Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Summary of RFP

The Office of Management and Enterprise Services is issuing this request for proposal to select a qualified supplier for an online, web-based solution, preferably on a cloud-based platform, that allows state agencies to manage application intake, review, inspection, investigation, permits status and compliance activities related to issuing various types of licenses/permits affiliated with each state agency’s mission.

All questions regarding this solicitation must be posted to this page by 3 p.m. Central Time on Aug.23, 2017. Questions received after that date may not be answered.

For more information about this solicitation, please go to the 0900009281 solicitation page.

Vendor Questions and Answers

If you are a vendor and wish to ask a question specific to this solicitation, simply login to this community of practice and follow the instructions below. If you are a vendor and do not currently have access to login to this community of practice, please submit an online access request form. In order to guarantee that your access is created prior to closing date for submitting questions for a solicitation, please request access at least 5 business days prior to the closing date for questions. The State of Oklahoma cannot be responsible for a vendor’s lack of access if the request is not made within this timeline.

All questions, including those submitted by e-mail to the contracting officer, must be posted to the wiki. We understand that your access to the wiki may have resulted in a delay in your ability to post questions in accordance with the deadline. However, after you obtain access, you must submit your questions on the wiki to ensure the state’s response is provided.

Adding a New Question

To add a new question, simply choose the "Add Comment" link at the bottom of the appropriate solicitation page. After clicking the link, a text field will open. Type your question in the text field. When you've finished typing your question, select the "Post" button to post your question. Note: this feature may not work in older versions of Internet Explorer.

Replying/Posting a Follow-up Question

To ask a follow-up question to an existing question asked by you or another vendor, select the "Reply" link under the comment to which you want to ask your follow-up question. Type your follow-up question in the text box. When you have finished typing, please select the "Post" button.

If you have other questions, please contact the OMES Service Desk at (405) 521-2444 or servicedesk@omes.ok.gov.

Labels:
solicitation solicitation Delete
0900009281 0900009281 Delete
license license Delete
permit permit Delete
state state Delete
agency agency Delete
web-base web-base Delete
cloud-based cloud-based Delete
applicatiom applicatiom Delete
Enter labels to add to this page:
Please wait 
Looking for a label? Just start typing.
  1. Jul 28, 2017

    Is the government only looking for a COTS solution or would also consider a custom developed application solution?

    1. Aug 08, 2017

      The State of Oklahoma is not interested in having a custom developed application.

  2. Aug 02, 2017

    RFP Page #
    Require-ment #
    Question

    16 C.3.1.10 GPS capability for tracking and mapping

    Do you have a map-based interface with your current system today?
    16 C.3.2. Permit/Licensing/Renewal Processing

    What types of permits are you wanting to issue through the new system?  Can you please provide the list of permit and license types?
    29 C.3.1.3. Must have configuration capabilities to accommodate multiple agencies and license types.

    Can you please provide a breakdown of the multiple agencies and license types?
    29 C.3.1.14. Configurable dashboards

    What information would you like to be displayed on the dashboards?
    30 C.3.1.15. Inventory management capabilities to track assets taken upon enforcement of
    Investigations

    Can you please provide more information?  Please clarify inventory management and “assets” that are being tracked for enforcement of investigations.
    30 C.3.1.16 Configurable exams that can be uploaded and modified

    Please clarify configurable exams.  Is this a component that you would like the future system to capture or will they be attachments to the process?
    30 C.3.2.2. Renew license or permit

    What is your license and permit renewal process today?  Do you invoice customers for outstanding fees prior to renewal?  For example, car registrations --car registration renewal fees are mailed to customers prior to renewal.  If they are not paid in time a late fee (or penalty fee) is added.
    30 C.3.2.4 Accept payments for fees inside and outside of license functions (i.e. request for license verification, certificate of expanded functions, etc.)

    What is your current payment fee process today?  What is the financial software that OMES uses today?
    30 C.3.2.5 Process refunds or apply credits

    What is your refund/credit process today?
    30 C.3.2.9 Batch process permits or licenses

    Can you please provide more information?  What is your batch process today for permits and licenses?
    30 C.3.2.11 Transfer license or permit to another user

    Please provide more information for requirement.  How is license or permit information transferred to another user?
    30 C.3.2.14 Ability for sponsor/employer and/or licensee to process batch payments

    Can you please provide more information/clarification on this requirement?
    30 C.3.2.15 Create, print, and track invoices

    Are these invoices for renewals for outstanding fees?  Please refer back to the question for requirement C.3.2.2.
    30 C.3.2.16 Collect Continuing Education Units (CEU's)

    What sort of information is captured for CEU’s?
    31 C.3.3.1 Tracking disciplinary actions

    Please clarify disciplinary actions.  Are these code violations?
    31 Reporting What reporting tool are you using today?
    31 C.3.5.4 Ability to interface with existing imaging system

    What imaging system are you using today?
     
    How are inspections completed today?  Are they done remotely in the field?  If so, what system are the inspectors using in the field today?
    1. Aug 08, 2017

      C.3.1.10. Do you have a map-based interface with your current system today?

