Amendment 1.docx

III.SAP

State of South Carolina

Request for Proposal (Amendment 1)

Solicitation:

Amendment Issued:

Procurement Officer:

Phone:

E-Mail Address:

Mailing Address:

5400022579 03/09/2022

KATHY SANTANDREU

803-896-5304 ksantandreu@mmo.sc.gov SFAA, Div. of Procurement Services, MMO 1201 Main Street, Suite 600 Columbia SC 29201

DESCRIPTION: Aging Services Information System (ASIS)

USING GOVERNMENTAL UNIT: S.C. Department on Aging

SUBMIT YOUR OFFER ON-LINE AT THE FOLLOWING URL: http://www.procurement.sc.gov

SUBMIT OFFER BY (Opening Date/Time): 4-1-2022 4/15/2022 11:00 AM EST (See "Deadline For Submission Of Offer" provision)

QUESTIONS MUST BE RECEIVED BY: 2-28-2022 10 AM EST (See "Questions From Offerors" provision)

NUMBER OF COPIES TO BE SUBMITTED: Please see page 7. All copies required must be received no later than the opening date and time and must be labeled with the Offeror’s name and solicitation number.

CONFERENCE TYPE: Pre-Proposal (Web Conference) DATE & TIME: 2/22/2022 1:00 PM (this meeting may last several hours)

(As appropriate, see "Conferences - Pre-Bid/Proposal" & "Site Visit" provisions)

You must submit a signed copy of this form with Your Offer. By signing, you agree to be bound by the terms of the Solicitation. You agree to hold Your Offer open for a minimum of 180 calendar days after the Opening Date. (See "Signing Your Offer" provision.)

NAME OF OFFEROR

(full legal name of business submitting the offer) Any award issued will be issued to, and the contract will be formed with, the entity identified as the Offeror. The entity named as the offeror must be a single and distinct legal entity. Do not use the name of a branch office or a division of a larger entity if the branch or division is not a separate legal entity, i.e., a separate corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, etc.

AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE

(Person must be authorized to submit binding offer to contract on behalf of Offeror.)

DATE SIGNED

TITLE

(business title of person signing above)

STATE VENDOR NO.

(Register to Obtain S.C. Vendor No. at www.procurement.sc.gov)

PRINTED NAME

(printed name of person signing above)

STATE OF INCORPORATION

(If you are a corporation, identify the state of incorporation.)

OFFEROR'S TYPE OF ENTITY: (Check one) (See "Signing Your Offer" provision.)

___ Sole Proprietorship ___ Partnership ___ Other_____________________________

___ Corporate entity (not tax-exempt) ___ Corporation (tax-exempt) ___ Government entity (federal, state, or local)

COVER PAGE - ON-LINE ONLY (MAR. 2015)

SAP

SAP

PAGE TWO

(Return Page Two with Your Offer) HOME OFFICE ADDRESS (Address for offeror's home office / principal place of business)

NOTICE ADDRESS (Address to which all procurement and contract related notices should be sent.) (See "Notice" clause)

_________________________________________________ Area Code - Number - Extension Facsimile

_________________________________________________ E-mail Address

PAYMENT ADDRESS (Address to which payments will be sent.) (See "Payment" clause)

____Payment Address same as Home Office Address ____Payment Address same as Notice Address (check only one) ORDER ADDRESS (Address to which purchase orders will be sent) (See "Purchase Orders and "Contract Documents" clauses)

____Order Address same as Home Office Address ____Order Address same as Notice Address (check only one)

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

Offerors acknowledges receipt of amendments by indicating amendment number and its date of issue. (See "Amendments to Solicitation" Provision)

DISCOUNT FOR PROMPT PAYMENT

(See "Discount for Prompt Payment" clause)

PREFERENCES - A NOTICE TO VENDORS (SEP. 2009): Preferences do not apply

PREFERENCES - ADDRESS AND PHONE OF IN-STATE OFFICE Preferences do not apply

____In-State Office Address same as Home Office Address ____In-State Office Address same as Notice Address (check only one)

PAGE TWO (SEP 2009)

End of PAGE TWO

AMENDMENTS TO SOLICITATION (JAN 2004) (modified): (a) The Solicitation may be amended at any time prior to opening. All actual and prospective Offerors should monitor the following web site for the issuance of Amendments: www.procurement.sc.gov(b) Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment to this solicitation by identifying the amendment number and date in the space provided for this purpose on Page Two and returning with solicitation response (c) If this solicitation is amended, then all terms and conditions which are not modified remain unchanged.

