DATE: May 9, 2018 Submission of second round questions to Cathy Colbert,

Transcription

1 Please note, a second round of Q&A has been added to the RFP process and the final submission date for proposals has been updated. Changes to original RFP noted in red below: DATE: May 9, 2018 Submission of second round questions to Cathy Colbert, ccolbert@pedaids.org DATE: May 16, Question and Answer Second Response Document posted on EGPAF website at DATE: May 28, Completed proposals must be delivered electronically by the deadline mentioned on page one to: Cathy Colbert, ccolbert@pedaids.org with a cc to Christa Moore, cmoore@pedaids.org General Queries 1. Which cloud are you using? Microsoft Azure. Queries & Responses 2. Who developed the online databases and aiding tools? (i.e. Foundation s IT or 3rd party vendors). If 3rd party vendors, are they allowed to participate in the bidding process? The current sub-agreement management system was originally developed 11 years ago in house. The procurement system is a 3rd party vendor Verian/Basware. The aiding tools (MS Word, MS Excel, InfoPath) were developed by the Foundation. 3. Which SaaS based system is used for procurements? Verian/Basware. 4. We assume that complete access will be provided to the various application from offshore using VPN for the implementation of the application - Is this correct? No - we will only provide VPN access to the Foundation network, but access to each related system would have to be discussed on a case-by-case basis. Most likely access to those system's data would be done via an API or ETL.

2 5. We assume that the contractors need only to include equipment & supplies for the development environment. Cost for all other environment QA, UAT, Training, Production would be borne by the EGPAF - Is this understanding correct? Yes - the Foundation would use Azure for the QA, UAT, training, and Production. 6. Please provide schema along with the details for all the applications where we need to integrate in order to create a new application. From the data warehouse we will import data fields such as expense coding and expenditure information. Our data sources are Solver and GP. More detail will be provided to the shortlisted firms. 7. Details of in-house API's are needed. The Foundation currently use ETLs to move data between systems. We would like the new system to take advantage of APIs. 8. Do you still plan to continue using the legacy grant management application? No, this new system would replace the legacy system. The legacy system will continue to be maintained for record retention purposes, however. 9. How many visits do you anticipate to DC? What would be the duration for the visits? We expect the contractor to propose the number, length, scope, and participants required for each visit. 10. Can the work be performed offshore or must the entire team locate onsite? Offshore is ok as long as a clear approach to communication/coordination is proposed. 11. Will the Foundation provide seats/space for one or 2 key vendor personnel to work from their office for tighter coordination? Yes, we can make space available but having a person onsite for the whole project is not required. 12. Will there be a demo of existing software systems (that are to be replaced) to the bidders so that they can come up with near-accurate estimation?

3 Yes, shortlisted providers will be invited to a demo of existing systems and given further details of the proposed systems. Providers are welcome to revise their proposals and submit a final offer after this time. 13. Will the app need to work in all form factors? (PCs, laptops, tablets and mobiles) Our primary focus is PCs/laptops. 14. What is the peak concurrent number of users (estimated) and frequency of peak load during a typical workweek? The peak concurrent users is estimated to be 1,000 users, although we expect this number to be reached on very rare occasions. The usual load expected would be around users. 15. Are there documented performance requirements? Not clear on the question. 16. Is Foundation open for cloud-hosting and using a specific cloud offering or we must restrict to on-premises software and tools? Cloud is preferred mechanism for hosting, but providers are not limited to this option. EGPAF uses MS Azure, but again, providers are not limited to this offering. 17. Does Foundation have any technology vendor preference? (i.e. Microsoft technologies or open source or JAVA technologies etc.) Preference for Microsoft. 18. Is Foundation open for specific 3rd party tools? (Ex. K2 Blackpearl or some other workflow management tool) Yes. 19. Can the contractor provide 2 technical proposals with different approach and technology? Yes, providers are welcome to submit multiple technical proposals. Providers are also invited to submit multiple pricing structures/timelines for each technical proposal. 20. Who is in charge of the 3rd party software licenses and hardware required to develop and operate the solution? The Contractor should have their own core software, however all fees (production, uat, test, etc.) will fall on EGPAF. For all 3rd party systems we would expect the provider to set up the 3rd party systems, fees associated with these 3rd party system licenses will be the responsibility of the Foundation.

4 21. Will data migration activities be the charge of the contractor, the Foundation or a 3rd party? We will not be migrating data from the current system. For data management from the previous systems, the legacy internal system will remain in place and a data capture will be done from the other system. We will, however, need the ability to upload bulk data (e.g. vendor lists, items list, related data, etc.) as outlined in "System Wide Requirements/General/Data Upload" section of the RFP. 22. Will production deployment activities be the charge of the contractor, the Foundation or a 3rd party? This will be the Foundation's responsibility. 23. Will solution management and operation be the charge of the contractor, the Foundation or a 3rd party? This will be the Foundation's responsibility. 24. Can you provide a deeper description of the functionality expected to manage contract & RFP templates (based on.doc) that should be included on the system? Sample templates will be provided to the shortlisted firms. In general, these templates will be dynamic and terms and conditions/formats will change based on a variety of factors (e.g. contract type, selection method for RFP, etc.). System-Wide Requirements 25. Number of possible integration (other than outlook) with other system/s? In addition to ADFS, this system will share data to and from the Data Warehouse (DW). Having an API to easily export or import data would be preferred. 26. DO you want a DMS for documents of these systems? Yes. 27. Permissions will be the composite of role-based & group-based permissions. Kindly confirm. Yes, this is correct. 28. Should we maintain the labels and the messages for multiple languages?

5 The total system should be multiple languages throughout front and backend, based off the users preferred language. Once delivered EGPAF would need to maintain it. 29. Is it ok to get the Exchange rates from GP into the new system? We will either pull these from a flat file or the DW. The exchange rates will not come from GP. 30. Are we looking for Power BI Dashboard for the individual KPIs? If yes, what are the key reports that we need? Outside of scope. 31. Could you please describe the compliance needs in terms of infrastructure and security? A minimum security requirement of HTTPS is required with the ability to use Okta security features. 32. Is this 'Code must be saved on EGPAF s Team Foundation Server.' a mandatory requirement? This depends on how the system is being developed. If it's not in our code bank, then we must have access to the code itself. 33. Can you provide detail of the in-house APIs mentioned in the integration system section? Please include technologies and protocols for integration (REST, SOAP, files, etc.). Currently we use ETLs, we want the new system to have APIs. More information can be provided to the shortlisted providers. 34. Our company is planning to use a native cloud solution (PaaS) which would produce higher development productivity and lower maintenance costs. As other PaaS technologies on the market, the Foundation will OWN the custom solution (source code & documentation), but that solution would work only on that PaaS solution. Will this type of solution suit the Foundation? The Foundation is open to newer technologies. PaaS solutions will be considered along with the associated cost implications. Providers are invited to submit multiple financial options based on their technical proposals. Pricing 35. Any Budgetary allocation for particular project.

6 Negotiable. 36. Are you looking for fixed bid or Time and material bid, Requirements are very high level for fixed bid. Per the RFP, we prefer a fixed price bid but are willing to consider other options proposed by bidders, as long as there are clear mechanisms for cost control. We are open to multiple pricing and timeline structures for a given technical proposal. We also will accept revised offers after the short-list period when additional detail is provided by the Foundation. Timeline 37. What is the expected duration of project and contract duration (Project Development + Support)? This is up to the contractor to propose. However, we would like to have the majority of the development and testing complete in 2018 but are willing to look at longer timeframes for cost savings. Contractors are welcome to submit multiple timeline/cost options. Sub-Agreements 38. Provide the detail of Sub agreement Templates System. These templates are currently composed in InfoPath. Based on selections made (award type, donor, funding source, organization type, etc.) the terms change to build the sub-agreement template. Sample existing templates will be provided to the short-listed candidates upon signing an NDA. 39. Provide the detail of Transmittal Sheet. This excel based tool generates the current required approvers based on a few inputs (e.g. amount of award, project, country, award type). This tool will be replaced by system-generated workflows. 40. Provide the detail of Compliance Tool. This is an excel workbook with approximately 90 yes/no compliance questions used to test transactions. We plan to import the summary page (contains the questions, percentage of responses compliant and a few additional details) of the tool so the compliance data can be used in trend reports. 41. Provide the detail of financial reporting tool and cash request. This is a 6 tab excel workbook that captures high level financial reporting information. 42. How many reports are in financial reporting tool?

7 This will differ based on sub-agreement type but most commonly used tool consists of 6 tabs within a single Excel workbook. 43. How many forms and certifications are there in MS Word? Provide the detail of Pre Award Assessment. This is an Excel based tool with primarily of Yes/No and multiple choice questions, with a few free text responses and notes. A Foundation identified subset of these questions/answers and aggregate scores calculated within the worksheet (e.g. risk level identified, date assessment conducted, who conducted the assessment) will be imported into the system. 45. Plan -> Create-> Approve-> Manage Sub agreements. Is this the typical workflow for the Foundation users? Is there any application process from the Sub-recipient? This is the typical sub-agreement management cycle and within this, there are several workflows. First, a sub-agreement approval workflow would be completed. Upon receipt of a financial report, a financial report approval workflow would be followed. Amendments to a subagreement would also be their own unique workflow. 46. What level of information is available already in GP to establish the links? We have existing links but these will be re-visited. 47. Manage sub-agreements & expense entry are the activities of the subrecipients. Please confirm. We would like sub-recipients to have limited ability to access the system for basic tasks such as expense entry, viewing certain final documents, and uploading of reports. 48. It has been mentioned in the document that sub-recipient will raise the cash request (using the Financial Reporting tool & Cash request in the background section). Do we need to have similar provision in new system for additional finance requests? See above. 49. Do we need a separate workflow if the sub-agreement is denied? In the event a request is not acceptable, we would have 2 options: (1) Return to previous user for modification/correction and; (2) Reject - return to requestor who will have the ability to permanently remove the request from the workflow. A record of the rejected request will remain in the system for audit purposes.

8 50. Monthly expense details of the Foundation office on each active subagreement is readily available in GP, which will be pulled into the new system automatically. Is this correct? The new system will need to pull this data into the system automatically. This data is readily available. 51. No automation is needed to pull the expense data from Quick books/ data warehouse. Is this correct? We will need to have a link between the DW and the new system to pull the expense data into the new system. No link to Quick Books is required. 52. What are the key financial reports that we need from the BI360? The contractor would not build BI360 reports for us. 53. No need to integrate our new system with Quick books since the expenses details of sub agreements for all the sub recipient offices are already integrated and available in BI360. Is this correct? Correct - This data is already imported into the DW. 54. Should we maintain the key compliance details of all the sub-recipients in the system? Yes. 55. Only approved (Active) sub agreements integrate with GP & BI360 (Data warehouse). Please confirm. No. Data from sub-agreements in any stage of approval will export to the data warehouse. Data will include status of the sub-agreement (approval, pending approval, expired, etc.) for purposes of reporting. No data from proposed system will be exported to GP. 56. What is the need for the Quick books integration from various subrecipients? None. 57. Should the existing sub-agreement information (from Foundation & subrecipient) to be migrated into the new system while going live? No.

9 Procurements 58. Contract Templates-Please provide the detail of this form. These templates are currently based in Word but will operate in the system similarly to the aforementioned sub-agreement templates. Required terms and determining factors will be provided to winning contractor. 59. Request for Proposal Templates-Please provide the detail of this form. Currently a Request for Quotes and a Request for Proposals template exist in Word. Depending on the selection method chosen in the system, one of the forms will be used. 60. Procurement Justification Form-Please provide the detail of this form. This is a 4 tab excel workbook (based on procurement tyoe, only 2 of the 4 tabs will be used for each procurement) where information regarding the procurement evaluation is documented. 61. Number of possible workflow in each modules. Approximately 10 workflows (but each workflow would have various decision gates that lead to different paths. There will be Foundation-wide initiators of the process). 62. Number of possible reports in each module? Clear/easy portal navigation/filtering for end users within the system is essential. A separate external reporting platform does not need to be built, however. The Foundation will build reports using data extracted from the system (with tools like Power BI, SQL, etc.). For testing purposes, reporting will be necessary to test/clean the data. 63. Plan ->Purchase Request -> PRQ Approval -> RFQ/RFP -> PO/Contract-> Approval -> Receipt/Returns -> Invoice. This is the typical Purchase workflow for all the Goods/Services. Please confirm. This is the typical procurement cycle/process. However, within this there are different workflows. A workflow approval would be required to approved the Purchase Requisition (original request), upon approval we would move into the sourcing/bidding phase, once a contractor is selected/contract drafted, a second workflow would be initialed to approve the contract/selection. Later after the goods/services are received, a third workflow would be initiated for the invoice approval. 64. Do we need to import the vendor list from GP (foundation vendors) to the new system? No, a vendor list from GP will not be imported. System will have the ability to bulk import vendors using a template, or input vendor details one-by-one. 65. Do we need import the Item list from GP to the new system?

10 No, this is not required as the Foundation does not make use of the GP Procurement Module. The ability to import item lists to the proposed via a template will be required, however. 66. What are the service types maintained in GP that we need to map in the new system as well? We are not using this module in GP. 67. All the procurement approval workflows should be maintained in the system for various combinations/criteria. Is this correct? Yes. 68. Do we need the Vendor invoice details to be retrieved automatically from GP or is it a manual entry? We need to capture invoice data in the new system, expenditure data would be imported from the DW. 69. Do we need to keep track of all the payment details associated with the invoice? This data would be imported from the DW. 70. Do you have the Purchasing module licensed in GP? If yes, do we need to tie this Procurement process (Requisition- PO- Receipt-Invoice) with the GP Purchasing? No, the Foundation does not have GP purchasing module. 71. If the Foundation s purchasing, invoicing & payment activities are being handled in GP, why do we replicate the same process in our new system? The Foundation's purchasing is not happening in GP. GP is also not being using for invoice approval workflows, only invoice entry and payment. Invoicing 72. Do you want a scanning option to receive OCR scanned Invoices? Not required.