Opportunity Detail

Questions and Answers

Outside Counsel e-Billing / Legal Matter Management System
Document #:  AGO-EB-LMS-20-1001


Question:   1. May either (or all) of the Cover Page, Table of Contents, Transmittal letter be omitted from the 1.5 line spacing requirement? 2. May the Cover Page include font that is smaller than the 12 point Times New Roman font restriction? (for proposal disclosure information, etc) 3. Would the AGO consider labeled CDs instead of USB drives for the electronic version of the proposal, in order to comply with the requirement of: USB drive must be labeled with a text file to indicate the prospective contractor name, solicitation name, and date of submission. 4. Please describe the condition of the data to be converted from your current eBilling solution (2008 to present) 5. Please describe the condition of the data potentially to be converted from your legacy SQL system (1999 to 2008). 6. Does the SQL system and current system have a consistent field mapping / organization or are they notably different? 7. COR 1.1 - Does OH have an existing eFax solution the proposed system is to integrate with, or does the solution need to provide eFax capabilities? 8. (Multiple -instances) CLT 2.3 - Export to Excel or PDF. Does the system need to provide both, or is either or acceptable?

Answer:   1) The Cover Page can be omitted from the 1.5 line spacing requirement; however, the Table of Contents and the Transmittal letter must be no less than 1.5 spaces between lines as stated in section 4.1. 2) The Cover Page can include font that is smaller than 12 point Times New Roman; however the rest of the proposal must follow the font and pitch requirements as stated in section 4.1. 3) No, the AGO will not accept labeled CDs. The prospective contractor must provide one USB drive containing the electronic version of the paper copy. (Reference section 4.2) 4) The AGO assumes that the data in the current e-Billing system is in good condition (no orphan records, reference integrity, etc.…). If the AGO discovers reference data that needs to be cleaned up, the AGO intends to clean up the data prior to conversion. 5) The data in the legacy SQL system is in good condition (no orphan records, reference integrity, etc.). It is a small database, approximately 50MB in size. 6) The AGO does not have access to the database schema for the current e-Billing system and therefore, is unable to provide an answer to the field mapping question. The organization of the data does have some differences. The main differences are • In the SQL system, there is a matter record for each fiscal year and each amendment to the matter (changes to attorney assigned, budget, rate); In the e-Billing system there is only one matter that goes across multiple fiscal years and amendments. • The SQL system has information for clients (name, address, phone, contact name); The e-Billing system does not have detailed client information. Clients are identified in a text field and by the work area. 7) The AGO has an existing eFax solution that leverages Outlook to send eFax’s. 8) The proposed solution should be able to export search results to Excel and if possible also export to PDF.

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67715


Question:   Section 5.0— Required Proposal Content (Page20). The solicitation provides page limits for the required proposal sections. In order to present a comprehensive description of the content, features, and services to be provided and to include complete answers to all of the requirements in the solicitation, including a separate cost proposal volume, would the AGO consider eliminating the page limit requirements altogether? If the agency will not remove all page limit requirements, would the AGO please consider the following: ­--Volume I, Technical Proposal—To ensure that offerors provide the AGO with the information needed to effectively evaluate responses, would the agency please extend the page limit for Section E, Approach and High Level Plan, to 12 pages? ­--Volume II, Cost Proposal—To ensure that offerors are able to provide the AGO with complete pricing information, including applicable licensing agreements and terms and conditions, this offeror respectfully recommends that the AGO remove the page limit for Volume II altogether. If the AGO requires a page limit, would the AGO please extend the page limit for Volume II to 20 pages? This will allow the separately sealed price proposal to be a stand-alone document with all the necessary information to fully evaluate the proposed cost.

Answer:   1) The RFP page limits are set by policy and will not be changed at this time. 2) No, the page limit for Section E Approach and High Level Plan is set by policy and will not be changed at this time. In this section, the prospective contractor will submit a high level description of the general plan to provide the scope of work of the RFP. This limitation does not include the pages provided in responding to “Attachment A – e-Billing / Legal Matter Management System Requirements” per instructions in Attachment A. 3) No, the RFP page limits are set by policy and will not be changed at this time. The licensing agreement and terms and conditions will be addressed during contract negations with the selected contractor.