      We do not have GPS capability with our current system.

      C.3.2. What types of permits are you wanting to issue through the new system? Can you please provide the list of permit and license types?

      Professional licenses/permits supporting over 500 different license types supporting approximately 50 different agencies who issue over 750,000 licenses and or permits across the State of Oklahoma. A complete list will be provided upon selection of a supplier.

      C.3.1.3. Can you please provide a breakdown of the multiple agencies and license types?

      Please see answer 16.

      C.3.1.14. What information would you like to be displayed on the dashboards?

      Dashboards should be user configurable as needed by each agency. Examples may be License request status, number of licenses renewed by time period, etc.

      C.3.1.15. Can you please provide more information? Please clarify inventory management and “assets” that are being tracked for enforcement of investigations.

      This component is in response to any agencies who conduct investigations for complaints or code enforcement tracking and may need to confiscate assets or property. More information and examples will be provided upon selection of a vendor.

      C.3.1.16. Please clarify configurable exams. Is this a component that you would like the future system to capture or will they be attachments to the process?

      This may be both. Some agencies may want to upload exams that are completed at the agency and others may want to create an online exam to give to licenses at their agencies.

      C.3.2.2. What is your license and permit renewal process today? Do you invoice customers for outstanding fees prior to renewal? For example, car registrations-car registration renewal fees are mailed to customers prior to renewal. If they are not paid on time a late fee (or penalty fee) is added.

      These processes vary from agency to agency by license type. This information will be provided in more detail upon selection of a supplier.

      C.3.2.4. What is your current payment fee process today? What is the financial software that OMES uses today?

      These processes vary from agency to agency by license type. The information will be provided in more detail upon selection of a supplier. The software varies from agency to agency as well.

      C.3.2.5. What is your refund/credit process today?

      These processes vary from agency to agency by license type. This information will be provided in more detail upon selection of a supplier.

      C.3.2.9. Can you please provide more information? What is your batch process today for permits and licenses?

      These processes vary from agency to agency by license type. This information will be provided in more detail upon selection of a supplier.

      C.3.2.11. Please provide more information for the requirement. How is a license or permit information transferred to another user?

      These processes vary from agency to agency by license type. This information will be provided in more detail upon selection of a supplier.

      C.3.2.14. Can you please provide more information/clarification on this requirement?

      These processes vary from agency to agency by license type. This information will be provided in more detail upon selection of a supplier.

      C.3.2.15. Are these invoices for renewals for outstanding fees? Please refer back to the question for requirement C.3.2.2.

      Both. These processes vary from agency to agency by license type. This information will be provided in more detail upon selection of a supplier.

      C.3.2.16. What sort of information is captured for CEU’s?

      A continuing education unit (CEU) or continuing education credit (CEC) is a measure used in continuing education programs to assist the professional to maintain his or her license in their profession. These processes vary from agency to agency by license type. This information will be provided in more detail upon selection of a supplier.

      C.3.3.1. Please clarify disciplinary actions. Are these code violations?

      They may be code violations or disciplinary actions put in place by the board to oversee the particular professional license. These processes vary from agency to agency by license type. This information will be provided in more detail upon selection of a supplier.

      What reporting tool are you using today?

      There is not a standard reporting tool. These processes vary from agency to agency by license type. This information will be provided in more detail upon selection of a supplier.

      C.3.5.4. What imaging system are you using today?

      An example is ApplicatinXtender; however, applications vary from agency to agency. This information will be provided in more detail upon selections of a supplier.

      How are inspections completed today? Are they done remotely in the field? If so, what systems are the inspectors using in the field today?

      Some are done remotely in the field; however, these processes vary from agency to agency by license type. This information will be provided in more detail upon selection of a vendor.

  3. Aug 02, 2017

    19 C.5.1.3 RFP page 19, Item C.5.1.3 requests that upgrades and patches to be vetted with OMES/IS Security prior to deployment.  Please explain the process that vendors are to follow in order to comply with this requirement.
    27 E.13.4.5 RFP page 27, item E.13.4.5. Value Added requests responses to Section C.3. However, the evaluation criteria and Checklist both ask for Value Added comments.  Should vendors address Section C.9 here instead of C.3 in their response?
    28 F. Checklist RFP page 28 refers to an Attachment A-The State of Oklahoma-security Certification a Accreditation for external System.  However, there was not an Attachment A attached to the RFP.  Please clarify what vendors need to do to comply with this request.
    28 F. Checklist This is the only place where a Vendor Payee Form is mentioned. Please clarify what vendors need to do to comply with this request.
    1. Aug 16, 2017

      C.5.1.3. requests that upgrades and patches to be vetted with OMES/IS Security prior to deployment. Please explain the process that suppliers are to follow in order to comply with this requirement.

