The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
SOLICITATION ADDENDUM TWO
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
SOLICITATION NUMBER: 122777 O5
Network Manager Services Opening Date: October 23, 2025, 2pm CST Addendum Effective Date: September 10, 2025
Questions and Answers
The following are the questions submitted and answers provided for the above-mentioned solicitation. The questions and answers are to be considered as part of the solicitation. It is the responsibility of bidders to check the State Purchasing Bureau website for all addenda or amendments.
| Question Number |
| RFP Section |
Reference
RFP
Page Number
| 1. |
| V.K – Technical Overview |
| 35 |
| Does the State have a preferred cloud hosting vendor (e.g., Google Cloud, AWS, Azure), or should the proposer recommend the best fit? |
| No, there is not a preferred cloud hosting vendor. However, all cloud hosting must be in compliance with NITC Standards, OCIO policies, and any other requirements applicable to the data being hosted. Bidder should describe bidder’s plan for meeting the Technical Overview requirements in RTM 15. |
| 2. |
| V.C – Current Portal Operations and Environment |
| 26 |
| Please confirm the size of data (volume and formats) expected to be migrated from existing systems into the new solution. |
| Appendices A and B contain a list of all current portal websites and applications. The selected Vendor should anticipate providing, supporting, maintaining, and hosting these services and migrating data necessary to continue maintaining the website or application. Exact volume and format of data are not available at this time. |
| 3. |
| V.D – Current Financing Model |
| 27 |
| Is a combination of onshore and offshore staffing acceptable for implementation and support activities? |
| No. See V.F.3. The Network Manager and any subcontractors will perform all work under the Contract in the United States. It is preferred that the Network Manager have personnel located in Lincoln, Nebraska. |
| 4. |
| V.C – Current Portal Operations and Environment |
| 26 |
| Can you provide an estimate of the number of internal staff users and expected external/public users of the portal? |
| The incumbent Vendor reported 1.7 million Portal website page views, 21,000,000 transactions processed, and 942,380 users in 2024. |
Most services are public facing, but some have backend services for internal use. Any state agency, board or commission may participate in the Portal, along with local government entities.
| 5. |
| V.K – Technical Overview |
| 35 |
| Are there preferred integration methods or middleware tools that the State expects vendors to use when connecting with existing systems? |
| No, there are no preferred integration methods or middleware tools that the State expects vendors to use. Partners use a variety of software solutions and Systems. The selected Vendor must be flexible in offering integration methods and middleware tools that are compatible with Partner software and Systems, acceptable to the Partner, and in compliance with NITC Standards and OCIO policies. |
| 6. |
| III.P – Nebraska Technology Access Standards |
| 21 |
| Are there mandatory compliance standards, such as CJIS, NIST, or FedRAMP, that the solution must adhere to? |
| See V. K. 9. Data Security Requirements. |
Services are developed as requested by Partners. Partners may require compliance with standards applicable to the data or information received or processed. In addition, the NITC Standards reference and incorporate compliance standards. The selected Vendor will have to discuss these requirements with the relevant Partner on a project-by-project basis, and comply as specified by Partner.
