RFP 26_001 ERP Addendum No_ 2.pdf

Vision

We strive to cultivate an educational foundation that empowers students to realize their full potential, thrive as productive global citizens, ignite positive change, and create a more just and equitable world.

ADDENDUM NO. 2

DATE: Jan 29, 2026

TO: All Bidders

FROM: Lonita Broome, PhD.

Chief Financial Officer

RE: RFP 26-001 - Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Application Acquisition and

Implementation

Addendum No. 2 for the above-referenced solicitation.

A. Questions and Answers

Q1. Please clarify whether the scope of work under this RFP is limited to ERP implementation services only, or whether the selected Offeror is also required to provide and/or procure ERP software licenses as part of the proposed solution.

A1. The scope includes both procuring the ERP and implementation services.

Q2. If the Government currently maintains existing ERP software licenses, please provide details of the license type, version, and licensing model to enable us to assess compatibility and compliance with their proposed solution and existing systems.

A2. The district currently pays an annual maintenance and cloud-based subscription fee to the incumbent provider, Harris Software Solutions, for their Smartfusion product.

Q3. Can you tell me the name of the POC for this bid?

A3.

Kattina Abram Purchasing Specialist| City Schools of Decatur Elizabeth Wilson School Support Center 125 Electric Avenue | Decatur, GA 30030 csdpurchasing@csdecatur.net

Dr. Carmen Sulton Hans Utz Tracey Anderson James Herndon Lorraine Irier Sophia D’Elena

Chair Vice Chair Board Member Board Member Board Member Student Representative

125 Electric Avenue ● Decatur, Georgia 30030 ● 404-371-3601 ● www.csdecatur.net

Q4. Will there be any consideration for an extension, given the short turnaround time for submitting questions?

A4. Yes, the deadline date for receipt of proposals has been extended to Friday, February 13, 2026, at 1:30 PM EST. Proposals received after this date and time will not be considered.

Q5. Implementation Approach: For planning purposes, does the District anticipate that the majority of implementation activities can be conducted remotely, with in-person engagement limited to key milestones, or should proposers plan for more frequent on-site collaboration during the project lifecycle?

A5. The proposer should present the most effective implementation process documented by successful governmental ERP implementations. CSD would certainly want some in-person engagement when the proposer states it is most effective.

Q6. User Population: Can the District provide approximate counts of active users expected across Finance, HR/Payroll, and Procurement/Supply Chain, including any read-only or approval-only users?

A6. Excluding the Employee Self-Service Portal, the approximate count of active users is sixty-four (64).

Q7. Current Core Systems: What systems are currently used for Finance, HR/Payroll, and Procurement, and are these systems integrated today or largely standalone?

A7. The district currently uses SmartFusion as the ERP system and Frontline Education for Absence Management, Professional Growth, Recruiting & Hiring, and Time & Attendance.

Refer to C. CURRENT ERP ENVIRONMENT in the RFP document for a summary description of these applications.

Q8. Data Migration Scope: Approximately how many years of historical data does the District expect to migrate or make accessible within the new ERP system at go-live?

A8.Refer to Item 12. DATA CONVERSION under D. IMPLEMENTATION, GO LIVE, AND SUPPORT APPROACH in the RFP document for the systems currently containing the CSD data that should be migrated to the new system. It is the preference of CSD to convert as much historical data as feasible. The proposer should include historical data conversion in their proposal at go-live, based on what is standard in government organizations / recent government implementations, and also provide a pricing plan for additional historical data conversion. As noted below in Q41/A41, there is a need for a minimum of five (5) years of historical payroll and tax data (e.g., W-2s) to be available for active employees within the new system’s self-service portal.

Q9. SIS Integration Expectations: For the Student Information System integration, is the District primarily expecting data exchange (e.g., position, payroll, budgeting inputs), or deeper workflow and approval integration?

A9. CSD desires the ERP to export position data to ensure employee assignment “source of truth” data in the ERP matches employee records in the Student Information System.

