GEMS 2.0 Supplier Q&A

Question RFI Reference Section Question GTA Response

1 General Looking at the current state challenges on Attachment C for the Scope of Work which shows the legacy GEMS and other tools, is the current legacy GEMS solution currently managed through a vendor contract? If so, can I get the vendor name, contract number, and contract start and expiration date?

GTA has a current contract with Computer Aid Incorporated (CAI). The contract number is ES-RFP-98000-27 and the current contract term is from

July 1, 2022 - June 30, 2023.

2 General My team has taken the last few days to review the RFI and believe we have a solution that would address all the needs stated in the RFI. However, many of our team members will be taking vacation next week around the 4th of July and the week after that we all have an internal mandatory training we have to attend.

We would very much like to respond to this RFI, but honestly we don’t have the time based on the current schedule. I’d hate for GTA not to get our thoughts on the solution we could provide. I’m reaching out to ask if GTA would consider an extension for this RFI of 4 weeks for the due date and also an extension for the written questions period. If we could get this extension it would give us adequate time to form our response.

Yes, GTA did extend the posting of the event. Notifications were sent. See the GPR for close date.

3 General Would GTA consider providing a two-week extension for the Deadline for

Submitting Responses to 5:00 p.m. ET, July 29?

Yes, GTA did extend the posting of the event. Notifications were sent. See the GPR for close date.

4 General Thank you for inviting XXXXX to participate in GTA’s RFI. Do you have time later this week or next week to discuss your initiatives in further detail?

All questions by suppliers and answers by GTA will be posted as outline in the RFI.

5 Detailed Requirements spreadsheet; Items 1.11, and 1.15

The tasks in these items refer to a “document repository .” Is there a document repository system already in place to link to, or is creating a document repository part of the requirements?

The EPMO leverages Microsoft Teams as the current document repository for all project artifacts. Teams is cloud-based and leverages MS SharePoint as the underlying framework. Any solution going forward should leverage this existing repository, or present a solution that integrates with or replaces

Teams. In the case of integration, suppliers should respond with data integration costs. In the case of replacement, potential suppliers should account for data migration, new hosting costs and licensing costs.

6 Detailed Requirements spreadsheet; Items 2.1-

2.5

Please define the intention for the goal to "allocate resources " as presented in these items.

Essentially this requirement equates 'resources' with 'stakeholders' and

'subject matter experts' who assist with Pre-Procurement activities such as, assessments and other input on the procurement. Satisfying this requirement means having an ability to notify various stakeholders or SMEs and/or receive their input.

7 Detailed Requirements spreadsheet; Item 2.11

The task refers to “approval by GTA CTO .” Do approvals require an e-signature

(DocuSign, etc.) to be official?

A digital signature is not a current GEMS 2.0 requirement. Rather, capturing a date, time and user would be needed to satisfy the requirement.

Supplier Q&A Template

8 Detailed Requirements spreadsheet; Item 2.18

The task refers to “... allocate I.S. resources“. Is it anticipated that planning be for named personnel or at the role level?

In this case, I.S. refers to information security. Satisfying this requirement will mean tracking by role and named person. Further, reporting on approvals should contemplate an ability to see both or either.

9 Detailed Requirements spreadsheet; Item 3.19.

In this item, GTA indicates this task is currently tracked in the CPR Forecast file.

Please describe this tracking process.

The CPR forecast file is an Excel spreadsheet used to manually track projects that are invited to the monthly CPR meetings.

10 Detailed Requirements

Spreadsheet; Item 5.53

This item refers to editing, viewing, tracking, and re-assigning licenses. Please clarify what licenses this is in reference to.

This requirement refers to how licenses were managed with the legacy

GEMS system. This is not applicable if all users listed in the requirements are accounted for in the licensing scenarios you present in your responses.

11 Detailed Requirements spreadsheet; Item 7.16

Item 7.16 refers to the task “View projects and pipeline that are cloud hosted” so that I can “Get details about which cloud environment the application is hosted on.”

Please clarify the usage of “projects” vs “applications”?

Entries on the current Pipeline Report are tracked as projects, some of the projects involve applications. In our reporting, we want to be able to filter by hosting environment.

12 Detailed Requirements spreadsheet; multiple items

Please define “investment ” as used in this spreadsheet, for example, item 1 task

– Submit a new investment.

A technology investment is defined as the commitment of resources to any product or service that consists of, or relies upon, information technology to capture, process, store, share, or otherwise manipulate data that is managed by a state entity.

13 Scope of Work; Item

4.10

4.10 System must allow EPMO users to override agency project team assessment of any KPI.

Does this mean the EPMO has the ability to change responses that users provide or just change the results?

Both

14 Scope of Work; Item

4.11

4.11 The system must have the ability to report on KPI related metrics for the current period and compare IV&V assessments with values from agency project team assessments.

Is design of an IV&V data repository a requirement or will that be provided?

The current IV&V tool is a stand alone Word template. There is no existing

IV&V repository (other than storing the customized Word template). IV&V requirements are detailed in section 2.6 of the RFI - GEMS 2.0 Scope of Work document.

15 Implementation Costs Please confirm the use of ROM pricing following PMO PMBOK guidelines is acceptable for the cost response portion of this RFI.

We understand PMBOK guidelines to be -25% to +75%. Optimum desire for the plus is to be no greater than +25%.

16 Solution Please clarify if GTA is seeking vendor software or a vendor to develop an application that GTA will own.

Ultimately we see ourselves procuring and implementing low code application platform LCAP, that will be configured to the requirements provided and able to be maintained by citizen developers or professional developers with available support from the implementation supplier. We would also be open to procuring accelerators / plug-ins that 'jump-start' satisfying GTA requirements.

