The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Sheet1 Questions & Responses 170-4410-24 Case Management
| 1 | For the Requirement Matrix, Line 17 - "Capacity to build web-based forms..." Is the software to be a framework that will allow Treasury to define (build) web forms? |
| Response | No, we require webform compatibility. For example, we are using a webform on the OST website to initiate reports. We need the data from the form to flow into the database. |
| 2 | For the Requirement Matrix, Line 22 - "Capable of triggering workflows..." This statement is very general - what should these workflows do? |
| Response | This team has a very set legal framwork for our processes. These would form the basis of desired workflows. For example, when a case is reported for intake, it would trigger an alert for review by the Intake Specialist; after review, it would be marked as needing research, then assigned to a staff member for that step of the process. It would also integrate related templates and necessary staff actions would be triggered with reminders. Possible workflows include: billing, accounting, research, documentation, field work, pleadings, legal processes, inventory, interactions with heirs, etc. The team runs multiple cases across years, so automation around reminders and status tracking would be very important. |
| 3 | Is there another document that descripts input to the system (such as CPA invoices) and outputs (specific reports and dashboards) and processes (sending statements, accruing interest, processing late fees, etc.)? |
| Response | We need a way to track assets and expenses in real time to see the financial picture of an estate. Assets include physical inventory as well as cash from various accounts, plus interest that accumulates on those assets. On the outflow side, we have debts that we are paying for the decedent, administrative expenses, and we need the system to update in real time so we always know what the balance is. |
| 4 | Does documentation exist for the existing system that can be used to create an "Existing vs Desired" matrix? |
| Response | No. |
| 5 | Do data structures exist in the current system for Estates, Assets, workflows of specific types, etc. Is data consistent over time and across all cases? • | Page 11, a), ii) 1) "Approximately 12,000 cases will need to be transferred to the new database. Each case will have additional records, such as contacts, billings, inventories, etc." |
| Response | Yes; data consistencies varies | |
| 6 | Explain how integration with Accounts Payable / Accounts Receivable will ideally work. Does Treasury have an existing Accounts Payable / Accounts Receivable API to facilitate this process? What data is required (i.e. account codes). Does an API exist to query Account codes and related accounting data? • | Page 10, item ii: "Ideally, the solution will generate a payment request document or dataset that transfers payment data to Treasury’s accounting program to initiate payment of expenses, including expenditure approval." |
| Response | First to clarify the use of the term "Treasury's accounting program" means the staff assigned to process payables and receivables. The term does NOT refer to an electonic system or application. Currently, Treasury is developing an application framework to streamline the extraction of data from various systems/application, transform the data to meet the requirements of the Statewide Financial Management Application (SFMA) through an interface process. Ideally, the case management system will allow the user to trigger a workflow that configures data in a specific way to another person to approve. Once approved, the data would be delivered to the application built to process the payment or account for the revenue. Ideally, the case management solution will create a daily data transmittal of daily requested and approved transactions. When the transaction has been entered and cleared in SFMA, the updated information of the entry and clearance would then be extracted and sent to the case management solution update the payment record with the appropriate information. We anticipate that a centralized database will be developed to serve as the tool to collect the data from one application and deliver to another application, and back again. We anticipate that account coding will be applied in the centralized database through a lookup function or entered manually, depending on the nature of the expenditure. | |
| 7 | Does Treasury now have, or do they plan to have, access to the Microsoft Azure Cloud platform? Specifically, proposed vendor will need cloud environments for development testing, load testing, user acceptance testing, and production. |
| Response | Yes, we have Microsoft Azure Cloud platform |