Q10. Identity and Access Management: Can the District confirm whether Google Workspace is the sole identity provider for ERP access, or if proposers should plan for hybrid identity scenarios?

A10. Google Workspace (via OAuth or LDAP) is the sole IDP.

Q11. Go-Live Timing Considerations: Is the District targeting a specific fiscal year, school year, or payroll cycle for ERP go-live that proposers should consider when designing the implementation schedule?

A11. CSD's preference is for go-live at the beginning of the CSD fiscal year (July 1st) or, alternatively, at calendar year-end.

Q12. Change Management Expectations: Beyond end-user training, does the District expect proposers to include a formal organizational change management approach, or is change management limited to training and communications activities?

A12. Refer to Item 7. CHANGE MANAGEMENT under D. IMPLEMENTATION, GO LIVE, AND SUPPORT APPROACH in the RFP document for the Change Management Plan requirements and expectations. The Change Management Plan should clearly outline the required training (e.g., train-the-trainer and end-user training) and the communications activities needed to ensure the successful implementation of the proposed system.

Q13. Key Personnel Commitment: Does the District expect proposed key personnel to remain assigned through the full implementation phase, or is there flexibility post go-live?

A13. There will be flexibility post go-live.

Q14. Evaluation Emphasis: Among the evaluation factors, does the District place greater emphasis on K-12 ERP experience, implementation approach, or long-term support model when differentiating between proposals?

A14. The district considers all of those factors as major components and places equal emphasis on each.

Q15. Would CSD consider extending the proposal submission deadline from February 3, 2026, to February 17, 2026, to allow sufficient time to incorporate responses to clarification questions and deliver a more complete and thoughtful proposal?

A15. The proposal submission date has been extended to February 13, 2026, at 1:30 pm. Refer to question number 4

Q16. The RFP requires one original and four printed copies. Would CSD accept digital submissions to reduce manual effort and paper?

A16. To be considered, CSD will accept proposals in accordance with one of the following:

● CSD Procurement Portal or

● One (1) original, four (4) copies, and an electronic flash drive sealed to the City Schools of Decatur Purchasing Department, at 125 Electric Avenue, Decatur, Georgia 30030, Attn: Kattina Abram

Q17. Is it required that the project references provided (as requested in Section III.H) currently be in a live production environment using the exact software version and architecture that the vendor is proposing for this RFP?

A17. The references should be for software versions similar to or identical to the one being proposed.

Approach

Q18. Describe the transformational priorities you have for this project.

A18. CSD would like to transform the back-office business processes that now require the use of some singular-use application systems, manual processes, and manually routed printed forms. The result of this transformation should be a truly integrated system that will

(1) increase data quality, integrity, and reliability,

(2) reduce and eliminate manual processes,

(3) support strategic decision-making and planning,

(4) streamline workflow and communications, and

(5) support a self-service environment.

Q19. Describe events that could impact CSD resource availability, project schedules, blackout periods, and/or go-live dates. Examples may include technology/software license expiration, winter and spring break, benefit open enrollment periods, performance and/or compensation review periods, etc.

A19. CSD resources will be available at all times. The individual assigned may change;

however, representation for each area will be present.

Q20. What preferences do you have for go-live dates, if any? Please address those dates for both a multi-phased and single-phased implementation.

A20. CSD's preference is for go-live at the beginning of the CSD fiscal year (July 1st) or at calendar year-end. These go-live dates would apply to a phased rollout approach or a single phase.

Q21. Aside from the Change Management Plan, what other change management deliverables would you like support from Cognizant on (i.e., stakeholder and readiness assessments, change impact assessment, personas/journey maps, change champion network plan, change network activities and post go-live sustainment plan?

A21. The Change Management Plan should clearly outline the required training (e.g., train-the-trainer and end-user training) and the communications activities needed to ensure the successful implementation of the proposed system. While these other change management deliverables would be needed with a small staff, refer to Item 7. CHANGE MANAGEMENT under D. IMPLEMENTATION, GO LIVE, AND SUPPORT APPROACH in the RFP document for the Change Management Plan requirements.