17 Solution Does GTA intend on doing any development for the project resulting from this

RFI?

Check the GPR for any subsequent solicitations.

18 Technologies Please provide the technologies GTA has evaluated in the course of preparing the RFI. Database, EDMS, Workflow, etc.

We have focused primarily on solutions that have been vetted in the Gartner

Magic Quadrant for Enterprise Low-Code Application Platforms LCAPs. Our perspective follows Gartner definitions that LCAPs typically create metadata and interpret that metadata at runtime and abstract the underlying server infrastructure for ease of use; many also allow optional procedural programming extensions. Also, the chosen LCAP supports: UI capabilities via responsive web and mobile apps, Orchestration or choreography of pages, business process, and decisions or business rules, Built-in database, and

"One button" deployment of applications.

19 Technologies Please identify the technologies for internal reporting and for the extranet reporting that GTA has standardized.

GTA reporting is currently performed using two data analytic tools primarily.

Power BI and Tableau. However, it is our desire that through this effort

(GEMS 2.0), the larger requirements of the enterprise dashboard reporting program (EDRP) will be satisfied. Specifically, that a data management framework is established that would allow GEMS 2.0 data to be analyzed and visualized using multiple reporting/visualization solutions. This is explored in section 4 Reporting and Analytic Requirements, of the RFI -

GEMS 2.0 Scope of Work.

20 General According to https://gta.georgia.gov/epmo-main-page-0/reporting-applications/georgia-enterprise-management-suite, GTA established a contract with Computer Aid, Inc. (CAI) to offer an enterprise-wide portfolio management application that GTA began rolling out to agencies in FY

2013. Can you confirm that Computer Aid is the incumbent vendor? If so, is it possible to obtain contract information such as, contract number, and contract start and expiration date?

GTA has a current contract with Computer Aid Incorporated (CAI). The contract number is ES-RFP-98000-27 and the current contract term is from

July 1, 2022 - June 30, 2023.

21 General Your Microsoft Georgia team is hoping that you can help clarify something for

us. Many software manufacturers such as Microsoft, Salesforce, Oracle, and the like, go to market with solution integrators or implementation partners.

Typically, an RFI or RFP issued from our State & Local Government customers is answered directly from solution integrators due to the nature of scoping questions, architectural recommendations, and implementation timelines.

For this RFI, questions from "Section 3, Supplier Capabilities and Supplier

Experience" cover topics that span across both software manufacturers (OEMs) and solution integrators (partners). Will it be acceptable to receive responses from solution integrators/partners in collaboration with the software manufacturer?

I hope that makes sense. Thank you in advance for any clarification.

We are fine with responses from software manufacturers (OEMs) and solution integrators (partners).

22 General What is the key business objective of this RFI and has the GTA quantified it?

Is there a budget estimate for this project? If so, what is the investment?

What LCAP solution is the state currently using?

Does the GTA have the necessary staff should the solution be implemented for the state?

What factors are the most crucial in the success of this project? (i.e. accelerated implementation, rapid application development)

Regarding page four of the statement of work "Electronic Records: GEMS 2.0 will leverage modern case management features such as workflow tools that can eliminate manual processing and report preparation," Is Case Management part of this overall solution?

The primary objective of GEMS 2.0 is to satisfy legacy GEMS requirements while reimagining GEMS 2.0 to meet or exceed the requirements of the

Enterprise Dashboard Reporting Program (EDRP). Specifically, GEMS 2.0 will be reimagined and architected with enough rigor to stand up to traditional software development lifecycle (SDLC) standards, while embracing agility and simplicity through the selection and implementation of a Low Code

Application Platform (LCAP). With this approach, business users (citizen developers) or development professionals will be able to rapidly initiate, implement, prepare & operate EPMO Project Investment Lifecycle solutions.

Ease of use and speed to solution will be hallmarks of GEMS 2.0! TAs for quantifying, we are looking to satisfy the objectives stated here without increasing current cost of ownership.

Current LCAP: At this point, our considerations are centered on supporting the project investment lifecycle processes of the EPMO specifically, not statewide! While the success of the EPMO implementation may have further-reaching impact, this effort does not currently contemplate staffing for a state-wide LCAP implementation. The EPMO and broader GTA organization have leveraged MS Power Platform, ServiceNow & Tableau for various projects.

Budget Estimate: No current budget estimate.

Staffing: At this point, our staffing considerations are centered on the EPMO staff and possibly the broader GTA staff. This effort does not currently contemplate staffing for a state-wide implementation.

Critical Success Factors: Ease of use and speed to solution

Case Management: As required to satisfy routing, notifications & approval use cases

23 Scope of Work; Item 2.6 Is IV&V provided in a standardized configurable format from all IV&V providers?

Are the two IV&V reports in the scope of work document, the standard output and will it need to be configurable?

Currently all IV&V dashboard reporting is provided using the format that was presented in the Scope Of Work.

24 Solution Please clarify if GTA is seeking to purchase a vendor software solution or to engage a vendor to develop an application that GTA will own.

We are seeking the best solution for our requirements.

25 Solution In cases where code artifacts are generated in support of configurations and workflows, are there required or preferred source/code control tools or repositories (e.g., Git)?

The EPMO would look to leverage the best practices of the implemented solutions, and anticipate much of the considerations raised in your question to a part of a well-conceived and implemented LCAP solution.

26 Solution For use and publication of information on the Extranet, what are the expectations for data currency and refreshing (e.g., 24 hours or younger for data refreshes)?

Current data is manually updated weekly & monthly internally. The expectation for external (non-stand employee) data would be the same.