Response to Offeror Questions document 2.pdf

RFP 17760 Questions and Responses Page 1 of 8

STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT) RFP

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

700 GOVERNORS DRIVE

PIERRE, SD 57501

Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Survey Administration and Reporting

Questions and Responses

PROPOSALS ARE DUE NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 3rd, 2025 BY 5:00 PM CDT

RFP #17760 BUYER: Division of Medical Services

POC: Kirsten Blachford Kirsten.Blachford@state.sd.us

Q1: Section 1.5: Is there a limit on the size of the electronic files the SFTP folder can receive (e.g., 30 MBs)? If so, please provide the maximum size limit the SFTP folder can receive.

Section 1.5 mentions uploading documents. Our understanding is that the information for what and where to upload documents will be contained in the SFTP folder, is this correct?

A1: There is not a limit on the file size. From Section 1.5: Please note the offeror will need to work with its own technical support staff to set up SFTP compatible software on the offeror’s end. While the State can answer questions, the State is not responsible for the software required to access the SFTP folder.

Q2: Section 1.13: Would DSS confirm that the offeror does not need to submit two versions of the proposal (non-redacted and redacted) and that identifying the proprietary information in the Executive Summary and marking information in the body of the proposal meets the proprietary information requirements?

A2: The offeror does not need to submit two versions of the proposal (non-redacted and redacted). Offerors must clearly identify in the Executive Summary and mark in the body of the proposal any specific proprietary information they are requesting to be protected. The Executive Summary must contain specific justification explaining why the information is to be protected.

Q3: Section 1.13: Does adding “Proprietary” before a paragraph or on a page meet the requirement to “mark” proprietary sections? If not, how should offerors indicate proprietary sections?

A3: Yes.

Q4: Section 3.0: Please confirm if any supplemental questions will be added to either the adult, child, or CHIP survey instruments. If yes, please confirm how many supplemental questions will be added to each survey instrument.

A4: The Children with Chronic Conditions supplemental set of questions will be required in accordance with CMS regulations. Previous surveys have included additional supplemental questions and the State anticipates it may want to include up to 5 additional questions with each survey instrument.

mailto:Kirsten.Blachford@state.sd.us

RFP 17760 Questions and Responses Page 2 of 8

Q5: Section 3.0: Please confirm if a mixed-mode methodology consisting of mail (three questionnaire mailings, two reminder postcards) and a web-based survey is an acceptable methodology for surveying.

A5: The State encourages a mixed-mode methodology for conducting the survey.

Q6: Section 3.0: Please confirm if surveys are required to be administered in English and Spanish.

A6: Surveys will be administered in English, a Spanish survey may need to be administered if a recipient indicates a need.

Q7: Section 3.0: Given that the contract will not be awarded until mid-February 2026, along with the time needed for contract start-up and survey administration, please confirm that submission to the AHRQ CAHPS database will not be required in the first year since data are required to be submitted in June 2026.

A7: The selected vendor will be required to submit 2026 data in compliance with 2027 deadline.

Q8: Section 3.0: Please confirm base sample sizes of 1,350 members for the adult CAHPS survey and 3,490 members for the child CAHPS and CHIP CAHPS surveys are expected, if there is to be no oversampling.

Will the state use the NCQA-required base samples (1,350 for Adult Medicaid; 3,490 for Child Medicaid with Chronic Conditions questions)? Or will there be an oversample required?

Will any custom questions be added to any of the surveys? If no, we assume we will use the standard 5.1H instruments provided by NCQA.

Section 3.0 Scope of Work describe the type of surveying to be done. Is there an approximate estimate for the number of total surveys that will be done each year of the contract?

A8: The State will use the NCQA-required base sample sizes. Oversamples associated with the CCC supplemental set will also be required.

The State anticipates up to an additional 5 supplemental questions.

Q9: We would like to confirm there are three survey samples:

a. Adult Medicaid

b. Child Medicaid (using the chronic conditions question set)

c. CHIP (fielded as a separate sample/population, also using the chronic conditions question sets)

A9: Correct.

