Response to Offeror Questions document.pdf

Answers to Vendor Questions Received for 24RFP11965 – Reemployment Assistance Fund Accounting

1. Can you provide a detailed inventory of the current mainframe environment, including supported languages, databases, and interfaces used by the RA Fund Accounting System?

a. Databases = ADABAS, Flat Files and VSAM

b. Languages = COBOL and Natural

c. CICS Screens (Key Master)

2. Are specific proprietary file types or data formats requiring special handling during migration?

a. No

3. While Azure is preferred, are there specific Azure services (e.g., Azure SQL Database, Data

Factory) that the State prefers vendors to utilize?

a. Azure ADF

b. Azure Functions

c. Azure API Management

d. Azure SQL Database

e. Azure Data Lake/Storage

4. Should vendors include costs for provisioning a new Azure environment, or will the State provide access to an existing Azure tenant?

a. No. The State of SD can provide access to an existing Azure Tenant

5. What systems or third-party applications must the new RA Fund Accounting System integrate with (e.g., payment processors, reporting systems)?

a. Integration with Wells Fargo Bank for Payment Processing

b. Desktop Scanner for check deposits.

c. Integration with Automated Standard Application for Payments (ASAP)

d. Elavon & Converge (credit card processing)

e. Electronic Federal Tax Payment System (EFTPS)

6. Are there APIs, middleware, or other tools currently in place to support integrations?

a. No APIs currently in place.

7. What is the size and format of the current dataset to be migrated, and are there known data quality issues (e.g., duplicates, outdated records)?

a. Format is ADABAS

b. Total size of 1923.45 M, approximately 5 to 8 G of decompressed data

c. There are known data quality issues.

8. Are there specific compliance requirements or retention policies that must be addressed for historical data? South Dakota’s record retention schedule requires retention of records for 5 years, provided all litigation, claims, and audit findings involving the records have been resolved and final action has been taken.

9. Are there specific features or workflows in the current system that must be preserved in the modernized system?

a. No

10. Can you provide examples of critical financial reports or fund tracking workflows? No, we do not have any documented workflows at this time.

11. How many user roles and levels of access must the system support?

a. 6 roles with 5 levels of access.

b. Will need an Admin role for internal controls.

12. Are there specific security requirements for user access management (e.g., multi-factor authentication)?

a. Yes, we use SSO and will need MFA for integrations.

13. Are there defined performance metrics for the system (e.g., system availability, response times)?

a. Yes. Defined performance metrics will be outlined and negotiated in the SLA upon award.

14. What are the peak usage periods, and what level of scalability is expected?

a. Peak usage: First 6 weeks of a calendar quarter (3 months)

b. Level of scalability: That which is required to maintain performance level, as negotiated.

15. Is there a targeted go-live date for the new system, and is a phased implementation approach acceptable? There is no targeted go-live date for the new system. A phased implementation approach would be acceptable.

16. Are there external dependencies or projects that could affect the timeline?

a. Yes, pre-existing IT projects.

17. Will the State provide test cases, or is the vendor responsible for developing them?

a. Combination of both.

18. Are there specific testing requirements for regulatory compliance or data validation?

a. Yes

19. How many users will require training, and what format is preferred (e.g., in-person, online)? A total of 6 users would require training, we do not have a preference on the format. It can be in-person or online.

20. Should vendors include ongoing training for new hires post-deployment? No

21. Is there a not-to-exceed budget or funding range for this project? No.

22. Will value-added options (e.g., extended support or additional features) be considered within the proposal? Yes, value-added options will be considered in reviewing proposals.

23. Are there preferences for subscription-based licensing versus perpetual licensing? South Dakota is preferring a perpetual license, but is open to subscription-based proposals.

24. Should vendors leverage existing State agreements with Microsoft or other providers? Vendors may leverage Microsoft, if desired. Other providers will be considered, but Microsoft is preferred since it is the State’s enterprise provider.

25. What level of post-implementation support is required, and should vendors include specific SLAs in their proposal? This depends on the definition of post-implementation support. We anticipate training staff internally after deployment but may need support if complex troubleshooting is required. Vendors should include SLAs in their proposal.

26. Are system upgrades expected to be handled by the vendor, and if so, how frequently?

a. Yes, upon release. If there is a major release, it may require a security scan before releasing to production.

