RFP S-44300-00017151.pdf

S-44300-00017151- Medicaid Enterprise System (MES) System Integration Services

STATE OF OREGON

COVER PAGE

OREGON HEALTH AUTHORITY AND

THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES

Are issuing this Request For Proposals (RFP) under OregonBuys® Bid Number S-44300-00017151 for

MES SYSTEM INTEGRATION PLATFORM AND SERVICES

Date of Issue: June 25th, 2026

Opening Date and Time: August 7th, 2026, at 12:00 PM PST

Single Point of Contact (SPC): Enrique Rodriguez, Procurement & Contracts Specialist

Address: 500 Summer St, Suite E03 City, State, Zip Salem, OR 97301 Phone 503-569-8279 E-mail: enrique.rodriguez@odhsoha.oregon.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.

mailto:enrique.rodriguez@odhsoha.oregon.gov

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1: GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

1.2 SCHEDULE

1.3 SINGLE POINT OF CONTACT (SPC)

SECTION 2: AUTHORITY, OVERVIEW, AND SCOPE

2.1 AUTHORITY AND METHOD

2.2 DEFINITION OF TERMS

2.3 OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE

2.4 SCOPE OF WORK/SPECIFICATIONS

SECTION 3: PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS

3.1 MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

3.2 MINIMUM SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

3.3 ROUND 1 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

SECTION 4: ROUND 1 SOLICITATION PROCESS

4.1 PUBLIC NOTICE

4.2 PRE-PROPOSAL 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 ROUND 1 EVALUATION PROCESS

4.11 ROUND 1 POINT AND SCORE CALCULATIONS

4.12 ROUND 1 RANKING OF PROPOSERS

4.13 NEXT STEP DETERMINATION

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 COMMITMENT TO FAIR ACCESS

6.2 CERTIFIED FIRM PARTICIPATION

6.3 GOVERNING LAWS AND REGULATIONS

6.4 OWNERSHIP/PERMISSION TO USE MATERIALS

6.5 CANCELLATION OF RFP; REJECTION OF PROPOSAL; NO DAMAGES

6.6 COST OF SUBMITTING A PROPOSAL

6.7 STATEWIDE E-WASTE/RECOVERY PROCEDURE

6.8 RECYCLABLE PRODUCTS

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT A SAMPLE CONTRACT

ATTACHMENT B DISCLOSURE EXEMPTION AFFIDAVIT

ATTACHMENT C PROPOSER INFORMATION AND CERTIFICATION SHEET

ATTACHMENT D REFERENCE CHECK FORM

ATTACHMENT E PRICE PROPOSAL FORM

ATTACHMENT F COBID CERTIFICATION / OUTREACH PLAN

ATTACHMENT G RESPONSIBILITY INQUIRY

ATTACHMENT H SYSTEM INTEGRATION INITIAL REQUIREMENTS

ATTACHMENT I OHA/ODHS TECHNICAL REFERENCE ARCHITECTURE (Ia &Ib) ATTACHMENT J STATEWIDE INFORMATION AND CYBER SECURITY STANDARDS (For Reference in Round 1)

ATTACHMENT K MEDICAID MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM INTERFACE LIST

SECTION 1: GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The State of Oregon, acting by and through the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) and Oregon Department of Human Services (ODHS) (individually referred to as “Agency” and collectively referred to as “Agencies”) are jointly issuing this Request for Proposal for Medicaid Enterprise System (MES) System Integration Services.

Agencies seek to procure a System Integration Platform and Services in support of the MES. The selected Proposer shall lead Phase 1 of a multi-phase initiative to assess, plan, and design a scalable integration platform that enables secure, real-time data exchange and batch data across Oregon’s Medicaid systems. This effort is a critical step in modernizing the state’s Medicaid Enterprise System and ensuring future interoperability, flexibility, and compliance with federal and state standards. Subject to availability of funding and approval by the MES Program’s Executive Steering Committee, Agencies may award additional Phases to the successful Proposer under this procurement as described in Section 2.3.5 Phases 2/3- Development Phase Decision (MES Mod Executive Steering Committee). Please see Section 2.3.3 Project Overview and Background for more details on anticipated Phases.

To ensure effective and sustainable technology investments, OHA and ODHS seek solutions that leverage enterprise-wide capabilities and promote reusability across multiple programs and business domains within both agencies. The ideal solution will be architected for scalability, reuse and adaptability across multiple divisions and programs, forming a foundation for broader enterprise transformation efforts within OHA and ODHS.

Agencies anticipate the award to one successful Proposer from this RFP and reserve the right to form multiple agreements with the successful Proposer to meet the enterprise-wide strategy described in the paragraph above.

The initial term of the Contract(s) is anticipated to be 5 years with options to renew if Agencies deem renewal to be in the best interest of the State of Oregon.

1.2 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

Questions / Requests for Clarification Due July 17, 2026 12:00 PM

Answers to Questions / Requests for Clarification Issued (approx.) July 24, 2026

RFP Protest Period Ends

14 calendar days prior to RFP Opening

Opening (Proposal Due) See RFP cover page

Opening of Proposal Same as Opening (Proposal Due)

Presentations, Demonstrations, or Interviews TBD

Issuance of Notice of Intent to Award (approx.) TBD

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

1.3 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.

