Supplier Q&A - 6

Revised 02/11/11 SPD-SPR004

Supplier Q & A - 6

RFP Number: 47400-DOR0000056 RFP Title: Fraud Management Solution Requesting State Entity: GA Department of Revenue

Date: 03/24/15

Issuing Officer: Arnaz Fanning RFP Initially Posted to Internet: 02/27/15 eMail Address: Arnaz.fanning@dor.ga.gov Telephone: 404-417-2188

The purpose of this document is to provide answers to supplier questions.

Please see Questions and Answers included herein.

Note: This document is intended for informational purposes only. Any changes to the RFP must occur through a published addendum (or through publication of a new version of the RFP in Team Georgia Marketplace™). If multiple Q & A documents are posted, the most recent Q & A shall govern in the event of a conflict.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

# Questions Referenced

RFP Section Answers

1.

Can the Department provide guidance on how it would prefer vendors who provide integrated systems to account for costs in the Cost Workbook? For example, our products are sold on a commercial basis as part of a bundled package.

The software is included as part of the equipment cost and is not priced individually as separate components of the overall system.

Section 5.1 Cost Proposal

On the Cost workbook, under “Item Response/Comment” you should provide a summary of what is included and the associated cost.

2. 2

If we mark certain elements of the RFP responses as “proprietary and confidential information,” will it be excluded from the public domain?

If certain documents are of a proprietary nature, and are not otherwise publically available, they are not subject to the Open Records Act.

3.

According to RFP specifications Section 1.4. Schedule of Events, GA DOR indicates that without attending the mandatory bidder’s conference a vendor may not submit a bid. Please confirm that this pertains to vendors that participate either as the prime or as a subcontractor.

This pertains to any contractor who has the intent of submitting a response to this RFP. Any awarded contract will be with the prime contractor not its sub. Only companies that were in attendance at the Mandatory Offeror’s Conference responses will be considered for award.

4. 4

Is it possible that DOR could execute a contract extension or other type of renewal for the existing contractor of the GA DOR Fraud Management Solution?

The DOR currently does not have an executed contract for the requirements as outlined in this RFP; therefore no extension of an existing contract is possible.

Revised 02/11/11 SPD-SPR004

# Questions Referenced RFP Section

Answers

5. It was mentioned that the DOR might select the top ‘X’ bidder proposals to engage in a proof‐of‐concept trial before selection of the winning bidder.

QUESTION: What would be the criteria and timing of such proof‐of‐concept?

For example, once the top ‘X’ bidders are selected for a proof of concept, when will they be notified and how long will the bidders have to return successful fraudulent results and do a solution demonstration for the DOR?

What will be the measurement(s) and criteria of success for the DOR during this POC phase in determining award to the bidder with the best solution?

After the Evaluation Team has scored the suppliers’ proposals, the DOR may elect to enter into one or more rounds of negotiations with all responsive and responsible suppliers or only those suppliers identified by the Evaluation Team as being in the competitive range. The competitive range will not be selected arbitrarily and those suppliers included in the competitive range must have highly scored proposals. If the DOR elects to negotiate pursuant to Section 6.6, the DOR may either (1) elect to negotiate with all responsive and responsible suppliers,

(2) limit negotiations to those suppliers identified within the competitive range, or

(3) limit negotiations to the number of suppliers with whom the DOR may reasonably negotiate as defined below. In the event the DOR elects to limit negotiations to those suppliers identified within the competitive range, the DOR will identify the competitive range by (1) ranking suppliers’ proposals from highest to lowest based on each supplier’s Total Combined Score and (2) then looking for breaks in the scores such that natural groupings of similar scores may be identified. ), the supplier will submit revisions to its proposal factors and/or cost proposal, which revisions will be scored by the Evaluation Team in accordance with the same criteria used to evaluate the initial responses from the suppliers. Those suppliers identified by the Evaluation Committee to negotiate will be notified and invited to attend negotiations. Suppliers will be notified in writing: (i) the general purpose and scope of the negotiations;

(ii) the anticipated schedule for the negotiations; and (iii) the procedures to be followed for negotiations.