| 7. |
| III.J – Insurance Requirements |
| 18 |
| Please confirm if cyber liability insurance is specifically required in addition to general liability and professional liability. |
| Yes, cyber liability insurance in the amount of $15,000,000 is required. |
| 8. |
| V.O – Transition Plan Requirements |
| 38 |
| What is the expected transition timeline with the incumbent vendor, and will there be a period of overlap? |
| There may be a period of overlap up to 30 months to transition websites and services. The actual transition period will depend upon the start date of the Contract, and will be specified by the NSRB. A new Vendor would not obtain the transactional revenue for a service until the service is transitioned to the new Vendor and live. |
| 9. |
| General |
| N/A |
| Is the current incumbent vendor eligible to rebid for this contract, and are there any identified issues or challenges with their performance? |
| The current incumbent Vendor may submit a response to the RFP. |
| 10. |
| General |
| N/A |
| Is there an estimated budget range or ceiling for this project that proposers should align with? |
| No. The Portal operates primarily using a self-funding model, without increasing the tax burden on the citizens of Nebraska. See Appendix C. for Network Revenue and Transactions. |
| 11. |
| V.M – Software Ownership and Licensing |
| 37 |
| Does the State require full ownership of custom-developed code, and how should third-party components be licensed? |
| As provided in V.M., the State will be entitled to a perpetual, nonexclusive, royalty-free right-to-use license to all software, documentation, interfaces, and source code utilized in operating the Portal. As noted in the RFP, there are exceptions outlined in the incumbent Vendor’s contract. Bidders may propose exceptions for review. |
| 12. |
| V.N – Escrow Requirements |
| 37 |
| Please clarify escrow deposit frequency, acceptable escrow agents, and release triggers (e.g., insolvency). |
| As provided in V.N., the escrow agent will be selected and mutually agreed upon by the Network Manager and the NSRB. A reliable, experienced third-party is expected, and factors like company size, location, time in business, security, and insurance coverage will be considered. |
The Network Manager must deliver to the agreed upon escrow agent, a copy of the source code, including any updates or changes, monthly during the term of Contract (or more frequently, following software updates or changes). Upon expiration or termination of the Contract, or in the event the Network Manager becomes unable to perform, a copy of the software, as it exists upon such date, will be delivered to the State from the escrow account within thirty (30) calendar days, using a method and form or format acceptable to the State.
| 13. |
| V.R – Penalty |
| 39 |
| Please confirm how uptime is measured and reported, and whether penalties are cumulative across applications. |
| Uptime statistics are measured and reported to the NSRB quarterly in the Management Report. |
The penalty addressed in V.R. is applied per occurrence, not per service, Application or website.
| 14. |
| VI.A – Solicitation Response Submission |
| 28 |
| Please confirm whether vendors must strictly adhere to the hourly rates provided in the RFP, or if we may propose our own rates that differ (including higher rates) in Attachment A |
| Vendors should provide their hourly rates for Portal time and materials projects on Form A.2. Bidder must list each role/title and provide an hourly rate. All travel expenses must be included in the rates. There is no guaranty on the number of hours that will be used under the Contract. |
| 15. |
| V.E – Infrastructure |
| 28 |
| Can you provide a high-level overview or inventory of the current IT infrastructure and systems in use? |
| Appendices A and B contain a list of all current portal websites and Applications. The selected Vendor should anticipate providing, supporting, maintaining, and hosting these services. Websites are currently hosted using Pantheon. Applications are currently hosted either in a cloud environment or two geographically separate Tier IV datacenters with failover options. Please see V.K. |
Application development needs of Partners may involve using a variety of programming languages, including but not limited to Perl, Apache Groovy, PHP, JAVA, .NET, and COBOL, along with Mainframe web services, and Application Programming Interface (API) calls and communication.
| 16. |
| V.A – Background / Overview |
| 25 |
| What are the key IT challenges or pain points the State currently faces? |
| The term of the incumbent Network Manager’s contract continues through March 30, 2026, with an option to extend. The NSRB is responsible for contracting with a Network Manager to implement, operate, and expand the State’s online information Portal and do so without increasing the tax burden to the citizens of Nebraska. The Network Manager will work with Partners to determine what services are needed and propose solutions within the scope of the Network Manager’s contract. |
| 17. |
| V.H – Performance and Strategic Planning |
| 32 |
| What is the expected level of budget detail in the strategic plan (e.g., ballpark figures or detailed cost modeling)? |
| Please review Section V.G. Business Plan, which provides for the inclusion of a financial plan, including estimated revenues and expense projections, and a summary of any changes or updates to accounting practices and electronic payment functions. |
Please also review V.E.3.k.