Q22. What internal communications (i.e., communications planning, communications development) capabilities/resources do you have or expect to have for this project? Would you like Cognizant to develop your Communications Plan? Would you like Cognizant to develop your end-user communications?

A22. This proposal is for an ERP system, not a communications plan. Note that the Change Management Plan needs to include plans and strategies to sustain desired outcomes from changes, and that may include communication activities. Available channels include internal employee email and newsletters.

Q23. CSD notes a limited number of back-office staff. What is the expected maximum Percentage of Effort CSD SMEs can commit to this project weekly without impacting daily operations?

A23. This varies across employees and time as the school year progresses, but generally around 50%. Successful implementation of an ERP is a top priority for the Board of Education and staff.

Functional Core HCM & Compensation

Q24. CSD has identified that support for unions and/or CBAs is needed, specifically as it relates to tracking and payment of dues. How many unions and bargaining groups are in scope, and what other union-related support is needed (e.g., compensation step progression, union-specific absence plans, etc.), if any?

A24. Georgia is not a collective bargaining state and does not rely on unions to negotiate compensation, employee relations, or other support.

Benefits

Q25. Are any benefits supported by Campus Benefits subject to payroll deductions?

A25. Yes, all flexible benefits supported by Campus Benefits are paid deductions, except for the employer-paid term life benefit.

Q26. CSD has defined both the ERP, Campus Benefits, and the State Health Benefit Plan as all being responsible for benefit enrollment and administration. We would typically expect that only one of these systems would own the recording of benefit elections and administration (system of record), with the other(s) receiving enrollment information through an integration from the system of record. The ERP is typically the most natural system of record because it creates a single user experience, and payroll, ACA, and other internal ERP integration is built into the system. Given these remarks, how does CSD expect these systems to interact with each other?

A26. Currently open benefits enrollment and benefit changes (e.g., life events) are managed through two external entities (State Health Benefit Plan (SHBP) and Campus Benefits). Health insurance benefits are managed through the State Health enrollment portal, with enrollments and changes provided to CSD for manual entry into Fusion (employee by employee). All other flexible benefit plan changes are managed through the Campus Benefit portal, where employees can make changes and sign up for benefit plans. CSD receives an electronic file that is uploaded into Fusion. Additionally, CSD gets a weekly report from VALIC (insurance provider) for Tax Sheltered Annuity (TSA) changes and these changes must be manually entered into Fusion. CSD would like to have a single system of record through ERP functionality, with data being uploaded from SHBP, Campus Benefits, and VALIC. This functionality and the required process would need to be fully described in your proposal.

Q27. There is a requirement to “manage defined benefit and contribution pensions and other retirement benefit plans”. Is the intent to simply identify and remit employee eligibility, calculate deduction amounts, and remit deductions to a 3rd party administrator or something broader in scope? If this is the latter, please describe the nature of the required administration in detail.

A27. Employee eligibility is provided by enrollments and changes documented by the State Health Benefit Plan (SHBP), Campus Benefits, and VALIC. This eligibility is captured in the financial accounting system, and deduction amount calculations are done in the financial system based on set rates loaded into the system or a calculation method in the system. CSD does need the capability to capture all benefit plan withholdings for remittance to these benefit providers.

Q28. Please provide a copy of your 2026 employee benefits handbook, including the providers for all benefits plans.

A28. 2026 Employee Benefits Guide

Learning

Q29. Describe the use case to make Learning accessible to external systems. We typically see learning as a user of external system content and learning as opposed to a supplier of it.

A29. It is the intent to use the learning functionality of the ERP system to allow employees to access external learning content and have that learning documented in the ERP learning system when completed.

Q30. What requirements exist, if any, to provide learning to workers who would not otherwise be in the ERP system? This typically includes volunteers, suppliers, etc.

A30. Volunteers and suppliers will not have access to the ERP system.

