Enterprise Resource Planning Software (ERP)

UTAH COUNTY, UTAH

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

FOR

ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING SOFTWARE AND IMPLEMENTATION SERVICES

RFP 2024-2

MARCH 19, 2024

ELECTRONIC SUBMISSIONS DUE

WEDNESDAY, MAY 1 AT 3:00 PM MDT

THROUGH THE U3P PROCUREMENT SYSTEM

Section 1. Introduction

1.1 Objective

Utah County Government (the County) seeks proposals from qualified respondents for Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Software and Implementation Services. The initial scope of award will be for the financial functions provided by an ERP system, however, as detailed further in section 1.3.1, the County’s evaluation will consider the functionality and capabilities of both finance and human capital management in the proposed system.

This Request for Proposals (RFP) is designed to provide qualified and interested proposers (Respondents) with sufficient information to submit proposals meeting minimum requirements but is not intended to limit a proposal’s content or exclude any relevant or essential data. The County expects that this RFP will result in a contract(s) awarded to the Respondent whose proposal is determined to provide the best value for the County based on the evaluation criteria (the Selected Vendor).

1.2 Background Information About Utah County

Utah County is located in north-central Utah, immediately south of Salt Lake County, Utah. The County, incorporated in 1850, covers an area of approximately 2,143 square miles. The County had an estimated 702,000 residents according to the 2022 U.S. Census Bureau estimate, making it the second largest county by population in the state of Utah. The County’s general fund budget for 2024 is approximately $133 million. The County’s fiscal period is the calendar year (i.e., January 1 – December 31). The County currently has approximately 1,200 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions in its approved staffing plan.

1.3 About the Project

The County currently utilizes an in-house built financial system (COFIS), which is an Oracle-based platform and has been in place for over 20 years, to manage its general ledger, asset tracking, procurement, vendor management, treasury, customer billing, and financial reporting functions. Since the initial implementation, County staff have continued to build additional features and modify COFIS to meet current business process needs. The County uses Workday for its human capital management (HCM) to manage human resources and payroll functions. The County also uses other third-party solutions for specific needs, as well as relying on a multitude of Excel spreadsheets maintained across almost all departments to track various financial information.

The current systems allow the County to process its required business transactions but not always in the most efficient manner. Manual, and often duplicative, entry still occurs and is not only time-consuming, but also increases the likelihood of errors.

Business users desire more functionality and reliability than is currently available. The County would like to explore and assess the functionality of modern, cloud-based ERP solutions and, more importantly, improve overall business processes and underlying system integration. As such, the County made the strategic decision to assess the full ERP market before investing in a long-term ERP solution.

1.3.1 Finance and HCM

While the County is committed to Workday in the near term to serve its HCM needs, the County believes a single ERP provider for both finance and HCM needs will lead to better long-term outcomes than two separate providers. To best align the long-term interests of the County, the evaluation will consider the features and functionality of financial and HCM components to best position the County in the long term. While the County only intends to initially contract for a finance system at this time, aligning both finance and HCM will likely result in the County implementing the same solution for both finance and HCM in the future.

1.3.2 Project Preparation

The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) was selected by the County to guide it through the ERP selection process. GFOA is a professional membership organization representing over 23,500 public sector professionals across the United States and Canada. GFOA has no ties to any specific ERP technology.

As part of the scoping activities for this project, GFOA and the County worked together to review existing business processes. The County was divided into Process Improvement Teams (PITs) by functional area. Each PIT crew met with GFOA to identify gaps in current processes when compared to best practices and modern ERP functionality. The PIT crews will remain intact during selection and implementation.

Areas for improvement have been documented into a plan of action (Action Plan). The Action Plan describes changes that range from changing existing practices without regard to technology to preparing for change when technology is available. Many Action Plan items and related readiness activities will be addressed in advance of implementation. Some improvement items may be technology dependent, and the County will rely on collaboration with and expertise of the Selected Vendor to complete these activities.

1.4 Project Governance

The County’s ERP is managed by the Auditor’s Office, which has a dedicated Project Manager for the preparation of this RFP and will continue during selection and implementation. A Steering Committee has been established to provide guidance regarding project scope, funding, and business processes and County policies impacted by the project. As mentioned above, the project is supported by multiple PIT crews, with each PIT crew consisting of County stakeholders representing various stages of a functional process.

Governance Structure

Figure 1

Role	Description	Duties
Project Sponsor (County Auditor)	Serves as a member of the Steering Committee. Resolves conflict within the Steering Committee or on the project and is the final decision-maker during Steering Committee impasses.	• Act as project champion. • Secure necessary resources and remove obstacles for the project. • Provide strategic direction for the project. • Promote the project to County leadership and department staff. • Participate on the Steering Committee.
Steering Committee (9 senior leaders for the County)	Provides ongoing leadership to the ERP Project.	• Act as project champions, assist with making the project an organizational priority and assist with providing resources for the project. • Provide project guidance and direction. • Resolve issues and policy conflicts. • Approve scope changes; • Provide a strategic perspective when defining needs for a future software system and the associated processes. • Assist with change management across the organization. • Communicate progress of overall project to Departmental staff on a frequent basis.
Advisory Committee (Department heads)	Supports the Steering Committee and provides feedback on the process from departments.	• Be a project champion and assist with making the project an organizational priority. • Provide a strategic perspective when defining needs for a future software system and the associated processes. • Serve as main point of contact for their department throughout the project. • Communicate project information and progress in their department. • Provide advice on Steering Committee decisions.
Project Manager	Coordinates day-to-day activities on the project and serves as primary point of contact for the County’s vendor partners	• Address day-to-day project issues. • Serve as liaison to external consultants. • Work closely with the Project Sponsor and Steering Committee to coordinate resources to meet the project objectives. • Coordinate with County staff to ensure cross-department participation in the project. • Provide regular project updates and communications to project stakeholders. • Schedule and facilitate project meetings. • Coordinate and implement project communication plan. • Resolve issues, review deliverables, and maintain project plan, schedule, and budget.
GFOA Consultants	Serves as the ERP program advisor to the County	• Provide general guidance on ERP selection practices. • Provide guidance on best practices in public sector. • Facilitate and guide the County through scoping, solicitation, selection, and contracts for the future ERP solution. • Complete tasks outlined in the Contract, including project planning, businesses process analysis and improvement, and project readiness plan.
Process Improvement Teams & Leads	PIT crew members have a general understanding of their functional process. Leads provide functional expertise, coordinate stakeholders, and coordinate tasks and assignments.	• Identify potential areas of improvement and assist with the development of future state processes and system improvements. • Review and validate functional and technical requirements. • Make recommendations and assist in the development of procedures and guidelines to implement best practice business processes. • Serve as project champions within their department. • Confirm that recommendations work for the organization as a whole.
Subject Matter Experts	Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) have deep knowledge of a particular process or sub-process within a functional area.	• Provides information and recommendations about their defined area of expertise. • Assist in developing and validating new processes and/or system requirements.

Section 2. Procurement Rules and Procedures

2.1 Rules of Procurement

a. This procurement shall conform to and is governed by the County’s Procurement Rules and Regulations established by the County’s Division of Procurement.

b. The County reserves the right to award multiple contracts from this RFP.

c. The County reserves the right to reject any or all proposals and to waive technicalities and informalities when such waiver is determined by the County to be in the County’s best interest.

d. The County may modify this RFP by issuance of one or more written addenda.

e. The County reserves the right to meet with select Respondents at any time to gather additional information. Furthermore, the County reserves the right to add, remove, or modify RFP scope until the final contract signing.

f. This RFP does not commit the County to award a contract.

g. All proposals submitted in response to this RFP become the property of the County and public records, and as such, may be subject to public review (see 2.2.5). Respondents concerned with release of proprietary or confidential information are encouraged to not submit that information in the proposal.

h. All proposals must be submitted in the proposal format outlined in Section 4 of this RFP.

