ESBD_549115_1787952589881_Addendum - Vendor Questions RFP 739-SL3821039 - Consulting Services - Enterprise AI Adoption Enablement.pdf

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Consulting Services

Enterprise AI Adoption & Enablement

Addendum No. 1

RFP 739-SL3821039

Addendum No. 1

Consulting Services

Enterprise AI Adoption & Enablement

AMENDMENT (1)

Section 2.4 - Anticipated Term, which previously read:

The anticipated term of any resulting agreement will begin on the date an agreement is executed, and expire on August 31, 2027.

Is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

The anticipated term of any resulting agreement will begin on the date an agreement is executed, and expire on March 31, 2028.

AMENDMENT (2)

Section 5.4 - Services Specifications, paragraph entitled “Project Schedule:”, which previously read:

TTUHSC desires to operate in accordance with the following schedule. These dates are for planning purposes and subject to change:

• Kick-off meeting:

• Completion of Deliverable 1: ________________

• Completion of Deliverable 2: ________________

• Completion of Deliverable 3: ________________

• Completion of Deliverable 4: ________________

• Completion of Deliverable 5: ________________

• Completion of Deliverable 6: ________________

TTUHSC desires to operate in accordance with the following schedule. These dates are for planning purposes and subject to change:

• Kick-off meeting: February 2027;

• Completion of Deliverable 1: April 2027;

• Completion of Deliverable 2: April 2027;

• Completion of Deliverable 3: September 2027;

• Completion of Deliverable 4: September 2027;

• Completion of Deliverable 5: December 2027;

• Completion of Deliverable 6: February 2028.

AMENDMENT (3)

Section 6.1 Pricing for Services Offered:, which previously read:

1. Provide a “not to exceed” fixed fee for each of the deliverables including associated fees (i.e. printing costs, attendance at meetings, travel), for the Consulting Services - Enterprise AI Adoption & Enablement. A schedule should be included to document the level of effort used to derive the quoted fixed fee.

2. An hourly resource rate card by resource type (e.g., Project Manager, Analyst) valid through August 31, 2027 which will be used as the basis for change orders.

1. Provide a “not to exceed” fixed fee for each of the deliverables including associated fees (i.e. printing costs, attendance at meetings, travel), for the Consulting Services - Enterprise AI Adoption & Enablement. A schedule should be included to document the level of effort used to derive the quoted fixed fee.

2. An hourly resource rate card by resource type (e.g., Project Manager, Analyst) valid through March 31, 2028 which will be used as the basis for change orders.

RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS

The following responses to participant questions are fully incorporated into RFP 739-SL3821039.

Question TTUHSC Response

1. Section 3.7 states a VetHUB Subcontracting Plan is required and that TTUHSC has determined subcontracting opportunities are probable under this RFP. Appendix A Section 1.1.6 provides that the selected proposer will not delegate its duties or responsibilities to any subcontractor except as expressly provided in the Agreement. Please confirm the required HSP method and supporting documentation where the proposer is itself a Texas certified Historically Underutilized Business with veteran designation and intends to self perform one hundred percent of the Services with no subcontracting.

Specifically, please confirm whether such a proposer completes the self performance justification in lieu of the good faith effort subcontractor solicitation and notice requirements, and identify which sections of the Appendix C form must be completed in that circumstance.

As described the Proposer would complete and submit on the basis of the self performance justification.

2. Section 5.4(E) states the Contractor shall provide solutions via a software platform, managed analytics services, or integrated reporting tools, and the Overview states the specification does not mandate a single proprietary methodology or commercial software delivery mechanism. Please confirm that a managed analytics and reporting service, built on TTUHSC's existing enterprise AI telemetry and reporting tools rather than a separately licensed contractor platform, is a responsive approach to Deliverable 5. If TTUHSC has a preference for a licensed platform, please indicate whether platform license costs should be priced inside the Deliverable 5 not to exceed fixed fee under Section

6.1 or presented as a separate line.

A solution that meets the requirements and built on TTUHSC existing enterprise AI telemetry would be considered responsive.

TTUHSC does not have a preference as to how this specification would be met.

Costing for any solution offered is at the discretion of the Proposer. Cost breakdown within a deliverable line or a separate cost line is not a differentiator for TTUHSC reviewers. Please ensure costing is clear and discernable to the evaluating reader.

3. Section 5.2 lists compliance with the Texas Risk and Authorization Management Program (TX-RAMP) "as may be required." Section 5.4(E) permits adoption and impact analytics to be delivered via a software platform, managed analytics services, or integrated reporting tools. Please confirm whether TX-RAMP certification is required where a proposer delivers Deliverable 5 as a managed analytics and reporting service operating within TTUHSC's existing enterprise environment and approved tooling, with no contractor hosted cloud service and no institutional data leaving TTUHSC controlled systems. If TX-RAMP would still apply in that delivery model, please identify the

Under Texas Government Code § 2054.0593 and Texas Department of Information Resources guidelines, TX-RAMP applies specifically to Cloud Service Providers offering hosted cloud computing services (SaaS, PaaS, IaaS).

As described in Question 3 specifically, Deliverable 5 is executed strictly as a professional/managed service operating inside TTUHSC’s approved enterprise environment, using TTUHSC’s certified infrastructure and tooling, and keeping all institutional data on-premise systems, the managed service itself is not classified as an out-of-scope third-party cloud product.

applicable certification level and the required timing relative to award.

