SharePoint File Migration Project Request For Information FINAL 6-1-26~1.pdf

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI)

SharePoint File Migration Project

Oregon Department of Justice (DOJ)

1. INTRODUCTION

The Oregon Department of Justice (DOJ) is requesting information from qualified vendors regarding tools, services, and implementation approaches to support DOJ’s transition from its current content repositories—including Alfresco and various shared drives—to Microsoft SharePoint Online in the Microsoft 365 Government Community Cloud (GCC). This effort is part of the statewide move toward a unified enterprise content management (ECM) system aligned with DOJ’s Cloud First strategy and the Legal Tools Program (LTP) roadmap.

This RFI is for information-gathering purposes only. It is not a solicitation and does not obligate DOJ to issue a future competitive procurement. Responses are voluntary, non‑binding, and will not be used to award a contract or prequalify any vendor. DOJ may use information received to inform the development of a future procurement.

2. BACKGROUND

DOJ stores decades of content across Alfresco, network drives, and existing SharePoint Online sites. These systems lack consistent governance, metadata, classification, retention alignment, and modern search capabilities. DOJ is planning to migrate all non-legal and administrative content into newly designed SharePoint Online sites that will conform to agency requirements for governance, retention, metadata standards, and access controls.

As part of this project, DOJ will also support the migration of legal case-related content into the new case management system being implemented by the Legal Tools Program. That system will utilize SharePoint for file storage, but the site/folder structure will be managed by the model-driven Power App, so the legal content may have a different migration path depending on the selected tools. Currently, that content migration is planned to be addressed under a separate effort, but there is a possibility for it to be combined with this project

DOJ’s existing data storage and retrieval environment presents the following challenges:

• ECM and data governance is limited or non-existent (data governance is being developed under a separate effort)

• Limited search and retrieval functionality

• Lack of standardized metadata

• Fragmented repositories and inconsistent access controls

• Difficulty identifying document ownership and retention requirements

• User frustration and workflow inefficiencies

A modern, unified SharePoint Online environment will be required to meet DOJ’s long-term operational needs, governance expectations, and integration dependencies with the Legal Tools upcoming Dynamics 365-based case and matter management system, JusticeNexus.

DOJ operates primarily in Pacific Time and will require services to be provided during Pacific Time business hours as needed.

3. RFI PURPOSE & OBJECTIVES

Through this RFI, DOJ seeks to gain an understanding of:

• Available migration tools and related services that support large-scale Alfresco and network-shared drive migrations

• Available services for analysis of existing data, identification of data cleansing approaches and options, estimating which data can and cannot be successfully migrated, and developing strategies for managing data that cannot be successfully migrated

• Vendor best practices for governance, metadata modeling, taxonomy, retention, SharePoint Online architecture, and permissions design

• Migration methodologies that minimize downtime and risk o Some groups within the agency are 24x7 operations and may need a specialized approach for migration and cutover

• Integration approaches ensuring alignment with LTP and JusticeNexus requirements

• Organizational Change Management (OCM) approaches for adoption and training strategies including both end users and technical/administrative staff

• Knowledge transfer for technical, administrative, and security staff to ensure ongoing SharePoint (SP) administration and support, including training approaches for system administrators and end users

• Pricing models for tools and professional services

• Vendor capacity and experience conducting enterprise-scale migrations

Responses should describe vendor capabilities, tools, and typical approaches. Respondents are not expected to provide detailed designs, binding commitments, or final pricing.

4. PROJECT OVERVIEW

4.1 Project Vision

The SharePoint File Migration Project aims to establish a unified, sustainable content management environment for DOJ by:

• Architecting and implementing SharePoint Online sites and hub sites with enterprise standards for document libraries, metadata, folder structures, etc.

• Replacing Alfresco with SharePoint Online as the ECM system

• Migrating all non-case and administrative content across DOJ divisions into

SharePoint Online

• Preparing the environment required for LTP’s legal case document migration into the

JusticeNexus-connected SharePoint space and assisting with the migration of legal case-related documents into SharePoint

• Implementing enterprise metadata, taxonomy, governance, and retention models

• Ensuring durable alignment with DOJ’s cloud-first strategy and enterprise information governance policies and standards

4.2 Anticipated Scope of Work

In Scope The project scope includes:

• Establishing a target operating model for SharePoint Online as an Enterprise Content Management system

• Implementing enterprise data governance by establishing metadata models, taxonomy, and retention standards

• Designing and configuring SharePoint Online architecture

• Establishing requirements for DOJ’s document staging environment and configuration of that environment in preparation for migration activities

• Migrating content from Alfresco and additional select document storage systems to

SharePoint Online

• Migrating non-case and administrative documents across all DOJ divisions

• Moving/updating content from existing SharePoint libraries into the new structure

• Integrating certain Alfresco Supplementary Systems not covered by Legal Tools

• Procuring migration tools and professional services to support these activities

Out of Scope

• Migration of existing Microsoft Teams-connected SharePoint sites beyond implementing tenant level content management policies

• Migration from systems predating Alfresco

• Ongoing post-project operational support

5. INFORMATION REQUESTED FROM VENDORS

Vendors are requested to provide complete responses to each category below. Responses should be included directly in the submitted RFI package and organized using the section numbering provided here.