| 8 | During the development process, will the selected vendor be able to access the existing system to ensure processes in the new system produce matching/acceptable results? |
| Response | Related to Treasury-owned or leased systems, the selected vendor and each employee of the vendor must sign Non-Disclosure Agreements as required to access our systems. Regarding SFMA and the state data warehouse, we are subject to the Department of Administrative Services restrictions and security protocols. |
| 9 | What persons within Treasury will work with the selected vendor to ensure the new system is developed to specification as it is being built? Describe experience level of selected persons and availability to work with selected vendor. |
| Response | This will be determined prior to the start of implementation. |
| 10 | Page 9, c), i): "The solution must sync with the trust accounting component.". Elaborate on the sync process - how and when will it occur, and what data will be synced? |
| Response | Treasury does not currently have an efficient and effective process or product that can maintain a trust account. Under the law, estate-owned property (including cash) must be held in trust for the estate. Treasury anticipates that a vendor's proposals will include a component to manage an estate trust (bank) account. If the trust account solution is not part of the primary solution being presented, but is a separate component, the the case management system should offer an data entry and retreival ability with the trust account solution that syncs at regular intervals or in real time. For example, if a proposal includes the purchase of an accounting solution such as Quickbooks or Sage, case management solution must be able to sync data with the accounting solution to avoid duplicate data entry and management. |
| 11 | Page 10, h), i): "The proposed solution would ideally integrate with other Treasury programs and applications". Elaborate on what systems will integrate, will integration be scheduled or real-time, what data will be exchanged. |
| Response | Please refer to the answer to Question 6 above. In this integration means an API that will push/pull data from another system as a way to streamline work and reporting. Most ETL processes will be schedule at regular intervals. In rare instances, Treasury may ask for real-time syncing. |
| 12 | Page 9 b) iii): To what extent are Treasury users expected to be allowed to "customize steps, manage users and tasks, link actions across stages or tasks, and promote efficiency". Describe a business case for this functionality. How are changes in workflows expected to impact existing cases (i.e. does a case that is near completion need to go through the workflow again if steps are added to the workflow). |
| Response | A select number of users will be able to customize steps and link actions. We're not expecting changes in workflows, we are expecting better organization of current cases. We will bring in current cases run them through these new workflows. Inactive past cases will be archived. |
| 13 | We are currently undergoing a SOC 2 Type 2 audit. Would having the report by go-live be sufficient? Or could we submit evidence, such as a letter of engagement from the CPA, in lieu of the report? |
| Response | SOC 2 Type 2 confirmation (Attachment J) must be provided with proposal. |
| 14 | We respectfully request the budget for the Case Management Software Solution described in the RFP. |
| Response | Budget numbers will not be provided. |
| 15 | Per Attachment J Proposer is required to obtain an SOC 2 audit. Can Proposer obtain SOC 2 certification upon award of the contract and provide the report within 60 days of award? Also, for a small organizations of two or three developers, this requirement is typically not feasible or appropriate. Is there an alterative attestation the Proposer can submit if Proposer is a small company? |
| Response | Please see response to question 13. |
| 16 | My company may hire additional developers only upon award of the contract. Are resumes required in advance for all developers who will be be working on the software? |
| Response | Any key persons identified in the proposal must have a resume attached to the proposal. |
| 17 | Per RFP, Intent to award will be end of September 2024. Per page 16 item I, "Solution must be implemented and live no later than January 1, 2025". Approximately 90 days from award to live implementation seems unrealistic. How flexible is this date? Dates around Q3 2025 seem more attainable. |
| Response | There is the possibility for some flexibility. |
| 18 | What is the timeframe of this project? How long does the Treasury anticipate between award and completion of the project? |
| Response | Please refer to Section 2.E (Schedule) of the RFP document. Anticipated Go Live date is January 1, 2025. |
| 19 | Would you please confirm the Bid Opening and Closing dates? We have had issues with these dates being inaccurate on OregonBuys.gov. |