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67724


Question:   Section 4.0— Proposal Preparation Instructions (Page 17). To help ensure the AGO receives proposal submissions as expected, can you please confirm the following: ­--Does the AGO want proposal submissions in two volumes: a technical volume and a price volume? ­--Does the AGO want to receive one original and six copies of each proposal volume? ­--Should the price volume be sealed separately from the technical volume? ­--Does the AGO want two USB drives submitted with the response: one drive for the technical volume and one drive for the separately sealed price volume?

Answer:   1) The cost proposal for the e-Billing Management system must be submitted in a sealed document separate from the rest of the proposal. (Reference section 5.4.9.) If the prospective contractor chooses to submit a cost proposal for Legal Matter Management, this cost proposal must be submitted in a sealed document separate from the e-Billing Management cost proposal and the rest of the proposal. (Reference section 5.4.14.) 2) The prospective contractor must submit one original and six copies of the proposal. The prospective contractor can submit one cost proposal for the e-Billing Management system in a sealed document separate from the rest of the proposal. If the prospective contractor chooses to submit a cost proposal for Legal Matter Management, they can submit one cost proposal in a sealed document separate from the e-Billing Management cost proposal and from the rest of the proposal. 3) Yes, the prospective contractor must submit the cost proposal for the e-Billing Management system in a sealed document separate from the rest of the proposal. (Reference section 5.4.9.) If the prospective contractor chooses to submit a cost proposal for Legal Matter Management, this cost proposal must be submitted in a sealed document separate from the e-Billing Management cost proposal and the rest of the proposal. (Reference section 5.4.14.) 4) No, the prospective contractor must submit one USB drive. The cost proposal for the e-Billing Management system must be on a separate identifiable file on the USB drive. (Reference section 5.4.9.). If the prospective contractor chooses to submit a cost proposal for Legal Matter Management, this cost proposal must be on a separate identifiable file on the USB drive. (Reference section 5.4.14.)

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67723


Question:   Section 1.3— Contact (Page 6). The solicitation states that “until the AGO advises differently, all contact is to be in writing using the State of Ohio Procurement Site.” In case there are any problems with using the procurement site, will the AGO please offer a point of contact to whom contractors can reach out during the course of this solicitation?

Answer:   The Q & A period is now closed. Questions about navigating the DAS procurement site should be addressed to the DAS webmaster though the Procurement Comments & Questions page: https://procure.ohio.gov/proc/submitCommentsQuestions.asp

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67722


Question:   In questions LMM – 1.1- LMM 1.5, MAT-2.2 “Controlling Board” information is listed. Is the Controlling board essentially a cost center? Please further explain controlling boards and the role they play in billing and budget approval.

Answer:   The Controlling Board provides legislative oversight over certain capital and operating expenditures by state agencies and has approval authority over various other state fiscal and purchasing activities. The AGO Outside Counsel Section meets with each client to determine the client’s outside counsel budget for the next fiscal year. The AGO Outside Counsel Section presents each client’s outside counsel budget to the Controlling Board prior to the start of each fiscal year. The Controlling Board must approve the budget amount before any payments can be made. When the client is near to or goes over the original budget for the fiscal year, the AGO presents an increased budget amount to the Controlling Board. The Controlling Board must approve the increased amount before any payments over the original budget can be made.

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67721


Question:   Does the AGO intend to have any systems interface with the ebilling application, such as document management, accounts payable, etc.

Answer:   The proposed solution may need to interface with Outlook in order to generate email or eFax correspondence. (Attachment A / Requirement ID COR-1.1 and COR-1.3). The AGO does not intend to have the proposed solution interface with a document management system or accounts payable system.

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67720


Question:   When the AGO asks about maintaining “clients” is it intended that all “clients” will be system users or will they be maintained as a data table in which specific clients can be associated with a matter on the matter template

Answer:   The proposed solution shall provide the ability to identify each client preferably as a data table. The specific client will be associated with a matter. Each client will have system users that will be able to review/accept/adjust/reject invoices for their matters.

