Attachment C.docx

section

State of South Carolina Request for Proposal (Amendment 1) includes page references Solicitation: Procurement Officer:

Phone: E-Mail Address: Mailing Address:

5400020111 5400022076

KATHY SANTANDREU 803-896-5304

ksantandreu@mmo.sc.gov SFAA, Div. of Procurement Services, MMO PO Box 101103 Columbia SC 29211

Attachment C

DESCRIPTION: Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT)

USING GOVERNMENTAL UNIT: Department of Social Services

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

SUBMIT OFFER BY (Opening Date/Time): 04/15/2022 11:00 AM ET (See "Deadline for Submission of Offer" provision)

QUESTIONS MUST BE RECEIVED BY: 03/11/2022 11:00 AM ET (See "Questions from Offerors" provision)

NUMBER OF COPIES TO BE SUBMITTED: see page 3

CONFERENCE TYPE: n/a

DATE & TIME:

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

LOCATION:

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 120 calendar days after the Opening Date. (See "Signing Your Offer" provision.)

NAME OF OFFEROR

(full legal name of business submitting the offer AS IT APPEARS ON TAX CERTIFICATE) 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)

*there is no separate contract to sign. Once this page is signed and your proposal is submitted, it is a binding Offer

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)

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS – this page, of this document, is where you will acknowledge all 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)

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.

1. Pages 140-150 are missing from the RFP. Was this section mis numbered or are 10 pages missing from the RFP? If pages are missing, please provide bidders with the missing information.

State’s Response: There is no information missing. Page numbers are incorrect. The page numbers of the RFP posted with amendment four are correct.

2. RFP Section III.C describes Pandemic EBT (P-EBT) requirements. Where should respondents include CPCM pricing for P-EBT?

State’s Response This is explained in the RFP document and highlighted in yellow. It is part of pricing‑optional‑but it is still pricing. Please include in your pricing section as a separate item (separate line item or separate sheet or separate tab).

RFP Reference: p.152, and p.309 Schedule 2 - Optional Pricing.

3. RFP Section IX, Appendix R on page 316 mentions “Section IV - 1.1.7.” Section IV. 1.1.7 is not included in the RFP. Please provide bidders with the correct reference for this section.

State’s Response The state has removed the information on page 316 regarding Section IV 1.1.7 from this RFP. Please disregard.

4. RFP Section II on page 19 says “Note that the dates of 09-21-21 and 09-22-21 are tentatively scheduled for the demonstration.” Please provide bidders with updated demonstration dates.

State’s Response Tentative dates are May 25, 2022 and May 26, 2022.

See Amendment 3, p.3, ITEM# 3 “Demonstration Dates.”

5. On pages 83 and 84, the RFP describes five different peer groups (Type 1 through Type 5). Since peer groups are associated with WIC and not with Cash Benefit Programs, would the State please remove the requirement for peer groups or explain the intention of this requirement?

States Response:

The state will remove all references to peer groups from this RFP.

See Amendment 3, p., ITEM# 7 “Peer Groups”

6. Will cardholder fees for EFT/ePay be part of the overall pricing evaluation?

State’s Response Yes, cardholder fees for EFT/ePay are be part of the overall pricing evaluation

7. Section I. Scope of Solicitation, Page 7: This section states the contract term includes “an initial one (5) year term and two (2) optional one-year renewal terms”. Please confirm the initial term is for five (5) years.

State’s Response:

The maximum contract period shall be for seven (7) years. This includes an initial five (5) year term and two (2) optional one-year renewal terms.

See Amendment 3, p.3, ITEM# 5 “Maximum Contract Period – Estimated (Jan 2006).”

8. Section II. Instructions to Offerors – B. Special Instructions, Demonstrations, Pages 19-20: In the introductory paragraph on page 19, the RFP states the presentation is to be made through a web conferencing solution. Item (g) on page 20 contradicts this by stating vendors will present their demonstration in person. Would the State please clarify whether the demonstration is to be conducted virtually or in person in South Carolina?

