OED RFP - Enterprise Service Management System.docx

State of Oregon

Cover Page DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, STATE PROCUREMENT SERVICES (“DAS SPS”) ON BEHALF OF STATE OF OREGON EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT (“OED”) Is issuing this Request for Proposals (RFP) under OregonBuys® Bid Number S-DASOBO-00017784 for

ENTERPRISE SERVICE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Date of Issue: August 26, 2026 Opening Date and Time: October 15, 2026 Single Point of Contact (SPC): Brian Eilerts, PCS III

The State of Oregon promotes equal opportunity for all individuals without regard to age, color, disability, marital status, national origin, race, religion or creed, sex or gender, sexual orientation, or veteran status.

OED RFP S-DASOBO-00017784 Page 2 of 27 Table of Contents

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT A SAMPLE CONTRACT

ATTACHMENT B DISCLOSURE EXEMPTION AFFIDAVIT

ATTACHMENT C PROPOSER INFORMATION AND CERTIFICATION SHEET

ATTACHMENT D REFERENCE CHECK FORM

ATTACHMENT E PRICE PROPOSAL FORM

ATTACHMENT F COBID CERTIFICATION / OUTREACH PLAN

ATTACHMENT G RESPONSIBILITY INQUIRY

ATTACHMENT H RESSERVED

ATTACHMENT I RESERVED

ATTACHMENT J STATEWIDE SECURITY STANDARDS SPREADSHEET

ATTACHMENT K RESERVED

ATTACHMENT L VENDOR EVALUATION WORKBOOK

GENERAL INFORMATION

INTRODUCTION

The State of Oregon, acting by and through its Department of Administrative Services, State Procurement Services (“DAS-SPS”) on behalf of the Oregon Employment Department (“OED ”or “Agency”), is issuing this Request for Proposal (RFP) under the provisions of ORS 279B.060 for an Enterprise Service Management System. This procurement seeks a cloud-based solution for managing IT services, including the necessary customization and configuration to meet the specific needs of the Agency.

Additional details on the Scope of the goods or services or both are included in the Scope of Work section.

Agency anticipates the award of one Contract from this solicitation. The initial term of the Contract is anticipated to be 5 years with options for renewal.

SCHEDULE

The table below represents a tentative schedule of events. All times are listed in Pacific Time. All dates listed are subject to change. N/A denotes that event is not applicable to this RFP.

SINGLE POINT OF CONTACT (SPC)

The SPC for this RFP is identified on the Cover Page, along with the SPC’s contact information. Proposer shall direct all communications related to any provision of the RFP only to the SPC, whether about the technical requirements of the RFP, contractual requirements, the RFP process, or any other provision.

AUTHORITY, OVERVIEW, AND SCOPE

AUTHORITY AND METHOD

DAS SPS, on behalf of OED, is issuing this RFP pursuant to its authority under ORS 279A.050 and OAR 125-246-0170(2).

DAS is using the Competitive Sealed Proposal method, pursuant to ORS 279B.060 and OAR 125-247-0260. Agency may use a combination of the methods for Competitive Sealed Proposals, including optional procedures: a) Competitive Range; b) Discussions and Revised Proposals; c) Revised Rounds of Negotiations; d) Negotiations; e) Best and Final Offers; and f) Multistep Sealed Proposals.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

For the purposes of this RFP, capitalized words are defined in OAR 125-246-0110 or as defined below.

“Agency Project Manager” means the person representing Agency who serves as Successful Proposer’s primary point of contact for the Services.

“Authorized Representative” means a person representing a party to this Contract who is authorized to make commitments and decisions on behalf of the party regarding the performance of this Contract. Successful Proposer’s Authorized Representative is the person so identified in Exhibit D. Agency’s Authorized Representative is the person so identified in Exhibit E. See RFP Attachment A, Sample Contract.

“Business Days” means Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Pacific Time, excluding State of Oregon holidays and business closure days.

“Calendar Days” means contiguous days.

“Confidential Information” is defined in Contract Section 9.1. See RFP Attachment A, Sample Contract.

“Configuration” The process of adjusting the solution settings and workflows to match the operational needs of the Oregon Employment Department without requiring extensive software development or coding.

“Customization” Vendor-provided modifications or enhancements to the base solution to ensure it meets the specific functional, operational, and regulatory requirements of the Oregon Employment Department.

“DAS” means the State of Oregon acting through its Department of Administrative Services, State Procurement Services.