4. Has TTUHSC established a budget, appropriation, or not-to-exceed amount for the Services described in Section 5.4? If a specific figure cannot be published, would TTUHSC indicate a range so that proposers can calibrate the depth and sequencing of the six deliverables appropriately?

The cost shall not exceed $750,000.

5. Section 2.4 states that the anticipated term expires August 31, 2027, and Section 2.3 shows evaluation continuing through November 30, 2026. Does TTUHSC expect all six deliverables to be completed within that remaining window, and does TTUHSC anticipate renewal, extension, or a follow-on term beyond August 31, 2027 for continuing enablement and adoption support?

TTUHSC is seeking the completion of all deliverables and will work collaboratively in constructing a contract term that accommodates that position.

6. Section 4.8.1 reserves the right to award an agreement for all or any portion of the requirements, or to award multiple agreements. Will TTUHSC consider a phased award, or an award covering a subset of the six deliverables? If so, should the Pricing Schedule be structured so that individual deliverables can be selected independently?

It is TTUHSC’s intention to issue a single award, however in accordance with the terms of the RFP, reserves the right to award an agreement for all or any portion of the requirements proposed by reason of this request, award multiple agreements, or to reject any and all proposals if deemed to be in the best interests of TTUHSC and to resolicit for proposals, or temporarily or permanently abandon the solicitation.

7. If the full scope described in Requirements A through G cannot be delivered at full depth within the initial term, which requirement areas does TTUHSC regard as the highest priority for the first phase of work?

TTUHSC is seeking the completion of all deliverables and will work collaboratively in constructing a contract term that accommodates that position.

8. Section 5.4 notes that TTUHSC has already provisioned enterprise AI tools including large language models and embedded AI productivity assistants. Which tools are currently licensed and deployed, and is a systems integrator, reseller, or implementation partner presently engaged in adoption, training, or governance work that the Contractor would be expected to coordinate with?

Microsoft Copilot is currently the enterprise generative AI tool that has been deployed. Other GenAI tools are being evaluated. Examples of other tools provided enterprise-wide include Zoom AI Companion, Epic, Grammarly, etc.

There is no incumbent systems integrator, reseller, or implementation partner engaged; there is no incumbent vendor engaged to provide these consulting services.

9. Requirement E.4 describes ROI modeling and verification using TTUHSC supplied baseline metrics and assumptions. Are those baseline metrics presently established? Will they be made available to proposers during this solicitation, or provided to the successful Contractor at kickoff?

Baseline metrics have not been established. TTUHSC conducted some AI baseline surveys in 2025 and 2026, but the Contractor is expected to bring a method for measuring the baseline and, later, the ROI.

Baselines are not established today; they will be provided to the successful Contractor at kickoff where available, and the Contractor is expected to establish the measurement framework.

10. Has TTUHSC completed any prior AI readiness or maturity assessment, acceptable use directive, governance policy, or inventory of AI use cases that the Contractor should build upon rather than originate?

TTUHSC has some governance structure already in place and seeks to align with both the NIST AI Risk Management Framework and the Texas DIR framework. TTUHSC has a responsible AI use policy (OP 52.21) and maintains an active AI tool inventory.

No formal maturity or readiness assessment exists; the Contractor is expected to conduct the first baseline assessment and build upon the existing inventory and policy rather than originate everything from scratch.

11. Approximately how many employees fall within the scope of the Requirement C workforce upskilling program, and how are they distributed across the five campuses and across the functional domains named in C.1 (procurement, finance, clinical administration, academic operations)? Approximately how many leaders are anticipated for the Requirement B.1 leadership education sessions?

Total number of employees: about 6,000. Abilene: ~100; Amarillo: ~700;

Dallas: ~90; Lubbock: ~3,710; Permian Basin: ~600; Strategic Initiatives (Correctional Managed Care): ~800.

Functional domains (some groups overlap): Clinical: ~2,000; Academic:

~2,000; Research: ~1,300; Other (Admin, Operational, Supporting): ~2,000.

Number of leaders: around 150-200.

The initial rollout will target about 3,000 individuals.

12. Requirement D.1 refers to evaluating functional departmental processes for AI-driven redesign, and the Objective in Section 5.4 references clinical operational units. Please confirm whether the clinical element of

The clinical scope may extend to clinical decision support, diagnostic, and patient-facing applications. Any solution must comply with applicable regulatory requirements, with human-in-the-loop controls and clinical validation before any production clinical deployment.

scope is limited to administrative and operational workflows, or whether it is intended to extend to clinical decision support, diagnostic, or patient-facing applications.

13. Requirement A.4 calls for a governance framework addressing permissible use, data privacy, IP management, algorithmic accountability, and risk mitigation. Does TTUHSC expect the framework to be aligned to a specified external reference, such as the NIST AI Risk Management Framework or Texas Department of Information Resources guidance, or is the Contractor to propose the governance structure?

TTUHSC has some governance structure already in place and seeks to align with both the NIST AI Risk Management Framework and the Texas DIR

The Contractor is to propose the governance structure, aligned to the NIST AI RMF and the Texas DIR framework, building on OP 52.21 rather than replacing it.