      An email notification should be sent to the OMES Service Desk at servicedesk@omes.ok.gov and copy qaa@omes.ok.gov. Proved the following information:

      • Service impacted
      • Description of Maintenance, Event or Change
      • Planned Start Date, End Date
      • Planned Start Time, End Time
      • Contact name and information

      If security patches are being applied an email notification should be sent to securityoperationscenter@omes.ok.gov. Provide the following information:

      • Patches being applied
      • Planned Start Date, End Date
      • Planned Start Time, End Time
      • Contact name and information

      OMES recommends that notifications be sent 2 weeks prior to the implementation date for proper scheduling and conflict review, but must be received not later than 48 hours before implementation, except in the event of critical emergency maintenance or restoration of a service caused by a service incident.

      E.13.4.5. Value Added requests responses to Section C.3. However, the evaluation criteria and Checklist both ask for Value Added comments. Should vendors address Section. C.9 here instead of C.3. in their response?

      Yes. This should reference C.9. instead of C.3.

      The State of Oklahoma-Security Certification Accreditation for External System. However, there was not an Attachment A attached to the RFP. Please clarify what vendors need to do to comply with this request.

      Amendment 3 is the Security Certification Accreditation form. Please fill out and submit it as part of the final response.

      This is the only place where a Vendor Payee Form is mentioned. Please clarify what vendors need to comply with this request.

      Amendment 2 is the Vendor Payee Form. Please fill this out and submit it as part of the final response.

  4. Aug 08, 2017

    When does the state anticipate award or execution of contract with selected/preferred vendor? Prior to end of calendar year?

    1. about 10 hours ago

      Our goal is to select and possible award prior to the end of the calendar year.

  5. Aug 08, 2017

    Please provide the following information:

    Total number of named backoffice users (permitting)?

    Total number of named backoffice users (licensing)?

    Total number of mobile field inspectors (inspectors require back-office license)?

    1. about 10 hours ago

      30+ agency’s that all have multiple named back office users as well as field inspectors.

  6. Aug 08, 2017

    Please confirm: OMES would prefer vendor to host them in a SaaS, or cloud environment vs. hosting the system itself.

    1. about 10 hours ago

      OMES would prefer a SaaS or cloud environment.

  7. Aug 08, 2017

    A.39. Offshore Services 

    No offshore services are provided for under this Contract. State data shall not be used or accessed internationally, for troubleshooting or any other use not specifically provided for herein without prior written permission, which may be withheld in the State’s sole discretion, from the appropriate authorized representative of the State 

    To confirm, OMES is stating that no aspect of this project can be performed using offshore services, including configuration, report development, interface development, etc. Correct?

    1. about 10 hours ago

      Correct, no offshore services provided

  8. Aug 08, 2017

    How quickly, or frequently does OMES anticipate responding to vendor questions?

    1. Aug 08, 2017

      This question has already been addressed. OMES responds to questions as quickly as possible.

  9. Aug 08, 2017

    How many total license and permit types will OMES need configured into the new system? 

    Here are examples of what we consider "types" of permits/licenses:

    • Electrical Contractor
    • Mechanical Journeyman
    • Plumbing Apprentice
    •  Home Inspector
    • Fire Sprinkler
    • Real Estate License Broker (BP, BM, BB, BR)
    •  Volunteer License 

    Etc...

    1. about 10 hours ago

      Approximately 500 license/permit types at this time

  10. Aug 08, 2017

    Does OMES have a stated budget for this project? If so, can you provide it?

    If not, can you provide a range (between X and Y)?

    1. about 10 hours ago

      This does not apply to questions concerning how to prepare a response.

  11. Aug 08, 2017

    The RFP contained the following statement:

    A.37. Limitation of Liability

    To the extent any limitation of liability in any Contract Document is construed by a court of competent jurisdiction to be a limitation of liability in violation of applicable law, such limitation of liability shall be void.

    After reviewing the RFP and Oklahoma Attorney General Opinion 06-11, which in addition to the statement above, included the guidance that “a limitation of liability clause that creates an unfunded contingent liability for the State is void for public policy”.

    Does the State have any ability to reach an agreement with a binding limitation of liability?

    1. about 8 hours ago

      Without going into specific details, we are permitted to agree to certain limitation of liability provisions. However, each limitation of liability will need be evaluated and negotiated for compliance with Oklahoma law and business impact. For example, there are legal limitations, such as the fact that Oklahoma law prohibits contracts, which exempt a party from its own fraud, willful Injury or a violation of law, whether willful or negligent. Further, there are liabilities that certain vendors try to limit, which the State would not agree to as a business decision even if there were not a specific legal prohibition. The basic answer is yes. However, they will be evaluated on a case by case basis.

  12. Aug 09, 2017

    1.       Reference Section C.3.1.3 Configuration capabilities to accommodate multiple agencies and license types.  Does the State envision having State resources launch a new agency (new company, new general ledger, new fees, etc.) within the software and configuring each license for the new agency?  Or, would the State consider allowing the vendor to perform these configurations as part of a service agreement?

    2.       Reference Section C.3.1.10 GPS capability for tracking and mapping.  Please provide more detail on the State’s vision for use of GPS tracking and mapping within the software.  How will the State use GIS coordinates/GPS tracking within the workflow supported by the software?