“Deliverables” means all items that Successful Proposer’s is required to deliver to Agency under this Contract, including Work Product, as specified in the SOW.

“Documentation” means all documents, including documents that are Deliverables described in the Statement of Work and which may include reports, minutes, manuals, training materials, guides, commentary, listings, requirements documentation, and other materials that are to be delivered by Successful Proposer’s under this Contract. Documentation includes documents in hard copy or electronic form. See RFP Attachment A, Sample Contract.

“DOJ” means the State of Oregon acting through its Department of Justice.

“EIS” means the State Chief Information Officer acting as Enterprise Information Services.

“ESM” means Enterprise Service Management System: An ESM system extends the principles and tools of ITSM beyond the IT department to the entire organization. It allows groups such as HR, Facilities, Finance, Procurement, and Legal to manage their services, requests, workflows, and information using a shared platform. ESM promotes standardization, reduces manual work, and improves collaboration across departments.

“ITIL” means Information Technology Infrastructure Library ITIL is a globally recognized framework of best practices for delivering high‑quality IT services. It provides guidance for managing the full lifecycle of IT services—from strategy and design to operation and continual improvement. ITIL is not software; it’s a set of practices that organizations use to structure and improve their ITSM and ESM processes.

“ITSM” means Information Technology Service Management System: An ITSM system is a platform that helps an organization design, deliver, manage, and improve the way IT services are provided to users. It usually includes tools for incident management, service requests, change management, asset tracking, knowledge bases, and workflow automation. Its goal is to ensure that IT services operate reliably and efficiently.

“Project Manager” means Contractor’s representative who manages the processes and coordinates the Services with Agency’s Authorized Representative to ensure delivery of the Deliverables and completion of Milestones. Successful Proposer’s Project Manager is the person so identified in Contract Exhibit D. See RFP Attachment A, Sample Contract.

“State” means the State of Oregon.

“Statement of Work” or “SOW” means a document that describes the Services to be provided by Successful Proposer’s, including the Tasks, Deliverables and Milestones, Documentation, Work Product, the attributes of each Deliverable, identification of the Deliverables and Services that are associated with each Task, and a timeline for each Milestone and Deliverable, the Payment Schedule for each Deliverable and Milestone, and any other items as agreed by the parties and attached as a Statement of Work, including as amended pursuant to Section 7. As used in this Contract, except where otherwise expressly identified as being applicable only to a specific Statement of Work, a reference to “Exhibit A,” “SOW” or “Statement of Work” means the applicable Exhibit A (e.g., Exhibit A-1, Exhibit A-2, etc.) individually. A Statement of Work includes Accepted Deliverables, if specifically agreed upon in a Statement of Work.

“Solution” means the sum total of the Services, including Work Product, Deliverables, intellectual property, and the Documentation described in the Statement of Work.

“Vulnerability” means a weakness or flaw in an asset, system, or process. It is the gap that allows a threat to cause harm. While a threat is the danger itself, the vulnerability is the flaw that makes the risk a reality. In regard to Cybersecurity State regulation’s view vulnerability in the context of IT systems. The Oregon Secretary of State defines it as the susceptibility of an information resource to a material adverse event, such as a disruption or breach. Vulnerability Levels will be negotiated with the Successful Proposer, but are anticipated to reflect the levels in Exhibit B.

OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE

Agency Overview and Background The Mission of the Oregon Employment Department (“OED”) is to Support economic stability for Oregonians and communities during times of unemployment through the payment of unemployment benefits. Serve businesses by recruiting and referring the best qualified applicants to jobs and provide resources to diverse job seekers in support of their employment needs.

The Service Desk is the face of IT Service for the Oregon Employment Department, and the ticketing system is the main resource used by staff. The current system is not user-friendly, lacks reporting, metrics, and data, is not supported by the vendor, and cannot be updated or patched. The agency is ready for a modern Enterprise Service Management (ESM) system. The agency is also supported by a separate version of FootPrints (IT Ticket System) for Change Enablement. The existing systems cannot have shared workflows or data. By obtaining a commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) solution configured and not customized and using vendor implementation, OED will gain a single work intake solution for IT services. This will enhance visibility and access to IT services. A modern ESM system provides workflows that can meet the need for accelerated service delivery to improve responsiveness and outcomes. An ESM system enhances service governance by embedding workflows that track service performance and allow improved data tracking and reporting.

