Attachment E - Service Level Agreement.pdf

Attachment E: Reporting & Service Level Management

Attachment E – Reporting and Service Level Management 5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 1 of 24

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

STATE FISCAL ACCOUNTABILITY AUTHORITY

Reporting and Service Level Management

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 2 of 24

In addition to Sections I.1, Mandatory Terms and Conditions, and I.2, Proposed Contract Terms, the State proposes to include all the following terms in any contract resulting from this solicitation. You may state an exception to any of the terms in this Attachment. If you do so, you must:

a. Identify the term(s) on an attachment to your proposal;

b. Explain why you take exception to the State’s language;

c. Indicate what change or alternative language you propose;

The State will interpret the absence of an exception to a term as your acceptance of that term.

When the apparent successful vendor has been determined, the agreed upon contract terms will be incorporated into a fully integrated document that will serve as the parties’ final contract.

Reporting and Service Level Management Consistent with Section L.1 of the Agreement, as used in this attachment, unless the context requires otherwise,

(a) “including” (and any of its derivative forms) means including but not limited to, (b) “may” means has the right, but not the obligation to do something and “may not” means does not have the right to do something, (c) “will,” “must” and “shall” are expressions of command, not merely expressions of future intent or expectation, (d) “or” shall not be exclusive, (e) words used in the singular include the plural, the plural includes the singular, and the neuter gender includes the masculine and the feminine, (f) the words “herein,” “hereof,” and “hereunder” and other words of similar import refer to this Agreement as a whole and not to any particular Article, Section, Subsection or other subdivision, (g) any reference to “month” in this attachment shall mean a calendar month, (h) “Service Level Credit” means amounts paid or credited to the State by Contractor for missing any of the Service Levels described below, and (i) “Scheduled Uptime” shall have the meaning set forth in Attachment L.1, Definitions, of the Agreement.

Service Levels This attachment establishes a minimum threshold in what the State is looking for in Service Level commitments, which will be further refined both as part of the proposal process and in subsequent contract negotiations with the final attachment being included as part of the Agreement. In addition, this attachment sets forth the tables and descriptions that provide the State’s framework, specifications relating to the Service Levels, and the implications of failing to meet the Service Levels which include, but are not limited to, the payment of Service Level Credits, which may be issued either in the form of an immediate payment to the State by the Contractor and/or a credit against current and future fees due under the Agreement, as determined solely by the State, to incent Contractor performance.

The Service Levels are divided into three categories. The first category applies to the implementation services (and any other subsequent projects) and are referred to as the “Project/Implementation Service Levels”. These

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 3 of 24

Service Levels are set forth in Section 4.6.1 below. The Project/Implementation Service Levels will be effective upon commencement of the implementation services (or commencement of any other subsequent projects) and will continue until completion of all such services. The second and third categories of Service Levels are applicable to the live production services and are referred to as the “Live Production Service Levels” and the “Critical Live Production Service Levels”. These Service Levels are set forth below in Sections 4.6.2 and 4.6.3, respectively. Both the Live Production Service Levels and the Critical Live Production Service Levels will be effective at the initial deployment of any functionality which is used in live production processing by the State, which is to occur only after successful completion of the agreed production acceptance criteria and a measurement period as documented in the Implementation Plan, and shall continue during the remainder of the term of the Agreement.

The mechanisms set out herein, as finally agreed between the parties, will be implemented to manage the Contractor’s performance against each Service Level and to monitor the overall performance of the Contractor in delivery of the Service.

The Contractor will be required to comply with the following performance management and reporting mechanisms, as may be modified in the final Attachment, for all Services within the scope of the Agreement and will provide these reports to the State as stipulated in the sections 4.3 and 4.4 below.

4.1 Service Level Credits

Contractor recognizes the State is paying Contractor to deliver the System and related Services at the specified Service Levels. If Contractor fails to meet any Service Levels, then, in addition to other remedies available to the State, Contractor shall, at the State’s direction, pay or credit to the State the Service Level Credits described below in recognition of the diminished value of the System and Services resulting from Contractor’s failure to meet the agreed upon level of performance, and not as a penalty. Under no circumstances shall the imposition of Service Level Credits be construed as the State’s sole or exclusive remedy for any failure to meet the Service Levels.

However, if the State recovers monetary damages from Contractor as a result of Contractor’s failure to meet a Service Level, Contractor shall be entitled to set-off against such damages any Service Level Credits paid for the failure giving rise to such recovery.

The monthly Service Level Credits are set forth in the tables 1A, 1B and 1C below. Table 1A titled “Project/Implementation Service Level Credits” details the monthly Service Level Credits applicable for Contractor’s failure to maintain the Project/Implementation Service Levels delineated in paragraph 4.6.1 below.

Table 1B titled “Live Production Service Level Credits” details the monthly Service Level Credits applicable for Contractor’s failure to maintain the Live Production Service levels delineated in paragraph 4.6.2 below. Table 1C titled “Critical Live Production Service Level Credits” details the monthly Service Level Credits applicable for Contractor’s failure to maintain the Critical Live Production Service Levels delineated in paragraph 4.6.3 below.

