CCITC - RFP Addendum No. 2.pdf

Addendum 2 Page 1 of 33 December 22, 2020

City-County Information Technology Commission (CCITC)

407 Grant Street

Wausau, WI 54403-4783

December 22, 2020

To All Bidders:

Subject: Request for Proposals for Software and Implementation Services for an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Software Systems Environment

ADDENDUM NO. 2

To Whom It May Concern:

With reference to our bid request relative to the above subject, please refer to the changes/modifications/clarifications to the original bid request.

The RFP schedule of events has been updated based on the extension of the Proposal Due Date in Addendum 1.

Event Estimated Date

RFP Published Tuesday, November 10, 2020

Pre-Proposal Vendor Teleconference Thursday, November 19, 2020 @ 12pm CST

Deadline for Questions From Vendors Wednesday, December 2, 2020 @ 4pm CST

Deadline for Proposal Submissions Friday, January 15, 2021 @ 4pm CST

Shortlist Vendors notified Week of February 8, 2021

Vendor Demonstrations Week of March 8, 2021

Please find below questions received and responses from the CCITC.

1. Will CCITC accept proposals from DBE/MBE businesses located outside of the state?

CCITC Response: Yes

2. Are there any functional areas that are necessary to focus on in the first phase?

CCITC Response: No – there are no particular business drivers requiring prioritization of replacing a certain module/functional area first in the phasing.

3. Section 1.2 of the RFP talks about the diverse areas served by CCITC. Will the selected software be used by other entities besides the CCITC, Marathon County, and the City of Wausau?

CCITC Response: The City provides access to the current system to the River District and Wausau Events for Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable, and reporting processes.

https://www.citycountyit.org/ https://www.citycountyit.org/

Addendum 2 Page 2 of 33 December 22, 2020

4. Is the CCITC currently providing first line support for Cayenta issues/tickets internally and if so, will this continue to be the practice in a new environment?

CCITC Response: In a future state, the CCITC envisions that front-line support will be provided by end-users within the departments and subject matter experts, prior to contacting the CCITC for support. CCITC would then provide any needed technical support and if needed escalate the support item to the selected vendor.

5. Does the CCITC have any target timelines, or constraints that would impact the timing of the project/phases, which vendors should be aware of?

CCITC Response: Attachment A, Tab 5 (Project Schedule) contains information to help inform the development of any phasing/timelines. The CCITC/City/County does not have any specific constraints (such as end of system life/support) that will drive timelines for completion, but the entities would prefer to take into account cyclical busy seasons (e.g.

tax processing in January, fiscal year end) when refining the project schedule. The entities request that vendors provide phasing and timelines that best align with their standard approach and any information in Attachment A, Tab 5.

6. What are the reasons for moving to a new system?

CCITC Response: The entities have identified several of the primary challenges in the RFP, including manual processes, workarounds, and the current version of the software not being able to meet all requirements of the departments.

7. Is there a new version of Cayenta that meets your requirements?

CCITC Response: The CCITC is interested in understanding the available options in the marketplace, including any upgrades or replacement of solutions, through this RFP process. Currently, there are many third-party supporting systems that have been adopted to supplement use of the Cayenta solution, and the CCITC wishes to consolidate systems where possible.

8. Has the CCITC engaged in any software demonstrations in the past twelve months?

CCITC Response: No, the CCITC has not engaged in any formal software demonstrations in the past twelve months.

9. Do you have a budget for the software purchase and implementation costs, and can you share the budget (even if a budget range)?

CCITC Response: The CCITC has performed some internal, high-level budgeting for the software purchase/subscription as well as implementation costs, but is not willing to share that information at this time.

10. What is the fiscal year of the entities? When do you anticipate contract award and beginning the implementation process?

CCITC Response: The CCITC operates on a January 1-December 31 fiscal year. Per the RFP, Attachment A Tab 5, the CCITC anticipates beginning the implementation process in the second or third quarter of calendar year 2021.

11. Would the CCITC be able to provide a cost ceiling or not to exceed figure against which vendors can work within?

Addendum 2 Page 3 of 33 December 22, 2020

CCITC Response: No. The CCITC has a preliminary budget in place, however, the objective is to find the best solution to meet the needs of the organization first and foremost, and if necessary the CCITC will seek additional budgetary resources if absolutely required.

12. Does the County or City use any purchasing vehicles/cooperative contracts? If so, would it be feasible to leverage one such cooperative in this process?

CCITC Response: Yes, in the past, the entities have leveraged cooperative agreements for purchasing. Attachment A requests sample contracts from vendors, and further requests information on any available cooperatives that may be leveraged to support the contracting/pricing process.

13. How do you envision the implementation approach considering the three entities? We want to know what you think works best in terms of addressing any unique needs between the entities.

CCITC Response: From the perspective of the entities, there will not be significant deviation to the set-up of business processes as they are currently very similar. There are some processes that the City currently manages in a centralized capacity while the County is decentralized. It is expected that the entities will need their own distinct chart of accounts.