How we got here The need did not occur suddenly, nor was it only just recognized. It is a product of technical debt incurred due to:

· unanticipated expenses (pandemic, budgetary cycles)

· ever-evolving technology

· gaps in internal communication

Is it really that bad The agency has two instances of an Information Technology Service Management (ITSM) system (BMC FootPrints). The agency uses the most current version to submit service requests and incident tickets to the service desk. The Application Development team uses the other instance for Change Management. Key limitations of the existing instances are:

· lacking in performance

· cumbersome to use

· requires the support of labor-intensive manual business processes

· does not support data analysis or reporting

· unable to share data and workflows between instances

The current system lacks several key functionality areas necessary to support modern service management best practices. There are additional risks associated with the current system:

· Vendor no longer supports the software

· The current system is not stable enough for changes or service packs.

· No workflows can be created or changed.

Project Overview and Background Agency Information Technology Services (ITS) staff deliver and support technical infrastructure services for their customers. IT practices, policies, and procedures guide staff in their work. The current system requires continued use of manual processes outside of the system, impacting IT Services' ability to meet federal and state requirements for ADA accommodations. Business is conducted and enabled using outdated, end-of-life ITSM tools. ITS staff and customers interface with ITSM tools daily.

ITS has a strategic goal of being a trusted business partner by replacing our ticketing system; it should allow ITS to improve customer satisfaction by providing increased transparency, status, and user-facing service catalog. (All items from InfoTech CIO Survey that impacted satisfaction scores). The IT Service Management Office has worked with InfoTech to complete workshops to define our Incident Management Practice and Service Desk Standard Operating Procedure, Standardize the Service Desk, and Service Catalog development in preparation for this project. The purpose of this project is the implementation of an integrated Enterprise Service Management (ESM) solution to satisfy critical agency needs and establish a sound foundation and improved delivery services:

· ITIL practices:

· Service Request

· Change Enablement

· Incident Management

· Improve delivery of IT services

· Workflow and process automation

· Communication and coordination

· Enhanced customer and employee experience

· Improved data integrity

The solution will enable the following activities in support of daily ITS operations:

· Receipt and processing of customer requests for ITS services

· Management of incidents, problems, and changes involving ITS services

· Tracking of internal work assignments and time reporting

· Management of subordinate and related tasks for customer requests and internal work assignments

· Storing data, information, and knowledge of events

· Improved Reporting and Metrics inherent in the system

· Sourcing data for billing and metrics reporting

· Exportable data and information that can be used for analysis and metrics to support data-driven decision-making and help identify areas of improvement Strategic Alignment An ESM system will support improved IT service requests and ticketing management. Successful implementation of the ESM system will strengthen the Employment Department’s IT infrastructure, providing the agency with a more stable foundation to implement new technology systems throughout the multi-biennia Modernization Program.

The value of this effort includes increased alignment with and support for:

2.3.3.1 EIS strategic framework

· Investment Governance - provides data and insights needed to mature agency IT governance, enabling project prioritization and stewardship of IT resources based on business alignment, cost, return on investment, and risk.

· Data Utility - enables data utilization as a strategic asset to improve service delivery, identify cost savings, and enhance transparency.

· User-friendly, Reliable, and Secure - allows for innovative, accountable, customer-focused collaboration across the agency

2.3.3.2 Oregon’s State Data Strategy

· Data-informed culture - an essential tool for enabling the use of data to inform decisions

· Governance and effective management - a platform for documenting, contextualizing, and understanding agency data in order to receive value from it.

· Ethical use - helps enable efforts in data justice and representation, visibility, and ethics

2.3.3.3 EIS Modernization Playbook

· Puts people first - the effort starts and ends with people; the focus is on enhancing the experience of those relying on agency services as well as those delivering the services

· Leverages data - an opportunity to leverage data as a strategic asset, enabling data-driven decision-making and transparency by default

· Agile, continuous improvement - the effort will put in place a system that will be able to sustain a culture of continuous improvement encompassing people, processes, and technology

2.3.3.4 OED Strategic Plan

· Continually advance partnerships and systems- The new system will provide an improved user experience and future opportunities to innovate our service approach by improving opportunities to provide feedback to IT Services.

· Inclusive, fair work environment - the solution implementation will be designed to foster an inclusive and fair work environment where employees feel valued and supported in reaching their full potential, an environment where seeking service and providing it is not an onerous chore to be avoided

Modernization of the ESM system will provide the agency an opportunity to address immediate needs and challenges while supporting its long-term strategic goals to:

· Achieve best practices in key processes

· Maintain existing systems to support business programs throughout the modernization effort

· Develop systems that support continuous improvement practices

2.3.3.5 Current State

The Oregon Employment Department utilizes a system for ITSM activities built on BMC FootPrints. This system is used to support two key business processes:

· Service Request: The agency’s ITS Service Desk team uses version 12 of the product to track and manage support requests from end users of the agency’s software and equipment.