DOJ is also interested in recommendations based on your experience with similar organizations undertaking similar efforts.

5.1 COMPANY BACKGROUND

Please provide:

• Company name, size, and years in operation

• Public or private status

• Office locations

• Statement and related information whether vendor would be able and willing to provide engagement resources that are US-based (CONUS) and have passed applicable background checks if DOJ elects to proceed with a procurement opportunity

• Statement and related information about whether vendor would be able and willing to provide project staff that are available to collaborate and conduct project activities during Pacific Time business hours, as needed by DOJ

• Experience with Microsoft 365 GCC, SharePoint Online, Alfresco migrations, largescale public sector engagements, and legal sector clients

• A summary of current public sector clients

• A description of your most recent successful implementation for a public sector legal organization, including scope and outcomes

• Primary point of contact (name, title, email, phone)

• Identification of any subcontractors or teaming partners that vendor would typically utilize for this type of engagement

5.2 TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES

Migration Tool Capabilities Provide a description of your proposed migration tooling and its capabilities, including:

• Proposed migration tool(s) and the rationale applied for selecting the migration tool(s)

• Ability to migrate from Alfresco, Windows file servers, and legacy SharePoint Online environments

• Capacity to support large datasets (e.g., 60TB+, 10M+ files, large/complex directory structures, >250MB files)

• Preservation of metadata, timestamps, permissions, and version history

• Ability to detect and remediate corrupted or problematic content

• Duplicate detection and automated de-duplication rules

• Delta migration capability and throttling/performance controls

• Automation or scripting options for wave-based migration

• Error reporting, dashboards, and migration validation outputs

Metadata, Taxonomy, & Retention Describe your approach to:

• Mapping metadata from Alfresco and file servers to SharePoint metadata fields

• Implementing DOJ-required metadata, taxonomy, labeling, and retention models

• Using Microsoft Purview for auto-classification, sensitivity labels, data protection, data governance/management, and compliance capabilities

• Bulk metadata operations and data quality validation

Permissions & Security (Tool-Related) Provide information about:

• Permission model migration and/or redesign

• Support for RBAC, Entra ID, MFA, conditional access, and GCC security requirements

• Prevention of privilege escalation during permissions mapping

• Chain-of-custody auditing and logging capabilities

SharePoint Architecture & Optimization Describe:

• Your approach for analyzing DOJ’s needs, identifying options, and recommending a SharePoint Online architecture for DOJ (site/hub structure, library models, metadata approach, permission model, governance alignment)

• Your approach to post-migration search optimization, including search schema, metadata, and user experience improvements

• Relevant enterprise standards your team applies (e.g., ITIL, COBIT)

5.3 MIGRATION APPROACH & PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Pre-Migration Activities

• Describe your pre-migration analysis and inventory processes, including content discovery, ROT analysis, metadata review, and permission mapping

• Identify DOJ responsibilities or prerequisites required before migration begins

Test Migration & Validation

• Explain your test migration process, sampling strategy, validation criteria, and how defects or inconsistencies are addressed

• Describe how test results influence production migration planning

Migration Execution

• Provide a detailed description of your migration methodology and anticipated timeline (phased, iterative, or cutover-based)

• Explain your approach to delta migration and handling content added or modified during migration windows

• Describe how your approach differentiates between case-related and non-case content

• Identify risks and describe mitigation strategies for metadata loss, permission issues, downtime, or tooling limitations

High-Level Schedule & Timeline Estimates To support DOJ’s planning and sequencing across multiple divisions, respondents are asked to provide high-level, nonbinding, estimated timelines for a project of this scale. Please include:

• Estimated duration for each major phase, such as:

o Design / Discovery o Configuration / Build o Test Migration / Validation o Production Migration (including migration waves if applicable) o Cutover o Post-migration Stabilization

• Key assumptions used to develop these estimates, including:

o Size and complexity of the dataset (e.g., 60 TB+, millions of documents, deeply nested structures) o Number of DOJ divisions (11 divisions of varying size and complexity) included in the migration o Expected number of migration waves or sequencing considerations o Dependencies that typically influence the duration of each phase

• Factors that may shorten or extend the project timeline, informed by your experience with similar large-scale public sector migrations

Respondents may provide sample or anonymized timelines from comparable projects to illustrate typical ranges.