State’s Response:

Demonstrations will be virtual, and the state will provide the virtual platform email address to qualified offeror(s).

See Amendment 3, pp.3 - 4, ITEM# 2 “Demonstrations, Item G.”

9. Section III: Scope of Work/Specifications, Introduction and Background, c. Pandemic Electronic Benefit Transfer (P-EBT), Pages 23-24: The State provides guidance to Offerors to include cost per case month (CPCM) as a separate item for the support of a potential P-EBT program that may still be in effect after contract award. In an effort to maintain consistency among bidder responses and to make it easier for the State to evaluate, could the State provide the volume of P-EBT cases the pricing should be based upon?

State’s Response:

For School Year 2020-2021 P-EBT K-12 cases = 506,645; Child Care = 105,014. South Carolina does not have case volumes for School Year- 2021-2022.

10. Section III: Scope of Work/Specifications, Introduction and Background, c. Pandemic Electronic Benefit Transfer (P-EBT), Pages 23-24: For the separate CPCM to be provided to support a potential P-EBT program that may still be in effect after contract award, does the State want a P-EBT price that includes mailed P-EBT cards or cards issued over-the-counter?

State’s Response:

Mailed P-EBT cards; there will be no over-the-counter P-EBT cards issued.

11. Section III: Scope of Work/Specifications, Introduction and Background, c. Pandemic Electronic Benefit Transfer (P-EBT), Pages 23-24: The RFP provides estimated caseloads for SY2019-2020 and SY 2021-2021. Could the State also provide an estimated number of cases and the estimated number of benefit issuances for 2021-2022 as well as ongoing cases and issuances the Contractor will be expected to support?

State’s Response:

No, South Carolina cannot provide P-EBT benefit issuance information for the School Year 2021-2022.

12. Section III: Scope of Work/Specifications, Introduction and Background, c. Pandemic Electronic Benefit Transfer (P-EBT), Pages 23-24: For a future P-EBT occurrence, undefined, please confirm the State will invoke such services using the change request process? Therefore, no pricing for a new future pandemic, which may have a different scope than the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, is required to be submitted at this time as it will be addressed upon occurrence.

State’s Response:

Yes, the State will invoke such services using the change request process if is required.

13. Section: III. General Specifications #28, Page 36 This paragraph references closure of the project to include the State’s approval of the conversion of a paper check delivery system to an EBT delivery system. Could the State confirm that it intends to convert the current process of cutting checks for Foster Board and Adoption Subsidy payments to distributing those payments through either an ACH direct deposit or a branded debit card?

State’s Response:

Foster Care Board Payments and Subsidy Payments are issued either on a card or through direct deposit.

14. Section III. Scope of Work/Specifications, SNAP Requirements (Specifications), #46. Card and PIN Issuance, pages 43-44 and #48. Client Selection of PIN, page 45: The following statements in requirements #46 and #48 indicate that PIN mailers are not required:

· In #46 the RFP states, “The state has not issued any PIN mailers in the past 12 months. It is acceptable for Contractor to provide only support and information on PIN change through the SIVR/IVR.”

· In #48, the RFP states, “The CSRs do card replacements, they do not send out any PIN mailers. Clients can reset the PIN via the IVR or receive assistance from a CSR.”

These requirements are contradicted by the final statement made in requirement #48, which states, “To PIN cards on the IVR, web portal, or mobile application is not a substitution to PIN mailer requirements. Mailers are a requirement.”

Would the State please clarify whether PIN mailers are required?

State’s Response:

Yes, PIN mailers are required. To PIN cards on the IVR, web portal, or mobile application is not an acceptable substitution to PIN mailer requirements.

See Amendment 3, p. 4. ITEM# 4 “Clarification Regarding PIN Numbers”

15. Section III. Scope of Work/Specifications, SNAP Requirements (Specifications), #48. Client Selection of PIN, page 44, #49. Replacement Card Issuance, and #51. Recipient Training and Printed Material, pages 45-46: The following statements in requirements #48 and #49 indicate that cards are to be mailed in an “inactive” status:

· In #48 the RFP states, “A removable bilingual (English/Spanish) sticker (currently there is not a sticker on the card, the card is mailed with the inserts shown on Attachment 1 to this document) shall be placed on the front of the card explaining the need to activate the card and the need for the PIN. Instructions for selection of PIN must be on a sticker on the card – not on the card mailer. No exceptions.”