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67719


Question:   How many different clients does the OH AGO have?

Answer:   The AGO has 124 clients (clients are state agencies, boards and commissions, colleges and universities, and retirement systems).

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67718


Question:   Billing / Workflow Diagram, p, 37 Attachment A. - Based on the diagram provided, it appears that the actual billing rules are applied after both the OH AG and client review the invoices. Generally, e-billing systems apply the billing rules and guidelines during invoice upload. Can you confirm when the rules engine should run, and if it is after a review by AGO and Client why this is being done this way? We’d like to ensure we understand how you’d like the process to flow so we can meet all requirements. - When invoices are approved and the payment letter is generated, are the payments made by the client and do you need to add payment files into our application for reporting?

Answer:   The current e-Billing system applies invoice billing rules and guidelines when the invoice is submitted. The proposed solution must also apply billing rules and guidelines when the invoice is submitted. The AGO and Client reviewers will review invoices after they are submitted - this includes reviewing warnings that were generated for an invoice that violated billing rules and guidelines when it was submitted. Payments are made by the client. The proposed solution does not need to record payment information (date issued, warrant number, etc.).

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67717


Question:   Section 3 of the RFP document lists terms and conditions. Will vendors have the opportunity to request redlines to these items? In particular, we would like to add some clarification around the surrounding items: • 3.2 – What would occur if in the middle of implementation funding is not renewed during a biennial period (3.2 and 3.2.1 and 3.2.3) • 3.2 – Suspend or terminate – with or without cause - We would like to request a notification time period. • 3.4.1 – Holdback of 15% until final approval. - We’d like to request the wording be “until final approval, not to be unfairly withheld” • 3.5.1.1 – Service Credits – Are these negotiable?

Answer:   Perspective contractors should not expect to negotiate mandatory contract terms. Specific to funding, the AGO’s contracts are subject to fiscal biennium restrictions that are applicable to the State of Ohio.

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67716


Question:   Would the AGO reconsider the 1.5 line spacing requirement to 1.15 (Single) line spacing?

Answer:   No, as stated in section 4.1, the proposal must be no less than 1.5 spaces between lines.

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67714


Question:   Several sections in the requirements mention the ability for in-house counsel to “draft” an invoice. Is the OH AG looking to track and bill internal time from the ebilling application?

Answer:   The AGO will not be using the e-billing application to track and bill in-house counsel time. The proposed solution will only be used to create/submit/review invoices for work done by outside counsel. Outside counsel users must be able to create and save a draft of an invoice before they submit it to the AGO. The AGO administrative users must be able to create and submit an invoice on behalf of an outside counsel.

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67713


Question:   1) The RFP states: NO WORK TO BE PERFORMED OUTSIDE OF USA (RFP Section 3.7 pg. 17/26 via Addendum 1) w/o AGO written permission. Is this still correct? Might the AGO give written permission?

Answer:   As stated in the RFP, customization work and call center work that is performed on behalf of the AGO must be performed within the territory of the United States and AGO data must not be stored, accessed from or transmitted to outside of the United States without AGO’s written permission provided in advance. The AGO reserves the discretion to determine whether or not specific circumstances warrant an exemption, as presented in the proposals that are submitted in response to the RFP.

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67710


Question:   Section 3.7— Place of Work, Contractors, and Data (Page 17). The solicitation states that “all work performed under the Agreement must be performed within the territory of the United States.” This contractor’s proposed solution has product developers located across the globe that work to continually update and improve our solution. With the knowledge that foreign workers would not be in direct contact with the AGO (in relation to support and training) and that the AGO’s data would still be housed within the U.S., will the AGO consider a solution that is developed in part outside of the United States?

Answer:   As stated in the RFP, customization work and call center work that is performed on behalf of the AGO must be performed within the territory of the United States and AGO data must not be stored, accessed from or transmitted to outside of the United States without AGO’s written permission provided in advance. The AGO reserves the discretion to determine whether or not specific circumstances warrant an exemption, as presented in the proposals that are submitted in response to the RFP.