14. In Attachment B you ask for interfaces for Taleo and NeoGov and also include requirements that would replace them. If we are proposing functionality to replace these two systems, should we still list the pricing and describe how we might address an interface, or list the pricing as optional?

CCITC Response: Vendors should provide pricing for the proposed modules that are in-scope, and should also include on an optional basis the cost for developing an interface in case CCITC determines to stay with NeoGov or Taleo.

15. Is the CCITC able to share any additional information surrounding any planning or desires related to the redesign of a chart of accounts?

CCITC Response: The CCITC is looking to align the future chart of accounts with best practices for government/fund accounting, and GFOA guidelines.

16. Can you talk about your change management goals or approach?

CCITC Response: We currently have a formal change management program most focused on hardware and software. Through this process the CCITC wants to understand what vendors offer in this area for consideration.

17. Have you had any meetings with vendors in the past year?

CCITC Response: No.

18. How is the scoring on the cost evaluation calculated? Are you using the highest cost or lowest cost?

CCITC Response: The CCITC will not be sharing the exact methods for applying cost points, or any other of the evaluation criteria points. The evaluation criteria have been described and weighted with what the CCITC feels is sufficient detail to inform vendors of the criticality of each criteria and the incorporated components.

19. How many time clocks should we include in our proposal? Is 37 correct?

Addendum 2 Page 4 of 33 December 22, 2020

CCITC Response: There are 28 current clocks. Please provide optional pricing as part of the response to the price proposal, including the line item cost for one time clock, as well as the total cost for 35-40 to allow for additional locations. If there are volume price breaks, please indicate the quantity needed to achieve each level.

20. Is it desired for the time clocks to be Biometric or HID proximity?

CCITC Response: HID Proximity would be preferred.

21. If proximity is preferred are the current HID cards Indala, iCLASS, or standard Proximity?

CCITC Response: The County, City, and CCITC use the HID ISOPROX II Proximity Card, and the City also allows the use of an HID ProxKey II fob as well.

22. Is it desired for the time clocks to take thermal readings of your employees, prohibiting them from being allowed to punch in if they have a fever?

CCITC Response: Possibly, but this is not something that is deemed critical. Some departments may find this beneficial.

23. Please confirm if the City-County-CCITC are looking to replace the current time clocks.

Page 13 of the RFP states the same model GENUS clock in the future; however a change in time and attendance systems would require the time clocks to be replaced. Please clarify why the model Genus clock is listed as the desired future time clock on page 13.

CCITC Response: If there is the option to use our current clocks with the new system, this would be the model clock needed by the entities if additional time clocks would be needed to bring additional departments on board. If the clock cannot be used with the new system, then a quote would need to be provided for 35-40 new badge readers/clocks.

24. Will Advanced scheduling be included in this scope of work? (Advanced scheduling is defined as employees who need to do Shift swaps, vacation bidding, or having scheduling rules in the system which automatically assign the correct employees to open shifts)

CCITC Response: Yes.

25. If Advanced scheduling is needed, how many employees will need to be licensed for it?

CCITC Response: 300 for the County and 175 for the City.

26. Will Phone Entry (IVR) be needed for the scope of this project? (defined as employees punching in/out via dialing a phone number, or dialing a phone number to dial out sick)

CCITC Response: Yes.

a. If so how many employees will need to be licensed for IVR?

CCITC Response: County: 200, City: 10, and CCITC: 20. If there are volume price breaks, please indicate the quantity needed to achieve each level.

27. Is FMLA Case Management required? Defined as the new time & attendance system automating the process of requesting FMLA leave, allowing employees to fill out required forms directly in the new Time & Attendance system, and tracking the open case, automatically alerting employees/managers when an employee is due back or running out of FMLA time?

CCITC Response: Yes.

Addendum 2 Page 5 of 33 December 22, 2020

28. Does the City-County desire to lock employees out from punching too early before their scheduled start times?

CCITC Response: No.

29. Is it desired for employees to punch in/out from a computer or smart phone?

CCITC Response: Yes and no. Not all departments will give their staff the option to use a smart phone to punch.

30. Is it desired for employees to request time off electronically at a computer or smart phone?

CCITC Response: Yes.

31. Has the City-County viewed any demonstrations of timekeeping systems prior to the release of this RFP? If so Which Vendors provided a demonstration?

CCITC Response: No.

32. With there already being an Oracle job & database server, would there be a preference to migrate to an Oracle ERP?

CCITC Response: The CCITC intends for this to be a fair and open process, and to evaluate all options available in the marketplace.

33. Does the City/CCITC have a prime systems integrator that they typically partner with and would the winner of the RFP be required to partner with that systems integrator. An example of this would be if the CCITC had an existing partnership with Accenture, Infosys, or PwC.

CCITC Response: No. The CCITC intends for this to be a fair and open process, and to evaluate all options available in the marketplace.

34. Has the CCITC established a preliminary budget for this implementation effort? Can you share that with us?

CCITC Response: Please see the responses to Questions 9 and 11.