· Change Enablement: An older version of BMC Footprints (version 11) is used to coordinate agency change activities.

The existing system, purchased from the original creator vendor and brought into production in 2009, underwent a version upgrade in 2016 written by the current vendor, BMC. However, despite this update, the system's performance is limited, cumbersome, and relies on labor-intensive manual business processes. As it stands, the system lacks several key areas of functionality required to uphold modern service management best practices. These system upgrades are urgent, and immediate action is required to ensure efficiency and effectiveness. The system does not meet the current needs of the agency:

2.3.3.6 Limited Functionality:

· The current system comprises multiple independent workspaces on two software versions. The system does not adequately support data flow between workspaces, technicians, and end customers.

· Service Desk technicians do not receive the information they need to track and manage customer requests effectively.

· They resort to manual workarounds to meet customer needs.

2.3.3.7 Diminished Efficiency:

· The current system does not effectively support automated classification and routing of service tickets.

· Technicians are required to enter, evaluate, assign, track, and manage each individual incident using time-consuming manual processes.

· Technicians spend a disproportionate amount of time on repetitive tasks that could be automated, leaving them less time to perform activities that require subject matter expertise or add value to the customer.

2.3.3.8 Inadequate Reporting:

· The current system does not capture all data needed for measuring and managing service performance.

· Categories used to track tickets do not fit the actual work being performed, and poorly categorized tickets degrade the system’s ability to provide accurate information about service performance.

· The reporting interface is difficult to use and cannot produce some needed reports.

· The underlying database does not support consistent and reliable reporting.

2.3.3.9 Cumbersome Interface:

· Customer access to the current system is limited, and interfaces are not user-friendly.

· Communications from the system to end users are often difficult for customers to interpret.

· There is no user-friendly mechanism for capturing customer feedback about whether the service provided resolved their problem or whether they were satisfied with the service received.

2.3.3.10 Challenged Administration:

· Support for the system is no longer available.

· Limitations of the current system mean that the technical knowledge base is maintained outside the system. This increases the time required for technicians to maintain the knowledge base and perform other value-added administrative activities.

The current system has many service limitations on all IT workflows. The new system resolves these limitations and includes additional inherent capabilities in the base configuration at implementation—no additional phases are required.

2.3.3.11 Future State

OED is seeking a solution for replacing an existing system with one that can provide the following:

· Provide comprehensive functionality, as described below, which meets the agency’s identified needs from a modern, integrated ESM system.

· Provides an interface that supports service requests, change enablement, incident management, and improves the user experience.

· Provides knowledge management capabilities that align with the Knowledge-Centered Service (KCS®) framework

· A solution that can expand and support additional workflows in the future for the agency.

· Increase efficiency by allowing service staff to focus on work that adds value for the customer instead of spending time on tasks that could be automated or resolved by the customer through self-service.

· Provide the opportunity for customers to obtain services and track their requests through a user-friendly self-service portal.

· Provide accurate, reliable data and a user-friendly reporting interface for measuring and managing service performance.

· Implementation should be based on modern information technology and methodology foundations, administered by staff with available skill sets, or that can be developed and supported by a vendor who maintains the system through regular and timely upgrades and enhancements.

· Strengthen the agency’s enterprise service management processes (particularly those of IT), support continual service improvement practices, and deliver enhanced value to customers who rely on IT.

SCOPE OF WORK/SPECIFICATIONS

Example of statement of work and expectations, terms used may be adjusted to match the system selected during procurement

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Planning and Implementing Enterprise Service Management (ESM) System The Enterprise Service Management Project is an initiative chartered through Oregon Employment Department (OED) IT and Oregon EIS / P3. Its purpose is to replace the current OED Footprints ticketing system that exists in 2 independent environments within OED’s IT infrastructure. The project aims to implement an integrated Enterprise Service Management (ESM) solution to deliver improved services.

PURPOSE & EXPECTED RESULTS:

The purpose of this project is to provide the planning and implementation of a new Enterprise Service Management System. The system supports service requests, change enablement (management), incident management, knowledge management, asset management, and improved user experience.