14. Deliverable 5 describes an Analytics and ROI Reporting Dashboard or Service, and Requirement E permits delivery via a software platform, managed analytics services, or integrated reporting tools. Would TTUHSC accept an analytics and reporting capability built and operated inside TTUHSC's own Microsoft 365 and Azure environment, with all institutional data remaining under TTUHSC control and no Contractor-hosted service, in place of a vendor platform? The same question applies to the institutional knowledge repository in Requirement C.5.

Yes. An analytics and reporting capability built and operated inside TTUHSC's own Microsoft 365 and Azure environment, with all institutional data remaining under TTUHSC control and no Contractor-hosted service, is acceptable. Power BI is available. The same applies to the institutional knowledge repository, which may leverage existing TTUHSC systems (e.g., SharePoint/Teams).

15. Section 5.2 states that the Proposer is to be compliant with the Texas Risk and Authorization Management Program as may be required. Please confirm whether TX-RAMP certification is required for this procurement and, if so, which components of the scope it applies to, given that professional consulting services which do not host or process institutional data on Contractor-operated cloud infrastructure fall outside the program's stated scope.

Under Texas Government Code § 2054.0593 and Texas Department of Information Resources guidelines, TX-RAMP applies specifically to Cloud Service Providers offering hosted cloud computing services (SaaS, PaaS, IaaS).

If a proposal does not include the above, TX-RAMP likely would not apply.

16. Will Protected Health Information be made available to the Contractor in the course of this engagement, or will data provided be limited to de-identified, administrative, and operational information? Is execution of the Business Associate Agreement expected at award in either case?

PHI is not expected to be made available; TTUHSC has test patient data that may be used, and data will be made available based on need. Where any PHI is involved, the Business Associate Agreement would apply.

The Business Associate Agreement would be executed where the approved scope of work requires access to PHI; it is included so that it is in place if PHI access is required.

17. Section 1.53.11 of the Business Associate Agreement restricts access to, transmission of, and storage of PHI beyond the boundaries and jurisdiction of the United States absent written authorization. Please confirm whether this restriction is intended to apply to PHI only, or to all institutional data provided under the Agreement, so that proposers can staff and price accordingly.

This restriction applies to all institutional data.

18. Given that TTUHSC operates across five campuses spanning a large geography, is onsite facilitation required? If so, at which campuses and at approximately what frequency? Would TTUHSC accept a predominantly virtual delivery model with onsite presence concentrated at defined milestones such as executive alignment sessions and leadership workshops?

TTUHSC expects some on-site presence but does not have strict requirements for delivery frequency or duration. A predominantly virtual/hybrid model is acceptable, with on-site presence concentrated at defined milestones such as executive alignment sessions and leadership workshops. The initial kickoff is preferred on all campuses (negotiable), and the leadership enablement meeting is preferred on-site in Lubbock, TX. Overall, a hybrid model is preferred.

Travel is to be included in the fee.

19. Section 6.1 requires a not-to-exceed fixed fee for each deliverable inclusive of associated fees such as printing, meeting attendance, and travel. May travel and expenses be shown as a separately itemized not-to-exceed line within each deliverable total, so that TTUHSC can evaluate the professional services component distinctly?

Costing for any solution offered is at the discretion of the Proposer. Cost breakdown within a deliverable line or a separate cost line is not a differentiator for TTUHSC reviewers. Please ensure costing is clear and discernable to the evaluating reader.

20. Does TTUHSC impose a page limit, minimum font size, or file format requirement on the proposal or on any individual section? Section 5.3 does not specify one, and we wish to avoid submitting a response that is

No limit exists as a requirement under the RFP. Please ensure proposals are clear and discernable to the evaluating reader.

longer or shorter than TTUHSC's evaluation team would prefer.

21. Section 5.3 requires at least three references from current or recent clients whose specifications and requirements are most similar to those in this RFP.

Should these be three separate client organizations?

Will TTUHSC consider references from public sector clients outside higher education and healthcare where the scope of services, scale, and institutional complexity are comparable?

The intention is to request three “separate” reference clients.

References provided are at the discretion of the Proposer and can be from any sector that compares favorably to the services requested within this RFP.

22. Section 3.7 states that TTUHSC has determined subcontracting opportunities are probable under this RFP. Would a self-performing HUB Subcontracting Plan, documenting that the Proposer will perform the entire contract with its own personnel and resources, be considered responsive? Is there a HUB participation goal or target percentage applicable to this procurement, and does TTUHSC maintain or recommend a list of certified HUB or veteran-owned vendors under NIGP commodity code 91878 with capability in AI enablement, training delivery, or change management?

A completed VetHub Subcontracting Plan indicating Proposer self performance is responsive.

VetHUB goals, etc., can be viewed here:

https://www.fiscal.ttuhsc.edu/purchasing/hub/findavendor.aspx

The VetHUB directory is maintained by the Texas Comptroller and does not identify services to that level of granularity (“AI enablement, training delivery, or change management”).

23. Section 1.3 of the Agreement provides that all writings, reports, and materials produced by Consultant are works made for hire owned by University. Will TTUHSC consider a clarification confirming that University owns all deliverables and work product created under the Agreement, while Consultant retains ownership of the pre-existing methodologies, frameworks, and templates it uses to produce them, licensed to University for its unrestricted internal use?

Relatedly, please confirm that Section 1.4 is directed at University property and is not intended to restrict Consultant's own pre-existing materials.

