RFP OLIS-T.pdf

STATE OF OREGON

COVER PAGE

Legislative Administration

Oregon Legislative Information Systems Transformation (OLIS-T)

Pre-project Exploratory Analysis Request for Proposal (RFP)

Date of Issue: July 9, 2024

Closing Date and Time: August 23, 2024, by 12 p.m.

Single Point of Contact (SPC): Brenda Alfano, Contracts Specialist

Address: 900 Court St. NE Salem, Oregon, 97301 Rm. 40

Phone (voice) 503-986-1184

E-mail: Leg.procurement@oregonlegislature.gov

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.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1: GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

1.2 SINGLE POINT OF CONTACT (SPC)

1.3 DEFINITIONS

SECTION 2: AUTHORITY, OVERVIEW, AND SCOPE

2.1 AUTHORITY AND METHOD

2.2 OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE

2.3 SCOPE OF WORK/SPECIFICATIONS

SECTION 3: PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS

3.1 MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

3.2 MINIMUM SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

3.3 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

SECTION 4: SOLICITATION PROCESS

4.1 PUBLIC NOTICE

4.2 PREPROPOSAL CONFERENCE

4.3 QUESTIONS / REQUESTS FOR CLARIFICATIONS

4.4 SOLICITATION PROTESTS

4.5 PROPOSAL DELIVERY OPTIONS

4.6 PROPOSAL MODIFICATION OR WITHDRAWAL

4.7 PROPOSAL DUE

4.8 PUBLIC OPENING

4.9 PROPOSAL REJECTION

4.10 EVALUATION PROCESS

4.11 POINT AND SCORE CALCULATIONS

SECTION 5: AWARD AND NEGOTIATION

5.1 AWARD NOTIFICATION PROCESS

5.2 INTENT TO AWARD PROTEST

5.3 APPARENT SUCCESSFUL PROPOSER SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.4 CONTRACT NEGOTIATION

SECTION 6: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

6.1 CERTIFIED FIRM PARTICIPATION

6.2 GOVERNING LAWS AND REGULATIONS

6.3 OWNERSHIP/PERMISSION TO USE MATERIALS

6.4 CANCELLATION OF RFP; REJECTION OF PROPOSAL; NO DAMAGES

6.5 COST OF SUBMITTING A PROPOSAL

6.6 STATEWIDE E-WASTE/RECOVERY POLICY

6.7 RECYCLABLE PRODUCTS

LIST OF EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT A STATEMENT OF WORK

EXHIBIT B RESPONSIBILITY INQUIRY

EXHIBIT C SAMPLE CONTRACT

EXHIBIT D CONTRACTOR CERTIFICATION FORM

EXHIBIT E INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

EXHIBIT F COBID CERTIFICATION

EXHIBIT G REFERENCE SCORING SHEET

EXHIBIT H SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST/COVER SHEET

SECTION 1: GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The Oregon Legislative Administrator (LA) plans to undertake a multi-year, multi-phase, initiative known as the Oregon Legislative Information Systems Transformation (OLIS-T) Project. The objective of the project is to replace the disparate legacy systems used throughout the lifecycle of a bill with a new consolidated and modernized system or systems. The purpose of this RFP is to obtain a vendor to perform exploratory analysis of the legacy systems and recommend the best approach to assist and prepare the Legislature prior to initiating and planning the OLIS-T Project.

There are currently a handful of integrated homegrown or vendor supported systems in use to move a bill through the legislative process. These systems are built on out-of-date technologies and are rapidly becoming a challenge to support. LA intends to leverage the opportunity to modernize the processes as well as the technology when implementing a new solution. In preparation of the project, LA desires to review alternatives to determine not only the best technical solution and architecture, but also recommended approach to ensure successful transitions all at once or in phases from multiple legacy systems to a new consolidated system or systems.

LA seeks proposals from qualified vendors to conduct analysis activities and deliver alternative recommendations for the OLIS-T project. The proposal shall include a description of the proposer’s experience with and approach to analysis of state legacy systems and processes. The proposal shall include how the proposer intends to deliver all required deliverables within the required timeframe of June 13, 2025.

The vendor awarded this RFP shall produce documentation deliverables comprised of at least the following:

• Analysis of current processes and how they currently integrate between separate systems.

• Suggestions or recommendations for the modernization of the processes within a future state solution. For example, describe opportunities to streamline workflow, update steps in the process where applicable, and/or add new desired functionality.

• Description of options (alternatives analysis) summarized with a recommended approach to modernization. Give special consideration to architecture. LA desires to move to a single system and conversely, not replace each disparate system onto a modern platform.

• Estimated resourcing, cost, and timeline within a rough order of magnitude (+/- 25%) for the each of the options.

• For the recommended option, provide an estimated high-level project plan to design, develop, test, document, implement, integrate, and train on the OLIS-T technology solution.

Participation in this RFP does not exclude the proposer from participating in future RFPs related to the OLIS-T project or related work efforts.

SCHEDULE

The table below represents a tentative schedule of events. All times are listed in Pacific Time. All dates listed are subject to change.