| 18. |
| V.H – Performance and Strategic Planning |
| 32 |
| Are there existing performance indicators used by the State that we should align with? |
| The NSRB provides oversight of the Portal, including Network Manager performance. Network Manager performance is evaluated based upon the entirety of the Network Manager’s responsibilities, including, but not limited to: Partner and User satisfaction, uptime requirements, fulfilling operation plans in the Network Manager’s business plan required by Section V.G., and completing projects within established timelines, as prioritized and approved by the NSRB, and compliance with NITC Standards. |
| 19. |
| F. Staffing Requirements, Item #3 |
| 32 |
| The RFP states, “It is preferred that the Network Manager has personnel located in Lincoln, Nebraska.” Can you please clarify if there is a percent of the project staff or certain roles that you would prefer to be in Nebraska? Will this preference be given any weight in evaluation? |
| The Network Manager works closely with Partners, including regular in-person meetings to discuss project progress and Partner needs. The Network Manager also meets in-person regularly with the Executive Director of NSRB and attends all scheduled NSRB meetings. It is preferred that leadership and project management staff be present in Nebraska. Bidder’s response RTM 10 regarding V.F. Staffing Requirements will be scored in the evaluation process. |
| 20. |
| F. Staffing Requirements, Item #5 |
| 32 |
| Can the State clarify the conditions under which E-Verify is deemed “appropriate” for background checks of personnel or subcontractors? Are there specific roles or tasks that trigger this requirement? |
Please see Section III. C. Employee Work Eligibility Status regarding the applicability of E-Verify.
| 21. |
| I.H, Submission of Technical Response |
| 4 |
| Will the State provide an evaluation scoring matrix or weighting for the Corporate Overview and Technical Response? |
The Evaluation Criteria will be posted online after the solicitation opening.
| 22. |
| I.H, Submission of Technical Response |
| 4 |
| Is there a budget range or cap the State is allocating towards this project? |
| The Portal operates primarily using a self-funding model, without increasing the tax burden on the citizens of Nebraska. Partners, at their discretion, may use the Contract to request time and materials work at approved hourly rates. |
| 23. |
| V.D., Current Financing Model, 2 |
| 27-28 |
| Section V.D explains that Portal Fees can be either Margin or Non-Margin, with Margin fees split 80/20 between Network Manager and NSRB. Users usually pay the Portal Fee at checkout. Would the State prefer proposals that (a) remove citizen-paid Portal Fees for statutory licenses, registrations, and permits in favor of agency-funded, fixed per-transaction pricing approved by the NSRB, and (b) give positive consideration during evaluation to proposals that decrease or eliminate citizen-paid Portal Fees? |
| The NSRB is required to finance the operation and maintenance of the Portal from transaction revenue pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. §84-1205. Proposals should include a plan for operating within the current model. Bidders may also propose alternative solution(s) that comply with Neb. Rev. Stat. §84-1205 for review. |
| 24. |
| V.D., Current Financing Model, 2 |
| 27-28 |
| To advance the RFP’s self-funding goal without increasing the tax burden, would the State permit replacing most per-transaction Portal Fees for statutory services with an NSRB-approved fixed Platform Subscription covering shared services (hosting/CDN, CMS, identity, observability, accessibility audits, core DevOps), funded through existing mechanisms under NSRB authority (its 20% share, subscriptions, time-and-materials, and grants), subject to NSRB approval? |
| The NSRB is required to finance the operation and maintenance of the Portal from transaction revenue pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. §84-1205. Proposals should include a plan for operating within the current model. Bidders may also propose alternative solution(s) that comply with Neb. Rev. Stat. §84-1205 for review. |
| 25. |
| V.D., Current Financing Model, 2 |
| 27-28 |
| Please confirm that proposals may include either or both models (agency-funded fixed per-transaction and/or platform subscription) and that the State will consider them as long as NSRB’s oversight, fair, reasonable, and appropriate pricing criteria, and any statutory fee requirements are maintained. |
| The NSRB is required to finance the operation and maintenance of the Portal from transaction revenue pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. §84-1205. Proposals should include a plan for operating within the current model. Bidders may also propose alternative solution(s) that comply with Neb. Rev. Stat. §84-1205 for review. |
| 26. |
| V.D.4, V.J |
| Varies |
| What is the typical timeline and process for NSRB approval of new or adjusted Portal Fees? Are there specific criteria or thresholds (e.g., cost recovery, user impact) that the NSRB prioritizes when reviewing fee proposals? |