Success Criteria:

· Completed document that reviews readiness for full implementation

· Completed planning

· Completed Incident and Service Request Management configuration and implementation

· Completed Problem Management configuration and implementation

· Completed Change Control (management) configuration and implementation

· Knowledge Base configuration and implementation

· OED branding for application

· Reports and metrics generated

· UAT completed, and the system is working as planned by the contractor and OED

DELIVERY SCHEDULE:

· In agreement with OED, the contractor will develop the delivery schedule based on a (Start Date) and (Completion Date) for the following tasks and deliverables. Implementation planning is completed

· Incident and Service Request Management configuration is completed

· Problem Management implementation is completed

· Change Control (management) implementation is completed

· Asset Management implementation is completed

· Training is complete for OED System Administrators

· Knowledge Base configuration is completed

· Readiness Review for Enterprise Implementation is completed

· User Acceptance Testing is completed

· Documentation identified in Deliverables has been handed over to OED

SCOPE OF WORK

SCOPE INCLUDES:

· Implementation Planning

· Incident and Service Request Management configuration and implementation

· Problem Management configuration and implementation

· Asset Management configuration and implementation

· Change Enablement (Change Advisory Board (CAB), Change authorizations workflows as examples) configuration and implementation

· APIs needed for OED Systems (Access Management/ Remote Desktop)

· Knowledge Base configuration and implementation

· OED branding for application

· System administrator and user training and documentation

· Organizational Change Management documentation and training

· System metrics and reporting

SCOPE EXCLUDES:

· Migration of current Footprints data from either instance to the new application

· Customization

· Process Changes

· Development of CMDB

· Sunsetting existing Footprints instances

PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS

MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

To be considered for evaluation, Proposal must demonstrate how Proposer and the proposed meet all requirements of this section:

1.1.1 BUSINESS REQUIREMENTS

To be considered for evaluation, Proposer must demonstrate that the proposed solution meets all of the following requirements:

Qualification 1: Robust Functionality. Describe how the system provides comprehensive functionality that meets the agency’s needs for a modern, integrated IT service request and ticketing management system and allows for the identification and management of IT Problems.

Qualification 2: Increased Efficiency. Describe how the system allows staff to focus on work that adds value to the customer instead of spending time on tasks that could be automated or resolved by the customer through self-service.

Qualification 3: Valuable Reporting. Describe how the system provides accurate, reliable data and a user-friendly reporting interface for measuring and managing service performance.

· The system will have several standard-templated reports available for use

Qualification 4: Self-Service. Describe how the system allows customers to obtain services and track requests through a self-service portal that is easy to use.

Qualification 5: Sustainable Administration. Describe how the system is based on modern technology, administered by staff with skill sets that are available or that can be developed, and supported by a vendor who maintains the system through regular upgrades and enhancements.

· Service requests resolved by vendor

· Outstanding service issues by vendor.

Qualification 6: Implementation Approach and OCM. Demonstrate how the software solution is rolled out, customized, and integrated into OED. We are looking for a vendor led implementation with a knowledge handover to OED IT resources who will own the configuration and internal administration and daily maintenance. We are not looking for an Agile methodology, but a Vendor proprietary, Waterfall or Hybrid approach.

· planning,

· execution,

· communication,

· risk,

· quality,

· stakeholder engagement, and

· cut over / implementation.

· highlight unique aspects of your approach,

· highlight key assumptions, and

· Highlight any value-added practices that distinguish their methodology

· communication planning,

· training development and delivery,

· impact analysis and change adoption strategies.

· demonstrate how your approach supports successful organizational adoption

Qualification 7: Vendor Evaluation Workbook (Attachment L) The required comprehensive completion of the attached workbook is mandatory. Please ensure all sections of the attached workbook are filled out, as this is crucial for the next steps to proceed, it is necessary that the attached workbook be completed in detail complete the attached workbook in full to ensure all details are captured.

TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS

To be considered for evaluation, Proposer must demonstrate that the proposed solution meets all of the requirements in the Vendor Evaluation Workbook.

MINIMUM SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

ROUND 1 Proposal Submissions To be considered for evaluation, Proposal must contain each of the following elements (further detailed in Proposal Requirements section below):

Executive Summary Administrative Proposal Disclosure Exemption Affidavit (Attachment B) Proposer Information and Certification Sheet (Attachment C) Reference Check Form (Attachment D) Price Proposal Form (Attachment E) COBID Certification / Outreach Plan (Attachment F) Responsibility Inquiry (Attachment G) Robust Functionality Technical Solution Increased Efficiency Valuable Reporting Self Service Sustainable Administration Statewide Security Standards Spreadsheet (Attachment J) Security Statements (Mandatory, Pass/Fail) Implementation Approach & OCM Vendors Evaluation Workbook (Attachment L) Proposal Page Limits Proposal is not limited to a page limit requirement. However, the OregonBuys® System has a data upload cap limit of 500 MB.

