ESBD_508237_1777399643879_RFP 240k Final ACH Svcs Addendum 1.pdf

TEXAS COMPTROLLER OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Request for Proposals (RFP No. 240k)

For

Automated Clearing House Services Addendum No. 1

Issued April 28, 2026

I. RFP No. 240k Automated Clearing House Services is hereby amended by this Addendum No. 1, as follows:

Exhibit I, CLIENT REFERENCE FORM is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the

Exhibit I, CLIENT REFERENCE FORM attached hereto.

II. Acknowledgement of Receipt of Addendum No. 1 (“Acknowledgement”):

Respondent Name:

Signature of Authorized Representative:

Printed Name, Title:

Date:

Respondent must sign and return this Acknowledgement with its Proposal.

Respondent’s failure to submit a signed copy of this Acknowledgement may result in disqualification of Respondent’s proposal.

RFP 240k Automated Clearing House Services Page 70 of 72

CPA CMD# 26-8303VR

EXHIBIT I

CLIENT REFERENCE FORM

Automated Clearing House Services

Request for Proposals #240K

REFERENCE DEADLINE to Comptroller: May 19, 2026 02:00 PM (Central Time)

The Texas Comptroller’s office (CPA) requests your assistance in providing a reference for a Request for Proposals (RFP) that has been issued. The Vendor that is responding to this RFP is providing this document for you to fill out and return directly to CPA at the following email address: contracts@cpa.texas.gov.

This table to be completed by the Vendor requesting reference information:

Respondent Name (the “Vendor”)

Client to be contacted as a reference

Complete description of the work performed and deliverables provided (the “Services”)

Dates of Performance for Listed Client

Starting Date:

Ending Date:

Accurate description of the cost of the work performed (if for a public entity), including whether payment was fixed-fee, hourly fee, or some other method of compensation. $

Items below to be completed by the Company providing reference.

Rating: (0) Unsatisfactory; (1) Marginally Satisfactory; (2) Satisfactory; (3) Excellent; or N/A (Not Applicable). Definitions for each rating category are contained at the end of this document. Please provide your opinion by rating the following:

Quality of Services

1. Have you purchased any Services from this Vendor in the past 2 years? Yes___ No____

2. Vendor’s ability to provide the Services in a timely manner? 0.___ 1.___ 2.___ 3.___ N/A____

3. Vendor’s knowledge of and ability to answer questions regarding the Services? 0.___ 1.___ 2.___ 3.___ N/A____

4. Vendor’s ability to resolve problems? 0.___ 1.___ 2.___ 3.___ N/A____

Cost

5. Did Vendor submit timely, accurate and complete invoices? 0.___ 1.___ 2.___ 3.___ N/A____

Timeliness of Performance

6. Adherence to delivery schedule (major tasks, milestones) 0.___ 1.___ 2.___ 3.___ N/A____

Business Relations & Satisfaction

7. Effectively communicated with Reference’s management & staff 0.___ 1.___ 2.___ 3.___ N/A____

8. Vendor personnel (professional, cooperative & flexible) 0.___ 1.___ 2.___ 3.___ N/A____

9. Vendor’s attitude toward customer service 0.___ 1.___ 2.___ 3.___ N/A____

10. Overall Satisfaction with Vendor 0.___ 1.___ 2.___ 3.___ N/A____ mailto:contracts@cpa.texas.gov

RFP 240k Automated Clearing House Services Page 71 of 72

Comments: (Please use additional page if necessary)

In your opinion, would you use this Vendor again for these Services? Yes_____ No _____

In your opinion, should this Vendor be recommended to others? Yes_____ No _____

Name of Individual Completing Form: ____________________________________________Date:_____________

Organization:__________________________________Title:______________________________

Phone Number:__________________ Email address:______________________

RFP 240k Automated Clearing House Services Page 72 of 72

Vendor References

Scoring

Score Pricing Timeliness Customer Service

Excellent (3)

There are no quality problems.

There are no cost issues. There are no delays. Responses to inquiries, technical, service, and administrative issues are effective and responsive.

Satisfactory (2)

Nonconformances do not impact achievement of contract requirements.

Cost issues do not impact achievement of contract requirements.

Delays do not impact achievement of contract requirements.

Response to inquiries, technical, service, and administrative issues is usually effective and responsive.

Marginal (1)

Nonconformances require minor Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements.

Cost issues require minor

Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements.

Delays require minor

Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements.

Response to inquiries, technical, service, and administrative issues is somewhat effective and responsive.

Unsatisfactory (0)

Nonconformances are compromising the achievement of contract requirements.

Cost issues are compromising performance of contract requirements.

Delays are compromising the achievement of contract requirements.

Response to inquiries, technical, service, and administrative issues is not effective and responsive.