rfp offeror’s section refernced question response … for information/general... · ip rfp...

NM Human Services Department, Information Technology Division IP RFP #17-630-4000-1001

RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS

of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

1. Section 8 Resource

Requirements

119 Offeror shall propose a staffing model

that demonstrates how they will provide

all of the required expertise (stated or

implied) over the project life, how a

sufficient number of skilled staff will be

deployed on the project, and how the

project team will be structured to

effectively deliver the required work.

Page 119, Section 9, Integration

Platform Resource Requirements,

subsection A. Organization Structure

states: The IP Contractor shall design an

organization structure for the IP team

that enables efficient, high quality

performance and effective management

of all resources to successfully deliver

work under the IP contract.

However, RFP pages 120-126, Section

11, Key Personnel is very prescriptive

requiring 13 Named Staff, 11 of whom

must work 100% onsite in Santa Fe

throughout the life of the project. This

requirement as stated appears to

contradict the approach listed in Section

8 and 9 and significantly limits

Offerors’ ability to present bids that will

enable the most efficient, cost effective

and highest quality solutions for

Vendors must bid as required in the RFP.

Vendors may submit an alternative staffing

proposal, the proposals will be scored on

the staffing model required by the RFP.



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

delivery.

Will HSD modify Section 11, Key

Personnel to allow Offerors the

opportunity to bid the number of Key

Personnel and an onsite/offsite

blended delivery model that best fits

with each Offerors bid solution?

2. Appendix G, 1.c Complete

Solution

9 With respect to the evaluation of re-use,

please confirm that the State does not

want vendors to assume re-use of any

components and that pricing should be

provided for all necessary hardware and

software.

CMS requires maximum reuse; it is the

State’s position that vendors who reuse

components also will be expected to factor

in additional costs.

3. Section II - B.

MMISR

Approach

MMISR

Approach

Will HSD consider releasing answers to

questions on a rolling basis prior to

September 22, 2016?

No

4. Will HSD kindly publish the Bidder’s

Conference attendee list that identifies

all HSD SME staff and Vendor

attendees?

Will be posted to

http://www.hsd.state.nm.us/LookingForInf

ormation/open-rfps.aspx

5. Section II - B.

MMISR

Approach

MMISR

Approach

18 The RFP states that that HSD must

complete implementation of the entire

MMISR solution not later than

November 30, 2018. The

implementation timelines for future

models will be dependent on the

implementation timeline for the

Integrated Platform. Will the State be

Yes.

http://www.hsd.state.nm.us/LookingForInformation/open-rfps.aspx

http://www.hsd.state.nm.us/LookingForInformation/open-rfps.aspx



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

communicating the timelines and

systems availability of the IP to assure

the other modules can consider the IP

Vendor’s availability in order to meet

the needs?

6. Section II - B.

MMISR

Approach

MMISR

Approach

18 The overall MMISR implementation

timeline will be shaped by the ability for

multiple Vendors to meet inter-

dependencies. Will the State consider

other timelines for this, or other

modules which are contemplated to be

shorter than the IP due to end date for

the entire Enterprise, that may address

the situation where vendors do not feel

the timeline is adequate to meet the

requirements and timing of each

module?

The State will consider other timelines

within the overall MMISR framework, but

RFP responses should be framed in the

context of the timelines presented in the

RFP.

7. Appendix G – 3.

Database

Database 85 The IP Module Contractor will have

responsibility for the planning, design,

implementation, operation and

maintenance of an EDW that will be the

master repository for reporting, ad hoc

queries and analytics for the MMISR

solution and for HHS 2020. While the

Data Services Module Contractor will

identify and provide the specific tools,

techniques and approaches used to

deliver these services, HSD wants to

ensure that the core infrastructure

Section 3 of the Requirements addresses

Hosting. These requirements to not require

or limit the IP vendor on hosting

subsequent modules. The Vendor should

describe its hosting solution and outline

any assumptions used for the solution.



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

supporting DS is consistent with and is

hosted by the IP Contractor.

HSD has stated that the IP contractor

will provide, not just the database, but

also the infrastructure and hosting for

the Data Services Module; what is the

expectation of HSD for hosting the

remaining modules as those future

modules are described as "black box".

Will HSD confirm the future module

vendors will be hosting their own

solutions?

8. Appendix G

- b.

Operational

Data store

101 In some instances the ODS is described

as a Data Warehouse and in some

instances it may be described to be the

“system of record” for all modules data,

including that data which goes beyond

reporting needs. For example, all data

will be converted from the legacy

MMIS to the ODS and all modules will

exchange data with the ODS. Please

confirm the full intent of the Operational

Data Store identified in the RFP. Is it to

be only an analytic database/data store

or is also a more transaction focused

database where modules will get the

info they need to operate and process

transactions (e.g. such that if the claims

module needs provider data will it go to

The IP is comprised of three major

components: the ESB, the ODS and the

EDW. The ODS is intended to be used for

system migration and data conversion

activities only. As each legacy system gets

replaced, the ODS will serve as the

repository of those source systems’ data.

