Opportunity Detail

Questions and Answers

Document Generation System Project
Document #:  JFSRLBOIS11016


Question:   There are county systems in place that depend on receiving an imaged copy of the form. How will the new Forms system being sought through this RLB provide this functionality to these counties?

Answer:   All copies of generated forms will also be stored as PDF in FileNet and counties will have access to these copies.

Date: 4/28/2011

Inquiry: 22431


Question:   RLB Section I Purpose. Does the State agree that all intellectual property developed prior to or independently of this project shall continue to be owned by vendor or any relevant third parties? Vendor respectfully seeks confirmation that Vendor and all relevant third parties will maintain ownership to all independently developed software and related materials. Such a clarification will have no deleterious effects on Vendor’s performance under this agreement.

Answer:   No. All dealings with the State of Ohio are subject to public inquiry. Refer to the languages on trade secrets in the RLB and disqualification criteria on proprietary information in the Phase I evaluation criteria in the RLB.

Date: 4/28/2011

Inquiry: 22457


Question:   In RLB Attachment F, Section 1.5.11 requires the vendor to demonstrate capacity for 200 concurrent users however, Section 14.2.2 requires capacity for 100 concurrent users. Can ODJFS please clarify the number of concurrent users the DSG system must support?

Answer:   This section should be amended to show 200 concurrent users throughout the RLB. Below is the amended paragraph reflecting the amendment. 14.2.2 The vendor shall demonstrate that the system has sufficient design, record locking, and redundancy to allow for an average volume of 200 concurrent DGS users.

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22409


Question:   RLB Section IX B, Termination, Sanction, Damages. Will the State consider capping Vendor liability to an amount equal to the total amount that the customer has paid the Vendor in the 12 months prior to the incident in dispute? In order to offer the best possible price, Vendor respectfully requests a cap on liability consistent with industry standards and reasonable apportionment of risk on programs of similar size and complexity.

Answer:   Not being considered at this time.

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22456


Question:   Will the State hold negotiations after award of the project to the winning bidder? Vendor looks forward to negotiations to work out any remaining questions or concerns for the success of the project.

Answer:   Negotiation processes are completed prior to award and part of the selection process.

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22455


Question:   Is the State amenable to considering alternative contract language during contract negotiations? Vendor looks forward to negotiations to work out any remaining questions or concerns for the success of the project.

Answer:   Negotiation processes are established to be consistent, fair and competitive as part of the selection of vendor(s).

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22454


Question:   Will the State consider compensating Vendor for any unrecoverable costs incurred by delay of the program due to acts or omissions of the State? Vendor is firmly committed to implementing the program as scheduled. The State’s agreeing to this will have only positive effects for the success of the project.

Answer:   No, the State (ODJFS) is not responsible for vendor reimbursement.

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22453


Question:   RLB Section IX B, Termination, Sanction, Damages. Will the State agree to provide Vendor with a reasonable cure period prior to any termination for cause? Vendor respectfully requests that in accordance with industry standards, common business practice, and the principles of equity and fairness, Vendor be granted the opportunity to correct any alleged default prior to termination.

Answer:   ODJFS is reasonable and collaborates with awarded vendors throughout a project. If termination occurs at the request of the ODJFS, notification expectations are outlined within RLB.

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22452


Question:   RLB Section IX B, Termination, Sanction, Damages. Will the State agree to compensate Vendor for any unamortized costs and reasonable wind-down costs in the event of a termination for convenience? Vendor respectfully requests that in the event of any termination for reasons other than default by Vendor, the State reimburse Vendor for the unamortized costs of investments that Vendor undertook in reliance on its agreement with the State.

Answer:   No, the State (ODJFS) is not responsible for vendor reimbursement.

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22451


Question:   RLB Section IX B, Termination, Sanction, Damages. Will the State consider equitable adjustment of pricing in the event of a termination in part by the State? Because Vendor’s’ pricing is offered on the assumption that Vendor will be providing the full range of services requested in this RFP, Vendor respectfully requests that, in the event of any termination in part, the State be willing to negotiate equitable pricing appropriate to such a restructured deal.

Answer:   If termination occurs, ODJFS will only reimburse services rendered that met ODJFS RLB requirements and completed work deemed completed by the vendor based on the original cost proposal and/or State of Work of the award. ODJFS is not responsible for any other reimbursement as the result of an award termination.

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22450


Question:   RLB Section XIII, Contractual Requirements. Will the State confirm that that the terms and conditions of the STS will apply to this project? If so, what will be the order of precedence among the various contractual parts? Is the STS mentioned in Section XIII the same for all STS contracts? Vendor seeks to understand the order of precedence among disparate contractual parts.

Answer:   STS is a DAS-OIT contract that all State Agencies may use as a procurement vehicle. Any contract/agreement language and terms and conditions must be met under current vendor’s STS. Any terms and condition questions about STS is not the responsibility of ODJFS since it is not an agency contract!