· In #49, the RFP states, “Replacement cards will be mailed in inactive status and recipients will be required to activate the card upon receipt. A bilingual sticker (English/Spanish) shall be placed on the front of the card explaining how to activate the card.”

· In #51, the RFP states, “For replacement cards the card activation and PIN selection information will be sufficient.”

These requirements are contradicted by the last sentence in the first paragraph of requirement #51, which states, “All cards are issued with an active status.”

If cards are to be issued in an “active” status, there is no need to activate the card, and no need for an activation sticker to be placed on the card. Rather, the client just needs to select a PIN and the card is ready to be used. Issuing cards in “active” status is secure, saves the client time, and saves the State the cost of putting an activation sticker on the card. Will the State remove the requirements to issue cards in an “inactive” status and to place an activation sticker on the card?

State’s Response:

· Regular SNAP Card is in “ISSUED” status and is ready to be picked up by the Card Mailer process. At that time the status is updated to MAILPAN. The card is activated by PINNING the card at that time the status is updated to ACTIVE.

· For Vault OTC cards the card is in ’ISSUED’ status and is issued by the State. Cardholder PINS the card and status is updated to ACTIVE.

· For Disaster cards the card is in ‘ACTIVE’ status and is issued by the State. The initial Disaster cards will have the PIN set to MMDD of the card holder’s date of birth. Cardholder can change this PIN at any time.

· No sticker is placed on EBT cards

· All regular cards are sent out with an EBT brochure.

16. Section: SNAP Requirements #102, Page 65 Is it the State’s intent for the $40 for stand in processing of SNAP purchases to cover $40 per day per case per retailer, or $40 per cardholder per day?

State’s Response:

Upon notification that the EBT system is unavailable, then retailers may accept and process SNAP transactions using manual vouchers. Each SNAP household may purchase up to $40 per day. The Vendor would be liable up to the $40.00 defined amount. Any transactions performed by the retailer more than the $40 stand-in amount are done at the retailer's risk.

17. Section: III. Scope of Work/Specifications, SNAP Requirements (Specifications), #145. Customer Service Statistics Reporting, page 75: Will the State modify this requirement to state, “The Contractor shall provide Statistical Reporting monthly, available on the 5th business day of the month for the previous month…”? This modification allows for weekends/holidays that may fall in the report preparation period and provides a consistent number of days each month to prepare the report.

State’s Response:

No, this requirement will not be amended. The Contractor is to provide monthly customer service statistical reporting data by the 5th business day of the month.

See Amendment 3, p. 4, ITEM# 5, “Customer Service Statistics Reporting, Item 145, RFP p. 75

18. Section III. Scope of Work/Specifications, Cash Benefits Programs Specifications: (EFT/ePAY), #181, page This requirement is about negotiating in good faith should the State pursue or expand the EBT or EFT delivery method for other programs. Nonetheless, the requirement then includes definitions of store types that are specific to a WIC project and not a SNAP or Cash/debit card project. Would the State please remove the requirement language that pertains to the list of five vendor types?

State’s Response:

Yes, the state will remove these retailer types.

19. Section IV. Award Criteria, Page 112 How will costs for optional services be scored given that the State has the option to select one or more or none of the priced services?

State’s Response:

Scoring is Subjective. Subjective Scoring is a two-part process: technical score and score for cost/price. First, the panel will individually score the technical portion of the Offerors’ responses. The state will evaluate all tiers of the CPCM and case types although the 300,001 - 310,000 tier will be weighted higher than the other tiers because it is the tier into which DSS generally falls.

