AMENDMENT 2.doc

SAP

State of South Carolina

Request for Proposal Amendment #2

Solicitation Number:

Date Issued:

Procurement Officer:

Phone:

E-Mail Address:

Mailing Address:

5400022826 May 3, 2022 Faith Williams

803 896-6677 fwilliams@mmo.sc.gov SFAA, Div. of Procurement Services, OSP 1201 Main Street, Suite 600 Columbia SC 29201

DESCRIPTION: GRANTS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

USING GOVERNMENTAL UNIT: DPS Administration

The Term "Offer" Means Your "Bid" or "Proposal". Unless submitted on-line, your offer must be submitted in a sealed package. Solicitation Number & Opening Date must appear on package exterior. See "Submitting Your Offer" provision.

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

SUBMIT OFFER BY (Opening Date/Time): 05/24/2022 11:00 AM EST (See "Deadline For Submission Of Offer" provision)

QUESTIONS MUST BE RECEIVED BY: TIME PASSED email questions to fwilliams@mmo.sc.gov (See "Questions From Offerors" provision)

NUMBER OF COPIES TO BE SUBMITTED ON-LINE BID

CONFERENCE TYPE: Not Applicable

(As appropriate, see "Conferences - Pre-Bid/Proposal" & "Site Visit" provisions) LOCATION: Not Applicable

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 one hundred twenty (120) 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

AMENDMENTS TO SOLICITATION (JANUARY 2006) (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 (1) by signing and returning the amendment, (2) by identifying the amendment number and date in the space provided for this purpose on Page Two, (3) by letter, or (4) by submitting a bid that indicates in some way that the bidder received the amendment. (c) If this solicitation is amended, then all terms and conditions which are not modified remain unchanged.

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. ANY RESTATEMENT OF PART OR ALL OF AN EXISTING PROVISION OF THE SOLICITATION IN AN ANSWER DOES NOT MODIFY THE ORIGINAL PROVISION EXCEPT AS FOLLOWS: UNDERLINED TEXT IS ADDED TO THE ORIGINAL PROVISON. STRICKEN TEXT IS DELETED.

CHANGES TO THE SOLICITATION: EXTEND DATES / ADDITIONS / DELETIONS / ANSWER QUESTIONS

THE FOLLOWING DATES HAVE BEEN EXTENDED:

SUBMIT OFFER BY (Opening Date/Time): 05/13/2022 TO 05/24/2022 – The Opening Time remains 11:00 AM EST

AWARD & AMENDMENTS Award will be posted on 09/07/2022 TO 09/27/2022

ADDITION: SECTION IV:

The Offeror shall include any and all assumptions, additional license or subscription documents, SLAs, terms and conditions, ancillary contracts, or open-source agreements relative to their proposal. The Offeror shall also submit the number and nature of exceptions (if any) such Offeror requests to the terms and conditions in Part 7 B. Special Terms and Conditions. SFAA reserves the right to negotiate the terms and conditions of any such Contractor supplied terms, documents, and agreements or to reject. Any acceptable changes, documents, or agreements shall be documented in the Record of Negotiation. Please include as a separate appendix to the solicitation, in accordance with the Exceptions to Requirement, pages 16-18.

DELETIONS:

VII. TERMS AND CONDITIONS -- B. SPECIAL

CONTRACT DOCUMENTS and ORDER OF PRECEDENCE-SOFTWARE LICENSING-SINGLE AGENCY (FEB 2015) – 7B042-1

VENDOR QUESTIONS – RESPONSES

1. Page 21, “The SCDPS is seeking a qualified vendor to provide a web-based COTS grant management solution utilizing current software technologies to assist with all phases of the grant management lifecycle.”

a. Is it mandatory that the solution be a commercial off the shelf solution or is the SC DPS open to grants solutions that are developed via low code platforms that provide the same functionality with greater efficiency?