Event Date Time

Pre-Proposal Conference July 15, 2024 10:00 AM

Questions / Requests for Clarification Due July 12, 2024 5:00 PM

Answers to Questions / Requests for Clarification Issued (approx.)

July 19, 2024

RFP Protest Period Ends

7 calendar days prior to RFP Closing

Closing (Proposal Due) August 23, 2024 12:00 PM

Opening of Proposal August 26, 2024 9:00 AM

Round 1 Evaluation August 26, 2024 – September 6, 2024

Round 2 Interviews September 9, 2024 – September 13, 2024

Issuance of Notice of Intent to Award (approx.) September 16, 2024

Award Protest Period Ends 7 calendar days after Notice of Intent to Award

1.2 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.

1.3 DEFINITIONS

The following table provides the definition or description for terms that are used in this RFP that may not be commonly known.

Term Acronym Definition, Description

Administrator The Administrator user role will configure and manage the system as required behind the scenes with access to functionality within the system that the standard user will not have. It is assumed the Information Services (IS) administrator will have the capability to perform all of the functions of an administrator as necessary.

Information Services

IS Information Services (IS) is a branch of Legislative Administration (LA) that provides technology services and support to the legislative assembly.

IS will assist with technology project management and system architecture of the OLIS-T project, as well as support the system after GoLive.

IS Administrator See “Administrator”

Legislative Administrator

LA The office of the Legislative Administrator (LA) is the centralized administrative agency for Oregon’s legislative branch of government.

LA will administer and manage this procurement and any subsequent Contract. Legislative Administration is led by the Office of the Administrator, and divided into five departments: Employee Services, Facility Services, Financial Services, Information Services, and Visitor Services.

Term Acronym Definition, Description

Legislative Concept LC A draft of an idea for legislation, prepared by Legislative Counsel.

Legacy Systems The information technology systems that will be replaced by the OLIS-T Project.

Long Session These are regular sessions that take place in odd years. They are limited to up to 160 calendar days.

Measure A bill, joint resolution, concurrent resolution, resolution, joint memorial or memorial.

Measure Name The measure prefix and measure number are commonly referred to as the measure name. Examples: House Bill 2323 or Senate Joint Resolution 4.

Measure Number The number assigned to the measure following the guidelines in Chapter 7 of the Form and Style Manual.

Measure Prefix Existing measure prefixes are: HB (House Bill), SB (Senate Bill), HR (House Resolution), SR (Senate Resolution), HJR (House Joint Resolution), SJR (Senate Joint Resolution), HCR (House Concurrent Resolution), SCR (Senate Concurrent Resolution), HM (House Memorial), SM (Senate Memorial), HJM (House Joint Memorial), and SJM (Senate Joint Memorial).

Measure Short Summary

An abbreviated version of the measure summary prepared by a Drafting Attorney or Copy Editor for resolutions and memorials. The short summary appears on the bill back and history sheet for a resolution or memorial.

Measure Short Title

A condensed version of the measure title, omitting certain clauses.

Appears on the bill back and history sheet for a bill. This is read on the floor by the Reading Clerk if the rules are suspended to allow reading by title only.

Measure Summary A brief, impartial description of a measure that must accompany the measure upon introduction.

Memorial A measure adopted by one house to make a request upon or to express an opinion to Congress, the President of the United States or the officials or agencies of another governmental body.

Oregon Constitution

The Oregon Constitution contains the fundamental laws outlining principles by which Oregon is governed.

https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/Pages/OrConst.aspx

Oregon Laws The collected laws and selected memorials and resolutions of a legislative session. The session laws are published either in a soft-bound single session or a hard-bound biennium version. These publications may also be referred to as the Oregon Laws.

See also: Session Laws

Oregon Revised Statutes

ORS Oregon Revised Statutes, the codified laws of the State of Oregon.

https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/Pages/OrConst.aspx

Term Acronym Definition, Description

Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure

ORCP These are the rules that govern civil proceedings in Oregon Circuit Courts. Changes are submitted by the Council on Civil Court Procedures to the Legislative Assembly at the beginning of every odd-year session. The Legislative Assembly may amend, repeal, or supplement the rules, as well. These are printed in Volume 1 of the ORS, before Chapter 12.

Pre-defined Reports

Reports with standard content such as header, footer, parameters, sort options, filters, output type, data elements, charts or graphs, and formatting. Pre-defined reports may be output electronically, in print, or both.

Regular Session These are the regular annual Legislative sessions, either long or short depending on the year.

Session The period in which the Legislative Assembly officially convenes. The regular session begins on the second Monday in January of every odd-numbered year. Special sessions may be convened at the call of the Governor or of a majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly.

Short Session These are regular sessions that take place in even years. They are limited to up to 35 calendar days.

Special Session A convening of the Legislative Assembly at a time other than during the regular session. The Governor or a majority of each house may call a special session.

SECTION 2: AUTHORITY, OVERVIEW, AND SCOPE

2.1 AUTHORITY AND METHOD

Agency is using a method similar, but not identical, to the competitive sealed proposal method, as provided in ORS 279B.060 (“Competitive Sealed Proposal”). Agency may use a combination of the methods available 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. IS intends to use a single-step Competitive Sealed Proposal method.