Each Service Level will be measured using a “Green-Yellow-Red” traffic light mechanism (the “Individual SL GYR State”), with “Green” representing an acceptable level of performance, “Yellow” representing an unacceptable level of performance for which a Service Level Credit is due to the State and “Red” representing a lower level of performance for which an enhanced Service Level Credit is due to the State.

All amounts contained in a row pertaining to the “Yellow” or “Red” Individual SL GYR State represent Service Level Credit amounts. The amount of the Service Level Credit for each Service Level will be based on the Individual SL GYR State. The Service Level Credit for each Service Level shall be determined by multiplying the appropriate percentage factor from the tables below by the monthly charge paid or payable pursuant to the Agreement for the Services provided during that month (“Monthly Charge” or “MC”). If there is no MC paid for the period being measured, then the MC equivalent value will be the annual cost divided by 12. To address the appropriate MC for each type of Service Level, invoices must be submitted separately for Implementation/Project Services and Live Production Services. By way of example, if two Live Production Service Levels subject to the Service Level

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 4 of 24

Credits in Table 1B were missed and one had a Yellow Individual SL GYR State and another had a Red Individual SL GYR State and the Monthly Charge for Live Production Services for that month was $100,000.00, a Service Level Credit of $4,500.00 would be due [i.e. (3% x 100,000) plus (1.5% x 100,000)].

In addition to the above, the amounts of the Service Level Credits will increase, as reflected in the column titled “Consecutive Occurrence Service Level Credit” in all three tables, when the Individual SL GYR State for a particular Service Level is red or yellow for two consecutive months, such increase to begin on the second consecutive month and shall continue each consecutive month thereafter until a green Individual SL GYR State is reached for that specific Service Level or the Agreement is terminated for Default. For example purposes only, if during live production processing a particular Live Production Service Level subject to the Service Level Credits in Table 1B was red in month one, yellow in month two, red again in month 3, and green in month four, a 3% Service Level Credit would be due in month one for that specific Service Level, a 2.5% Service Level Credit would be due in month 2, a 5% Service Level Credit would be due in month 3 and no Service Level Credit for that Service Level would be due in month 4.

Table 1A – Project/Implementation Service Level Credits

Table 1B – Live Production Service Level Credits

Table 1C – Critical Live Production Service Level Credits

Individual SL GYR State Initial Occurrence Service Level Credit

Consecutive Occurrence Service Level Credit

Red 1.5% of the Monthly Charge 2.5% of the Monthly Charge

Yellow 0.75% of the Monthly Charge 1.25% of the Monthly Charge

Green None None

Individual SL GYR State Initial Occurrence Service Level Credit

Consecutive Occurrence Service Level Credit

Red 3% of the Monthly Charge 5% of the Monthly Charge

Yellow 1.5% of the Monthly Charge 2.5% of the Monthly Charge

Green None None

Individual SL GYR State Initial Occurrence

Service Level Credit Consecutive Occurrence

Service Level Credit

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 5 of 24

The parties agree that in each month of the Agreement, a maximum of 15% of the MC for that month will be at risk as Service Level Credits.

Once the specific cause of a Service Level issue has been identified and the parties have mutually agreed to address it in a specific Release, Schedule, Roadmap or other process, then the State may, in its sole and absolute discretion, consider allowing the Contractor to remove the Service Level issue resulting from that particular cause from the determination of the Individual SL GYR State provided, and for so long as, the State is and remains satisfied with the Contractor’s progress in timely rectifying such issue and no other issues arise causing the same Service Level to enter a yellow or red Individual SL GYR State.

4.2 Overall Service Level Score and Express Termination Rights In addition to the individual Service Levels and associated Service Level Credits as provided above, on a monthly basis, an overall Service Level score (the “Overall SL Score”) will be determined, by assigning points to each Service Level based on its Individual SL GYR State. The table set forth below sets forth the Performance Multiple for computing the Overall SL Score:

Table 2 – SLAs GYR State

The Overall SL Score is calculated by multiplying both the number of Service Levels in a Red Individual SL GYR State by a Performance Multiple of 4 and the number of Service Levels in a Yellow Individual SL GYR State by a Performance Multiple of 2 and adding the resulting products. For example, if two Service Levels are in a Red Individual SL GYR State, one Service Level is in a Yellow Individual SL GYR State and all other Service Levels are in a Green Individual SL GYR State, the Overall SL Score would be 10 (i.e. [4 x 2 Red Individual SL GYR States] plus [2 x 1 Yellow Individual SL GYR State]).