35. Has the CCITC established a preliminary budget for ongoing operating/licensing costs? Can you share that with us?

CCITC Response: Please see the responses to Questions 9 and 11.

36. Will historical data need to be converted from Cayenta into the new system? If so, would it simply be summary data for historical top line reporting? Or will there be a need to convert historical, transactional data?

CCITC Response: Please see Attachment B, Data Conversion (tab 19) for data conversion specifications.

37. What database does Cayenta use?

CCITC Response: Cayenta uses an Oracle database.

38. Section 2.13 implies a software warranty. May we assume (as a Microsoft Partner) that this warranty will ‘roll up’ to Microsoft?

CCITC Response: Yes, if this is the proposed structure.

39. Are the ‘Terms and Conditions’ negotiable? If so, can a copy be provided in Word Format for redlining?

Addendum 2 Page 6 of 33 December 22, 2020

CCITC Response: Please see Attachment A, Exceptions to Project Scope and Contract Terms (Tab 14). The CCITC reserves the right to disallow exceptions it finds are not in the best interests of the CCITC. Any and all exceptions must be identified and fully explained in the submitted Proposal. It is the CCITC’s intention to be made aware of any exceptions to terms or conditions prior to contract negotiations. As an Exhibit to Tab 14, Proposer to provide any deviations to the sample contract language proposed by the CCITC in the RFP. Each item to be listed along with the requested alternative language for review by the

CCITC.

40. I understood from the vendor conference call that CCITC leverages an Enterprise Agreement with Microsoft. This is great, because it allows for license acquisition at a much lower cost. These prices are not visible to Microsoft Partners who are not established as your ‘Digital Partner of Record’ (because they can differ greatly from customer to customer). Can you contact your Licensing Service Provider and provide your cost (monthly or annually) for the following software SKUs from Microsoft?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not believe this information is needed for vendors to submit a proposal.

41. Does CCITC currently use Cayenta to run their own Payroll and Financials?

CCITC Response: Yes, CCITC manages its own Payroll and Financial in Cayenta.

42. Are the CCITC and City data combined, or are they in separate databases?

CCITC Response: They’re separate datasets, CCITC has its own dataset.

43. Does any Cayenta data need to be converted for CCITC?

CCITC Response: Please see Attachment B, Data Conversion (tab 19) for data conversion specifications.

44. Which financial resource (City / County or CCITC) is responsible for preparing financial reporting for CCITC?

CCITC Response: CCITC is responsible for preparing their own financial reporting.

45. Could the City provide us with the total number of users that would be accessing the Cashiering module, including supervisors? Read-Only users are no charge, so please do not include those.

Addendum 2 Page 7 of 33 December 22, 2020

CCITC Response: Please see Table 05: Number of Users in the ERP RFP Specifications.

The number of City users identified (40) are the number of users that would be accessing the Cashiering module.

46. (As it relates to cashiering) Outside a real-time integration with the Financial A/R system, for the integration of remaining applications for receipting/cashiering purposes is it the intent of the City to (1) have a batch integration (ex. End of day) for pulling payment information in or (2) have the new cashiering solution record transactional receipts and have a real-time bi-directional interface to those applications. Please note for the requested interface applications.

i. Complus

ii. CCAP

iii. CUSI

iv. Avolve

v. LIMS

vi. Tipps

vii. Solid Waste Scales

viii. Transcendent Technologies

ix. Trimin

x. Any other integrations not mentioned

CCITC Response: The desired frequency of data transfer for each application is identified in Attachment B, Tab 20. Interfaces. A near-immediate (real-time) frequency is applicable to a real-time bi-directional interface. A daily batch or on-demand frequency is applicable to a batch integration.

47. (As it relates to cashiering) Can the City list the current POS equipment and model you would like the Cashiering solution to integrate with, such as the Ithaca printer? Would the City like any additional POS equipment to be included in the RFP response (receipt printers, scanners, cash drawers, check imaging/MICR devices, encrypted credit card swipe and EMV/chip/tap-to-pay devices)?

CCITC Response: Please see Attachment A, VI. General. Proposer shall describe available hardware options to support cash register/drawer functionality. The CCITC will consider these on an optional basis, and costs shall not be included in the technical proposal. Please also see Attachment C, Optional Hardware, Cash Station Hardware. The City is interested in exploring the available POS options available therefore the City is open to proposers describing additional POS equipment to support cash register/drawer functionality.

48. (As it relates to cashiering) What credit processor is the CCITC currently using?

CCITC Response: The Entities currently use several credit card processors and would be open to reviewing a processor with an already established integration with the proposed solution.

49. (As it relates to cashiering) Would you like the POS/Cashiering solution to also have the option to accept online payments? Please note which applications you would like to have included in this option.

CCITC Response: CCITC is interested in accepting online payments. The list of applications will be determined during the implementation process.

Addendum 2 Page 8 of 33 December 22, 2020

50. (As it relates to cashiering) Would the City like the cashiering solution to create an ICL containing check images for deposit, and send it to your bank? If so, is US Bank the ICL destination?