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22449


Question:   On Attachment E, Personnel Profile Summary (Experience and Qualifications), Work Experience #1 on each of the forms asks for Position Title, but the remaining Work Experience boxes ask for Project Title. Would the State like us to supply the Position Title or the Project Title for each project listed?

Answer:   ODJFS wants the vendor to provide the Position Title for each experience listing.

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22408


Question:   In RLB Attachment F under Functional Requirements of the System, Section 1.5.6 requires real-time processing. 1) Can ODJFS provide estimates as to the number of users generating a document at the same time? 2) Does ODJFS have 100, 1000, 4000 users all pressing "enter" at the same time? 3) Can ODJFS provide average page counts for "real-time" forms?

Answer:   1 – ODJFS is requiring load testing be conducted for the 200 concurrent user level for real time processing. This is the best estimate at this time. 2 – ODJFS estimates a 200 concurrent user level. 3 – The smallest is 1 page and the largest is 14 pages, but most fall between 2 – 3 pages.

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22407


Question:   In RLB Attachment F under Functional Requirements of the System, Section 1.5.13 discusses batch processing. 1) Can ODFJS provide the peak number of forms generated per hour? 2) Does ODJFS have certain days per month where you generate more forms than other? 3) Can ODJFS provide average page counts for "batched" forms?

Answer:   The peak number of forms generated is 2 million and it takes 8 minutes and this happens once in the month of September. Production month can change at any time. The average page counts for forms are between 1 - 14 pages.

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22406


Question:   In RLB Attachment G, Section 1, Question 7, can ODJFS provide more details around this question?

Answer:   ODJFS would like an explanation of the functionality within the vendor’s DGS that allows user roles and levels, as defined in a user profile, to be passed to SETS, via the XML interface, for data retrieval.

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22405


Question:   In RLB Attachment G, Section 1, Question 6, can ODJFS explain what is meant by profiles?

Answer:   Profiles in this context refer to the roles the users are assigned when working in the DGS. ODJFS is looking for the level of security (E.G., county, document, page field, etc.).

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22404


Question:   In attachment N, ODJFS Technical Standards, section 3, Technical System Requirements, under Domain Middleware, can you please specify the WebSphere Application Server edition used at ODJFS. Specifically are you currently licensed for WebSphere Network Deployment or WebSphere Base?

Answer:   WebSphere Network Deployment is the version we currently use at ODJFS.

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22410


Question:   In RLB Section VIII Selection Process, the State cautions against “Proposal containing assumptions...” We understand this concern however, vendors may need to include a limited number of critical assumptions. Where in our proposal response should vendors include these assumptions (e.g., Cost Summary)?

Answer:   All Assumptions need to be clearly stated at the end of Tab “D”.

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22401


Question:   In RLB Section VI, B Vendor Deliverables, for the environments to be installed, only development and production are mentioned in item 2. We also recommend that the State have a test environment. Does the State require a test environment?

Answer:   Development environment is used for testing as well.

Date: 4/27/2011

Inquiry: 22400


Question:   It is our understanding that Vendors can use the qualifications of its sub-Vendors to meet the requirements set forth in the RFP. We respectfully request that the State confirm this understanding. The State has allowed this approach in the past to ensure a stronger implementation team and a more competitive proposal response. Thank you.

Answer:   Yes. The vendors may use the qualifications of its sub-Vendors to meet the requirements of this RLB.

Date: 4/26/2011

Inquiry: 22393


Question:   RLB Section VII Format of Submission states “In addition, the vendor must submit one Cost Summary (Attachment O) in a sealed envelope…” Should vendors include the Cost Summary information on the required CD copy of our response or is the State only requiring the Cost Summary in hard copy?

Answer:   ODJFS is requiring that a hard copy Cost Summary be included in a sealed envelope in the vendor’s bid package. A soft copy is not required but if the vendor does include one, it must be on a separate CD packaged in the same sealed cost Summary envelope. These cost Summaries will not be opened until the Phase I and II scoring is completed.

Date: 4/26/2011

Inquiry: 22383


Question:   RLB Section III Anticipated Procurement and Project Timetable states two purchase order awards will be issued for the project. The Purchase Order for the software license is estimated to be issued on 6/10/2011. The Purchase Order for the services is estimated to be issued shortly after 7/5/11. If there is a delay regarding the approval of either purchase order, will ODJFS move back the implementation date of 11/25/11?

Answer:   If any delay by ODJFS’ generation of a purchase order for services jeopardizes the 11/25/11/implementation date, that date will be revised.

Date: 4/26/2011

Inquiry: 22379


Question:   In RLB Section V.B Organizational Experience and Capabilities, item 1 states “In the event that the vendor proposes the use of any sub Vendors, information on the sub Vendor(s) and letters of commitment are required as well.” Where in the vendor’s proposal response should we include these letters of commitment from proposed sub Vendors? For example, should these letters be included in Tab C or following the Cover Letter in Tab A?