2.2 OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE

2.2.1 Agency Overview, Background, and Purpose

The OLIS-T Project’s desired outcome is a modernized process and single or consolidated system to produce, track, and process a bill after it has been drafted through completion. The Oregon Legislative Administration- Information Services Department (LA-IS) intends to prepare for this future project by engaging a vendor for assistance with exploratory analysis and documentation. The modernization of business processes and system architecture is a significant work effort and change, and LA-IS seeks alternatives for approach and an industry best practice recommendation to ensure success. Additionally, some business processes are closely tied to traditional decorum which users may determine are outside of the scope of change. Analysis should consider the impact of maintaining tradition when discovering current processes and House and Senate Chamber rules.

Users may also identify opportunities for useful functionality for a future state that they do not have in the current systems.

Oregon Legislative Assembly Background

The Oregon Legislature consists of elected legislators and supporting staff. The elected legislators (i.e., the Legislative Assembly) are members of either the House or Senate. Oregon’s Legislative Assembly is composed of two chambers, the Senate and House of Representatives. The Senate consists of 30 members elected to four-year terms. Half of the Senate seats are up for election every two years. The House consists of 60 representatives elected to two-year terms. Except in cases of persons selected to fill vacancies, legislators are elected in even-numbered years from single-member districts. Election by single-member district means that each Oregonian is represented by one senator and one representative. Each chamber elects presiding officers to oversee daily sessions and operations and perform other duties set by rule, custom, and law. These officers are known as the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House.

The primary functions of the Legislature are to enact new laws and revise existing ones, make decisions that keep the state in good economic and environmental condition and provide a forum for discussion of public issues. The Legislature reviews and revises the governor’s proposed budget and passes tax laws to provided needed revenue. The Oregon Constitution requires that the state must not spend money in excess of revenue.

The Legislature also influences executive and judicial branch decisions. Laws enacted by the Legislature, along with adoption of the budget, establish state policy that directs all state agency activity and impacts the courts.

The Legislative Assembly utilizes Committees to examine public policy and facilitate readying measures for a chamber vote. The committees are composed of small groups of legislators from both political parties. They deal with issues and proposed legislation related to their committee focus (e.g., transportation, revenue).

There are different types of committees, some are formed and active only during session while others function year-round. Still others are formed to address special topics. Some are statutory, and their authorization is established through statutes.

Legislative Administration Description

Legislative Administration (LA) is the centralized administrative agency for Oregon’s legislative branch of government. Legislative Administration is led by the Office of the Administrator, and divided into five departments: Employee Services, Facility Services, Financial Services, Information Services, and Visitor Services. For this procurement, LA- Information Services (IS) is the lead agency driving the change that will impact each agency within the Oregon Legislature. LAC was created to support the process and effectuate the objective.

Legislative Business Process Overview

At a high level, the process of moving a bill from introduction to enrolling is represented in the flower diagram below. When considering the scope of the business analysis requested in this RFP, the list of systems for modernization are as follows:

• DESKS. Used by Desk Parliamentarian staff. Every motion of a bill goes into this system. Reports (journals and nightly reports) are generated in this system.

• Committee Agenda Scheduling System (CASS). Used to pick committee members, setup committees, schedule, create agendas, and track actions.

• OLIS. Public facing system that displays information such as videos of hearings and the status of a bill.

• Staff Measure Summary (SMS). Used by support staff to create summaries of bills. Includes a budgetary component.

• Fiscal and Revenue Impact System (FISRIS). Used by LFO and LRO to create fiscal and/or revenue impact statements for bills.

• Several other minor systems that manage data within the whole process.

Additionally, there are systems that are critical in the bill process but are not within scope of the OLIS-T Project. These must be considered from an integration standpoint when analyzing the overall solution and approach.

• LegisPro.

• Document Process and Management System.

• Invintus System. Used for recordings and archiving.

2.3 SCOPE OF WORK/SPECIFICATIONS

Contractor must meet the highest standards prevalent in the industry or business most closely involved in providing the required goods and services, as required under ORS 279B.060(2)(c).

The vendor awarded this contract will be responsible for conducting exploratory analysis, documenting, and proposing a recommendation for best approach to the OLIS-T Project. In their proposal, vendors should describe how they will accomplish the work required as outlined here and in the STATEMENT OF WORK, attached to this RFP as Exhibit A.

The legacy systems are in need of functional updates and modernization. Some systems have not been updated for a number of years due to the complexity and the understanding that any changes would necessitate an entire rewrite of the programs. They cannot seamlessly integrate with other core applications in use and there are risks in maintaining them because the vendors have not supported the software in many years and there is no migration path. In addition, the legacy technology cannot keep pace with the evolving requirements of legislative users and the performance expectations of these systems.

Consequently, LA management determined that the legacy technology is at its end-of-life and intends to launch the OLIS-T Project to replace disparate systems with a modern solution or solutions.