| See V. J. for the criteria the NSRB will use to evaluate Portal fees. Regarding the typical timeline, the Network Manager discusses the appropriate fee with the relevant Partner. The Network Manager and Partner representative attend the NSRB meeting to assist in presenting the proposed new or adjusted fee to the NSRB. The NSRB must approve the fee. The NSRB meets quarterly, unless there is no current business. |
| 27. |
| V.E.5.29-30 |
| Various |
| Does the requirement for a live help representative online “at any time day or night” (Section V.E.5.30) mandate 24/7 live support coverage, or is this limited to the 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM CT hours specified for telephone and chat support? |
| Yes. The Network Manager should provide online live support 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. |
| 28. |
| V.E.5.29-30 |
| Various |
| Can the State provide an estimate of the current or historical volume of User and Partner support inquiries (e.g., calls, emails, chats per month) to assist in planning help desk staffing and resources? |
| The incumbent Vendor reported an average of 2,680 monthly support inquiries. There may be filing times which impact the volume of support inquiries. |
| 29. |
| V.K.I |
| 35 |
| Can the State confirm whether the primary and secondary data centers classified as “Tier IV” must be owned and operated by the Network Manager, or can third-party hosting providers with Tier IV certification be utilized? |
| Third-party hosting providers with Tier IV certification may be permitted, if in compliance with NITC Standards and OCIO policies. |
| 30. |
| V.K (Technical Overview) and V.O (Data Security Requirements) |
Various How will the State evaluate compliance with standards with standards like PCI-DSS, HIPAA, and IRS Publication 1075 during the contract term? Are there specific certifications beyond PCI-DSS Attestation that are required?
The State will review data center comprehensive annual certifications, PCI-DSS Attestations of Compliance, and copies of audits that assess internal controls and data security safeguards. The NSRB or Partners may require additional documentation, audits or reviews to determine compliance.
| 31. |
| V.N. |
| Various |
| Does the State have any preferences or requirements regarding the type of escrow platform, file formats, or standards—such as the use of certain repositories or designated escrow agents—for depositing source code and related documentation? |
| As provided in V.N., the escrow agent will be selected and mutually agreed upon by the Network Manager and the NSRB. A reliable, experienced third-party is expected, and factors like company size, location, time in business, security, and insurance coverage will be considered. |
The Network Manager must deliver to the agreed upon escrow agent, a copy of the source code, including any updates or changes, monthly during the term of Contract or more frequently, following software updates or changes.
| 32. |
| Appendix A and Appendix B |
| n/a |
| Are there any planned changes to the services or websites listed in Appendices A and B that may affect solution design? |
| It is anticipated, though not guarantied, that Applications and websites in Appendices A and B will continue to be operated and managed through the Portal. New services are regularly added. In addition, Partners are consistently seeking to modernize services, and legislation may mandate changes. These changes can result in transition of services to a new vendor, transition to a new application or platform provided by the Network Manager, or a Partner only needing payment processing services from the Network Manager. The Network Manager must be prepared to accommodate Partner requests for changes or terminations of service. |
| 33. |
| Appendix A and Appendix B |
| n/a |
| Will there be a single point of contact for all agencies and boards mentioned in the appendices, or will separate stakeholder engagement be required? |
| The Network Manager will work directly with the Executive Director of the NSRB, but separate engagement with contacts designated by Partners will also be required. |
| 34. |
| Appendix A |
| n/a |
| Will of the applications listed in Appendix A in scope for this RFP need to be re-platformed as part of the Portal, and priced for accounted for in the bidder’s technical approach? |
| It is anticipated, though not guaranteed, that Applications and websites in Appendices A and B will continue to be operated and managed through the Portal. The selected bidder will need to develop a plan to continue such services and websites. |
Some Applications are on proprietary low-code/no-code platforms and will likely need to be replatformed or custom built. Any escrowed materials will be provided to the selected Vendor.
The Portal operates primarily using a self-funding model, without increasing the tax burden on the citizens of Nebraska. Services are provided and the Network Manager receives revenue through Portal Fees.