27. Are there specific federal, state, or industry standards that the system must comply with (e.g., NIST, IRS 1075)? Yes; NIST, IRS 1075

28. Are there additional requirements for safeguarding Personally Identifiable Information (PII) or financial data? PII and financial data should be safeguarded. There aren’t any additional requirements other than generally acceptable business standards

29. Are there encryption requirements for data at rest and in transit?

30. What are the expectations for securing user access (e.g., single sign-on, role-based access)?

a. SSO, MFA, Administrative ability to set role-based access

31. How will proposals be evaluated, and are there weighted criteria (e.g., cost, experience, technical solution)? Best solution proposed for implementation, ease of use, value-to-cost.

32. Are there bonus points or considerations for innovative solutions or value-added services? No

33. If invited for a presentation, what specific topics or aspects of the system should be demonstrated? We do not have any specific topics. A general demonstration of major features/functions is acceptable.

34. Are there specific formatting or organizational requirements for the proposal submission? No, there are not.

35. Can vendors include supplementary materials, such as demonstration links or videos, in their response? Vendors may do so.

36. Could you provide additional details about the main challenges and pain points of the current RA Fund Accounting System that this modernization project seeks to address? The main challenge with the current system is that it is not a comprehensive system. The majority of the work is conducted through manual entries. Users can't work independently. At certain times, the system has become “unavailable” which hampers workflow and productivity.

37. Beyond the requirements listed in the RFP, are there any specific long-term goals for the system (e.g., expansion, advanced analytics capabilities)? No

38. What are the primary languages, databases, and middleware currently used in the mainframe system?

a. Databases = ADABAS, Flat Files and VSAM

b. Languages = COBOL and Natural

c. CICS Screens (Key Master)

39. Are there specific processes within the existing system that must be maintained or replicated in the modern platform?

a. Yes, all business processes will need to function within the new software.

40. Does the State have existing Azure resources or subscriptions available for this project, or should vendors include provisioning new resources in the proposal?

a. Yes, the State has existing Azure resources and subscriptions available for this project.

41. Is multi-cloud compatibility a consideration, or is the system expected to remain exclusively within Azure? Azure is preferred

42. What is the volume and type of data stored in the current system?

a. Data is currently stored in ADABAS and flat files.

b. Total size of 1923.45 M, approximately 5 to 8 G of decompressed data

43. Are there specific historical data requirements for compliance or audit purposes?

a. Must maintain data for 5 years

44. Are there any data cleansing or normalization activities anticipated before migration?

45. Are there any new capabilities or functionalities (e.g., dashboards, advanced reporting tools) that are critical to the success of the modernized system? No

46. Will the State require workflow automation or predictive analytics features as part of the modernization?

a. Yes, workflow automation.

b. No forecasting is anticipated.

47. Is there a specific target for go-live, and are there high-priority features that must be implemented in the early phases of the project? There is no specific target date for go-live;

however, the start of the state fiscal year (SFY), July 1, would be preferred.

48. Does DLR have preferences regarding phased implementation versus a single launch? DLR does not have a preference regarding phased implementation versus a single launch. Either approach would be acceptable.

49. Will the State provide testing criteria and scenarios, or is the vendor expected to define and execute the full test strategy?

a. Will require a combination of test cases from the State and the vendor.

50. Are there compliance or certification tests that must be conducted as part of the project?

a. Yes, PCI & NACHA

51. How many users will require training, and are there specific training formats (e.g., instructor-led, self-paced) that are preferred? 6 users will require training. A combination of instructor-led and self-paced would be preferred.

52. Should the vendor provide comprehensive system documentation, and are there specific guidelines for formatting or content? System documentation should be part of the proposal.

However, there are no specific guidelines for formatting or content.

53. What is the expected duration and scope of post-implementation support? Should vendors include extended maintenance options in the proposal? South Dakota does not have an expected duration for post-implementation support. Yes, vendors should include extended maintenance options in the proposal.

54. Does the State anticipate requiring additional training sessions or updates after deployment?

South Dakota does not anticipate requiring additional training sessions after deployment.

55. Is there a budget range allocated for this project, and will cost be a weighted factor in the evaluation criteria? There is no budget range allocated for this project. Upfront and ongoing maintenance costs will be a weighted factor in the review of the proposal.

56. Will additional value-added features (e.g., enhanced security, advanced reporting tools) be considered during evaluation, or should the proposal strictly adhere to the outlined requirements? The proposal should adhere to the outlined requirements; however, value-added features will be considered during the evaluation process. The proposal should provide cost estimates for these features as options.

57. Are there specific security certifications or compliance standards (e.g., SOC 2, FedRAMP, NIST) that the system must adhere to?

a. Yes, FedRAMP, NIST.

58. Should the system include built-in support for audit trails or user activity tracking to meet compliance requirements?

59. If selected for a presentation, are there specific aspects of the proposed solution that DLR would like vendors to focus on during the demonstration? No