Answer:   These letters of commitment should be included in Tab A.

Date: 4/26/2011

Inquiry: 22372


Question:   In RLB Section V.B Organizational Experience and Capabilities, item 1 states “In the event that the vendor proposes the use of any sub Vendors, information on the sub Vendor(s) and letters of commitment are required as well.” Where in the vendor’s proposal response should we include these letters of commitment from proposed sub Vendors? For example, should these letters be included in Tab C or following the Cover Letter in Tab A?

Answer:   These letters of commitment should be included in Tab A.

Date: 4/26/2011

Inquiry: 22371


Question:   In RLB Section V.B Organizational Experience and Capabilities, item 1 states “In the event that the vendor proposes the use of any sub Vendors, information on the sub Vendor(s) and letters of commitment are required as well.” Where in the vendor’s proposal response should we include these letters of commitment from proposed sub Vendors? For example, should these letters be included in Tab C or following the Cover Letter in Tab A?

Answer:   These letters of commitment should be included in Tab A.

Date: 4/26/2011

Inquiry: 22370


Question:   In Attachment G, Section 1 Basic System Functionality, question 1 asks vendors to detail the functionality of their DSG as they relate to the requirements outlined in Functional Requirements Section of the ODJFS Business and Architecture Requirement document. Given the requirement that vendor responses cannot contain any proprietary or confidential information, is the State expecting a narrative that includes a point-by-point detailed response to each requirement in RLB Attachment F or are they expecting a broader discussion of the functionality required in RLB Attachment F?

Answer:   ODJFS is expecting a detailed response to this RLB. The general proprietary information warning is included because the vendor must understand that their responses to this RLB are public records under Ohio law. ODJFS realizes the proposed solution to this RLB will be met with Commercial Off-The-Shelf software and assumes the marketing descriptions of its functionality would not be proprietary information.

Date: 4/26/2011

Inquiry: 22375


Question:   In RLB Section V.B Organizational Experience and Capabilities, item 1 states “In the event that the vendor proposes the use of any sub Vendors, information on the sub Vendor(s) and letters of commitment are required as well.” Where in the vendor’s proposal response should we include these letters of commitment from proposed sub Vendors? For example, should these letters be included in Tab C or following the Cover Letter in Tab A?

Answer:   These letters of commitment should be included in Tab A.

Date: 4/26/2011

Inquiry: 22373


Question:   RLB Section I Purpose states that vendors will be responsible for “developing and installing two (2) document templates” as part of this project. Is it the State’s intent to use State personnel, trained by the vendor, to develop and install the other over 150 document templates currently in use by the Office of Child Support or will the State be contracting with the winning vendor at some later time to complete the remaining required document templates?

Answer:   Yes. ODJFS will utilize state personnel to complete the available system document inventory. The vendor will not be contracted to handle that in the future.

Date: 4/26/2011

Inquiry: 22369


Question:   Can the State provide additional detail mapping the evaluation criteria included in RLB Attachment C for the “Proposed Document Generation System Solution” to the technical requirements included in RLB Attachment F?

Answer:   No. ODJFS does not have a specific mapping of the evaluation criteria to each business requirement. A few of the criteria are general, such as Overall Functionality, and others are specific, such as Security.

Date: 4/26/2011

Inquiry: 22368


Question:   In RLB Section XIV Other Requirements, items B and C require vendors to disclose certain information about previous performance however, there does not appear to be a clear place within the required response format to include this information. If Vendors have such disclosures to make, can this information be appended to the Cover Letter? If not, where should these disclosures be included in the vendor’s response?

Answer:   This information should be appended to the cover Letter.

Date: 4/26/2011

Inquiry: 22367


Question:   In RLB Section VII Format of Submission, the requirement for Tab H requires vendors to include a copy of the Vendor’s current Ohio State Term Contract. Are Vendors required to include the entire contract or just the cover page as required in the instructions for Tab A – Cover Letter?

Answer:   The vendor should include the cover of their State Term contract as well as the pages that specifically identify the Job Titles and Products listed in Attachment O. Other pages can be omitted.

Date: 4/26/2011

Inquiry: 22365


Question:   In RLB Section VII Format of Submission, the requirement for Tab D requires vendor to submit a Document Generation System Solution description in addition to our response to RLB Attachment G. Please confirm that vendors are required to include a separate narrative description of our solution in addition to completing RLB Attachment G. If a separate narrative is required, can the State please clarify what is expected in the vendor’s “Document Generation System Solution description”? Is this the section where vendors should address the Evaluation Criteria for the Proposed Document Generation System outlined in RLB Attachment C? Or is the State expecting a detailed response to the requirements in RLB Attachment F?