Project Objectives

When performing the analysis and drafting a recommendation, it’s important to keep in mind the agency’s expectations and appetite for risk and change. A successful OLIS-T technology solution implementation will achieve the following objectives:

1. The solution must meet or exceed the overall performance of the legacy systems it is replacing.

2. The solution must enhance the business processes, for example, through a reduction in manual process steps and the elimination of double-keying.

3. The solution’s technical infrastructure must be especially considered. IS must be heavily involved and the solution must integrate seamlessly within the existing technical infrastructure. Consider the impact of the active Document Processing and Management System (DPMS) Project

4. The solution must be extensible. IS must be able to provide maintenance and support; with the ability to enhance the system if and when required.

5. The solution must be reasonably priced to purchase and implement.

Project Timeline

The timeline is driven by the deadline to expend funds by the end of the biennium. Ideally, the winning vendor would begin shortly after awarding this RFP. (See the schedule.) Deliverables must be received and approved prior to June 13, 2025.

SECTION 3: PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS

3.1 MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

To be considered for evaluation, Proposal must demonstrate how the proposer meets all requirements of this section:

3.1.1 Licensing/Registration requirements

• Respondents must be a licensed and registered to transact business in the State of Oregon and must provide proof of registration.

3.1.2 Key Person Requirements

• The vendors key staff in all roles (project manager, architect, programmer, analyst) must have at least five (5) years of experience on projects of similar technology, scope, and complexity. Please provide confirmation in response to Exhibit K.

• Preference will be given to persons who possess professional certifications (PMP, etc.)

assigned to lead and manage this project on behalf of the vendor. Please provide confirmation in response to Exhibit K.

3.2 MINIMUM SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

3.2.1 Proposal Submissions

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

• Submittal checklist/cover sheet

• Experience

• References

• Cost Proposal

• Key Persons detail

3.2.2 Proposal Format and Quantity

Proposal should follow the format and reference the sections listed in section 3.3 of this RFP. Responses to each section and subsection should be labeled to indicate the item being addressed.

Proposer shall submit one copy of its Proposal and all other submittal requirements, with Exhibit H – Submittal Checklist/Cover Sheet bearing the Proposer’s authorized representative’s Signature, via OregonBuys, email, or file sharing service (such as DropBox, OneDrive, etc.) to the Single Point of Contact, in an Adobe Acrobat (pdf) format. If Proposer believes any of its Proposal is exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law (ORS 192.311 through 192.478), Proposer shall submit a fully redacted version of its Proposal, clearly identified as the redacted version.

A proposer shall label any information that the proposer wishes to protect from disclosure to third parties as a trade secret under ORS 192.345 with the following: "This material constitutes a trade secret under ORS 192.345 (2) and is not to be disclosed except as required by law." LA shall take reasonable measures to hold in confidence all such labeled information, but LA and the State of Oregon are not liable for a release of any information if a law or an order of a court requires the release, whether pursuant to the Oregon public records law (ORS 192.311 to 192.478) or otherwise. LA and the State of Oregon are also immune from liability for disclosing or releasing information under the circumstances set forth in ORS 646.473(3).

3.2.3 Authorized Representative

Failure of the authorized representative to sign the Proposal may subject the Proposal to rejection by the Legislative Administrator.

3.3 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 not Responsive to this RFP and will not be considered further.

A 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. The Proposal should be straightforward and address the requests of the RFP. A Proposal containing excess marketing or advertising material may receive a lower evaluation score if specific information is difficult to locate.

3.3.1 Proposer Information and Certification Sheet

A proposer shall complete and submit the SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST/COVER SHEET, attached to this RFP as Exhibit H.

Failure to demonstrate compliance with Oregon tax laws and sign the submittal checklist/cover sheet may result in a finding that the proposer is not Responsible.

3.3.2 Experience

Provide a high-level overview of the vendor’s experience implementing similar projects, and how that experience will translate to this project.

3.3.3 References

Provide 3 references from current or former client firms for similar projects performed for any clients or other state legislatures within the last 5 years. References must be able to verify the quality of previous, related work.

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

A proposer shall send the Reference Scoring Sheet (Exhibit G) to its references. Reference Scoring Sheets must be completed by the reference, returned to the proposer and submitted with the Proposal.

3.3.4 Cost Proposal

Submit a detailed cost proposal via email or file sharing service, stating the cost for each phase of the project, if proposing a phased approach, and the total cost for the entire project, including:

• A description of all assumptions underlying the cost proposal

• If proposer is proposing to enter into a sub-contractual arrangement for any portion of this project, the specific tasks to be performed by the subcontractor and costs associated with that work must be included.

Service Agreement

Include a detailed Cost Proposal, stating the cost for various service agreement options. This cost Proposal shall include a general description of the service agreement, type and/or level of services offered, duration, and any associated costs.

3.3.5 Key Persons and their Resumes

Specify key persons to be assigned to this project and include a current resume (not to exceed 2 pages each) for each individual that demonstrates qualifications and experience for the Work described.

SECTION 4: SOLICITATION PROCESS

4.1 PUBLIC NOTICE

The RFP and exhibits are published in OregonBuys at https://oregonbuys.gov. RFP documents will not be mailed to prospective Proposers.

Modifications, if any, to this RFP will be made by written Addenda and published in OregonBuys. The prospective proposer is solely responsible for checking OregonBuys to determine whether any Addenda have been issued. Addenda are incorporated into the RFP by this reference.

4.2 PREPROPOSAL CONFERENCE

A pre-Proposal conference will be held for this RFP on the date and time indicated in the schedule on page 5.

The pre-proposal conference will be held at the Oregon State Capitol at 900 Court St. NE, Salem, OR 97301 https://oregonbuys.gov/ and via virtual conference. Proposers must inform the SPC if they plan to attend the pre-proposal conference. The pre-proposal conference will include:

• A Question-and-Answer period. Topics of discussion will be limited to: 1) Scope of Work; 2) Statement of Work; 3) Exhibits; 4) Proposal submission requirements.

4.3 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 email

• Reference the RFP 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

4.4 SOLICITATION PROTESTS

4.4.1 Protests to RFP

A 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 proposed Sample Contract. This is prospective proposer’s only opportunity to protest the provisions of the RFP, except that proposer may protest Addenda as provided below and proposer may negotiate or propose alternative terms and conditions for the Sample Contract as set forth in section 5.4 of this RFP.

4.4.2 Protests to Addenda

Prospective proposer may submit a Written protest of anything contained in an Addendum. Protests to Addenda, if issued, must be submitted by 5 p.m. Pacific Time of the second business day after the Addendum is issued or the date/time specified in the respective Addendum, or they will not be considered. Protests of matters not added or modified by an Addendum will not be considered.

4.4.3 All Protests must:

• Be delivered to the SPC via email

• Reference the RFP number

• Identify prospective Proposer’s name and contact information

• Be sent by an authorized representative

• State the reason for the protest, including:

o the grounds that demonstrate how the Procurement Process is contrary to law, Unnecessarily Restrictive, legally flawed, or improperly specifies a brand name; and o evidence or documentation that supports the grounds on which the protest is based

• 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

4.5 PROPOSAL DELIVERY OPTIONS

Proposer is solely responsible for ensuring its Proposal is received by the SPC in accordance with the RFP requirements before Closing. Proposals can be sent to Brenda Alfano, Contract Specialist at leg.procurement@oregonlegislatureg.gov. Address: Legislative Administration 900 Court St. NE Room 49, Salem, OR 97301. A Proposal submitted by any means not authorized below will be rejected.

Delivery through OregonBuys

A Proposal may be submitted electronically through OregonBuys. Supplier Bidding Instructions can be found at: https://oregonbuys.gov

Delivery through email or file sharing service

A Proposal must be submitted through email or file sharing service (DropBox, OneDrive, etc.) to the SPC by the stated submission deadline. If choosing to submit their proposal through a file sharing service, the Proposer is solely responsible for the setup, installation, and operation of said file sharing service. The Agency will not provide guidance, help, or other assistance with regard to operating or using a file sharing service.

If choosing to submit their proposal through a file sharing service, the Proposer may execute the submission by uploading all required documents to the file sharing service and providing the SPC a link to all required documents.

4.6 PROPOSAL MODIFICATION OR WITHDRAWAL

If a Proposer wishes to make modifications to a submitted Proposal, it must submit its modification in the same manner as provided in section 4.5 of this RFP. To be effective the notice must include the RFP number and be submitted to the SPC prior to Closing.

If a Proposer wishes to withdraw a submitted Proposal, it must submit a Written notice signed by an authorized representative of its intent to withdraw to the SPC via email prior to closing. To be effective the notice must include the RFP number.

4.7 PROPOSAL DUE

A Proposal (including all required submittal items) must be received by the SPC on or before Closing. All Proposal modifications or withdrawals must be received prior to Closing.

A Proposal received after Closing is considered LATE and will NOT be accepted for evaluation. A late Proposal will be returned unopened to the Proposer or destroyed.

4.8 PUBLIC OPENING

A public Opening will be held on the date and time listed in the Schedule and at the location stated on the Cover Page. Only the name of the Proposer will be read at the Opening, no other information will be made available at that time. Proposals received will not be available for inspection until after the evaluation process has been completed and the Notice of Intent to Award is issued.

4.9 PROPOSAL REJECTION

Agency may reject a Proposal for any of the following reasons:

mailto:leg.procurement@oregonlegislatureg.gov https://oregonbuys.gov/

• Proposer fails to substantially comply with all prescribed RFP procedures and requirements, including but not limited to the requirement that proposer’s authorized representative sign the Proposal.

• Proposer fails to meet the responsibility requirements of ORS 279B.110.

• Proposer makes any contact regarding this RFP with State representatives such as State employees or officials other than the SPC or those the SPC authorizes, or inappropriate contact with the SPC.

• Proposer attempts to influence a member of the Evaluation Committee.

• Proposal is conditioned on Agency’s acceptance of any other terms and conditions or rights to negotiate any alternative terms and conditions that are not reasonably related to those expressly authorized for negotiation in the RFP or Addenda.

4.10 EVALUATION PROCESS

4.10.1 Responsiveness and Responsibility determination

4.10.1.1 Responsiveness determination

A proposal will be reviewed to determine if it is Responsive to all RFP requirements including compliance with the Minimum Qualifications section and Minimum Submission Requirements sections. If the Proposal is unclear, the SPC may request clarification from proposer. However, clarifications may not be used to rehabilitate a non-Responsive Proposal. If the LA evaluation committee finds the Proposal non-Responsive, the Proposal may be rejected.

4.10.1.2 Responsibility determination

Agency will determine if an apparent successful proposer is Responsible prior to award and execution of the Contracts. Proposers shall submit a signed RESPONSIBILITY INQUIRY form, attached to this RFP as (Exhibit B).

At any time prior to award, LA may reject a proposer found to be not Responsible.

4.10.2 Evaluation Criteria

An Evaluation Committee shall conduct an evaluation of the proposals received by the due date indicated on page 1 of this RFP.

Each Proposal will be independently evaluated by members of an Evaluation Committee. Evaluators will assign a score for each evaluation criterion listed below in this section up to the maximum points available in section 4.11 of this RFP.

SPC may request further clarification from a proposer to assist the Evaluation Committee in gaining additional understanding of a Proposal. A response to a clarification request must be to clarify or explain portions of the already submitted Proposal and may not contain new information not included in the original Proposal.

Evaluation Items

• Evaluation Item 1: Proposal Evaluation: LA will evaluate proposals for applicability, breadth, and quality of the response to this RFP, vendor financial and organizational stability, vendor experience with projects of similar scope and complexity, vendor key personnel expertise and experience based on key personnel resumes, and ability to deliver within specified timeframe.

• Evaluation Item 2: COBID Participation Plan: LA will evaluate proposer’s submission for Exhibit F, COBID Participation Plan is reviewed, attached as Exhibit F of this RFP.

• Evaluation Item 3: Interviews Evaluation: Vendors may be invited to travel to participate in interviews. Interviews will be question and answer. At LA’s discretion, written interview questions may be sent prior to the interview to vendors in the competitive range who have been invited to interview.

• Evaluation Item 4: Cost Proposal Evaluation: Cost proposals will be evaluated. LA reserves the right to negotiate the amount of the Cost Proposal or to award a contract without scoring cost Proposals.

4.10.3 PREFERENCES

4.10.3.1 Oregon Supplies and Services

LA prefers Oregon goods and services, and for evaluation purposes, per ORS 279A.128, LA shall give a preference to a proposer that certifies that all Goods fabricated or processed, or all Services performed for this procurement are entirely fabricated, processed, or performed in Oregon.

4.10.3.2 Reciprocal Preference

For evaluation purposes per OAR 137-046, LA shall add a percent increase to each out-of-state Proposer's Proposal price that is equal to the percent preference, if any, given to a Resident Offeror in the Proposer's state.

4.10.3.3 Recycled Materials

In comparing Goods from two or more proposers, if at least one proposer offers Goods manufactured with Recycled Materials, and at least one proposer does not, LA will select the proposer offering Goods manufactured from Recycled Materials if each of the conditions specified in ORS 279A.125 (2) exists following any adjustments made to the price of the Goods according to any applicable reciprocal preference.

4.11 POINT AND SCORE CALCULATIONS

Scores are the points assigned by each evaluator.

The members of evaluation committee will each score the proposal. The SPC will add all scores and divide by the number of members who submit scores to determine an average score.

SECTION 5: AWARD AND NEGOTIATION

5.1 AWARD NOTIFICATION PROCESS

5.1.1 Award Consideration

LA, if it awards a Contract, shall award a Contract to the highest-ranking Responsible proposer(s) based upon the scoring methodology and process described in Section 4. LA may award less than the full Scope defined in this RFP. LA, in its sole discretion, may make additional award(s) for up to 9 months following http://www.oregon.gov/DAS/EGS/ps/Pages/reciprocal.aspx the close of this solicitation. LA may select the next ranked Responsive and Responsible proposer, issue an Intent to Award notice and begin a new award protest period. If agreement with that proposer is not reached, LA may offer award to the next ranked proposer and so on until agreement is reached or until LA terminates the process. LA may require reconfirmation of the qualifications and staffing of any proposer.

5.1.2 Intent to Award Notice

LA will notify all proposers in writing that LA intends to award a Contract to the selected proposer(s) subject to successful negotiation of any negotiable provisions.

5.2 INTENT TO AWARD PROTEST

5.2.1 Protest Submission

An Affected proposer shall have 7 calendar days from the date of the intent to award notice to file a Written protest.

A proposer is an Affected proposer only if the Proposer would be eligible for Contract award in the event the protest was successful and is protesting for one or more of the following reasons as specified in ORS 279B.410:

• All higher ranked Proposals are non-Responsive.

• LA has failed to conduct an evaluation of Proposals in accordance with the criteria or process described in the RFP.

• LA abused its discretion in rejecting the protestor’s Proposal as non-Responsive.

• LA evaluation of Proposal or determination of award otherwise violates ORS Chapter 279B or ORS Chapter 279A.