CCITC Response: Yes.US Bank is the destination.

51. (As it relates to cashiering) Does the City have a multi-check scanning process in place for recording checks and invoices in batch? If not, should this be included in the response? What is the annual volume that the City would scan using this process?

CCITC Response: CCITC is interested in exploring this functionality.

52. (As it relates to cashiering) Does the City have scenarios where different departments need to submit end of day receipt summary information? If so, would the City like to automate that?

CCITC Response: Yes, such scenarios exist in the current environment, and yes the entities would be interested in automating this process wherever practical.

53. Would it be possible to get a three week extension to be sure that the CCITC responses can be incorporated into the proposal.

CCITC Response: The proposal deadline was extended to January 15 as outlined in Addendum #1.

54. Will North Central Health Care be a part of this implementation? Information is only listed for the City, County and CCITC. How is North Central Health Care relevant to this implementation?

CCITC Response: No. North Central Health Care is not a part of this implementation.

55. Are the City and County considered one organization? Or do they operate as separate business entities?

CCITC Response: The City, County, and CCITC are separate corporations.

a. Do you share employees? Chart of accounts/general ledgers/etc. or same EIN or Different?

CCITC Response: Proposers should consider all three organizations separate and distinct. All three organizations have a separate chart of accounts and EIN.

b. Overall, what separates and/or ties the two organizations together?

CCITC Response: The City and County both utilize Cayenta and receive support from

CCITC.

56. What is the State of Wisconsin's recommended Chart of Accounts Structure? (see page 10 of ERP RFP Specifications)

CCITC Response: Please refer to the link below for the State of Wisconsin’s recommended Chart of Accounts Structure. Please also see Attachment B, Tab 2. Gen Ledger & Fin Reporting for the desired chart of accounts structure.

https://www.revenue.wi.gov/DORReports/ucacty.pdf

57. Will your team be responsible for extracting the data from your current system? Or will you need the vendor to do that on your behalf?

https://www.revenue.wi.gov/DORReports/ucacty.pdf

Addendum 2 Page 9 of 33 December 22, 2020

CCITC Response: Yes. Per Attachment A, Tab 7, it is expected that the CCITC will be responsible for data extraction from current systems and data scrubbing, and that the Awarded Proposer shall be responsible for overall data conversion coordination, definition of file layouts, and data import and validation into the new system(s).

58. Are you open to discussions around bringing in your historical data? Is 5 years of data mandatory?

CCITC Response: The CCITC has listed the requested amount of data to be converted for each data conversion object in Attachment B, but has also provided space in column I for proposers to specify what is seen as a typical/standard conversion scope in the event there are variations.

59. Where does the budget for this solution come from? City, County or CCITC? Essentially which entity will be responsible for payment of service provided under this contract?

CCITC Response: Each Entity will pay for its own instance.

60. The RFP states that the CCITC support PCs and Laptops across three Counties, what Counties are these and are they relevant to this implementation?

CCITC Response: This information is provided as background on the CCITC only. The entities subject to this RFP are the City of Wausau, Marathon County, and the CCITC.

61. What is the internet bandwidth available to City, County, CCITC working at each entities’ office and for those working remotely?

CCITC Response: CCITC believes that it has significant bandwidth to support any product.

62. If the prime vendor anticipates using independent contractor or sub-contractors’ resource to meet certain future needs, do these subcontractors need to also provide reference, background and history for RFP evaluation?

CCITC Response: Please see Attachment A, Section V: Use of Subcontractors.

63. Where (in which system) are the time and attendance rules for the unions currently implemented for each organization? Are they in Cayenta or Intellierm (?) or someplace else?

CCITC Response: Time and attendance rules for unions are maintained in Cayenta and IntelliTime.

64. How frequently do the collective bargaining timekeeping rules change for each union and will there be new collective bargaining agreements during the duration of the ERP project?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not deem it necessary to provide additional details in order to respond to this requirement. Vendors should be able to respond to this requirement as-is.

65. Are the timekeeping rules for each union documented outside of the implementation in legacy systems?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not deem it necessary to provide additional details in order to respond to this requirement. Vendors should be able to respond to this requirement as-is.

66. Is the new ERP system expected to be integrated with the Genus 1 and 2 timeclock infrastructures?

Addendum 2 Page 10 of 33 December 22, 2020

CCITC Response: No.

67. Can you provide the functional areas statistics in table 04 (page 10) of the RFP for the

NCHC?

CCITC Response: The NCHC is not a party to this ERP RFP process.

68. Can you provide the number of users for table 05 (section 2.5) for the NCHC?

CCITC Response: The NCHC is not a party to this ERP RFP process.

69. Where (e.g. in which instance of Cayenta) are the Finance, procurement and HCM functions of NCHC currently implemented?

CCITC Response: The NCHC is not a party to this ERP RFP process.