At this point in the evaluation process, no scoring panel member or subject matter expert is privy to pricing. The panel is simply scoring the technical portion of the Offerors’ responses. Once that part of the scoring process is complete, the procurement officer discloses pricing for each of the proposals evaluated. The panel will consider each Offeror’s technical proposal and proposed cost (including options) to score the overall value of the proposed solution.

Note: All options will be considered during scoring. (this now includes, for example, P-EBT, etc.).

RFP Reference: p. 112

20. Section IV. Award Criteria Evaluation Factors, Page 112 If pricing for optional services is scored, how many of the total available points or what percentage of the total available points for cost will be allotted to the optional services pricing?

State’s Response:

Between 1 and 25 points. All costs, including costs for optional services, will be reviewed subjectively to determine the better value to the state.

RFP Reference: p. 112

21. Evaluation Factors, Page 112 How will the State evaluate and score Schedule 3, EBT Fee for Service Pricing?

State’s Response:

See item 19 and 20.

22. Section IV. Award Criteria Evaluation Factors, Page 112 If the EBT Fee for Service pricing will be scored, how many of the total available points for cost will be allotted to Schedule 3?

State’s Response:

See item 19 and 20.

23. Section IV. Award Criteria Evaluation Factors, Page 112 Will Schedules 1, 2 and 3 be weighted equally?

State’s Response:

See item 19 and 20

24. Section VII. Assignment, Novation, and Change of Name, Identity, or Structure (FEB 2015), Page 113. We request to add to the end of the first sentence of this clause a standard parameter for granting consent, inserted for clarity so that consent cannot be withheld without reason. Will the State accept adding “such consent to not be unreasonably withheld”?

State’s Response:

No, the state does not agree to make this modification.

See Amendment 3, p. 4 ITEM# 8, “Information to for offerors to submit”

25. Section VII. Contractor’s Liability Insurance, Page 121 - 123: Although the revised RFP states that changes will not be made to this section, it also encourages vendors to “ASK QUESTIONS NOW” and states that any offerors “having concerns with any specific requirements of this clause should communicate those concerns to the procurement officer well in advance of opening”. We have significant concerns with specific insurance requirements and cannot agree to some of the language as written due to our corporate insurance policies. To ensure competition and that the State receives multiple bids, we respectfully request the State allow modifications to the insurance clauses.

Any deductibles or self-insured retentions are the Contractor’s responsibility rather than the State’s, and we will not change or declare any deductibles to our insurance program. Thus, within sub-bullet (h), would the State please add the words red italics, “are the responsibility of the Contractor” and strike the rest of the sentence starting with “must be declared…”?

“Any deductibles or self-insured retentions are the responsibility of the Contractor must be declared to and approved by the State. The State may require the Contractor to purchase coverage with a lower deductible or retention or provide proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention.”

State's Response:

No, the state does not agree to make this modification See Amendment 3, p. 4 ITEM# 8, “Information to for offerors to submit” and p. 5 ITEM# 10

26. Section VII. Contractor’s Liability Insurance), Page 121 - 123: The language in sub-bullet (i) is only acceptable with mutual consent given the number of other clients protected by our insurance policies. Please allow modifications to the agreed upon insurance requirements in the contract with the agreement of the Contractor as shown in the revision below:

· “The State reserves the right, by mutual consent of Contractor to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.”

State’s Response:

No, the state does not agree to make this modification.

See Amendment 3, p. 4 ITEM# 8, “Information to for offerors to submit” and p. 5 ITEM# 10

27. Section VII. Contractor’s Liability Insurance, Page 121 - 123: Please strike all of sub-bullet (h)? This comes under the Errors and Omissions insurance policy and our corporate policy does not permit any client to be an additional insured on this policy.

State’s Response:

No, the state does not agree to make this modification See Amendment 3, p. 4 ITEM# 8, “Information to for offerors to submit” and p. 5 ITEM# 10.

28. Section VII. Contractor’s Liability Insurance, Page 121 - 123: Per our corporate policy, a certificate of insurance cannot be issued until the State has become a client, but it will be issued immediately after contract signing and before any work commences. Thus, within sub-bullet (j), would the State please add the comma and the words in red italics “, but after contract signature” and strike the last sentence?