Proposal Format and Quantity Proposer should follow the format and reference the sections listed in the Proposer Content Requirements section. Responses to each section and subsection should be labeled to indicate the item being addressed. Proposer must describe in detail how requirements of this solicitation will be met and may provide additional related information. Cost information must be submitted as a separate electronic file.

Proposer shall submit one electronic copy of its Proposal. In addition, if Proposer believes any of its Proposal is exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law (ORS 192.311 through 192.478), Proposer shall complete and submit the Disclosure Exemption Affidavit (Attachment B), and Proposer shall submit a fully redacted version of its Proposal, clearly identified as the redacted version.

OregonBuys® Electronic Response. Proposer shall submit its Proposal electronically through OregonBuys®. Proposer shall follow the procedures outlined in See: OregonBuys.Gov for electronic submission.

The Price Proposal must be submitted as a separate electronic response file.

Proposer shall submit one copy of its Proposal and all other submittal requirements, with Attachment C - Proposer Information and Certification Sheet bearing the Proposer’s authorized representative’s Signature, in one of the following formats: Adobe Acrobat (pdf), Microsoft Word (docx), or Microsoft Excel (xlsx). If Proposer believes any of its Proposal is exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law (ORS 192.311 through 192.478), Proposer shall complete and submit the Disclosure Exemption Affidavit (Attachment B). Proposer shall also mark as “Confidential” in OregonBuys® all attachments to its Proposal that Proposer believes are exempt from disclosure The Proposer Information and Certification Sheet (Attachment C) must bear the Proposer’s authorized representative’s signature.

Failure of Proposer’s authorized representative to sign the Proposal may result in rejection of the Proposal by Agency.

Authorized Representative Failure of Proposer’s authorized representative to sign the Proposal may result in rejection of the Proposal by Agency.

ROUND 1 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

Proposal must address each of the items listed in this section and all other requirements set forth in this RFP. Proposer shall describe the Goods to be provided or the Services to be performed or both. A Proposal that merely offers to provide the goods or services as stated in this RFP may be considered non-Responsive to this RFP and will not be considered further.

Proposal should not include extensive artwork, unusual printing or other materials not essential to the utility and clarity of the Proposal. Do not include marketing or advertising material in the Proposal, unless requested. Proposal should be straightforward and address the requests of the RFP. Proposal containing unsolicited marketing or advertising material may receive a lower evaluation score if required information is difficult to locate.

To be considered for evaluation, a Proposal must contain an Administrative Proposal that contains all required elements. The specifications for the completion of required elements are detailed below. All elements should be submitted in OregonBuys® as separate documents in either Microsoft Word or PDF format.

Non-Scored Provisions (Mandatory, Not Scored)

· Administrative Proposal

· Executive Summary

· Disclosure Exemption Affidavit (Attachment B)

· Proposer Information and Certification Sheet (Attachment C)

· Reference Check Form (Attachment D)

· Price Proposal Form (Attachment E)

· COBID Certification / Outreach Plan (Attachment F)

· Responsibility Inquiry (Attachment G)

· Security Statements (Mandatory, Pass/Fail)

Scoring Matrix

Scored Criteria, Section 2, Vendor's Evaluation Workbook

UC-002 Improve Customer and Technician experience with improved

UC-004 Reduce impacts on the business by eliminating outages and recurring

UC-008 Support Stakeholders with Development and Project Management

Administrative Proposal (Mandatory, Not Scored) The Administrative Proposal shall outline non-technical organizational, financial, and logistical details of the proposal.

Executive Summary (Mandatory, Not Scored) Briefly describe how the proposed solution addresses the high high-level requirements listed in this RFP. These requirements form the basis for a comprehensive yet succinct Executive Summary, not to exceed two pages, that summarizes the proposed solution, its distinctive features, and how it will fulfill the State’s requirements.

(Attachment B) Disclosure Exemption Affidavit (Mandatory, Not Scored) Proposer shall complete and submit the Disclosure Exemption Affidavit (Attachment B).