As is typical for traditional ODS

implementations, it will likely mimic the

source systems’ physical schemas.

The EDW can more accurately be thought

of as the IP’s System of Record, where

message content may be stored in an HSD-

compliant format and vernacular, for use

by the DS system.

All message requests, responses, inquiries,

broadcasts, subscriptions, etc. will be made



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

the ODS or is that data acquired via a

service call through the IP to the

Provider module)?

through/via the ESB, which may source

some of the data from the EDW, but likely

not the ODS, since it is a data conversion

artifact only. Any data required to support

ongoing business activities will flow

through the ESB portion of the IP, and

some or all of those data may end up in the

EDW/System of Record.

9. Section 4,

Section 5,

Appendix G, 100, 112 As per our understanding from the RFP,

we assume that the IP contractor will be

responsible for performing the following

testing activities throughout the

engagement: Please confirm.

1. During the IP Implementation phase:

a. Quality Assurance Testing (QAT)

b. System Integration Testing (SIT)

c. Automated Regression testing

d. Performance (Load) Testing -

Benchmarking

c. User Acceptance Testing (UAT)

Support

2. During the Maintenance and support

phase:

a. Production defect fixes testing

b. End to end testing for any Change

Request/Enhancement planned as part of

a production release

c. Integration Testing for integration

1) Confirmed

2) Confirmed



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

of IP solution with other MMISR

modules

d. Automated regression and

performance (load) testing to ensure

there is no impact on the production

system due to other MMISR module

integration (or) IP production release

10. Section 4 Appendix G 106 We understand that the State expects the

vendor to perform QAT (Quality

assurance testing) as part of IP

implementation phase. Please elaborate

on the testing activities and tasks

expected as part of QAT.

The State expects the IP vendor to oversee

QAT testing to ensure integration. Vendor

to provide testing plan. Each vendor is

expected to perform QAT testing. The

activities will be outlined in a testing plan

submitted to the State for approval by the

selected Vendor.

11. Section 13 Append

ix G

131 Appendix G, Section 13, point 6

mentions that "HSD will provide staff to

participate in IP solution and MMISR

solution testing in accordance with

agreed-upon test plans". Please confirm

if all the resources required for testing

will be provided by HSD (or) is the

vendor expected to provide the testing

resources.

Vendor is expected to provide testing

resources.

12. Section 5 Appendix G 114 RFP mentions " Report regularly upon

QM/QA activities, including but not

limited to: work performed, detailed

analyses of QA/QM findings, statistics

related to the findings, corrective action

Regular reporting will include weekly, bi-

weekly, monthly, quarterly, and annually

frequencies.



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

plans and status". What is the

recommended frequency of QM/QA

report submitted to the State (Weekly,

Bi-Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, etc.)

13. Section 5 Appendix G 112 a)Are there any Non-functional

requirements or SLA's which the IP

solution is expected to meet from

performance standpoint (Ex: Response

time, Concurrent user load, etc.)

b) Could you please confirm if there are

any test cases already available with the

State .

a) Expectation is for State and Vendor to

work together to establish reasonable

SLA’s. Please see 9 - HHS 2020 MMIS

Activity Data in the procurement library.

Vendor is expected to specify assumptions.

b) No. Current test cases do not apply to

the MMISR solution.

14. Privacy and

Security

h. REQUIRED

PROTOCOLS

AND

STANDARDS,

We are assuming that the NM DoIT

Simms Data Center in Santa Fe, NM,

and HSD’s non-production data center

in Albuquerque, NM are FISMA and

FedRamp compliant. Please confirm.

We are compliant with Federal and State

audit partners. We are NOT certified

FISMA or FedRamp compliant.

15. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 a) In this section, we could see the

following EDI transactions : 27X, 837,

834, 835.If any EDI tool is being used,

please share the landscape showcasing

presence of EDI applications and end to

end flows of these transactions.

b) If EDI tool is not being used

currently, please let us know if the State

has any preference ?

Vendor to provide/propose tool

16. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

82 What are the kind of data

transformations occurring in the present

system (App-App/App-EDI/EDI-

Vendor’s solution must provide the

appropriate adaptors and transformation

tools to process all standard data formats.

https://nmhsd-public.sharepoint.com/_layouts/15/WopiFrame.aspx?sourcedoc=%7BBD9211CA-C96D-4063-85D3-4F751CCAE5AD%7D&file=9%20-%20HHS%202020%20MMIS%20Activity%20Data.docx&action=default




of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

Components App/App-xml/xml-app/xml-xml,etc)?

17. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 Are 837, 835, 834, 27X

transactions processed in real-time or

batch?

The current transactions are batched.

18. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 Are we processing both 4010 and 5010

versions of Enrollments.

5010

19. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 Are there any specific processing

requirements for the documents received

(For example: encryption, decryption,

adding a prefix or suffix, etc.)

Yes, as needed per individual document.

20. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 Please provide the details of the tracking

and exception handling mechanism in

the current system

Vendor to propose a solution.

21. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 Please provide the details of any

customer specific EDI data validations

enabled in the current system

Please refer to the Xerox System

Documentation in the Procurement

Library. Vendor should note that the State

is seeking an entire Enterprise solution

which is broader than the MMIS alone.

22. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 How do we receive files from

TPA/Employer in current system, please

specify the current file transfer method

The State does not understand the reference

to TPA/Employer files. The IP vendor will

define the file transfer method standards

subject to State approval.

23. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

82 a) Do you have any archival process in

current system, if yes please provide the

a) The current MMIS has a retention period

of 10 years.



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

Service

Components

retention period.

b)What data is critical? Any special care

to be taken for the same?

b) From a security perspective – PHI, IRS,

SSA, Master Data. All audit requirements

must be met for confidential data.

24. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 Are the mapping requirement

specification documents available for

the existing EDI maps?

System Documentation is being posted to

Procurement Library

25. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 What is the number of transactions /

documents received by the system in a

day/week/month/quarter/year?

These numbers are not known for the

future Enterprise solution. Please see

Procurement Library 9 - HHS 2020 MMIS

Activity Data for current Medicaid

information only.

26. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 a) What is the frequency of the inbound

and outbound document flow?

b) How much time do you take in

processing the received inbound and

outbound documents (Real time / Batch

processing)?

a) Refer to Addendum 12 - HHS 2020

Legacy Interfaces (2) in the procurement

library.

b) The State currently receives both real

time and batch documents and expects the

same with the IP vendor.

27. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 What is the number of trading partners

currently supported on the system?

This is an Enterprise solution and there are

currently 167 Medicaid only trading

partners. This number will be higher for

the Enterprise solution but a specific

number is not known at this time

28. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 Is server redundancy / load balancing

required for the IP solution ?

Yes.

29. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

82 a) What is the minimum uptime

SLA/requirement?

a) See requirement 7.56

b) Vendor to propose scheduled



https://nmhsd-public.sharepoint.com/_layouts/15/WopiFrame.aspx?sourcedoc=%7B6CBA8AF7-89FB-4649-A97E-B74931889D27%7D&file=12%20-%20HHS%202020%20Legacy%20Interfaces%20(2).docx&action=default




of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

Service

Components

b) What can be the acceptable downtime

of the application for scheduled

maintenance?

maintenance windows, which the State

expects will not result in limitation of end

point systems to conduct business

transactions.

30. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 a) What kind of reporting system exists?

What kind of reconciliation is required

for production support

(manual/automatic reconciliation, etc.)

and how many reports in scope?

b) What is the expected file format for

these reports? Do we need to log report

generation activity? Do we require any

separate database for off line reports?

a) The State does not currently have an IP.

b) The Vendor’s proposed solution is

expected to include reconciliation

proposals, file format

recommendations, and its plans for

report generation. The proposal should

specify the tools the Vendor proposes

to use.

31. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 a) Does the application need support for

multiple languages? What are the

languages it should support?

b) Do we need to provide the support for

the entire application or should it be

limited to certain modules of the

application.

c) Integration Platform (IP) should

support Internationalization. IP should

be developed with products and tools

that can support international character

sets (Unicode).

d) IP vendor is responsible for supporting

the IP module and for ensuring the

readiness of subsequent modules to

connect using the transmission and

security standards established by the IP

Contractor.

32. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

82 Is a Disaster Recovery site present for

the business critical applications or will

it be needed to be built by the vendor?

A Disaster Recovery solution must be built

by the Vendor. The frequency is no less

than annually.



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

Components What is the frequency of performing the

Disaster Recovering Exercise?

33. 2.b Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components

82 Is sufficient Disaster recovery

documentation available for the critical

flows / server

configurations/transformations .

The existing DR document is not relevant

to the MMISR Enterprise solution. Vendor

should propose a solution and provide

documentation.

34. Addendum 12 HHS 2020

Legacy

Interfaces

document,

MMIS

Interface List

3,4 a) What is the number of Interfaces in

scope? We see 128+ interfaces with

some indicated as TBD.

b) What are the different types of back

end Systems / Legacy System to be

integrated as part of IP solution. ?

a) There is no definitive number. We

have provided information on known

interfaces. As this is an Enterprise

solution we anticipate this number will

increase.

12 - HHS 2020 Legacy Interfaces (2)

in the Procurement Library

35. General Could you please share the architecture

roadmap for HHS 2020 vision

Please see the amendment for the updated

diagram.

36. 2c Table 8 76 a) No middleware/ESB tools are listed

in the tools list in Page 76 of the RFP

document. Is the State already

evaluating any tools for ESB?

b) Could you please let us know if there

is any preference for open source stack

or commercial vendors such as IBM?

c) Does the State already have any tools

for SOA governance.

d) What is current ETL tool that is being

used.

a) No

b) No preference

c) No

d) There is no ETL tool for the Enterprise

envisioned by this and subsequent

modular procurements.