2.2 Notice to Respondents

Failure to carefully read and understand this RFP may cause the proposal to be out of compliance, rejected by the County, or legally obligate the Respondent to more than it may realize. Information obtained by the Respondent from any officer, agent, or employee of the County shall not affect the risks or obligations assumed by the Respondent or relieve the Respondent from fulfilling any of the RFP conditions or any subsequent contract conditions.

2.2.1 Joint Proposals

If all RFP requirements are not met with products and services provided by one firm, Respondents are encouraged to partner with one or more other firms to submit a Joint Proposal.

2.2.2 Primary Firm

If a Respondent consists of multiple firms submitting a joint proposal, the proposal must identify one firm as the Primary Firm, along with a primary point of contact. This identified person will be the primary point of contact throughout the procurement process and will be held responsible for the overall implementation of all partners included in the joint proposal.

2.2.3 Proposal Validity

All proposals, including all information and costs provided therein and any subsequent clarification or response to questions, shall be valid for a minimum of 180 days.

2.2.4 Late Proposals

Proposals received after the proposal due date and time indicated will not be accepted or considered.

Proposals may be withdrawn or modified in writing prior to the proposal submission deadline. Proposals that are resubmitted or modified shall be sealed and submitted prior to the proposal submission deadline.

2.2.5 Confidentiality

Respondents that deem any part of the proposal confidential shall indicate so in the relevant section of the proposal. The confidential demarcation does not necessarily exclude the section from Utah Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA) and any requests for such information will be reviewed by the County’s Attorneys’ Office.

2.2.6 Pre-Proposal Conference

A pre-proposal vendor conference will be held via web conference on the date and time established in the Procurement Schedule. Attendance at the pre-proposal conference is not mandatory, but the County requests vendors interested in participating in the pre-proposal conference RSVP to the contact listed in Section 2.3. Answers to questions submitted prior to the conference and answers to all questions asked at the pre-proposal meeting will be posted after the meeting to the solicitation on U3P.

2.3 Contact Information

The County’s Division of Procurement is the sole point of contact for this solicitation.

Robert Baxter

RobertB@utahcounty.gov

Attempts by or on behalf of a Respondent to contact or to influence any member of the Evaluation Committee, any member of the Utah County Commission, or any employee of the County regarding the acceptance of a proposal may lead to elimination of that Respondent from further consideration.

2.3.1 Clarifications

Any formal requests for clarification, questions, or additional information regarding this solicitation shall be submitted via the Q&A board on the solicitation on the U3P procurement site no later than 5:00 p.m. MT on April 2, 2024.

All questions concerning the RFP must reference the RFP section heading. Any questions received after the deadline shall not be considered. Questions received prior to the stated deadline will be collated into addenda and provided to all proposers, no later than April 10, 2024. All questions, requests for clarification, or additional information received by the County regarding this RFP will not be considered confidential in any way, shape, or form.

2.4 Procurement Schedule

The table below represents the anticipated schedule for this procurement. The County reserves the right to change the schedule with appropriate notification.

Activity	Scheduled Date (2024)
RFP Issuance	March 19
Optional Pre-Proposal Conference Call	March 26 2:00 PM MDT
Deadline to Submit Questions and Requests for Clarification on the RFP	April 2
Answers to Submitted Questions Provided	April 10
Proposals Due	May 1 3:00 PM MDT
Blind Evaluation of Proposal Components Completed	May 17
Initial Interviews	May 21 – 23
Completion of Written Proposal Analysis and Notification of Elevation for Software Demonstrations and Implementation Interviews	June 12
Software Demonstrations and Implementation Interviews	July 9 – 11, 16 – 18, & July 30 – August 1
Notification of Elevation to Semi-finalist or Finalist Respondent(s)	August 7
Conduct Discovery Sessions	Week of August 26
Notification to Selected Vendor	September 9
Contract Negotiations and Finalize Statement of Work	September / October
Execute Final Contract	October
Begin Implementation	November

Section 3. Project Scope

3.1 Overview

The County seeks an integrated ERP solution and a qualified professional services provider to implement the proposed ERP solution, including overseeing the implementation of any proposed third-party software. The scope of the project, including project milestones, will be defined by a Statement of Work (SOW) that identifies the final scope, project approach, roles and responsibilities of the Selected Vendor and County, payment milestones, functional requirements, and acceptance criteria.

