Section I. SUBMITTED PRIOR TO PRE-PROPOSAL MEETING
Question #1: ID #COA3: Please explain the business requirement behind the ability to have several versions of a COA string.
Answer: In order to facilitate budget iterations or what-if scenarios, the State would like to be able to have COA strings that can be entered, manipulated, and reported against prior to being posted to the General Ledger as a "final" version.
Question #2: TP #12: Please explain how escalation/de-escalation costs are used during the invoice process.
Answer: The escalation/de-escalation costs need to be verified while processing the invoice. The variance may cause an invoice to fail the funds availability check.
Question #3: TP #15: Are you looking for the system to accept a file in order to produce the payments? If not, please explain where the variables affecting the calculation of the subsidies would reside.
Answer: Yes, the State is looking for the system to accept a file, record the payments, and produce the checks. It was also anticipated that at a later date, the calculation of the tax relief subsidy might actually be done in the ERP.
Question #4: PP #11: Is the assumption here that other systems will need to interface in open payables in order to produce checks?
Answer: The State has a requirement to accept files from external sources to produce checks. Some of these files will also need to generate a voucher in the A/P and be recorded in the G/L and other files should simply be used to produce checks.
Question #5: PDC #8: Please elaborate on the capabilities requested here.
Answer: The State's lapse/carryforward requirements are explained in detail in the background of the scenario labeled FNGA-4.
Question #6: CM #7: Please explain the functionality requested here.
Answer: For a given customer (client), the payments of medical services (paid by the State) may be collected from various sources after the fact. The percentages the various sources are responsible for are identified when the customer is identified. Sources (payers) will be billed for their percentage of the costs.
Question #7: WO1-12: In regards to PCP1 in purchasing, about purchasing (procurement) cards and work orders under Projects and Grants:
a. Are these cards issued by a bank and issued to individuals or departments and how are they reconciled (daily, monthly, etc).
Answer: Cards are issued by a bank to an individual. A monthly reconciliation is done by the cardholder from receipts to a statement generated by a person in the agency's business office via the Internet. The bank also sends a statement to the cardholders, but those statements are received on or after the date the payment must be received at the bank.
b. Do you need a work order system that tracks charges against assets such as labor and materials. If so, what type of assets are you referring to (equipment, computers, etc.)?
Answer: Yes. All types of assets & resources used in either rendering services or the production of goods should be accounted for and charged in the work order.
Question #8: Under hardware platform and tier, the State desires the software vendor to bid an optimum platform, including total cost of ownership. IBM's AIX is not listed. Several of our references from other Public Sector implementations utilize this platform and both UDB/DB2 Oracle are much less expensive to run on AIX than the other UNIX platforms. For reference purposes and for cost of ownership, we ask that you consider this as a viable platform solution.
Answer: Since this project is proceeding with the state's EWTA standards as its guide, and since AIX is not listed in those standards (which are available on the DOIT web site), AIX is not one of the choices.
Question #9: The last sentence in the second paragraph of Page 4 of the RFP mentions "the State will only entertain proposals in response to this RFP from vendors of ERP software packages." Since we are not vendors for any ERP package, how would DAS allow us to participate? We can see a lot of value-add from our end in terms of providing the infrastructure and maintaining the same for DAS as well as the outsourcing of the ERP system itself wherein we will implement, customize and maintain the same and utilize well defined best practices that increases your competitiveness using IT.
Answer: If you are a hardware seller, you have an opportunity to work with a software vendor. If you are not an ERP software vendor, we will not entertain proposals. See also answers to questions #10, #12, and #13.
Question #10: What is the exact scope of the proposal? Is it an evaluation and selection of an ERP product? The main consulting contractor has been already selected. In that case, in what capacity would we work?
Answer: We are looking for a proposal for an ERP solution. The State is not considering outsourcing the ERP solution.
Question #11: Will vendors have an opportunity to interact with business end users to understand the business requirements?
Question #12: Will you be looking at purchasing and housing the hardware required at your own facilities or is it open to outsourcing the hardware requirements too?