Answer:   Tab D is to include the vendors completed Attachment G listing of specific questions. If the attachment G does not allow the vendor to sufficiently detail their DGS’ functionality, it can be expanded by the vendor or additional information can be included within Tab D. If the vendor chooses to specifically address the scoring criteria in Attachment C as a part of their system solution detail, this detail would also be included in Tab D.

Date: 4/26/2011

Inquiry: 22363


Question:   RLB Section VII Format of Submission requires that all pages in vendors’ proposal responses be sequentially numbered. Does this include all required RLB Attachments and requested initial plans? For example, should vendors renumber the RLB Attachments that we are required to complete and submit to ensure they are sequentially numbered with the entire proposal response or retain the numbering native to the document? Similarly, are vendors expected to number their initial Project Management Plan so that it is sequentially numbered within the larger proposal response or can we page number this document separately as it is a draft deliverable?

Answer:   Vendors can retain the sequential numbering native to each attached document. The initial Project Management Plan submission can also be page numbered separately.

Date: 4/26/2011

Inquiry: 22362


Question:   Section XIII. Subsection C – Presentation. Per your request for the 90 minute Vendor Presentation / Demonstration, 05/16-20, who do we coordinate this with & because of travel can the Vendor pick the date & time?

Answer:   As outlined in the RLB, the Vendors that pass Phase II evaluation will be contacted accordingly with further instructions date and time.

Date: 4/25/2011

Inquiry: 22350


Question:   Regarding Section VI. Project Scope and Deliverables, subsection B. Vendor Deliverables, 9. Final System Completion Certification. Paragraph 9a seems to contradict the last paragraph on page 10 related to services and software payment. Please clarify. Also, is it the intent of ODJFS, OCS to pay for Services in one lump sum after the Final System Completion Certification is approved or will milestones have payments also?

Answer:   Section VI, subsection B, paragraph 9a is incorrect. This paragraph should read “ODJFS Approval of this document must be obtained prior to the payment of the second vendor purchase order for vendor services. This error will be corrected in an RLB Amendment.

Date: 4/25/2011

Inquiry: 22355


Question:   Section I. – Purpose, states that ”The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (ODJFS), Office of Child Support (OCS) is soliciting fixed price bids to identify a vendor who will supply, install, configure, and implement on ODJFS purchased hardware a Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Document Generation System (DGS).” Attachment O requires completion of Project Hours and Rates. How does ODJFS, OCS intend to use the information in Attachment O?

Answer:   As outlined in the RLB, the Fixed Price Cost Quote section of Attachment O is where the vendor details their fixed price bid by identifying the personnel and software licenses proposed to satisfy the work requirements of this RLB. In the first part of this section, the vendor must identify the required Project Manager and Implementation Lead and all individuals who will be working on the project. For each individual listed, the vendor will need to supply the STS Job Title, the hours to be worked, the vendors STS rate, the vendors discounted STS rate, and the total discounted cost (hours X discounted rate) for the individual. In the second part of this Cost Quote Section, the vendor must itemize each software license required to implement the system on both the development and production environments specified in the RLB. This includes the proper numbers of each license to accommodate the numbers of various ODJFS DGS users. For each license specified, the vendor needs to identify the item name, STS Product Number, Quantity specified, STS Cost, Discounted Cost, and Total discounted Cost (Qty X Discounted Cost). The sum of the Total Staff Cost and the Total Software cost will be the vendor’s not-to-exceed fixed price bid. This total bid will be scored using the criteria detailed in the RLB Section VII, C – Cost Scoring, page 18. The information provided in the Annual Software Maintenance Cost section of Attachment O will be used by ODJFS solely for the purpose of budgeting for the ongoing DGS software license maintenance agreements and will not be a part of the RLB scoring process.

Date: 4/25/2011

Inquiry: 22354


Question:   Section VI. Project Scope & Deliverables, Subsection A. Project Scope, Document Generation System: Will the 100 document designers be using the system for Designing / Developing / Deploying the documents to the Web? Batch? Both? Are the Document Designers located in a single location or throughout the state?

Answer:   100 Document designers (Template Authors) will be using the system for Designing / Developing /Deploying the documents to local printers, imaging applications, and to batch for subsequent centralized print. Document designers are located in various locations (88 counties) throughout Ohio.

Date: 4/25/2011

Inquiry: 22353


Question:   Section VI. Project Scope & Deliverables, Subsection A. Project Scope, Document Generation System: Will all 4,000 ODJFS and County staff members be using this system via the Web? How many named users will be needed?

Answer:   ODJFS prefers the general system users would be able to access the system via a web interface. All 4,000 will be required to have secured access via the ODJFS e-directory and DGS internal security roles. Therefore, they will all be named.

Date: 4/25/2011

Inquiry: 22352


Question:   Section VI. Project Scope & Deliverables, Subsection A. Project Scope, Document Generation System: How are the 100 Administrators going to be using the new Document Generation System?