· “Prior to commencement of the work, the Contractor shall furnish the State with original certificates of insurance for every applicable policy effecting the coverage required by this clause. All certificates are to be received and approved by the Procurement Officer before work commences, but after contract signature. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Contractor’s obligation to provide them. The State reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including policy declarations and any endorsements required by this section, at any time.”

State’s Response:

No, the state does not agree to make this modification.

See Amendment 3, p. 4 ITEM# 8, “Information to for offerors to submit” and p. 5 ITEM# 10

29. Section VII. Information Use and Disclosure (FEB 2015), Pages 128 – 130: Within sub-bullet (h), Actions Following Disclosure, the list of actions the Contractor is to fulfill related to possible damages require that the awarded contractor agree to unlimited liability. Will the State agree to negotiate a cap for all, or at least some, of these possible damages with the awarded vendor?

· “With regard to any compromise or improper use of government information, Contractor shall: (1) provide any notification to third parties legally required to be provided such notice by Contractor, and if not (e.g., if legally required of the using governmental unit), Contractor shall reimburse using governmental unit for the cost of providing such notifications; (2) pay all costs and expenses for at least two years of identity theft monitoring services (including without limitation, credit monitoring) and identity theft restoration services for any such affected individuals receiving notice where such services are appropriate given the circumstances of the incident and the nature of the information compromised; (3) undertake any other measures that are customary and reasonable for an entity to take when experiencing a similar disclosure, (4) pay any related fines or penalties imposed on the using governmental unit, and (5) reimburse the Using Governmental Unit all costs reasonably incurred for communications and public relations services involved in responding to the compromise or improper us.

· Notwithstanding any other provision, contractor’s obligations pursuant to this item (h) are without limitation. “ State’s Response:

No, the state does not agree to make this modification.

See Amendment 3, p. 4 ITEM# 8, “Information to for offerors to submit”

30. Section VII. Information Use and Disclosure (FEB 2015), Page 129, Would the State please change the word “Immediately” in sub-bullet (h) on page 136 to the word “Promptly”?

· Additionally, within that same section, would the State consider changing “twenty-four” hours to “forty-eight” hours within the same sub-bullet (h) on page 136? This request is to allow for corporate security procedures to be followed.

“(h) Immediately Promptly upon discovery of a compromise or improper use of government information, Contractor shall take such action as may be necessary to preserve forensic evidence and eliminate the cause of the compromise or improper use. As soon as practicable, but no later than twenty-four forty-eight hours after discovery, Contractor shall notify using governmental unit of the compromise or improper use, including a description of the circumstances of the use or compromise.”

State’s Response:

No, the state does not agree to make this modification See Amendment 3, p. 4 ITEM# 8, “Information to for offerors to submit”

31. Section VII., Page 131. To replace the complete removal of any provisions capping damages, will the State add the following clause:

LIMITATION OF LIABILITY

· CONTRACTOR’S TOTAL AGGREGATE LIABILITY UNDER OR RELATED TO THE AGREEMENT SHALL UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES EXCEED THE FEES PAID OR PAYABLE BY THE STATE UNDER THE CONTRACT DURING THE CONTRACT TERM.

State’s Response:

No, the state does not agree to make this modification.

See Amendment 3, p. 4 ITEM# 9, “limitation of liability”

32. Section VII. Ownership of Data and Materials (JAN 2006), Page 132. The provisions for Proprietary Software and Customized Software differ. (See page 141.) If this section applied only to Customized Software, it would be acceptable. At this time, however, no Customized Software is planned for this SaaS deal. The Contractor must own its own intellectual property which is why it is able to indemnify for IP claims. Will the State accept the following modification to this clause?

· “All data, material and documentation prepared for the state pursuant to this contract shall belong exclusively to the State Contractor but Contractor shall grant to the State a license to use such data, material and documentation.”

State’s Response:

No, the state does not agree to make this modification.

