CCB LMS RFP - All Q and A vPOST 2026FEB19.pdf

Q# Date, User Subject Question Answer 1 2/2 System

Automation Corp

Cost Proposal Form

The RFP mentions an initial term that includes all stand up and implementation activities and deliverables through Go Live for the Solution plus five years of operations and maintenance (O&M), which could be interpreted as a period that is longer than 5 years (implementation followed by 5 years of O&M). However, the cost proposal form indicates 5 total years that includes both implementation and M&O. Please confirm the duration of the initial term of the contract, as well as the anticipated O&M portion of that term (e.g., 5 years minus the implementation period).

To be able to measure each vendor against each other, use 5 years total. Delineate implementation cost through GoLive, initial Operations and Maintenance and Hosting cost, and escalation of Operations and Maintenance for the years through five years.

2 2/2 System Automation Corp

Budget Can the State confirm that the $4M budget is for both implementation and O&M costs incurred over 5 years in total

Yes – total 5-year cost estimate used for the IT Investment form submitted to EIS.

3 2/2 System Automation Corp

Staff Count Please confirm that OR CCB will have a total of 60 staff users accessing and using the new system.

Also, please provide a breakdown of the total number of OR CCB employees that will be using the new solution by OR CCB program and role, as well as which ones will be performing Job-Site Checks and/or Investigations.

Sixty is the current number of staff. They are broken down as follows:

Administration 4 Dispute Resolution 8 Education 4 Enforcement 6 Licensing 21

IT 4.5

Business Services 4 Field Investigators/mediators 10

Please note, these numbers also include limited duration positions and vacant positions. Keep in mind that CCB may move positions between different areas as they make improvements or workload shifts. This is just an estimate at this point in time.

4 2/2 System Automation Corp

Section 7.1 of RFP references subcontracting with COBID certified businesses. Is there a requirement and/or percentage of the resulting contract that must be subcontracted with a COBID Certified business?

DAS SPS and Agency believe RFP Section 7.1 is self-explanatory.

5 2/2 System

Automation Corp

Is a Certified Disadvantaged Business Outreach Plan required for this project and proposal?

Refer to RFP Section 3.1.1 and RFP Attachment A-2 for the information required or requested by this RFP.

6 2/2 System Automation Corp

Is OR CCB open to a phased implementation approach? If a phased implementation approach is acceptable, what is the desired order for which OR CCB programs are to be implemented?

CCB is open to a phased approach. If a vendor is going to propose a phased approach, CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposer's process, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and resolution paths.

7 2/2 System Automation Corp

Implementation Please elaborate upon any timing considerations for when specific programs / areas / functions will need to be fully transitioned to the new solution.

CCB expects the proposer to suggest a timeline and explain the process they would take to meet the timeline.

8 2/2 System Automation Corp

Devices and Connectivity

Can bidders assume that the portable devices for OR CCB investigators and internet connectivity will be supplied by OR CCB

Yes

9 2/2 System Automation Corp

Prior Demonstrations

What presentations, software demonstrations and/or estimates / quotes have OR CCB programs received related to this project and from whom?

CCB performed its own market research that included limited software demonstrations and cost estimates from a variety of relevant vendors to develop the request for proposal.

10 2/2 System Automation Corp

Data Conversion & Migration

For data conversion requirements, please inventory all data sources (HYDRA, QUESTYS, etc.), file formats, and approximate size of the current data sets an imaging / document files to be converted and migrated into the new system.

CCB cannot provide estimates as this time, except that migration could involve up to two terabytes of data. The majority of the data is contained in HYDRA-based files, but significant quantities of data are contained in other formats such as .doc .xls .png, .pdf, Questys image files and so forth. CCB is actively following state archive guidelines to reduce the amount of data to be migrated. CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposers process, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths.

11 2/2 System Automation Corp

Training Does OR CCB desire to have the option for staff to be trained in application administration to make changes, updates, and add new capabilities to the system after go-live?

CCB wishes to have a configurable system where many updates are configured as opposed to hard coding. CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposer's process, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths.

12 2/2 System

Automation Corp

Templates Please provide an approximate number of standard email/letter templates implemented in Correspondence used by OR CCB that are to be implemented in, and automated by, the new system.

Approximately 200 with some having multiple options that can be selected. CCB anticipates some of the letters sent now could be emails. CCB expects the proposed solution to explain how the Proposers system handles emails and letters and the assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths. See the Correspondence requirements section for more requirements of CCB.

13 2/2 System Automation Corp

Application and Certification Types

How many different or distinct license application and certification types will be supported in this solution? Please provide a comprehensive list.

Please see the CCB website:

Oregon Construction Contractors Board : Welcome Page : State of Oregon

And Oregon Open Data: CCB Active Licenses | data.oregon.gov | Oregon's Open Data Portal | Oregon.gov

14 2/2 System Automation Corp

Integrations Please identify ALL other systems that the new solution will need to integrate with (e.g. payment processor, Gov Delivery, DOR, Statewide Accounting System, electronic signature solution, LMS) along with an inventory of which interfaces will need to be whether a one-way (import or export) or two-way data exchange, along with the format (e.g., REST API call or flat file exchange) of each interface?

CCB currently integrates with other state systems but we do not know how this will change in the future.

CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposer's process for integrations, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths

15 2/2 System Automation Corp

Proposal Due Date

Given the short timeframe between the questions due date and proposal due date, complexity of the RFP, extensive requirements, forms, etc. can the response due date be extended by at least 3 weeks?

Yes, the RFP has amended (vAmended 2026 FEB18).

The RFP Bid Opening (Proposal Due) date and time is now March 23, 2026 at 10:00 AM Pacific time zone

16 2/2 System Automation Corp

Pre-Proposal Conference

Which vendors attended the pre-proposal conference?

Pre-proposal conference was voluntary; no roll call or attendance was recorded.

https://www.oregon.gov/ccb/pages/default.aspx https://www.oregon.gov/ccb/pages/default.aspx https://data.oregon.gov/business/CCB-Active-Licenses/g77e-6bhs/about_data https://data.oregon.gov/business/CCB-Active-Licenses/g77e-6bhs/about_data

17 2/2 System

Automation Corp

Technical Requirements

Requirement EDPM 01 states Solution should be able to support education with a built in Learning Management System however EDPM 02 and elsewhere speaks to integrating with an LMS.

Given this, can vendors assume the requirement is NOT building an LMS within the system and the requirement will either be rewritten or removed?

Please respond with what your company has available. CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposer's process, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths

18 2/2 System Automation Corp

Technical Requirements

Please elaborate on requirement CE 08, which states Solution allows courses to be added to the online portal and contractors to take CCB classes through the online portal and applies credits to their record. Are vendors required to implement online portal with functionalities to support CCB (or other 3rd parties, such as CE Providers) to create the classes, courses, and applicable credits? If Proposers are to create classes and courses, much more information would be required about the process and volume of courses / classes to be implemented, and this effort would impact overall project timelines.

Please respond with what you currently have available in your system. CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposer's process, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths

19 2/2 System Automation Corp

Reports Can OR CCB provide an inventory of all the reports that need to be replicated within the new system?

When a vendor is selected, CCB will provide the reports currently used. CCB anticipates that many reports needed will be able to be created by users and not standard. CCB expects Proposers to explain their system’s current capabilities and explain the process, assumptions, and obstacles in creating reports.

20 2/2 System Automation Corp

Budget Page 4 of the RFP reads, The Agencys desire is to have the Solution fully implemented and in operation by June 30, 2027 (the end of the 25-27 biennium). Can the State Parties confirm whether this date is driven by funding constraints? In other words, will part or all of the funding for the implementation expire at the end of the biennium?

CCB provided an initial time estimate but can be adjusted when working with the selected vendor in contract negotiation.

21 2/2 System

Automation Corp

Security Requirements

Page 10 of the RFP reads, Successful Proposer must comply and collaborate with the agency in the completion of a System Security Plan (SSP) prior to Go-Live of the Solution. Successful Proposer must maintain compliance with Oregons Information Technology Control Standards at all times by either: a. Providing proof of current GovRAMP (f.k.a. StateRAMP) Authorized status (Ready, Provisional, or Authorized) in the form of a GovRAMP Letter or documentation of a valid GovRAMP Security Snapshot Score, OR b. For the purposes of this RFP, a narration that describes and demonstrates how the Proposer meets all the requirements of Sections 2.4.3 (a) - (d) below: Separately, Requirement ACS 11 in Attachment B-2 Requirements Fit-Gap Matrix Analysis reads, System must meet SOC-2/Fed Ramp security status. Can the State Parties confirm whether providing proof of SOC 2 Type II certification will meet the requirements of 2.4.3?

CCB expects the proposed solution to meet state security standards which are established by the State and not at the agency level.

22 2/2 System

Automation Corp

Data Conversion Page 11 of the RFP reads, 'Agency expects Contractor to create, lead, and execute Extract, Transform, and Load (ETL) processes to extract from source systems, cleanse, and stage data for the Contractor to pick up, transform and load into the new Solution.' Our standard data conversion approach varies from the approach listed on this page of the RFP. Specifically, our standard approach is to lead and support data mapping from legacy systems to our platform, provide agencies with a conversion database containing the tables, columns, and constraints in the customers data model, and support the agency as they extract data from their legacy database into the target conversion database. We believe this approach best leverages the expertise and knowledge of both our company and the agency, allowing the agency, who are the experts in their data model, to extract their data from the legacy system, while tasking our team with loading the data into our platform. We find that this approach also reduces costs and timeline by eliminating the need for our team to learn the technical nuances of each agencys legacy database. Are Proposers allowed to recommend alternate approaches to data conversion that align with the State Parties goals for the RFP, or must all Proposers agree to take on all aspects of the analysis, extraction, and transformation of data from CCBs legacy systems?

Yes – provide your approach to data conversion. CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposer's process, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths in data conversion.

23 2/2 System

Automation Corp

Technical Requirements

Page 12 of the RFP states, Successful Proposer shall document and reconcile all Agency Requirements against the Solution via the creation and configuration of a Requirements Traceability Matrix (RTM), based upon the information in Attachment B-2 Requirements Matrix Fit/Gap Analysis, to ensure successful Proposer has met Agency Accepted Requirements for the Solution. To what extent has CCB documented its current and future state processes and workflows?