The State expects the Vendor to provide

design/development tools such as

Individual Development Environment

(IDE), Automated Code Review (ACR),

Continuous Integration (CI), Source Code




of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

Editor (SCE), and Graphic User Interface

Development/Builder (GUID/B). State

expects any tools that are used to view or

access code will not be proprietary or will

be licensed to the State at no additional

cost.

37. Appendix H

Is customer evaluating any off-the-shelf

products for the member enrollment and

claims adjudication workflows? If not,

can we propose BPM tools like Pega

etc.

Member enrollment occurs in ASPEN and

claims adjudication will be in the financial

services module provided by BPO. It is

expected that each module will have its

own workflow; IP is responsible for

“moving” task between modules.

38. Appendix H

What is the State's mobile technology

roadmap? Is customer looking to expose

and monetize the APIs to external world

for building mobile applications?

No roadmap yet, but the goal is to utilize

mobile technology. State is looking for

vendor to provide recommendations and a

roadmap for solution. The State is not

asking Vendors to monetize APIs.

39. Appendix H

Is there any requirement to view how

the entire business process is performing

and see if there is any SLA breach and

improve the process performance .?

Yes. See Appendix G and Appendix H.

Specific SLAs are agreed upon during

contract negotiations.

40. Appendix H

What are the different channel /

different data formats through which

enrollments /claims will be submitted to

IP Platform for processing?

Vendor’s proposed solution must

demonstrate the capability to integrate all

formats.

41. Section 4 100 How many source tables/files are The legacy MMIS system has 405



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

present in the legacy MMIS system?

Production DB2 Tables (which includes 7

years of Claims History information).

These numbers are based on the current

MMIS and not the anticipated Enterprise.

42. Section 4 100 What are the modules that are currently

present in the legacy MMIS application

that need migration?

The current MMIS is not a modular

solution. All MMIS capabilities will need

migration, though not all functional areas

will be the responsibility of the IP Vendor.

43. IV B 26 How many source tables/files are

present in the legacy CSES system

maintained by Xerox?

None. CSES Source tables/files are not

maintained by Xerox.

44. b. Operational

Data Store

227 a) What is the current data volume (in

GB) of the ODS source

b) What are the different data file

formats going to flow into ODS

a) The current data volume is not relevant

for what is anticipated in the Enterprise

solution.

b) Standardized file formats.

45. i. define model-

to-model

relationships of

repository

objects

230 Is this requirement similar to 'Abinitio

MDR' tool representation

Yes

46. Section C 3 What is the expected volume of files/DB

Size (both History & ongoing) for the

following?

1. Conversion of data from the Legacy

MMIS to the IP ODS

2. Import Legacy data from the

Omnicaid DB into ODS

3. ETL Process to load the data into

Refer to addendum 15- Conversion in the

procurement library.

T O T A L S I Z E: TRACKS===>

6985060

CYLINDERS===>

465670.667

Or 500 GB which includes 7 years-worth

of claims history. Including 10 years of



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

MMISR DW or DS Contractor from

ODS

4. What are the number of files that will

be exported by Xerox for loading to

ODS.

claims history, we are looking at 1000 GB

or 1 Terabyte worth of data.

1&2. See question #41. Omnicaid is a

DB2 system.

These numbers are based on the current

MMIS and not the entire Enterprise.

3. Vendor to propose a process. As a DB2

system, Xerox would leverage the DB2

unload function to unload the data from the

DB2 tables.

4. This would depend on the non-DB2

files the State would like to export. For

DB2 unloads, we would break the 7 years

of claims data into extract files by paid date

ranges to facilitate timely extracting, file

exchange and loading of smaller files as

needed. The number of files will be

dependent on the size and will be

determined during conversion.

47. Section C 3 A)What is the expected YoY growth of

data? This would be helpful for

appropriate infrastructure identification

b) How many years of historical data

will have to be loaded and maintained?

a) The State declines to provide estimates

for these parameters as these numbers

are not known. The known data for the

MMIS is in the Procurement Library.

The State will add to the Procurement

Library 9 - HHS 2020 MMIS Activity

Data.

SFYE17 Enrollment is projected to be

at 927,547 the projected growth is for



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

Medicaid only members. Vendor

should note that Medicaid is just one

component of the Enterprise.

b) The current MMIS has a retention

period of 10 years.

Vendor should provide assumptions used

in their proposal.

48. Appendix H

How many extracts are expected to be

provided to external systems?

The known interfaces are included in the

Procurement Library 12 - HHS 2020

Legacy Interfaces (2)

49. Appendix H

Do we have Reporting requirement as

part of this scope? If so,

a. What is the estimated number of

Standard, Dashboards and Scorecards

looking at as part of the proposal? ?

b. What are the standard report output

formats (like PDF, Xls, etc.) or

Reporting tool expected as part of this

scope?

c. Do we have analytic Reports

expected as part of this RFP?

a) Reporting requirements for IP are for

system performance, not data analytics.

b) Propose the format in which you

produce reports. The IP Vendor is to

bring the reporting and analytic tools

for system monitoring and performance

etc.

c) Only as they relate to IP module

performance.

50. Appendix H

What is the technology platform of

databases in the source systems.