    3.       Reference Section C.3.1.14 Configurable dashboards.  Can the State expand upon its vision for configurable dashboards?  How does the state envision using dashboards, for what modules and/or metrics?  Would the State accept dashboards that are pre-configured by the vendor as part of its service agreement with the State?

    4.       Reference 3.1.16 Configurable exams that can be uploaded and modified.  What format does the State envision uploading to the software to create the exam?  Does the State intend to use MS Word or MS Excel to create the exam for upload or is there some other program that will be the source of exam creation?

    5.       Reference Section C.3.2.14 Ability for sponsor/employer and/or licensee to process batch payments.  Does the State have an existing payment processor or would the State prefer the Vendor bring a PCI compliant payment processor to the State that can process batch payments?

    6.       Reference Sections C.3.5.1, C.3.5.3 and C.3.5.4 Interface.  Can the State describe the existing options or protocols for interfacing with other State agencies (web services, APIs, other)?

    7.       Reference Section 3.5.2 Conversion of current system data.  Will the State provide more detail on its current system data (number of systems/databases, format and size)?

    8.       Has the State received presentations from any vendors prior to this solicitation?  If so, please provide the names of the company(ies) and software package(s) reviewed by the State.

    9.       Does the State have a budget set aside for the acquisition, deployment, and ongoing support of the software?  If so, please provide detail of the budget if possible.

    1. Aug 16, 2017

      1. The state desires to have State resources set up any new agencies that come on board after the initial rollout. The vendor may present both options.

      2. An Example requirement is a need for inspectors working in the field to utilize GIS, or a requirement to map runways, signs, etc.

      3. Configurable dashboards that can be set up for each user. Agency’s all have different needs for dashboards, but, in general, most agency’s would like to see outstanding applications, open assignments, applications waiting on applicants, etc.

      4. Multiple formats may be used. Provide what your system would be capable of using.

      5. The vendor should provide whatever option they can offer for batch processing of payments.

      6. The vendor should provide whatever options they can offer.

      7. The information varies from one agency to another. If there are certain systems the vendor is not willing to work with, they should state that in the response otherwise provide an example of what they can do when there are various systems.

      8. The State has used Garner as a place for research of application options.

      9. This does not apply to questions concerning how to prepare a response.

  13. Aug 09, 2017

    1.       We have a Named User licensing structure. We define Named Users as "staff with access to the back-office Software regardless of whether such access is concurrent or consecutive."

    (a) Based on this definition, how many Named Users does the State anticipate having on its new system? (b) Is it the intention of OMES to have each agency involved considered separately, to scale costs with implementations per agency? (c) If yes, please separate the named users by each agency.  (d) Is there an alternative licensing structure required, such as a site license for the entire state?

    2.       The RFP mentions a need for certain third-party data-exchange interfaces. Please provide an inventory of these required system interfaces and the purpose of each. Also, please note if each interface will be one-way or two-way.

    3.       Can the State list all the types of licenses, registrations, permits, etc.  intended to be included in this system, the approximate number of entities applying for and holding each type, and specify which license type(s) will require which types of online functionality (e.g. online applications, renewals, verifications, disciplinary processes, etc.)?

    4.       Please provide the names of all system outputs required, including reports, queries, and correspondences.  Also provide the audience and the location from which each will be run (back-office, public website, specific login-secured area of public website, etc.).  If such details are not available at this time, please provide at least the total numbers of each type of output required.

    5.       Can the State elaborate on the agency's preferences regarding hosting with the vendor?

    6.       As a COTS software provider, we have a standard license agreement and additional contract terms which need to be incorporated into the procurement process.  Where in our response should these appear?

    7.       We offer multiple support plan options in addition to the primary support plan we will be proposing.  How would the State like vendors to incorporate the additional options and corresponding contract language into our proposal, to provide the agency with the right and option to choose from our full range of support options in the future?

    8.       Where information and images can be provided to clarify and serve to answer multiple questions, and/or this content does not fit well in the in-line response format, rather than repeat or cram such supporting information in-line, may vendors include supporting documents at the end of the main RFP response file, and reference specific documents in the in-line answers?  If not, please elaborate on where/how such information should be included.

    9.       Can the State elaborate on any need for mobile inspection/field investigation capabilities?  If there is any need, please respond to the following:  (a) How many mobile devices would the agency need set up to use on the new system?  (b) Would the agency need to use its own devices and mobile service, or could it pursue an all-inclusive solution integrated with its back-office system? (c) In order that we may determine the number of forms that would be integrated into the new mobile system, how many different forms are currently in use in the field? (d) How should pricing for these items be proposed?

    10.   Regarding project budget: (a) What is the budget for this project?  (b) If all cost proposals come in above a certain amount, would this RFP be cancelled? (c) What is that amount? (d) Did the legislature allocate any funds specifically for this project?  (e) If so, what is the amount allocated, and when does it need to be used?