Answer: SCDPS has specified and prefers a commercial off-the-shelf product (COTS). A modified off-the-shelf product (MOTS) may be acceptable.

b. Can the government clearly define a web-based COTS grant management solution? For an example, does the above reference statement read that the government will only consider an already package ready-made software rather than the commissioning of a custom-made grant management solution?

Answer: SCDPS has specified and prefers a COTS, ready-made software. A web-based solution is required. SCDPS does not intend to implement an infrastructure for this solution but expects that to be provided by the COTS with SaaS.

2. What is the budget for this potential contract?

Answer: The budget for this solicitation will not be disclosed.

3. Page 37, #2 Experience A list of a minimum of three (3) references of current or past State clients the Offeror’s firm has provided services to in the past two (2) years (that are similar in size and scope to the requirements herein). Please include name, address, telephone number and email address of the appropriate contact.

Would the government accept federal clients as references as well?

Answer: To clarify, the “State clients” this question is referencing does not mean other clients in the state of South Carolina; rather, current or past clients who are state agencies. If contractor does not have current or past clients as state agencies, SCDPS will accept federal or other clients as part of the minimum of three (3) references.

4. Does the SCDPS expect files to be transferred with data between the GMS and FMS?

Answer: Refer to page 31, Section B – System Interface & Integration.

5. Are there any other systems the future Grant Management System expected to integrate with?

Answer: Refer to page 31, Section B – System Interface & Integration. Included in this section on page 32, the solicitation states:

The system shall interface with the US Postal Service (or other acceptable vendor) for validation of addresses.

The system shall interface with Sam.gov for validation of DUNS number and agency information.

6. Does the SCDPS require data migration? And if so:

a. How many programs?

b. How many years of data must be migrated?

c. Can you confirm if the below is included in data migration?

i.

Award amounts ii.

Full award detail including budgets iii.

finance reports, activity/metric reports etc.

Answer: Yes, SCDPS is requesting data migration from a SaaS solution (K2Share) to the new system. Approximately, six years (FFY 2018-FFY2023) of data is collected within the existing system, K2Share.

As stated on page. 61, 1.1.4 Migration –Migrate all existing data into system beginning with 2018. Legacy data migration includes analysis, data conversion plan and execution plan. Existing data is currently being stored in a MSSQL Server, which is approximately 1GB of data at this time. File attachments are stored in a separate file system and include approximately 2GB of data. It is expected that these numbers will grow by the time data is migrated, due to the OHSJP accepting another round of annual applications in the Spring of 2022 on its existing system. Data to be migrated:

· Applications/Grants, Subgrantee account information approximately 1GB

· File attachments-2GB

In addition, Email history will not be required as part of the data migration to the new system.

The aforementioned items includes award amounts and full award detail including budgets. “Finance reports, activity/metric reports etc.” are not available in the existing system and, therefore, would not exist for migration. A detailed description of GMS Office Units and their associated programs is provided in the RFP beginning on page. 18. For the purpose of data migration this would include the Highway Safety Grant Program, all of the Justice Grant Programs, and the School Resource Officer (SRO) Program.

7. To clarify usage as will be submitting a Subscription based SaaS solution.

How many external users will access the system?

Answer: See page 21 and 22 in the “Identified Roles” section for a detailed breakdown of estimated system users. All three rows listed as “SCDPS” are considered internal users while all others are considered external.

8. How many internal people will use the system?

Answer: See answer to item number 7 above.

Please do not count people who would just run a report - but rather consistent users of the system

Answer: See page. 21 and 22 in the “Identified Roles” section for a detailed breakdown of estimated system users. All three rows listed as “SCDPS” are considered internal users while all others are considered external.

9. Do you have an anticipated budget for this project? If so, will you share the budget amount?

Answer: The budget for this solicitation will not be disclosed.

10. Does the agency hold licenses for an electronic signature tool you would like to use as part of this solution? If so, please provide the name. If not, do you have a preferred tool or would you like this to be included in the proposal?

Answer: Please include this in the project pricing.