| Response | Please refer to the Title page of the RFP document. |
| 20 | When do you anticipate Round 2 taking place? |
| Response | Estimated between August 26, 2024 through September 10, 2024. |
| 21 | Is there any payment upon completion of Round 1? |
| Response | No. |
| 22 | How many respondents will be selected to move on from each Round? |
| Response | Please refer to Section 6.F (Next Step Determination) of the RFP document. |
| 23 | According to Attachment H (checklist) and RFP section 4.A (p.15), Attachment G must be submitted with the proposal, however, RFP section 7.C (p.26) seems to suggest that Attachment G is required to be completed after award. Could you confirm when Attachment G should be submitted? |
| Response | Please submit WITH proposal. |
| 24 | Will private contracts be accepted for the requested references in Attachment G, or only government contracts? |
| Response | Yes, private contracts will be accepted for references. |
| 25 | What size business does the Treasury intend to employ? |
| Response | There is no preference. |
| 26 | Is there a budget amount allotted to this solicitation? |
| Response | See response to question 14. |
| 27 | Will templates for forms referenced in RFP section 2.D.e.ii (p.10) be provided, or will we be responsible for developing them? |
| Response | Templates will be provided. |
| 28 | What is the reason the treasury is moving away from using PCLaw Time Matters? Was the price too high? Were there functionalities missing? Any other issues we should have in mind while developing our proposal? |
| Response | The product is no longer being supported. |
| 29 | Will there be a list of accounting mathematics provided, so that we can incorporate them into our software solution? |
| Response | Yes. Ideally, the equations will be programed into the system while providing the ability to edit values. For example, the calculation of time multiplied by a staff member's hourly rate. The calculation would be programmed into the system, but Treasury would be able to adjust the rate for each staff member. |
| 30 | Will we be responsible for building an accounting suite, or will we be integrating already existing software for that purpose? |
| Response | The decistion to build an accounting suite or integrating existing software is up to each vendor. Treasury does not have existing software capable of trust accounting. |
| 31 | Sometimes developers must pay upon integration of licensed software. So we can more accurately calculate our costs, is there a complete list of programs and applications to be integrated into our software solution, or is the list in RFP 2.D.h.i (p.10) exhaustive? |
| Response | Microsoft Office, Microsoft 365, OneDrive, SAP Concur, Cobblestone Software's Contract Insights are currently the critical systems for integration into the case management solution. |
| 32 | Will templates be provided for the invoices referenced in RFP 2.D.f.i (p.10)? |
| Response | Yes. |
| 33 | Will we be responsible for continuing to pay for a subscription to the Cloud Solution mentioned in the Case Management Solution Requirement Matrix (Exhibit 1), Row 48? |
| Response | Pricing for the solution must be provided in Attachment E. |
| 34 | Will we be responsible for continuing to pay the license for the Threat Intelligence referenced in Exhibit 1, Row 50? |
| Response | Pricing to meet requirements must be included in Attachment E. |
| 35 | Will we be responsible for continuing to pay the license for the Security incident Response Integration Bundles referenced in Exhibit 1, Row 52? |
| Response | Please see response to question 34. |
| 36 | Regarding the Vulnerability Response mentioned in Exhibit 1, Row 54: |
| a. | Will Vulnerability Response be managed by us, or by a third party? | |
| i. | If a third party, are we responsible for paying for those services? | |
| b. | Will Vulnerability Response be reimbursed on a case-by-case basis, or would a subscription-type payment be preferred? | |
| Response | If the vendor hosts the systems, the vendor will manage vulnerability response. For any on-prem solutions, vulnerability response will be a shared responsibility between OST and the vendor. |
| 37 | Will the Predictive Intelligence mentioned in Ex. 1, Row 57 be handled through a third party? Will we be responsible for paying that license? |
| Response | Please see response to question 34. |
| 38 | Will the Performance Analytics mentioned in Ex. 1, Row 58 be handled through a third party? Will we be responsible for paying that license? |
| Response | Please see response to question 34. |
| 39 | Can you clarify the cybersecurity requirements for Configuration Compliance referenced in Ex. 1, row 59? |
| Response | Systems should be configured using industry best practices (i.e CIS benchmarks, STIGs) |
