S-12300-00009416_C2023011_EDMS_RFP_Addendum_3.pdf

Addendum #3 to Oregon Business Development Department RFP No. S-12300-00009416 “Economic Development Management System”

The Oregon Business Development Department (“Business Oregon” or “Agency”) has received numerous questions regarding the requested services, and we wish to provide responses to the questions received. None of the answers modify or add to the directions in the RFP document but provide useful information for drafting a proposal.

Questions and Answers to additional questions received between March 1st and the Due Date for Questions/Requests for Clarifications/Exceptions at 12 PM on March 11, 2024:

Q1. Would Oregon consider pushing the deadline further to ensure we can provide you with compelling solutions?

A1. Please see Addendum 2.

Q2. Does Oregon have a budget or budgetary constraint we should know about?

A2. Please see answer A10 on Addendum 1.

Q3. For section 3.3.5, can you clarify on what section of the quote would you like the price proposal to be uploaded in?

A3. Section 3.3.5 is pertaining to the Proposer Information and Certification Sheet (RFP Attachment C). Please refer to RFP Section 3.2.3 Proposal Format and Quantity for information regarding the price proposal.

Q4. Section 2.4.1 is it another solution we could bid on its own? Please clarify and could you please extend the deadline to ensure we can create a compelling proposal.

A4. Please see answer A11 on Addendum 1.

Q5. For section 3.1.2, does the company have to include any information to respond to this in the bid? Additionally, does Oregon require the proposing company to register with the Oregon Secretary of State before or after submitting a proposal?

A5. Please refer to section 3.1.2 (page 10) of the RFP.

Q6. Section 4.5 detailed instructions on how to submit. a) Provide instructions on how to submit several quotes or if only one quote is needed to submit for the solutions we will be submitting proposal for (outlined section 2.4). Can you specify how to respond to this solicitation for several proposed solutions on Oregon Buy. b) Please clarify how you would like us to respond to each of Section 2.4 (all solutions) with a detailed guide and checklist for each proposed solution on Oregon Buys. Would you like us to create a separate quote for each solution we propose on Oregon buys? c) Where would you like us to upload the response flies within each quote? Clarifying this portion would be very helpful for us to respond.

A6. a) One quote containing details for all components being proposed. Also, please see answer A7 on Addendum 1.

b) Please see page 2 of Addendum 1 and refer to details provided in section 3.2.2 and 3.3.1 for how to respond.

c) All response files must be uploaded to OregonBuys. Proposer should follow the procedures outlined in OregonBuys Vendor Formal Solicitation Response.pdf for electronic submission. Proposer should follow the procedures outlined in OregonBuys Vendor Formal Solicitation Response.pdf for electronic submission.

Q7. Pg. 8, Section 2.4, Para. 5. External Facing Portal Component: Are you looking for all 80 programs listed on your website (Business Oregon : Programs : Programs : State of Oregon) to be housed in the external-facing portal?

A7. No. The program content and information will remain on our website. Application forms for our programs will be housed in the portal and one way our customers could access those applications would be by following a link from our website to a specific form.

Q8. Pg. 8, Section 2.4, Para. 5. External Facing Portal Component: Do you want a separate application for each of the 80 programs listed on the Business Oregon website?

A8. There will be application forms, as well as other forms, accessible from the portal.

Q9. Pg. 6, Section. 2.3.2: Do any of these applications require external data or calculations? If so, what data/calculations?

A9. Yes, some applications may entail calculations, such as generating a total budget amount in a budget table. More detail will be provided during implementation.

Q10. Pg. 6, Section. 2.3.2: It appears that the external portal is focusing primarily on the application submission - is that all you're looking for, or would you also like the system to have grant/project management features around the cases associated with the application: for example, after application is submitted, do you want the system to create a case around the application, allow for review, task/workflow list, accomplishment reporting/tracking, funding/budget tracking, or the ability to communicate back and forth with stakeholders?

A10. As stated in 2.4, fourth paragraph, this project includes implementing automated workflows that track and document the progression of work with a specific customer or project in a transparent and organized fashion. The objective is to use the EDMS to track the status of a project, trigger the next action item to be performed, request and document needed approvals, and automatically report on the process. A successful implementation will provide visibility to both the external customers and internal staff as to the progression of the work. We also expect communication capabilities as outlined in Requirement 6.3.2.

Q11. Pg. 13, Section 3.3.4: How many administrative (internal to Business Oregon) users would be involved in managing applications and workflows?

A11. Up to six employees.

Q12. Questions for Section 2.4 Scope of Work/Specifications:

a) Does the State of Oregon have any preferred cloud (Azure, AWS, GCP) or integration (Boomi, Trey.io) vendors?

b) Will any systems not named in the RFP be added to the integration system?

c) Does the State of Oregon anticipate that data will move in real-time or batched?

d) Do legacy systems that data will be imported from have development and UAT environments? If so, do those environments include data that is anonymized and de-identified?

e) Can a proposer solely bid on section 2.4.1 Implementation and Integration?

A12. a) We do not have preferred vendors.

b) Not at this time. We are looking to create a system that can change with our needs, so in the future, yes.

c) Real time.

d) No.

e) Please see answer A11 on Addendum 1.

Q13. Attachment H - Across multiple integration requirements - Does Business Oregon already have an integration middleware (bus) that we would be asked to use to connect with the state financial system and other parties?

A13. For State Financial Management Application (SFMA) integration details, please visit https://www.oregon.gov/das/Financial/AcctgSys/Documents/Interface-Testing- Requirements-and-Procedures.pdf

Q14. Sample Contract - Is Business Oregon willing to enter a Professional Services Agreement for those parties that are solely bidding the implementation partner aspect?

A14. Business Oregon will not be entering into agreements with implementation vendors as a result of this solicitation since integration is not within the scope of this RFP.

Proposers for each component will be expected to implement their product under the sample contract, which covers professional services for such component implementation.

Q15. Contract Management tab of Attachment H - Please clarify the use of "Requests." Does each contract with each customer initiate a request or are contract templates generated from requests that can then be used for multiple customers?

A15. A single request may result in a contract and as stated on Page 8 of the RFP there are approximately 100 different templates to be used in the creation of the requester’s document.

Q16. Attachment J -Integration Experience & Attachment D -Reference Check Form -

Attachment J requests customer information and Attachment D requests reference contact https://www.oregon.gov/das/Financial/AcctgSys/Documents/Interface-Testing-Requirements-and-Procedures.pdf https://www.oregon.gov/das/Financial/AcctgSys/Documents/Interface-Testing-Requirements-and-Procedures.pdf information. For some customers we list in Attachment J, can we omit the contact information but still list the integration experience information?

A16. Please see answer A8 on Addendum 1.

Q17. Attachment D -Reference Check Form - Would Business Oregon be open to having reference forms filled out by references upon down-selection, since that is typically the timing for requests of this type?

A17. Proposers may have their references complete Attachment D. References are a required submission for Round 1, as set forth in Section 3.2.1 of the RFP.

Q18. RFP Section 2.4 Scope of Work/Specifications ‘This includes interfaces with internal

Agency systems (e.g., Salesforce (system of record for all organization and contact information for customers, partners, and contacts), Active Directory, M365 software), as well as external systems operated by partner agencies (e.g., SFMA (state's financial system of record)).’

a) What is the total number of applications that would integrate with the proposed solution?

b) Are there any additional systems not mentioned here that Business Oregon requires the

EDMS solution to be integrated with?

c) What level of integration will these systems support (API, Web Service, SOAP, etc.…)?

d) Is Business Oregon seeking an API-lead approach for all external systems that need to integrate with the proposed solution?

e) Are these one-way or bi-directional interfaces?

f) Is there a need for real-time and batched integrations?

g) What are the approximate numbers of transactions per minute for the investment management portion?

A18. a) 4 existing “must have”, 3 existing “nice to have”, plus those resulting from this

RFP. Refer to Attachment H-EDMS Requirements, 1.3.2 ALL Solutions and 5.2.3 Donor Management.

b) Please see answer A12 b) above

c) In general, API. Specifically, for active directory (ADFS), M365 (Single Sign-on), and Salesforce (Rest API).

d) Unknown at this time.

e) Both one-way and bi-directional interfaces are needed.

f) Both are needed

g) Unknown at this time due to the current manual process.

Q19. Attachment H-EDMS Requirements – Tab: Donor Management – ‘System may integrate with US Bank and NIC USA…’ Question: Is Business Oregon asking for these two integrations to be a part of the proposed solution?

A19. As stated in Requirement 5.2.3, this is a ‘nice to have’ priority. We plan to continue utilizing the services of US Bank and NIC USA for transaction processing.

Q20. Can Business Oregon please confirm the DocuSign products you currently have?

DocuSign E-Signature? DocuSign CLM?

A20. DocuSign E-Signature

Q21. Can Business Oregon clarify the overlap in users across the five different scope components?

A21. Individual user capabilities will be defined and controlled through security roles or groups as outlined in Attachment H-EDMS Requirements, 1.1.4 All Solutions.

Q22. "Support multi-tenancy capabilities" (Section: Technical Requirements) - How do you envision implementing multi-tenancy within the EDMS? Is there a preference for complete data isolation between tenants through separate database instances, or would a shared database architecture that employs row-level security to ensure data privacy among different program areas be considered adequate?

A22. As stated in Attachment H-EDMS Requirements, 1.1.4 All Solutions, we are looking for field-level permissions provisioned via security roles or groups. We prefer a shared database architecture.

Q23. "Create a single master Data Dictionary" (Scope of Work) - Could you detail the envisioned structure and essential elements of the single master Data Dictionary for the EDMS, particularly how it's designed to enhance data governance and ensure consistency across various data types and sources within the system? What guidelines or standards are expected for defining and maintaining this Data Dictionary to support effective data management and interoperability across the EDMS components and with external systems?

A23. All field names (and labels) and their type (alpha numeric, drop down, etc);

definition and use, data entry rules; dependencies and connections. Once operational, Business Oregon’s data governance team and data stewards will be responsible for maintaining the dictionary, ensuring that data entry rules are followed, and undertake activities to maintain consistency. The IT Team will use it to ensure interoperability, set up of initial reports through PowerBI, and ongoing system maintenance.