Partners, at their discretion, may use the Contract to request time and materials work at approved hourly rates.
| 35. |
| Appendix A and Appendix B |
| n/a |
| If the answer to the above is no, If not, is there a plan to move them over in a phased approach? Are there any services or websites listed in Appendix A and B that are expected to be prioritized or excluded from the initial phase? |
| Transition plan requirements are included in V.O. The priority of transition of services and websites will be agreed upon by the incumbent Vendor, selected Vendor, and the NSRB, in consultation with Partners. |
| 36. |
| Appendix A |
| n/a |
| Is there a future plan for Nebraska state websites not on this list, e.g., https://cio.nebraska.gov ? |
| Partners make independent decisions regarding their websites. Any plan for the website of the OCIO would be determined by the OCIO, not the NSRB. |
| 37. |
| A. PROJECT OVERVIEW |
| 25 |
| RE: Appendix A & B : Is there a prioritization of services and websites that should be considered? If so, please share. |
| It is anticipated, though not guaranteed, that Applications and websites in Appendices A and B will continue to be operated and managed through the Portal. The selected Vendor will need to develop a plan to continue such services and websites. |
Transition plan requirements are included in V.O. The priority of transition of services and websites will be agreed upon by the incumbent Network Manager, selected Vendor, and the NSRB, in consultation with Partners.
| 38. |
| A. PROJECT OVERVIEW |
| 25 |
| Please identify all legacy systems and technical platforms (including non-standard integrations, documentation/architecture diagrams, and any under-contract technologies) that must remain supported or cannot be decommissioned. |
| It is anticipated, though not guaranteed, that Applications and websites in Appendices A and B will continue to be operated and managed through the Portal. The selected Vendor will need to develop a plan to continue all services and websites. Application development needs of Partners may involve using a variety of programming languages, including but not limited to Perl, Apache Groovy, PHP, JAVA, .NET, and COBOL, along with Mainframe web services, and Application Programming Interface (API) calls and communication. Available documentation will be provided to the selected Vendor as part of the transition process. |
| 39. |
| C. CURRENT PORTAL OPERATIONS AND ENVIRONMENT |
| 26 |
| Is the goal to have a centralized CMS system that will allow for scalability and governance, or provide autonomy to each website, where they dictate their content management? Is part of the strategy to consolidate solutions and systems across the current ecosystem? |
| Partners control their own website content. Bidders may propose strategies for scalability and governance. |
| 40. |
| C. CURRENT PORTAL OPERATIONS AND ENVIRONMENT |
| N/A |
| Is there a pre-defined data migration process we must follow? If so, please share. |
| Transition plan requirements are included in V.O. The priority of transition of services and websites will be agreed upon by the incumbent Network Manager, selected Vendor, and the NSRB, in consultation with Partners. The selected Vendor should anticipate that data migration will be necessary, and will be coordinated with the incumbent Network Manager, Partners, and the NSRB. |
| 41. |
| C. CURRENT PORTAL OPERATIONS AND ENVIRONMENT |
| N/A |
| Are there any federal integrations (e.g., IRS, DHS, FMCSA) currently supported through the Portal that have specific compliance obligations? |
| Yes. The selected Vendor will implement required integration as requested by Partners. |
| 42. |
| C. CURRENT PORTAL OPERATIONS AND ENVIRONMENT |
| N/A |
| What is the aggregate bandwidth for all websites and services across the ecosystem? |
| The incumbent Vendor reported 1.7 million Portal website page views, 21,000,000 transactions processed, and 942,380 users in 2024. |
It is anticipated, though not guaranteed, that Applications and websites in Appendices A and B will continue to be operated and managed through the Portal. The selected Vendor will need to develop a plan to continue such services and websites.