Questions from Offerors - amendment (revised) The solicitation is amended as provided herein. Information or changes resulting from questions will be shown in a question-and-answer format. All questions received have been reprinted below. The “state’s response” should be read without reference to the questions. The questions are included solely to provide a cross-reference to the potential Offeror that submitted the question. Questions do not form a part of the contract; the “state’s response” does.

The state will only accept questions regarding Amendment 1. Questions will be accepted until March 15, 2022, 9AM ET.

Updates to timeline:

· SUBMIT OFFER BY (Opening Date/Time): Friday, April 15, 2022, 11AM ET

· Demonstrations: May 9, 2022 through May 13, 2022

· Post Award: May 23, 2022

Combined vendor questions

Aging Services Information System (ASIS) RFP 5400022579

1. On page 22 the solicitations states that the demonstrations scripts are in the appendices. I have looked through the solicitation several times and can't seem to find them. Please verify where they are.

“Module demonstration scripts and operating parameters are included in the appendices. SCDOA at its sole discretion has the ability to modify or change the script prior to the date set for demonstrations. “ (p.23)

A previous version of the RFP included a large scale script. This was removed. Scripts and as warranted data for the different modules will be posted in the future.

2. During the Pre-Proposal Conference, we discussed that demonstrations may have different levels of maturity based on the required solution. Examples given were that Survey Systems Module may be very mature as there are niche companies that specialize in that whereas ASIS Core may be more of a technology demonstration as the vendor will not have been able to integrate with other modules yet. Please verify if this is a correct.

This is correct, given that “mature” modules will be operational and modules that are more “unique” (less mature) may not be an operational application. Unique modules will be given greater latitude; however, a presentation with graphical representations (User Interface (UI)) with a logical storyline is expected.

3. During the Pre-Proposal Conference we discussed security and access management. Please verify that no single sign on is required and each module may have it's own front end access. Two examples are Micro Transactions and Survey System.

A single sign on is not required. However, it is expected that some modules can lend themselves to sharing a sign on.

4. Due to the complexity of the solution, is it possible to extend the proposal due date by two weeks?

Yes.

5. Regarding the receipt of the thumb drive, are FedEx packages delivered to a mail room and then to the Procurement division? If so, are packages delivered on the same day of receipt into the mail room?

Please do not wait until the last minute to submit your proposal online and mail your thumb drive. Packages are time stamped when they arrive in the procurement division’s bid room.

6. On page 65 of the solicitation document under “Delivery Date’ it states that “All items must be delivered within 12 weeks after receipt of purchase order.” If purchase orders for each of the six (6) modules are near the same date they would likely all need to be delivered by the same date. Does SC Aging Services have the capacity to properly conduct UAT for each of the six modules at the same time?

“All items must be delivered within 12 weeks after receipt of purchase order. [03-3038-1]” (p.65) This point will be revised in an addendum. The time frame for delivery will be tied to the complexity of the module solution.

It is expected that user acceptance testing (UAT) and implementation of the modules will be staggered.

7. Are there any onsite requirements that the vendor should be aware of? How much of the work can be performed remotely?

There are currently no specific onsite requirements. The majority of work can be performed remotely. However, those modules that may require additional analysis (stakeholders, specifications, etc.) would undoubtedly benefit from collocated live interaction and discussion.

8. Has a budget been allocated for this project? Is there an estimated contract value available?

As indicated during the conference meeting budget will not be discussed.

9. Does the budget include the acquisition of any new technology required for the solution?

Solution responses must include all aspects for a full solution of the module(s).