Varied Relational Data Base, Varied Flat

Files and Varied Proprietary sources. We

expect the Vendor to have adaptors

(including JSON) to handle a variety of





of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

source data.

51. Section 4.b (b) 102 What will be the total number of data

sources ? How many inbound and

outbound files are expected as part of

this engagement ?

See the interface list in the procurement

library. Vendor is expected to understand

that there will be sources other than the

MMIS.

52. Section 4.b.c.1 102 As mentioned Xerox will be responsible

to extract comma-separated files to load

data for IP ODS and MMIS Data

warehouse (other requirements)

Would it be possible XEROX to send

the information in a defined (Common)

format across all submitters? Will all the

(Claim, MCO E&M, etc.) details come

in a one single master file or individual

separate files for each data sets?

See Addendum 15 in the Procurement

Library related to Turnover.

53. Section 4.b.e 102 We are assuming that the State will

provide the existing Data model

document to incorporate new /

additional fields as part of the data

movement into IP ODS and MMIS

DW/DS tables. Please confirm.

No

54. Section 4.b.c.2 102 How frequently does the inaccurate

exception report needs to be sent to

HSD ? Is the expectation to schedule

this report or execute on-demand?

Both - Scheduled and On-Demand,

dependent upon the exception.

55. 2.c Enterprise 82 For each of the master indexes - MCI, a) This is an Enterprise system with



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

Technology

Service

Components -

Master Index

MPI, MAI, MEI, explain the sources in

terms of the following:

a) What are the sources?

b) What are the functional areas covered

by these sources?

c) What is the nature of each of these

sources (type of database, files etc.)?

d) Are there any external sources? If

Yes, what is the integration mechanism

for such sources?

e) In what frequency will the sources

send data to MDM?

multiple sources for each.

b) All functional areas.

c) All types of sources and the expectation

is the Vendor will have the adapters

needed.

d) Vendor is expected to recommend an

integration mechanism.

e) varies

56. 2.c Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components -

Master Index

83 Do you have licenses for any of the

following -

a) Data Quality Tool

b) Metadata Management Tool

c) Master Data Management Tool

If not, what is choice of tool for these

components?

a) Data Quality Tools are part of ASPEN

b) No

c) No; see table 8 in the RFP – Reuse.

Vendor’s proposed solution should

outline the tools.

57. 2.c Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components -

Master Index

83 For each of the master indexes - MCI,

MPI, MAI, MEI, explain the

downstreams in terms of the following:

a) What are the downstreams?

b) What are the functional areas covered

by these downstreams?

d) What are the requirements /

expectations of these downstreams?

e) What is the mode of interaction

(including frequency) for each of these

See response to Question 55.

The expectation is that the Vendor will

create the master indices within the MDM

and will use the MDM functionality to

manage the indices.



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

downstreams?

58. 2.c Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components -

Master Index

83 a)Is there any requirement for Business

Glossary? Please provide the details if

applicable .

b) Is there any requirement for

requirement for Data Lineage to be

established? Please provide the details

if applicable .

c) Is there any requirement to link the

different master indexes? Please provide

the details if applicable.

a) Yes.

b) Yes.

c) Yes.

Defining details would be part of the JAD

process for the selected Vendor.

59. 2.c Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components -

Master Index

85 a) What is the current state of Data

Governance?

b) We understand that the DS contractor

will be responsible for designing and

implementing the Data Governance.

What is the scope of Data Governance

from IP Contractor perspective.

a) In development

b) The State expects the IP Contractor to

participate in and contribute to

discussions and decisions related to

Data Governance with the State and the

selected DS module Vendor. The State

also expects the IP Contractor to

enforce the established Data

Governance processes.

60. 2.c Enterprise

Technology

Service

Components -

Master Index

86 Has any data profiling activity been

done for the sources of Master Data

Management?

No

61. 2.c Enterprise

Technology

87 Is there any existing implementation of

any of the following -

No



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

Service

Components -

Master Index

Data Quality

Metadata Management

Master Data Management

If YES, please provide the details of the

transitions

62. section b Operational

Data Source

101 Do we have "Data Dictionary", "Data

Model" and other documentation for

understanding of legacy MMIS and

Omnicaid systems

Yes. See procurement library

63. Appendix H 140 What is the approximate amount of

storage that you will be replicating

between sites (ex: 30TB)?

Not sure what is meant by “between sites.”

Depends upon Vendor’s proposed

deployment strategy.

64. Appendix H 140 What is the expected rate of data change

at the primary site(s) (GB/day)?

State does not have an estimate available.

65. Appendix H 140 Will any new applications be accepted

when we are in DR

No

66. Appendix H 140 In the event of a disaster, should the site

failover be initiated manually or

automatically?

Automatically preferred

67. Appendix H 140 Will the vendor be expected to setup a

DR for the primary datacenter? If so

please mention the DR requirements

(Hot/Warm/Cold with recovery time

expectations) ?

Refer to Requirements 6.01, 6.02 and 6.03

for DR. Vendor should include their

recommendation for Hot/Warm/Cold

recovery time.



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

68. Appendix H 140 What are the RPO / RTO requirement

for the solution in scope?

Vendor to propose solution.

69. Appendix H 140 Are there any external application

dependencies for the DR scope which

needs to be factored in .

Vendor to describe their solution for

dependencies. See the Interface List in the

Procurement Library.

70. Appendix H 140 Are there any encryption requirements

for the replicated data?

Yes. Please see 14 14 - HHS 2020

Security Privacy and Standard in the

Procurement Library

71. Appendix H 140 Is the requirement for replication 1-way,

bi-directional or multi-site?

Vendor to submit recommended solution.

72. Appendix H 140 What are the number and frequency of

application bookmarks (checkpoints)

required and what is the associated

retention period?

Vendor to submit recommended solution

73. Appendix H 140 List any replication technology

requirements if any

Network/SAN/Hosted)?

Dependent upon Vendor’s proposed DR

solution. See Table 8 in the RFP – Reuse.

74. Appendix H 140 List the network requirements for

replication between the facilities

(MPLS, HOSTING PARTNER

Backbone, …. ).

Dependent upon Vendor’s proposed DR

solution. Please see Table 8 RFP - Reuse

75. Appendix H 140 Is there a current Disaster recovery

system in place? If so, please provide

Yes, see table 8 RFP – Reuse

The existing DR recovery system is




of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

more details.

irrelevant and Vendor should propose a

solution and provide the documentation.

State has a disaster recovery site located in

Albuquerque that hosts non-Omnicaid

systems.

76. Appendix H 140 How many Disaster recovery sites do

you have?

State has a disaster recovery site located in

Albuquerque that hosts non-Omnicaid

systems.

77. Appendix H 140 Is an external vendor currently being

used for DR activities?

Yes, all of the State’s current external

vendors, such as Xerox, are required to

have their own DR plans and activities.

78. Appendix H 140 What is the current Storage architecture

for the state which is expected to be

used for this engagement

Vendor to propose a solution.

79. Appendix H 140 We see that the existing application is

using Corticon Business rules engine

5.3.4.6 and planned for upgrade to 5.5.

Could you please let us know if you are

open for evaluating other BRMS tools

apart from Corticon for this RFP (either

Open source tools like Drools /

Proprietary products like IBM ODM,

FICO Blaze)?

Yes

80. Appendix H 140 Could you please provide the following

additional details to help us better

understand the processing of Business

rules in the current system?

a) 15200

b) 5 million transactions from the ASPEN

eligibility system

c) both



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

a) Approximate number of Business

rules configured in the Corticon rules

engine

b) Approximate number of rules engine

hits/ transactions daily

c) Is the processing of business rules

batch processing / real time processing /

mix of both ?

Corticon is used for ASPEN Eligibility

system only.

Vendor’s proposed IP solution must

address the entire Enterprise’s data

integration requirements.

81. Appendix H 140 Could you please provide the sample

Business rules for major categories in

the existing application to understand

the level of complexity of the Business

Rules?

We assume bidder is asking about the

MMIS. See the Xerox system

documentation in the procurement library.

Bidder should note that this documentation

is not reflective of the complexity of

business rules that may be required for the

Enterprise.

82. Appendix H 140 Could you please let us know the scope

of work with respect to Business Rules?

Is there a need to completely revamp the

existing Business rules?

Scope of Work is defined in Appendix G.

Revamp is not needed for IP. The State

does not have a BRE that can be used for

the IP module.

83. Appendix H 140 Could you please let us know if the

Rules engine needs to interact with any

Database / external systems for

retrieving any relevant data during

processing other than the data that is

being sent by the Calling Application ?

If so, please provide the details.

Vendor to propose a recommended

solution.



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

84. Appendix H 140 Could you please share the complexity

details of the Interfaces, possibly along

with the complexity definition.

Vendors familiar with Medicaid and

Healthcare should understand the

complexity of the interfaces listed in the

Procurement Library.

85. Appendix H 140 Could you please let us know the level

of configurability of Business rules by

Business users in the current system.

Will business users be able to configure

the rules directly?

The current system is not indicative of the

intended Enterprise.

86. Appendix H 140 Could you please let us know the

number of applications that are

triggering Corticon business rules in the

current system?

The current system is not indicative of the

intended Enterprise.

87. Appendix H 140 For which service/Use Cases will the

Business Rule engine be used for? Is it

confined to claim adjudication alone?

The IP rules engine is related to performing

services for the ESB. IP Vendor is not

responsible for claims adjudication.

88. Appendix H 140 Are Standard NFR's defined for the

Rules application? Example Response

time, production peak and average

service load, growth of users in

production, Throughput TPS, etc.?

No

89. VII Response

Specifications,

B. Other

Requirements,

51 Section 3. Financial Stability

Documents requests that Offerors

submit most recent audited financial

statements and 10K, for the preceding

The State requires hard copies of all

documents submitted.



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

3. Financial

Stability

Documents

three years.

Given these documents are hundreds of

pages in volume and in order to remain

environmentally conscience, would the

State please accept these items via

electronic submission only?