11. Is the vendor required to be on site for any portion of the contract term?

Answer: Refer to page 30 of the solicitation, which states:

Vendor should provide SCDPS the option for both virtual and in-person training for up to 35 SCDPS users. While the SCDPS has its own learning management system, tracking SCDPS user training through this system is not a requirement. Vendor shall provide virtual training for several hundred Applicant and/or Subgrantee users upon completion and acceptance of GMS. Allowing trainees the ability to practice using a non-production version of the system is preferred, using realistic examples. Any training videos/webinars shall be available for later playback. Vendor shall also have the ability to provide short videos explaining key processes (grant application creation and submission; budget revisions; request for payment process; reporting; etc.), which shall be available for access in the GMS.

12. Have you seen demonstrations of any grant management systems prior to issuing this RFP? If so, will you share which systems?

Answer: SCDPS currently utilizes K2Share. SCDPS elects not to disclose the demonstrations we have seen prior to issuing this RFP.

13. Can you confirm the number of specific grants that will need to be implemented by September 2022 is 8: Highway Safety (1 grant program), Justice (4 grant programs), School resource Office 1 grant program), Body-Worn Camera (1 grant program), and InCar Video Camera (1 grant program).

Answer: SCDPS will push the implementation date back to January 2023 to allow sufficient time for the transition, data migration, and user acceptance testing. At this time, the number of programs to be implemented is 10: Highway Safety (1 grant program), Justice (6 grant programs), School Resource Officer (1 grant program), Body-Worn Camera (1 grant program), and In-Car Video Camera (1 grant program).

14. Do you anticipate adding other grant programs this year, and if so, how many?

Answer: It is possible that the state legislature could pass provisos that would create two-to-three additional SCDPS grant programs. The agency will not know until July 2022 what additional programs, if any, the legislature will pass.

15. Please elaborate on the agency’s preference for future systems maintenance. Does the agency prefer future support and maintenance is done by the selected partner, internal team or a combination of both? For example, an internal admin would handle Tier 1 support and Tier 2 support would go to vendor?

Answer: SCDPS prefers future support and maintenance to be provided by the selected vendor. As stated on page 30, the System shall be fully vendor supported and maintained with current IT technologies.

16. How does SCDPS plan to fund this project? Is it part of the operating budget or capital budget?

Answer: The budget for this solicitation will not be disclosed.

17. Does SCDPS have an anticipated budget for this new Grants Management System?

If yes, can you provide that budget information to guide vendor bidding decision-making? If the budget is too low, it does not support bid preparation.

Answer: The budget for this solicitation will not be disclosed.

18. Has SCDPS previously entertained any system demonstrations and/or presentations from vendors?

Answer: See answer to item number 12.

If so, which systems were seen and when?

Answer: See answer to item number 12.

19. Did SCDPS utilize any vendor / SME consultants in defining the sought-after functionality and/or scope of work enumerated in the RFP?

If yes, please provide the name of the vendor/consultant.

Answer: No

20. Given the requirement to manage Federal funds, does SCDPS require vendors who have experience deploying Grants Management Systems at the Federal level?

Answer: No

21. Given the priority of securing public data and assets, does SCDPS require any cloud-based, SaaS solutions to be provisioned on a FedRAMP-certified infrastructure?

Answer: See page 32, Section C. System Security, some of the information to be captured by the GMS may include restricted security level data/PII. The system must meet all South Carolina state security standards, including those required when handling Personally Identifiable Information (PII) (e.g. NIST 800-53, DIS-200, FEDRAMP Medium/High).

22. For this procurement, would SCDPS be open to using an existing state grants management contract?

Answer: No

23. Grants Programs Funding Cycles

Please provide the funding cycles for each of the 5 grants programs listed in the RFP.

Answer:

Terms and Conditions

VII. TERMS AND CONDITIONS -- A. GENERAL

CONTRACTOR’S LIABILITY INSURANCE – INFORMATION SECURITY AND PRIVACY (FEB 2015)

(e) Coverage shall have limits no less than five million ($5,000,000.00) dollars per occurrence and ten million ($10,000,000.00) dollars aggregate.