SECTION 2: AUTHORITY, OVERVIEW, AND SCOPE

2.1 AUTHORITY AND METHOD

Agencies are issuing this RFP under the authority of the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) delegation REQ- 00073415(as amended)

Agencies are using the Competitive Sealed Proposal method, pursuant to ORS 279B.060 and OAR 125-247-0260. Agencies may use a combination of the methods 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.

2.2 DEFINITION OF TERMS

For the purposes of this RFP, capitalized words are defined in OAR 125-246-0110 or as defined below or in Attachment H, System Integration Requirements and Attachment I (Ia &Ib Technical Reference Architecture.

Terminology specific to the OregonBuys® system may be found at:_ OregonBuys https://oregonbuys.gov/bso/

2.3 OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE

2.3.1 Agencies’ Overview and Background

2.3.2 Oregon Health Authority (OHA) is Oregon’s State Medicaid agency responsible for ensuring access to health services are available to Oregonians. Oregon Department of Human Services (ODHS) is the agency responsible for administering other public assistance benefits and also provides operational support for distinct Medicaid functions. The partnership between OHA and ODHS and their alignment with business operations and technology services unites these two agencies in their common goal to establish streamlined Medicaid eligibility, improve access to care and service delivery, and expand coverage to more Oregonians.

Together, OHA and ODHS support the technology needs for all their programs:

• 16,580 OHA and DHS agency staff in 166 local offices and facilities around the State

• 250+ systems and applications related to eligibility, enrollment, benefit issuance, licensing, protective services, public health, case management, hospital management, provider payments and many more health and human services needs. While many applications are new and supported, many applications are dated, with a variety of platforms, programming languages, databases and interfaces

• 300+ technology tools and support applications

• 25,700+ technology devices (computers, printers, servers, mobile devices)

Agencies intend to create an enterprise vision for transforming the way Medicaid services and programs are delivered to Oregon citizens, going beyond technology.

This encompasses a re-evaluation of processes and organization structures used to manage and deliver program services, efforts to work across organizational boundaries to more effectively manage and deliver health and human services (HHS) in Oregon, and transition from current operating models to an outcomes-based focus.

2.3.3 Project Overview and Background

Agencies are seeking services to prepare for the implementation of a System Integration Platform for Medicaid Management Information System (MMIS) Interfaces. Agencies believe that the system integration platform will eventually be leveraged to integrate other Medicaid systems and introduce new modules into the MES (Medicaid Enterprise System).

Agencies anticipate that a SI (System Integration) Contractor will eventually establish and maintain an integration platform that enables secure real-time, or near real-time, data exchange and integration of data and services across Oregon’s Medicaid systems.

The integration platform software and architecture developed in Phase 2 will meet or exceed the requirements set forth in an updated and Agency Accepted Attachment H and :

• facilitate connectivity, security, communication, and processing to translate protocols, platforms, and data formats to facilitate data sharing and the reuse of processing services and deliverables

• enable a common information exchange framework that reduces reliance on tightly coupled, system-to-system integrations and instead supports reusable, centrally governed integration services to improve maintainability, scalability, and transparency across systems

• create an architectural model that promotes information sharing and services across all Medicaid systems using common semantics, syntax and mechanisms to communicate through the integration platform and fundamental infrastructure components

• route and manage all business logic (e.g. API routing and composition, policy enforcement and mediation, transformation rules, and protocol mediation) to integrate services across disparate systems and allow services and technology to remain independent

System Integration Platform Project Scope of Work

The initial System Integration effort, defined in this RFP as the System Integration Platform Project, is envisioned as 3 distinct phases with a 4th Phase after project completion. Please note, only Phase 1 of the System Integration Platform Project is funded at this time.

Subject to availability of funding and Executive Steering Committee Approval (as described in Section 2.3.5 of this RFP), if funded and approved, Agencies may decide to negotiate and integrate Phase 2 and 3 scope into the successful Proposer’s contract via a new Contract or amendment to the existing Phase 1 Contract. Phase 4 scope may be integrated at a future date and time, subject to the same funding restraints and some variation of the approval process described in Section 2.3.5.

Phase 1 – Discovery, Gap Analysis and Master Integration Plan (See Figure 2 and Attachment K MMIS Interfaces) Phase 2 – Platform Development and MMIS Interface Integration (Figure 2) Phase 3 – Platform Operations and Maintenance (O&M Support) Phase 4 – Program Support Services (future discovery/gap analysis work for MES Ecosystem (Figure 1) and module integration support)

The System Integration Project will be considered complete after the set-up of the Platform and successful integration of the MMIS Interfaces. Agencies anticipate that there will be overlap between Phases 2 and 3, but are planning to consider the System Integration Platform Project completed after all MMIS interfaces have been successfully migrated onto the platform and stabilized. Agencies anticipate that any additional work related to the MES Ecosystem will be completed in Phase 4 with additional scope elements integrated into the successful Proposer’s contract via amendment or the development of a new contract.