| 43. |
| K. TECHNICAL OVERVIEW |
| 35 |
| The RFP requires Tier IV data centers, would Tier III+ providers (e.g., AWS GovCloud, Azure Government) with redundancy/high availability be acceptable, and are there existing cloud provider contracts that must be used, or can bidders propose alternatives? |
| Proposals should include a plan for operating in compliance with the provisions of the RFP. Bidders may propose alternative solution(s) for review; provided such solutions are in compliance with NITC Standards and other standards applicable to the data or information received or processed. |
| 44. |
| C. CURRENT PORTAL OPERATIONS AND ENVIRONMENT, Point 9 |
| 26 |
| Can NSRB confirm whether the current processor (Elavon / U.S. Bank ACH) will remain onboard, and provide historical transaction volumes, revenue per service, and details of revenue-generating vs non-revenue services? |
| The State’s electronic payment processor is selected by the State Treasurer and the Director of Administrative Services. The current Elavon contract has a term of July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2028, with the option to renew for three (3) additional two (2) year periods. The bank is selected by the State Treasurer. The current contract with U.S. Bank has a term of September 1, 2021 through August 31, 2026, with the option to renew for two (2) additional one (1) year periods. The NSRB does not manage either of these contracts, but the State Treasurer and the Director of the Department of Administrative Services are represented on the NSRB. See Appendix C. for Network Revenue and Transactions. As of October of 2024, 45% of the Applications had no payment associated with the Application at all. |
| 45. |
| F. STAFFING REQUIREMENTS, Point 3 |
| 32 |
| The RFP notes a preference for staff in Lincoln, NE, is remote staffing acceptable for specialized roles? Will NSRB facilitate clearances/background checks, and are international subcontractors allowed if work/data remain in the U.S.? Finally, how will collaboration with the content provider and Network Manager be structured? |
| The Network Manager and any subcontractors will perform all work under the Contract in the United States. It is preferred that the Network Manager have personnel located in Lincoln, Nebraska. |
The Network Manager works closely with Partners, including regular in-person meetings to discuss project progress and Partner needs. The Network Manager also meets in-person regularly with the Executive Director of the NSRB and attends all scheduled NSRB meetings. It is preferred that leadership and project management staff be present in Nebraska.
Background checks are the responsibility of the selected Vendor.
Partners provide and control Partner content and facilitate communication with Partner vendors, when requested by Partners.
| 46. |
| H. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS |
| 32 |
| What are the requirements for analytics, dashboards, and reporting (including visibility into metrics, preferred solutions, templates, and potential data consolidation), and what is the expected cadence of collaboration for portal enhancements and maintenance? |
| Reporting requirements are specified in V.H. Format is subject to approval by the NSRB. |
Maintenance requirements are found in V.K. Portal enhancements and non-emergency maintenance must be completed in coordination with Partners. See also Question #32.
| 47. |
| O. TRANSITION PLAN REQUIREMENTS, Point 2.e |
| 38 |
| The RFP allows 12 months for transition, can NSRB clarify which services must be transitioned earlier, whether dual operations with the incumbent are anticipated, and whether there are existing contracts that must be integrated or replaced? |
| Transition plan requirements are included in V.O. The priority of transition of services and websites will be agreed upon by the incumbent Vendor, selected Vendor, and the NSRB, in consultation with Partners. |
See Question #44 for existing contracts regarding payment processing. In addition, Partners use a variety of software solutions and Systems. The selected Vendor will implement required interfaces with “back-end” enterprise, legacy production systems and third-party vendor programming, as requested by Partners.
| 48. |
| G. BUSINESS PLAN, Point 2.e |
| 32 |
| Is the expectation for bidders to provide a visionary component to the portal: AI capabilities, UX Best-Practices, Technology Enhancements? How will approval of innovative services and associated fees be governed — via annual Business Plan, or ad-hoc NSRB approval? |
| Submission of an annual business plan includes an opportunity for proposing changes to bring innovation and efficiency to the Portal. In addition, Attachment A, RTM 25 provides the following: Bidder must provide suggested new ideas, technologies, and functionality for the Portal. Bidder must also include any terms and conditions and pricing applicable to such suggestions. Approval of innovative services and associated fees may take place at the time of Contract award, approval of the annual business plan, or at quarterly meetings of the NSRB. |
| 49. |
| O. PERFORMANCE BOND |
| 13 |
| The Guarantor requirement may impose significant parent company liability. Would NSRB consider a performance bond or insurance guarantee as an alternative? |
| V.Q requires a parent guarantee. II.O. requires the selected Vendor also provide a performance bond. |