If LA receives only one Proposal, LA may dispense with the evaluation process and intent to award protest period and proceed with contract negotiations and award.

5.2.1.1 Protests must:

• Be delivered to the SPC via email

• Reference the RFP number

• Identify prospective proposer’s name and contact information

• Be signed by an authorized representative

• Specify the reasons for the protest, which must be a reason set forth in ORS 279B.410; and

• Be received within 7 calendar days of the intent to award notice

5.2.2 Response to Protest

Agency will address all timely submitted protests within a reasonable time and will issue a Written decision to the respective Proposer. Protests that do not include the required information may not be considered by Agency.

5.3 APPARENT SUCCESSFUL PROPOSER SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Proposers who are selected for a Contract award under this RFP will be required to submit additional information and comply with the following:

5.3.1 Insurance

Prior to award, proposers shall secure and demonstrate to Agency proof of insurance as required in this RFP or as negotiated. Insurance Requirements are found in Exhibit I

5.3.2 Taxpayer Identification Number

The apparent successful Proposer shall provide its Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) and backup withholding status on a completed W-9 form when requested by Agency or when the backup withholding status or any other relevant information of Proposer has changed since the last submitted W-9 form, if any.

5.3.3 Business Registry

If selected for award, Proposer shall be duly authorized by the State of Oregon to transact business in the State of Oregon before executing the Contract. Information about these requirements may be found at http://sos.oregon.gov/business/pages/register.aspx.

5.3.4 Responsibility Inquiry

Prior to award, the apparent successful Proposer shall be required to complete and submit Exhibit C — Responsibility Inquiry.

5.4 CONTRACT NEGOTIATION

5.4.1 Negotiation

After selection of a successful proposer, LA may enter into Contract negotiations with the successful proposer. By submitting a Proposal, proposer agrees to comply with the requirements of the RFP, including the terms and conditions of the Sample Contract (Exhibit C). With the exception of those terms listed below for negotiation.

Proposer shall review the attached Sample Contract and note exceptions. Unless proposer notes exceptions in its Proposal, the State intends to enter into a Contract with the successful proposer substantially in the form set forth in Sample Contract (Exhibit C). It may be possible to negotiate some provisions of the final Contract; however, many provisions cannot be changed. Proposer is cautioned that the State of Oregon believes modifications to the standard provisions constitute increased risk and increased cost to the State.

Any subsequent negotiated changes are subject to prior approval of LC or the Oregon Department of Justice.

Agency may negotiate the Statement of Work and the following terms and conditions:

• Method of payments

• Invoicing methods and requirements

• Prices in response to potential future cost fluctuations

• Units of measurement for goods or services or number of units of goods to be supplied

• Insurance provisions

• Project phasing or scheduling http://sos.oregon.gov/business/pages/register.aspx

Agency reserves the right to determine the basis for compensation (e.g., fixed price, costs reimbursement, etc.).

In the event that the parties have not reached mutually agreeable terms within 30 calendar days, Agency, at its discretion, may terminate Negotiations and commence Negotiations with the next highest-ranking Proposer.

SECTION 6: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

6.1 CERTIFIED FIRM PARTICIPATION

Pursuant to Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) Chapter 200, Agency encourages the participation of small businesses, certified by the Oregon Certification Office for Business Inclusion and Diversity (“COBID”) in all contracting opportunities. This includes certified small businesses in the following categories:

disadvantaged business enterprise, minority-owned business, woman-owned business, a business that a service-disabled veteran owns or an emerging small business. Agency also encourages joint ventures or subcontracting with certified small business enterprises. For more information please visit https://oregon4biz.diversitysoftware.com/FrontEnd/VendorSearchPublic.asp?XID=6787&TN=oregon4biz

A proposer must evaluate the project and the Proposal to determine whether opportunities for subcontracting exist. If the proposer determines that subcontracting some part of the project or the Proposal is feasible, the proposer shall submit a completed COBID Certification, attached to this RFP as Exhibit J, prior to executing the Contract.

6.2 GOVERNING LAWS AND REGULATIONS

This RFP is governed by the laws of the State of Oregon (“State”). Venue for any administrative or judicial action relating to this RFP, evaluation and award is the Circuit Court of Marion County for the State;

provided, however, if a proceeding must be brought in a federal forum, then it must be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. In no event shall this section be construed as a waiver by the State of any form of defense or immunity, whether sovereign immunity, governmental immunity, immunity based on the eleventh amendment to the constitution of the United States or otherwise, to or from any claim or from the jurisdiction of any court.

6.3 OWNERSHIP/PERMISSION TO USE MATERIALS

All Proposals are public record and are subject to public inspection after LA issues the Notice of the Intent to Award. Application of the Oregon Public Records Law will determine whether any information is actually exempt from disclosure.

All Proposals submitted in response to this RFP become the Property of LA. By submitting a Proposal in response to this RFP, proposer grants the State a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free license for the rights to copy, distribute, display, prepare derivative works of and transmit the Proposal solely for the purpose of evaluating the Proposal, negotiating an Agreement, if awarded to Proposer, or as otherwise needed to administer the RFP process, and to fulfill obligations under Oregon Public Records Law (ORS

192.410 through 192.505). Proposals, including supporting materials, will not be returned to Proposer unless the Proposal is submitted late.