Agencies anticipate that System Integration Support services in Phase 4, may include:

• Module Integration Services (Module Requirements Review, Module Vendor Oversight, Module platform integration support, standards drafting, review and enforcement), provision of individual staff via staff augmentation support services to meet program specific needs

• Integration of existing shared enterprise tools (i.e. Letter Generator, Email Features, Electronic Management) as well as the implementation of new platform tools as deemed by the Agency to be in the best interest of the State

• Medicaid Modernization Consulting Support (i.e. Review and Assistance with the development of Program Documentation such as stage gate materials, solicitations and Contractor library documentation)

Figures 1 and 2 represent an example of some of the known MES related systems (Figure 1) and MMIS interfaces/subsystems (Figure 2). As stated above, the scope of this project is Figure 2, Attachment K, and the associated integration into the existing OHA/ODHS infrastructure and security solutions. The successful Proposer should also provide input and updates to Figure 1 as part of the Phase 1 scope of work.

Figure 1 - MES Ecosystem

Figure 2 - MMIS Interfaces/ Sub-systems

2.3.4 Purpose

The purpose of this Solicitation is to select a contractor to design and implement a System Integration Platform. The initial portion of this effort, described as Phase 1 below, is expected to result in the delivery of a platform design and master integration plan. The platform design and master integration plan provided in Phase 1 is expected to include detailed scoping and associated cost estimates for platform development/interface integration (Phase 2) and platform support (Phase 3). The primary purpose of system integration for a Medicaid Enterprise System is to create a connected and efficient platform that enables interoperability, allowing different health IT systems to exchange real-time data seamlessly. This integration supports goals like improved patient care through better information sharing and care coordination, reduced administrative burden by automating processes, enhanced program integrity and compliance through standardized data, and more accessible, efficient healthcare for Medicaid members.

2.3.4.1 Phase 1- Discovery, Gap Analysis and Integration Plan

Agencies seek a System Integration contractor to provide consulting support in the form of a system-wide assessment and development of MMIS system documentation and architecture followed by planning for the implementation of an SI platform and associated support services necessary to monitor and manage MMIS interfaces. This platform should be designed to enable modular integration of new technologies. The MMIS system-wide assessment should be solely focused on MMIS unless MMIS dependencies with other MES software require a more extensive analysis to complete the Phase 1 work.

Successful completion of Phase 1 Discovery, Gap Analysis and Integration Plan is expected to comprise:

• System-wide assessment and discovery of existing MMIS applications, sub-systems and related technology

• The update and transformation of all Initial System Integration requirements (Attachment H) into detailed specifications covering all aspects of the SI Platform and related support services

• Evaluation of compliance with relevant federal and state Medicaid regulations and standards such as Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR)

• Assessment and planning for security risk including alignment with State of Oregon Security Standards, NIST and the MES Technical Reference Architecture (See Attachments I and J)

• Gap Analysis between existing (as-is) and future (to-be) state of the MMIS and interfacing systems

• Finalized platform design and master integration plan with associated pricing for Phases 2 and 3 of the System Integration Platform Project

2.3.5 Phases 2/3- Development Phase Decision (MES Mod Executive Steering Committee)

The decision to execute a contract to begin Phase 2 Platform Development, MMIS Interface Integration activities and Phase 3 Platform Operations and Maintenance (O&M Support) with the successful Proposer will be provided by the MES Mod Executive Steering Committee (MES Mod ESC). Factors in the MES Mod ESC decision will likely include Agencies’ assessment of the feasibility of the SI Contractor’s Phase 2/3 proposal (Master Integration Plan) and the availability of funds to support the proposed Phase 2/3 work effort. Additional factors may be considered as determined by the Agencies. Failure to receive MES Mod ESC approval for the SI Contractors Phase 2/3 plan and or inability to secure funding for the proposed Phase 2/3 work could result in project termination, project rebaselining or rescoping of SI Contractor efforts towards consulting on other MES Mod program activities.

2.4 SCOPE OF WORK/SPECIFICATIONS

2.4.1 Phase 1 – Discovery, Requirement Updates, Gap Analysis and Master Integration Plan

The successful Proposer shall complete discovery, requirement updates, gap analysis and a master integration plan/platform design for the State of Oregon. Proposer’s approach to Phase 1 work will be based on the Agencies’ needs as generally described below. Please review Attachment A, Sample Contract for additional provisions.

The successful Proposer will provide the following Services in support of the System Integration Project, as well as other Services as may be necessary. The Services listed below are general in nature and fit a variety of potential strategies. Agencies intend to negotiate a Contract substantially in the form attached as Attachment A including a Statement of Work based on the structure outlined in this Section 2.4 to fit the particular strategy proposed by the successful Proposer, including:

2.4.1.1 Project Management

Successful Proposer shall provide all project management services necessary to complete the Phase 1 work from kickoff meeting through Phase 1 closeout. Successful Proposer shall update both the PMP and Project Schedule through Phase 1 Closeout.