Q10: Section 3.0: The RFP states, “Offerors must address and provide information described in sections 6.1.1-6.1.8 in their response.” The RFP does not include sections 6.1.1-6.1.8.

Were these sections intended to be 8.1.1-8.1.8? If not, would DSS please provide text for Sections 6.1.1-6.1.8?

A10: Offerors must address and provide information described in sections 8.1.1-8.1.8.

Q11: Section 4.0: Please confirm if findings for the adult, child, and CHIP populations should be reported in one combined report.

A11: All populations should be reported individually, results by population may be combined into one deliverable or separate deliverables.

RFP 17760 Questions and Responses Page 3 of 8

Q12: Section 4.0: For each population, please confirm if any other deliverables besides a report will be required and what those will be.

A12: There are no other required deliverables. Offerors may include other deliverables and descriptions in their proposals if they would like.

Q13: Section 4.1: The RFP states, “In addition, the offeror’s proposal must include how its proposed deliverables will meet the following IT requirements (General and Vendor Hosted).

The offeror must provide a response detailing how the solution will meet the requirements in Sections 3 and 4.” Must offerors address each item in Sections 4.2 and 4.3?

A13: Yes.

Q14: Section 3.0: Please confirm if any of the reporting and deliverables that are required to be delivered electronically will be web-based.

A14: Item will be discussed with the offeror awarded the contract.

Q15: Section 4.1: Section 4.1 requires the inclusion of a Requirements Traceability Matrix, a Testing Plan, a Training Plan, a Go-Live/Cutover Plan, and a Post-Implementation Support (or Maintenance and Operations Plan).

If an offeror has established systems in place for the collection and transfer of data, can these plans be excluded from the proposal response?

A15: Details should be provided for the established systems in place for the collection and transfer of data.

Q16: Section 4.2: Section 4.2 includes references to “deliverables,” which seem to reference IT deliverables. The Scope of Work does not include IT development. Could DSS clarify what deliverables it is referencing in Section 4.2?

A16: In the context of that question, deliverables is referring to the contract deliverables. If it’s a SaaS or COTS solution, it would be referring to either of those.

Q17: Section 4.2.8: Will DSS treat a vulnerability report as confidential if it is marked “Confidential” or is a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) necessary to prevent disclosure?

A17: Yes, all vulnerability reports will be treated as confidential.

Q18: Section 4.2.10: The RFP states, “The offeror must use industry standard processes and procedures, such as a software development lifecycle, when planning the development, configuration, implementation, and support of a proposed deliverable.” IT development is not a requirement of the Scope of Work. Could DSS clarify what it is referencing in this section?

A18: As part of your business practice, we are requiring that you take these items into consideration for any software, webpage, web app, etc. that you develop and sell.

Deliverables in the context of any reference is the deliverable of the contract; it is not referring to only custom developed software.

Q19: Section 4.4.1: Should Section 4.4.1 be numbered 4.3.1?

A19: Yes.

Q20: Section 4.4.1: May offerors include security certifications in an appendix?

A20: Yes.

Q21: Section 4.4.2: Should Section 4.4.2 be numbered 4.3.2?

A21: Yes.

RFP 17760 Questions and Responses Page 4 of 8

Q22: Section 4.4.2: Is this referencing a member-level or respondent-level data file and data dictionary that will allow survey response data to be filtered and imported as needed in a CSV, Excel, text, or SAS format?

A22: That is correct, and that the data remains the property of the State and should not be restricted or cumbersome for the State to access and or all data.

Q23: Section 5.1.1: Would DSS confirm that the project organization chart and the list of all consultants and subcontractors in the offeror’s response are to include only the offeror’s staff and subcontractors and not BIT staff and Agency staff?

A23: Only the offeror’s staff and subcontractors.

Q24: Section 5.2: Please confirm that the offeror does not need to address the Agency Project Sponsor, Agency Project Manager, Project Steering Team, and BIT Project Manager roles in its response.

A24: Correct.