For most major processes at CCB, a Use Case has been documented for current processes. These Use Cases also discuss areas where CCB has identified potential future improvements. We expect the selected vendor to review these with SME’s as the configuration process starts.

24 2/2 System Automation Corp

Technical Requirements

Page 12 of the RFP states, Successful Proposer shall document and reconcile all Agency Requirements against the Solution via the creation and configuration of a Requirements Traceability Matrix (RTM), based upon the information in Attachment B-2 Requirements Matrix Fit/Gap Analysis, to ensure successful Proposer has met Agency Accepted Requirements for the Solution. To what extent has CCB documented its current and future state processes and workflows?

For most major processes at CCB, a Use Case has been documented. We expect the selected vendor to review these with SME’s as the configuration process starts. See answer to question 23 above.

25 2/2 System Automation Corp

Technical Requirements

If CCB has documented its current and future state processes and workflows, will these documents be made accessible to the successful Proposer upon award?

When a vendor is selected and a contract signed and executed, CCB will provide current process documents.

26 2/2 System

Automation Corp

Sample Test Plan Page 13 of the RFP states, Proposal shall provide a Sample Test Plan the Successful Proposer will use to document testing services. The Sample Test Plan must contain a detailed description of Proposers testing plan to include internal testing, be it unit, performance, system integration, security, penetration, or other types of testing mutually agreed upon and by whom. The scope of testing must cover testing of all configured functionality to meet Solution Requirements.

Additionally, successful Proposer shall include test cases in collaboration with the agency. The Sample Test Plan must also contain all test cases that are planned for execution by Proposer and any that Proposer would recommend for the State to run during User Acceptance Testing (UAT). Can the State Parties clarify the scope of the content requested in the Sample Test Plan? Is what is requested truly a Sample, or (per the quoted RFP text above), do the State Parties expect the submitted proposal to effectively contain a completed test plan for the project with all test cases that are planned for execution by Proposer and any that Proposer would recommend for the State to run during User Acceptance Testing (UAT)?

Vendor should provide a sample of what types of tests will be done in the test plan and how they will be done and documented and who they expect to do the testing (vendor/state). CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposer's process, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths.

27 2/2 System Automation Corp

Proposal Format Section 3.2.3 of the RFP on page 18 discourages embedding or linking within the proposal. Is it permissible to include links to other sections within the same response document (for example, to a requirement already addressed in another section) to reduce repetition in the response?

The intent of RFP Section 3.2.3 is improve evaluation efficiency by discouraging methods that tend to hinder finding information. Proposers are responsible for the arrangement and content of their Proposal.

28 2/2 System

Automation Corp

Price Proposal Worksheet

Page 51 reads, This section offers a framework for Proposers to propose an estimate of price and costs associated with their Solution, detailing their assumptions, conditions, and other information that could be considered relevant to understanding the calculation and factors that affect their proposed price. The table in the Price Proposal Worksheet on Page 52 contains several Cost Item categories within which pricing can be provided. Is it correct to assume that this means that Offerors can alter the list of Cost Items as required to properly present pricing (e.g., removing Wearable Device Costs and adding other line items as needed)?

Attachment C is a template for organizing the pricing so that evaluators can more efficiently understand and compare price quotes for proposed Solution.

Refer to the italicized instructions on the cover page.

Wearable Device Costs and other line items merely illustrate example methods for including costs called for by the Solution that may not neatly fit elsewhere in the template and not intended to elicit information irrelevant to the Solution being proposed.

29 2/2 System Automation Corp

Business Process Reengineering

The Business Case (Page 70 of the RFP) reads, "CCB anticipates that the implementation of a modern system will bring multiple opportunities for business process reengineering." Can the State Parties confirm whether business process reengineering is in scope of the project? If so, whoCCB or the contractoris expected to perform business process reengineering?

Some business process re-engineering is inherent with a new system. CCB has no interest in replicating the current system. CCB SMEs will work with the vendor as the system is configured and implemented to understand what new processes are being proposed. CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposer's process, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths.

30 2/2 System Automation Corp

Document Migration

The Business Case (Page 70 of the RFP) reads, At implementation of the system, CCB anticipates migrating data from the current license data base (HYDRA) but not migrating all images from the current imaging system (QUESTYS). CCB uses a home-grown letter writing software that may need to be re-engineered if the modernized system obtained does not provide the functionality for creating letters out of the data base. If the selected system can successfully generate correspondence, is CCB open to migrating images from the current imaging system? Or is the decision to migrate documents from QUESTYS not dependent on this capability?

QUESYS is entirely an imaging system. It has nothing to do with letter writing in Correspondence. See the Requirements Section titled Correspondence for the requirements for letters.

31 2/2 System

Automation Corp

Legacy Document Migration

Can CCB confirm whether the intention is to migrate legacy documents into the new system?

Refer to Question 10.

32 2/2 System Automation Corp

Integrations/Func tionalities

Page 72 of the RFP lists the main stakeholders for CCB's licensing and compliance system. Can the State Parties discuss the roles of Other agencies such as Building Codes Division, Workers Compensation, Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of Revenue (DOR), Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) in terms of in-scope integrations or functionality required to support the needs of each of these agencies?

CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposer's process for working with other agencies for integrations, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths.

33 2/2 System Automation Corp

Data Conversion & Migration

Page 75 of the RFP lists assumptions and constraints for the project. One of the assumptions is: Historic data will be able to be converted to a new system. Underneath these are two corollary assumptions: CCB may decide to convert only active licenses, and CCB will most likely not migrate imaged data. Can the State Parties confirm whether CCB has made firm decisions regarding either of these assumptions?

No decisions have been made. CCB anticipates that the vendor will assist in making the decisions. CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposer's processes and assistance with decisions such as these, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths.

34 2/2 System Automation Corp

Project Schedule Page 76 of the RFP lists the following project constraint: Schedule. Especially for parties that are external to CCB. Can the State Parties elaborate on the nature of the schedule constraint related to parties external to CCB?

Not at this time. Until a vendor has been selected and an implementation schedule created, CCB cannot elaborate.

35 2/2 System

Automation Corp

System Uptime/Availabili ty

There are multiple statements about system uptime/availability requirements in Attachment F Sample Contract and Attachment B-2 Requirements Fit-Gap Matrix Analysis: a. Section

4.3.1 (Solution Service Level Agreements) lists the Production Availability Service Level Objective as 99.9%. b. Attachment B-2 Requirements Fit-Gap Matrix Analysis, requirement AVAIL 01 reads: Subscription Services must be available for external users 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, excluding pre-approved downtime for maintenance (99.99%). c.

Attachment B-2 Requirements Fit-Gap Matrix Analysis, requirement AVAIL 02 reads:

Subscription Services must be available for internal users weekdays between 6 am and 6 pm PST, excluding pre-approved downtime for maintenance (99.99%). d. Attachment B-2 Requirements Fit-Gap Matrix Analysis, requirement AVAIL 03 reads: The system shall support an uptime of 99.9%. Can the State Parties clarify the difference (if any) between Production Availability, Subscription Services Availability for internal/external users, and Uptime, and clarify the reason for the difference in availability levels required for each of these categories?

99.99% is a typo. Both should be 99.9%

36 2/2 System Automation Corp

Technical Requirements

Requirement ACM 10 in Attachment B-2 Requirements Fit-Gap Matrix Analysis states:

Solution should allow admin user to have ability to initiate a reset password for the user. Our solution supports password resets through 100% self-service functions (requirement ACM 09). We limit password resets to the user owning the account to increase the security of that users account and reduce administrative burdens on agency IT staff related to password resets. If ACM 09 is met, is ACM 10 still required?

ACM 09 and ACM 10 are different requirements, and the Requirements FitGap Matrix provides a space for proposers to explain their answer.

37 2/2 System

Automation Corp

Technical Requirements

Requirement CONF 05 in Attachment B-2 Requirements Fit-Gap Matrix Analysis states: The system must allow for update to the system prior to implementing changes to values in business rules. Can the State Parties clarify what is meant by this requirement, or provide an example illustrating it?

CCB needs to have a history of business rules and when they have been changed. For example: CCB needs to change the fee charged for a license. CCB expects to be able to change the fee amount with a starting date for the new value. The old cost will stay in the system with an end date. CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposer's process, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths

38 2/2 System Automation Corp

Technical Requirements

Requirement PAY 19 in Attachment B-2 Requirements Fit-Gap Matrix Analysis states:

Solution should allow payments to be accepted prior to official billing (for example: payments on proposed order prior to final order) and treated differently than other payments. Can the State Parties confirm what treated differently means in the context of this requirement?

If a person pays their proposed order as opposed to their final order, CCB must hold these dollars a “liability” instead of “revenue.” Different general ledger accounts are used and CCB must differentiate.

CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposer's process, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths

39 2/2 System Automation Corp

Technical Requirements

Requirement ACCT 03 in Attachment B-2 Requirements Fit-Gap Matrix Analysis states: The system shall reconcile with external financial systems (such as Department of Revenue and Statewide Accounting System). Can the State Parties confirm whether an interface with the Department of Revenue and/or the Statewide Accounting System is in scope? If so, can the State Parties provide the format and frequency of this interface?

Yes. It is in scope. Format and frequency to be determined as part of the contract negotiation.

When responding to the RFP, CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposer's process, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths

40 2/2 System Automation Corp

Attachment A-4 Can OR CCB consider waiving the notarization requirement for Attachment A-4?

The notary portion of RFP Attachment A-4, Disclosure Exemption Affidavit is not required. An amended version of RFP Attachment A-4 has been posted to OregonBuys, to be used in place of the version in the prior RFP. The RFP has also been amended (vAmended 2026FEB18) with the updated RFP Attachment A-4

41 2/2 System

Automation Corp

Technical Requirements

In the Scope of Work Template, Part 2: Scope of Services Summary, Section 2. Solution Technology Architecture and Design includes an extensive description of what is desired by CCB as a Proposers Response for (b.)

Hardware/Equipment Selection, but not (a.)

Software Components and Configuration. Section

2.4 Project Scope, Item 2.4.2. Solution

Technology Architecture and Design also does not include a description of this item. Can CCB clarify or provide guidance on what is being asked for as a Proposers Response for item (a.)

Software Components and Configuration?