    11.   Please identify instances where any agency employee has viewed or discussed a potential software application similar to the one being solicited in this RFP in the last 24 months. Please name the vendor(s), dates of contact and describe the nature of the contacts including whether pricing was discussed. Has the agency received any estimates or quotations for the services and software describe in this RFP, and if so, which ones and what were the amounts?

    12.   Sometimes we see that an agency desires to meet an overall schedule but struggles with finding the time to deliver on regularly scheduled items which add up to the total schedule.  Given any limited resources on the part of the State, will 10-day turnarounds on vendor approval requests be met, and where not met, allow for automatic approvals at 10 days in order to stay on schedule?  If not, will there be any other mechanism to ensure adherence to the schedule on the Agency’s end?

    13.   Regarding vendor’s staff assigned to the project, our experience shows vendors with their own COTS solution tend to have more processes guiding the implementation, as opposed to custom software requiring more dedicated staff management and adjustment to guide the implementation. Based on this:  (a) Please confirm which roles are required to be assigned to the project.  (b) Please indicate any required/expected percentage of such employees’ full-time work be dedicated to the project.  (c) In the case that the costs of such employees’ time being dedicated to the project would greatly increase the price of services, please help vendors understand the State’s preferences of 100% dedicated staff time versus cost savings by partial staff allocation to the project.  (d) Would the State prefer to have vendors show such dedicated staff time as optional in the cost proposal, to allow cost-savings if less dedicated staff management is actually required?

    14.   For item E11, the RFP states that, “The State of Oklahoma has issued payment cards to most State agencies. The current P-Card contract holder utilizes VISA.” For item E12, the RFP states that, “The State of Oklahoma passed legislation in 2012 requiring funds disbursed from the State Treasury be sent electronically.” Is there a requirement or preference as to which payment type(s) the vendor should accept for its services provided under this contract?

    15.   Item C.3.1.10 from Specifications/Requirements mentions GPS tracking and mapping. (a) Can the State elaborate on the needs in relation to GPS tracking and mapping that the agency requires? (b) Is this in relation to mobile inspections?

    16.   Item C.3.6.2 discusses accessibility of the system on mobile devices, over the web. In addition to mobile connectivity to the system over the web, does OMES also desire a data-disconnected mobile inspection solution for times/locations when internet services are unavailable?

    17.   Item C.3.7.10. states that a systems certification and accreditation must be performed on each web application before production and annually thereafter. Can the State elaborate on the specific certifications or accreditations that are required to meet this requirement?

    18.   Item C.6.1. states, “Bidder should submit a brief narrative (not to exceed 2 pages) describing the Bidder’s capabilities, including a summary work plan and project timeline, based from an estimated date of award, and any proposed interim milestones.” This sort of information is usually provided in a Gantt Chart and a management plan that far exceed two pages. Is it acceptable to provide summary information within 2 pages, and then point to supporting documentation including Gantt Chart and sample management plan that go into more detail?

    19.   Item C.3.1.16. mentions configurable exams that can be uploaded and modified. Can the State elaborate on this requirement, the access to exams, the exam process, and the involved parties?

    20.   Item A.27 mentions background checks and verifications. Specific nature of background checks and verifications may incur costs to the vendor. Can the State elaborate on this requirement as to specifics, and whether it should be included in the required or optional pricing category?

    21.   Item C.5.1.3. states, “The bidder shall provide notification by e-mail and telephone on any system changes and upgrades, no less than 2 weeks before implantation. These upgrades and patches should be vetted with the OMES/IS Security Department for the proposed environment.” Can the State elaborate on the ways that OMES/IS Security Department plans to vet the updates, and what criteria will be used to approve the system changes?

    1. about 9 hours ago

      1) 30+ agency’s that all have multiple named back office users as well as field inspectors. Propose as many licensing structures you are willing to offer.

      2) If you system has interfaces with 3rd parties, list them. Plan for one-way or two way as it varies by agency. Examples include OTC-Oklahoma Tax Commission, OSBI-Oklahoma State bureau of Investigations, Secretary of State, etc.

      3) Reference questions 29 and 41. All agencies will require the ability to do initial and renewal online applications, verification, disciplinary actions, etc.

      4) ADHOC and canned reports and searches with the ability to export data to provide to end users, board meetings, executives, etc.

      5) Refer to Q&A 26

      6) 

      7) C.5.2.5. If different levels of support are available, the bidders needs to provide the details and pricing for each level in the pricing section. Briefly describe procedures for problem escalation and bug fixes.

      E.13.7. Pricing

      All information relating to costs are to be sent in a separate binder/envelope, on a separate thumb drive clearly marked as “Price/Cost” Multiple price options and alternatives will be accepted and considered.

      8) 

      9)  a)    C.3.6.2. Accessibility to the system remotely (Web) or via mobile device (admins, agency staff, and licensees) with different sized screens (Responsive, Dynamic Flow)

           b)    The agencies will use their own devices

           c)     The number of forms will vary from agency to agency.

           d) The vendor should provide pricing proposal based on their capability to provide these features and best practices.

      10) Budget for this project has not been approved.

      11) This State has used Gartner as a place for research of application options.

      12) High level requirement gathering has begun with the agencies. Agencies are also currently gathering documentation on current system and needs to ensure a schedule can be kept.

      13) Based on C.8. of the RFP, it is expected that the vendor will provide project management for the implementation not limited to the following tasks: Kickoff Meeting, Project Schedule, Project Management Support, Progress Reports, and Change Management.

      14) There is no preference as to which payment type(s) the vendor should accept for its services provided under this contract. Please note in your response if your company accepts p-cards, EFT, or both.

      15) This is mostly in relation to mobile inspections. A couple of agency’s do have other requirements in terms of GPS for tracking certain landmarks (i.e. runways, signs, etc)

      16) Yes, the ability to work offline and then have the system sync up is desired.

      17) 

      18) Yes.

      19) State agencies need the ability to upload exams to the system for users to be able to complete. As legislation or other changes come up, these exams need to be able to be modified.

      20) 

      21) 

  14. Aug 10, 2017

    1.

    Form 004 (Certification for Competitive Bid and/or Contract). 

    What exactly is "Agency Number"?

    2.

    C.6.1. Bidder should submit a brief narrative (not to exceed 2 pages) Describing the Bidder’s capabilities, including a summary work plan and project timeline, based from an estimated date of award, and any proposed interim milestones. The Bidder must specify in the implementation-work plan, the tasks and activities that are to be undertaken, as well as identifying responsibility for completion of each activity task.

    It will be difficult to provide an adequate work plan and project timeline in 2 pages, when most project plans alone are generally at least 1-2 pages. Would OMES consider lifting this limitation?

    3.

    E.5. Solicitation Amendments

    E.5.1. If an “Amendment of Solicitation”, OMES Form 011 (or other format as provided), is issued, then the Bidder shall acknowledge agreement with each such Amendment of Solicitation by signing and returning the Solicitation Amendment. An executed Amendment may be submitted with the Bid or may be forwarded separately. If forwarded separately, the executed Amendment must contain this Solicitation number and Closing Date and Time on the front of the envelope. The State must receive the executed Amendment by the Closing Date and Time specified for receipt of bids for the Bid to be deemed responsive. Failure to agree to a Solicitation Amendment may be grounds for rejection.

    Amendment of Solicitation”, OMES Form 011 cannot be found in the RFP.  Is OMES referring to acknowledging each individual addendum. 

    1. about 9 hours ago

      1) 090

      2) Provide best summary and/or provide link if applicable.

      3) Yes, every amendment must be acknowledged to move forward in the evaluation process.

  15. Aug 10, 2017

    1. Which current application systems will be replaced by this project?  Please list the any brand name and custom systems.
    1. about 9 hours ago

      N/A

  16. Aug 11, 2017

    General:

    1. Would the State grant a two week extension to the due date of the RFP to allow vendors to review responses to questions asked?

    Organizational Scope:

    Section C.2.1 of the Solicitation states

    C.2.1. The intent of this Request for Proposal (RFP) is to select a qualified supplier for a web based licensing/permit software system to support high quality, secure, accessible and customizable data collection and reporting to support potentially 50 professional licensing agencies across the State of Oklahoma.

    We as a vendor are concerned that the cost estimate the State receives will vary widely based on the statement “potentially 50 professional licensing agencies”.  Could the State please provide the following to ensure an apples to apples comparison of vendors:

    1. How many agencies will be in scope for the implementation of the solution?
    2. Is there a preference to the deployment model (big bang if a limited number of agencies or phased if upwards of 50)?
    3. If phased, what is the grouping of agencies for deployment?

    Transaction Volumes:

    1. What are the number of permits per agency for those agencies that will be deploying the new solution?

    Timing:

    1. What is the anticipated start date of the project?
    2. Is there a required completion date for the project?
    3. Are there any timeframes to avoid due to lack of State resource availability or competing projects?
    1. about 9 hours ago

      1. OMES will not be extending the RFP at this time. There is a buffer period built into the solicitation timeline between the time the questions and answers close and the time the bid is due. All questions are being answered as quickly as possible.

      2. The vendor should make the recommendation based on their capabilities and best practices.

      3. To be determined on an agency to agency basis.

      4. Unknown until the selection process is completed.

  17. Aug 11, 2017

    Will the State consider a two week extension to ensure that vendors have adequate time to submit the highest quality response possible?

    Thank you.

    1. Aug 11, 2017

      OMES will not be extending the RFP. Questions close August 23 and bids are due September 8. There will be no extension as of this time. If this changes, an amendment will be posted.

  18. Aug 14, 2017

    Does OMES have an existing payment processing vendor that we can utilize (and integrate to) or do we need to provide that capability as a part of the solution we are offering in our response?

    1. about 9 hours ago

      The vendor should provide that capability as a part of the solution they are offering.

  19. Aug 16, 2017

    The state responded to an earlier question about the onboarding and implementation of additional agencies by stating:

    1. The state desires to have State resources set up any new agencies that come on board after the initial rollout.

    Question: how many agencies and corresponding license types should be accounted for in the initial rollout? 

  20. Aug 17, 2017

    1. c 3.2.8 – does the OEM anticipate that the selected vendor will provide the hardware for specialized printing (e.g. card printers) or are there already printers  in use that would continue to be used?

    2. In previous question responses, OMES has stated “These processes vary from agency to agency by license type. This information will be provided in more detail upon selection of a supplier.” Could you provide two or three examples that are somewhat indicative of general processes?

    3. It appears that the proposer is encouraged to document a potential approach that it thinks is best for the gradual onboarding of the 50 agencies.  Does that OEM have a preference for how onboarding is achieved?

    4. What time frame does the OEM have in mind for the conclusion of the onboarding of 50 agencies? 

    5. Given the amount of questions asked and yet unanswered, is there the possibility of an extension?

    1. Aug 17, 2017

      5. As previously stated in responses, there will be NO extension. The question and answer period close next week and the bids are not due until September 8. Questions are being answered as quickly as possible; however, many people are being consulted to give the best answer possible. There will be NO extension as of this time. If an extension is needed, then an amendment will be posted on this website.

  21. Aug 17, 2017

    Regarding the "Security Certification" spreadsheet recently posted to the OMES website, can the state please provide instructions on how to respond to this document, including an explanation of  the maturity rating columns?

  22. Aug 18, 2017

    1. C.3.1.2 – What specific fields are desired to be allowed for update by licensees for their online profile?
    2. C.3.1.3 part 1 – Does the State desire that the data for each agency be administered separately by each agency or by a central group within the State?
    3. C.3.1.3 part 2 - Additionally, does the data (e.g. Licensees, Licenses, Addresses) need to be separated between agencies or is there a desire for a shared system (e.g. one licensee record which could potentially be referenced by multiple agencies).
    4. C.3.1.8 – Please clarify who’s digital signatures need to be captured/recorded by the system, applicants/licensees or State staff?
    5. C.3.2.8 – Will each agency (and possibly License Type) have their own permit/license format or will this be standardized State wide, or by agency?
    6. C.3.5.1 and C.3.5.3 and C.3.5.4 – Please describe the type of data transfer required for each system integration.  (e.g. one-way or bi-directional, batch processing or real-time?)
    7. C.3.7.1 and C.3.7.4 and C.3.7.6 – Can the State please clarify what specific data fields are considered PII and intended to be tracked within the system?
    8. C.7.3 – Please clarify if the intention is that each of the 10 staff will receive one on one mentoring for 20 days each (200 days total) or if the intention is that each of the 10 staff will receive one on one mentoring for 2 days each (20 days total).
  23. Aug 20, 2017

    1. Can the State please provide a copy of Table 1.0 in “Section G. Other” in the native format (MS Word or Excel) it wishes to receive the completed table from the Bidder?
    2. Can the State please provide a breakdown of the evaluation criteria and how Bidders will be scored?
    3. Can the State please provide an implementation timeframe for the initial rollout including the desired number of professions (e.g., Nursing, Barbers, Real Estate, etc.) and license types to be included in the initial rollout?
    4. (C.3.1.10) – We interpret this requirement to mean that the solution shall be able to store the GPS coordinates for a location to be used for tracking and mapping by the agency. Is that a correct interpretation of the requirement?
    5. (C.3.1.16) – We interpret this requirement to mean that the product allows administrators to configure exam questions that can be answered by applicants and licensees online and scored. Is that a correct interpretation of the requirement?
    6. (C.3.2.17) – We interpret this requirement to mean that CE Providers and/or Agency Users can log in to the system and enter/record continuing education units on behalf of licensees. Is this a correct interpretation of the requirement?
    7. (C.3.5.4) – We interpret this requirement to mean that the Bidder’s solution will include an integrated document management system that will ingest documents produced by the Agency’s existing document imaging system. Is this a correct interpretation of this requirement? 
  24. yesterday at 9:35 PM

    Is the intent to have a statewide contract that agencies who are looking for this type of solution could draw from?

    Is it acceptable to provide a platform that can support the noted requires which the State can then configure a solution to meet the specific process requirements for each of the agencies?

    Is there a single agency that can provide detail on their licensing and permitting processes to allow a vendor to estimate the effort in deploying an agency in phase 1?

    Without additional detail to estimate the effort required to stand up a solution based on each agencies requirement, is it the intent to train internal employees on the configuration of the solution?

    Is it acceptable to provide an estimate of the required software and then provide an hourly rate for the services to implement agency requirements?

    How many internal agency users will be categorized in the following buckets:

    General Users (occasionally searching and retrieving documents and information)

    Advanced Users (spending a majority of the time in the solution processing information)

    Public Users (external users or licensees)

    How may external users are expected to access and perform tasks within the solution? External being identified as licensees.

    How many different "form documents" are expected to be generated within any given agency?

    Is the Digital Signature Capabilities referring to required signatures internal or external to agency employees?