Project Management Plan

Successful Proposer shall develop a Project Management Plan (PMP) that includes:

• Strategy and approach

• Resource plan

• Communication Plan

• Quality Management Plan

• Change Control Management Plan

• Roles & responsibilities

• Risks and Issue Log

• Monthly status report template

• Project Schedule Successful Proposer shall create and manage a project schedule in MS Project format (preferred) and update weekly or as needed.

Weekly Project Meetings

Successful Proposer shall facilitate weekly meetings with Agencies to discuss the current status of the project, including but not limited to, risks and ongoing tasks.

Monthly Progress Reports

Successful Proposer shall deliver a Monthly Progress Report starting the first calendar month after receiving written Notice to Proceed from Agencies. These Monthly Reports must focus on the activities of the previous calendar month. Successful Proposer shall continue to provide Monthly Progress Reports through Final Acceptance. For the purpose of pricing, Proposer should assume that twenty-four (24) Monthly Process Reports are required for Phase 1 of this Project.

Each Monthly Progress Report is expected to include the following:

• Status of Successful Proposers Deliverables

• Updated Issue Log for Agencies review and Acceptance

• Updated Project Management Plan for Agencies review and Acceptance

• Known schedule slippage by Deliverables or projected labor hour utilization Project issues or risks and their assessment and mitigation that may impact project scope, schedule, or budget

Successful Proposer shall assist Agencies in the development of all information or documents necessary for Agencies to receive state approvals to proceed with the next phase of the project, including completion of a Cloud Workbook, benefit management plan (e.g. identify benefits, measurements for progress and actions being taken to achieve benefits) and system security plan as required by the Office of the State Chief Information Officer, if applicable.

2.4.2 MMIS Technical/Business Charting

The successful Proposer shall complete information gathering via stakeholder engagement, document review, surveys, or any other tools that effectively garner information necessary to complete its work.

The successful Proposer shall perform a thorough evaluation of the existing MMIS environment, including related interfaces and data transfers. This assessment must provide a detailed model of the current MMIS technology, processes, and sub-systems.

Anticipated charting tasks include:

• Architecture Mapping - diagram and documentation of the MMIS architecture, showing key components (e.g., data sources, middleware, APIs) and data flow between MMIS and other MES systems

• Technology Mapping – map of infrastructure including servers, databases, applications, security measures (encryption level, access control, incident response etc.) and system interfaces (including source and target system information, request and response structure, authentication mechanisms, rate limits and quotas)

• Data Mapping – Field to Field Mapping, Data Types, formats, transformation logic, look-up tables and references to sample data sets (limited to data that is anticipated to flow through an SI Platform)

• Compliance and Certification Mapping – legal, industry and regulatory requirements that must be adhered to throughout the integration process (e.g. Medicaid standards, FHIR, NIST, State of Oregon etc.)

• Process Mapping – Visual representations of MMIS business workflows across integrated sub-systems, showing data entry, processing, change management and decision points

• Updated version of Figure 1 MES Ecosystem , Figure 2 MMIS Interfaces / Subsystems and Attachment K MMIS Interfaces

2.4.3 Updated System Integration Services and Platform Requirements

The successful Proposer shall review and develop revision recommendations (including new requirements as appropriate) for initial System Integration Services and Platform Requirements included in this RFP as Attachment H.

Successful Proposer shall recommend additions and modifications of the initial requirements in Attachment H to define desired future-state capabilities for a for the envisioned platform. Successful Proposer is expected to provide clear, traceable updates to the initial requirements in Attachment H of this RFP as part of this work effort.

The successful Proposer’s requirements should remain technology neutral- (outcome based with a focus on flexibility and adaptability) as well as adhering to the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) and the Technical Reference Architecture (see Attachment I (Ia &Ib) to this RFP). The successful Proposer’s requirements should reference relevant TRA components to demonstrate compliance or justify variances. Agencies anticipate a series of working sessions where the successful Proposer will develop and review recommended requirements with the Agencies, integrate Agencies’ feedback into the initial requirements documentation and provide detailed explanations to Agencies’ representatives in cases where Agencies’ feedback was not included in the resulting deliverable. The result of these working sessions will be the successful Proposer’s submission of an updated set of System Integration Services and Platform Requirements for Agencies’ review and Acceptance. Acceptance of requirements will be contingent upon approval by Agencies and State regulatory bodies. A current initial version of Agencies’ requirements can be found in Attachment H of this RFP.

2.4.4 System Integration Gap Assessment

The successful Proposer shall identify and prioritize discrepancies between the current state (as-is) and the desired future state (to-be).

Successful Proposer shall identify gaps related to functionality, integration, security and data quality. Gaps should be mapped across MMIS sub-systems, processes, technology and data domains. Successful proposer shall assess gaps to determine which interfacing systems and subsystems can be adapted to the future state and which should be upgraded or replaced and identify where current MMIS components align or diverge from TRA domains (integration, data, security, hosting, etc).The successful Proposer shall define the future-state vision, aligning it with modernization objectives, business goals, and regulatory requirements. This vision must include the capabilities and features required in the new system integration platform to meet the updated requirements.