CCB would like a COTS solution that is configurable by the agency. Any third-party software or proposer software not in the main proposal but needed by the solution should be detailed here. Examples might be 3rd party LMS or Imaging software. CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposer's process, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths

42 2/5 System Automation Corp

Price Proposal Worksheet

The price proposal includes a five-year grid listing Cost Item and Quantity,separate from the implementation and license fee pricing table.

Please clarify what respondents should include in this first grid and how it is intended to be used in the proposal evaluation.

See Answer 28

43 2/5 System Automation Corp

Price Proposal Worksheet

Please clarify what respondents should include in the Price Proposal worksheet table titled Itemized List of Equipment.?

See Answer 28

↑ - Posted to OregonBuys 2/09/26 - ↑ 44 2/09 Spruce

Technology Budget Does the $4 Million dollar budget include software costs or is that budget strictly for implementation and support services?

Software license, implementation, backfill of some positions during implementation, Operations and Maintenance, and software license after implementation up to 5 years. Also see answers to questions 1 and 2.

45 2/09 Spruce Technology

Document Management

Do you have a preferred document management system you would like the solution to integrate with? Alternatively, would you like the solution to include document management?

CCB has no preferred document management system.

CCB prefers a system where document management is integrated into the system. Currently, they are 2 separate systems.

46 2/09 Spruce Technology

Identity Management

Does CCB use Active Directory for agency users?

If not, what is the Identity Management System currently in use?

Yes. CCB uses Active Directory.

47 2/09 Spruce

Technology Integrations Please provide a list of all specific integration in scope. Please include if these are bi-directional or single directional.

CCB’s current integrations (note: these may change prior to or during implementation):

• OSHA daily SCP inbound

• NewApps daily SCP inbound (this will not exist in a new system)

• BCD data transfer daily SCP outbound

• DOR email inbound monthly (human interaction in the middle)

• Open Data (DAS) app interface outbound daily

• DCS SCP/SFTP outbound quarterly

• DAS Print Plant SML feeds for documents printed by them. Multiple tiny. SCP outbound weekly.

48 2/09 Spruce

Technology Integrations What is the expected integration method for in-scope integrations? (WebServices, SFTP, etc.)

CCB uses SCP/SFTP/Email not by intention, other methods could be used. CCB’s expectation is that it works and is compatible with the specific partner.

49 2/09 Spruce Technology

Requirements/Fit Gap Matrix

Within the Requirements/Fit Gap Matrix is the following: CE 02: System or staff user to include accompanying response tracking in Continuing Education Audit List. Could you please provide further detail on this requirement?

When CCB does a Continuing Education audit, the contractor is sent a request to respond to the audit with a deadline. CCB desires the system to track if and when the response is received and provide tracking so that if further action is needed it can be taken.

50 2/09 Spruce Technology

Data Migration For legacy data migration, please provide the technology of the source data (i.e., SQL, Oracle, or COTS products). Please also provide the number of records required to be migrated into the new system.

• Technology: SQL, Oracle, File Storage (Questys)

• May need to migrate information from other sources depending upon migration decisions.

• Also see answer to question 10 above

51 2/09 Spruce Technology

Go-Live Are there any business drivers for the selected go-live date?

When a vendor is selected, CCB will negotiate with the vendor a go-live date that takes into account some seasonal impacts to the business.

52 2/09 Spruce Technology

License Types How many distinct licensing types and sub-types are in scope for this implementation?

Refer to Question 13

53 2/09 Computronix Page 1 Schedule RFP Bid Opening (Proposal Due)

Due to the complexity of the RFP, will the CCB grant a 2-week extension?

Refer to Question 15

54 2/09 Computronix Page 4 -

Introduction Budget

The RFP states a budget of $4.0M for the initial term of the Contract. Attachment G �?? Business Case suggests a projected one-time cost of $1,250,000 and annual recurring costs of $200,000 - $250,000, which implies a cost for the initial term of $2.25M - $2.5M. Please confirm the stated budget amount for the initial term and clarify if this budget amount includes internal Agency costs such as staffing, not just vendor costs for a solution.

It does include some internal costs for staffing. Also see answers to questions 1,2 and 44

55 2/09 Computronix Page 13 of 81, Section 2.4.8, Training

What physical location(s) will be used for any proposed on-site Train-the-Trainer training? (Just Salem, OR, head office? Or?) Please describe the training lab(s) to be used (i.e., number of training workstations or laptops, provision of Internet access, access to in-room A-V equipment such as TV/presentation screens). How many end user trainers need to be trained? How many IT Support staff need to be trained in System support / sys admin functions?

CCB expects proposer to discuss how they propose to do training. CCB would like some training to be in person. It would most likely be located in Salem. CCB does not have a “lab” but a large majority of employees have a laptop computer. CCB anticipates that most every employee will need to be trained on some aspects of the new system. Up to five staff trained on system admin functions.

56 2/09 Computronix Page 18, Section 3.1.2., Volume 2:

Project Proposal, sub-section (g) Work Samples.

Please clarify what the RFP means by �??Work Samples.�?? Please provide further examples of the kind of documentation or proposal verbiage that could be used in this proposal section or that would be most useful to Evaluators.