See Amendment 3, p. 4 ITEM# 8, “Information to for offerors to submit”

33. Section VII. Software Licenses (JAN 2006), Page 134 – 135. To be very clear that outsourced services are being provided, will the State agree to add the following to the end of this Software Licenses clause?

· For avoidance of doubt, the RFP scope of services does not include the licensing of any software. Contractor is providing an outsourced service and does not contemplate licensing any software to the State. Any request for customized software would require a separate Statement of Work (SOW) or contract amendment.

State’s Response:

This RFP does not include licensing for any software; however, should this change during the life of the contract. Changes to any contract resulting from this solicitation will require a change order and, if applicable, a separate Statement of Work.

34. Section VII. Most Favored Customer, Pages 151: Would the State please consider the addition of the words in underlined italics to this section as shown below?

· Would the State also consider striking the text from this same section as shown?

“If benefits or contract terms determined by South Carolina to be advantageous to South Carolina have been or are subsequently agreed to by the Contractor in other agreements with substantially similar services, terms and conditions, and while taking into account the length of the contract, the size and scope of the services to be delivered and any other factor that significantly impacts price or cost of operations, then the contract may be amended to accord equivalent advantage to the State of South Carolina by or reasonably close to the date(s) that the Contractor’s other agreement(s) become effective. services, terms, and conditions, the same advantageous prices, benefits, and terms must be extended to South Carolina at least by the date(s) that the Contractor's other agreement(s) become effective.”

State’s Response:

No, the state does not agree to make this modification.

See Amendment 3, p. 4 ITEM# 8, “Information to for offerors to submit”

35. VII. Terms and Conditions – F. Special (SCDSS), Page 156: Would the State accept a performance bond or other information in place of a parent company guarantee to demonstrate the commitment of the organization to perform the agreed upon contractual work? This would be consistent with the RFP’s statement in Section V., Qualifications, on page 108 which says, “Corporate subsidiaries are cautioned that the financial capability of an affiliated or parent company will not be considered in determining financial capability; however, we may elect to consider any security, e.g., letter of credit, performance bond, parent-company corporate guaranty, that you offer to provide.”

· In our company’s structure, all corporate functions are leveraged across the enterprise, so from the standpoint of a guarantee, the management and assets are the same whether the work is being performed by our division, the parent company or some other subsidiary. However, an instrument such as a performance bond is issued by a third-party and offers the State a more direct financial remedy should there be a significant performance deficiency specific to this contract. In addition, as a matter of corporate policy, our company does not generally enter into parent guarantees due to certain reporting requirements of the parent company as a publicly traded entity.

State’s Response:

Review clause 05-5005 -2(3) QUALIFICATIONS OF OFFEROR (MAR 2015) RFP Reference: p. 108

36. Schedule 1 (Price Proposal), General Question: Would the State be amenable to tie the contract to the Consumer Price Index, CPI, on an annual basis?

State’s Response:

No, the state will not tie the contract to the CPI on an annual basis. Contractor may request a price increase prior to each renewal option not to exceed the unadjusted percent change for the most recent 12 months for which data is available, that is not subject to revision, in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for all urban consumers (CPI-U), "Other Goods & Services" for services. See clause “PRICE ADJUSTMENTS -- LIMITED BY CPI "OTHER GOODS and SERVICES" (JAN 2006)” in the RFP document for additional information.

37. Schedule 1 (Price Proposal): EBT Core Cost Per Case Month (CPCM Pricing): The table is missing the range of 201,000 – 250,000. Should the bidder add the required rows to accommodate the tiers of 10,000 that this range represents?

State’s Response:

See Schedule 1 (Price Proposal) EBT Core Cost Per Case Month (CPCM Pricing) above. The state has added line item 1 (> 250,000,) based on historical data, the State does not believe the number cases are likely to drop below this number.

38. Schedule 3 (Price Proposal): EBT Fee for Service Pricing: For the Disaster card production, stockpiling and delivery (100,000) item, please confirm the definition of “unit price”. Is unit price defined as per card or does the unit price equate to the price for the full 100,000 cards?

State’s Response:

Unit price is price per unit – so price per card.

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.jpeg