70. Since the RFP requires bidders to provide a POS system, should we assume that Activenet is being sunsetted, or will the new ERP system be expected to work with Activenet?

CCITC Response: CCITC is looking to replace ActiveNet with a new POS.

71. Will data migration be required from other systems besides Cayenta? (e.g. NeoGov, Paybud, Sage FA, Taleo, or Supeau (?)

CCITC Response: Please see Attachment B, Data Conversion (tab 19) for data conversion specifications.

72. The solution we are proposing is provided by a large vendor who typically requires a separate contract be entered into with them as a SAAS provider. If we bid such an arrangement is that considered a "deviation" or would our proposal be considered non-compliant because of contractual condition ii?

CCITC Response: The CCITC will consider such arrangements where a separate agreement is required with a SaaS/Software provider, and a separate agreement for an implementation services firm. Any such instances should be clearly defined in the proposal in layman’s terms.

73. Can you explain what the business rationale was for CCITC having its own instance of Cayenta with so few users and accounts under management? Is it your intention to continue to manage CCITC as its own enterprise in your ERP system?

CCITC Response: CCITC will continue to have its own enterprise.

74. Where do you anticipate having NCHC live in your ledger or subledger accounts? Is it its own organization standing separate from the other entities or is it considered a division of the county or the state?

CCITC Response: NCHC is not a party to this RFP process.

75. Could each of the organizations (Marathon, Wassau, CCITC and NCHC) please provide prospective vendors with the timing of other important Finance, HR, procurement, and budgeting cycles in addition to fiscal year end and open enrollment? For example, what is each organization's budget formulation cycle? Are these organizations subject to regular or annual reviews? Are there windows on or around years end when reports need to be produced or when spending is frozen in order to close the books. Any information you can give us about your important business cycles will allow us to create a plan that better fits your organization’s needs.

Addendum 2 Page 11 of 33 December 22, 2020

CCITC Response: NCHC is not a party to this RFP process. There are various business cycles that each Entity works around and is not central to the implementation of the system at this time.

76. Do any of the organizations have grant money that are cost allocated to the federal government and how are you currently tracking the spending of cost allocated grant funds?

CCITC Response: The County uses sub funds within its various funds to track grant funding is interested to learn more about vendors proposed solution for grant management.

77. Of the existing systems that were listed in the RFP, which of these systems are currently integrated with instances of Cayenta?

CCITC Response: The following systems listed in Attachment B are integrated by file export and import: INT.5, INT.6, INT.7, INT.10, INT.11, INT.12, INT.14, INT.16, INT.17, INT.19, INT.20, INT.21, INT.23, INT.24, INT.27, INT. 28, INT.29, INT.30, and INT.31.

78. Can you provide prospective bidders with a complete list of technical interfaces you expect to be implemented as part of the scope of this RFP?

CCITC Response: Please see Attachment B, Potential Interfaces tab.

79. Can each of the organizations provide prospective bidders with a list of reports that are considered to be in scope for the implementation of the project for each of the 16 technical areas covered in the RFP?

CCITC Response: The entities have defined certain reporting and querying requirements within the applicable tabs of Attachment B.

80. The RFP notes that all three entities share the same chart of accounts (page 10). Is it required to secure data such that City, County, and CCITC data cannot be shared / seen across entities?

CCITC Response: It is important to note that all three entities follow the same chart of account structure but do not share the same chart of accounts. Vendors should describe the security protocols in place that would prevent an unauthorized user from viewing information in another entity.

81. It was noted during the pre-proposal conference that one or more of the entities are undertaking a Chart of Accounts redesign process. Can you share with prospective vendors what the impacts of this redesign will have on the financial processes? Will the redesign happen prior to or concurrently with the ERP implementation? How do you see the ERP project and the process redesign projects working together?

CCITC Response: The RFP redesign with happen concurrently with the ERP implementation. CCITC will partner with the selected vendor to redesign and implement a new Chart of Accounts.

82. It was noted during the pre-proposal conference that one or more of the entities would like to redesign other business processes, (in addition to Chart of Account). Is this process redesign in scope for the project and can you share with prospective vendors what processes you want to improve and why? Will these redesigns happen prior to or concurrently with the ERP implementation? How do you see the ERP project and these additional process redesign projects working together?

Addendum 2 Page 12 of 33 December 22, 2020

CCITC Response: CCITC has identified specific business processes that have been diagramed to reflect the current and desired future process. Desired business process changes will be discussed with the selected vendor. CCITC encourages vendors to describe their approach to business process changes in the proposal.

83. Are the entities open to unifying business processes such that we can implement broadly unified processes for finance, budget, procurement and HR?

CCITC Response: Yes. There may be some instances were processes will have to vary between Entities based on specific needs.

84. We understand that Phasing is required in Attachment A but is there a preferred phasing by the entities? Some options are:

i. Go-live with one area (ERP, HCM and Payroll) for all three entities, and roll the next area out later

ii. Go-live with the full solution for one entity, then the second, then the third (recommendation would be smallest to largest)

CCITC Response: The CCITC anticipates beginning implementation in the second or third quarter of calendar year 2021. The CCITC requests that offerors provide potential phase start and target go-live dates in proposal responses based on past experience and recommended approach.