The Gap Assessment should include a plan for

• Business Process Modernization – aligning technology integration with improved operational workflows and user experiences by identifying and redesigning key business process, workflow automation requirements and redundancies or inefficiencies that integration would solve

• Technical Integration Layer - establishing the architecture and infrastructure to connect systems in a secure and scalable way by having an interface and API strategy, message routing, transformation, and orchestrating logic, and reuse shared technical services (like identity management)

• Data Exchange Components – which ensure semantic and syntactic interoperability and high data quality across MMIS and interfacing systems

• Technical Debt Identification and Resolution Planning – identify areas of technical debt and provide a roadmap for resolution

2.4.5 Platform Design and Master Integration Plan (Platform Development and MMIS Interface Integration)

The successful Proposer shall create a platform design and master integration plan based on the Agencies’ accepted Gap Analysis and updated requirement documentation. This plan must also include detailed scoping and associated cost estimates for phases 2 and 3 of the System Integration project.

Agencies anticipate reviewing a draft version of the Platform Design and Master Integration Plan with the successful proposer via a series of working sessions facilitated by the successful Proposer. The successful Proposer will integrate Agencies’ feedback from these working sessions into the draft documentation or provide detailed explanations for why Agencies’ feedback was not included in the resulting documentation.

The resulting documentation should include the following:

• A detailed platform design and requirements traceability matrix

• A detailed platform development, testing and integration schedule for MMIS interfaces

• Testing must include a security test of the production system to be performed before go-live. To avoid potential conflict of interest, the testing will be performed by an organization that does not report directly to the same organization that created the solution. 3rd party testing is preferred. Any critical and high priority vulnerabilities will be remediated, and follow up scans will be performed until there are assurances that no critical or high vulnerabilities remain. The test will be scoped accordingly and be designed to only test the services being procured, and ensure that the successful Proposer’s other regular business is not affected.

• A mapping of where current MMIS components align or diverge from TRA domains (integration, data, security, hosting, etc)

• Roles and responsibilities (Agencies’ staff, Contract staff, 3rd party Contractor staff (ex.

Gainwell) for Phases 2 and 3

• A set of performance measures that include goals, measurements of each goal and the results of achieving each goal

• A Cost Benefit analysis quantifying the measurable benefits associated with developing the System Integration Platform including the provision of associated services and support. The cost benefit analysis must conform to federal standards required within the then current Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) I-APD template.

• A risk register with a list of current risks and associated recommendations (mitigate, accept, avoid) and proposed process for updating the risk register during Phase 2 and Phase 3

• A high-level interface integration strategy with potential approaches for system-to-system communication, data transformation and workflow automation

• A strategy for a successful Proposer led CMS certification of the SI Platform including a detailed CMS Certification plan which contains the successful Proposers staffing approach for supporting CMS certification activities, including roles, level of effort assumptions, and how resources will participate in planning, artifact development/review, and meetings as required by the State.

• A detailed operations and maintenance plan that includes incident management, system maintenance related meeting cadence, change control, and any revisions to the service levels outlined in Exhibit B of the Contract.

• Proposed pricing (including any 3rd Party costs) for Phases 2 and 3.

• A completed Attachment J, Statewide Information and Cyber Security Standards.

The successful Proposer must be prepared to present its design and integration plan to Agencies’ executives. This presentation may require ancillary documentation such as a power point presentation and/or single page handout which distills core concepts of the integration plan into a summarized form for executive consumption.

Additional Notes:

In accordance with 42 CFR § 433.112(b)(5), Agencies shall be granted full ownership of all work products produced by the successful Proposer and accepted by the Agencies under a contract or set of contracts resulting from this Request for Proposals. Proposer is strongly encouraged not to provide work products, or suggest technology within its work products, that are proprietary to the successful Proposer. In accordance with Oregon’s Department of Administrative Services Memo 107-004-052 ‘Cyber and Information Security’, unless an exemption is provided by the State of Oregon’s Chief Information Officer, the successful Proposer shall not be allowed to use offshore resources for any work under a contract resulting from this Request for Proposals.

Further, Agencies are committed to providing equitable access to information and services, and effective communications that are culturally and linguistically appropriate and accessible for a wide spectrum of people who have different communications needs or abilities. To this end, the successful Proposer shall deliver Services that meet standards for digital accessibility established in ODHS/OHA Operational Policy ODHSOHA 010-030 (Digital Accessibility in Hardware, Software and Systems) and ODHSOHA 010-029 (Digital Accessibility in Content Creation and Sharing). The Solution and Deliverables that are electronic documents or multimedia content, and web, desktop, and mobile applications, as well as Solution documentation (such as training materials and user guides) must meet all applicable standards for digital accessibility. Applicable standards are those set in law, administrative rule, and the ODHS/OHA operational policies, including as those laws, administrative rules, and policies are updated from time to time.

SECTION 3: PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS

3.1 MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

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

3.1.1 Licensing Requirements

Proposer must be legally registered and authorized to conduct business in the United States and the State of Oregon. If applicable, Proposer must hold any required business or professional licenses necessary to perform the services described in this RFP.