| 40 | Is there a list of other security applications (Ex. 1, Row 60) to be integrated with? |
| Response | SIEM (i.e Splunk, Microsoft Sentinel ) |
| 41 | Aside from the demonstrations referenced in RFP 2.E (p.12), is there a timeframe for when demonstrations of software will be needed? |
| Response | The schedule provided in Section 2.E of the RFP is the timeline for when demonstrations are needed. |
| 42 | Will we be reimbursed for the SSAE SOC 2 audit required in RFP 3.A (p.14)? |
| a. | Is this audit required prior to proposal submission, or after award? | |
| Response | NO reimbursement will be given. See response to question 13. |
| 43 | Page 8, Section 2, Subsection C - Project Overview and Purpose: Is PCLaw Time Matters the incumbent system used by the Oregon State Treasury? |
| Response | Yes. |
| 44 | Page 8, Section 2, Subsection C - Project Overview and Purpose: For the incumbent system, why is a replacement being sought as part of the RFP? |
| Response | See response to question 28. |
| 45 | Page 8, Section 2, Subsection C - Project Overview and Purpose: Are there existing Software as a Service (SaaS) platforms the Treasury has evaluated which meet some or all of its requirements? If so, what are those platforms? |
| Response | No other platforms have been evaluated. |
| 46 | Page 8, Section 2, Subsection C - Project Overview and Purpose: Does the Treasury seek only an established Software as a Service (SaaS) provider for the electronic case management solution? |
| Response | Treasury seeks an established solution. |
| 47 | Page 8, Section 2, Subsection C - Project Overview and Purpose: Would the Treasury consider a custom-built application that is tailor-made to its requirements? If so, how would the Treasury recommend that the supplier complete Exhibit 1 - Requirements Matrix and Attachment E - Price Proposal? |
| Response | No, Treasury will not accept a custom-built solution. |
| 48 | Page 9, Section 2, Subsection D - Scope of Work item 1.a.i.2: What is the SSO authentication tool you are presently using? |
| Response | Microsoft Active Directory. |
| 49 | Page 9, Section 2, Subsection D - Scope of Work item 1.b.iii.: Please clarify your expectations for customizing steps, managing users and tasks, and linking actions across stages or tasks. Please share more details regarding your expectations for how the system should be customizable/configurable by your teams during the course of the contract. We are seeking to understand the ‘built in’ configurability you may be seeking after initial build, configuration, and release of the platform to your team. |
| Response | Users should have permissions based on our requirements, and we will provide who will have which permissions based on our needs. We do not need the ability to customize this system at the developer level, we need the ability to control and customize pre-built tools and workflows. |
| 50 | Page 10, Section 2, Subsection D - Scope of Work item 1.d.ii.: What is Treasury’s trust accounting program, and are APIs already available from that provider for integration into this program? |
| Response | Treasury does not have a trust accounting system. Trust Account information is currently maintained in PCLaw/TimeMatters and Excel spreadsheets. |
| 51 | Page 10, Section 2, Subsection D - Scope of Work item 1.e.i.: Does the Treasury have a preferred or already-established document storage repository (e.g., OneDrive)? |
| Response | Yes. |
| 52 | Page 10, Section 2, Subsection D - Scope of Work item 1.i.i.: Does Treasury wish to utilize an existing business intelligence/reporting suite to query the case management system’s database and create its own reports, or is Treasury seeking a report-builder tool built into the case management system? |
| Response | Treasury currently uses Tableau and Power BI. It is not necessary for the case management solution to incorporate a robust buisiness intellegence solution. |
| 53 | Page 10, Section 2, Subsection D - Scope of Work item 1.i.i.: What business intelligence/reporting suite or tools does the Treasury use today? |
| Response | Tableau and Power BI. |
| 54 | Page 10, Section 2, Subsection D - Scope of Work item 2.a.ii.: In what format(s) is the data that will be transferred into the new case management system? |
| Response | The data is currently stored within the table structure designed by PCLaw, which resides in SQL Server on-prem. Documents are stored on our LAN, with pointers to those files from within the database. With that in mind, the choice of data migration techniques can be flexible. |
55 Page 15, Section A Minimum Qualifications: Is it acceptable for a SOC2 attestation for an SSAE SOC 2 audit to be provided in advance of the software release in the case of a custom built application that will require certification once build is complete?