(Attachment C) Proposer Information and Certification Sheet (Mandatory, Not Scored) Proposer shall complete and submit the Proposer Information and Certification Sheet (Attachment C).

Failure to demonstrate compliance with Oregon Tax Laws and sign the Proposer Information and Certification Sheet may result in a finding of non-Responsibility.

(Attachment D) References (Mandatory, Scored 50 pts) Provide 3 references from current or former client firms for similar projects performed for any clients within the last 2 years. References must be able to verify the quality of previous, related Work.

Proposer shall send the Reference Check Form (Attachment D) to its references. Reference forms must be completed by the reference, returned to the proposer and submitted by the Proposer.

Agency may check to determine if references provided support Proposer’s ability to comply with the requirements of this RFP. Agency may use references to obtain additional information, or verify any information needed. Agency may contact any reference (submitted or not) to verify Proposer’s qualifications.

Proposer shall submit reference names and contact information.

(Attachment E) Price Proposal (Mandatory, Not Scored) Proposers are required to submit a detailed Price Proposal (Attachment E) electronically through OregonBuys®. The Price Proposal must state the total price for the entire project and include a breakdown of all labor and expenses. The cost breakdown should follow a structured format like the example in Attachment E.

Note: Proposers should complete Attachment E for their official bid submission.

Key Persons and their Resumes (Mandatory, Not Scored) Specify key persons to be assigned to this project and include a current resume (not to exceed two pages each) for each key person that demonstrates the person’s qualifications and experience for the Work described in this RFP.

Robust Functionality(Mandatory, Scored 150 pts) Briefly describe how the system provides comprehensive functionality that meets the agency’s needs for a modern, integrated IT service request and ticketing management system and allows for the identification and management of IT incidents, changes, and problems.

(Attachment F) COBID Certification/Outreach Plan (Mandatory, Not Scored) Proposer shall complete and submit the Proposer COBID Certification/Outreach Plan (Attachment F).

(Attachment G) Responsibility Inquiry (Mandatory, Not Scored) Proposer shall complete and submit the Proposer Responsibility Inquiry (Attachment G) (Attachment J) Statewide Security Spreadsheet (Mandatory, Scored 150 pts) Proposer shall complete and submit the Statewide Security Spreadsheet (Attachment J).

Increased Efficiency (Mandatory, Scored 150 pts) Describe how the system allows staff to focus on work that adds value to the customer instead of spending time on tasks that could be automated or resolved by the customer through self-service Valuable Reporting (Mandatory, Scored 150 pts) Describe how the system provides accurate, reliable data and a user-friendly reporting interface for measuring and managing service performance and assisting in Problem Management.

Self Service (Mandatory, Scored 150 pts) Describe how the system allows customers to obtain services and track requests through a self-service portal that is easy to use.

Sustainable Administration (Mandatory, Scored 150 pts) Demonstrate how the system is based on modern technology, administered by staff with skill sets that are available or that can be developed, and supported by a vendor who maintains the system through regular upgrades and enhancements.

Implementation Approach & OCM (Mandatory, Scored 150 pts) Describe your proposed implementation approach, including the methods, processes, tools and guiding principles your organization typically applies when delivering a solution of this size and complexity. Include a description of your Organizational Change Management (OCM) approach, tools, and practices your organization would apply to support this implementation.

(Attachment L) Vendor Evaluation Workbook (Mandatory, Scored 150 pts) Please complete the attached workbook in full. Comprehensive and detailed completion of all sections is required to proceed with the next steps.

3.2.18 Security Statements (Mandatory, Pass/Fail)

If Proposer’s Security Statement indicated that Proposer intended to use offshore and/or foreign services computing services to provide the System or any of the Services, Proposer shall submit a detailed description of its plan for the use of offshore and/or foreign services (“Offshore and Foreign Services Plan”) including:

· All offshore computing services, including cloud/hosting, application development, systems/service maintenance, and support;

· The employees or contractors who will be providing the Services and whether they are United States citizens or individuals with a valid United State’s visa;

· Where the data centers or other Proposer facilities, employees or contractors providing the Services are located;

· Why Proposer needs to use offshore computing services or employees or contractors;

· What, if any, security precautions Proposer has taken and will take throughout the term of the Contract in order to protect Agency Data and the State’s networks; and

· What, if any, security precautions Proposer believes Agency must take in order to protect Agency Data and the State’s networks.

EIS Cyber Security Services (CSS) will review the Offshore and Foreign Services Plan and, in its sole discretion, determine whether the proposed Plan meets or exceeds the State’s Security Standards.

