Department of Financial Services Office of Financial Regulations

Transcription

1 ITN Section erence Vendor Question 1.a Section (page 9) of ITN Attachment B states that Approximately 2 million transactions exceeding the $1,000 occur which equates to an estimated average of 160,000 transactions per month. OFR Response The estimate was calculated based upon feedback from a small group of large volume check cashers. We estimate that the annual Florida volume of all checks over $1,000 is far less than 1 million and the volume of commercial checks over $1,000 is less than 250,000 per year based on information from the Financial Service Centers of America (FiSCA, the national trade association for Check Cashers) and their Florida members. How was the 2 million estimated annual transaction count calculated? 1.b Does this estimated count include only commercial checks which exceed $1,000? If not, what other categories of checks does it include? 1.c Does this estimate also include aggregated transactions over $1,000? If so, what categories of checks must be aggregated (e.g., commercial checks, payroll checks, etc.) and what is the estimated volume of each category of aggregated transactions? 1.d Given that industry estimates for volume of checks that must be reported to the CCDB is significantly less than 2MM, is the Office open to lowering the estimated number of checks in the ITN to a more realistic level (e.g., 500,000 annually)? 1.e If the Office determines that 2MM checks annually is the volume prospective bidders should use, is the Office open to providing for a price increase in contract years 2 and 3 to recover upfront development costs incurred if actual transaction volume is lower than this estimate? It includes all types of payment instruments outlined in HB 217. All payments outlined in HB217 must be aggregated. No. Negotiable. Page 1 of 22

2 ITN Section erence Vendor Question 1.f Since the ITN seeks to "combat fraudulent check cashing activity, does the OFR expect future check volume to decline as those committing suspected fraud are either identified or move to other nonlicensed institutions to conduct check cashing activity? 2.a The solution contemplated by the ITN will require customer support for successful on-going operation and maintenance of the CCDB (e.g., on-going training, customer service, web/interface support for licensees, interface support for Department State DB and Division of Workers Compensation DB). The ITN does not appear to anticipate the need for this support or provide specifics about support requirements. Additionally, the pricing / cost estimates in ITN Attachment C do not appear to include the provision of on-going support services by the vendor. OFR Response This is a possibility. See ITN Statement of Work Attachment B Maintain. OFR will provide an end user help desk as a first line of support. Technical issues will be forwarded to the selected vendor for resolution. See Attachment C - Cost/Price Response Sheet, Table- Post Implementation Costs (Options 1 and 2) Does the OFR agree that this type of support will be needed? If so, what are the support requirements? 2.b Who will provide this support (e.g., vendor, OFR, the vendor and OFR, See response to 2.a. another third-party)? 2.c The ITN evaluation criteria do not appear to incorporate consideration See response to 2.a. Additionally, refer to: of vendor qualifications to provide this type of support. If the OFR - ITN Section 3.6 expects the vendor to provide this support, how will these - Attachment C - Cost/Price Response qualifications be evaluated and scored? Should ITN Attachment C be Sheet, Table- Post Implementation Costs updated to incorporate the cost of providing support? (Options 1 and 2) 3 When does the contract with the incumbent vendor end? There is no incumbent vendor. Page 2 of 22

3 ITN Section erence Vendor Question 4 What is the desired date for the new Check Cashing Database system to be operational? 5 If a no cost solution is provided to OFR, we assume the bonding requirement would be zero since there is no outlay of funding from the State and the vendor is assuming all of the project risk. Please confirm this assumption. If this assumption is not true, please indicate how a vendor is to determine the amount of the performance bond under a no-cost scenario. 6 The ITN indicates that the vendor is to conduct a demonstration if selected for a presentation. If the vendor is opting to submit a proposal for a customized solution, what is OFR s expectations for the system demonstration portion of the presentation? Or, is OFR only considering commercial off-the-shelf solutions? 7 What is the average number of transactions per year for the last three years, divided by month 8 What is the average dollar amount for each transition per year for the last three years, divided by month? 9 What is the requirement for the vendor to provide customer support for any system users? 10 Would OFR please provide a logical data model or entity relationship diagram for the current system? OFR Response FY 14-15, subject to appropriation and selected vendor s schedule. Negotiable. OFR is open to all options outlined in the ITN. If proposing a complete custom solution, OFR expects the vendor to present a similar system built recently that demonstrates the vendor s capability to build and operate such systems. Information not available. See ITN Attachment B Statement of Work, section page9. Information not available. See ITN Attachment B Statement of Work, section page9. See response to 2.a. There is no current system. Page 3 of 22

4 ITN Section erence Vendor Question 11 What size (gigabytes) is the current Deferred Presentment Transaction System database? How many tables does it contain? 12 How many records does the Deferred Presentment Transaction System currently have in the database? 13 If a new Check Cashing Database solution is selected, will OFR run the new system in parallel with the old system? If so, for how long? 14 For data conversion/migration, does OFR plan to convert/migrate all data to the new system? If yes, how much historical data does OFR need to convert/migrate to the new Check Cashing Database (i.e., records, size, and years of history)? 15 How much does the current vendor collect for its operations on a yearly basis (last three years, by month) for the Deferred Presentment Transaction system? 16 How many years has the Deferred Presentment Transaction System been operational? 17 Would the State please consider lowering the umbrella liability insurance lowered from $15 million to $3 million to allow lower cost responses to be submitted? OFR Response The Office does not have this information. The Office does not have this information. There is no existing system. There is no historical data that needs to be converted. See Attachment 1 located at the end of this document. 11 years Negotiable. Page 4 of 22

5 ITN Section erence Vendor Question 18 There were no ongoing support services mentioned in the RFQ for several key aspects of the CCDB; how are the following services to be handled (i.e. by the contractor or the OFR)? Help Desk and Technical Support, for example: o Web Login for new licensees o Login/password issues for web portal users o Data transmission errors o General questions about use of the CCDB Training (new licensees, new licensee personnel, new OFR personnel, etc.) Point of Sale integration (e.g., interface testing for new licensees, interface user issues, etc.) Other support requirements 19 How was the 2 million estimated transaction count (page 10) calculated? Does this estimated count include only commercial checks which exceed $1,000? If not, what other categories of checks does it include? OFR Response See response to 2.a. See response to 1.a and 1.b. We conducted a survey of FL licensees and have estimated that the total number of checks over $1,000 is substantially lower than what the OFR has estimated in the ITN. 20 Does all work performed for this project need to be conducted onsite at the office of the OFR (ref. page 41)? Can system development work be performed off-site? Negotiable, depending on the vendor s proposed solution option. Page 5 of 22

6 ITN Section erence Vendor Question 21 In the RFQ it states the State of Florida has exclusive rights to the software (page 46). For Hosting Option 3, we do not have any issues with the exclusive nature as it pertains to use by the OFR in the State of Florida, but does the contractor have rights to use or modify the software outside the State of Florida? 22.a It is mentioned that appropriations may be needed (pages 7 and 42). OFR Response Negotiable. To be determined. At what cost level will additional appropriations be needed? 22.b If appropriations are needed, when can these appropriations be Anticipated in FY funded? 22.c Will the need for an appropriation impact the project start date? Likely. 22.d Can a contract be signed prior to necessary appropriations being No. See HB 217 approved? 23 Section 3 - Provide 6 (Six) duplicate paper copies of the Response. (This No. CD is required. Response submission requirement replaces the submission instructions in PUR Instructions Submit 1 (One) digital copy on a Compact Disc (CD) that 3.4 How to does not contain the Cost/Price Response. Submit a Response Along with the appropriate amount of paper copies, would the Office P16 accept 1 (One) USB drive as the digital copy medium in lieu of a Compact Disc? The USB will be encrypted and we will provide the Office with the appropriate password to access Accenture s ITN responses. The USB will not contain the Cost/Price Response. Page 6 of 22

7 ITN Section erence Vendor Question 24 Section 3 - With regard to the Office s request for independent evidence of Response sufficient financial resources and stability for Respondent(s); how Instructions many financial statements by year would satisfy this request? ( to 2012, etc.) Financials P17 25 Attachments May we request receiving either the documents or a link to their location on VBS either the Word or Excel versions of the Attachments; at the very least, Attachments, C, D, F and G: A Standard Contract Form B Statement of Work C Cost/Price Response Sheet D uirements Response Matrix E uirements Specification Report F Preferred Pricing Affidavit G Identical Tie Response Certification 26 SECTION 5. Additional Solicitation Terms 5.1 Insurance P24 The request for a 100 percent Performance Bond is outside industry norms. Would the Office consider reducing the Performance Bond to 10 percent, which is consistent with how other agencies in the State use a Performance Bond? OFR Response Recent 3 years. See the following URL: TNs.htm Negotiable. Page 7 of 22

8 ITN Section erence 27 Attachment B - Statement of Work Phase Six: Implement and Train P29 28 Attachment B - Statement of Work Phase Six: Implement and Train P30 Vendor Question The Contractor s responsibilities during the Train phase shall include: 6) Conducting training in Tallahassee for all CCDB internal end users (about 250 users). OFR has requested that the vendor provide train-the-trainer training for the on-going, post implementation, training of OFR internal CCDB users. In an effort to balance training effectiveness with expense, would OFR be willing to utilize the trained staff to assist the vendor with the initial training of the approximately 250 internal CCDB users? The Contractor s responsibilities during the Train phase shall include: 20) Providing course-related information that will be maintained in the employee s CCDB training record. Please clarify what this responsibility entails. OFR Response Negotiable. Provide a document with the name of the employee, date of training, course attended, and completion status. Page 8 of 22

9 ITN Section erence 29 Attachment B - Statement of Work Phase Six: Implement and Train P30 30 Attachment B - Statement of Work; Page 7 Section CCDB Architecture Vendor Question The Contractor s responsibilities during the Train phase shall include: 21) reshing the training to match the needs of the training schedule. If the schedule cannot suit all classes, the Contractor shall set up multiple copies of the training database and an easy method to access the proper copy or an easy method for allowing trainers to conduct a refresh of training data without requiring technical assistance. Please clarify what is meant by multiple copies of the training database? A typical environment solution usually only includes one instance of a training database. Additional instances may incur costs that outweigh the benefits. Could you please share the existing interface APIs/Schema/Documents for CCDB interaction with other system? (What interfaces will systems like REAL, Department of Financial Services managed systems, Division of Workers Compensation system, Department of State System expose to CCDB?) OFR Response Propose alternatives. The idea is for some OFR users to get the complete training (i.e. all roles). There is no existing CCDB system. Most likely a web service or other similar popular mechanism (will be finalized during requirements validation and design sessions). Page 9 of 22

10 ITN Section erence Vendor Question 31 Attachment B What are the security requirements for the source code? Can vendor - Statement maintain source code in its own secure repository or must all source of Work code be kept within the client's network? If required to keep all source Page 37 code within client's network, will VPN access be provided or will Section 4 vendor staff have to work on site? Also, what source control system is Deliverables currently in use? and Schedule; 4.1 Deliverables Phase Four: Develop 4.1 Source Code 32 Attachment B Bullet 3 states: The ability to meet record retention requirements - Statement of the Office. of Work Page 9 Please provide a URL that describes these requirements. Section CCDB Architecture 33 Is the notification of no negative finding by the CCDB to be made to the licensee electronically, permitting clearing or shall there be an automated interface to a licensee s check processing systems? [In other words, if the OFR finds suspicion to stop the transaction, can they stop it or just direct the licensee not to proceed?] OFR Response Negotiable. OFR uses MS Team Foundation Server. See Florida Administrative Code records retention policy: FAC.cfm OFR does not intend to stop the transactions. Page 10 of 22

11 ITN Section erence Vendor Question 34 For the non-hosted options, do you require the vendor to include h/w and s/w costs for test and development environments in its bid or estimate so that the OFR can procure? 35 Are there any provisions / requirements established specifically for checks submitted for cashing electronically (e.g., captured on a mobile device and submitted to a licensee)? 36 Is the fraud concern at the payer or payee level? In other words does Florida suspect that payers are creating fraudulent records or are the payees coming in with fraudulent checks? OFR Response Yes. Not presently. See HB 217. See neyservicebusiness/wc_msbreport- Rec.pdf 37 Attachment F Preferred Pricing Affidavit Please verify if this document is required to be submitted with the response. No. Questions related to Attachment D - RRM uirement Description(s) Vendor Question OFR Response ID(s) Type Sub-type 38 13,6 Technic Auditing 13. The system architecture shall Given implementation Option 2, are Submit your proposal. Page 11 of 22

12 ID(s) 4,65, 66 Type al Sub-type uirement Description(s) Vendor Question OFR Response ensure that audit information (e.g., user login, date of transaction, type of transaction) is stored for each transaction. the existing REAL system auditing capabilities acceptable for CCDB components? 64. The system shall provide the capability to collect security audit information, including but not limited to Security Administrator actions, user logins and logouts, and tracking the access of each user to each object, including but not limited to displays, fields within displays, forms, and reports. 65. The system shall provide the capability to generate security audit information reports for each user on randomly selected records as well as the capability to view all the details for any user. 66. The system shall provide the capability to retain security audit information for N years, where N's initial value is 10 and is specified in a configurable business rule changeable only by users assigned to the Security Administrator role. Page 12 of 22

13 ID(s) Type Sub-type uirement Description(s) Vendor Question OFR Response 39 95,9 6, , 106, Technic al Technic al Organizati on Security 95. The system shall have an ability to designate licensee and OFR users as belonging to one of the hierarchy levels. 96. The system shall implement a flexible hierarchical and geographic organization model representing licensees and OFR users. 97. The system shall implement capability to set up unlimited number of organizational levels and reporting structures for licensees and OFR users The system shall not allow direct access to databases from any Would the OFR please provide an example or further clarification of what is meant by the hierarchy levels and geographic organization models? Given implementation Option 2, can the existing REAL system security be As an example, some larger check cashers have multiple geographically dispersed branches. Employees can work at multiple branches/locations and access to the solution should be controlled at the branch level. The solution also needs to capture the employee location of each transaction. Similarly, an aggregated transaction may consist of transactions that have been conducted at multiple locations and multiple check cashing employees. Submit your proposal. Page 13 of 22

14 uirement Description(s) Vendor Question OFR Response ID(s) Type Sub-type 115 components that are not in the restricted (Application) zone. applied to the additional CCDB components? 106. The system shall not transmit PII data in clear text as part of the URL or any other communication PII data shall be encrypted in all layers of the system Technic al Usability The system shall be accessible from a mobile device. The ITN references interfaces between the Licensee s Point of Sale (POS) system and CCDB solution in multiple requirements. Do all licensees use one POS system or are the multiple POS system interfaces? If there are multiple POS systems, does the Office see it as the responsibility of the vendor to develop interfaces to each one? What does the Office see as the Licensee s responsibility for development of interfaces to the POS system? Does the Office know how many POS systems are utilized by the Licensees? If architected using modern design patterns, there should only be a single interface to which all POS systems would connect. Licensees will need to develop the ability to connect to the CCDB using the interface mechanism exposed by CCDB , 220, Function al User Administra 219. The system shall provide the OFR user (administrator account) Would the Office clarify what they consider to be the OFR web portal? Depending on the solution option, these Page 14 of 22

15 ID(s) 221, 411, 412, 413, 414 Type Sub-type tion uirement Description(s) Vendor Question OFR Response with an ability to login to the DFS OFR web portal with a unique username and password The system shall provide the OFR user (user account) with an ability to login to the DFS OFR web portal with a unique username and password. How does this differ from the REAL system portal and the CCDB portal? could all be the same portal The system shall have an ability to validate the user name and password entered by an OFR user via the DFS OFR web portal The system shall provide the licensee (administrator account) with an ability to login to the DFS OFR web portal with a unique username and password The system shall provide the licensee (supervisor account) an ability to login to the DFS OFR web portal with a unique username and password. Page 15 of 22

16 ID(s) Type Sub-type uirement Description(s) Vendor Question OFR Response 413. The system shall provide the licensee (user account) an ability to login to the DFS OFR web portal with a unique username and password , 381 Function al Function al Function al Transactio n Managem ent User Administra tion Transactio n Managem ent 414. The system shall have an ability to validate the user name and password entered by a licensee user via the DFS OFR web portal The system shall utilize web services to facilitate transmissions from the licensees Point of Sale system The system shall provide the licensees (administrator account) with an ability to create user accounts. User accounts can be set up as locations/branches when using the licensee's point of sale systems to connect to CCDB via a system interface or as individual user accounts when using the web portal The system shall provide the licensee user with an ability to submit aggregated transactions via a system interface. Will the Office please elaborate on the need for mobile device access and what is required? Is the Office just requesting that the CCDB solution be accessible from a laptop or tablet that runs a standard browser? Would the Office please clarify the meaning of aggregated transactions stated in uirement 263 with an example? The Licensees should be able to access the CCDB from a mobile device (e.g., a slate type of hardware such as ipad, iphone etc.) If on a calendar day, a payee cashes multiple checks with the same Licensee (possibly at different branches) Page 16 of 22

17 ID(s) , 305, 306, 307 Type Function al Sub-type Business Rules uirement Description(s) Vendor Question OFR Response 304. The system shall have an ability to restrict submission of a transaction if the transaction amount is less than or equal to $ The system shall have an ability to restrict submission of an Would the Office clarify the meaning of ability to restrict submission of a transaction if the transaction amount is less than or equal to $1000? Is the Office asking for the application to restrict users from entering transactions of $1000 or less into the where each check may not exceed the $1000 threshold; however, the aggregate (sum) of all the checks cashed on that calendar day by the Payee and with that Licensee may exceed $1000. In such instances, the Licensee should be able to identify and submit all the individual transactions as 1 aggregate transaction (with multiple rows {one for each payment instrument}) at the end of the calendar day. Yes. The application should restrict Licensees from submitting transactions (aggregate and individual) where the Page 17 of 22

18 ID(s) Type Sub-type uirement Description(s) Vendor Question OFR Response aggregated transaction if the transaction amount is less than or equal to $ The system shall have an ability to return an error message to the licensee user if the transaction amount is less than or equal to $1000. CCDB database? If yes, is the Office requesting the application have the flexibility to turn that capability on/off through a configurable means? total transaction amount is less than or equal to $1000. Yes, configurability is highly desired and will be further explored during requirements validation and design The system shall have an ability to return an error message to the licensee user if the aggregated transaction amount is less than or equal to $ Does OFR have a preferred toolset? What performance monitoring tools does OFR currently use? Will our solution have to integrate with OFR current tool set or should we recommend a solution? Are there specific tools that they would not want to use? The requirements express a need for searchable online help. Will OFR accept a solution that includes Content Management and Search Preferred toolset/monitoring tools: ISDM and Team Foundation Server (TFS). Negotiable. Submit your proposal. Yes. Page 18 of 22

19 ID(s) Type Sub-type uirement Description(s) Vendor Question OFR Response servers? The requirements express detailed architecture requirements, including source control, style guides and separation of interface and implementation. Does OFR have a preferred set of development tools, source control management systems or IoC containers? The requirements express a requirement that service endpoints not be discoverable. Does that requirement extend to authenticated users or does that requirement only apply to unauthenticated users? The requirements express a requirement that services use the Simple Open Access Protocol. Since SOAP services are inherently discoverable, can we use RESTful Web Services with frameworks like Web API and OData, REST services instead of SOAP? Yes. See requirements 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 55, 56, 57. Additionally see URL: o.com/division/dis/is DM/documents/Webb AppPlatformAndDeplo ymentstandards.docx Both. Propose your solution. Page 19 of 22

20 ID(s) , 154, 206, 234, 254 Type Sub-type Department of Financial Services uirement Description(s) Vendor Question OFR Response Aggregated Transaction: ers to a transaction that is comprised of multiple payment Instruments, -Does this aggregate transaction connected to any workflow? If yes could you please describe the details? Are there any other Payment instruments other than the ones listed? Are there any other Types of Check Cashing Location than branch office, mobile location? Will OFR consider using virtual machines to host their QA, staging and production environments? Does OFR implement such protection within their current network? If it does, will this requirement only apply to services hosted outside of OFR and REAL? No. See HB 217. The Office may add other payment instruments during the rule-making process. Not at this time. Propose your solution. Yes. All options. Page 20 of 22

21 Page 21 of 22

22 Florida Office of Financial Regulation ATTACHMENT 1 RESPONSE TO QUESTION 15 Month Volume for Current DPP Base Actual Fees Collected Payments per Month Jul , , Aug , , Sep , , Oct , , Nov , , Dec , , Jan , , Feb , , Mar , , Apr , , May , , Jun , , Jul , , Aug , , Sep , , Oct , , Nov , , Dec , , Jan , , Feb , , Mar , , Apr , , May , , Jun , , Jul , , Aug , , Sep , , Oct , , Nov , , Dec , , Jan , , Feb , , Mar , , Apr , , May , , Jun , , FY FY FY Page 22 of 22