3.1.2 Certification Requirements

Proposer must demonstrate relevant industry certifications, such as:

• Project Management Professional (PMP) certification for key project management staff

• Relevant cloud or integration platform certifications (e.g., AWS, Azure, MuleSoft, or similar), if applicable to the proposed solution

3.1.3 Key Person Requirements

Proposer must identify key personnel who will be assigned to the project. These individuals must have:

• A minimum of five (5) years of experience in large-scale system integration projects, preferably within Medicaid or other public health systems

3.1.4 Other Requirements:

• Proposer must have a minimum of five (5) years of experience providing system integration services for large-scale public sector programs. Experience supporting State Medicaid programs, MMIS, or CMS certification efforts is strongly preferred.

• Proposer must have successfully completed at least one (1) project of similar scope and complexity within the last five (5) years

3.2 MINIMUM SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

3.2.1 ROUND 1 Proposal Submissions

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

3.2.2 Administrative Proposal, including:

• Proposer Information and Certification Sheet (Attachment C)

• Disclosure Exemption Affidavit (Attachment B)

• Executive Summary

• Security Statement

• Proposers Organizational Profile

• Experience and Capabilities

• Key Persons, Organizational Chart, Subcontractors

• Reference Check Form (Attachment D)

• Underlying Agreements

• Value Added Services

• COBID Certification / Outreach Plan (Attachment F)

• Responsibility Inquiry (Attachment G)

3.2.3 Technical Proposal, including:

• Scope of Work Delivery Approach, addressing the Scope of Services set forth in Section

2.4 and System Requirements in Attachment H, including o Project Management o MMIS Technical / Business Charting o Updated System Integration Service and Platform Requirements o System Integration Gap Assessment o Platform Design and Master Integration Plan

• Platform Development, Interface Integrations, Overall Tools and Solution Information

• Work Samples (should be limited to no more than 6 examples and be products directly applicable to the scope of work described in Section 2.4 e.g. Project Management Plan, Requirements Traceability Matrix, Functional and Technical Design Documents, Master Integration Plan)

3.2.4 Price Proposal

Proposer shall complete and submit its Price Proposal on the Form attached hereto as Attachment E. As noted in Attachment E, if the Proposer wishes to submit a Labor Hour Not to Exceed (NTE) price for the Mapping and Charting work, that pricing submission must be provided with the information requirements outlined in Attachment E.

3.2.5 Proposal Page Limits

Proposal is limited to 75 pages. Any pages exceeding this limit will not be provided to the evaluation committee or considered in the evaluation. The following items do not count toward the page limit:

• Disclosure Exemption Affidavit (Attachment B)

• Proposer Information and Certification Sheet (Attachment C)

• Reference Check forms (Attachment D)

• Key Persons (Note: Please limit submission to 2 pages per Key Person)

• Price Proposal (Attachment E)

• COBID Certification / Outreach Plan (Attachment F)

• Responsibility Inquiry (Attachment G)

• Work samples

3.2.6 Proposal Format and Quantity

OregonBuys® Electronic Response. Proposer should submit its Proposal electronically through OregonBuys®. Proposer should follow the procedures outlined in RFP Section 4.5 for electronic submission.

The Price Proposal must be submitted as a separate electronic response file.

Proposer shall submit one copy of its Proposal and all other submittal requirements, in one of the following formats: Adobe Acrobat (pdf), Microsoft Word (docx), or Microsoft Excel (xlsx). with Attachment C - Proposer Information and Certification Sheet bearing the Proposer’s authorized representative’s Signature.

If Proposer believes any of its Proposal is exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law (ORS 192.311 through 192.478), Proposer shall complete and submit the Disclosure Exemption Affidavit (Attachment B). Proposer shall also mark as “Confidential” in OregonBuys® all attachments to its Proposal that Proposer believes are exempt from disclosure

3.2.7 Authorized Representative

Failure of Proposer’s authorized representative to sign Attachment C may result in rejection of the Proposal by Agencies.

3.3 ROUND 1 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

The Proposal must address each of the items listed in this section and all other requirements set forth in this RFP. Proposer shall describe the Services to be performed or the Goods to be provided or both. A Proposal that merely offers to provide the goods or services as stated in this RFP may be considered non-Responsive to this RFP and will not be considered further.

The 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, unless requested. Proposal should be straightforward and address the requests of the RFP. Proposal containing unsolicited marketing or advertising material may receive a lower evaluation score if required information is difficult to locate.

Proposal should follow the format and reference the sections listed in this Round 1 Proposal Requirements section. Responses to each section and subsection should be labeled to indicate the item being addressed.

3.3.1 ADMINISTRATIVE PROPOSAL

3.3.1.1 Proposer Information and Certification Sheet (Pass/Fail)

Proposer shall complete and submit the Proposer Information and Certification Sheet (Attachment C).

Failure to demonstrate compliance with Oregon Tax Laws and sign the Proposer Information and Certification Sheet may result in a finding of non-Responsibility.

3.3.1.2 Disclosure Exemption Affidavit (Pass/Fail)

Proposer shall complete and submit the Attachment B, Disclosure Exemption Affidavit as part of the Proposal. Submission is required even if Proposer is not identifying confidential or proprietary information and data for nondisclosure. If Proposer is identifying items for nondisclosure as confidential or proprietary, in addition to the original Proposal, Proposer must submit a redacted single electronic copy of the complete, original Proposal submission (see section 3.1.4).

