Would MTA please confirm that this should be corrected to Section 2, General TOP Requirements and NOT Section 3?

Section Page Question

A. It was also not clear what tables “must be totaled” – Can MTA please clarify?

The reference to Section 3 should state Section 2; MTA will issue a correction.

– “Tables must be totaled” refers to ensuring hours and pricing tables sum correctly.

Attachment B Financial TOP Instructions & Form

N/A Q. Hours for each year are pre-populated.

Are these provided as an example that should be overwritten? If so, can MTA provide a version of the excel workbook that allows those cells to be edited?

A. The labor hour quantities are MTA’s estimates and offerors are expected to propose their own estimates. The MTA does not have an editable excel workbook of this data to be shared.