Answer:   As outlined in the RLB, the administrators are identified as County or State template author, and they will be using the DGS for carrying out their role as stated in Attachment F of the requirement document. They should be able to create new or modify existing state forms or publications or existing county-designed document templates. Be able to create a header and/or footer that will be used for any document templates created in the state or county, and may have a standard opening/closing paragraph that would be used in multiple templates. They shall be able to see all document templates that share common template fragments, and be able to include general mathematical equations including: percentages, monetary amounts, decimals, rounding etc. They should be able to select from a list of data elements that are available to be pulled real-time from a data source and populated onto the document. They should be able to identify where the document shall print. They must have ability to save a draft template prior to completion. They should be able to update document and create their own versioning system, and save a draft template.

Date: 4/25/2011

Inquiry: 22351


Question:   Section I – Purpose, states The Vendor selected under this RLB will have until November 25, 2011 to complete this project. What is the vision / plan for implementing the new Document Generation System to the State & 88 Counties by 11/25/2011 (In Production)? Is there a phased rollout for production?

Answer:   As outlined in the RLB, implementation is considered to be complete once the UAT phase is successfully completed making the system production worthy. The vendor’s job is complete at that time and all ODJFS may need beyond that is warranty support. ODJFS does not anticipate a phased rollout due to the limited nature of the original implementation (2 templates). The 11/25/11 date reflects the limited scope of the vendor activities and the 90 hardware procurement period.

Date: 4/25/2011

Inquiry: 22349


Question:   Attachment F, page 4, item 1.5.9 reads “Throughput capacity”. Was additional description text omitted here or can additional explanation be provided?

Answer:   1.5.9 – It was a heading for this section including the subsequent requirements below. We did not miss any text. Please ignore this wording.

Date: 4/25/2011

Inquiry: 22348


Question:   Section VI. Project Scope and Deliverables, subsection B. Vendor Deliverables, # 6 Load and Testing Deliverables, states that ODJFS load testing tools will be used to perform load testing of the system. What are the specific tools?

Answer:   These tools are identified in Attachment H.

Date: 4/25/2011

Inquiry: 22347


Question:   1.5.1—This shall include the ability to mask/redact data elements from identified users/roles. Please provide an example or explain where this would need to occur, on the template itself, within the system where a user brings up the case information or as the user is creating a document. 12.3 Aesthetics The system should allow for branding of pages using the ODJFS logo. Is it the composition tool or web pages that the user will use to select cases and create documents or both? 17.2.1—The system should manage authorizations using application resources (application database). Please clarify/expand? 17.2.6—The system should be able to add, edit, and delete security roles as well as customize security on a field and page level basis. Can you please provide an example or scenario to explain this? 18.1.7—The system should employ a layered approach to protecting data Can you please provide an example or scenario to explain this?

Answer:   1.5.1 – This is a nice-to-have feature. For example, if an SSN is used, only the first 4 bytes would display during preview. 12.3 – Since ODJFS does not know the functionality of the composition tools and system architecture the vendors are proposing, it is impossible to answer this question. ODJFS business requirements specify the functionality desired, not the architecture. 17.2.1 – ODJFS requires the DGS to handle role based security (after initial logon which is linked to the ODJFS Novell e-Directory) entirely within DGS. Therefore, DGS resources and functionality will be required to handle this security. If the DGS requires an external database, the vendor’s hardware/software specification (Attachment H) must detail these requirements for ODJFS purchase. 17.2.6 – An example would be changing a staff member’s role from general user to administrator when a promotion occurs or job assignment changes. Customizing security at the field level or page level would cause the redacting/masking of information in 1.5.1 above. 18.1.7 - There must be security protection at every layer in the application; meaning authentication, authorization, all interfaces must be secured by user id/password, database access must be allowed only via a user id/password, server access is via secure methods etc.

Date: 4/25/2011

Inquiry: 22345


Question:   HP would like to request an extension on the due date for this letterhead bid. We need the additional time to prepare a quality proposal that addresses all of the business requirements in this bid. We also need additional time to ensure our STS contains all the software and services requested in the bid. Please consider extending the due date two week out. Thanks

Answer:   As previously answered. We are unable to extend this date due to end of fiscal year procurement process.

Date: 4/25/2011

Inquiry: 22322


Question:   HP would like to request an extension on the due date for this letterhead bid. We need the additional time to prepare a quality proposal that addresses all of the business requirements in this bid. We also need additional time to ensure our STS contains all the software and services requested in the bid. Please consider extending the due date two week out. Thanks

Answer:   As previously answered. We are unable to extend this date due to end of fiscal year procurement process.