Q24. "Capability for tracking investment performance and compliance" (Scope of Work) - For the EDMS's investment tracking and compliance capabilities, is there a preference for integrating with established investment tracking or compliance monitoring platforms, or do you seek built-in functionalities to manage these aspects directly within the system?

How should the system align with specific regulatory requirements or industry standards to ensure comprehensive oversight of investment performance and adherence to compliance mandates?

A24. The preference would be for a solution to include built-in functionalities to manage private market investment tracking, performance measurement, and compliance monitoring. The system should adhere to industry standards and have the flexibility to incorporate additional state and federal regulatory requirements as needed.

Q25. "Record and track donation details and campaigns" (Scope of Work) - In the donor management component of the EDMS are there particular features such as donor segmentation, campaign performance analytics, or integration with third-party fundraising platforms that are considered critical for enhancing campaign management and engaging with donors effectively?

A25. Nothing in addition to the requirements listed in Attachment H-EDMS Requirements, Donor Management tab.

Q26. RFP Reference: "Present forms to external partners and customers for an online interactive process" (Scope of Work) - Does Business Oregon have specific requirements or standards for the user experience and accessibility of online forms and interactions within the external facing portal, especially in terms of ADA compliance and mobile responsiveness?

A26. Yes. Please refer to Requirements 1.2.1 through 1.2.4.

Q27. Additional Features: While the RFP provides a comprehensive outline of current requirements, it does not specifically mention the exploration of some features that are covered in our existing “Intelligent DEVELOPMENT and MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Dashboard.” Given the potential of these futuristic features to transform experiences, would the EDMS be interested in reviewing the capabilities of our system? If yes, may we include them in our proposal by adding an additional/optional section in the proposal submission?

A27. Business Oregon is interested in how products and services meet the requirements outlined in the RFP. However, if a proposed solution contains features and functions that the Proposer sees as a natural ‘next step’ for this project in the future, this information may be included in the response but must be within the stated page count.

Q28. Could you please specify the budget allocated for this project?

A28. Please see answer A10 on Addendum 1.

Q29. Can we assume that the upgrade is on existing infrastructure or proposed to be done in a new environment?

A29. A new environment.

Q30. Are you looking for readily available solution?

A30. Please see answer A13 on Addendum 1.

Q31. Can you provide insights into how the evaluation criteria, such as responsiveness, experience, and cost, are weighted in the overall assessment process?

A31. Please see section 4.10.2 Evaluation Criteria explanation table (page 18 of the RFP) and section 4.11 Round 1 Point and Score Calculations (page 20 of the RFP).

Q32. Are there any specific expectations for the number and types of references that vendors should provide to demonstrate their experience and qualifications?

A32. Please refer to section 3.3.2 Experience (page 12) of the RFP.

Q33. Is there room for negotiation or adjustments in the contract terms, particularly concerning the contract period and associated costs?

A33. Please refer to section 5.4 Contract Negotiation (page 24) of the RFP.

Q34. Are subcontracting proposals permissible for this project?

A34. Proposers may form partnerships to designate a subcontractor to provide one aspect of the scope of work (Prime provides SaaS product or products and subcontractor provides services, for example). Agency expects a primary contract for any partnership arrangement. Proposal shall identify all subcontractors providing the products and services set forth in the Scope of Work of the RFP.

Q35. Do you require resumes for key personnel involved in the project? If so, could you please outline the specified limit for the number of resumes and the page limit per resume?

A35. Please see section 3.3.7 Key Persons and their Resumes (page 14) of the RFP.

Q36. Is dedicated support during specific working hours necessary, or is 24/7 support expected?

A36. This will be determined during contract negotiations.

Q37. Does the budget encompass support costs?

A37. Yes.

Q38. Is the upgrade intended for existing infrastructure, or is it proposed to be implemented in a new environment?

A38. Please see A29 above.

Q39. What specific functionalities and features are considered indispensable? Are there any priority areas within the scope?

A39. All requirements listed Attachment H-EDMS Requirements with a priority of “must have” are considered indispensable. Since the new solution being sought from this RFP will replace three existing components, priority may be specific should one or more of those components become unavailable or nonfunctional before project implementation.

Q40. Is there a prescribed response template for the proposal submission?

A40. Please see section 3.2.3 Proposal Format and Quantity (page 11) of the RFP.

Q41. Are you seeking a solution readily available, or is customization expected? COTS?

A41. Please see answer A13 on Addendum 1.

Q42. Could you provide insights into how the evaluation criteria, such as responsiveness, experience, and cost, are weighted in the overall assessment process?

A42. Please see section 4.10.2 Evaluation Criteria explanation table (page 18 of the RFP) and section 4.11 Round 1 Point and Score Calculations (page 20 of the RFP).

Q43. Will preference be given to state-certified small businesses, women-owned, veteran-owned, or minority-owned enterprises?

A43. Please see section 6.1 and 6.2 (page 25) of the RFP.

Thank you for your continued efforts and interest.