3.3.1.3 Executive Summary (Mandatory, Not Scored)

Proposer shall submit an Executive Summary that briefly describes how the proposed services package addresses the needs set forth in this RFP. The Executive Summary should be a comprehensive yet succinct description, not to exceed three

(3) pages, that summarizes the proposed service delivery, distinctive features, and how it will fulfill the State’s needs and highlights those factors that Proposer believes distinguish its Proposal. The Executive Summary may also contain a high-level “block” diagram of the proposed support structure in addition to the three (3) pages.

3.3.1.4 Security Statement (Mandatory, Not Scored)

Proposer must provide a narrative statement that attests to whether the Proposer currently meets or can in the future meet the following protections:

• Proposer understands and has the capability of handling and protecting Agency Data that has been classified as Level 3 Information under the State of Oregon’s Information Asset Classification policy, available online at https://www.oregon.gov/das/Policies/107-004-050.pdf.

• Describe the shared responsibility model for the solution, including what Proposer would be responsible for, what Agencies would be responsible for, and if applicable what Proposer’s partner/s or subcontractor/s are responsible for.

o Provide a narrative that describes Proposer’s security program as it relates to the proposed solution, addressing all of the following NIST 800-53 control families in the response. See table below.

https://www.oregon.gov/das/Policies/107-004-050.pdf

• Proposer and its employees, contractors, and agents shall comply with all applicable state and federal laws and regulations, and State of Oregon policies governing Agency Data and its use and disclosure, including as those laws, regulations, and policies may be updated from time to time, including:

o Oregon’s Statewide Information Security Standards, found online at: https://www.oregon.gov/eis/cyber-security-services/Pages/guidance-for-state-agencies.aspx including security controls that meet or exceed “Moderate” security controls in the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-53 o Oregon’s Statewide Information Security Plan, found online at:

https://www.oregon.gov/eis/cyber-security-services/Pages/guidance-for-state-agencies.aspx o Statewide Cloud Computing policy:

http://www.oregon.gov/das/policies/107-004-150.pdf o Oregon’s Statewide Information Technology Policies:

www.oregon.gov/das/Pages/policies.aspx#IT o Privileged Access Monitoring and Reporting viewable at:

https://www.oregon.gov/das/Policies/107-004-140.pdf https://www.oregon.gov/eis/cyber-security-services/Pages/guidance-for-state-agencies.aspx https://www.oregon.gov/eis/cyber-security-services/Pages/guidance-for-state-agencies.aspx https://www.oregon.gov/eis/cyber-security-services/Pages/guidance-for-state-agencies.aspx https://www.oregon.gov/eis/cyber-security-services/Pages/guidance-for-state-agencies.aspx http://www.oregon.gov/das/policies/107-004-150.pdf http://www.oregon.gov/das/Pages/policies.aspx#IT https://www.oregon.gov/das/Policies/107-004-140.pdf

3.3.1.5 Proposer’s Organizational Profile (Mandatory, Not Scored)

Proposer must provide a profile of its organization, including an overview of its organization, description of the structure of its business, and a discussion of how the organization can effectively deliver the Services described in this RFP. The Profile must include:

• Ownership. If incorporated, the state in which the organization is incorporated and the date of the incorporation

• Location of the organization’s headquarters and location of the office from which employees will be assigned to work on the project for the Agency

• Number of employees located in the Pacific Northwest, nationally, and internationally

• Established business relationships with proposed subcontractors (e.g., data conversion contractor)

• Provide a description of the Proposer’s Business Continuity Plan for their organization

3.3.1.6 Experience and Capabilities (Mandatory, Scored)

Proposer must demonstrate Proposer has a minimum of five (5) years of experience providing System Integration Services including the installation of least one (1) System Integration Platform including the provision of ongoing maintenance and support for that platform. The Proposer’s installed System Integration Platform must be of similar scope and size to the desired State of Oregon platform and have been successfully implemented in the past three (3) years.

3.3.1.7 Key Persons, Organizational Chart, Subcontractors (Mandatory, Scored)

Key Persons. Specify key persons to be assigned to the Services and include a current resume (not to exceed two (2) pages each) for each individual that demonstrates qualifications and experience for the Services proposed.

Project Management Key Person(s) Requirements and Preferences are:

• Proposed Project Manager must demonstrate the candidate’s experience with project management types, such as predictive, agile, or hybrid, on projects of similar size and complexity

• Must have five (5) years of experience managing projects of similar size and scope

• Substantial experience in public sector environment is preferred

Service Manager Key Person(s) Requirements and Preferences are:

• Recent experience, in last three (3) years, providing Solution management Services substantially similar to the Key Persons requirements described in Section 4.3 of Attachment A, Sample Contract system of similar size and complexity is required

• Substantial experience in public sector environment is preferred

Account Manager Key Person Requirements and Preferences are:

• Recent experience, in last three (3) years, providing Account management Services substantially similar to the Key Persons requirements described in Section 4.4 of Attachment A, Sample Contract system of similar size and complexity is required

• Must have a minimum of five (5) years’ contract management experience managing related services with similar budgets, preferably in Medicaid or the healthcare industry and for a project similar in size and scope to this project. The Account Manager shall be employed by the Proposer

Organizational Chart. Provide an organizational chart identifying the staffing that will provide the Services required by this RFP, illustrating the lines of authority as appropriate.