Cutover & Operational Continuity

• Describe how cutovers could be managed to minimize operational disruption, including typical options that DOJ might decide between

• Outline communication plans, freeze windows, and user-impact reduction strategies

• Provide details on rollback and recovery procedures if content does not pass validation

Engagement Model & Resourcing

• Describe your available engagement model(s) (onsite/offsite/hybrid) and benefits of each possible model

• Describe options related to staffing expectations for both vendor and DOJ personnel and the cost implications of each option

• Please provide information regarding DOJ timelines and typical expectations, including identification of any Legal Tools Program dependencies

5.4 GOVERNANCE, COMPLIANCE & SECURITY

Describe how your governance and security approach could support DOJ requirements for SharePoint Online in the GCC environment.

Governance & Compliance Describe your experience and approach related to:

• Implementing enterprise content governance, metadata models, taxonomy structures, and retention schedules

• Supporting DOJ’s metadata, taxonomy, and retention requirements

• Using Microsoft Purview for classification, labeling, DLP, auditing, and sensitive data governance

• Operating within Microsoft 365 GCC and complying with applicable standards

(FedRAMP, NIST 800-53, CJIS, IRS Pub 1075, HIPAA, FERPA, ADA/508)

Secure Data Transfer & Migration Controls Explain:

• How data will be securely transferred from Alfresco and file servers to SharePoint Online

• Controls preventing unauthorized access to migration endpoints and staging environments

• Chain-of-custody processes and audit logging standards across the migration lifecycle

Post-Migration Security Validation Describe:

• How validation will ensure migrated content meets DOJ cybersecurity requirements

• How permission models will be validated or redesigned

• How RBAC, MFA, conditional access, PIM, and other GCC-aligned controls will be applied or supported

Residency & Data Location Requirements Statement and related information regarding vendor’s ability and willingness to meet DOJ needs regarding:

• All vendor personnel performing work are US-based (CONUS) and have passed criminal background checks

• DOJ data will not be accessed, transferred, or stored outside the US under any circumstances

5.5 ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE MANAGEMENT (OCM) & TRAINING

Based on stakeholder feedback and known pain points with Alfresco adoption, DOJ requires strong OCM capability. DOJ is interested in recommendations and information on the following:

Readiness Assessment

• Describe your approach to assessing readiness for both end users and technical/security staff

OCM & Adoption Strategy

• Provide your recommended strategy for end user adoption, communication, engagement, coaching, and reinforcement

• Describe approaches to minimizing change fatigue for divisions impacted by both the Legal Tools Program and SharePoint migration

Training & Knowledge Transfer

• Describe your recommended training strategy for IS technical staff, including SharePoint and Purview administration

• Describe your recommended knowledge transfer plan to ensure self-sufficiency after project completion

5.6 PRICING STRUCTURE

To assist DOJ in understanding the anticipated cost components and possible options associated with this type of migration effort, vendors are asked to provide informational, non-binding estimates across the categories described in this section.

Due to the sensitive nature of DOJ content and the variety of environments involved in the migration effort, vendors may not be granted direct access to certain DOJ systems or production environments. In such cases, production migration activities may need to be performed by DOJ personnel using DOJ controlled identities and processes.

Therefore, respondents are requested to provide:

1. A high-level cost estimate based on your standard delivery model, assuming vendor executed migration activities; and

2. An estimated additional cost range reflecting the effort required to support a DOJ executed production migration, including any advisory support, runbook development, tooling configuration, validation guidance, or other accommodations needed if DOJ personnel perform production execution steps

Professional Services (Phase-Level Estimates) For professional services, please provide high-level, phase-based estimates reflecting how you would typically structure work of this nature. At a minimum, break out estimates for the following phases:

• Design / Discovery

• Configuration / Build

• Migration & Validation

• Cutover Support

• Post-migration Stabilization

For each phase, vendors may describe (at a summary level):

• The types of roles typically involved

• Typical effort ranges (e.g., hours or level of effort)

• Any core assumptions or cost drivers that influence the estimate

Additional Information Vendors may also provide:

• Optional services that may impact cost

• Key dependencies that could alter pricing

• Any pricing models or tiering commonly used for projects of similar scale

6. SUBMISSION FORMAT & INSTRUCTIONS

6.1 Submission Requirements

Respondents must provide an electronic submission (PDF preferred) that includes clear and complete responses to all information requested in Section 5 – Information Requested from Vendors. Responses must be organized using the same section numbering and structure provided in Section 5 to ensure consistency and ease of review.