Date: 4/25/2011

Inquiry: 22321


Question:   RLB Section V.A Required Vendor Qualifications states that “Vendors which do not meet both of the above requirements will be disqualified from further consideration for award.” However, there is only one bullet listed under Section V.A. Will a copy of the vendor’s current STS cover page, included in Tab H of vendor’s proposal, meet the Required Vendor Qualifications?

Answer:   Yes. A copy of the vendor's STS cover page will meet the Required Vendor Qualifications.

Date: 4/22/2011

Inquiry: 22380


Question:   Can the State please clarify what the title of the tab should be for Tab C? In the initial list of the response sections in RLB Section VII Format of Submission on page 11, it is listed as “Vendor Qualifications – Organizational Experience and Capabilities” and on page 12, it is listed as “Vendor Qualifications”.

Answer:   Vendor Qualifications – Organizational Experience and Capabilities

Date: 4/22/2011

Inquiry: 22377


Question:   Can the State please clarify what the title of the tab should be for Tab F? In the initial list of the response sections in RLB Section VII Format of Submission on page 12, it is listed as “Standard Affirmation and Disclosure Form” and on page 13, it is listed as “Standard Affirmation and Disclosure Form: Banning the Expenditure of Public Funds on Offshore Services”.

Answer:   Standard Affirmation and Disclosure Form

Date: 4/22/2011

Inquiry: 22378


Question:   Can the State please clarify what the title of the tab should be for Tab C? In the initial list of the response sections in RLB Section VII Format of Submission on page 11, it is listed as “Vendor Qualifications – Organizational Experience and Capabilities” and on page 12, it is listed as “Vendor Qualifications”.

Answer:   Vendor Qualifications – Organizational Experience and Capabilities

Date: 4/22/2011

Inquiry: 22376


Question:   RLB Section XI State Contracts requires vendor to list any current contracts we have with the State of Ohio, including the purpose of the contract, the amount of the contract, the time period covered by the contract, and the percent of the project completed. We are instructed to include this information in Attachment B however, RLB Attachment B only requests information for the last fiscal year and only has space to include the agency name and contract value. Where should vendors include the other contract information required in RLB Section XI?

Answer:   Vendors can add additional sheets of paper containing other contract information, if necessary. Additional sheets should be submitted under Tab G along with the Required Vendor information and Certification Document.

Date: 4/22/2011

Inquiry: 22366


Question:   In RLB Section VII Format of Submission, the requirement for Tab G requires that the completed and signed Required Vendor Information and Certifications form be included in Tab G of our response. However, the instructions at the top of RLB Attachment B itself state “Vendors are to provide the completed and signed information and certifications as the cover pages of their original proposal submitted to ODJFS.” Can the State please clarify whether Attachment B should be submitted in Tab G of our response or as the cover pages of the response?

Answer:   The Required Vendor Information and Certifications form is to be submitted in Tab G.

Date: 4/22/2011

Inquiry: 22364


Question:   RLB Section VII Format of Submission requires vendors to submit six copies of their response in hard copies. Are vendors required to include original signature documents in all six copies or should one of the six copies be marked as the “Original” and include the original signature documents and the five copies would contain copies of all signature documents?

Answer:   Original signatures in all submitted vendor's proposals.

Date: 4/22/2011

Inquiry: 22361


Question:   3. Is there an approval process for On-Demand Document generation required for any correspondence? This often is a rule / step in the document workflow that requires supervisor of management approval before being released for output / print? 4. Does ODJFS have an existing document portal, web site or shared infrastructure that the DGS solution could integrate with to host and present “published documents” for selection by ODJFS? Or, should the proposed solution include this infrastructure and functionality as part of the products / services proposed? 5. Does ODJFS have an existing document workflow solution or content management solution capable of delivering document generation workflows (for on-demand document generation) to facilitate the WIP requirement or any other approval or routing requirements? Or, should the proposed solution include this infrastructure and functionality as part of the products / services proposed? 6. Are all users of the DGS solution connected to the ODJFS network, or, can they be outside of the firewall? 7. Do you envision that all of the county and state developers will utilize a shared development environment / database for the sharing of object, components or “Fragments” from a single, centralized location? Does ODJFS utilize Citrix or Remote Desktops in its technology portfolio? 8. Do you envision that all of the county and state developers will fulfill correspondence requests via a centralized production environment for real-time and batch output. 9. Is the production environment going to be licensed and installed on the mainframe, or, will it be deployed on mid-range servers? 10. Is Filenet being used only as a final storage location for composed PDF documents, or, does the DGS need to pull content, images, or documents from it for output? Does Filenet play any additional roles in the document composition process or workflow? 11. How long can documents remain in the “Work in Progress” state? 12. Can we please get the attachments in word format?