Please note from Section 7 – GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

If Proposer takes exception to any of the Required Terms, Proposer will submit a list of the exceptions as part of its proposal.

Section 1.4 is referencing University property.

24. Section 1.7 of the Agreement and Section 1.1.9 of the Execution of Offer provide for indemnification without stated limitation. Will TTUHSC consider a mutually agreeable cap on Consultant's aggregate liability under the Agreement? Will TTUHSC accept defense conducted by Consultant's own counsel, subject to TTUHSC's reasonable approval, rather than counsel approved in advance by TTUHSC?

Please note from Section 7 – GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

If Proposer takes exception to any of the Required Terms, Proposer will submit a list of the exceptions as part of its proposal.

25. Hosting Approach for Deliverables D and E:

Would a Proposer's solution for Deliverable D (Workflow Automation & Agentic Strategy) and Deliverable E (Analytics & ROI) be considered compliant — without requiring independent TX-RAMP certification by the Proposer — if it is built and operated entirely within TTUHSC's own existing, already-licensed cloud environment (e.g., TTUHSC's Microsoft 365/Azure tenant), rather than as a separately hosted platform?

Yes. A solution built and operated entirely within TTUHSC's own existing, already-licensed cloud environment (e.g., TTUHSC's Microsoft 365/Azure tenant), rather than as a separately hosted platform, would not independently trigger TX-RAMP certification by the Proposer. Where a proposal includes a contractor-hosted cloud service, TX-RAMP would apply.

26. Deliverable D Scope and Pricing Structure:

For purposes of the not-to-exceed fixed fee required under Section 6.1.1, would it be acceptable for the "functional prototypes" referenced in Section 5.4-D to be scoped as proof-of-concept-level demonstrations validated in a limited or test environment (rather than production-hardened systems), with the number of prototypes determined through the Deliverable A and D discovery process and defined within the fixed fee — and any additional prototypes or complexity identified beyond that defined scope addressed through the hourly rate card as a change order under Section 6.1.2?

TTUHSC is planning to have at least two workflows/use cases from each functional area (Academic, Clinical, Research, and Admin) evaluated by the Contractor, for a total of about 8 to 10 workflows. Solutions should be either pilot-ready or fully production-ready; the associated cost should not be included in the fixed fee but may be listed as an optional item for TTUHSC to consider.

Prototypes may be scoped as proof-of-concept demonstrations validated in a limited/test environment, with the number determined through discovery and defined within the fixed fee; additional prototypes or complexity beyond that scope may be handled through the hourly rate card as a change order.

27. AI Tool Use by Proposer:

Does the data-use restriction in Section 5.4-F, which prohibits use of TTUHSC institutional data to train or fine-tune AI models, apply specifically to TTUHSC's institutional data, or does it also restrict a Proposer's internal use of general-purpose AI tools for tasks such as drafting deliverables, where no TTUHSC data is entered into those tools?

Section 5.4-F applies to TTUHSC institutional data and does not prohibit a Proposer’s internal use of AI-enables tool. However, the Proposer must ensure that TTUHSC institutional data, confidential information, protected health information (PHI), personally identifiable information (PII), or other TTUHSC-sensitive information is not submitted to, processed by, or used to train any artificial intelligence systems unless expressly authorized in writing by TTUHSC.

28. PHI Scope by Deliverable:

Which of the six deliverables under Section 5.4 does TTUHSC anticipate will involve Protected Health Information (subject to the Business Associate Agreement at Appendix A), as distinct from FERPA-covered or other institutional data?

PHI is not expected to be made available for any deliverable; TTUHSC has test patient data that may be used. Where any deliverable requires PHI access, the Business Associate Agreement would apply. FERPA-covered and other institutional data will be provided based on need.

29. Deliverable E Data Scope:

What source systems does TTUHSC anticipate making available for adoption and usage analytics under Deliverable E (e.g., AI tool usage reporting, learning management system data), and what is the approximate scale of the covered user population?

Total number of employees: about 6,000. Abilene: ~100; Amarillo: ~700;

Source systems for adoption/usage analytics (e.g., AI tool usage reporting, LMS data) will be made available based on need; Access to telemetry data will be provided to the Contractor if needed.

30. Project Schedule Section 5.4 leaves the kickoff and Deliverables 1–6 milestone dates blank. Please provide TTUHSC's anticipated contract execution date, kickoff date, and desired completion date for each deliverable.

The following proposed Project Schedule may change based on RFP progress:

o Kick-off meeting: February 2027;

o Deliverable 1: April 2027;

o Deliverable 2: April 2027;

o Deliverable 3: September 2027;

o Deliverable 4: September 2027;

o Deliverable 5: December 2027;

o Deliverable 6: February 2028.

TTUHSC is seeking completion of all deliverables and will work collaboratively in constructing a contract term that accommodates that position.

Proposers may propose their own timeline within the term; TTUHSC will work collaboratively on sequencing and dependencies.

31. Budget Range Does TTUHSC have an anticipated budget or budget range for this engagement that may be shared with proposers?

The cost shall not exceed $750,000.

32. Population and Organizational Scope Approximately how many employees, faculty, clinicians, researchers, students, departments, schools, campuses, and/or functional areas should proposers assume are within scope of the assessment, training, and adoption activities?