    Please elaborate on the required GPS capabilities for tracking and mapping?

    How many dashboards are expected to be generated within any given agency?

    Please provide additional detail on the use cases for requirement C.3.1.16 regarding configurable exams?

    What types of "public" authentication is required for access to the public portal?

    Section C.3.2 Permit / Licensing / Renewal Processing:

    Is it anticipated that the solution will include the capabilities to accept and process payments or is there an existing payment processing solution that the solution would integrate with?

    Section C.3.3 Compliance and Enforcement:

    Is it anticipated that the solution will include its own scheduling / calendaring functionality or the ability to integrate with an existing scheduling solution?

    Section C.3.5 Interface

    What types of interfaces should the solution be expected to support? (i.e. Web Services, File Exchange, API interfaces, etc.)

    Can additional data be provided in regards to the current system data that needs to be converted? (i.e. File Formats, Data Formats, Volumes, Database Information, etc.)

  25. yesterday at 11:14 PM

    C. SOLICITATION SPECIFICATIONS

     

    C.2.1.  The intent of this Request for Proposal (RFP) is to select a qualified supplier for a web based licensing/permit software system to support high quality, secure, accessible and customizable data collection and reporting to support potentially 50 professional licensing agencies across the State of Oklahoma.

    How many total users of the solution will there within the 50 agencies?  How many of the total users will be in the solution more than 40% of their day?

     

    C.3.1.10.  GPS capability for tracking and mapping

    How does the OMES envision this capability being used in the solution?

    C.3.1.15. Inventory management capabilities to track assets taken upon enforcement of investigations.

    Please explain further what the need is for inventory management capabilities for the solution.  Please provide examples of how you envision this functionality within the solution.

    C.3.2. Permit/Licensing/Renewal Processing

    Is there a current payment application being used that the solution could interface with?  If so, please provide the application/product name.

     

    C.3.5.1. Interface with other state agencies and outside vendors (OTC, PeopleSoft, SOS, OSBI, Third Party, testing facilities, etc.)

    What level of interfaces or integrations are necessary for each of the state agency applications listed above?  Please give us what type of interface OMES would like the solution to have with each one of these applications.

    Please explain the functionality of each of these applications.

     

    C.3.5.2. Conversation of current system data

    Please supply information for the following:

     

    Application Name:

    Product Name:

    Product Version:

     

    Is there an in house System Administrator to assist with Discovery?

    How many document types exist in the current application?

    Total number of pages to be migrated, if any?

    How large is the current file store (GB) for all the data stored in the current system?

    Does the current system have built-in functionality to extract metadata into a standard format?

    Does the application use a proprietary file format?

    Is the legacy system supported internally or is your data center outsourced?

    What is the Database Platform (Microsoft SQL Server, Oracle, Proprietary, etc.)?

    Does a test system/database exist?

    Are documents being stored in the same file storage location?  If so, what are the file types being stored?

     

    C.3.5.4. Interface with existing agency imaging systems.

    What existing imaging systems are currently being used in the agency?

    Application Name:

    Product Name:

     

    How does the agency envision the interface to work with each of these imaging systems?

     

  26. about 9 hours ago

    Is Canada considered offshore or near-shore for the purposes of this procurement? Are the use of Canadian-based resources acceptable?

  27. about 8 hours ago

    1. In order to provide the most complete and competitive response possible, would the State consider extending the submission date by two weeks? We believe this extension provides the vendor community adequate time to review the final set of the State’s responses and to modify the detailed vendor responses accordingly.
    2. How many users will need access to the system for the initial rollout? How many users will need access to the system once all 50 agencies have been implemented?
    3. Are there any agencies using software that is end-of-life or near catastrophic failure due to age or other factors?
    4. Are any agencies legislatively (or otherwise) mandated to have a new solution implemented? Is there a date associated to this mandate?
    5. Are any agencies utilizing common platforms today? Could you please specify which agencies are on shared platforms and the names of the platforms?
    6. Does the State anticipate multiple licensing systems depending on domain or vertical, or is the State seeking a single platform for all 50 agencies, plus future agencies?
    7. Does the State have a budget identified for the project as a whole?
    8. Does the State have a budget identified for each specific agency?
    9. Will the State share its budget breakdown for the project?
    10. Has the State conducted a feasibility study or options analysis for a modernized licensing solution in the past? If so, can details of this analysis be provided (findings and vendor who completed these services)?
    11. Will the State be assigning any resources to this project? If so, what skillset will those resources possess?
    12. Are there any agencies that have high volume, but are not currently online for submittal?
    13. Are there any agencies with high volume licenses that need to be streamlined?
    14. How many legacy systems are currently in place to support the State today? Will the State provide details about those systems?  In addition, can the state provide details of the data migration that will be required for these legacy solutions?
    15. Does the State wish to standardize business processes and operations across agencies? If so, can the State provide additional information on how this was determined or what the driver is behind this standardization?
    1. about 7 hours ago

      1. OMES will not be extending this solicitation. The deadline is the same as it has always been and will not be changing.