90. Appendix H Response to

Specifications

142, 143 Within "System" Requirements, there's

a jump from Requirement 7.23 to 7.26.

Please clarify if there should be two

additional requirements, 7.24 and 7.25,

included.

The following requirements are to be

considered part of RFP and addressed in

Vendor’s response. These requirements

are also included in the RFP amendment.

7.24 Vendor shall propose required

tooling for Data Conversion/ODS and

EDW/IP System of Record such as

ETL/ELT, data profiling, metadata

management; for ESB, an administrative

dashboard and tuning tools; and for

MDM/Master Index, tools for

administration and tuning. Vendor shall

also propose roles and responsibilities for

State participants to interact with these

tools.

7.25 Vendor shall employ best practice

Software Quality Management tools such

as IDEs, Automated Code Review and

Continuous Integration tools, as well as

best practices for eliminating defects

before code goes to test. Vendor shall state



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

its understanding that all architecture and

design artifacts shall be approved by State

architects before being finalized and

submitted for development, configuration

and implementation.

91. VIII Evaluation, 1.

Mandatory

Specifications,

Required

Sample

Documents

53,54 The item "Required Sample

Documents" is listed under evaluation

and Mandatory Specifications, however,

there does not appear to be specific

guidance as to what sample documents

the Offeror is required to submit. Will

the State please provide clarification?

No. Vendor should use its own judgement

as to which sample documents best reflects

an understanding of the IP module.

92. VIII Evaluation,

Cost Points at

Sub-Factor

Level .v. Total

Evaluated Price

Receiving Total

Cost Points

54,55 The current approach to scoring Cost

Proposals may encourage companies to

shift their proposed costs into lower

point categories. Will the State please

consider scoring and awarding points

related to Cost based on Total Cost and

the Total Points attributed to Cost? If

not, will the State please clarify how

Cost Points will be scored in a way that

eliminates the potential for inappropriate

cost submissions?

Please see Amendment.

93. B. MMISR

Approach

1. The MMISR

Modular

Procurements -

b. Data

Services

15,16 RFP states that IP contractor is

responsible for providing Infrastructure

for Data Services procurement and Data

Services contractor will be responsible

for designing, implementing, operating

The IP Vendor is responsible for providing

the integration infrastructure for all

modules. All Module Vendors must

comply with the IP standards and

specification for service integration, data



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

and continually improving the

structures, processes and data needed to

support HSD.

As IP contractor will not know the

proposed solution, tools, and

performance needs of the Data Services

contractor at the time of submission,

will the State please provide guidance

on expected storage and growth or

entertain an option that would allow for

capacity to be increased/decreased as

needs change over time?

transmission, security, etc. as outlined in

this RFP. The State expects the Vendor to

provide a scalable solution which has

capacity that can be increased or decreased

over time without disruption to the

solution.

94. G. MMISR

Procurement

Library

Program-

related

Documents

33,35 RFP identifies 12 documents that are

contained within the Procurement

library, however, one seems to be

missing -"1. HHS 2020 Roles and

Responsibilities." Will the State please

upload this document to the

Procurement library?

Posted.

95. D. Contractor

Period of

Performance and

Scope

30 To create a level playing for all offerors

and reduce variation in sizing of HW

and SW Licenses, we request NM HSD

to publish input sizing parameter for all

key components including:

a) ESB

b) ODS

c) Data warehouse

The State declines to provide estimates for

these parameters as these numbers are not

known. The known data for the MMIS is

in the Procurement Library.

Vendor should note that Medicaid is just

one component of the Enterprise.

Vendor should provide assumptions used

in its proposal.



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

The parameters may include the

following:

a) No. of transactions per hour on the

ESB

b) No. of Transactions during peak

hours

c) Size of Payload on the Messages

going through the ESB ODS

d) Total no of transactions per day

e) Total No of Transactions during peak

hours

f) Expected no of tables in the Data

warehouse

96. Appendix G -

Integration

Platform Detailed

Statement of

Work

1. IP Contractor

Role, c.

Complete

Solution

73,74 RFP states that IP Contractor will be

responsible for setting standards that

apply across the whole MMISR

solution; for facilitating problem

diagnosis and resolution across the

integrated solution; and for providing

guidance, review, testing, coordination

and troubleshooting as additional

MMISR contracts are awarded and

modules are implemented.

Our understanding is that NM has an

existing investment for Ticket and

Problem Management. Would the State

please provide additional information on

the product, version, and current

The State currently utilizes the Cherwell

ITSM version 8.1 for incident and request

ticket management across the Enterprise.

The State’s choice of a ticketing

management system may change over the

life of the IP contract. The State requires

the awarded Contractor to utilize the same

ticketing management system as the State.

The State will be responsible for building

in needed categories in the Service Catalog

as for the IP solution. Customization

beyond building necessary categories or

custom interfaces to the ticking

management system will need to be agreed

upon and may be at the Contractor’s

expense.



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

utilization?