Based on the Overall SL Score equaling or exceeding a threshold of twelve (12) (e.g. 3 Red Individual SL GYR States or any other combination such as 2 Red Individual SL GYR States and two Yellow Individual SL GYR States), then

Red 6% of the Monthly Charge 10% of the Monthly Charge

Yellow 3% of the Monthly Charge 5% of the Monthly Charge

Green None None

Individual SLs GYR State Performance

Multiple

Green 0

Yellow 2

Red 4

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 6 of 24 the State may initiate the mandatory escalation procedures outlined in section 4.5 below to quickly restore acceptable Service Levels. The initiation of escalation procedures along with the Service Level Credits will not constitute the State’s exclusive remedy for issues related to the Contractor’s performance and the State retains the right to terminate the Agreement for Default as set forth in the Agreement and/or to seek other remedies related to Contractor’s performance under the terms of the Agreement. In addition to the above, and notwithstanding anything else to the contrary in the Agreement, Contractor acknowledges and agrees that if:

i) The Overall SL score reaches a threshold of:

(1) Twelve or more each month during a period of 3 consecutive months,

(2) Twelve or more for a total of 4 months over any rolling 12-month period; or

(3) Twenty 20 for any one month; or

ii) The Service Availability – Solution Component/Application Availability Service Level in subsection 4.6.3(1) below for live production processing equals or is below 95% for any 4 months during a rolling 12-month period;

then in any of the foregoing cases, the State may, at any time and without permitting any further cure period and with as little as two (2) business days written notice, terminate the Agreement, in whole or in part, for Default.

As with all terminations by the State for Contractor’s Default, such termination shall be without further obligation for the State to pay any remaining amounts due or to become due under the Agreement and without any penalty, except the State will only be required to reimburse Contractor for its actual, verified expenses (i.e., excluding profit) incurred in providing the Disengagement Support in accordance with the Agreement. In addition, Contractor shall immediately reimburse the State for any pre-paid fees under the Agreement and any outstanding Service Level Credits.

4.3 Contractor Service Levels Management

The Contractor must implement and utilize measurement and monitoring tools and metrics as well as standard reporting procedures to measure, monitor and report the Contractor's performance of the Services at a level of detail sufficient for the State to verify compliance with the applicable Service Levels and the Overall SL Score – all of which are subject to the State’s prior approval. The Contractor must provide the State with access at all times to the Contractor’s on-line databases containing up-to-date information regarding the status of service problems, service requests and user inquiries. The Contractor also will provide to the State’s satisfaction information and full access to the measurement and monitoring tools, reports and procedures utilized by the Contractor upon the State’s request. The State will not be required to pay for such measurement and monitoring tools, or the resource utilization associated with their use. Within one month after Contract Award, the Contractor must provide to the State proposed Service Level report formats, for State approval. In addition, the State may identify a number of additional Service Level reports to be generated by the Contractor and delivered to the State on an ad hoc or periodic basis. Generally, the Contractor tools must provide a number of standard reports and the capability to provide real-time ad hoc queries by the State. A number of additional or other periodic reports (i.e., those other than the standard ones included in the tools) mean a number that can be provided incidentally without major commitment of resources or disruption of the efficient performance of the services. Such additional reports will be electronically generated by the Contractor, provided as part of the Services and at no additional charge to the State. To the extent possible, all reports will be provided to the State on-line in web-enabled format and the information contained therein will be capable of being displayed graphically.

4.4 Monthly Service Level Report

In addition to the above, and on a monthly basis, the Contractor will provide a written report (the “Monthly Service Level Report”) to the State which includes the following information: (i) the Contractor’s quantitative performance for each Service Level; (ii) each Individual SL GYR State; (iii) the Overall SL Score; (iv) the amount of any monthly Service Level Credits due for each Service Level for that month; (v) the contract cumulative total amount of Service

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 7 of 24

Level Credits (i.e. the total amount of Service Level Credits from the contract’s effective date through the end of the then current monthly reporting period) that have been paid and any outstanding credit balance owed for each Service Level and the contract cumulative total amount of Service Level Credits for all Service Levels that have been paid and any outstanding credit balance owed for all Service Levels; (vi) a “Root-Cause Analysis” and corrective action plan with respect to any Service Levels where the Individual SL GYR State was not “Green” during the preceding month which analysis and plans must be agreed to and approved by the State; and (vii) trend or statistical analysis with respect to each Service Level as requested by the State. The Monthly Service Level Report must always include the values listed for the current month and prior 12 months and it will be due no later than the tenth (10th) calendar day of the following month.

Failure of the Contractor to timely report performance for any Service Level or not providing root cause analysis information for any Service Level with a non-Green Individual SL GYR State will result in the Overall SL Score automatically being designated as twenty (20) for that reporting period.

4.5 Escalation for Repetitive Service Level Failures

The State may escalate a repetitive service level failure to the Contractor’s executive sponsor, the Contractor’s Managing Director / Lead Public Sector Partner for Public Sector, or the equivalent position (“Escalation Executive”) by submitting same in accordance with the Notice provision in the Agreement. Within ten (10) business days of the State’s escalation Contractor shall: (a) complete a root cause analysis of the reasons(s) for the repeated service level failure, (b) prepare and submit to the State, for the State’s review and approval, a written a corrective action plan that identifies the cause(s) of the repetitive service level failure and describes in detail the Contractor’s plans to correct and prevent such service level failure from reoccurring in the immediately succeeding monthly service level measurement period; and (c) if requested by the State, make available the Escalation Executive selected by the State to meet with the State, either online, in person at the State’s offices or another location, as designated by the State, to review and discuss the corrective action plan, the State’s questions and objections. All such activities in this paragraph shall be at no cost to the State.

4.6 Service Levels Requirements: Project Implementation & Services The Contractor must meet the Service Level requirements for each Service Level set forth in the sections below.

4.6.1 Project/Implementation Service Levels

The following Service Levels will be effective during the Project implementation (and any other subsequent projects) and are detailed in the tables below:

1. Deliverable and Work Product Submission Acceptance

2. UAT Severity 1 Issues Resolution – Mean Time to Repair

3. UAT Severity 2 Issues Resolution – Mean Time to Repair

4. UAT Severity 3 Issues Resolution – Mean Time to Repair

5. UAT Environment Availability

6. UAT Readiness

7. UAT Issue Resolution Quality - Recidivism Rate

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 8 of 24

Project Implementation Service Level Agreement: Deliverable and Work Product Submission Acceptance

Acceptance of Contractor deliverables and work products based on the timeliness and quality of submissions.

The Contractor must provide “deliverables” and “work products” (as defined in F.3) to the State in keeping with agreed levels of completeness, content quality, content topic coverage, delivery schedule, and otherwise achieve the agreed purpose of the deliverable between the State and the Contractor. The basis for rejection of a deliverable or work product will be that it is late or of poor quality. The deliverables and work products contained in this RFP and general on-going contracted services will represent the minimum set of expected deliverables and work products.

Notwithstanding the State review and approval cycles, this SL will commence upon contract initiation and will prevail until contract completion.

Measurement Period

Data Source Collection Frequency

SL Formula SL Measure GYR State

Monthly, During Contract

Weekly Project Status Report

Weekly

% Submission Acceptance (Expressed as %) =

Total Submissions that are both Accepted and On-Time (Deliverables + Work Products) divided by

Total Submissions (Deliverables + Work Products)

85%

80% and

85%

80%

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 9 of 24

Project Implementation Service Level Agreement: UAT Severity 1 Issues Resolution – Mean Time to Repair Prompt resolution of eProcurement Solution issues identified as part of Contractor System/Unit Testing and/or User Acceptance Testing (UAT).

This Service Level begins upon first migration of Solution functionality into the User Acceptance environment.

The State shall, in consultation with the Contractor, determine the Severity of each issue identified during UAT. Formal declaration of the Severity of each UAT issue to the Contractor will be made by the State.

Prioritization: An Issue shall be categorized as "Severity 1" if the issue will prevent the State from authorizing Production migration of the associated functionality or module.

Typical characteristics of Severity 1 issues are situations that would prohibit the execution of productive work for a group(s) or individual performing a critical business function. Examples include, but are not limited to:

- Procurement transactions cannot be completed.

- Procurement transactions can be completed but have incomplete and/or inaccurate data/information.

- Procurement transactions would be transmitted to a Supplier with inaccurate or incomplete data/information.

- Suppliers are unable to securely interact with the Solution (e.g. Registration, On-line Bid/RFP Response submission)

- Processes would produce an inaccurate or incomplete public procurement record

Measurement: Issue "Time to Repair" will be measured from the time the State reports the issue as Severity 1 to the point in time the Contractor provides either a resolution or workaround to the State for verification and acceptance. In the case where the resolution or workaround is determined by the State to be unacceptable the tracking of the "Time to Repair" will recommence at the time the State reports the unacceptability.

In the case of a workaround, the State may accept the workaround as a short-term solution, allowing the functionality to move to Production, but still need the issue resolved at a lower Severity. In these circumstances, the State will consider the associated Severity 1 issue resolved and the Contractor will establish a new issue at the State determined Severity for management and tracking.

The "Mean Time to Repair" for the reporting month will be measured by assessing the elapsed time in business days (expressed as a decimal number, to two positions after the decimal point, that reflects the hours and minutes) of all resolved Severity 1 UAT issues to determine the statistical mean.

Measurement Period

Data Source Collection Frequency

SL Formula SL Measure GYR State

Reporting Month

Monthly Service Report

Per Issue

Mean Time to Repair (Severity 1 Issues) =

(Total elapsed business days for all resolved Severity 1 Issues) divided by

(Total number of all resolved Severity 1 Issues)

<= 5 days

> 5 days and

<= 7 days

> 7 days

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 10 of 24

Project Implementation Service Level Agreement: UAT Severity 2 Issues Resolution – Mean Time to Repair Prompt resolution of eProcurement Solution issues identified as part of Contractor System/Unit Testing and/or User Acceptance Testing (UAT).

This Service Level begins upon first migration of Solution functionality into the User Acceptance environment.

The State shall, in consultation with the Contractor, determine the Severity of each issue identified during UAT. Formal declaration of the Severity of each UAT issue to the Contractor will be made by the State.

Prioritization: An issue shall be categorized as "Severity 2" if the issue will prevent the State from authorizing Production access to the associated functionality via a limited deployment and not on an enterprise level (e.g. a dark launch restricted to a subset of users prior to full release).

Typical characteristics of Severity 2 issues are situations that require restricted functionality access in a tightly controlled user environment to limit the risk of prohibited execution of productive work for a group(s) or individual performing a critical business function. Examples include, but are not limited to:

- Basic procurement transactions can be completed, but extended use of the functionality has high likelihood of encountering problems completing transactions or may cause data/information inaccuracies.

- Complicated workarounds are required to use the functionality, increasing the likelihood of user error and/or confusion.

- Entity specific configuration cannot be sufficiently completed to permit deployment.

- Supplier access to Solicitations restricts ability to submit questions.

- Extended use of the functionality has high likelihood of causing non-compliance with Procurement policy.

Measurement: Issue "Time to Repair" will be measured from the time the State reports the issue as Severity 2 to the point in time the Contractor provides either a resolution or workaround to the State for verification and acceptance. In the case where the resolution or workaround is determined by the State to be unacceptable the tracking of the "Time to Repair" will recommence at the time the State reports the unacceptability.

In the case of a workaround, the State may accept the workaround as a short-term solution, allowing the functionality to move to Production, but still need the issue resolved at a lower Severity. In these circumstances, the State will consider the associated Severity 2 issue resolved and the Contractor will establish a new issue at the State determined Severity for management and tracking.

The "Mean Time to Repair" for the reporting month will be measured by assessing the elapsed time in business days (expressed as a decimal number, to two positions after the decimal point, that reflects the hours and minutes) of all resolved Severity 2 UAT issues to determine the statistical mean.

Measurement Period

Data Source

Collection Frequency

SL Formula SL Measure GYR State

Reporting Month Monthly Service Report

Per Issue

Mean Time to Repair (Severity 2 Issues) =

(Total elapsed business days for all resolved Severity 2 Issues) divided by

(Total number of all resolved Severity 2 Issues)

<= 10 days

> 10 days and

<= 15

> 15 days

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 11 of 24

Project Implementation Service Level Agreement: UAT Severity 3 Issues Resolution – Mean Time to Repair Prompt resolution of eProcurement Solution issues identified as part of Contractor System/Unit Testing and/or User Acceptance Testing (UAT).

This Service Level begins upon first migration of Solution functionality into the User Acceptance environment.

The State shall, in consultation with the Contractor, determine the Severity of each issue identified during UAT. Formal declaration of the Severity of each UAT issue to the Contractor will be made by the State.

Prioritization: An Issue shall be categorized as "Severity 3" if the issue will result in the State limiting Entity and/or Supplier use of or access to components/features of the associated functionality.

Typical characteristics of Severity 3 issues are situations that would have adverse effect on the rollout, adoption and training of the functionality. Examples include, but are not limited to:

- Procurement transactions can be completed but access to the component/feature will cause transaction errors.

- Processing transactions produces system on-screen messages that are inaccurate or are not understandable.

- Workarounds are not available to permit use a specific component/feature of the functionality.

- Workarounds are sufficiently complicated that functionality component/feature access has to be limited Entity procurement staff.

- Supplier use will result in significant number of support calls.

Measurement: Issue "Time to Repair" will be measured from the time the State reports the issue as Severity 3 to the point in time the Contractor provides either a resolution or workaround to the State for verification and acceptance. In the case where the resolution or workaround is determined by the State to be unacceptable the tracking of the "Time to Repair" will recommence at the time the State reports the unacceptability.

In the case of a workaround, the State may accept the workaround as a short-term solution, allowing the functionality to move to Production, but still need the issue resolved at a lower Severity. In these circumstances, the State will consider the associated Severity 3 issue resolved and the Contractor will establish a new issue at the State determined Severity for management and tracking.

The "Mean Time to Repair" for the reporting month will be measured by assessing the elapsed time in business days (expressed as a decimal number, to two positions after the decimal point, that reflects the hours and minutes) of all resolved Severity 3 UAT issues to determine the statistical mean.

Measurement Period

Data Source

Collection Frequency SL Formula SL Measure GYR State

Reporting Month

Monthly Service Report

Per Issue

Mean Time to Repair (Severity 3 Issues) =

(Total elapsed business days for all resolved Severity 3 Issues) divided by

(Total number of all resolved Severity 3 Issues)

<= 20 days

> 20 days and

<= 40 days

> 40

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 12 of 24

Project Implementation Service Level Agreement: UAT Environment Availability eProcurement Solution UAT Environment is available to State users for scheduled UAT activities.

UAT Environment availability means access to the UAT functionality being tested is enabled; log-in is permitted from the local user LAN and test scripts can be executed. While access is dependent on State provided infrastructure, the Contractor will implement State approved operational processes, instrumentation, monitoring and controls that validate availability of eProcurement Solution to State testers.

Measurement: This Service Level will be calculated for those Service Elements that are directly in the Contractor’s scope and will be measured from the end-user community desktop to the ability to process transactions to the eProcurement Solution database. If, as a result of the root cause analysis performed by the Contractor, the parties mutually agree the cause of the Service Level being in a yellow or red Individual GYR State was primarily due to an “unavailable” condition due to the State provided Infrastructure, the Contractor shall be excused from those outages that arise from such a condition, unless the outage is a direct result of a Contractor created situation.

Measurement Period

Data Source Collection Frequency

SL Formula SL Measure GYR State

Reporting Month Monthly

Service Report Continuous, 24 hours a day

UAT Environment Availability (Expressed as

(Total Environment Scheduled Uptime – Total Environment

Unscheduled Outages) divided by

(Total Environment Scheduled Uptime)

>= 99.5%

< 99.5% and

> 95.0%

<= 95.0%

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 13 of 24

Project Implementation Service Level Agreement: UAT Readiness eProcurement Solution User Acceptance Test preparations are complete for scheduled UAT activities.

UAT Readiness means that Test Scripts are provided to the State on time, and that the functionality to be tested is migrated to the UAT environment on time, as set forth in the Implementation Plan.

Measurement: Monitoring compliance will be determined by tracking the following key performance indicators (KPIs):

- Submission of Test Scripts: the number of business days prior to the scheduled migration date of the associated UAT release that test scripts are submitted to the State. The baseline is 10 business days.

- On-time Migration of UAT functionality: the number of business days after the scheduled UAT release migration date that the release is actually migrated.

Measurement Period Data Source Collection

Frequency SL Formula SL Measure GYR State

Reporting Month Monthly

Service Report

Each UAT release migration

UAT Readiness (Expressed in Business

Days) = the greater value of the following two calculations:

10 - (UAT Release Scheduled Date - Test

Script Submission Date)

OR

(Actual UAT Release Migration Date -

Scheduled UAT Release Migration Date)

<= 3 day > 3 day and <= 5 days

> 5 days

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 14 of 24

Project Implementation Service Levels: UAT Issue Resolution Quality - Recidivism Rate

Resolved Severity 1, 2 and 3 UAT issues affecting the eProcurement Solution do not reoccur or cause other issues as a result of the resolution to the root cause of the Issue.

Monitoring compliance will be determined by tracking the following key performance indicator (KPI):

- Issue Recidivism tracking: the number of closed Severity 1, 2 or 3 issues that reoccur and the number of new issues caused by resolution of a Severity 1, 2 and 3 issue.

Measurement: Recidivism Rate will assess the number of recidivism occurrences in a month to the number of corresponding Severity 1, 2 and 3 issues in the same month.

Measurement Period Data Source Collection

Frequency SL Formula SL Measure GYR State

Calendar Quarter

Issue Management

System Report Per Issue

Recidivism Rate (Expressed as %) =

Total Number of Recidivism Occurrences divided by

Total number of Resolved Severity 1, 2 and 3 Issues

<= 1% > 1% and

<= 3% >3%

4.6.2 Live Production Service Levels

The following Service Levels will be effective at the initial deployment of functionality when used in live production processing by the State and are detailed in the tables below:

1. Issue Resolution – Mean Time to Repair (Severity 1 Issues)

2. Issue Resolution – Mean Time to Repair (Severity 2 Issues)

3. Issue Resolution – Mean Time to Repair (Severity 3 Issues)

4. Issue Resolution Quality - Recidivism Rate

5. Service Request Responsiveness

6. Catalog Onboarding/Maintenance Services

7. Services for External Sources (e.g. Punchouts)

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 15 of 24

Live Production Service Levels: Issue Resolution – Mean Time to Repair (Severity 1 Issues)

Prompt resolution of eProcurement Solution Severity 1 issues that impact State processing and processes.

This Service Level begins upon completion of agreed production acceptance criteria and a measurement period as documented in the Implementation Plan.

The State shall, in consultation with the Contractor, determine the Severity of each issue. Formal declaration of the Severity of each issue to the Contractor will be made by the State.

Prioritization: An Issue shall be categorized as a “Severity 1 Issue” if the issue is characterized by the following attributes.

The Issue:

- renders a business critical System, Service, Software, Equipment or network component un-Available, substantially un-Available or seriously impacts normal business operations, in each case prohibiting the execution of productive work, or

- affects either a group or groups of people, or a single individual performing a critical business function, or

- causes violation of Procurement policy, regulation or law thereby placing the procurement action at risk of audit and/or legal action.

Measurement: Issue "Time to Repair" will be measured from the time the State reports the issue as Severity 1 to the point in time the Contractor provides either a resolution or workaround to the State for verification and acceptance. In the case where the resolution or workaround is determined by the State to be unacceptable the tracking of the "Time to Repair" will recommence at the time the State reports the unacceptability.

In the case of a workaround, the State may accept the workaround as a short-term solution, allowing the resolution to move to Production, but still need the issue resolved at a lower Severity. In these circumstances, the State will consider the associated Severity 1 issue resolved and the Contractor will establish a new issue at the State determined Severity for management and tracking.

The "Mean Time to Repair" for the reporting month will be measured by assessing the elapsed time, including nights and weekends, etc. (expressed as a decimal number, to two positions after the decimal point, that reflects the total number of hours and minutes) of all resolved Severity 1 issues to determine the statistical mean.

Measurement Period Data Source Collection

Frequency SL Formula SL Measure GYR State

Reporting Month

Monthly Service Report

Per Issue

Mean Time to Repair (Severity 1 Issues) (Expressed in hours) =

(Total elapsed time for all resolved Severity 1 Issues) divided by

(Total number of all resolved Severity 1 Issues)

<= 24 hours

> 24 hours and <= 48 hours

> 48 hours

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 16 of 24

Live Production Service Levels: Issue Resolution – Mean Time to Repair (Severity 2 Issues)

Prompt resolution of eProcurement Solution Severity 2 issues that impact State processing and processes.