85. Any phased approach will require some temporary manual processes or integrations, is that an issue?

CCITC Response: No. Vendors shall detail any such temporary integrations or manual processes in the proposals.

86. What middleware, if any, is used to manage current integrations? Is that middleware required to stay or is that open for replacement?

CCITC Response: Middleware is not currently used.

87. Several tools / programs are listed as potential interfaces on page 18. Some of these could be replaced by our proposed solution for example

i. IntelliTime for Time and Labor

ii. Paybud – Homegrown budgeting system

iii. Resource X

iv. Sage Fixed Assets

As many of these have requirements listed in the Excel req doc, may we assume these systems will be replaced with our solution and thus, no integration will be required?

CCITC Response: Please see the listing of potential interfaces provided in Attachment B.

The CCITC wishes to understand the solutions available in the marketplace, including those that may replace currently used solutions. If a system is not able to meet or exceed current functionality in existing systems, then an interface may be required. Vendors should provide pricing for the proposed modules that are in-scope and address the functionality requirements in Attachment B, and should also include on an optional basis the cost for developing an interface in case CCITC determines to stay with any such existing supporting systems.

Addendum 2 Page 13 of 33 December 22, 2020

88. When considering your General Ledger redesign, you asked all respondents to explain how we propose to retain the old numbering system. Can you please say more about what problem you are trying to solve by retaining the old ledger numbers and any other context you can give us for this request?

CCITC Response: CCITC anticipates a period of time in which staff will have to reference the old ledger numbers as they learn the new ledger numbers and understand the relationship to the former number scheme.

89. Do the three organizations (CCITC, Marathon and Wassau) have a shared general ledger numbering taxonomy at present?

CCITC Response: Yes. The structure is similar, but each Entity has its own chart of accounts.

90. In light of COVID and Holiday shipping delays, will CCITC consider email submission?

CCITC Response: No, vendors must mail proposals.

91. During the implementation process, how many years of historical data does CCITC wish to import into the new solution?

CCITC Response: Please see Attachment B, Data Conversion tab.

92. Will the group be looking to produce 2 or 3 separate budget books?

CCITC Response: Yes.

93. Is there a preferred existing format for the Budget Book document, or will a GFOA Award compliant template be acceptable?

CCITC Response: A GFOA Award compliant template is acceptable.

94. How many tax jurisdictions does CCITC file in each one of the entities?

CCITC Response: Federal and State only.

95. How many garnishments disbursements does CCITC have?

CCITC Response: Less than 10, assuming that this question refers to employee garnishments.

96. Does CCITC have three separate EIN's?

CCITC Response: Yes.

97. In Table 07, are all 26 additional applications intended to be retained and used after the ERP implementation project?

CCITC Response: It is expected that some may be replaced by a future system, however the final determination will be made based on the solution(s) selected by the CCITC and suitability of the proposed functionality.

98. Will all the City, County, and CCITC employees enter their time in IntelliTime time and attendance system?

CCITC Response: Employees currently capture time using both IntelliTime and paper-based processes. CCITC is interested to learn system capabilities that could meet the requirements outlined in Attachment B, Time and Attendance (tab 18).

Addendum 2 Page 14 of 33 December 22, 2020

99. Will the 2 recruiting systems (NeoGov and Taleo) be retained after the implementation project? These 2 systems are on both the interface and conversion lists.

CCITC Response: Please see the response to question 87.

100. (As it relates to Treasury) Approximately how many investment positions are in the investment portfolio? What is the total dollar amount?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

101. (As it relates to Treasury) What type of investments are purchased (more than just CD’s, Muni’s, Deposit Notes?)?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

102. (As it relates to Treasury) How many participants (funds) are in the investment pool to which you allocate interest? Is this monthly or quarterly?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

103. (As it relates to Treasury) In the Debt Management tab, DM.6 - The system has the ability to allocate amortization schedules by fund, is this to allocate for debt or investments? Are you looking to allocate debt service schedules to various funds from a main bond issue?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not deem it necessary to provide additional details in order to respond to this requirement. Vendors should be able to respond to this requirement as-is.

104. (As it relates to Treasury) How many outstanding Debt issues are you currently tracking? What type of debt is in the debt portfolio?

CCITC Response: The City is currently tracking approximately thirteen debt issues. They are a combination of general obligation bonds and notes, anticipation notes, and revenue bonds.

105. (As it relates to Treasury) Do you have leases or loans in the debt portfolio that you need to track?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

106. (As it relates to Treasury) What system are you currently using to track your investment portfolio?

CCITC Response: Microsoft Excel.

107. (As it relates to Treasury) What system are you currently using to track your debt portfolio?

CCITC Response: Microsoft Excel.

108. Attachment B: 1.General and Technical Section - GT.17 (The system has the ability to provide a toolkit to create and manage API's.) Question: Can you clarify what kind of API management is being sought by you?

