Supplier Q&A - 7

Revised 02/11/11 SPD-SPR004

Supplier Q & A - 7

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

Date: 03/25/15

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 RFX must occur through a published addendum (or through publication of a new version of the RFX 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

RFX Section Answers

1.

The system will provide a service to systematically compare and cross reference at least fifteen unique data sources for approximately…” eRFP document. Is integration of the 15 data sources within scope for services that should be scoped?

The integration of at least 10 unique data sources is within scope for services.

2. 2

After implementation, the Georgia Department of Revenue shall have the option to own all source code licenses for the purpose of support, maintenance and knowledge transfer.” eRFP document. Can you elaborate on the contract structure requirements defining the term “own?

The option for DOR to request ownership of all source code will depend on the solution and its ability to easily integrate with the existing Integrated Tax Solution application. The term own refers to DOR taking possession of source code once the project is complete for the purpose of support, maintenance and knowledge transfer. The source code would reside and be supported on infrastructure supported by DOR.

3.

The GA Department of Revenue requires a dedicated Project/Account Manager for the day-to-day dealings for this project to be housed at DOR facility. Does the Offeror agree to this stipulation? Would the Department consider moving this requirement to the “Mandatory Scored Requirements” section?

Mandatory Requirement #3

This is a mandatory requirement and unfortunately will not be revised.

RFX Section

Answers

4. 4

Can the Department elaborate on what it means by “operational services for testing?”

Mandatory Requirement #39

This statement is documented as Mandatory Requirement #40.

DOR expects the Offeror to oversee the operational activities to maintain and run the logistics needed to support testing.

5. Do you anticipate volume of reviewed returns to stay the same as the previously stated 5% of 4.3 million?

DOR anticipates the volume of reviewed returns to be within a range of 5-7%.

6. What volume of tax returns do you anticipate will be subject to a) Knowledge Based Authentication and b) Identity Verification?

DOR anticipates a volume of approximately 1-2% will be subject to Knowledge Based Authentication.

7. What is the number of annual tax returns that are subject to review and how many are joint filings?

The number of annual tax returns subject to review is the entire population of 4.3 million with approximately 5-10% being held for review with potentially less than 5% being identified as Fraud. We have a population of approximately 20% of joint filings.

8. Data Storage: It was mentioned that respondents will have to account for storing historical data. Specifically, the DOR mentioned the 4.3M returns per-year and 4.5 terabytes of data and to account for 2% growth / year.

QUESTION: Exactly what data will be stored and for what purpose?

How does this differ from return storage today? Please be specific and give approximate breakdown of storage sizes per category and intended uses of data in each storage category. Also, will access be required online – if so, how? If offline, will access be restricted to only the fraud detection functionality within the fraud management system. Please be specific to access and use of stored data as well.

Any and all data associated with a given Taxpayer to include but not limited to all items on a tax return could potentially be stored for historical purposes.

Respondent must take necessary safeguards to prevent unauthorized disclosures before, during and after processing.

DOR expects respondents to take necessary measures for properly storing and processing of all return and return information.

RFX Section

Answers

9. Measurement of Fraud based on Anticipated Changes: DOR mentioned the need to measure fraud based on anticipated changes.

QUESTION: We assume this to be related to eRFP: 1.1 Purpose of Procurement Item 1. If not, could you please elaborate on the requirement?

1.1 Purpose of Procurement Item 1.

Allow users to analyze the full impact of fraud rules, including the number of returns affected and population percentages before applying rules to the Fraud Management Solution.

Yes, this functionality is intended to be incorporated into the live production environment. DOR wants a way to view the full impact of changing rules before actually applying the change.

10. Data Shared with Other States:

DOR Mentioned that fraudulent data will be shared with other states QUESTION: Can you be specific as to what return data will be shared with other states and by what mechanism?

DOR currently leverage the Gentax Data Exchange and the FTA SFE (Suspicious Filers Exchange) to facilitate information sharing between states. Some examples of information being shared can range from Taxpayer entity data, return data and tax preparer information. DOR can share any and all Taxpayer return information with other states. DOR on occasions have created Taxpayer accounts manually based on insider information. The data to be stored will include Taxpayer and return data.

11. Page 1 Section 1.1.6: Moving the out of wallet questioning strategy/policy to DOR to allow for onsite control may eliminate some of the solution benefits to DOR. Will you consider advanced systems designed to run as an off-site managed solution? Your requirement can stipulate demonstrated successful experience with this process, including service level agreement (SLA’s) to ensure for fast response times for the changing of the questioning strategy at the hosted provider.

The preferred method depends on the solution and its ability to integrate and easily interface. DOR expects the data input to Fraud Management to contain Federal Tax Information. Therefore, any proposed solution would have to be hosted in an IRS 1075 compliant data facility.

12. Page 1, Section 1.1.2: Are there external (non-Federal, non-State) data sources that will be part of the Tax Fraud Management Solution, which are already assumed and

DOR expects Offeror to provide unique external data sources that are not Federal or State to be a part of the Fraud Management Solution to be integrated with our existing sources. Further

RFX Section

Answers should be considered within an offerors’ solution?

information regarding data sources cannot be divulged in a public document without compromising the current DOR fraud management process.