Q25: Section 5.3: May resumes be included in an appendix?

A25: Yes.

Q26: Section 5.3. This section mentions the information what must be contained for staff. Is there a specific format required for this information?

A26: Standard resume format that is easy to read.

Q27: Section 6.2.2: As needed, may the offeror exclude page numbers from pages where the insertion of documents such as certifications may preclude the use of footers?

A27: Yes.

Q28: Section 6.2.2: May offerors add a footer with a page number to the required form?

A28: Yes.

Q29: Section 6.2.3: The bulleted list under 6.2.3 includes “Required Diagrams.” Would DSS clarify to what diagrams this is referring?

A29: This would include architecture diagrams and data flow diagrams.

Q30: Section 6.2.3: May offerors include a cover page with their proposals?

A30: Yes.

Q31: Section 6.2.3: Page 1 of the RFP appears to be a form for offerors to complete;

however, the form is not included in the bulleted list under 6.2.3. Should offerors complete the form on page 1 and, if so, where should the form be placed in the proposal?

A31: Yes, page 1 must be completed. It can be an attachment to the proposal.

Q32: Section 6.2.3: May offerors include a cover/transmittal letter within its proposal? If so, should this be placed before or after the form that appears on page 1 of the RFP?

A32: Before.

Q33: Section 6.5: Based on our reading of this section the state would like a project plan outlining each point in the section and a separate document containing a schedule of all activities contained in the plan. Is this correct?

A33: Yes, the schedule should be a separate document, provided in Microsoft Excel, and submitted as an attachment to your proposal.

RFP 17760 Questions and Responses Page 5 of 8

Q34: Section 6.4: The RFP states, “The offeror’s Deliverables section should address each evaluation requirement enumerated in Section 8.” Are offerors to respond to all of Section 8.0 or just Sections 8.1.1 through 8.1.8?

A34: Offerors are expected to address all of Section 8.0.

Q35: Section 6.4: Please confirm the offeror’s proposal should include RFP Sections 3, 4 and 8 within Section 6.4 of its response.

A35: Section 6.2 details the response.

Q36: Section 6.4: Section 6.4 states, “The offeror’s Deliverables section must include a complete narrative detailing the assessment of the work to be performed, approach and methods to provide the requirements of this RFP, the offeror’s ability to fulfill the requirements of this RFP, the offeror’s approach….” Would DSS clarify what it is expecting for “approach and methods” versus “offeror’s approach”?

A36: The “approach and methods” would address the “offeror’s approach”.

Q37: Section 6.6: Is Section 6.6 referencing IT items only or all items in Section 4?

A37: The offeror needs to notify the State if you cannot comply with the IT requirements stated in Section 4.

Q38: Section 6.7: The RFP states, “the offeror must submit a completed Security and Vendor Questionnaire, which is attached to this RFP as Exhibit 1, for each proposed deliverable.”

Would DSS explain what is meant by “each proposed deliverable?”

A38: This refers to the different hosting methods in the proposal.

Q39: Section 6.7: Section 6.7 states, “if the offeror’s proposal includes more than one hosting option, the offeror must complete a Security and Vendor Questionnaire for each hosting option and indicate which questionnaire belongs to which hosting option.” However, the questionnaire states, “NOTE: If your proposal includes options for more than one of the hosting sections below, please note how your answers in the System-General section would change depending upon the hosting solution.”

Would DSS clarify how many questionnaires offerors need to submit?

A39: This number corresponds to the number of hosting options proposed.

Q40: Section 6.7: Would DSS confirm that offerors are to save the Word doc Security and Vendor Questionnaires as PDFs for submission as separate documents from the proposal response?

A40: The State will accept Microsoft Word or PDF submissions on the Security and Vendor Quqestionnaire.

Q41: Section 6.10: Does DSS have a required number of references that offerors must include?

A42: The offeror’s proposal must provide details about the four most recent projects that the offeror was awarded and managed through to completion. If the offeror cannot provide four examples, the offeror must explain why it cannot provide four examples and must provide as many examples as possible. These most recent projects will serve as references.

