ESBD_383246_1738107713200_HHS0014578 HHSC Responses to Solicitation Questions.pdf

PCS 134 HHS Responses to Questions

Effective Date 06/26/2015 Version 1.00 Page 1 of 5 Revision Date 09/13/2023

Solicitation Title: Request for Offers (RFO) for BMC Subscriptions, Maintenance Services and Support for Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) and Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS)

Solicitation Number: HHS0014578

# Reference Question Response

1.

Who is the incumbent on this contract? Are they bidding for new contract as well?

Cooper Consulting (Prime) and, Peraton (Subcontractor) are the incumbent contractors for this contract. The requested information is not necessary to respond to the Solicitation.

2. Page 12 - 2.1.3.2 Can we take over the existing instances or do we have to stand up new instances and migrate to them?

HHS does not own the existing instances and thus contractor will need to stand up new instances and migrate to them

3. Page 12 - 2.1.3.2 BMC usually only allows downward license adjustments at the annual renewal. Are you able to do it quarterly currently?

No, HHSC is unable to do downward license adjustments quarterly.

4. HUB – self-performing company

If we use a mix of W-2 and 1099s, are we still self-performing?

If these W-2 & 1099 employees work for your company, then this would still be considered self-performing.

5.

Page 17 – 2.1.3.3.4 – Roles and responsibilities

HHS will ensure “Contractor Staff are given access to all necessary systems, facilities and workspace”. Can contractor staff be remote, or do they have to work on premise?

Contractor Staff can be remote, however, HHS will not be responsible for ensuring access to all necessary systems, facilities and workspace, as stated in Section 2.1.3.3.4, for a contractor’s remote staff.

Version 1.00 Page 2 of 5 Revision Date 09/13/2023

# Reference Question Response

6. Exhibit T – Liquidated Damages

Is this paid by BMC (the vendor hosting the software?

Or do you expect the vendor who wins this RFP to pay it? “RoD PROD Availability Calculation - $617 for every 10 minutes in breach of the Service Level Objectives, excluding the first 20 minutes or 0.02% *(Total Minutes in the Month) + 10 minutes (whichever is greater). Calculations are performed monthly.”

As stated in Section 2.1.3.3.12, (Performance Requirements) the Respondent awarded a contract will be responsible for any assessed liquidated damages.

7.

Since we were not sent the link for the vendor conference could we get the presentation?

Refer to Addendum No. 1 to the Solicitation.

8. HHS0014578_BMC_RF

O/ Section 2.1.3.3.6

Section 2.1.3.3.6 references the successful completion of the technology assessment and planning Deliverable but does not provide a description of the assessment or the contents of the deliverable.

Would HHSC provide additional detail regarding what is desired in the technology assessment and planning Deliverable?

Refer to Addendum No. 2 to the Solicitation.

9.

HHS0014578_BMC_RF

O/ Sections 2.1.3.3.4

- 2.1.3.3.12

Sections 2.1.3.3.4 - 2.1.3.3.12 do not appear to be specifically related to Turnover (Section 2.1.3.3).

Would HHSC clarify which areas they would like to see addressed are part of Turnover versus other areas of the engagement?

The Respondent should address the entirety of Section

2.1.3.3 Turnover Phase as it relates to the SOW.

Sections 2.1.3.3.4 – 2.1.3.3.12 are related to Section

2.1.3.3 Turnover Phase as it provides details on the

responsibilities and roles to be addressed by the awarded Respondent and HHSC, as well as meeting the required Deliverables in the section.

Version 1.00 Page 3 of 5 Revision Date 09/13/2023

# Reference Question Response

10. HHS0014578_BMC_RF

O/ Section 3.6.3

Table A, Item #2 references "Technical Proposal" (Section 5.2) however there is no section 5.2 in the

RFO.

Would HHSC clarify what is being referenced by Item #2?

Refer to Addendum No. 2 to the Solicitation.

11. HHS0014578_BMC_RF

O/ Section 3.3.2

Section 3.3.2 prohibits contact with HHSC regarding this solicitation. Our proposed key personnel have been working with HHSC since 2014 and it would be relevant for this engagement to have HHSC specific references.

May we coordinate with the Sole Point of Contact to request particular references for our proposed key staff?

Communications with the Sole Point of Contact should be made in accordance with Section 3.3, Inquires. To ensure fair dealings with all HHS vendors, HHS personnel may not endorse or provide a reference for any HHS individual vendor or a vendor's products or services.

12.

HHS0014578_BMC_RF

O/ Exhibit J Cost Proposal & Section 2.2.2

Multiple Tabs in the Cost Proposal reference Year One of the initial term to be 10 months, which follows a two-month transition period. Transition is the last two months of FY25, and base term is only 10 (out of 12) months of FY26.

Assuming Transition takes place July 1, 2025 – August 31, 2025, would HHSC evaluate if Year One of the initial term should actually be 12 months?

The Cost Proposal is based on a contract year, not fiscal year. A contract year may begin in one fiscal year and continue into the subsequent fiscal year or may exist entirely in one fiscal year.

Version 1.00 Page 4 of 5 Revision Date 09/13/2023

# Reference Question Response

13. HHS0014578_BMC_RF

O/ Section 6.3

Will HHSC confirm that the word “respondent” in Section 6.3 References includes the proposed prime contractor’s corporate subsidiaries and affiliates for the purposes of submitting relevant experience references?

Although not a federal procurement, Case law from the U.S. Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) indicates that the response should be “Yes,” but we wanted to confirm. The GAO has long held that “[a]n agency properly may attribute the experience or past performance of a parent or affiliated company to an offeror where the firm’s proposal demonstrates that the resources of the parent or affiliate will affect the performance of the offeror.” IAP-Hill, LLC, B- 406289 et al., Apr. 4, 2012, 2012 CPD ¶ 151 at 3 (emphasis added). “The relevant consideration is whether the resources of the parent or affiliate—its workforce, management, facilities or other resources—will be provided or relied upon for contract performance, such that the parent or affiliate will have meaningful involvement in contract performance.” Id. “Where the proposal shows a significant nexus between the parent or affiliate concern’s resources and the contracting entity—for example, use of the affiliate’s employees as key personnel or a commitment of the parent’s financial resources—there is nothing objectionable in attributing the experience or past performance of the related entities to the business entity entering into the contract.” Id. at 3-4 (emphasis added).

Respondent is as defined in Section 1.2, Definitions, however Respondent must provide their proposed operating structure for the Services requested under this Solicitation and which entities (i.e., parent company, affiliate, joint venture, subcontractor) will be performing them; as outlined in Section 6.1.2 Company Profile.

Version 1.00 Page 5 of 5 Revision Date 09/13/2023

# Reference Question Response

14. ARTICLE VII. COST

PROPOSAL Page 52

You say all items must be firm/fixed price but there are unspecified "projects" to be specified and approved over the course of the contract. What are HHS expectations regarding how the vendor is to propose future, unknown scope pieces of work and how they are to be included in this response?

Respondents shall only provide pricing for deliverables in the Scope of Work and Cost Proposal.