3.2 Contract Scope

The County shall enter into a contract with the Selected Vendor, provided however that in the event of a Joint Proposal, multiple contracts may be required for all implementation services as described under this RFP. It is the Respondent's responsibility to partner as necessary and assemble the team, skills, assets, and other qualifications to meet the requirements of this RFP. The County understands that software contracts and third-party solution contracts may be handled separately; however, a comprehensive SOW will be developed to integrate all of the contracts.

3.3 Organization Scope

The full scope of the project, including all functional requirements, must accommodate the needs of all County departments. In addition, the County will use the financial system to store financial data for all other entities listed as being part of the County’s reporting entity. For more information on the County, please refer to the County’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report, which is available on the County’s website.

3.4 Process Scope

The scope of this project is defined by goals, processes, and requirements.

• Goals: The activities undertaken in preparation for this RFP have culminated in several high-level goals the County wishes to achieve. Goals represent major outcomes or improvements the County desires to achieve as a result of using the system and improvements to policy, process, organizational structure, or improved efficiencies.

• Process: The major functions the County will use the system for represent the processes. Processes are defined by transactional processes, outputs, or overall groupings of system features the County will use to achieve its goals.

• Requirements: Each process is further defined by requirements that will serve as a service to communicate expectations for the system and acceptance. The requirements for each process can be found in Attachment 9 – Functional Requirements.

3.4.1 General

The ERP will serve as the central hub for enterprise data addressing financial accounting, procurement, enterprise reporting, and, potentially, employee records. General business rules and workflow processes will be defined in the ERP for most transactions related to financials and procurement, as well as potentially human resources and payroll.

Integrated, secured access to the ERP platform is high priority for the County. Internal and external users should be assured of the security of the system and its data. Transaction flow, including notifications, should be easily configured based on County business rules and policies, and user interfaces should be intuitive, with processes available on mobile devices when possible. Report tools should be based on no- or low-code interfaces and business configuration should not require programmer intervention.

While the County is eager to consolidate systems around a new ERP solution, it acknowledges other existing systems will remain, so it is imperative the new ERP sufficiently integrates and shares data with other County systems to provide consistent, timely, and accurate data.

3.4.2 Accounting

3.4.2.a. Goals

The County’s main financial ledger is maintained by the IT department and administered through the County’s Auditor’s Office. County leadership seeks to employ program-based budgeting and financial management paradigms. The County is planning to enhance its chart of account structure to accommodate a program-based construct by adding program and project segments. The County recognizes altering the chart of accounts structure is a major effort and will begin this effort during the ERP selection process.

GFOA met with the Accounting PIT Crew several times to discuss modern ERP functions. The County conveyed its desire for robust project and grant accounting functionality, as well as functionality to efficiently support internal service charges. Reporting tools should be flexible to accommodate Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) requirements, including the ability to accommodate multiple accounting views and periods (e.g., grant reporting year vs. County reporting year) simultaneously. The future ERP solution should also be functionally scalable to accommodate GASB changes.

3.4.2.b. Process Scope

• Chart of Accounts

• General Ledger Transactions

• Internal Service Charges

• Project / Grant Tracking

• Financial Reporting

3.4.3 Budget

3.4.3.a. Goals

The County seeks an integrated budgeting solution to manage operating, capital, and personnel budget development across the County.

Currently, budget is controlled at the line-item level. While the specific level has not yet been identified, the County intends to begin controlling at a higher level with a new ERP application. Additionally, monitoring and reporting budgets at the program level will be important for the County.

Position control is important to management, and this function is currently being done in the County’s HCM, making it a cumbersome and manual process to accurately track vacancies, understand cost savings based on open positions, and estimate position costs. The County seeks a future ERP solution that budgets and tracks authorized positions, accounts for underfilled positions adequately, and seamlessly integrates with the financial components of the ERP.

Further, the County seeks a budgeting solution that supports scenario-based analysis, allows for departments to actively participate in the budgeting process both during and outside of “budget season,” including multi-year budgeting cycles, and facilitates the development of transparent reports and outputs for internal and external stakeholders.

3.4.3.b. Process Scope

• Operating Budget

• Budget Monitoring / Adjustments

• Capital Improvement Plan

• Capital Budget

3.4.4 Procure to Pay

3.4.4.a. Goals

The County recently updated its purchasing policy to better align with industry best practices, and the benefits of a modern ERP application will assist in the facilitation of this revised policy. The County envisions a solution that supports integrated contract management, solicitation management, vendor self-service functions, and rules-driven workflows for purchase requisitions and purchase orders. Additionally, there is a desire to provide more automation for expense reimbursements and management of the County’s purchasing card program.

3.4.4.b. Process Scope

• Vendor File

• Requisitions

• Purchase Orders

• Change Order

• P-Card

• Invitation to Bid / RFQ / RFP

• Contracts

• Receiving

• Accounts Payable

3.4.5 Asset Management

3.4.5.a. Goals

The County tracks its capital assets in COFIS, and it requires an ERP system that tracks assets from purchase through disposition. Some assets are tracked in other systems, and while these systems may remain, it will be important for information to be shared with the ERP without the need for manual intervention. The system will also need the ability to tag and track controlled assets that may not meet the County’s capitalization threshold. Other accounting processes, such as calculating depreciation and disposition management, will also be accommodated in ERP.

The County also seeks system features to manage internal service requests, repairs and maintenance work, and appropriate cost allocation for both internal and external costs. The future vision is to establish the ERP solution as the centralized asset management record.

3.4.5.b. Process Scope

• Acquisition

• Asset Lifecycle

• Work Orders

• Depreciation

• Disposition

• Leases

3.4.6 Customer Billing

3.4.6.a. Goals

The system will serve as the official accounting record for the County, so it intends to run receivables from some business units and other miscellaneous receivables through the future ERP solution. Specialized receivables systems, such as the medical billing system, will likely remain but will send summarized accounting data to the ERP solution. The County expects to be able to trace payments to open receivables, and management desires a system that can accommodate a central customer database to allow users to drill down from a customer record to the source receivable, even if the receivable is in an external application. Eventually, the County wants to use this ERP project to establish standardized receivable and billing processes that reflect best practices and that can be applied to any receivables application operating in the County.

Additionally, the County maintains multiple point-of-sale (POS) solutions, resulting in manual and redundant processes to transmit information to the financial system. Management has a strong desire to move to a uniform point-of-sale POS application that seamlessly integrates into the ERP and can also support web-based payment portals that match the look and feel of the County website.

3.4.6.b. Process Scope

• Customer File

• Billing

• Online Bill Pay

• Accounts Receivable

• Aging

3.4.7 Treasury

3.4.7.a. Goals

As a county government, the County is responsible for the collection of numerous taxes and fees that are ultimately distributed to other agencies in the state. This process involves numerous steps and manual interventions, and the County expects a new system to efficiently manage the collection and disbursement of funds. Additionally, the County seeks an integrated cash reporting and forecasting tool that can pull data from various accounts and subledgers and provide reliable cash position data.

Improving and making more efficient the bank reconciliation process is also a goal for the Treasury team. Currently, it can be difficult to research payables and receivables data, and reconciling bank data requirements significant manual effort and use of external spreadsheets. Automating the reconciling process, accounting for bank adjustments in a centralized ledger, and easier access to receivables and payables data are all functions that will help achieve their vision.

3.4.7.b. Process Scope

• Payment Receipts

• Disbursements

• Interest Allocation

• Bank Reconciliation

3.4.8 Human Resources

3.4.8.a. Goals

A new system must be able to maintain a comprehensive employee record system that follows the career path of an employee, supports career growth, and helps management with succession planning.

Hiring managers should have a clear view of vacancies with the ability to submit personnel requisitions with relative ease. Approvers should have a comprehensive view of the job being filled. Customer service is important to maintaining the human resources vision. Potential employees must have access to a robust recruitment system, and hiring managers and other HR staff must have intuitive tools to analyze candidates.

As new employees are onboarded, data obtained during the recruitment process should carry over into the employee record, and new employees should be guided through the onboarding process, including enrolling in employee benefits. Onboarding managers should be able to track and manage employees as they complete the process, and employee records should be updated accordingly.

As employees progress in their career, they should be assured that accurate collection of data during their evaluation, certification, and training processes. Employee self-service must allow for the updating of information, changing elections, and providing a comprehensive view of their employment history and elections, and Human Resources staff assured of data integrity through comprehensive workflow approval processes.

3.4.8.b. Process Scope

• Position Management

• Recruitment

• New Hire / Onboarding

• Employee File

• Benefits

• Personnel Actions

• Personnel Evaluations

3.4.9 Payroll

3.4.9.a. Goals

Key to program budgeting and performance management is the ability to rely on complex and accurate time entry and payroll data. The County requires solutions that support labor data collection related to programs and projects, and it expects technology to support scalable and flexible solutions. County management recognizes that accurate labor data collection corresponds to user experience. The solution needs accessible time entry portals, ideally on employee preferred devices. Finally, employees should be able to access their leave balances and pay history through intuitive self-service portals.

Currently, departments use varying methods of scheduling, from formal to informal. The County is interested in exploring scheduling functionality to ensure appropriate coverage where services are provided (e.g., health clinics, jail, etc.). Any scheduling functionality should be dynamic and feed time entry.

Payroll Administrators expect a flexible and scalable solution that is capable of handling complex business rules. The solution must be able to accommodate processes without halting others (e.g., stopping processes while payroll is running), and complex transactions, such as retro pay, should be as automated as possible. When research is required, intuitive reports should be available to aid in the assessment. Adjustments and other similar transactions should be auditable.

3.4.9.b. Process Scope

• Time Entry

• Time Approval

• Scheduling

• Payroll Calculations

• Payroll Processing

• Deductions

• Leave Management

3.5 Conversion Scope

The County has identified its required data conversion from legacy systems in Attachment 10 – Data Conversions. Respondents will be expected to assist the County in working with each of its legacy application vendors as part of the conversion effort. The conversions identified in Attachment 10 – Data Conversions shall be included in the price proposal.

3.6 Interface Scope

The County will continue to rely on third-party systems and integrations to achieve its business goals once the ERP is implemented. Respondents shall support the County in developing proposed integrations to the systems identified in Attachment 11 – Interfaces. Any positive response (“Yes”) shall be considered in scope and the pricing for such integrations shall be included.

3.7 Report Scope

The County has identified Critical Reports required for day one of go-live in Attachment 12 – Reporting. These reporting requirements can be achieved through (1) standard reports provided by Respondents, (2) the ability for users to create ad-hoc reports using no or low-code options within the proposed system, or (3) other reporting tools or dashboards in the system. The County expects that at go-live, all in-scope reports will be available for users to access.

3.8 Implementation Scope

The tasks described below represent project tasks, activities, and completion requirements for the implementation scope. The tasks and deliverable requirements herein are for guidance purposes, and it is up to the Respondent to carefully review and meet these requirements. The County recognizes Respondents may have their own implementation methodologies, and the County encourages Respondents to propose and define their methodologies and tailor the proposed methodology to comply with the task and activity requirements as described under this section.

3.8.1 Project Management Methodology

The Respondent must implement strong project management methodology practices to conform with proposed project delivery schedule. Project management activities should include:

a. Oversight for overall project guidance and direction.

b. Preparation of project status reports and meetings.

c. Management of issue tracking and resolution processes ensuring consistency and quality of project deliverables.

d. Maintaining project documentation, procedures, issues tracking process, project plan updates, developing and updating project dashboards, executing financial documents and deliverables for invoicing, preparing reports, updating project and associated spend plans, and arranging meeting logistics.

3.8.2 Re-engineer Business Processes

The County evaluated its business processes and developed proposed future state business processes. However, the County also understands there may be even more efficient processes to achieve the same outcomes, so Respondents are expected to propose business process changes that achieve County outcomes based on best practices and processes germane to the software solution.

3.8.3 System Design

Respondents shall use the Functional Requirements and process maps from this RFP to assist the County in developing “To-Be” business practices, and Respondents are expected to document analysis of any functional gaps and recommendations of potential solutions.

3.8.3.a. Configuration

Respondents shall configure the proposed solution by incorporating recommendations and approvals from the Design effort. This entails technical development work such as configuring “To-Be” business practices, including workflow configuration, report development, integrations and interfaces, data conversions, security setup, and approved configurations. The County expects the Respondent to provide knowledge transfer opportunities to the County’s project team.

3.8.3.b. Testing and Validation

The Respondent shall implement all system validation and fixing tasks to ensure a smooth transition for deployment. The testing strategy must address the following:

a. Roles and responsibilities for testing (Business Process Testing)

b. Unit testing

c. Integration testing

d. User acceptance testing

3.8.3.c. Deployment and Postproduction

In this phase, the Respondent is preparing the County for solution deployment, which includes end-user training, assessing system go-live readiness, assembling a go-live user support plan, system cutover plan, and other go-live activities.

Respondents should include a post-implementation support period to include the first period closing after go-live.

3.9 Training Scope

Training will play a critical role in the County’s ability to successfully deploy a new ERP solution. Training shall encompass training guides for all processes, including integrations, delivery of training sessions, and training approaches for “super” users, end users, and post implementation.

Section 4. Proposal Submission Requirements

4.0.1 General Proposal Requirements

It is the sole responsibility of the Respondent to ensure that Proposals are accurate and free of errors, include only the items requested by this RFP, and received prior to the submission deadline. Proposals should be prepared as simply as possible and provide a straightforward, concise description of the proposed products and services to satisfy the requirements of the RFP. Attention should be given to accuracy, completeness, relevance, and clarity of content.

4.0.2 Organization of Proposal

Respondents must organize and present their proposal materials in the same order as presented in the Submittal Checklist and include page numbers. Proposals must be submitted in three separate submission packages that contain information consistent with the County’s evaluation process. The submission packages are:

I. Submission Package I – Primary Submission

II. Submission Package II – Submission for Blind Review

III. Submission Package III – Price Proposal

4.0.3 Attachments

Attachments included in this RFP are required to be completed and returned with the Respondent’s proposal. Alterations to attachments or a failure to follow the guidelines below may result in the proposal being deemed non-responsive.

a. Respondents shall not change the format or structure of attachments and shall only provide information where indicated.

i. Microsoft Word attachments may be submitted inline within the body of the RFP response to assist in readability.

b. Respondents shall not change the file name of any attachment but may append the file name to include the Respondents name (e.g., FileName_CompanyABC).

c. Microsoft Excel attachments should be submitted as Excel files, with a PDF copy.

4.1 Submission Package I – Primary Submission

4.1.1 Introduction

The introductory material should include a title page with the RFP name, name of the proposer, address, contact information, and the date, as well as a table of contents.

4.1.2 Executive Summary

The Executive Summary should be limited to a brief narrative summarizing the proposal, including why the Respondent is best suited to complete the project for the County while helping it achieve its project goals.

4.1.3 Respondent Team

This section shall also identify and provide a concise summary of the Respondent, including all firms providing software or professional services as part of this proposal. The response should highlight the Respondent’s experience delivering similar projects, including the relevant attachments.

4.1.4 RFP Submittal Checklist

Complete Attachment 1 – Submittal Checklist.

4.1.5 Signature Page

Complete Attachment 2 – Signature Page.

4.1.6 Vendor Certification

Complete Attachment 3 – Vendor Certification.

4.1.7 Respondent Statement

Complete Attachment 4 – Respondent Statement.

4.1.8 Professional Services Background

Complete Attachment 5 – Profession Services Background.

4.1.9 Reference Form

Complete Attachment 6 – References.

4.1.10 Software Background

Complete Attachment 7 – Software Background.

4.1.11 Detailed Software Products

Complete Attachment 8 – Detail Software Products.

4.2 Submission Package II – Submission for Blind Review

The Evaluation Committee will review this submission package blind (i.e., without knowledge of the specific Respondent). Respondents should limit the use of identifying names in these responses. The procurement team will redact any identifying information before submitting it to the Evaluation Committee.

After these materials are scored by the Evaluation Committee, the scores will be assigned to the submitting Respondent.

4.2.1 Functional Requirements Response

Complete Attachment 9 – Functional Requirements.

The Functional Requirements describe software and implementation scope of the overall project and the requirements for each functional area. Responses to the Functional Requirements shall identify the scope of the configured system that will be accepted by the County as part of the project.

The Functional Requirements are a material component of the proposal evaluation and will allow the County to determine if a Respondent can adequately support the County in meeting its project goals identified in section 3.4. Respondents should accurately reflect the ability of the proposed solution to meet a specific requirement. The inability to provide some requirements or excluding some requirements from scope may affect scoring but will NOT eliminate the proposer from contention. However, failure to accurately portray a software’s capability may result in disqualification. If Respondents are unsure or unclear on the description of a specific requirement, please send a question or request for clarification by the April 2nd deadline. The requirements responses submitted will become part of the agreement. Respondents are expected to warrant the delivery and configuration / implementation of all positive responses.

4.2.2 Implementation Team Roles

Respondents shall describe their proposed project team roles and responsibilities for each resource (this does not need to include individual names but shall include specific roles on the project team and a description of responsibilities), including approximate dedication of each resource and approximate time spent on-site.

Respondents shall also complete Attachment 13 – Level of Effort.

4.2.3 Implementation Approach

Respondents shall describe their implementation approach and methodology taking into account the implementation scope described in Sections 3.8 and 3.9, including any phases the Respondent proposes. This can include but is not limited to:

i. Project timeline;

ii. Project milestones and associated Implementation tasks and activities;

iii. Project deliverables;

iv. Quality assurance measures; and

v. Knowledge transfer and training.

4.2.3.a. Specific Implementation Example

Respondents shall also provide, by way of example of Implementation Approach, a description of how Project Accounting would be implemented for the County.

4.2.4 Project Management Expectations

Complete Attachment 14 – Project Management Expectations.

4.2.5 Deliverable Expectations

Complete Attachment 15 – Deliverables Expectations.

4.2.6 Data Conversions

Respondents should provide their approach to data conversions, including completing responses to the conversion requirements Attachment 10 – Data Conversions.

4.2.7 Interfaces

The County has provided anticipated interfaces in Attachment 11 – Interfaces. Respondents should describe generally their approach to interface development. The interface plan proposed by the Respondent shall be included in the price proposal. The County acknowledges that additional interfaces not included in the attachment may require a change order and an additional fee.

4.2.8 Reporting

Reporting is a key component of County management, and the County will rate favorably systems that have an intuitive, no- or low-code report design. Respondents shall provide narrative on their experience in report development on similar projects, as well as the Respondent’s approach to facilitating report development for clients.

Additionally, the County has identified critical reports important to the organization. Using Attachment 12 – Reporting, respondents shall identify if the reports identified by the County are in scope, as well as provide detail on additional “standard” reports available from the software. Respondents should also include the complexity of developing the report using the guide in the table below.

...