| 50. |
| R. PENALTY |
| 39 |
| The RFP specifies penalties up to $20,000 per occurrence. Can NSRB clarify whether this applies to each impacted application individually or to the incident as a whole? |
| The penalty addressed in V.R. is applied on a per occurrence basis (not per service, application or website). |
| 51. |
| N. ESCROW REQUIREMENTS |
| 37 |
| Regarding software ownership and escrow: if third-party licensed software is used, can bidders exclude proprietary components from escrow while still complying? |
| As provided in V.M., the State will be entitled to a perpetual, nonexclusive, royalty-free right-to-use license to all software, documentation, interfaces, and source code utilized in operating the Portal. As noted in the RFP, there are exceptions outlined in the incumbent Vendor’s contract. Bidders may propose exceptions for review. |
| 52. |
| Compliance & Standards |
| N/A |
| Does NSBR have a government mandated Act to implement (IDEA ACT of 2018)? |
| The NSRB is not the designated state agency for administration of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA Act). Portal services are developed as requested and subject to requirements specified by Partners. Partners may require compliance with standards applicable to the data or information received or processed. The selected Vendor will discuss these requirements with the relevant Partner on a project-by-project basis. |
| 53. |
| Compliance & Standards |
| N/A |
| Please confirm compliance and security requirements, including whether FedRAMP/StateRAMP certification is required vs internal attestation, backup/storage obligations (e.g., cold/offline), and all mandated frameworks (PCI-DSS, SOC2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, NIST 800-53, CIS, etc.). |
| See V.K. Technical Overview. The selected Vendor must provide merchant and payment processing services consistent with the most current PCI-DSS in effect, including but not limited to, payment card acceptance, authorization, management of refunds, credits, and returns, and provision of PCI-DSS compliant swipe or payment devices. The State prefers an Elavon PCI-validated point-to-point encryption (P2PE) solution for payment devices. |
The selected Vendor must comply with NITC Standards, which reference and incorporate other compliance standards. Partners may require compliance with standards applicable to the data or information received or processed. The selected Vendor will discuss these requirements with the relevant Partner on a project-by-project basis.
| 54. |
| V.D., Current Financing Model, 2 |
| 27-28 |
| The solicitation states that under the current model, “Portal Fees are characterized as either Margin Service Portal Fees or Non-Margin Service Portal Fees. Margin Service Portal Fees are currently split between the Network Manager and the NSRB, with 80 percent going to the Network Manager and 20 percent going to the NSRB.” Would the state be open to a different financial model from the current one? |
| The Portal operates primarily using a self-funding model, without increasing the tax burden on the citizens of Nebraska. Proposals should include a plan for operating within the current model. Bidders may also propose alternative solution(s) that comply with Neb. Rev. Stat. §84-1205 for review. |
| 55. |
| IV. Solicitation Response Instructions |
| 40 |
| Please confirm that a vendor’s response to Form A.1 Requirements Traceability Matrix satisfies the following RFP requirement: “Bidders should identify the subdivisions of “Project Description and Scope of Work” clearly in their solicitation response; failure to do so may result in disqualification”. |
| A completed Attachment A is required per the Solicitation Requirements in Section I.O. Form A.1 addresses the Project Overview and Scope of Work. |
| 56. |
| Form A.1 RTM |
| 1 |
| Form A.1 RTM includes all content from RFP Section V Project Description and Scope of Work except D. Current Financing Model. Please confirm that the exclusion was intentional and that bidders are not required to respond to D. Current Financing Model in Form A.1. |
| RTM 13 addresses Bidder’s understanding of and plan to operate within the Current Funding Model identified in Section V. Paragraph D of the RFP (referred to as the Current Financing Model in such section). Bidders must address V.D. Current Funding/Financing Model when responding to RTM 13. |
| 57. |
| V. Q. Guarantor |
| 39 |
| Section V.Q. requires a parent guaranty for subsidiaries. Is the Guaranty due at the time of bid or the time of award and contract? Is there a format prescribed by NSRB to fulfill the Guarantor requirement? |
| The guarantee is due at the time of Contract award. The guarantee will be in writing and subject to approval of the NSRB. |
58.
| Can you elaborate on the expected timeline and process for transitioning existing Applications and websites to the new Network Manager's hosting environment, including any data migration responsibilities? |
| Transition plan requirements are included in V.O. The priority of transition of services and websites will be agreed upon by the incumbent Vendor, selected Vendor, and the NSRB, in consultation with Partners. The selected Vendor should anticipate that data migration will be necessary, and will be coordinated with the incumbent Vendor, Partners, and the NSRB. |
59.