If the proposed Plan meets or exceeds the State’s Security Standards, EIS shall grant Agency an exception from the requirements of the Cyber and Information Security Policy based upon the Proposal and proposed Offshore and Foreign Services Plan.

If the proposed Plan does not meet the State’s Security Standards, DAS SPS may reject the Proposal as non-Responsive.

WCAG Compliance: The Solution must meet standards for digital accessibility in conformance with Title II of the ADA. The current compliance standard is Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 (Level AA).

The successful Proposer will ensure its Solution, including all documentation, and Deliverables each meet all applicable standards for digital accessibility on or before April 24, 2027, or at the time the Solution is submitted to Agency for testing, whichever date is sooner.

PUBLIC NOTICE

The RFP and attachments are published in the State of Oregon’s electronic procurement system OregonBuys® at https://oregonbuys.gov/. Documents will not be mailed to prospective Proposers.

Modifications, if any, to this RFP will be made by written Amendment(s) published in OregonBuys®. Prospective Proposer is solely responsible for checking OregonBuys® to determine whether or not any Amendment(s) have been issued. Amendment(s) are incorporated into the RFP by this reference.

PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

A Pre-Proposal conference will be held at the date and time listed in the Schedule. Prospective Proposers’ participation in this conference is highly encouraged but not mandatory.

The purpose of the Pre-Proposal conference is to:

· Provide additional description of the project;

· Explain the RFP process; and

· Answer any questions Proposers may have related to the project or the process.

Statements made at the Pre-Proposal conference are not binding upon Agency. Proposers may be asked to submit questions in Writing.

Interested parties may participate in the Pre-Proposal Conference by:

The Pre-Proposal Conference will be held on September 10, 2026, via Microsoft Teams. The start time of the Pre-Proposal Conference is 1:30 PM PDT and will be one hour in length. To receive an invite to this meeting send an email to SPC Brian.Eilerts@DAS.Oregon.Gov at least two days in advance of the meeting and you will receive an invitation to the Pre-Proposal Conference via email response.

QUESTIONS / REQUESTS FOR CLARIFICATIONS

All inquiries, whether relating to the RFP process, administration, deadline or method of award, or to the intent or technical aspects of the RFP must:

· Be delivered to the SPC via an OregonBuys® submission, or email;

· Reference the OregonBuys® bid number ;

· Identify Proposer’s name and contact information;

· Refer to the specific area of the RFP being questioned (i.e. page, section and paragraph number); and

· Be received by the due date and time for Questions/Requests for Clarification identified in the Schedule in Section 1.2.

SOLICITATION PROTESTS

Protests to RFP Prospective Proposer may submit a Written protest of anything contained in this RFP, including but not limited to, the RFP process, Specifications, Scope of Work, and the Sample Contract. This is prospective Proposer’s only opportunity to protest the provisions of the RFP, except that Proposer may protest as provided below.

Protests to Amendment(s) Prospective Proposer may submit a Written protest of anything contained in an Amendment. Protests to an Amendment, if issued, must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time on the second Business Day following the issuance of the Amendment or the date/time specified in the Amendment, or they will not be considered. Protests of matters not added or modified by the Amendment will not be considered.

Requirements for Protests All protests must:

Be delivered to the SPC via email;

Reference the OregonBuys® bid number;

Identify prospective Proposer’s name and contact information;

Be sent by an authorized representative;

State the reason for the protest, including:

the grounds that demonstrate how the Procurement Process is contrary to law, Unnecessarily Restrictive, legally flawed, or improperly specifies a brand name; and evidence or documentation that supports the grounds on which the protest is based; and State the proposed changes to the RFP provisions or other relief sought.

Protests to the RFP must be received by the due date and time identified in the Schedule.

Protests to an Amendment must be received by the due date identified in the Amendment.

PROPOSAL DELIVERY OPTIONS

Proposer is solely responsible for ensuring its Proposal is received by the SPC in accordance with the RFP requirements before Opening. Agency is not responsible for any delays in mail or by common carriers or by transmission errors or delays, or for any mis-delivery for any reason. A Proposal submitted by any means not authorized below will be rejected. The following delivery options are permitted for this RFP:

Delivery through OregonBuys® ONLY Proposal submission should be electronically through OregonBuys®. at: https://oregonbuys.gov Detailed instructions on how to submit a Proposal can be found at OregonBuys Vendor Formal Solicitation…