Total number of employees: about 6,000. Abilene: ~100; Amarillo: ~700;

Students are not the primary focus of the workforce upskilling scope.

33. Depth of Enterprise Assessment Does TTUHSC expect detailed readiness and workflow assessments across all organizational units, or should proposers assume an enterprise-wide framework with deeper assessment of a prioritized subset of departments or functions?

An enterprise-wide framework with deeper assessment of a prioritized subset of departments or functions is acceptable; depth of assessment may be prioritized with the Contractor based on the current-state assessment.

Prototypes are expected across Academic, Clinical, Research, and Admin functional areas (about 8-10 workflows).

34. Current AI Technology Environment Please identify the enterprise AI tools, Large Language Models, productivity assistants, and related platforms currently provisioned or approved by TTUHSC, Microsoft Copilot is currently the enterprise generative AI tool that has been including the approximate number of licensed or active users where available.

Specific license/seat counts will be provided to the selected Contractor based on need.

35. Workflow Discovery Volume Approximately how many departmental workflows or use cases should proposers assume will be evaluated during workflow discovery and opportunity mapping?

The number of workflows evaluated during discovery may be proposed by the Contractor based on the current-state assessment; TTUHSC anticipates about 8-10 workflows across the four functional areas.

36. Number of Automation Prototypes For Deliverable 4, how many functional automation prototypes or custom solutions should proposers include within the fixed-fee scope?

TTUHSC is planning to have at least two workflows/use cases from each functional area (Academic, Clinical, Research, and Admin) evaluated by the Contractor, for a total of about 8 to 10 workflows. Solutions should be either pilot-ready or fully production-ready; the associated cost should not be included in the fixed fee but may be listed as an optional item for TTUHSC to consider.

37. Prototype Maturity Should Deliverable 4 solutions be considered proof-of-concept prototypes, pilot-ready solutions, or fully production-ready applications? If production deployment is expected, should ongoing hosting, licensing, maintenance, and operational support be included in the fixed fee?

TTUHSC is planning to have at least two workflows/use cases from each functional area (Academic, Clinical, Research, and Admin) evaluated by the Contractor, for a total of about 8 to 10 workflows. Solutions should be either pilot-ready or fully production-ready; the associated cost should not be

Solutions should be either pilot-ready or fully production-ready. Associated ongoing hosting, licensing, maintenance, and operational support costs should not be included in the fixed fee but may be listed as optional items for TTUHSC to consider.

38. Agentic AI Expectations Does TTUHSC expect the Contractor to deploy production agentic AI workflows during the engagement, or primarily develop an agentic AI architecture, governance framework, controls, and selected prototype use cases?

TTUHSC does not mandate a specific framework. The preference is for the Contractor to design and recommend the agentic AI architecture, governance framework, controls, and selected prototype use cases.

The primary expectation is to develop the agentic AI architecture, governance framework, controls, and selected prototype use cases rather than deploy production agentic workflows at scale.

39. Analytics Platform For Deliverable 5, does TTUHSC prefer that the Contractor use existing institutional business-intelligence and reporting platforms, such as Power BI or equivalent tools, or is TTUHSC seeking a new Contractor-provided analytics platform or managed analytics service?

Either route is acceptable, with no preference here. Power BI is available; the Contractor may build on existing institutional BI/reporting platforms or propose a solution.

40. AI Usage and Adoption Data What usage telemetry and adoption data are currently available from TTUHSC's enterprise AI platforms, and will the selected Contractor receive appropriate access to this data through administrative reporting, exports, or APIs?

Access to telemetry data will be provided to the Contractor if needed. Access to admin/telemetry data (e.g., Microsoft 365 admin data) will be provided to the Contractor based on need, through administrative reporting, exports, or APIs where available.

41. ROI Baselines Does TTUHSC currently maintain baseline data for labor hours, process cycle times, operating costs, service levels, or other measures that may be used to calculate and validate AI-related ROI and productivity improvements?

Baseline metrics have not been established. TTUHSC conducted some AI

TTUHSC does not maintain established baselines for labor hours, cycle times, operating costs, or service levels for these processes; the Contractor is expected to help establish them.

42. Training Population Approximately how many individuals should proposers assume will receive live or instructor-led training, and approximately how many role-based learning pathways or functional curricula should be included in the fixed-fee scope?

Total number of employees: about 6,000. Abilene: ~100; Amarillo: ~700;

The number of role-based learning pathways/curricula may be proposed by the

Contractor based on the readiness assessment.

43. PHI and Business Associate Requirements Does TTUHSC anticipate that the selected Contractor will access, receive, maintain, or transmit Protected Health Information during this engagement? Where feasible, may assessment, training, prototyping, and development activities be performed using sanitized, de-identified, synthetic, or non-production data?

PHI is not expected to be made available; assessment, training, prototyping, and development activities may be performed using sanitized, de-identified, synthetic, or non-production data. TTUHSC has test patient data that may be used. Where any PHI access is required, the BAA would apply.

44. TX-RAMP Applicability Section 5.2 states that TX-RAMP compliance is required "as may be required." Please clarify the circumstances under which TX-RAMP certification or authorization will apply to this engagement, particularly where the Contractor performs consulting and development within TTUHSC-controlled environments rather than providing a Contractor-hosted cloud service.