Answer: We are looking to locate the hardware at our own facilities. It will be at 101 East River Drive, East Hartford, CT. See also answer to question #10.
Question #13: I would like to attend this pre-proposal meeting for the financial package on Jan 31st. We are a local reseller that has supplied Sun Microsystems to the State. We work in conjunction with Sun to help configure and install their systems.
Answer: Please be certain to refer to the Request for Proposal Document, page 4, Section A "Overview", second paragraph, where it states, "the State will only entertain proposals in response to this RFP from vendors of ERP software packages." You may or may not be eligible. However, in any event, you are free to attend. See also answers to question #9, #10, and #12.
Question #14: In the RFP, Form #RFP-26 indicates that proposals must be valid for 90-days. In the Request for Proposal Document, Section G "Special Terms and Conditions", page 21, item number 2, it indicates that proposals "must be valid for a period of 180 days from the due date of the proposal". Which is correct?
Answer: Proposals must be valid for 180 days
Question #15: Could the State please confirm whether the administration of the CT State Employee's Retirement System is within the scope of this ERP project and comment on the strategy to implement a new retirement administration solution ("administration" meaning - tracking member information (salary, service credit, employment dates, etc) handling repurchase of service, performing estimated and final benefit calculations, providing a web-based retirement administration interface, etc). If retirement administration will not be part of the ERP initiative, can the State comment on when such a project may be considered.
Answer: The CT State Employee's Retirement System is not within the Scope of Core-CT, the State's ERP project, as it is now defined. The management team for this project declines to comment on when such a project may be considered.
Question #16: While the RFP is well written and very clear, vendors are asked to respond with a great deal of information in a very short period of time. Would the state consider extending the proposal due date for an additional week or two to allow vendors to submit equally well written and clear proposal responses?
Answer: As discussed earlier, and outlined in RFP Addendum #1, the proposal due date will be extended to February 26, 2001.
Question #17: Since the scope of the RFP doesn't include implementation, could the State explain how the ERP vendor is to respond to the need for interfaces without doing implementation?
Answer: We are looking for an ERP vendor to respond with standard solutions, tools, and/or features that may be required.
Question #18: Can the State explain if the implementation vendor has any reseller agreement or financial relationship with any ERP vendor?
Answer: There is not a contract in place for implementation services at this time.
Question #19: Are employee records included in the table with payroll checks for all branches of government on page 5 of the overview?
Answer: We need further clarification to respond appropriately. No participants at the Pre-Proposal meeting responded, so we cannot address this question.
Question #20: Section B, Objectives #9: Does the State envision this through Internet, voice recognition, or other means of access or through a service representative internal to the State?
Answer: We would like the responses to describe how the ERP solution facilitates access to information.
Question #21: Procurement Page 9: Does Digital Commerce have an open API? What is the method of transferring info to DC and from DCC to the ERP software for encumbrance, accounts payable, etc.?
Answer: Contact DCC directly. They are located in King of Prussia, PA. The following two (2) contacts can address your question. 1st Choice is Dwayne Hanson, VP Software and 2nd Choice would be Bill Brown. Phone Number: 610-350-9500.
Question #22: hardware Page 9: Is it the State's intention to purchase all hardware under the State contract with the selected vendor?
Question #23: ERP Vendors are software providers and do not sell hardware as a rule. Can a hardware vendor submit a bid for their assessment of the requirements, and will the State work directly with the hardware vendor based on information submitted?
Question #24: How many users will need access to the Demo Environment (Page 10)?
Answer: Approximately 50.
Question #25: Page 11, Implementation Support Services: Can the State give examples of services it might want from an ERP vendor?
Answer: Any support service the ERP vendor can provide, such as installation of software, database performance measurement and tuning, training, design, technical support, etc.
Question #26: Page 13, Please explain the work "configured" as used by the State.
Answer: Configured means adding or modifying values or selecting parameters for any existing field, table or process.
Question #27: If the state is looking to purchase Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) software and there is no implementation as part of the bid, is the Set Aside, Page 16, Item L, possible?
