Att F - Technical Proposal I-SEAL RFP.docx

RFP 26-87473 I-SEAL 2027 INDIANA SPECIAL EDUCATION ALT LICENSE

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL QUESTIONS

ATTACHMENT F

Instructions: Vendor should provide a document formatted with Question #, RFS SOW Section, and Response Area followed by the vendor’s narrative response to that question. The response must address all items detailed below and provide the information and documentation as required. The response must be structured to address each question listed below. A table of contents (see “Section 2. Table of Contents”) must also be completed as listed in this Attachment. Where appropriate, supporting documentation may be referenced by a page and paragraph number. However, when this is done, the body of the Technical Proposal must contain a meaningful summary of the referenced material. The referenced document must be included as an appendix to the technical proposal with referenced sections clearly marked. If there are multiple references or multiple documents, these must be listed and organized for ease of use.

Scope of Work Questions

8.0 Project Responsibilities/Deliverables

Solution Incorporating AI:

· Does the proposed solution utilize any form of artificial intelligence (AI), as defined by IC 4‑13.1‑5‑1 (https://iga.in.gov/laws/2024/ic/titles/4#4-13.1-5-1)? If so, please address the following:

· How is AI utilized within the solution?

· Can the AI functionality be disabled without impacting the overall functionality or performance of the proposed solution?

· Can the State enable/disable the AI functionality, or is that controlled by the solution/implementation provider?

· If disabling AI does result in limitations, please specify what those limitations are.

· Is there a plan to introduce AI into the solution in the next four (4) years if AI is not already utilized OR is there a plan to expand AI in the solution if AI is already utilized?

If AI is not currently used in the proposed solution AND there are no plans currently to add AI to the proposed solution, respond with confirmation of understanding in the response area below.

· Do your developers use artificial intelligence (AI), as defined by IC 4‑12.1‑5‑1 (https://iga.in.gov/laws/2024/ic/titles/4#4-13.1-5-1) to augment their work? If so, please address the following:

· Describe the degree to which your developers use AI to augment their work.

· Describe the extent to which AI tools for development work are proposed for use in this project.

· Can the AI functionality be disabled without impacting the development of the proposed solution?

· If disabling AI does impact the development of the proposed solution, please specify what those impacts are.

· Is there a plan to introduce AI as part of the development of the proposed solution in the next four (4) years if AI is not already utilized in development OR is there a plan to expand AI as part of the development if AI is already utilized?

· If AI is not currently used by developers and there are no plans currently to leverage AI as part of development during the project or in Maintenance & Operations, respond with confirmation of understanding in the response area below.

Will your company develop and maintain the application to conform to the Assistive Technology Standard and the State’s architectural standards, unless both your company and the State agrees to why that is not possible?

Will your company create a plan and manage the activities to migrate the application to conform to the Assistive Technology Standard and/or the State’s architectural standards in a timeline that is agreeable to all parties?

· The State prefers a solution that meets requirements in the following priority order: out of the box functionality; configuration; or customization only as a last resort. The State expects the selected vendor to act as a partner to help identify potential business process changes that leverage out of the box or configuration options and reduce or eliminate the need for custom code. To help facility this, the selected vendor must document the out of the box and configuration options evaluated before proposing any customization and must demonstrate why configuration cannot satisfy the requirement.

· Customizations should be considered only when one or more of these criteria apply: the requirement is necessary to meet a federal reporting requirement or regulation; the requirement is necessary to meet a state law, regulation, or rule; the requirement is necessary to satisfy state security requirements; the requirement is necessary to interface or integrate with state systems; or the requirement will produce a material improvement in service delivery, partner interactions, or utilization of state resources. Material improvements must be documented, justified, and presented to the Project Steering Committee for review.

· All customizations require written approval from the Project Steering Committee before work begins. Each customization proposal must include a configuration first analysis, a functional specification, a technical design, an impact analysis addressing maintenance, upgrade compatibility, security, performance, accessibility, total cost of ownership, a test plan, a rollback plan, schedule impact, and itemized pricing if applicable. Approved customizations must pass the same acceptance tests as core functionality, be upgrade compatible or provide a documented migration path, and meet State security standards. The vendor will deliver source code, developer and user documentation, and a perpetual royalty free license for any custom code. Additionally, the State expects the vendor to consider approved and implemented customizations for incorporation into the selected vendor core solution going forward so that they become out of the box functionality

Section 2: Table of Contents Instructions: After responding to all questions above, vendor should add page numbers for each question/response.

Section 1: Scope of Work Questions

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

1.8

1.9

1.10

1.11

1.12

1.13

Section 3: Additional Technical Requirements

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use Disclosure

· The State seeks to understand the use of artificial intelligence tools in the preparation of vendor submissions. Respondents must disclose whether AI technologies were used in developing any portion of their proposal.

· AI Utilization Statement

· State whether any AI tools or systems were used in drafting, reviewing, or generating any part of this proposal.

· Description of Use If AI was used, provide the following details:

· Identify which sections, questions, or deliverables within the proposal were created, reviewed, or influenced by AI tools.

· Describe the purpose for using AI (e.g., drafting assistance, grammar review, data analysis, summarization).

· Explain the extent of human review and validation applied to AI‑generated content to ensure accuracy, completeness, and compliance with solicitation requirements.

AI Tools and Data Sources

· List the AI tools or platforms used (e.g., generative text tools, code assistants, data‑analysis models).

· Describe any datasets, proprietary information, or third‑party content provided to the AI tools during proposal development.