Q31. Does Learning requirement H650/651 require that course costs be tracked (e.g., charge for instructor, room, refreshments, etc.)?

A31. CSD definitely wants the ability to track learner and department training to date, but the financial/budget system itself would be used to track learning costs against the budget/plan.

The ability to track course costs in the learning system would only be optional. As a result, there would also not be a need to include cost information as part of email acknowledgments for enrollment confirmation notices.

Time Tracking & Absence

Q32. Describe any requirements for physical time clocks. If needed, does CSD plan to leverage existing clocks or replace them? What specific clock management system(s) will be in the future environment, if any?

A32. CSD currently uses Frontline Time & Attendance kiosk software running on a Chromebook or MacBook for timeclocked employees to clock in. Those devices would remain available to run front-end time clock kiosk software.

Q33. Do you administer leave of absence internally, or do you manage leaves through an external vendor?

A33. FMLA is managed internally, with documentation management through eFMLA. All other personal leave, vacation, medical, and off-contract leave are managed and administered internally within Google Workspace platforms such as Sheets and Forms.

Payroll

Q34. For how many companies/FEINs does CSD pay employees?

A34. One FEIN for all payroll employees.

Q35. Is effort certification required?

A35. Federal Grants require effort certification.

Financial Accounting

Q36. Should this implementation support more than one company/legal entity? If so, please describe the corporate structure of the school system.

A36. The school district operates under the authority of the Board of Education. The implementation will support one school district.

Q37. Describe your vision for supporting the management of “locally collected funds”?

A37. Locally collected funds are managed at each school site and should be received and credited in the ERP system. Refer to B. BACKGROUND in the RFP document for a listing of these local school sites.

Q38. We see that you have AdobeSign in your environment. How do you intend to integrate that product into your future ERP environment, if at all? We would typically expect to see one integrated electronic signature product scoped, but CSD has both AdobeSign and DocHub that support electronic signatures.

A38. The district is not attempting to duplicate the current system. If there is one integrated electronic signature product, please provide additional details in your submission.

Q39. Have you defined the future of reporting with this implementation? Do you know what reports or analytics leaders would like out of the new system?

A39. The district is interested in the reporting capability of the proposed ERP. Please provide a list of all available reports by area. For example, Finance would have budget reports, payroll reports, JE reports, etc.

Q40. For data conversion, CSD mentions migrating “essential data”. Does CSD have an estimated volume for the “current and prior year” records in SmartFusion that require migration into the new production environment?

A40. Refer to Item 12. DATA CONVERSION under D. IMPLEMENTATION, GO LIVE, AND SUPPORT APPROACH in the RFP document for the systems currently containing the CSD data that should be migrated to the new system. It is the preference of CSD to convert as much historical data as feasible. The proposer should include historical data conversion in their proposal at go-live, based on what is standard in government organizations / recent government implementations, and also provide a pricing plan for additional historical data conversion. As noted below in Q41/A41, there is a need for a minimum of five (5) years of historical payroll and tax data (e.g., W-2s) to be available for active employees within the new system’s self-service portal.

Q41. Does CSD have a specific requirement for the number of years of historical payroll and tax data (e.g., W-2s) that must be available for active employees within the new system’s self-service portal?

A41. A minimum of 5 years on the self-service portal.

Q42. Does the district require a solution with a single, unified data model where a single transaction (e.g., a salary adjustment or new hire) instantaneously updates the General Ledger and Budget without the use of middleware, sync processes, or overnight batching between HR and Finance modules?

A42. The district will consider all proposals. A single, unified data model has appeal.

Q43. Does the district require that non-technical business users (e.g., School Principals or Department Heads) be able to build and modify multidimensional reports directly within the application interface without requiring IT support, SQL knowledge, or data extraction to a separate BI tool?

A43. Yes, non-technical business users, such as the finance and HR departments, should be able to build and modify multidimensional reports. School site employees and department heads should be able to run standard reports.

All other terms and conditions remain the same.