6.4 CANCELLATION OF RFP; REJECTION OF PROPOSAL; NO DAMAGES.

Pursuant to ORS 279B.100, LA may reject any or all Proposals in-whole or in-part or may cancel this RFP at any time when the rejection or cancellation is in the best interest of the State or LA, as determined by LA.

https://oregon4biz.diversitysoftware.com/FrontEnd/VendorSearchPublic.asp?XID=6787&TN=oregon4biz

Neither the State nor the Legislative Administrator is liable to any Proposer for any loss or expense caused by or resulting from the delay, suspension, or cancellation of the RFP, award, or rejection of any Proposal.

6.5 COST OF SUBMITTING A PROPOSAL

Proposer shall pay all the costs in submitting its Proposal, including, but not limited to, the costs to prepare and submit the Proposal, costs of samples and other supporting materials, costs to participate in demonstrations, or costs associated with protests.

6.6 STATEWIDE E-WASTE/RECOVERY POLICY

If applicable, proposer shall include information in its Proposal that demonstrates compliance with the Statewide E-Waste/Recovery Policy effective July 1, 2012.

6.7 RECYCLABLE PRODUCTS

Proposer shall use recyclable products to the maximum extent economically feasible in the performance of the Services or Work set forth in this document and the subsequent Contract. (ORS 279B.025) http://www.oregon.gov/DAS/OP/docs/107-009-0050_%20E-Waste%20Policy_Final.pdf

EXHIBIT A

STATEMENT OF WORK

Oregon Legislative Information Systems Transformation Pre-Project Analysis

1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE

The Oregon Legislative Administrator (LA) plans to undertake a multi-year, multi-phase, initiative known as the Oregon Legislative Information Systems Transformation (OLIS-T) Project. The objective of the project is to replace the disparate legacy systems used throughout the lifecycle of a bill with a new consolidated and modernized system or systems. The purpose of this RFP is to obtain a vendor to perform exploratory analysis of the legacy systems and recommend the best approach to assist and prepare the Legislature prior to initiating and planning the OLIS-T Project.

There are currently a handful of integrated homegrown or vendor supported systems in use to move a bill through and enable the public to participate in the legislative process. These systems are built on out-of-date technologies and are rapidly becoming a challenge to support and lack desired features. LA intends to leverage the opportunity to modernize the processes as well as the technology when implementing a new solution. In preparation of the project, LA desires to review alternatives to determine not only the best technical solution and architecture, but also the recommended approach to ensure successful transitions all at once or in phases from multiple legacy systems to a new consolidated system or systems.

LA seeks proposals from qualified vendors to conduct analysis activities and deliver alternative recommendations for the OLIS-T project.

2. DELIVERY SCHEDULE

One of the key criteria for the selection of a vendor will be conformity with a delivery schedule that can accommodate the limited timeframe desired to complete the analysis body of work.

An ideal timeline would support efforts to begin the analysis upon awarding of contract and with completion and documentation delivery by not later than mid-June of 2025.

The milestone table below provides a hypothetical timeline with the proposed vendor deliverables by date.

The project timeline, milestones, and delivery dates will be finalized during the negotiations process with the vendor that is awarded the Contract for this RFP.

Del.# Project Milestones Vendor Deliverable Proposed Approximate Date

Draft of analysis of current processes and how they currently integrate between separate systems.

PDF and Word Monthly through January

Analysis of current processes and how they currently integrate between separate systems.

PDF February 2025

Drafts of A) Suggestions or recommendations for the modernization of the processes within a future state solution, B) Description of options (alternatives analysis) summarized with a recommended approach to modernization and a co-existence plan, C) Estimated resourcing, cost, and timeline within a rough order of magnitude (+/- 25%) for the each of the options, D) estimated high-level project plan to design, develop, test, document, implement, integrate, and train on the OLIS- T technology solution for the recommended option.

PDF and Word Monthly from March 2025 through June 2025

Suggestions or recommendations for the modernization of the processes within a future state solution. For example, describe opportunities to streamline workflow, update steps in the process where applicable, and/or add new desired functionality.

PDF June 2025

Description of options (alternatives analysis) summarized with a recommended approach to modernization. Develop a co-existence plan for each transition, if any. Give special consideration to architecture. LA desires to move to a single system and conversely, not replace each disparate system onto a modern platform.

PDF June 2025

Estimated resourcing, cost, and timeline within a rough order of magnitude (+/- 25%) for the each of the options.

For the recommended option, provide an estimated high-level project plan to design, develop, test, document, implement, integrate, and train on the OLIS-T technology solution.

2.1 WORK AND DELIVERABLES

The vendor awarded the contract for the OLIS-T pre-project analysis will be responsible for the delivery of quality services and deliverables throughout the duration of the project. The final format, frequency, and delivery dates for all vendor deliverables will be finalized during the contract negotiation process.

2.2 CONTRACTOR OBLIGATIONS

Based on this Statement of Work…