Subcontractors. If Proposer intends to work with subcontractor(s), Proposer shall include a statement detailing any subcontracting firms or individual subcontractors that may be engaged as part of the Proposal to this RFP, with those entities and the Services they will provide clearly identified.

3.3.1.8 Reference Check Form (Mandatory, Not Scored)

Proposer shall submit with its Proposal a completed Attachment D, Reference Check Form from three (3) references from current or former client firms (at least one client must be a public entity) for similar projects performed for any clients within the last 5 years. References must be able to verify the quality of previous, related Work. Proposer shall provide only the contact information for the reference with the Round 1 Submission Requirements.

Proposer shall provide with its Proposal a list of all State of Oregon Contracts Proposer has been a party to in the last five (5) years. Agencies reserve the right to utilize those Contracts as references as part of the determination of Responsibility.

Agencies may use information received from any reference as part of the determination of Responsibility. Office of Contracts and Procurement Services also may use references to obtain additional information, verify any information needed, or to verify Proposer’s qualifications.

References may be used in an additional round of evaluation.

3.3.1.9 Underlying Agreements (Not Scored)

Proposer shall submit any additional documents required for this project (e.g., Subscription Services Agreement, End User License Agreement (EULA), Maintenance Agreement, etc.).

3.3.1.10 Value Added Services (Optional, Scored)

If Proposer is proposing any value-added services, Proposer shall include a statement describing these services. Agencies reserve the right to add such Services to the resulting Contract as needed.

3.3.2 TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

3.3.2.1 Solution Delivery Approach (Mandatory, Scored)

Proposer shall describe how it will deliver the Services described in Section 2.4, Scope of Services. Proposer is encouraged to review Section 4.10.4.1 below for additional details on how the Proposer’s Solution Delivery Approach will be scored by the Agencies.

3.3.2.2 Platform Development, Interface Integrations, Overall Tools and Solution (Mandatory, Scored)

Proposer shall provide a description of its anticipated strategy and toolsets for (Phases 1 – 3). Proposer must provide comprehensive answers to the following questions. Agencies have provided a list of initial requirements in Attachment H and existing MMIS system metrics in Attachment E which Proposer may use complete this portion of the technical proposal.

3.3.2.1.1 Platform, Development Tools, Integration Strategy

a. Please describe the integration platform software (e.g., MuleSoft, Boomi, Ka�ka, Azure Integration Services, custom ESB) Proposer intends to use in Phase 2.

b. Please identify whether the platform is commercial off-the-shelf (COTS), SaaS, open source, or proprietary to Proposer.

c. Please describe the scalability features of the platform (e.g., containerization, cloud-native deployment, multi-cloud support).

d. Please describe any con�iguration-based integration tools included in

Proposer’s platform and how they reduce reliance on custom code.

e. Please describe the anticipated platform development and interface integration process including estimated timelines for platform development, scheduling strategy and preparation activities for interface integrations.

3.3.2.1.2 Architecture & Modeling Tools

a. Please describe the enterprise architecture tools (e.g., LeanIX, Abacus, Ardoq, Sparx EA) Proposer intends to use for documentation, modeling, and governance.

b. Please indicate whether these tools are Contractor-managed or State-managed, and whether the State must purchase licenses. If the State must purchase licensing, please provide the cost based on the Assumptions described in Attachment E and the cost structure outlined in Attachment E.

c. Please describe how Proposer’s architecture tools integrate with standards and frameworks (e.g., FEAF, TOGAF, MITA, ArchiMate).

d. Please describe Proposer’s approach to interface documentation (e.g., ICD templates, OpenAPI, RAML, JSON Schema). Specify whether interface definitions are maintained in structured, standards-based formats that support automated validation, testing, and integration (e.g., OpenAPI/Swagger, AsyncAPI), rather than static document formats.

e. Please describe Proposer’s approach to implementing State-approved member data matching and con�lict resolution standards, including governance, stewardship, auditability, and version control; and how it will support development of proposed standards if not provided at initiation.

f. Please describe the Proposer’s approach to coordinating transition of legacy systems interfaces.

3.3.2.1.3 Data Management & Analytics Tools / Strategy

a. Please describe the data management tools (e.g., data dictionaries, lineage tools, metadata catalogs) Proposer intends to use to support Phase 2 development.

b. Please describe the reporting and analytics tools the Proposer intends to use to support platform operations and performance monitoring.

c. For State-facing reporting (e.g., executive dashboards, SLA reporting, performance metrics, and CMS-related reporting), describe how the solution will integrate with or support the State’s enterprise reporting platform (currently Power BI). Proposer should not assume the State will adopt new enterprise reporting tools as part of this procurement.

d. Please describe any AI/ML tools Proposer intends to use in the integration…