DAS SPS and Agency believe this could be examples of how the vendor navigated something similar in another implementation or proposal of how they could go about tacking the area requesting the work sample.

57 2/09 Computronix Page 29, Section 6.3.6, Pay Equity Certification, and page 31 of 89, Attachment A-3, Responsible Inq

Please clarify when the Pay Equity Compliance Certificate required: at proposal submission (as suggested in Attachment A-3) or upon selection prior to Contract executions (per Section 6.3.6)?

The Pay Equity Certificate must be provided prior to contract execution. However, Proposer may elect to complete this requirement for their Proposal or may already have a Pay Equity Certificate from other contracting activities with the state.

58 2/09 Computronix Page 40

�??Attachment

B-1 SOW

Template Instructions, last bullet in "Avoid" section

Please clarify the style required for the SOW;

specifically: 1. If vendors use the SOW template and the instructional text is deleted, the Proposer response appears in blue, italicized text (Arial, 11 pt, single line spacing). Is this correct? 2. If vendors have headers, lists, tables, etc. that are intrinsic to their responses, it is unclear what fonts, subheaders, margins, tabs numbering conventions, etc. are to be used in the SOW template? The style in the file presents various fonts (Cambria, Arial, etc.) and margins. 2. If vendors use their own templates and are instructed to avoid �??Modifying the font, font size, and margins from this template,�?? please identify which fonts, subheaders, margins, tabs, numbering conventions, etc. are to be used in the

SOW.

DAS SPS and Agency believe the Note section of Attachment B-1 is self-explanatory with respect to this question. The template is for convenience purposes only and its use is NOT mandatory.

Guidance is to promote legibility and not an indication of mandatory elements.

59 2/09 Computronix Pp 40-47 B-1 SOW Template Entire SOW template

Will the CCB provide the SOW template as a separate Word file with a defined/restricted style guide?

Attachment B-1 – SOW Template is provided as an editable portion of the Word file that may be copied or converted into a separate editable file.

60 2/09 Computronix P 51 Attachment C Price Proposal Worksheet All text in blue italics

Is this information to be deleted in the Proposer�??s response (similar to the directions provided for Attachment B-1 SOW Template) or is the Proposer to provide a point-by-point response in addition to completing the Pricing Worksheet?

DAS SPS and CCB believe the first paragraph of the blue italicized font is self-explanatory on the purpose and use of Attachment C. Text blue italicized font should be deleted for the price proposal.

Also see Answer 28.

61 2/09 Computronix P 51 Attachment

C Price Proposal Worksheet, sub-section 2.b., Licensing Various SaaS user license r

�?� Should bidders calculate back-office (staff portal) user licensing based on 60 named users (60 internal users)? �?� RFP Attachment B-2, Compliance Requirements tab - How many CCB inspectors/enforcement agents will require a smartphone/tablet-based Mobile application for in-field investigations and enforcement data capture? (i.e., How many Mobile User licenses are required?) Has the CCB settled on a required or preferred Mobile platform and device (Apple iOS? Android? Both platforms?) for its in-field Mobile Users?

Refer to Answer 3

CCB expects the proposed solution to explain the Proposers process, their assumptions, and anticipated obstacles and their resolution paths.

62 2/09 Computronix Page 45, B-1 SOW, Section 8, Training Training for OSH

�??Proposer will provide at least one (1) week of in person training of OSH staff.�?? What does OSH stand for? Please further describe this user group and its particular training need. How many staff need to be trained? Will the Train-the- Trainer model be acceptable for this training or will the Bidder be responsible for providing end user training?

See Answer 28

63 2/09 Computronix Attachment C Price Proposal Worksheet Wearable Device Costs

Please define �??Wearable Device?�?? Please describe further. Is there a specific requirement in another RFP document (e.g., Vol 2 Requirements) that we should refer to for further details? Is this considered a mandatory line item or an optional line item?

See Answer 28.

64 2/09 Computronix Vol 2 Requirements Matrix �?? INT 02

"Provide an export to Oregon Department of Justice, Child Support at regular intervals.

Currently these are File Transfers." Please provide additional information about the current and/or preferred stated of this interface. Specifically: - What is the expected transfer method (eg. API, FTP, etc.)? - What specific data is expected to be included? - What is the anticipated frequency of these exports?

See answer to question 47. DCS SCP/SFTP outbound quarterly

65 2/09 Computronix Vol 2

Requirements Matrix �?? INT 04

Validate Workers Compensation data from DCBS OpenData website. Please provide additional information about the current and/or preferred stated of this interface. Specifically: - What specific data is expected to be included? - What is the anticipated frequency of this validation?

CCB’s current system cannot do this. When an applicant states they have Workers Compensation insurance, a licensing staff member must verify it on a website. It is not checked again until renewal or if a field investigator is on a site check. Renewal dates for Worker’s Compensation do not sync with renewal dates of contractor licenses. CCB is aware that the Worker’s Compensation information is provided on the state Open Data website and would like to be able to match it against license data periodically (would discuss with successful vendor) in order to report licenses without valid Worker’s Comp insurance.

66 2/09 Computronix Vol 2 Requirements Matrix �?? INT 06

Provide an export to Oregon Open Data at regular intervals. Please provide details about the anticipated volumes and types of imported data.