Typically, liability insurance requirements for other similar customers are one million ($1,000,000.00) dollars an occurrence. Is SCDPS open to reducing this amount?

Answer: No.

24. VII. TERMS AND CONDITIONS -- B. SPECIAL

CONTRACT DOCUMENTS and ORDER OF PRECEDENCE-SOFTWARE LICENSING-SINGLE AGENCY (FEB 2015)

Notwithstanding the clause entitled "Contract Documents & Order of Precedence," but as provided in the clause titled "Software Licensing Agreements-Single Solicitation," any contract awarded pursuant to this solicitation shall not include a software licensing agreement. Further, the document titled South Carolina Standard Amendment To End User License Agreements For Commercial Off-The-Shelf Software - Single Agency, which is attached hereto as an exhibit, is offered as information only and does not form part of the contract. [07-7B042-1]

License agreements are a standard practice with software. What protections will the State provide to the licensor to protect their rights, especially protection of intellectual property?

Answer: The clause is deleted from the solicitation.

25. Has the department allocated a budget for this procurement?

Answer: The budget for this procurement will not be disclosed.

26. On page 21 of the RFP it is indicated that “The SCDPS is seeking a qualified vendor to provide a web-based COTS grant management solution utilizing current software technologies to assist with all phases of the grant management lifecycle. A U.S. cloud-based software-as-a-service solution is a must.” Is the department considering a fully managed service with a partner(s) portal for the grant program(s)?

Answer: SCDPS expects the vendor to provide managed services via a web-based solution.

27. Please confirm that the department has considered remote management of the implementation for the vendor to provide all services and capabilities solicited in the RFP.

Answer: The vendor’s solution may be implemented remotely; however, see answer to item number 11 regarding training.

28. Does the department have existing Microsoft licenses for Dynamics 365?

Answer: No.

29. What resources does the department have available to support the implementation project on this procurement?

Answer: SCDPS staff (including technical and business representatives (end users) will be a part of the implementation team.

30. What kind of governance process is in place to manage requirements approval, change requests, etc.?

Answer: SCDPS expects the vendor to utilize standard Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL) and Critical Path Method (CPM) processes during development.

ITIL framework is a set of best-practice procedures and processes for IT and digital service management. It is a framework used by a huge range of organizations to ensure IT services are fully aligned to an organization's key goals.

CPM: critical path method, is a technique where you identify tasks that are necessary for project completion and determine scheduling flexibilities. A critical path in project management is the longest sequence of activities that must be finished on time in order for the entire project to be complete.

The vendor must provide a Project Manager for implementation.

31. What specific systems in the department does the vendor system need to interface/integrate with?

Answer: See page. 31, Section B. System Interface & Integration: SCEIS interface and integration is not a mandatory requirement of the grants management system. However, SCDPS would like to understand whether an Offeror’s GMS has the option to interface with the SCEIS system in the future, including the level of intervention required, for basic financial data for payment reimbursement.

32. Can you share the format in which the existing data is that needs to be migrated into the new grant management system?

Answer: Microsoft SQL however the current vendor may offer additional output options upon request.

33. Section IV. Information for Offers to Submit, Section A Technical Proposal, Experience, page 57. A list of a minimum of three (3) references of current or past State clients the Offeror’s firm has provided services to in the past two (2) years (that are similar in size and scope to the requirements herein). Please include name, address, telephone number and email address of the appropriate contact. Will the State accept references with non-profit organizations, educational institutions and States with similar size and scope to the requirements?

Answer: To clarify, the “State clients” this question is referencing does not mean other clients in the state of South Carolina; rather, current or past clients who are state agencies. If contractor does not have current or past clients as state agencies, SCDPS will accept federal clients and non-profit organizations as part of the three (3) references.

34. Why have you released this RFP at this time? Is it mainly due to K2Share's SPARS system's limited functions and the additional manual process?

Answer: Yes

35. Are you currently using K2Share's SPARS system to manage your grants or a combination of SPARS and the previous GMIS system?