Or, are you only interested in established SaaS platforms with the required attestations for the proposed solution?
Response See response to question 13 & 46.
| 56 | Page 18, Section 4, K References: If the Treasury is open to entertaining a custom-built case management platform rather than a SaaS platform, what would be acceptable forms of references to satisfy this requirement? |
| Response | See response to question 46. |
| 57 | Can small businesses based outside of Oregon participate? (Attachment F suggests this is possible, but will being based in Nebraska work against my company?) |
| Response | Yes. |
| 58 | Remote work is common in this industry. Is it acceptable for some resources to be located outside the United States? |
| Response | No, resources must be located in the United States. |
| 59 | Are there APIs readily available for the systems requiring integration? |
| Response | Concur and Cobblestone both offer APIs for integration, where Cobblestone requires custom API development. Other integrations would occur within applications developed within Treasury's Application Development Team, and so under our programmatic control. |
| 60 | Transfer Data from Current System: What is the current database being used? |
| Response | The database technology used to store our PCLaw Time Matters data is SQL Server 2019. |
| 61 | Will the current system be discontinued, or will it continue to operate alongside the new system? |
| Response | Discontinued. |
| 62 | Is it possible to submit the proposal without a SOC2 attestation and complete the audit after implementation? |
| Response | See response to question 13. |
| 63 | Will the final payment be withheld until the SOC2 attestation is obtained? |
| Response | See response to question 13. |
| 64 | Can we present an audit certificate that is equivalent to SOC2? |
| Response | No. |
| 65 | Predictive Intelligence: What specific outcomes or behaviors do you want to predict? |
| Response | Automated triggers based on our processes; automating team reminders and communications regarding process steps documenting staff actions and place in the process (process tracking); automating reminders for decisions making actions by staff; the team has a huge number of concurrent tasks and cases that extend across multiple years. |
| 66 | Can the proposed solution be deployed on-premises, in the cloud, or both? If both, are there specific preferences or requirements for each deployment option? |
| Response | Both. |
| 67 | If a cloud deployment is considered, are there any specific regulations, compliances, or security standards (e.g., HIPAA, GDPR, SOC 2) that must be adhered to? |
| Response | Please refer to Exhibit K of Attachment A (Sample Contract). |
| 68 | Are you specifically looking for an out-of-the-box solution, or are you open to custom solutions tailored to your needs? |
| Response | See response to question 46. |
| 69 | If a custom solution is acceptable, would solutions requiring minimal modifications be considered? |
| Response | An established solution with modification/configuration would be considered. |
| 70 | What is the expected timeline for the project to go live, including key milestones and deadlines? |
| Response | See response to question 18. |
| 71 | Where will the majority of the project work be performed (e.g., on-site, remote, a mix of both)? |
| Response | On-site, remote, or mixture of both will be considered. |
| 72 | What is the overall budget allocated for this project, and are there any specific financial constraints or considerations we should be aware of? |
| Response | Please see response to question 14. |
| 73 | Has the State received any demonstrations of case management software solutions within the last two years? If so, can you please provide the names of those solutions? (RFP Section 2.C.) |
| Response | Treasury has not received any demonstrations. |
| 74 | Is there a not-to-exceed budget for the initial term of this project? (RFP Section 2.A.) |
| Response | Please see response to question 14. |
| 75 | Does the State have a target go-live date for the case management software solution? (RFP Sections 2.D. & 2.E.) |
| Response | Please refer to section 4.I (Project Implementation Support/Plan) of the RFP document. |
| 76 | Regarding Section 3. Qualifications, A. Minimum Requirements (page 14) , will Oregon State Treasury accept an ISO 27001 certification in lieu of a SOC2 attestation? There is much overlap between the two certifications; therefore, an ISO 27001 certification demonstrates a similar knowledge of implementing security controls as SOC2. |
| Response | No, SOC2 is required. |
| 77 | Are offshore resources permitted to support this project? |
| Response | See response to question 58. |
| 78 | Are remote resources permitted to support this project? |
| Response | Yes. If located in the United States. No Offshore resources |