See Oregon Open Data: CCB Active Licenses | data.oregon.gov | Oregon's Open Data Portal | Oregon.gov

67 2/09 Computronix Vol 2 Requirements Matrix �?? INT 07

Provide an import/export to Oregon Department of Revenue at regular intervals. Please provide additional information about the current and/or preferred stated of this interface. Specifically: - What is the source system for Oregon DOR? - What is the expected transfer method (eg. API, FTP, etc.)? - What specific data is expected to be included? - What is the anticipated frequency of these exports/imports?

Inbound status and transaction files sent by email and dropped into a file location for processing. These are small to tiny files.

For more information about Department of Revenue Other Agency Accounts see:

https://www.oregon.gov/dor/programs/collections/p ages/debt-collection-services-for-state-and-local-government.aspx

68 2/09 Computronix Vol 2 Requirements Matrix �?? PAY

System should allow user to enter payment information (debit card, credit card, ACH) and parameters (such as amount, period of time) to make recurring payments. Please describe the business scenarios where you anticipate users�??

needs to set up recurring payments.

Recurring payments would happen when a contractor or unlicensed contractor has been given a penalty and has worked with CCB to develop a payment plan to pay the penalty. There are not a lot of these, but it would be helpful to be able to allow the person to set it up to ensure they are paid.

https://data.oregon.gov/business/CCB-Active-Licenses/g77e-6bhs/about_data

69 2/09 Computronix Vol 2

Requirements Matrix �?? ACCT

The system shall allow staff to generate invoices and record non-standard payments. Please define what is meant by �??non-standard payments�?? in the context of your business processes, including: - Examples of the types of non-standard payments you process and - How these differ from your standard payments (e.g., source, approval process, GL treatment, or how they affect the customer�??s balance).

Invoices and non-standard payments would also originate from civil penalties that are issued. Amounts and when they are due could differ. Also, interest accrues on these if they are not paid timely.

70 2/09 Computronix Att E OR SW InfoSec Standards Spreadsheet

Standards Worksheet Is the content outlined fully aligned with NIST 800.53 r5? Have there been any specific scoping or tailoring of the included controls?

The Standards Worksheet is aligned with NIST 800.53 r5. There is no specific scoping.

71 2/10 System Automation Corporation

Proposal Evaluation

The RFP notes that several proposal elements, including Volume 3: Price Proposal, are not scored in Round One. Please clarify how and when pricing will be evaluated in subsequent stages of the evaluation process, and how pricing will be considered relative to the scored technical components.

Refer to RFP Sections 5.2 through 5.4, and RFP Attachment D for scoring and weighting.

72 2/10 System Automation Corporation

Sample Contract Are respondents permitted to propose changes to the sample contract by submitting redlined revisions as part of their proposal?

Refer to information in RFP Section 1.1 regarding Attachment F, Sample Contract, RFP Section 6.4 Contract Negotiation, and RFP Sections 5.2 through

5.4 and RFP Attachment D.

Proposer may elect to submit proposed redlines with their Proposal, but at the time of this Q&A such redlines will not be reviewed, evaluated, or scored.

73 2/10 IBM RFP Section 6.4 and Section 5.4.2 (f)

Section 6.4 requires compliance with the Sample Contract (Attachment F) upon proposal submission, while Section 5.4.2(f) describes a potential contract redline exercise for Competitive Range Proposers. Will Competitive Range Proposers have the opportunity to propose contract modifications through the redline process, and will the State negotiate these proposed changes? The question is, should we propose the cost assuming no exceptions, or could we propose the more desirable pricing that would result from flexibility on some exceptions, and then list those desired exceptions in out response?

Refer to Answer 72.

With respect to the Price Proposal, refer to the guidance provided in blue italicized font.

74 2/10 IBM Missing Insurance Requirements

Prior to Execution of a Contract, the awarded Proposer shall secure and demonstrate to DAS SPS proof of Insurance as required in this RFP or negotiated. See, Exhibit B in the RFP Attachment F, Sample Contract, for the applicable Insurance Requirements.

RFP has been revised (vAmended 2026FEB18) to remove the sentence referring to Exhibit B in RFP Attachment F. However, the anticipated insurance requirements are as follows:

Commercial General Liability:

- Annual aggregate = $2,000,000

- Per Occurrence ≥ $1,000,000

Professional Liability (Technology E & O):

- $5,000,000

Automobile Liability: None 75 2/10 IBM Attachment D

Section 3. d) Proposer's Staffing Plan

Would CCB consider Bidders who propose services offshore for more desirable pricing?

State or agency data is restricted from being transmitted/stored/processed outside of the US and its territories, leaving open the possibility for development work that does not involve handling such data

76 2/10 IBM Attachment G, Pricing Proposal Worksheet, Budget

Can CCB Clarify if the $200,000 to $250,000 annual cost of maintenance listed in Attachment G is inclusive of licensing costs?

Yes. Inclusive of licensing costs.

77 2/10 IBM Section 2.4.4

Data Conversion and Migration Strategy

Please provide the following details on data migration: 1. Number of data tables to migrate 2.

Volume of data to migrate 3. Number of relationships between data tables 4. Current location of data

See answer to question 10

78 2/10 IBM Section 2.4.4 Data Conversion and Migration Strategy

How many documents and what volume of documents will need to be migrated?