Answer:   Yes. Check the requirements. There is an approval process for approving a template prior to publication for use by the document generation users. This is outlined in Attachment F “Business and Systems Requirements Document” Template Review/Approval Process section. Also the approval process after diagrams on page 23 of Attachment E. No. A portal does not exist at the current time. However, one is anticipated in the near future. The proposed solution must include a document workflow solution. So, the infrastructure and functionality must be a part of the vendor’s proposed solution. All users are a part of or connected to the ODJFS network. This is outlined in Attachment F “Business and Systems Requirements Document” in the Document Generation Section. ODJFS is depending on the vendor to propose the development environment. We expect all of the document developers to have role based access a centrally stored document/component library for efficient use of the system. Remote Desktops. Yes, ODJFS envisions a centralized environment for correspondence requests, both real-time and batch. The hardware used for the production environment will be up to the successful vendor’s proposal. ODJFS has both mainframe and server environments and can accommodate either. Final storage and no (FileNet will be the storage location for completed documents.) There is no defined time at this point—no less than 30 days. (Should be parameter driven and configurable.) Instructions in the bid: Send the word version request to:OIS-IT-BID-REQUEST@jfs.ohio.gov

Date: 4/22/2011

Inquiry: 22336


Question:   1.It appears that ODJFS’s request for professional services is for the vendors to work with ODJFS resources to develop documents and configure and deploy the solution. Can you please confirm that this is accurate, or whether ODJFS has a desired vendor deployment model, based on the definitions below: a.Turn-Key – Correspondence applications and solution are developed solely by Vendor Resources (using requirements delivered by client), and delivered to ODJFS upon completion for System and Integration Testing and UAT Testing. Vendor leads Project Management responsibilities. b.Joint Application Development - Correspondence applications and solution are developed jointly by vendor and ODJFS employees. Project Management is led primarily by Vendor. c.Mentorship / Support - Correspondence applications are developed by MSF employees, mentored and supported by Vendor resources. Project Management is led by ODJFS. 2.How many resources from the state, and what type of resources (roles and responsibilities), will be provided to support the project and for the deployment of the solution, and to development or convert correspondence (based on the approaches outlined above). 3.Do vendors need to provide service estimates for post-implementation and go-live support (in addition to other phases of the project)? 4.It appears that the vendor is expected to provide a Test Plan and Approach / Methodology for System and UAT testing. In 19.3 “Testing and Deployment” you indicate “Test scenarios developed with ODJFS assistance”. What role would the vendor play in developing the test scenarios (besides providing support) and supplying data versus the ODJFS? 1.If appears that only 2 templates are to be included in the 1st phase of the project, with all other templates to be converted in subsequent phases by state office or county developers. Does ODJFS require professional services support through the subsequent phases of the project for template development and conversion, or, only in the initial phases of the project? 2.Is there a requirement for the correspondence in scope to be produced in any additional languages other than English? 3.Is the sample template included in the “Attachment I” going to be included in the scope of the project (2 Templates in Scope)? Can ODJFS provide samples of the 2 templates that will be included in the scope of the project? 4.Section 5 and 6 of the Document Generation business requirements (On-Demand Documents) appears to indicate that the document user needs to be able to enter data for the document to be complete. Can you confirm, and more clearly outline the functionality steps required, for the following scenarios: a.Is the missing data entered on a data entry screen before the document is composed and presented to the user, or, b.Is the document composed, and presented to the user as a preview of the actual document view, with fields identified for data entry, and then submitted for final production? (Ie. Interactive entry of data on the documents) 5.Are there other user based interactive requirements for the DGS tool, to allow users to perform other functions like selecting text, enter values, enter dates, select check boxes, enter free text or other functions, prior to submission for fulfillment? If so, can you provide overview of desired functionality, and some use cases or samples where this is relevant. 1.Can ODJFS provide or proposed Network and/or Applications Diagrams to demonstrate the current systems and interfaces involved producing correspondence by a state and county worked, which will be employed in this project. 2.Can ODJFS provide a list of unique use cases (workflow’s) that will need to be developed in the new solution (if there are other unique workflows outside of what was provided in the RFP)?

Answer:   ODJFS intends for this to be a turn-key project where the vendor installs their software, configures the system (including DGS interfaces), develops two (2) templates, tests the system, and trains ODJFS users. ODJFS will provide over-site/monitoring resources, such as a project manager, and SMEs for technical environment, and testing when necessary. Implementation is considered to be complete once the UAT phase is successfully completed making the system production worthy. The vendor’s job is complete at that time and all ODJFS may need beyond that is warranty support. The vendor demonstrating the software works; Utilizing the two document templates specified in the RLB, the vendor will develop the Test Plan, test scripts, incident tracking mechanism, and provide professional services support during the testing phase, including Load Testing. No. ODJFS only requires professional support through the initial phase where two templates are developed, tested, and implemented. All correspondence will be produced in English. The second template to be developed, per the RLB, must enable a graphic to be inserted into the English text document. This graphic has instructions in other languages telling the document recipient, in their language, to contact a translator using the phone number provided. Yes. The sample template (Attachment I) is the first of the two required templates. The second is the template that will be designed by the vendor to include the graphic, which contains foreign language text instructions. Option b. is correct. The user is prompted to enter the data in the required fields prior to generating the document. The user should also be able to preview the template with the data that the user entered in addition to data that was pulled from the mainframe system. ODJFS is opened to flexibility to enter data online in the real-time mode to be necessary. ODJFS is open to the type of system process with capability to add non-interface data. Yes, these requirements were identified in Attachment F “Business and Systems Requirements Document” outlined in the template design section. No, Network and/or Applications Diagrams to demonstrate the current systems and interfaces involved producing correspondence by a state and county worked does not exist now. The workflows included in the RLB will be all that are need for this body of work.