Answer: SPARS only

36. If you are currently using K2Share's SPARS and you need to migrate the data from that system to the new system, what format would this data be in?

Answer: Microsoft SQL; however, the current vendor may offer additional output options upon request.

37. For the estimated internal users, how many of the Financial, Programmatic and System Administrators would you consider to be high-core users (using the system >40 hours per month), how many to be low-core (using the system <40 hours per month)?

Answer:

SCDPS-Financial: High-Core=8; Low-Core=3

SCDPS-Programmatic: High-Core=10; Low-Core=5

SCDPS-System Administrators: High-Core=4; Low-Core=1

38. For the external users, how many of the applicant/subgrantees and reviewers will access the system per month?

Answer: The system experiences peak and non-peak periods during the grant cycle. Peak usage would correspond with upcoming due dates (i.e. application submissions, quarterly requests for payment, quarterly progress reporting). A program breakdown of the number of applications recently received, and the number of subgrants awarded for each program is provided beginning at the top of Pg. 19-20, where known.

39.

What is your planned hosting option (public hosting, private hosting)?

Answer: SaaS provided via this solicitation.

40. Grant Application Process p. 24: What type of word processing features are you looking for in your application form fields that need to be compatible with Microsoft Word?

Answer: Standard edit capabilities, cut/paste, formatting.

41. You indicate that you are looking for a COTS solution, our solution is not technically a COTS solution but is highly configurable to tailor for your unique business requirements. Would you consider this type of solution?

Answer: No

42. Grant Application Process p. 25: In manually assigning grant numbers, your preferred option is to manually assign a grant number of up to 100 potential characters. Can you clarify on this requirement? Is it the ability to make use of 100 different keyboard characters or does the number need to go up to 100 positions (pretty big number)?

Answer: The agency prefers the ability to assign a grant number that can potentially have as many as 100 positions. One hundred positions is not typical, but in some unique situations it may be necessary.

43. Project Management:

Do you have a targeted start data and/or go-live date in mind? Is there a compelling event that is driving this date?

Answer: The agency will push the implementation date back, from the original date of September, to January 2023 to allow sufficient time for the transition, data migration, and user acceptance testing. A January go-live date will allow the next cycle of grant applications to be released and accepted in the new system.

44. Would you be able to share with us any details around the budget range based on procurement and/or government parameters?

Answer: The budget for this solicitation will not be disclosed.

45. Is there a dedicated internal Project Manager on staff or will you be outsourcing that role to a third party? How many people do you anticipate participating in the “core team” to ensure the joint success of the project?

Answer: The vendor must provide a Project Manager for the implementation. SCDPS estimates a “core team” of five people (not including vendor staff).

46. Are you open to a joint (two-company) bid or should all bids have one prime vendor or a prime vendor with a subcontractor?

Answer: SCDPS requires a primary vendor for this contract. Joint bids are not allowed.

47. Grants Management Process

How many unique programs are open annually? What are the estimated averages around the number of applications you receive per year?

Answer: A detailed description of grant programs is provided in the RFP beginning on Pg. 18 and includes the most recent number of applications per program.

48. For each of the program applications, are these application forms minimally or materially different? Are there different approval workflows for each program and/or application type? How do they materially differ?

Answer: There are a few, minimal differences among the applications for federal grant programs. For example, the main application categories are essentially the same with a few differences in the form fields within those categories, according to program needs. While the state-funded grant program applications differ materially from each other, they are substantially smaller than the applications for our federal programs. The various grant programs should essentially have similar workflows; however, some programs, such as Highway Safety, could require additional levels of approval for certain functions.

49. Do you administer your grant payments in advance or via claim reimbursement?

Answer: Most grant programs are claim reimbursement; an exception may apply to the Body Worn Camera Program and In-Car Camera programs.

50. For each of the program applications, do the line-item Grantee Budget templates vary minimally or are they materially different? Would you be open to sharing that format and document?

Answer: The below screenshot is an example of our typical budget template for Justice Programs; other programs are minimally different. For example, the Highway Safety template has two separate budget categories for travel; in-state and out-of-state. The SRO Program does not include the breakdown of fringe benefits or the Contractual Services category and has slight differences in the Personnel category column headers.

51. Is there desired visibility and interaction for external reviewers/panels to offer expert opinions and/or validation on the application pool?

Answer: Yes; as outlined at the top of page 21 in the Identified Roles section. The Reviewer role is an external role, which may include federal funding partners, and state-level board or committee members. These users are given read-only access and, in some cases, scoring functionality for specific grants to which they are assigned by a designated SCDPS System Administrator.

52. Do you desire to track sub-awards and/or re-grants?

Answer: Yes; as discussed in the Introduction section on Pg. 17. The OHSJP is tasked with, in general, (1) applying for and receiving these federal funds, (2) soliciting eligible applicants (state agencies, local units of government and non-profit organizations) for proposals, (3) reviewing and recommending funds in the form of subgrants, (4) presenting these recommendations to the South Carolina Public Safety Coordinating Council (PSCC) for final approval, (5) awarding subgrants on behalf of the PSCC, and (6) providing both technical assistance and monitoring (programmatic and financial) to ensure projects are successful and funds are properly expended.

53. Outputs:

Roughly how many types of automated email communications are sent to applicants/grantees? Roughly how many documents/templates will need to be generated in the system (e.g., grant agreement, payment letter, etc.)?

Answer: As stated on page 22, Section A General Requirements:

Shall provide automatic and scheduled notifications to external users, which shall include:

Upcoming deadlines, overdue notices, application status changes, revision/extension status changes, and Request for Payment status changes.

As stated at the bottom of page 24, (The system) Shall allow for customized forms among grant programs, which may include, but is not limited to, grant applications, monitoring reports, progress reports, financial reports, and training requests.

54. Do you have any standard reports that need to be created on a regular basis (e.g., Grant Approval List, List of Approved Grants, List of Payments, etc.)?

Answer: See Reporting section, beginning at the bottom of Pg. 28-30. It is unclear at this time with what frequency these particular reports would need to be generated by staff.

55. Do you currently use any advanced reporting/analytics software (such as Tableau, PowerBI, Qlik, etc.)? If yes, do you plan to continue to use this type of software going forward? If not, is there an interest to pursue this option

Answer: No.

56. Data Migration: Can you please estimate roughly how many grant records would need to be migrated from the previous systems? Organizations? People? Reports? Documents?

Answer: Existing data is currently being stored in a MSSQL Server, which is approximately 1GB of data at this time. File attachments are stored in a separate file system and include approximately 2GB of data. It is expected that these numbers will grow by the time data is migrated, due to the OHSJP accepting another round of annual applications in the Spring of 2022 on its existing system. Number of records to be migrated:

Approximately 2,000 grant applications and any associated file attachments

Approximately 500 applicant/subgrantee agencies that are associated with the migrated grant applications. The agency is open to discussing with the awarded vendor whether individual user accounts would need to be “migrated”, if the vendor has a user onboarding process that would allow previous users to access their historical data.

57. Single Sign-On: What, if any, is your Single Sign-On solution? If so, is it currently used for both internal users and external grantees? If not, did you have a targeted vendor partner in mind?

Answer: SCDPS is currently, utilizing K2Share, internal and external users log in to the web application SaaS. The vendor must provide like in kind access.

58. Other Integrations: Which systems must be integrated with our platform at launch? Do they have APIs available for integration? Ideally, in the consolidation of systems, which platforms do you envision continuing to use versus those where you want to consolidate/deprecate/EOL?

Answer: See Pg. 31, B. System Interface & Integration.

The State’s SCEIS (SAP) implementation for financial data has standard data formats and feeds for consuming output from various systems. The vendor must conform data transmissions per these pre-defined load formats if integration were to occur with the selected vendor at some point in the future.

Once data migration to the new system and full implementation has occurred, the agency will no longer use the K2Share system.