Q43: Section 6.11: Would DSS confirm that offerors do not need to address in their proposals the Agency roles in Section 5?

A43: The offeror will not address State/Agency roles.

Q44: Section 6.12: Background Investigations indicates that background investigations must be done on the offeror’s staff and that of their subcontractors, agents, assigns, and affiliated entities. Will these background checks be conducted by the state or the offeror

RFP 17760 Questions and Responses Page 6 of 8 their subcontractors, agents, assigns, and affiliated entities? Will the information required for this background investigation be required to be given in electronic or paper format? Or to put is another way, what will be the mechanisms and methods for this investigation?

A44: Background investigation packets, which will include instructions, will be distributed to the offeror awarded the contract by the State.

Q45: Section 6.14: Would DSS confirm that offerors do not need to submit audited financial statements with their proposals?

A45: Audited financial statements will only be required upon the State’s request and do not need to be submitted with the offeror’s proposal.

Q46: Section 7.0: The cost table requests pricing for “each year 1, 2, and 3.” However, Section 1.14 – Length of Contract describes a three-year initial term ending May 31, 2029, “with the option for renewal for up to three (3), one-year contracts at the discretion of the State.”

Please confirm whether DSS would like offerors to include pricing for the three optional renewal years in the Cost Proposal (Years 4 through 6) or whether the Cost Proposal should include only the base three-year term (Years 1 through 3).

A46: Offerors should include a cost proposal for the initial contract term (3-years), offerors are encouraged to include additional cost proposals for continued performance.

Q47: Section 7.0: The RFP notes DSS intends to pay “as an annual deliverable upon successful completion.” Could DSS please clarify whether “successful completion” refers to delivery of final reports for each annual CAHPS survey cycle, or if partial or milestone payments of the deliverable categories (e.g., after survey administration or data submission) will be permitted during each annual period?

A47: The State intends to pay one annual payment upon delivery of final reports. Offerors may also outline an alternative payment schedule for consideration.

Q48: Section 7.0: Would DSS confirm that the Cost Proposal should be included within the proposal and not as a separate document?

A48: The cost proposal should be included as part of the proposal.

Q49: Section 7.0: Would DSS explain how the costs in the “All labor, materials, postage, subcontractors, and administrative costs” row are different than the “Survey preparation and administration across all populations” costs in the first row?

A49: Survey preparation and administration is personnel time and indirect costs. The other line addresses direct costs.

Q50: Does DSS have a projected budget or budget range for this project?

A50: The State is seeking competitive proposals and will evaluate proposed costs as part of the review process. The State’s current contract is for $50,000. This contract does not include the oversample for the CCC questions.

Q51: What are the sources of funding for this project? Are they state, federal, or a combination of both.

A51: A combination of both funds will be used.

Q52: Was this same Scope of Work previously awarded? If so, to which contractor?

RFP 17760 Questions and Responses Page 7 of 8

A52: The State has issued previous contracts for completion of the CAHPS survey. The scope of work may vary. The contract can be found here: https://open.sd.gov/contracts/08/26- 0831-303.pdf Q53: Would DSS provide the contract value for the current work?

A53: The current contract with amounts can be found here:

https://open.sd.gov/contracts/08/26-0831-303.pdf Q54: Will DSS issue a list of Bidders/Offerors after the bid close? If so, when and where will the list of Bidders be available?

A54: From the time the proposals are submitted they are considered a working documents and as such, will be kept confidential until such time as the award is completed.

Q55: The RFP references following NCQA protocols. Related to that:

a. Will the State provide any email addresses for email enhancement protocols?

b. Will the State require any languages other than English? If yes, will the State provide any data about the member's preferred language?

c. Will results be submitted to NCQA? Or to any other sources?

A55: a. The State anticipates providing email addresses, if the State is unable to do so we will waive that protocol.

b. The State will require both English and Spanish versions.

c. Results will be submitted to AHRQ as required by CMS.