97. Appendix G -

Integration

Platform Detailed

Statement of

Work

2. IP

Technology

Requirements,

b. IP Tools

75 Will the State please let us know if there

is any Application Performance

Monitoring tools that are currently

utilized at DoIT State data centers?

There are no such tools at the data centers.

98. Appendix G -

Integration

Platform Detailed

Statement of

Work

3. Database, a.

Operational

Data Store

(ODS)

84,85 RFP states that the ODS must "Have

sufficient capacity to support known

workload requirements and be readily

expandable to accommodate increasing

or changing workloads."

Will the State consider publishing the

expected workload with a YOY growth

target in order to minimize variation?


99. Appendix G -

Integration

Platform Detailed

Statement of

Work

3. Database, b.

Data

Warehouse

Infrastructure

85 The IP Module Contractor will have

responsibility for the planning, design,

implementation, operation and

maintenance of an EDW that will be the

master repository for reporting, ad hoc

queries and analytics for the MMISR

solution and for HHS 2020. While the

Data Services Module Contractor will

identify and provide the specific tools,

techniques and approaches used to

deliver these services, HSD wants to

ensure that the core infrastructure

supporting DS is

consistent with and is hosted by the IP

The IP Vendor is responsible for the

Enterprise Data Warehouse. We believe

this is outlined clearly in this RFP.



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

Contractor.

Our Understanding is that IP contractor

will be responsible for providing

Infrastructure for Data Services

procurement scope on EDW and data

services contractor will be responsible

for implementation and operations of

EDW. Please clarify.

100. Appendix G -

Integration

Platform Detailed

Statement of

Work

4. Tools, g.

Hosting

87 In the option where NM hosts in the

DoIT Simms Data Center, should we

assume that NM will operate (monitor

and manage) the HW, Network,

Security, Hypervisor, and VMs up

through the Operating System as part of

DoIT standard infrastructure operations?

This should not be assumed. Vendor is

required to provide staffing for operations

of the IP solution.

The Security requirements include the

Vendor providing Authentication,

Authorization and Auditing (AAA).

101. Appendix D Reference

Questionnaire

Form

Appendix D states that the procurement

office must receive the Reference

Questionnaire Form no later than

September 7. Will the State please

clarify if this should be October 14, the

submission date of the proposal

response?

The Reference Questionnaire Forms are

due with the Proposal no later than October

14, 2016, 3PM.

102. Q&A Process Will the State consider allowing

potential Offerors the opportunity to

submit a second round of questions,

specifically for further clarification to

the answers posted on 9/22, if deemed

necessary?

No



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

103.

Appendix G

90 3. IP Project Management, Item a, bullet

f, refers to “Appendix G, Section IV,

D”. Could you please clarify the

reference to wherein the RFP details

may be found?

The RFP details for IP project management

are found in APPENDIX G, Section 3,

APPENDIX G, Section 6. and in the

Requirements listed in Appendix H.

104 Can you please clarify or provide a list

of what should be included as “Required

Sample Documents” which is cited as

25 points under the Evaluation Point

system? Also, please confirm that these

documents do not conform to the 300

page limit


Sample documents are not considered as

part of the 300 page limit.

105. Within the Proposal Format instructions

on page 48, can you please clarify that

tables and/or figures may use other fonts

and sizes different from the Times

Roman 12 pt. font required.

Vendors may use other fonts and sizes in

Tables and Figures provided they are

readable. Vendor should note that all

submitted materials should be spellchecked

prior to submission.

106. I.A. Purpose Of

This Request

For Proposals

8 Please confirm that this requirement

applies only to an Offeror who is

bidding as the Prime Contractor, and

does not preclude vendors participating

as subcontractors on more than 2

modules.

As part of the HSD commitment to

maximizing the benefits of a modular

MMISR solution, which includes no

longer being dependent on a single

That is correct.



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE

MMIS vendor, each Offeror may win no

more than two MMISR module

procurements. The selected IP

Contractor may not compete for or win

the Data Services (DS) module

procurement which will occur after this

release.

107. II.B.1.b 14 Please clarify whether the QA vendor

will use a CMS-compliant platform

provided by the IP vendor (or another

module vendor) or will be expected to

propose a QA module.

d. Quality Assurance (QA) –

Through a BPO contract, HSD will

contract with a vendor to obtain and

perform the following services for the

QA module using a CMS-compliant

platform and processes:

All modules must comply with CMS and

HSD requirements. Each module will be

procured independently. The IP Vendor is

not expected to propose a solution for any

other module.

108 Appendix H 8.02 Clarify the IP RFP requirements section

to help define the boundaries of work

between the IP vendor and future BPO

vendors for data conversion efforts - to

the effect that the IP vendor provides

future BPO vendors with data in formats

required to support BPO vendors’ data

conversion/migration activities.

The IP vendor is expected to provide future

BPO Vendors with data in standard

formats which the BPO Vendors may need

for conversion/migration/testing activities.



of 32

RFP

SECTION

SECTION

TITLE

REFERNCED

PAGE

OFFEROR’S

QUESTION

HSD’S

RESPONSE