10. Does Aging Services have a specific timeline in which the new system needs to be live or certain functional areas need to be live?

There is not a strict timeline; however, project delivery date will affect scoring of the module solution.

The system will evolve as the modules come online or are completed.

11. Does Aging Services have a baseline schedule for the order of module implementation?

The schedule is highly determined by the modules and vendors selected.

12. What is the current number of digital files to be migrated?

Initial migration of files to Module F: Document Library will be minimal if at all.

This transformation project is more akin to business process reengineering than simple business process (re)design. Thus the old phrase “Don’t automate, Obliterate!” comes to mind. Apart from testing, the focus of the Document Library will be for documents with retention schedules greater than one (1) year. Other types of documents will undoubtedly be stored too; however, criteria for inclusion and relevant business processes will have to be developed first.

13. What is the expected number of annual digital files in the new system?

File size will not expected to be more than 50GB - 100GB of new data each year.

14. Is there a state system to manage the billing to third party entities or is the expectation that ASIS will execute billing/invoice transactions such as check writing to external entities?

The State of South Carolina’s general accounting and check writing is within a separate ERP application.

15. Can the state provide the number of external interfaces/agencies that ASIS is expected to integrate with?

There may be a few external interfaces via API, after ASIS is operational.

There will be basic file exchange, (e.g., csv, xlsx) using export and import between the systems.

16. Does the state have an existing e-signature vendor?

Yes, there is a state term contract with DocuSign.

17. Are there a set number of reports & dashboards to be migrated/created for ASIS?

No, there is not a set number of reports.

There are some reports that will be complex and will require vendor help in creating them. Many reports are column-based reports with some degree of grouping. These reports may be good practice for stakeholders, in the report writing training sessions.

18. Does the state have a centralized GIS service in place to leverage?

Yes, there is a statewide term contract with ESRI. It is unknown if it can be leveraged.

19. Can the state provide the expected number of external users (users with no login) to the system?

Estimates are included in the RFP. Concurrent usage is unknown as there is no standard data collection and processing method in place.

20. What vendors are currently providing legacy solutions?

Saber Corp, Quickbase, Excel worksheets developed internally, SAP, VisionLink

21. Does Aging Services have separate teams to conduct User Acceptance Testing (UAT) for each module to avoid a bottleneck situation for the possibility of multiple vendors implementation plans?

See item 6 above.

22. In the event that multiple vendors are supplying different modules for the whole system, will there be one vendor identified for triage of support tickets? What is the expectation for the vendor providing support to coordinate and/or perform knowledge transfer with other vendors?

Support should be based on identifying the localized problem and the vendor that provided the module. In the case of API issues, the vendor responsible for module A: Core, is the most likely candidate to identify the source of the issue. (See 47 below.)

23. Does the agency utilize a procurement contract vehicle to secure software licenses, and would the agency consider adding licenses required for this program to an existing software contract?

The RFP is the procurement vehicle to secure software licenses.

24. Does the agency currently have any software licenses for orchestration of data movement?

No, the agency does not have any software in place.

25. What data analysis and visualization tools/platforms does South Carolina Aging Services currently have existing licenses for?

Tableau, R and Python libraries

26. Does the Agency have a source control repository that can be leveraged by vendors? If so, what is it?

The agency does not have a source control repository for use by vendors, at this time.

27. From how many sources will data need to be aggregated?

AIM, Excel, SC ACT, QuickBase.

28. Is there an approved list of device and browser compliance requirements for the user interface?

Mainstream device manufacturers (Lenovo, Dell, Samsung, Apple, etc.) and mainstream browsers (e.g., Chrome, Firefox, Safari, etc.) should be supported.

29. How many Aging Services people support the current system?

Several at the state level and at least one or two at each region.

30. How many vendor people support the current system?

Each of the current systems in use are supported to varying degrees by their respective vendors.

31. What is the team makeup of roles of the current Aging Services project team?

This project is meant to transform statewide operations and the project team will be formed based on the selected solutions from the RFP awards.