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67709


Question:   Per section 3.7 in the RFP Addendum "Addendum to Place of Work, Contractors and Data - Effective 10/2/2019", it is stated that “Place of Work, Contractors and Data All work performed under the Agreement must be performed within the territory of the United States. AGO data must not be stored, accessed from or transmitted to outside of the United States without AGO’s written permission provided in advance.” Will the AGO provide written permission in advance for work to be performed outside the territory of the United States? What would be required to receive this permission?

Answer:   As stated in the RFP, customization work and call center work that is performed on behalf of the AGO must be performed within the territory of the United States and AGO data must not be stored, accessed from or transmitted to outside of the United States without AGO’s written permission provided in advance. The AGO reserves the discretion to determine whether or not specific circumstances warrant an exemption, as presented in the proposals that are submitted in response to the RFP.

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67706


Question:   For requirement 3.7, we believe that most vendors in our industry have some telephonic customer support performed outside of the US (for simple questions and issues). So wouldn’t that preclude most vendors from being able to meet this requirement? This would also mean that Ohio AG would not be receiving responses from vendors with a solution that best meets their needs.

Answer:   As stated in the RFP, customization work and call center work that is performed on behalf of the AGO must be performed within the territory of the United States and AGO data must not be stored, accessed from or transmitted to outside of the United States without AGO’s written permission provided in advance. The AGO reserves the discretion to determine whether or not specific circumstances warrant an exemption, as presented in the proposals that are submitted in response to the RFP.

Date: 10/17/2019

Inquiry: 67695


Question:   1. Is there a legacy System that this Outside Counsel e-Billing / Legal Matter Management System will replace. 2. If yes to question 1, (a) when was that System developed? (b) When was that contract awarded? And (c) Can we have the Current Vendors Proposal?

Answer:   1. As stated in Section 1.1 Background of the RFP, the Ohio Attorney General’s Office currently uses two systems to manage special counsel matters and invoices. One system is a SaaS based e-billing and matter management system that is primarily used for managing matter budgets and submitting and reviewing invoices. The other system is an in-house developed system that is primarily used for managing special counsel matters. 2a. The Ohio Attorney General’s Office (AGO) initially implemented the SaaS e-billing and matter management system in 2008. The in-house system was developed in 1998 by AGO employees. 2b) The contract for the SaaS e-billing and matter management system was awarded in 2008. 2c) The request for the Current Vendors Proposal is being treated as a public records request. We will respond to that request within a reasonable period of time.

Date: 10/10/2019

Inquiry: 67681


Question:   Is it ok if part of our telephonic customer service is provided by overseas employees?

Answer:   No. As stated in section 3.7 in the RFP Addendum "Addendum to Place of Work, Contractors and Data - Effective 10/2/2019", all work must be performed within the territory of the United States.

Date: 10/8/2019

Inquiry: 67673


Question:   1. Whether companies from Outside USA can apply for this? (like,from India or Canada) 2. Whether we need to come over there for meetings? 3. Can we perform the tasks (related to RFP) outside USA? (like, from India or Canada) 4. Can we submit the proposals via email?

Answer:   1. Per section 3.7 in the RFP Addendum "Addendum to Place of Work, Contractors and Data - Effective 10/2/2019", all work must be performed within the territory of the United States; Per Requirement ID "SR-2" in "Attachment A - e-Billing / Legal Matter Management System Requirements", the data must be stored in the United States. 2. Some meetings could be done via web meeting; however, the AGO expects that the selected contractor may be on-site for some events associated with the scope of work. The prospective contractor should include travel expenses associated with the relevant on-site events (project kickoff meeting, analysis/configuration meetings, training, etc.…) in its Cost Proposal. 3. No, per section 3.7 in the RFP Addendum "Addendum to Place of Work, Contractors and Data - Effective 10/2/2019", all work must be performed within the territory of the United States. 4. No, per section 4.1 in the RFP, proposals must be submitted with one original, six (6) conforming paper copies, and one electronic copy on a USB drive.

Date: 10/3/2019

Inquiry: 67649


back

Inquiry period ended:  10/15/2019 8:00:00 AM