Date: 4/22/2011

Inquiry: 22335


Question:   Can you please provide the documents in Word format? Thank you.

Answer:   We will provide the WORD version of the attachments, to be completed, to any vendor upon request. Please send your request to the following e-mail address: OIS-IT-BID-REQUEST@jfs.ohio.gov

Date: 4/21/2011

Inquiry: 22346


Question:   Can you please send a word copy of the attachments as soon as possible.

Answer:   We will provide the WORD version of the attachments, to be completed, to any vendor upon request. Please send your request to the following e-mail address: OIS-IT-BID-REQUEST@jfs.ohio.gov

Date: 4/21/2011

Inquiry: 22342


Question:   Can you please send a word copy of the attachments as soon as possible.

Answer:   We will provide the WORD version of the attachments, to be completed, to any vendor upon request. Please send your request to the following e-mail address: OIS-IT-BID-REQUEST@jfs.ohio.gov

Date: 4/21/2011

Inquiry: 22341


Question:   Please provide attachments A-O in MS Word format.

Answer:   We will provide the WORD version of the attachments, to be completed, to any vendor upon request. Please send your request to the following e-mail address: OIS-IT-BID-REQUEST@jfs.ohio.gov

Date: 4/21/2011

Inquiry: 22315


Question:   Please provide attachments A-O in MS Word format. Thanks, Lane

Answer:   We will provide the WORD version of the attachments, to be completed, to any vendor upon request. Please send your request to the following e-mail address: OIS-IT-BID-REQUEST@jfs.ohio.gov

Date: 4/21/2011

Inquiry: 22314


Question:   Please provide attachments A-O in MS Word format. Thanks, Lane

Answer:   We will provide the WORD version of the attachments, to be completed, to any vendor upon request. Please send your request to the following e-mail address: OIS-IT-BID-REQUEST@jfs.ohio.gov

Date: 4/21/2011

Inquiry: 22313


Question:   based on the new project timetable proposals are still due 5/2. Is the state going to give a one week extension on the proposal due date?

Answer:   No extension on the proposal due date.

Date: 4/21/2011

Inquiry: 22339


Question:   Given the comprehensive requirements provided by the State for the Document Generation System project and our desire to provide the State with a complete and responsive bid submission, we respectfully request a one-week extension to the RLB deadline for submission of vendor questions listed RLB Section III Anticipated Procurement and Project Timetable.

Answer:   We should be able to extend the deadline for submission of questions from April 21, 2011, to April 27, 2011. Please see addendum #2, Revised Anticipated Procurement and Project Timetable.

Date: 4/21/2011

Inquiry: 22331


Question:   Given the comprehensive information required of the Document Generation System response and our desire to provide the State with a complete and responsive bid submission, we respectfully request a two-week extension of the RLB proposal response due date listed RLB Section III Anticipated Procurement and Project Timetable.

Answer:   We are unable to extend this date due to end of fiscal year procurement process.

Date: 4/21/2011

Inquiry: 22330


Question:   As described throughout RLB Section VII Format of Submission, we are requesting that the State provide Word versions of the RLB Attachments that Vendors are required to complete, including A, B, D, E, G, H, and O.

Answer:   We will provide the WORD version of the attachments, to be completed, to any vendor upon request. Send your request to the following e-mail address: OIS-IT-BID-REQUEST@jfs.ohio.gov

Date: 4/21/2011

Inquiry: 22329


Question:   Given the complexity of the Document Generation System project and our desire to provide you with a comprehensive response, we respectfully request a 2 week extension to the RLB response due date. Thank you.

Answer:   We are unable to extend this date due to end of fiscal year procurement process.

Date: 4/21/2011

Inquiry: 22324


Question:   HP would like to request an extension on the due date for this letterhead bid. We need the additional time to prepare a quality proposal that addresses all of the business requirements in this bid. We also need additional time to ensure our STS contains all the software and services requested in the bid. Please consider extending the due date two week out. Thanks

Answer:   We are unable to extend this date due to end of fiscal year procurement process.

Date: 4/21/2011

Inquiry: 22323


back

Inquiry period ended:  4/27/2011 8:00:00 AM