| What specific NITC Technical Standards and Guidelines (e.g., security, accessibility, cloud hosting) must be prioritized in the Network Manager's operations, and are there any anticipated updates to these standards during the contract term? |
| Compliance with the most current version of the NITC Standards is required for the duration of the Contract. Standards may be revised during the term of the Contract. Revisions occur through a public process initiated by the NITC’s Technical Panel. |
60.
| Regarding Application development, what are the preferred programming languages, frameworks, or tools (e.g., Perl, Groovy, PHP, JAVA, .NET, COBOL) for compatibility with existing Partner systems, and how should bidders demonstrate experience with these? |
| Application development needs of Partners may involve using a variety of programming languages, including but not limited to Perl, Apache Groovy, PHP, JAVA, .NET, and COBOL, along with Mainframe web services, and Application Programming Interface (API) calls and communication. |
RTM 4 requires bidders to describe bidder’s experience and plan to use a variety of programming languages or platforms and identify the programming languages and platforms. RTM 10 also provides an opportunity to summarize relevant bidder experience.
61.
| For payment processing, can you confirm integration requirements with the current State Processor (Elavon, Inc.) and ACH services (U.S. Bank), and what PCI-DSS compliance evidence must be provided? |
| See question 44. The State’s electronic payment processor is selected by the State Treasurer and the Director of Administrative Services The bank is selected by the State Treasurer. The selected Vendor will provide Vendor’s PCI-DSS Attestation of Compliance, along with copies of audits that assess internal controls and data security safeguards. The NSRB or Partners may require additional documentation, audits or reviews to determine compliance. |
62.
| How should the Network Manager handle interfaces with third-party systems or federal/state legacy systems, and are there specific APIs or protocols (e.g., for DMV or courts) that must be supported? |
| Partners use a variety of software solutions and Systems. The selected Vendor must be flexible in offering functionality that allows for communication and interaction, and is compatible with Partner software and Systems, acceptable to the Partner, and in compliance with NITC Standards and OCIO policies. |
63.
| Can you provide examples of "enhanced search engine capabilities" expected for the Portal, including any integration with AI or advanced indexing tools? |
| Search engine features must be efficient and improve the accuracy of search results by allowing Users to specify exact phrases, include and exclude certain words. Partners must be able to request results provided to Users be limited to specific domains or websites, ensuring credible sources. |
With approval by the NSRB, subject to agreed upon terms and conditions, search engine capabilities driven by artificial intelligence (AI) or other technology may be authorized.
The NSRB approved a pilot AI project at the March 2025 meeting.
64.
| What are the expectations for supporting Subscriptions, including batch processing for high-volume data access, and how many current Subscribers exist? |
| Appendices A and B contain a list of all current portal websites and applications. The selected Vendor should anticipate providing, supporting, maintaining, and hosting these services. V.E. provides expectations for supporting Subscription services. In some instances, Subscribers are frequent users of the services and not requestors of high-volume data access. The incumbent Vendor reported approximately 6,500 paid Subscriptions in 2024. |
65.
| What escrow requirements apply to source code, and which escrow agent is preferred or required? |
| See questions 12, 31, and 51. |
66.
| What are the expected user volumes and performance requirements? |
| The incumbent Vendor reported 1.7 million Portal website page views, 21,000,000 transactions processed, and 942,380 users in 2024. |
Performance requirements are outlined in the RFP, and generally include, but are not limited to, meeting project completion dates, ensuring security and availability of Portal services, uptime requirements, submitting required reports, operating in compliance with an approved business plan, and as otherwise directed by the NSRB.
| What are the specific security requirements for data handling (e.g., encryption, access controls) in Section V.K, and how do they align with federal standards like NIST? |
| See V. K. 9. Data Security Requirements. See also question 53. |
68.
| Can you provide more details on current technology stack (e.g., low-code platforms, open-source CMS) used for Applications and websites? |
| See questions 15 and 34. |
This addendum will be incorporated into the solicitation.
SPB Form 26 Last Revised 4-17-2025