See answer to question 10

79 2/10 IBM Attachment G, Pricing Proposal Worksheet, Budget

Can CCB Clarify if the $200,000 to $250,000 annual cost of maintenance listed in Attachment G is inclusive of licensing costs?

See answer to question 76

80 2/10 IBM Section 2.4.4 Data Conversion and Migration Strategy

Please provide the following details on data migration: 1. Number of data tables to migrate 2.

Volume of data to migrate 3. Number of relationships between data tables 4. Current location of data

See answer to question 77

81 2/10 IBM Section 2.4.4 Data Conversion and Migration Strategy

How many documents and what volume of documents will need to be migrated?

See answer to question 78

82 2/10 IBM Section 2.4.6 Develop and Document Solution's Design and Integrations

How many separate integrations are in scope? See answer to question 10

83 2/10 IBM Section 2.4.22 Licensing

Is the licensing and renewal process the same for all license types?

CCB desires the process for licensing and renewal to be similar for all licenses and certificates, but what is required (such as continuing education requirements, etc.) can be different. Because of current system restraints, the user might have to navigate different systems if they have a license and a certificate.

84 2/10 IBM Attachment G #2

New or Enhanced Service

How many languages will the portal and all forms need to be provided in?

When responding to the RFP, please specify the number and which languages your system currently supports. How would you propose to implement Spanish at Go-Live. What is the process and capability for implementing additional languages if requested after Go-Live.

85 2/10 Accela, Inc. Attachment E Can CCB confirm that Attachment E (InfoSec Standards Spreadsheet) is not required to be completed and returned with our proposal response?

Attachment E is not currently a requested element for the Project Proposal. It is primarily provided for informational purposes for Proposers in formulating their Proposals; however, the completion and or discussion of Attachment E could be incorporated into subsequent evaluation rounds (See RFP Section 5.4.2).

86 2/10 Accela, Inc. RFP Section 6.4.1 RFP Section 6.4.1, �??By submitting a Proposal, Proposer agrees to comply with the requirements of the RFP, including the terms and conditions of the Sample Contract (RFP Attachment F). After selection of an apparent successful Proposer, State Parties may commence contract negotiations with such Proposer.�?? Can CCB clarify if this means that (1) we need to agree with all requirements and T&Cs proposed contract terms upfront but will be allowed to negotiate our required exceptions after selection or (2) we need to provide our required exceptions now?�??

The sample contract is provided to aid Proposers in formulating their Proposals while applying the terms and conditions of the Sample Contract.

After selection, DAS SPS may optionally agree to negotiate certain contract terms, subject to the limitations outlined in RFP Sections 6.4.2 and 6.1.1.

87 2/10 Accela, Inc. COBID Can CCB confirm there is no mandatory COBID requirement/percentages?

RFP Attachment A-2, COBID Certification / Outreach Plan is for reporting purposes to understand progress towards State goals.

88 2/10 Accela, Inc. Attachment A-4 Can Vendors modify Attachment A-4? Bullet #2 currently reads this RFP # as �??S-DASOBO- 00014547, for OHA Patient Biometric Monitoring Solution�??

An amended version of RFP Attachment A-4 has been posted to OregonBuys, to be used in place of the version in the prior RFP. The RFP has also been amended (vAmended 2026FEB18) with the updated RFP Attachment A-4.

89 2/10 Accela, Inc. Attachment A-4 Can CCB clarify that Attachment A-4 (Disclosure

Exemption Affidavit) is still required if Vendor is not requesting exemption from public disclosure?

Furthermore, can CCB provide Exhibit A referenced in Attachment A-4, if required?

Refer to RFP 3.1.1.(d). Completing the Disclosure Exemption Form is required when submitting information the proposer believes to be exempt from disclosure under public records laws.

The Proposer is not otherwise required to complete this form; as a courtesy, however, Proposer may submit the form listing Exempt Information as “Not Applicable” or “N/A”/

Note that an amended version of RFP Attachment A-4 has been posted to OregonBuys, to be used in place of the version in the prior RFP. The RFP has also been amended (vAmended 2026FEB18) with the updated RFP Attachment A-4.

90 2/10 Accela, Inc. Extension Is the CCB willing to consider a 2-week extension?

Refer to Answer 15.

91 2/10 Accela, Inc. User Count How many internal staff would necessitate access to the solution?

Refer to Answer 3.

92 2/10 Accela, Inc. CCB Staff Does CCB Staff have the ability to administer the solution, including permissions, system updates, and upgrades or do you envision utilizing external support?

Both are legitimate options. When responding to the RFP, discuss your proposal for best option for the agency. CCB does have a small IT staff that has capabilities and capacity once the solution is implemented.

93 2/10 Accela, Inc. Support What is the preferred method for CCB to communicate with customer support, and what is the response time necessitated?

CCB would like the ability for phone and/or email/Teams support.

See answer to question 35 and requirements beginning with AVAIL

94 2/10 Sikich LLC To align with Control SA-22, is the State mandating the use of an API-led abstraction layer to decouple modern solution functionality from the legacy HYDRA system and mitigate migration risks stemming from the unsupported core?

Not required during…