32. Can Aging Services provide the estimated number of individual stakeholders that will provide significant input on this project?

This project is meant to transform statewide operations and the stakeholder participants will be chosen based on the selected solutions from the RFP awards.

33. What is the size of the data that is under the scope of work for this RFP both in number of database tables and size of the data storage in GB?

Data size is approximately 5 GB or less. The number of tables used will be based on the data architecture developed within the module solutions, especially modules A and B.

34. Are there any data governance policies we need to follow during data migration application migration/installations?

Yes, there are. Please refer to the RFP document regarding data governance, security, and privacy.

35. Please provide the volume of historical case objects and size of content to be migrated

See item 33 above.

36. Does South Carolina Aging Services have a preferred electronic fee payment processor?

This is not part of the RFP specifications.

37. What is the prescribed format defined by the payment processor?

Reports exported as csv/xlsx files that will be imported and/or copied into the state ERP application.

38. Are there any API Lifecycle Management Policies currently in existence?

No, there are currently no API Lifecycle Management Policies.

39. Please describe the scope/scale of the data conversion effort. How many records? How many fields? How many systems (including manual spreadsheets)?

Module C will require access to historical data for client and transaction related data.

Estimated to be 1.2 GB combined for the Sybase and Quickbase platform sources Sybase source data Will require the most cleaning Instances where tables that are not “relational” Simplification and translation of the DB design exists to assist vendors Table examples: (values were calculated in a cleaned, transformed, and migrated data source in a PostgreSQL DB; DB size = 1.1 GB) client: 130,000 rows; 197,820,416 bytes disk space service transactions: 5,500,000 rows; 391,438,336 bytes disk space vendor: 115 rows; 81,920 bytes disk space Quickbase source data Largely clean data Some gaps in fields may require backfilling 10 tables from a relational-graph hybrid DB; estimate size < 0.1 GB Table examples: client: 20,000 rows, contacts: 14,000 rows; interviews: 18,000 csv export VisionLink data quantity is unknown Data migration and data exchange tools and methods are available with this vendor VisionLink data should be relatively clean Module A as the Core will house the apps master data and thus will include the data migrated via Module C.

Client-transaction oriented data will be obtained via the integration to Module C Documents will be obtained via links to Module F Additional data to be loaded into the Core will be based on the quality of the data and its cost/benefit to SCDOA and its partners.

Example: historical assessment survey data; clean imported data for previous 2-years Example: historical survey data documented and loaded separately from the ASIS app Module F will load a limited number of historical documents into the library.

See table below.

40. Are there any business schedule or timeline considerations (such as federal reporting windows, or downtime restrictions, maintenance windows, end of month reporting, etc.)?

There are no specific timeline considerations other than the desire for expedient solutions.

41. What is the state's assessment of that data with respect to data quality for data migration purposes? (clean, fairly clean, moderately clean, requires extensive cleansing)

Mixed. Data prep will be necessary and SCDOA staff will assist the vendors with this process.

42. What is the state's assessment of the level of duplication in the data records requiring consolidation during data migration?

Low.

43. Is the vendor responsible for cleansing data?

Data cleansing (prep) will be a collaborative process between the vendors and SCDOA.

44. Is there a font type and size restriction?

Do not change the font type or size that is set in the Solution Response template docx.

45. Assuming the state may select multiple vendors to fulfill Modules A – F, would the Department anticipate single sign on (SSO) capabilities between each module managed by disparate vendors?

See 3 above.

A single sign on is not required. However, it is expected that some modules can lend themselves to sharing a sign on.

46. In Module E, paragraph 2, page 50, it states “Inclusion of a client ID will accomplish this.” Does the state anticipate the contractor would provide this functionality as part of Module A: Core Management and Analysis or does the state currently use a master person index for member identification?

Early design has this as a value generated in module A and passed to/pulled by module E. The state does not use a master person index.

47. If multiple vendors are selected, can the Department provide guidance as to which vendor(s) would be responsible for “Customer Support and Help Desk”? Specifically, would the vendor responsible for Module A: Core Management and Analysis be the primary entity responsible for these services?

