attachment-4-rfp-doe-2027-004-q-a.pdf

RFP: DIGITAL SPEND MANAGEMENT

Vendor Conference Questions and State Responses

Vendor Conference Date: July 10, 2026

State Representatives: Christopher Semonelli Jr., Jillian Cotrona, and Richard Sala

Vendor Companies: ClassWallet and Roddy Tech

Document Purpose: Formal summary of vendor questions and the State responses provided during the vendor conference.

Important Notice. The responses below summarize oral information provided during the vendor conference and are presented for informational purposes. They do not amend or supersede the RFP or any written addendum. If a conflict exists, the written solicitation and formally issued addenda govern.

1. ClassWallet

1.1. Question

Does the Bureau have a preference among pre-funding, just-in-time funding, or post-transaction settlement?

How does the Bureau's current architecture operate?

State Response The State does not have a preferred funding mechanism at this time. The RFP permits vendors to propose different approaches because the appropriate mechanism may depend on the selected solution. Following selection, the State and the successful vendor will determine the method that works best for both parties. The State does not currently operate a digital spend-management platform of the type contemplated by the RFP;

its present purchasing process is largely manual and is supported by an existing case-management system for participant information, authorizations, and reporting.

1.2. Question

Will participants make purchases directly, or will counselors make purchases on behalf of participants?

State Response Participants will make their own purchases. The intended model is for the State to authorize funds and purchasing parameters, place the approved amount in the participant's account, and allow the participant to select and purchase the authorized item directly. This approach is intended to empower participants and reduce delays and administrative workload for counselors and support staff.

1.3. Question

What metrics will the State use to determine whether the pilot or implementation is successful?

State Response The State has not established specific numerical performance parameters at this stage. Success will be evaluated primarily through: (1) the quality of implementation and support for State employees; (2) the quality of implementation, accessibility, and ease of use for participants; (3) the responsiveness and effectiveness of customer service; and (4) the extent to which the solution reduces administrative workload associated with purchasing, reimbursements, and related processes.

1.4. Question

Are there specific accessibility integrations the State requires, such as JAWS or other screen-reader integrations?

State Response Accessibility is a significant requirement because the Bureau serves individuals with many different types of disabilities. The State is not prescribing an exhaustive list of specific integrations. Proposed solutions should meet applicable ADA and WCAG accessibility expectations and work effectively with assistive technologies, including screen readers. The successful vendor must also be responsive when an accessibility issue is identified and provide an effective solution.

2. Roddy Tech

2.1. Question

How should products and vendors be organized within the platform, and does the State have a preferred commission structure?

State Response The State does not have a preference regarding a vendor's internal commission or revenue structure. For participants, however, the platform must organize and restrict available items so that participants can locate and purchase only goods or services authorized under their Individualized Plan for Employment (IPE). Vendors may propose a categorized marketplace, a searchable catalog, or another effective approach. The proposal should clearly explain the proposed structure, and detailed operating mechanisms may be finalized during contracting and implementation.

2.2. Question

How will vendors be onboarded and validated? Must the solution use a third-party identity-verification service, or may validation be handled administratively?

State Response The State currently verifies that vendors are in good standing, are not debarred from doing business with the government, and are otherwise eligible to receive government funds. Vendors included in the platform must be approved by the State, and the State and the successful contractor will need mutual agreement regarding participating vendors. The successful contractor may recommend additional vendors, which the State will review under its standards. The State does not require a specific third-party validation tool.

2.3. Question

Are the participating goods and service vendors federal contractors?

State Response No. The participating vendors are not limited to federal contractors. They are vendors approved by the State through its vendor-management and eligibility-review process. The State may approve vendors from a variety of sources and reserves the right to remove a vendor when appropriate.

2.4. Question

Should a commission or markup be added to the price of an item purchased through the platform?

State Response No commission or additional markup is expected to be added to an individual product transaction for distribution to other parties. The participant purchases the approved item from the goods or service provider at the applicable price. Compensation for the digital spend-management contractor will be determined through the contractor's proposal and the resulting State contract, rather than through an item-level commission added to each participant purchase.

2.5. Question

Is transportation or delivery of purchased goods part of the digital platform contractor's responsibility?

State Response No. Shipping and delivery are the responsibility of the vendor providing the purchased good. The goods provider may determine and charge any applicable shipping costs. Once the purchase transaction is completed through the platform, fulfillment and delivery are handled by the applicable goods or service vendor rather than by the digital platform contractor.

2.6. Question

Is the State seeking a marketplace even though the digital platform contractor will not directly provide the goods?

State Response Yes. The State is seeking a marketplace or comparable digital purchasing environment through which participants can use State-authorized funds to purchase approved goods and services. The platform contractor will facilitate the authorization and purchasing process, while third-party vendors will provide and fulfill the actual goods and services.

2.7. Question

Does a platform of this type already exist, or must the successful vendor build and implement a new solution?

State Response The State does not currently have a digital spend-management platform of the type described in the RFP. The existing process is largely manual. The State does have a case-management system that stores participant demographic information, records service authorizations, supports required reporting, and interfaces with the State's existing financial processes. The proposed solution must provide a practical method to export purchasing data so the State can meet reporting requirements and transfer needed information back into its existing systems.

3. Cyret Technologies Inc. – Questions submitted via email

3.1. Question

Does the State currently use a purchasing card? If so, which bank is the provider?

State Response - Pending The State does not currently have participants using purchasing cards to obtain goods. The State does have a case-management system that stores participant demographic information, records service authorizations, supports required reporting, and interfaces with the State's existing financial processes through manually completed purchase requests.

3.2. Question

What financial system does the State use, and does the State expect the proposed solution to integrate with its financial accounting system? If integration is expected, what integration capabilities are available?

State Response - Pending The State uses an existing accounting system and a separate case-management system. The case-management system has an API (Application Programming Interface) that with customizations allows for integration.

END OF VENDOR CONFERENCE QUESTIONS AND STATE RESPONSES