This Service Level begins upon completion of agreed production acceptance criteria and a measurement period as documented in the Implementation Plan.

The State shall, in consultation with the Contractor, determine the Severity of each issue. Formal declaration of the Severity of each issue to the Contractor will be made by the State.

Prioritization: An Issue shall be categorized as a “Severity 2 Issue” if the issue is characterized by the following attributes.

The Issue:

- does not render a business critical System, Service, Software, Equipment or network component un-Available, substantially un- Available but a function or functions are not Available, substantially un-Available or functioning as it/they should, and

- affects either a group or groups of people, or a single individual performing a critical business function.

Measurement: In the case of a workaround, the State may accept the workaround as a short-term solution, allowing the resolution to move to Production, but still need the issue resolved at a lower Severity. In these circumstances, the State will consider the associated Severity 2 issue resolved and the Contractor will establish a new issue at the State determined Severity for management and tracking.

In the case of a workaround, the State may accept the workaround as a short-term solution, allowing the resolution to move to Production, but still need the issue resolved at a lower Severity. In these circumstances, the State will consider the associated Severity issue resolved and the Contractor will establish a new issue at the State determined Severity for management and tracking.

The "Mean Time to Repair" for the reporting month will be measured by assessing the elapsed time, including nights and weekends, etc. (expressed as a decimal number, to two positions after the decimal point, that reflects the total number of hours and minutes) of all resolved Severity 2 issues to determine the statistical mean.

Measurement Period

Data Source

Collection Frequency

SL Formula SL Measure GYR State

Reporting Month

Monthly Service Report

Per Issue

Mean Time to Repair (Severity 2 Issues) (Expressed in hours) =

(Total elapsed time for all resolved Severity 2 Issues) divided by

(Total number of all resolved Severity 2 Issues)

<= 48 hours

> 48 hours and

<= 72 hours

> 72 hours

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 17 of 24

Live Production Service Levels: Issue Resolution – Mean Time to Repair (Severity 3 Issues) Prompt resolution of eProcurement Solution Severity 3 issues that impact State processing and processes.

This Service Level begins upon completion of agreed production acceptance criteria and a measurement period as documented in the Implementation Plan.

The State shall, in consultation with the Contractor, determine the Severity of each issue. Formal declaration of the Severity of each issue to the Contractor will be made by the State.

Prioritization: An Issue shall be categorized as a “Severity 3 Issue” if the issue is characterized by the following attributes.

The Issue:

- causes a group of people or single individual to be unable to access or use a System, Service, Software, Equipment or network component or a key feature thereof, and

- a reasonable workaround is not available, but

- does not prohibit the execution of productive work.

Measurement: Issue "Time to Repair" will be measured from the time the State reports the issue as Severity 3 to the point in time the Contractor provides either a resolution or workaround to the State for verification and acceptance. In the case where the resolution or workaround is determined by the State to be unacceptable the tracking of the "Time to Repair" will recommence at the time the State reports the unacceptability.

In the case of a workaround, the State may accept the workaround as a short-term solution, allowing the resolution to move to Production, but still need the issue resolved at a lower Severity. In these circumstances, the State will consider the associated Severity 3 issue resolved and the Contractor will establish a new issue at the State determined Severity for management and tracking.

The "Mean Time to Repair" for the reporting month will be measured by assessing the elapsed time in business days (expressed as a decimal number, to two positions after the decimal point, that reflects the hours and minutes) of all resolved Severity 3 issues to determine the statistical mean.

Measurement Period

Data Source

Collection Frequency SL Formula SL Measure GYR State

Reporting Month

Monthly Service Report

Per Issue

Mean Time to Repair (Severity 3 Issues) (Expressed in business days) =

(Total elapsed time for all resolved Severity 3 Issues) divided by

(Total number of all resolved Severity 3 Issues)

<= 5 days

> 5 days and

<=10 days

> 10

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 18 of 24

Live Production Service Levels: Issue Resolution Quality - Recidivism Rate Resolved Severity 1, 2 and 3 Production issues affecting the eProcurement Solution do not reoccur or cause other issues as a result of the resolution to the root cause of the Issue.

Monitoring compliance will be determined by tracking the following key performance indicator (KPI):

- Issue Recidivism tracking: the number of closed Severity 1, 2 or 3 issues that reoccur and the number of new issues caused by resolution of a Severity 1, 2 or 3 issue.

Measurement: Recidivism Rate will assess the number of recidivism occurrences in a month to the number of corresponding Severity 1, 2 and 3 issues in the same month.

Measurement Period

Data Source

Collection Frequency SL Formula SL Measure GYR State

Calendar Quarter

Issue Manageme nt System

Report

Per Issue

Recidivism Rate (Expressed as %) =

Total Number of Recidivism Occurrences divided by

Total number of Resolved Severity 1, 2 and 3 Issues

<= 0.5%

0.5 and 1.0

1.0

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 19 of 24

Live Production Service Levels: Service Request Responsiveness Prompt response to Service Requests for adds, modifications and deletions within specified timeframe according to urgency or critical nature of the request.