Support should be based on identifying the localized problem and the vendor that provided the module. In the case of API issues, the vendor responsible for module A is the most likely candidate to identify the source of the issue. (See 22 above.)

48. On Page 60 of the Solicitation, the Department states “support personnel should interact with ASIS clients that possess active login user ids with identity confirmation.” Will the Department clarify that the vendor would not interact directly with South Carolinians receiving services (“clients”) but rather those system users with active login user IDs?

Yes, that is correct.

49. On Page 77 within the evaluation specifications, the Department indicates the Price proposal is scored on a “Yes/No” basis. Will the Department clarify how pricing is taken into consideration as part of the overall evaluation criteria?

Price consideration will be based on the solutions value to the state.

50. Regarding OAAPS data collection and reporting, does the Department expect the ASIS solution to capture ALL OAAPS data, or will ASIS report only a subset of the OAAPS dataset the Department is required to submit per ACL requirements?

Universals (All) are dangerous.

The system should capture more than 90% of the data that is reported through OAAPS, to the Federal government.

51. Regarding data migration, will the Department please describe the type(s) and source(s) of data to be migrated into the new system? Additionally, please provide record volume / data format / etc. information so the vendor may adequately estimate the data conversion effort.

See 34, 41, 42, 90.

52. On Page 50 of the Solicitation, the Department states “A desired feature that can assist with exploratory longitudinal analysis is the capacity to chain surveys.” Can the Department please provide more details regarding the need to chain surveys?

This is better described as chaining or linking questions within surveys over time. A translational table in an RDBM system is one way of accomplishing this.

Example: Question 3, “What is your favorite color?” was on the XYZ survey from 2001 – 2007. The item was Question 19 from 2008 – 2012. The item from 2012 – 2017 became Question 11. The desire is have an easy way to analyze all the years from 2001 – 2017, in order to determine the number and percentage of females with green as their favorite color.

53. Regarding the mobile solution, is the use of PWA a requirement or a suggestion?

It is a very strong suggestion. However, if a case can be made to employ another method to solve the need, the review committee welcomes the edification.

54. Will service transactions only originate from Module D: Micro Transactions or can they be documented from Module A: Core Management and Analysis as well?

General service transactions will be entered via Module C: Service Transactions and Module D: Micro (mobile) Transactions. Module A: Core is intended to be the master data store and thus the end-recipient of the data integration process. It will have the reports/report app and analytics-visualization app connected to it, as well.

55. Regarding proposal preparation, Module A: Core Management and Analysis has two separate components (A.1 ASIS Core and A.2 Core Reports & Dashboards). Should a separate response template be submitted for each component or only one for Module A in its entirety?

A single Solution Response can be submitted, with two (2) Component sections included.

56. If a single vendor is chosen to provide multiple modules, will the Department allow a phased approach for implementation of the various modules?

Yes. A phased approach is viewed as a means of reducing project risk, reducing stakeholder stress, improving training knowledge retention, and overall improving project success.

57. In the interest of recognizing economies of scale, if a single vendor is chosen to provide multiple modules within the ASIS system, will the State provide guidance on methods for vendors to reflect those savings within the proposal pricing exhibits?

Awards are made by individual module. The modules must be priced as standalone.

58. Regarding the following requirements included on page 27 of the RFP, “State Ombudsman or ombudsman representative: review transactions, expenditures, and performance indicators for Ombudsman service areas,” can the Department provide more information on the types of expenditures, transactions, and performance indicators that will be in the new system?

An example AAA monthly transaction entry related to the Ombudsman program

· Description: Facility visits (March) | Quantity: 24 | Price: $99.99 | (various identifying fields)

59. Given that long term care facilities are typically paid as part of the Medicaid program, can the Department also confirm that this contractor will not be responsible for compiling information that is contained in other systems, notably those used for Medicaid?

The Medicaid program is a separate system.