Addendum 2 Page 15 of 33 December 22, 2020

CCITC Response: The CCITC is looking to understand available options within proposed systems to provide a means and method for the entities to develop APIs for integration without reliance on the software provider’s support.

109. Attachment B: 4. Purchasing Section - PUR.23 (The system has the ability to support internal electronic signatures.) Question: Can you clarify which kind of electronic signatures you are seeking? Provide more details about electronic signatures.

CCITC Response: CCITC is interested in this functionality for electronic purchase order signatures.

110. Attachment B: 1.General and Technical Section - GT.33 (The system has the ability to provide "Document Management System" functionality to track electronic files associated with specific system records.)

a. For “Document Management System”, should documents stored on local server (where system hosted) or any other cloud storage?

CCITC Response: Yes.

b. Which type of users can access for what type of documents from DMS?

CCITC Response: Documents should be available based on configured security permissions.

111. Attachment B: 1.General and Technical Section - GT.50 (The system has the ability to store passwords in encrypted form, if the system requires that passwords be stored.)

Question: What specific encryption algorithm or method required or generally used RSA/MD5 method required?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not deem it necessary to provide additional details in order to respond to this requirement. Vendors should be able to respond to this requirement as-is.

112. Attachment B: 1.General and Technical Section – GT.136 (The system has the ability to support access from mobile devices (e.g., for Entity-defined approvals and Executive Information System) with appropriate security permissions.) Question: Can you clarify which system should be accessed from mobile application (Android/iOS) or mobile browser for web based version?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not deem it necessary to provide additional details in order to respond to this requirement. Vendors should be able to respond to this requirement as-is.

113. Attachment B: 1.General and Technical Section – GT.146 (System should support Workflow Process.) Question: Can you provide us more detail about role-based workflow system, who will check and approve request/data?

CCITC Response: The CCITC expects that the decision related to this will be determined through configuration analysis with the selected vendor, and that a future system capabilities may support differing configuration and processes than used currently.

114. Attachment B: 2.General Ledger and Fin Reporting section – GL.82 (The system has the ability to provide at least 13 open periods, including one for audit adjustments (per 13).)

Question: Can you provide us more details about all 13 open account period instance and different open account period instance?

Addendum 2 Page 16 of 33 December 22, 2020

CCITC Response: CCITC does not deem it necessary to provide additional details in order to respond to this requirement. Vendors should be able to respond to this requirement as-is.

115. Attachment B: 4. Purchasing Section - PUR.8 (The system has the ability to generate a list of contracts available to departments that would allow the users to click on a vendor or commodity to see the associated contract and pricing.) Question: For this requirement, we need to understand all possible type of contracts (Vendor Contracts). Please provide more detailed information about it.

CCITC Response: CCITC does not deem it necessary to provide additional details in order to respond to this requirement. Vendors should be able to respond to this requirement as-is.

116. Attachment B: 4. Purchasing Section - PUR.185 (The system has the ability to attach the proof of receipt electronically to the receiving document in order to verify the 3-way match.)

Question: Can you detail more on 3-way match?

CCITC Response: This would include matching a purchase order, receiver/receipt document, and an invoice in order to validate that the invoice is appropriate to pay.

117. Attachment B: 4. Purchasing Section - PUR.193 (The system has the ability to report on all open contract available amounts and expenditures, including purchase order and P-Card expenditures, based on Entity-defined criteria.) Question: For P-Card expenditures, will there be manual entries or API integration for P-Card to get transaction details?

CCITC Response: Vendor’s should describe the options available in the solution and the recommended approach.

118. Attachment B: 4. Purchasing Section - PUR.143 (The system has the ability to produce a full audit trail on all transactions that include every field.) Question: What data should be shown in audit trail?

CCITC Response: At a minimum, the audit trail should include the user, date of entry/edit, previous, and current value.

119. Attachment B: 6.AP – AP.74 (The system has the ability to support the processing and reconciliation of checks from multiple (minimum of 5) Entity bank accounts.)

a. What way would be the Reconciliation process, will it be manual or Bank API integration required or Bank statement based reconciliation?

CCITC Response: Vendor’s should describe the options available in the solution and the recommended approach.

b. P-Card Reconciliation should it be manual / statement import/compare based or P-card Vendor API based?

CCITC Response: Vendor’s should describe the options available in the solution and the recommended approach.

120. Attachment B: 11. Inventory and Fixed asset Section – Fl.113 (The system has the ability to accommodate workflow processes for periodic inventory counts.) Question: Can you provide more details on how workflow processes accommodates periodic inventory counts?

Addendum 2 Page 17 of 33 December 22, 2020

CCITC Response: CCITC does not deem it necessary to provide additional details in order to respond to this requirement. Vendors should be able to respond to this requirement as-is.