Under Texas Government Code § 2054.0593 and Texas Department of Information Resources guidelines, TX-RAMP applies specifically to Cloud

45. Deliverable Acceptance Criteria Please clarify the acceptance criteria TTUHSC intends to use for Deliverables 1–6, including the expected review period and number of review/comment cycles proposers should include within the fixed-fee pricing.

Deliverable acceptance is by the Chief AI Transformation Officer, the AI Steering Committee, and the President, and will depend on TTUHSC review cycles.

Formal acceptance criteria and a work plan are required per Section 5.3.2;

specific acceptance criteria, review periods, and revision cycles will be agreed with the Contractor and may be reflected in fixed-fee pricing.

46. Onsite Expectations Does TTUHSC anticipate a minimum number of required onsite executive sessions, workshops, training events, or project meetings, and which TTUHSC campuses should proposers include when estimating travel?

TTUHSC expects some on-site presence but does not have strict requirements for delivery frequency or duration. A predominantly virtual/hybrid model is acceptable, with on-site presence concentrated at defined milestones such as executive alignment sessions and leadership workshops. The initial kickoff is preferred on all campuses (negotiable), and the leadership enablement meeting is preferred on-site in Lubbock, TX. Overall, a hybrid model is preferred.

Travel is to be included in the fee.

47. Pricing Assumptions and Change Orders May proposers state explicit fixed-fee assumptions regarding the number of departments assessed, workshops, training cohorts, automation prototypes, integrations, and onsite trips, with work exceeding those assumptions handled through change orders using the required hourly rate card?

Costing for any solution offered is at the discretion of the Proposer. Cost breakdown that includes fixed fee assumptions is not a differentiator for TTUHSC reviewers. Please ensure costing is clear and discernable to the evaluating reader.

48. Will TTUHSC consider awarding by deliverable or by scope area, ie, Strategy, Governance, Workflow, and Analytics deliverables separately from Workforce Upskilling delivery under Section C, or must a responsive proposal address all six deliverables identified in Section 5.4?

It is TTUHSC’s intention to issue a single award, however in accordance with the terms of the RFP, reserves the right to award an agreement for all or any portion of the requirements proposed by reason of this request, award multiple agreements, or to reject any and all proposals if deemed to be in the best interests of TTUHSC and to resolicit for proposals, or temporarily or permanently abandon the solicitation.

49. Section 4.8.1 reserves the right to award multiple agreements. Does TTUHSC anticipate multiple awards under this RFP, and if so, how does it expect scope to be allocated among awardees?

It is TTUHSC’s intention to issue a single award, however in accordance with the terms of the RFP, reserves the right to award an agreement for all or any portion of the requirements proposed by reason of this request, award multiple agreements, or to reject any and all proposals if deemed to be in the best interests of TTUHSC and to resolicit for proposals, or temporarily or permanently abandon the solicitation.

50. Is there an incumbent or prior contractor currently performing any portion of the scope described in Section 5.4?

None.

51. What is the anticipated budget or not-to-exceed value for the total engagement, and are funds allocated across the six deliverables in any particular proportion?

Costing for any solution offered is at the discretion of the Proposer. Cost breakdown within a deliverable line or a separate cost line is not a differentiator for TTUHSC reviewers. Please ensure costing is clear and discernable to the evaluating reader.

52. The project schedule at Section 5.4 is left blank for the proposer to populate. Given that the anticipated term expires August 31, 2027 (Section 2.4), does TTUHSC have a target kick-off date and a preferred sequence or completion window for the six deliverables?

The following proposed Project Schedule may change based on RFP progress:

o Kick-off meeting: February 2027;

o Deliverable 1: April 2027;

o Deliverable 2: April 2027;

o Deliverable 3: September 2027;

o Deliverable 4: September 2027;

53. For Deliverable 5, which enterprise AI tools are currently deployed, and what telemetry and administrative access will TTUHSC make available to the Contractor for adoption, engagement, and proficiency reporting?

Microsoft Copilot is currently the enterprise generative AI tool that has been

Access to telemetry data will be provided to the Contractor if needed.

54. Approximately how many employees fall within the scope of the Section C workforce upskilling requirements, broken down by campus and by population (academic, clinical, administrative, and research)?

Total number of employees: about 6,000. Abilene: ~100; Amarillo: ~700;

55. Section A.2 calls for an assessment of data architecture, security policies, and cultural adoption barriers. Has TTUHSC previously conducted an AI readiness or maturity assessment, and if so, will the results be made available to the Contractor at kick-off?

TTUHSC has some governance structure already in place and seeks to align with both the NIST AI Risk Management Framework and the Texas DIR framework. TTUHSC has a responsible AI use policy (OP 52.21) and maintains an active AI tool inventory. No formal AI readiness or maturity assessment exists; the Contractor is expected to conduct the first assessment.

Available inputs (e.g., 2025 and 2026 AI baseline surveys) will be shared with the selected Contractor.

56. Does the Texas Risk and Authorization Management Program (TX-RAMP) requirement at Section 5.2 apply to this engagement, and specifically to any analytics or reporting platform provided under Deliverable 5? If it applies, is certification required at award, or may it be achieved during the term?

Under Texas Government Code § 2054.0593 and Texas Department of Information Resources guidelines, TX-RAMP applies specifically to Cloud

If it applies, certification would be required prior to award. Note the DIR program includes - Provisional Status - Granted for up to 18 months while a full product assessment is underway.

57. Will TTUHSC consider a delivery model under which the Contractor does not create, receive, maintain, or transmit Protected Health Information, relying on the sanitized institutional scenarios contemplated by Section C.3, and if so, would execution of the Business Associate Agreement still be required?

Yes. A delivery model relying on sanitized institutional scenarios (per Section 5.4.C.3) in which the Contractor does not create, receive, maintain, or transmit PHI is acceptable. The BAA would be executed where the approved scope requires PHI access; it is included so that it is in place if needed.

58. Budget: Is TTUHSC able to share a budget range or not-to-exceed amount contemplated for this engagement, to help proposers scale their level of effort appropriately?

The cost shall not exceed $750,000.

59. Project schedule: Section 5.4 lists the kick-off and deliverable completion dates as blanks. Can TTUHSC share target dates or expected durations for each deliverable within the term ending August 31, 2027?

The following proposed Project Schedule may change based on RFP progress:

o Kick-off meeting: February 2027;

o Deliverable 1: April 2027;

o Deliverable 2: April 2027;

o Deliverable 3: September 2027;

o Deliverable 4: September 2027;

60. TX-RAMP applicability: Section 5.2 references TX-

RAMP compliance "as may be required." If a proposer's solution for Deliverable 5 (Analytics & ROI Reporting) uses a cloud-hosted platform, would TX- RAMP certification be required at proposal submission, at contract execution, or prior to production deployment? Would a reporting service delivered within TTUHSC's existing enterprise environment (rather than a vendor-hosted platform) be subject to

TX-RAMP?

Under Texas Government Code § 2054.0593 and Texas Department of Information Resources guidelines, TX-RAMP applies specifically to Cloud Service Providers offering hosted cloud computing services (SaaS, PaaS, IaaS).

As described in Question 60 specifically, because Deliverable 5 is executed a cloud-hosted platform, there is a high likelihood that TX-RAMP certification is required. This element will be evaluated and determined by the TTUHSC IT Governance, Risk, and Compliance office in accordance with Texas Department of Information Resources guidelines and guidance.

61. Enterprise AI environment: Can TTUHSC identify the enterprise AI tools and platforms currently provisioned (e.g., the LLM platform(s) and embedded productivity assistants referenced in Section 5.4 Background), so proposers can tailor training content and integration approaches accordingly?

Microsoft Copilot is currently the enterprise generative AI tool that has been deployed. Other GenAI tools are being evaluated. Examples of other tools provided enterprise-wide include Zoom AI Companion, Epic, Grammarly, etc.

62. Incumbent/prior work: Has any consultant or vendor performed AI strategy, readiness assessment, or related advisory work for TTUHSC that informs this RFP? If so, will any resulting artifacts be made available to the awarded Contractor?

None.

63. Data access for ROI baseline: For Deliverable 5, will TTUHSC provide baseline operational metrics and usage telemetry from its AI platforms, or is the Contractor expected to instrument data collection?

Baseline metrics have not been established. TTUHSC conducted some AI

Access to telemetry data will be provided to the Contractor if needed.

64. Travel expectations: Are executive sessions and training under Deliverables 1–3 expected to be delivered on-site across all five campuses, or will TTUHSC accept a hybrid model with periodic on-site presence primarily in Lubbock?

TTUHSC expects some on-site presence but does not have strict requirements for delivery frequency or duration. A predominantly virtual/hybrid model is acceptable, with on-site presence concentrated at defined milestones such as executive alignment sessions and leadership workshops. The initial kickoff is preferred on all campuses (negotiable), and the leadership enablement meeting is preferred on-site in Lubbock, TX. Overall, a hybrid model is preferred.

Travel is to be included in the fee.

65. BAA scope: Is it anticipated that the Contractor will access PHI in the course of this engagement, thereby triggering the Business Associate Agreement, or is the BAA included as a contingency?

The Business Associate Agreement would be executed where the approved scope of work requires access to PHI; it is included so that it is in place if PHI access is required. PHI access is not anticipated; PHI is not expected to be made available.

66. Scope of response. Section 4.8.2 states that any resulting agreement is non-exclusive and that TTUHSC reserves the right to enter into one or more agreements with third parties covering the same or similar Services, and Section 6.1 requests a "not to exceed" fixed fee for each deliverable. Would a proposal that addresses a subset of the requirement areas in Section 5.4 -- for example A (AI Strategy, Governance and Transformation Planning), B (Leadership Activation and Change Management), C (Workforce Upskilling, Training and Capability Building) and E (Analytics, Adoption Tracking and Impact Measurement), without D (Workflow Automation, Custom Solutions and Agentic Strategy) -- be evaluated, or would it be considered non-responsive?

It is TTUHSC’s intention to issue a single award, however in accordance with the terms of the RFP, reserves the right to award an agreement for all or any portion of the requirements proposed by reason of this request, award multiple agreements, or to reject any and all proposals if deemed to be in the best interests of TTUHSC and to resolicit for proposals, or temporarily or permanently abandon the solicitation.

67. Population and scale. To size the effort accurately, please provide the approximate number of employees in the intended target population, the number of departments or operational units in scope, and which of the five campuses (Abilene, Amarillo, Dallas/Fort Worth, Lubbock, Permian Basin) are included. For requirement B.1 specifically, approximately how many VPs, Deans, Department Heads and People Managers are anticipated to participate in the leadership education sessions?