60. One of the key features that is mentioned in 4.1 on page 50 of the RFP is “Off-line capability.” Can the Department provide more information about its expectations for this offline capability? For example, does this apply to both the web-enabled and mobile interfaces? Is there an expectation that files can be checked out and worked on offline?

This off-line capability refers to the ability to conduct a survey and collect the data without having a live Internet connection. Once reconnected to the Internet the data should find its way home. It should not matter what hardware device is being used. There are no specific files to check out for a survey. However, the mechanism to sync the survey data with the client’s other data residing in the Core module is left to the vendor to explain in their proposal.

61. Page 58 of the proposal identifies accessibility as an important usability requirement. Most vendors will say that they meet this, however, when people with disabilities try to use the system, they often find that they cannot be used or that they are so difficult to use that they are at a substantial disadvantage to other workers without a disability. We strongly encourage the Department to consider adding an accessibility demonstration as part of the system demonstration. This could include having someone who is visually impaired navigate the system.

Noted. This will be considered.

62. This project will require substantial changes to current business processes to take advantage of the opportunities created by the new automation. The appendices show that the Department has been thinking about new workflows, however, a considerable amount of work will be necessary to translate these documents into the documentation (e.g., automating the actual assessment tools, integrating skip logic and algorithms, etc.). What will be the contractor’s role in fleshing out these workflows and business rules and incorporating it into the automation?

The level of complexity among the modules is diverse. Some of the more complex workflows occur within the Financial module and here a more formal Business Process Model diagram is warranted. Less complex processes need not be documented in the same manner. Design of operational workflows will be a joint effort between vendors and the SCDOA.

Automation of the assessment surveys will undoubtedly be in the domain of the vendor awarded the Survey module. Cooperative effort between the vendor and SCDOA staff in setting up the primary assessment instruments and the requisite training to create and modify surveys in general is expected.

63. For example, is it the Department’s vision that the contractor will just provide the software and state, AAA, and provider staff will perform these tasks with the contractor answering questions?

No, the SCDOA expects vendors to provide a solution that will minimize risk and maximize a successful implementation of the project, while keeping cost in mind. The ease of use and the complexity of the solution will determine the amount assistance the stakeholders will require.

64. Or should the proposal include translating the business processes included in the appendices, clarifying the business processes and rules and incorporating it into the automation?

No, a direct translation of the business process diagrams is not a requirement. The business processes provided are meant to be informative and not prescriptive. In some cases the diagram provided may be ‘right on the money’, in other cases there may be a more elegant and correct solution.

Documentation of all kinds should be functional. This may be more documentation than an agile developer is accustomed to, but certainly much less than what a waterfall developer would generate.

65. Approximately how many different agencies and users will be using the system?

The number of agencies using the system (ASIS) is contingent on the module being used. Please see the RFP documents.

66. Will the contractor be responsible for training all users or will a train-the-trainer approach work in which the contractor trains representatives from the different agencies and they train their own staff?

The degree and manner of training is based on UI usability and the complexity of the topic. Vendors are encouraged to propose the best method of training possible while also being conscious of costs.

There are many possible options for training. Examples: live web-based, live in-person, online videos, interactive online videos, self-guided training followed by web-based discussions, etc. A train-the-trainer only approach becomes problematic as nuance and complexity increase.

67. Page 39, paragraph 2 of the RFP indicates “The design of these modules must take into account the relationship among the operational accounting systems and the source grant and fund accounting system.” Please clarify the disparate external system(s) (e.g., Eligibility, MMIS, Accounting, etc.) and interfaces that the ASIS system is expected provide along with their anticipated interface type(s).

The section regarding “the relationship among the operational accounting systems” and ASIS financials is a note to allow for columns/fields that can be used by stakeholder agencies to link the ASIS line items with their own accounting system. Example: there is an HCBS Chore line item in the grant award to the AAA. Associated with the description are identifiers (e.g., service expense, State accounting codes, etc.). One or more columns should be available for AAAs and providers to include their local accounting codes for the line item.

APIs and complex interfaces among different systems is not being requested. The ability to link line items in ASIS to their local systems will be through the ability to download an xlsx or csv file that includes the appropriate columns. Syncing the data locally is outside the scope of the ASIS system.

68. What is the process to bid the development time needed to connect with other vendor systems that have been awarded contracts for the modules not awarded to us?

Each vendor must determine what their individual capabilities, limitations, and costs are. If the module to be completed must transmit data to another module, the vendor must estimate the development time for code that transmits the data while taking into account the rare instance where code has to be revised. Likewise if a vendor is receiving data from other sources it is their obligation to estimate development time and costs for developing APIs.

69. What is the reasoning behind the Micro Transaction app not having a login? We suggest having a login because of the following:

a. A login process will ensure only authorized users can scan the barcodes.

b. The user would only need to be online to log into the app during the initial setup. Returning to the app would be possible offline like most other phone apps.

c. This will provide the needed transaction tracking to show who scanned the barcode and verify that they are a current authorized user.

d. This process would also eliminate the need for in-depth research and approval on the backend of the transaction.

e. The login would show who did the scanning and what provider they are associated with.

f. The app will also capture GPS for location verification.

Ease of use for UX/UI and overall administration.

70. What is the list of sources for the data that will need to be imported to the new solution? Please include a description of the source, data format, and current module it is used for.

See 33 above.

71. Document Library- Is this a blank form library or a storage place for filled documents for clients?

The document library is intended to store different types of documents. This will primarily be documents that have a retention schedule greater than one (1) year. Examples: contracts, invoices, financial/grant reports, and grant awards. The docs to store may be sent directly from the application or uploaded by a user.

Please reread Module F: Document Library beginning on page 51 of the Solicitation.docx. Module B: Financial (p39) refers to agreements and contracts that are to be stored in the library upon conversion to pdf/a archive format. Additional information is available within the appendices docx, especially the walkthrough in Appendix D.

72. Document Library- Will the search options be on form names and types or file content?

Ideally search options should not be restricted. Documents should be able to be accessed by document category, date, region, retention schedule, and other identifiers (metadata) associated with the file. Full text search on file content is not a requirement. However, it is a nice to have feature.

See above for examples given throughout the solicitation.

73. There is mention of partnering with other vendors in the document and during the discussion, but there is also a clause that prohibits “joint bids”. Can you please clarify?

Here’s the clause I was referring to:

BID/PROPOSAL AS OFFER TO CONTRACT (Modified)

By submitting Your Bid or Proposal, you are agreeing to enter into good faith negotiations with the Using Governmental Unit(s). Any award issued will be issued to, and the contract will be formed with, the entity identified as the Offeror on the Cover Page. An Offer may be submitted by only one legal entity; “joint bids” are not allowed.

If two Contractors want to partner, one or the other will need to be the prime contractor and the other a subcontractor or the Contractors will need to form a joint venture (which is a single entity) to submit the bid. The state will not award two prime Contractors separately under a joint bid.

74. Are there any restrictions on using project resources based in Global Delivery Centers outside of the United States?

OFFSHORE CONTRACTING PROHIBITED (FEB 2015)

No part of the resulting contract from this solicitation may be performed offshore of the United States by persons located offshore of the United State or by means, methods, or communications that, in whole or in part, take place offshore of the United States. [07-7B122-1]

75. Can the data be stored in Cloud platforms?

Yes, data can be stored in cloud platforms. The data must be transmitted to the master DB, module A, and be readily accessible.

76. Do this opportunity have unlimited liability?

There is not a limitation of liability provision in this contract

77. We have one integrated solution that checks the boxes for three modules (core module + 2 independent modules). May we complete one solution proposal template for the integrated solution or are three separate solution proposal templates for each module required?

The Solution Proposal document is meant to standardize the submission and the review process, benefitting the vendors and the reviewers. Please submit a Solution Proposal document for each module as requested.

If you do not wish to be awarded a contract in the event you are not awarded all three (3) modules, please note this in the first line of the Company Overview section on page 2 of the Solution Proposals.

78. For the independent modules (service transactions, survey system, document library, micro-transactions), do offerors have to complete BOTH a solution technical description & Gantt AND a component technical description & Gantt, OR should we put N/A since there is no component associated with those specific modules?

If there is no additional information to be provided, then NA (single component) is acceptable in the component section.

79. The Index page(6) references pages 117 thru 120. The solicitation document only contains 116 pages. Are there missing pages to the solicitation document or is the index in need of updating?

The main solicitation document ends with page 116.

80. Page 28 – “User persona interactions” – Bullet #3. –“ Intake Caregiver assessment survey for respite services.” Is this assessment tool required to be an electronic document in the system?

The Caregiver assessment survey data collection will be via the Survey module. The data will begin in the Survey module after which the data will be transmitted to the Core module.

81. If so, does is the assessment data required to be available to the reporting functions?

Yes. The data will be transmitted to the Core module where reports, analytics, and visuals can be developed.

82. Can you provide a copy of this assessment?

Yes.

83. Page 28 – “User persona interactions” – Bullet #3. –“Intake HCBS assessment survey for HCBS services.” Is this assessment tool required to be an electronic document in the system?

The HCBS assessment survey data collection will be via the Survey module. The data will begin in the Survey module after which the data will be transmitted to the Core module.

84. If so, does is the assessment data required to be available to the reporting functions?

Yes. The data will be transmitted to the Core module where reports, analytics, and visuals can be developed.

85. Can you provide a copy of this assessment?

Yes.

86. Is single sign-on a requirement for the solution for any or all modules?

A single sign on is not required. However, it is expected that some modules can lend themselves to sharing a sign on. (See 3 above.)

87. Page 68,69 – “Implementation Requirements” – Bullet #3- “Coordinating legacy data cleaning and migration of the data to the new system”. Can you provide a list of source data and the format it can be provided in?

See 34, 41, 42, 51, 85.

88. Please confirm you require 1 bid response document for each module bid on.

A Solution Proposal document (template provided) must be provided for each module. A single RFP response document is required.

89. Resumes are not mentioned as a requirement in the RFP document (Solicitaiton.docx); however, the Table of Contents of the Solution Response Template contains the line item “Resumes [Max: 2 pages per team member],” which is not contained within the actual template (i.e., there is no heading for it). Are resumes a requirement of this solicitation?

All documents posted are relevant to the RFP.

The Solution Response Template is a means to standardize responses and an opportunity for vendors to present their solution (technical and integration descriptions, PM method, training, etc.) and tell us about their project team (team summary and resumes) to the review committee.

90. The Phase I Scoring Evaluation allots 20 points for collaboration/cooperativeness and 15 points for overall qualifications, yet there are no requirements that directly refer to this in the Solution Response Template. Is it the expectation that the vendor address these elements within the character limits/headings currently set forth in the template?

Yes, the vendors have the opportunity to provide the review committee with information that indicates the vendor has and is able to work with others collaboratively. Good communication, collaboration, and cooperation all smooth the path to a successful project outcome. There is also that check-off on page 4 of the solution response that explicitly asks if the vendor will “Agree to work collaboratively with other vendors…”

Overall qualifications can be addressed directly; e.g., in the company overview section, or indirectly within the description of your solution, methodology, and personnel.

91. Are the page limitations in the Response Temp correct or will they be updated.

There will be no update at this time.

The word limitations specified in the Solution Response Template; e.g., [Max: 100 words], will be given some latitude. Example: if instead of 100 words there are 125 words, there will be no penalty or repercussions. However, in the case of page limitations, if the section indicates [Max: 2 pages], and the response is a cut and paste amalgam that is 4 pages long, then it may be rejected.

All other terms, condition, bidding instruction, and specifications remain unchanged. If there are any question or if any confusion or uncertainty arises as a result of this amendment, it is the sole responsibility of the Offeror to contact the procurement officer for clarification. Contact information can be found in the top right-hand corner of the cover page of this amendment reference the “Duty to Inquire” in the original Request for Proposal (RFP).

image1.png