Each submission must include:

• Executive Summary

• Company Background (as outlined in Section 5.1)

• Technical Capabilities (as outlined in Section 5.2)

• Migration Approach & Project Management (as outlined in Section 5.3)

• Governance, Compliance & Security (as outlined in Section 5.4)

• Organizational Change Management (OCM) & Training (as outlined in Section 5.5)

• Pricing Structure — high-level, nonbinding estimates as described in Section 5.6

• Optional Appendices, such as diagrams, case studies, whitepapers, or supporting materials that provide additional context for DOJ’s understanding

6.2 RFI Submission

Please submit the response to this RFI by June 15, 2026 at 5PM PDT. All submissions related to this RFI should be submitted via OregonBuys and e-mailed directly to the SharePoint File Migration team via e-mail at Lowell.s.elliott@doj.oregon.gov.

All responses should be submitted in a searchable PDF format.

6.3 Questions for DOJ

Respondents may submit clarifying questions to DOJ via email at Lowell.s.elliott@doj.oregon.gov until the deadline listed below.

6.4 Estimated Schedule

Final dates will be determined prior to any procurement.

• RFI Issued: 6/1/26 4:30PM PDT

• Vendor Questions Due: 6/8/26 5PM PDT

• DOJ Responses to Questions: 6/10/26 5PM PDT

• Vendor Submissions Due: 6/15/26 5PM PDT

7. OPTIONAL MATERIALS (as appropriate) Respondents may optionally include supplemental materials (e.g., brochures, product information) that help illustrate capabilities relevant to this RFI.

8. DISCLAIMER

This RFI is issued solely for information and planning purposes and does not constitute a solicitation. Submissions to this notice are voluntary, do not constitute offers and will not be accepted by DOJ to form a binding contract. Respondents are solely responsible for all expenses associated with their response and associated travel or other presentation expenses, as applicable, to this RFI. DOJ may use information obtained from this RFI to develop future procurement strategies.

9. PUBLIC RECORD/CONFIDENTIAL OR PROPRIETARY

INFORMATION

All submissions are public record and are subject to public inspection. If a Respondent believes that any portion of its submission contains any information that is a trade secret that is exempt from disclosure under ORS Chapter 192.345(2) or otherwise is exempt from disclosure under the Oregon Public Records Law (ORS 192.311 through 192.478), the Respondent must complete and submit the Exemption from Disclosure Affidavit (Attachment A) and also submit a fully redacted version of its response. Respondents are cautioned that cost information generally is not considered a trade secret under Oregon Public Records Law (ORS 192.311 through 192.478) and identifying the submissions, in whole, as exempt from disclosure in not acceptable. DOJ advises each respondent to consult with its own legal counsel regarding disclosure issues. If the Respondent fails to identify the portions of the submission that the respondent claims are exempt from disclosure, the Respondent has waived any future claim of non-disclosure of that information.

Attachment A – Exemption from Disclosure Affidavit

____________________ (Affiant), being first duly sworn under oath, and representing [insert Respondent Name] (hereafter “Respondent”), hereby deposes and swears or affirms under penalty of perjury that:

1. I am an employee of the Respondent, I have knowledge of the Request for Information referenced herein, and I have full authority from the Respondent to submit this affidavit and accept the responsibilities stated herein.

2. I am aware that the Respondent has submitted a submission, dated on or about [insert date] (the “Submission”), to the State of Oregon (State) in response to Request for Information, for End-to-End eProcurement Solution and I am familiar with the contents of the RFI and Submission.

3. I have read and am familiar with the provisions of Oregon’s Public Records Law, Oregon Revised Statutes (“ORS”) 192.311 through 192.478, and the Uniform Trade Secrets Act as adopted by the State of Oregon, which is set forth in ORS 646.461 through ORS 646.475. I understand that the Submission is a public record held by a public body and is subject to disclosure under the Oregon Public Records Law unless specifically exempt from disclosure under that law.

4. I have reviewed the information contained in the Submission. The Respondent believes the information listed in Exhibit A is exempt from public disclosure (collectively, the “Exempt Information”), which is incorporated herein by this reference. It is my opinion that the Exempt Information constitutes “Trade Secrets” under either the Oregon Public Records Law or the Uniform Trade Secrets Act as adopted in Oregon because that information is either:

a. A formula, plan, pattern, process, tool, mechanism, compound, procedure, production data, or compilation of information that:

i. is not patented,

ii. is known only to certain individuals within the Respondent’s organization and that is used in a business the Respondent conducts,

iii. has actual or potential commercial value, and

iv. gives its user an opportunity to obtain a business advantage over competitors who do not know or use it.

or

b. Information, including a drawing, cost data, customer list, formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process that:

i. Derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to the public or to other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; and

ii. Is the subject of efforts by the Respondent that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.

5. I understand that disclosure of the information referenced in Exhibit A may depend on official or judicial determinations made in accordance with the Public Records Law.

Affiant’s Signature

State of ___________)

County of ________)

Signed and sworn to before me on ___________ (date) by ______________________ (Affiant’s name).

Notary Public for the State of _________________

My Commission Expires: _________

Exhibit A to Attachment A Respondent identifies the following information as exempt from public disclosure and sets for the applicable statutory reference: