ARFQ WIC26 1 Addendum #2.pdf

SOLICITATION NUMBER: ARFQ WIC2600000001

Addendum Number: 2

The purpose of this addendum is to modify the solicitation identified as ARFQ WIC2600000001 (“Solicitation”) to reflect the change(s) identified and described below.

Applicable Addendum Category:

[X] Modify bid opening date and time

[ ] Modify specifications of product or service being sought

[X] Attachment of vendor questions and responses

[ ] Attachment of pre-bid sign-in sheet

[ ] Correction of error

[ ] Other-

Additional Documentation: Addendum #2 issued to answer vendor questions and to modify the bid opening date from 11/06/2026 at 10:30 a.m. to 11/13/2026 at 10:30 a.m. No other changes.

Terms and Conditions:

1. All provisions of the Solicitation and other addenda not modified herein shall remain in full force and effect.

2. Vendor should acknowledge receipt of all addenda issued for this Solicitation by completing an Addendum Acknowledgment, a copy of which is included herewith.

Failure to acknowledge addenda may result in bid disqualification. The addendum acknowledgement should be submitted with the bid to expedite document processing.

Question 1: Equivalent Solutions: Will the State evaluate an "or equal" solution based on its ability to achieve the required functional and business outcomes, rather than requiring identical technical implementations, feature names, connectors, or licensing structures?

Answer 1: Yes, the Agency will evaluate any equal solution if it meets the mandatory requirements.

Question 2: Workflow and Digital Transaction Management: Will broader workflow and digital transaction management capabilities, including electronic forms, configurable business rules, routing, approvals, integrations, reporting, audit trails, and process orchestration, be considered when evaluating whether a solution is equal or superior?

Answer 2: No, the Agency will not be evaluating if a proposed solution is superior to the solution being described in the specifications. The Agency will only evaluate a proposed solution to ensure it meets the mandatory requirements as described within the specifications. This solicitation is an ARFQ and therefore will be awarded to the lowest bidder meeting specifications.

Question 3: Integration Requirements: For the specified out-of-the-box connectors, will the State accept equivalent integrations developed through REST/SOAP APIs that provide the same business functionality? If not, could the State identify which connectors are currently used and their primary business purposes?

Answer 3: No, the Agency will not accept equivalent integrations developed through REST/SOAP APIs. The API used must use strict processing standards to prevent unauthorized access. BPH currently uses the API that allows files to be uploaded to a repository when our forms that are sent and go through all the signees are completed.

Question 4: Offline Mobile Signing: Does the offline mobile signing requirement mean that certificate-based digital signatures must be completed entirely without internet connectivity, or would the State accept offline document preparation and data capture followed by certificate-based signing once connectivity is restored?

Answer 4: Yes, certificate-based digital signatures must be completed entirely without internet connectivity.

Question 5: Cloud-Based Certificate Signing: Would the State accept a solution in which certificate-based signing requires an active connection to the cloud signing service, provided that other mobile capabilities can function offline?

Answer 5: No, certificate-based digital signatures must function offline in its entirety.

Question 6: Mobile Application Requirements: Will a responsive, browser-based application compatible with current iOS and Android devices satisfy the mobile accessibility requirements, or is a native, installed mobile application mandatory?

Answer 6: A native, installed mobile application is mandatory.

Question 7: Deployment and Hosting: Will the State consider alternative deployment approaches, including dedicated SaaS, private cloud, government cloud, or agency-controlled hosting, provided the proposed environment satisfies applicable security, compliance, authentication, auditing, and data protection requirements?

Answer 7: No, the Agency will not consider alternative deployment approaches.

Question 8: FedRAMP Requirements: Must the software product itself maintain a specific FedRAMP authorization, or may compliance be demonstrated through the complete hosted solution and its security boundary, including the hosting environment and applicable implemented controls?

Answer 8: Yes, the proposed solution must be FedRAMP authorized.

Question 9: Licensing Structure: Will the State accept enterprise or concurrent-user licensing models that provide the required organizational access and capacity, rather than requiring a specific named-user licensing structure?

Answer 9: Yes, in accordance with 3.1.6.2, 3.1.6.3, and 3.1.13, the Agency requires an Enterprise/Pooled Licensing Structure.

Question 10: Evaluation and Total Cost of Ownership: Will the State consider total lifecycle cost and overall solution value, including configuration, integrations, administration, future modifications, training, support, and additional software requirements, when evaluating proposals? Is there an opportunity for technical capabilities and lifecycle value to be considered alongside subscription pricing?

Answer 10: No, bids are evaluated strictly on whether they meet mandatory specifications.

The contract will be awarded to the lowest bidder meeting specifications.

Question 11: Business Process Use Cases: Could the State provide representative business processes or use cases that the proposed solution will support, including activities occurring before and after electronic signature, such as intake, review, approvals, notifications, document retention, reporting, and system integrations?

Answer 11: The solution must support multi-user access to shared templates, sequential signature routing with automated notifications, and document retention via the State’s shared drive API. Additionally, pre- and post-signature capabilities must satisfy: (3.1.17) Exportable transaction logs, comprehensive audit trails tracking author/message/time metadata, and verifiable chain-of-custody logging. And (3.1.6.3 and 3.1.13.3: Real-time tracking and reporting of pooled transaction volume across unlimited account holders.)

ADDENDUM ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM

SOLICITATION NO.: ARFQ WIC2600000001

Instructions: Please acknowledge receipt of all addenda issued with this solicitation by completing this addendum acknowledgment form. Check the box next to each addendum received and sign below.

Failure to acknowledge addenda may result in bid disqualification.

Acknowledgment: I hereby acknowledge receipt of the following addenda and have made the necessary revisions to my proposal, plans and/or specification, etc.

Addendum Numbers Received:

(Check the box next to each addendum received)

[X] Addendum No. 1 [ ] Addendum No. 6

[X] Addendum No. 2 [ ] Addendum No. 7

[ ] Addendum No. 3 [ ] Addendum No. 8

[ ] Addendum No. 4 [ ] Addendum No. 9

[ ] Addendum No. 5 [ ] Addendum No. 10

I understand that failure to confirm the receipt of addenda may be cause for rejection of this bid. I further understand that any verbal representation made or assumed to be made during any oral discussion held between Vendor’s representatives and any state personnel is not binding. Only the information issued in writing and added to the specifications by an official addendum is binding.

Company

Authorized Signature

Date

NOTE: This addendum acknowledgement should be submitted with the bid to expedite document processing.