Q56: What response rate has the State historically achieved on the survey?

A56: Approximately 21% response rate.

Q57: What percent of responses are received via mail, phone, or online?

A57: Approximately 18% by mail, 3% by phone.

Q58: To confirm. The cost for each category in the cost proposal table in section 7.0 Cost Proposal should be the total cost for that category, not a per unit cost. This cost should be all inclusive containing all the costs (salary, fringe, operating costs, indirect costs, etc.) for that category, and then for the total cost of all the categories combined?

A58: Yes, offerors should outlay costs by category total.

Q59: What is the proposed start date of the contract.

A59: The anticipated contract start date would be 07/01/2026.

IT QUESTIONS/RESPONSES BELOW:

Q60: Section 3.0 and Section 4.1: The Scope of Work does not include development of IT systems or applications, yet Section 4.1 requires the inclusion of a Requirements Traceability Matrix, a Testing Plan, a Training Plan, a Go-Live/Cutover Plan, and a Post-Implementation Support (or Maintenance and Operations Plan).

Could DSS confirm that these plans are related to IT development and that they do not need to be included in the proposal response, since the Scope of Work does not include IT development?

A60: This section would apply if your proposal contains a system in which login is required.

Q61: Section 4.1: Section 4.1 requires the inclusion of a Data Conversion Plan, if applicable.

Would DSS clarify what this plan should address?

A61: Inclusion of a Data Conversion Plan is only applicable if you are bringing old data into a new system.

https://open.sd.gov/contracts/08/26-0831-303.pdf https://open.sd.gov/contracts/08/26-0831-303.pdf https://open.sd.gov/contracts/08/26-0831-303.pdf

RFP 17760 Questions and Responses Page 8 of 8

Q62: Section 4.1: Section 4.1 requires the inclusion of a Requirements Traceability Matrix. If this is not related to IT development, would DSS clarify what this plan should address?

A62: This section would apply if your proposal contains a system in which login is required.

Q63: Section 4.1: Section 4.1 requires the inclusion of a Testing Plan. If this is not related to IT development, would DSS clarify what the plan should address?

A63: This section would apply if your proposal contains a system in which login is required.

Q64: Section 4.1: Section 4.1 requires the inclusion of a Training Plan. If this is not related to IT development, would DSS clarify what training the plan should address?

A64: This section would apply if your proposal contains a system in which login is required.

Q65: Section 4.1: Section 4.1 requires the inclusion of a Go-Live/Cutover Plan. If this is not related to IT development, would DSS clarify what the plan should address?

A65: This section would apply if your proposal contains a system in which login is required.

Q66: Section 4.1: Section 4.1 requires the inclusion of a Post-Implementation Support (or Maintenance and Operations Plan). If this is not related to IT development, would DSS clarify what the plan should address?

A66: This section would apply if your proposal contains a system in which login is required.

Q67: Section 5.3: Could DSS clarify what is meant by “RFP Project Experience” versus the other experience listed under Section 5.3, e.g., listing of work experience, experience in similar projects?

Section 5.3 and section 6.11 appear to ask for resumes to appear in both sections. Is this correct?

A67: RFP Project Experience would be the staff’s experience related to the requirements of this RFP. The other referenced experiences are specific to project management experience and other experience in similar projects.

Q68: Section 6.2.2: Section 6.2.2 states, “each of the sections listed in Section 6.2.3 should be tabbed.” Does the use of headers for each section of 6.2.3 and inclusion in the table of contents meet the requirement that the sections be “tabbed”?

Section 6.2.2 (bottom of page 19) – it states ‘Each of the sections listed in Section 6.2.3 should be tabbed’ – please clarify this when you ask questions as to if this something that was for previous ‘hard copy’ submissions. If not, how are we to tab a pdf document?

A68: Yes, the use of headers and inclusion in the table of contents would be sufficient.

For the 2nd question – A combination of headers and inclusion in the table of contents or the creation of bookmarks or buttons to allow for easy navigation fulfills the requirement to tab the items.