121. Attachment B: 13. Payroll - PR.110 (The system has the ability to maintain an off-cycle payroll calendar.) Question: What are the off-cycle payrolls and how you seeking to maintain its calendar in system?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not deem it necessary to provide additional details in order to respond to this requirement. Vendors should be able to respond to this requirement as-is.

122. Attachment B: 18. Time and Attendance – TE.27 (The system has the ability to designate a back-up for employees that are unable to enter or approve their time (e.g., due to sick leave).) Question: Need more details about how system will designate a back-up for employee who are unable to enter or approve their time.

CCITC Response: The CCITC is unable to inform vendors how their proposed solutions will accomplish this, as this will be based on the specific product that is proposed. The CCITC wishes to understand if systems are capable of designating, at the individual employee or group level, a back-up who with appropriate permissions is able to enter or approve time for an employee that is unable to do so themselves (e.g. due to sick leave).

123. (As it relates to budget preparation) How many weeks each year does the City and Counties spend preparing the annual budget?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

124. (As it relates to budget preparation) How many employees are involved in preparing budgets (including department managers, etc. for distributed budgeting)?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

125. (As it relates to budget preparation) What is the average percentage of work hours each week devoted to budget preparation during this period?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

126. (As it relates to budget preparation) How many work hours are there per week in your organization?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

127. (As it relates to budget preparation) What is the average cost per-hour of the employees involved in the budget preparation process?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

128. (As it relates to budget management) How many weeks per year does City and Counties spend managing the budget?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

Addendum 2 Page 18 of 33 December 22, 2020

129. (As it relates to budget management) How many employees are devoted to managing the budget throughout the year?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

130. (As it relates to budget management) What is the average percentage of work hours devoted to budget management?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

131. (As it relates to budget management) What is the average cost per-hour of the employees involved in managing the budget?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

132. PR.110 “The system has the ability to maintain an off-cycle payroll calendar.” Please explain how CCITC uses an off-cycle calendar in greater detail.

CCITC Response: CCITC does not deem it necessary to provide additional details in order to respond to this requirement. Vendors should be able to respond to this requirement as-is.

133. PR.201 “The system has the ability to calculate the appropriate benefit deductions for an employee that transfers positions during a pay period.” Please explain how CCITC would like the deductions to be treated.

CCITC Response: CCITC does not deem it necessary to provide additional details in order to respond to this requirement. Vendors should be able to respond to this requirement as-is.

134. PR.291 “The system has the ability to set a defined amount for direct deposit.” Please explain this requirement in greater detail.

CCITC Response: CCITC does not deem it necessary to provide additional details in order to respond to this requirement. Vendors should be able to respond to this requirement as-is.

135. PR.372 “Federal Annual E-4 report.” Please explain the Federal E-4 report in greater detail.

CCITC Response: CCITC does not deem it necessary to provide additional details in order to respond to this requirement. Vendors should be able to respond to this requirement as-is.

136. Requirements Spreadsheet – Job Costing Tab; Work Management. Please clarify what assets the work order management component of the proposed ERP solution is to perform work for (streets, facilities, utilities, etc.) and what system the asset information is stored/maintained.

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

137. Requirements Spreadsheet – Job Costing Tab; Work Management. Please clarify the existing asset management solutions to be integrated with the proposed solution

Addendum 2 Page 19 of 33 December 22, 2020

(FacilityDude, Fleet Management, etc.) and what asset management solutions (if any) are to be replaced by the proposed ERP solution.

CCITC Response: Please see Attachment B, Potential Interfaces tab.

138. RFP Section 2.7, Current Applications Environment: Do all 3 CCITC entities have the same legal address and registration number?

CCITC Response: No.

139. RFP Section 2.7, Current Applications Environment: Is CCITC looking for a consolidated ledger for all 3 entities for reporting purposes?

CCITC Response: Each entity anticipates maintaining separate ledgers.

140. RFP Section 2.7, Current Applications Environment: How many balancing segments is CCITC is looking for with each of the Chart of accounts?

CCITC Response: This will be determined when redesigning the chart of accounts.

141. RFP Section 2.7, Current Applications Environment: Does CCITC have any specific financial reporting requirements for the 3 entities?

CCITC Response: Please see Attachment B, which includes reporting requirements in each module.

142. Attachment B - Functional and Technical Requirements/Capabilities: In the data conversion tab, 10 +years of historical data is required to convert for some fields. Are you open to other options like storing this data in a Database/Data warehouse?

CCITC Response: The CCITC has listed the requested amount of data to be converted for each data conversion object in Attachment B, but has also provided space in column I for proposers to specify what is seen as a typical/standard conversion scope in the event there are variations. If a proposing vendor recommends a data warehouse as a possible solution to additional legacy data, this should be proposed on an optional basis for consideration.

143. RFP Section 2.7, Current Applications Environment: Do you have detailed documentation available from past implementations?

CCITC Response: CCITC does not feel this information is required for vendors to develop a proposal response.

144. RFP Section 2.7, Current Applications Environment: Would CCITC be willing to move the staff recruitment application from Taleo to Oracle Fusion Talent Management?

CCITC Response:…