Total number of employees: about 6,000. Abilene: ~100; Amarillo: ~700;

For Requirement B.1, there are around 150-200 leaders; the Contractor may propose the participant set based on role and organizational level.

68. Onsite delivery expectations. Section 6.1 requires that travel and meeting attendance be included within the fixed fee for each deliverable. Approximately how many onsite days does TTUHSC anticipate over the course of the engagement, and at which campuses?

TTUHSC expects some on-site presence but does not have strict requirements for delivery frequency or duration. A predominantly virtual/hybrid model is acceptable, with on-site presence concentrated at defined milestones such as executive alignment sessions and leadership workshops. The initial kickoff is preferred on all campuses (negotiable), and the leadership enablement meeting is preferred on-site in Lubbock, TX. Overall, a hybrid model is preferred.

Travel is to be included in the fee. The Proposer may state its on-site assumptions across the five campuses; travel is included in the fixed fee.

69. Deliverable 5, Analytics and ROI. Requirement E contemplates a software platform, managed analytics services, or integrated reporting tools. Would TTUHSC accept adoption and ROI reporting developed from its existing enterprise AI administrative telemetry and reporting exports, or does TTUHSC expect the Contractor to provide a separate vendor-hosted analytics platform? Relatedly, where a proposed approach introduces no new vendor-hosted cloud service, does the TX-RAMP requirement referenced in Section 5.2 still apply?

Yes. Adoption and ROI reporting may be developed from TTUHSC's existing enterprise AI administrative telemetry and reporting exports; Power BI is available and no separate vendor-hosted platform is required. Under Texas Government Code Sec. 2054.0593 and Texas Department of Information Resources guidelines, TX-RAMP applies specifically to Cloud Service Providers offering hosted cloud computing services (SaaS, PaaS, IaaS). Where the solution is delivered as a professional/managed service operating inside TTUHSC's approved enterprise environment, using TTUHSC's certified infrastructure and tooling, with no contractor-hosted cloud service and no institutional data leaving TTUHSC-controlled systems, TX-RAMP would likely not apply. Where the approach introduces no new vendor-hosted cloud service, TX-RAMP would not independently apply.

70. Budget and schedule. Has TTUHSC established a budget or not-to-exceed amount for this engagement?

In addition, the Project Schedule in Section 5.4 lists deliverable dates as to be determined and Section 2.4 states that the anticipated term expires August 31, 2027. What kickoff date does TTUHSC anticipate, and would TTUHSC consider a term extension if the agreed deliverable schedule extends beyond August 31, 2027?

The following proposed Project Schedule may change based on RFP progress:

o Kick-off meeting: February 2027;

o Deliverable 1: April 2027;

o Deliverable 2: April 2027;

o Deliverable 3: September 2027;

o Deliverable 4: September 2027;

TTUHSC will work collaboratively in constructing a contract term that accommodates completion of all deliverables, including any extension if the agreed schedule warrants.

71. Current-state information: Will TTUHSC provide the selected contractor with an inventory of current AI tools, licensed platforms, active pilots, data architecture, governance policies and adoption levels?

Which AI products and cloud environments are currently approved or deployed, such as Microsoft Copilot, Azure OpenAI, AWS, Google Cloud or ServiceNow?

TTUHSC will provide the selected Contractor with available inputs, including the active AI tool inventory, governance materials, and relevant current-state information, based on need. Microsoft Copilot is currently the enterprise generative AI tool that has been deployed. Other GenAI tools are being evaluated. Examples of other tools provided enterprise-wide include Zoom AI Companion, Epic, Grammarly, etc.

TTUHSC operates within a Microsoft enterprise environment.

72. Project duration: What is the anticipated contract term and expected timing for each of the six deliverables?

The completion dates in the RFP appear to be blank.

The following proposed Project Schedule may change based on RFP progress:

o Kick-off meeting: February 2027;

o Deliverable 1: April 2027;

o Deliverable 2: April 2027;

o Deliverable 3: September 2027;

o Deliverable 4: September 2027;

73. Operational scope: How many campuses, schools, departments and operating units are expected to participate in the initial phase? Does the scope include academic, administrative, clinical and research functions?

The scope includes academic, administrative, clinical, and research functions across the five campuses. Total number of employees: about 6,000. Abilene:

~100; Amarillo: ~700; Dallas: ~90; Lubbock: ~3,710; Permian Basin: ~600;

Strategic Initiatives (Correctional Managed Care): ~800.

Number of leaders: around 150-200. Depth of assessment and the units participating in the initial phase may be prioritized with the Contractor based on the current-state assessment.

74. Workflow volume: Approximately how many workflows or use cases should be discovered, prioritized, redesigned, prototyped and prepared for implementation?

TTUHSC anticipates about 8-10 workflows across the four functional areas (Academic, Clinical, Research, Admin) for discovery, prioritization, redesign, and prototyping; the Contractor may propose the number based on the current-state assessment.

75. Production implementation: For workflow automation and agentic AI, does TTUHSC expect production-ready deployments or primarily discovery, architecture, specifications and validated prototypes?

TTUHSC is planning to have at least two workflows/use cases from each…