Answer: Yes, we believe there are opportunities, especially in the hardware portions of this Request for Proposal.
Question #28: Will the State release a copy of any oral presentation that is videotaped to the vendor for their files?
Answer: Yes, after an award is made.
Question #29: Since the announcement says that this RFP is for ERP software vendors only, please explain page 21, paragraph 5 and the word "partnering".
Answer: Paragraph is self-explanatory. The State is reserving our right to review the hardware submitted with software proposals, and if, deemed in the best interest of the State, the State may request/require that an alternate hardware product be pursued.
Question #30: Please explain what the State would want in the liquidating damage clause on Page 23, Item 17, last sentence.
Answer: We would envision that it would make the state whole if there is a breakdown between parties. This is something we will be negotiating with the successful bidder.
Question #31: Page 24, Item 23, Please Explain Set Aside as requested above.
Answer: See answer to question #27.
Question #32: Appendix D, Page 5, Web Services Tech-022: What about Microsoft Explorer?
Answer: Use of a web service like Microsoft Explorer would be allowed. XML is acceptable also. We want a description of how your solution plays out in total.
Question #33: Will the State entertain a Hosting solution (ASP - Application Service Provider)?
Question #34: Does the State have additional information on the number and location of end users by module (e.g., General Accounting, Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable, Asset Management, Projects & Grants, Purchasing, Payroll, Benefits, Personnel Administration and Time & Attendance). If so, please provide the additional information.
Answer: Not at this time
Question #35: Will you provide, via the web, a listing of those companies / individuals that attend the Mandatory Bidder's Conference scheduled for 31Jan01?
Question #36: COA3: What is meant by a different "version" of a COA string?
Answer: Please see the response to question number 1.
Question #37: AMJP1: Please provide examples of the State's current "ledgers".
Answer: A ledger is defined for each fund used by the State. Additionally, each Agency who has a petty cash account or client activity fund should be allowed to use the ERP to account for these funds.
Question #38: What is the total number of Full Time Employees and what is the State's Operating Budget RFP (Appendix B-Pg. 13/30 - RL013).
Answer: The current system is unable to identify the exact number of FTE's, the State currently processes 65,000 to 70,000 pay checks per pay period.
The Governor's recommended budget for FY 2002-3 is scheduled to be released Wednesday February 7, 2001. The final state general fund budget for FY2001 is included on pages 46-49 of the Connecticut General Assembly's 2000 budget book, which is online at the following URL:
Question #39: Ability to accrue time and calculate pay for employees working special or averaging schedules.
Answer: This is a requirement.
Section II: QUESTIONS RAISED DURING THE PRE-BID 01/31/01
Question #40: In terms of giving a breakdown of the users, you said you could not do it by location. Can you give us a number by function?
Answer: We have done this in Appendix J of the Request for Proposal
Question #41: Appendix J is what we should base pricing on?
Answer: Yes, if that is how you are structuring your proposals.
Question #42: Can you expand Appendix J to include budget information?
Answer: We would refer you to the governor's proposed budget document for fiscal years 2002-3, which will be released February 7, 2001
Question #43: Is UCONN in or out of scope?
Answer: The issue of UCONN being in or out has not yet been determined.
Question #44: Has the state decided where the infrastructure will be located?
Answer: See answer to question # 12
Question #45: Please explain these three terms: delivered, configured, and modified.
Answer: Delivered is defined as functionality provided for by the standard software with no configuration required. Configured is defined as adding or modifying values, or selecting parameters, for any existing field, table or process. Modified is defined as any changes to the delivered software product or any additions of new functionality to the delivered software product.
Question #46: Proposal submission forms - all the forms must be submitted? The DAS-45 and RFP-16 seem to be missing.
Answer: The DAS-45 is the four-part CHRO form supplied in the RFP. The RFP-16 are the proposal pages which are provided in Appendix K.
Question #47: Do you want the forms to be submitted right after the submittal letter?
Answer: It does not matter.
Table of Contents
Index of Comptroller's RFPs
Comptroller's Home Page