59. Segmentation: Do you anticipate transparency across the organization to all records (i.e., can each country segment see each other's investments/work). If so, to what degree and on what record types are these barriers to visibility established? (i.e., people, organizations, grants, reports, or all)

Answer: No; SCDPS-System Administrators must have the ability to assign internal staff members to all or some grant programs. External users must only have the ability to view grant activities/records on the subgrantee accounts to which they are specifically assigned.

60. Security: To better understand compliance for this specific agreement, what levels do you require regarding State and Federal data security, accessibility for cloud-based SaaS offerings?

Answer: As stated on Pg. 32, C. System Security, Some of the information to be captured by the GMS may include restricted security level data/PII. The system must meet all South Carolina state security standards, including those required when handling Personally Identifiable Information (PII) (e.g. NIST 800-53, DIS-200, FEDRAMP Medium/High).

61. Additional Items: Will we be able to integrate our Terms and Conditions of our normal contract within the State’s contract?

Answer: Please see “Additional language, Section IV” above Exceptions to Requirement Offeror Guidelines: Please include as Appendix to the solicitation The contract resulting from this solicitation falls under the DPS. Offerors are strongly discouraged from taking exceptions to the standard terms and conditions residing in the Solicitation. Any exceptions taken to the standard terms and conditions may result in an Offeror’s proposal not being considered.

Offerors should note that DPS expects each Offeror to comply with the requirements of this RFP as written, and to price its Response accordingly. DPS strongly discourages any Offeror from indicating that it does not agree or does not comply with a provision because the Offeror is unwilling to price it (for risk, liability, or any other reason).

At the discretion of DPS, the final terms and conditions of any Contract awarded as a result of this RFP may be agreed upon during negotiation. However, the minimum standard terms and conditions that will be included in any awarded Contract are contained in the Solicitation documents.

This information is this section contains the format for Offerors to note any exception to any standard provision, term, or condition specified in the RFP. An explanation as to why the Offeror cannot comply with the provision, term, or condition and why the proposed alternative language must be included in the Response. Examples of nonresponsive explanations include:

1. Referencing negotiation of revised language in another DPS or other state agency contract;

2. Referring to an internal division’s need for the revised language without a valid reason as to why the exception is necessary;

3. Indicating the proposed language is “negotiable;” and

4. Referencing an internal Offeror terms and conditions document.

Exceptions must include:

1. RFP document title (RFP, Exhibit, Attachment, etc.) section number and section title;

2. Explanation as to why Offeror cannot comply with the term or condition; and

3. Proposed alternate language (redline).

4. Clearly identify why the acceptance of your proposed alternate language would be advantageous to the State.

If Offeror fails to note any exception within its Response, Offeror will not be allowed to request an exception upon award or at some later date. No exceptions will be considered after negotiations or contract award.

The Offeror shall complete below form as described:

· The column labeled Ref # shall be a sequential number.

· The column labeled “Location/Specific Section Reference” should be used to identify the specific RFP document (e.g., Exhibit 1.1 Definitions) and the location(s) (section number or other identifiable reference) within the RFP documents that the language addresses.

· The column labeled Objection/Issue shall describe the Offerors issue and/or objection to the term defined in the requirement documents, including the above-described required explanation.

· The column labeled Proposed Alternative Language (redline) shall be updated as follows: copy the term “as-is” from the associated RFP document, use strikethrough effect in Word for any removed text, use blue underlined text for any added text.

Offerors are encouraged not to request exceptions to standard contract terms and conditions; DPS, in its sole discretion, may or may not accept the Offeror’s requested exceptions.

Prior to the final award of a Contract, DPS reserves the right to make changes to the Solicitation. Should this occur, the highest ranked Offeror after scoring will be notified.

If there are no exceptions, the Offeror shall explicitly state the Offeror takes no exception to any part of this RFP. Any exception may result in the Contract not being awarded to the Offeror.

1 EXCEPTION TABLE

End of Amendment 2 Page

Page