This Service Level begins upon completion of agreed production acceptance criteria and a measurement period as documented in the Implementation Plan.

Formal submission of Service Requests and designation of Priority will be made by the State Project Manager or designee.

Priority 1: Adds, modifications or deletions that are critical to the operation and decision-making elements of the solution Priority 2: Adds, modifications or deletions that are semi-critical to the operation and decision-making elements of the solution Priority 3: Adds, modifications or deletions that are not critical to the operation of the solution to the operation and decision-making elements of the solution

Measurement: Service Request Elapsed Time will be will be measured from the time the State submits a Service Request to the point in time the Contractor demonstrates completion of the request. This elapsed time will be expressed in business days as a decimal number, to two positions after the decimal point that reflects the hours and minutes expended to meet the request. The worst case performance shall be used to determine the Individual SL GYR State for this Service Level.

Measurement Period

Data Source

Collection Frequency SL Formula SL Measure GYR State

Daily, Accounting

Month

Monthly Service Report

Per Issue

Mean Time to Complete Response (Expressed in business days) =

(Total elapsed time for all completed Priority X requests) divided by

(Total Number of completed Priority X Requests)

Priority 1:

<= 2

Priority

2:

<= 4

3:

<= 6 days

Priority 1:

>2 days and <= 3 days

>4 days and <= 6 days

>6 days and <= 8 days

Priority 1:

> 3

> 6

> 8

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 20 of 24

Live Production Service Levels: Catalog Onboarding/Maintenance Services Prompt onboarding and maintenance of Supplier provided catalog content that will be hosted in the Solution Open Marketplace environment for State review/approval.

This Service Level begins upon completion of agreed production acceptance criteria and a measurement period as documented in the Implementation Plan.

Submission of catalog content will be the responsibility of the Supplier. Supplier catalog onboarding to the Marketplace shall be complete, accurate and timely to ensure optimal access to the Supplier and its products and/or services.

This Service Level applies to initial and all subsequent catalog submissions for both contract and non-contract products/services accessible through the Marketplace.

The Catalog Onboarding Services measure is determined by monitoring compliance with the following key performance indicators (KPIs):

1. Catalog Content Validation for compliance to Solution format and data standards.

2. Catalog Content Loading into the Solution Open Marketplace and made available to the State for review/approval.

Measurement: Catalog Content Validation will be measured from the time a Supplier submits a catalog to the Contractor until a validation reports is provided to the Supplier. The time will be expressed in business days in decimal number format, to two decimal positions.

"Mean Time for Catalog Onboarding Services" will be measured as the statistical mean of the combined Catalog Content Validation and Catalog Content Loading times.

Measurement Period

Data Source

Collection Frequency

SL Formula SL Measure GYR State

Reporting Month

Monthly Service Report

Per Issue

Mean Time for Catalog Onboarding Services (Expressed in business days) =

(Total Catalog Content Validation time) divided by

(Total Number of Submitted Catalogs)

(Total Catalog Content Loading time) divided by

(Total Number of Validated Catalogs)

<= 3 days

> 3 days and

<= 5 days

> 5

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 21 of 24

Live Production Service Levels: Services for External Sources (e.g. Punchouts) Prompt onboarding of the technical setup, configuration, integration and/or connections necessary to provide marketplace access to State-approved external products/service sources. “State-approved External products/service sources” (aka External Sources) refers to suppliers that provide on-line shopping/buying websites that have been approved by the State as allowed to be integrated into the eProcurement system for user buying access.

This Service Level applies to those Third Parties that already have pre-existing technical capabilities for integration (e.g. Punchout, API, Web Services).

This Service Level begins upon completion of agreed production acceptance criteria and a measurement period as documented in the Implementation Plan.

Submission of the technical details will be the responsibility of the external source. External source onboarding to the marketplace shall be complete, accurate and timely to ensure optimal access to the associated supplier and its products and/or services.

The Punchouts sources Onboarding Services measure is determined by monitoring compliance with the following key performance indicator (KPI):

1. The External source onboarding time for Marketplace access to the External Source is in place for State verification.

Measurement: The KPI will be measured from the time the State authorizes approval to onboard an External Source until the Contractor provides access to the State for verification of the External Source. The time will be expressed in business days in decimal number format, to two decimal positions.

The Service Level measure will be the Mean Time of the KPI for the reporting period.

Measurement Period

Data Source

Collectio n

Frequenc y

SL Formula SL Measure GYR State

Reporting Month ly

Monthly Service Report

Per Issue

Mean Time for External Sources Services (Expressed in business days) =

(Total External Source Onboarding Time) divided by

(Total number of External Sources onboarded)

<= 15 days

> 15 day s and day s

> 30 day s

5400020744 – eProcurement Solution Page 22 of 24

4.6.3 Critical Live Production Service Levels

The following Service Levels will be effective at the initial deployment of functionality when used in live production processing by the State and are detailed in the tables below: