Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 1418-13402 for Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution

0 %
100 %
Information about Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 1418-13402 for Office of the Independent...
Technology

Published on March 11, 2014

Author: juggernautco

Source: slideshare.net

Description

The OIIG through the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer (“Procurement”) is issuing this Case Management System (CMS) Request for Proposal (RFP) to manage the receipt, processing, reporting, and closure of investigations. The system must allow for access of greater than 25 end-users at any given time. Upon successfully completing this initiative the County expects to meet the following goals and objectives:
A. Streamline/reengineer the process described herein;
B. Increase operational visibility;
C. Improve efficiencies;
D. Eliminate redundancies in data entry;
E. Automation of manual case handling;
F. Reduce manual steps;
G. Reduce paper processes;
H. Reduce processing time;
I. Track and manage work load distribution;
J. Retrieve information easily;
K. Enable robust statistical analysis and research;
L. Track and manage cases and,
M. Improvereporting;

COOK COUNTY GOVERNMENT Office of the Chief Procurement Officer Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 1418-13402 for Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution Issued on 02/14/14 Proposals must be delivered to: Office of the Chief Procurement Officer 118 N. Clark Street, Room 1018 Chicago, IL 60602 Attention: Shannon E. Andrews, Chief Procurement Officer Proposals are due no later than 3 p.m. Central Standard Time on Thursday, March 13, 2014 There will be a pre-proposal conference on Friday, February 21, 2014 at 10:00 am at 118 N. Clark Street, Bid and Bond Room 1030, Chicago, IL 60602 Questions regarding the RFP should be directed to: Richard Sanchez, Senior Contract Negotiator 312 603-2374, richard.sanchez@cookcountyil.gov ___________________________________________________________________________________ Toni Preckwinkle Shannon E. Andrews Cook County Board President Chief Procurement Officer ___________________________________________________________________________________

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Table of Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 6 1.1. Background ...................................................................................................................................... 6 1.2. Business Goals and Objectives......................................................................................................... 6 1.3. Schedule........................................................................................................................................... 7 2. Current State............................................................................................................................................ 7 2.1 Client ............................................................................................................................................ 7 2.2 Database ...................................................................................................................................... 7 2.3 File Servers................................................................................................................................... 7 2.4 Application Servers ...................................................................................................................... 7 2.5 Integration ................................................................................................................................... 8 3. Scope........................................................................................................................................................ 8 3.1 Proposed Project Approach and Implementation Methodology .......................................................... 8 3.1.1 Overview of the Implementation Methodology............................................................................. 9 3.1.2 Project Task List and Timeline......................................................................................................... 9 3.1.3 Requirements Validation and System Design................................................................................. 9 3.1.4 System Implementation and Configuration.................................................................................. 10 3.1.5 Quality Planning, Assurance and Control...................................................................................... 10 3.1.6 Knowledge Transfer, Training, and Transition.............................................................................. 11 3.1.7 Contract Performance Review and Acceptance ........................................................................... 12 3.2 System Solution Overview ............................................................................................................. 12 3.2.1 Software Requirements ................................................................................................................ 12 3.2.2 Hosting and Platform Requirements ............................................................................................ 13 3.2.3 Hardware and Equipment Requirements ..................................................................................... 15 3.2.4 Physical Environment Requirements............................................................................................ 15 3.2.5 Network ........................................................................................................................................ 16 3.2.6 Data Extract, Transform, and Load ............................................................................................... 17 3.2.7 Data Ownership, Access and Retention........................................................................................ 18 3.2.8 Licensing, Warranties and other Terms and Conditions............................................................... 18 3.2.9 Intellectual Property ..................................................................................................................... 19 3.2.10 Support and Maintenance .......................................................................................................... 20 3.2.11 Data Security and Compliance.................................................................................................... 21 3.2.12 Incident Response Requirements ............................................................................................... 23

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 3 of 110 3.2.13 Development and Configuration Practices................................................................................. 24 3.2.14 Business Continuity and Recovery.............................................................................................. 24 3.2.15 Audit Requirements.................................................................................................................... 26 3.2.16 Transition Out and Exit Requirements........................................................................................ 26 3.3 System User Requirements.................................................................................................................. 27 4. Current OIIG Process.............................................................................................................................. 27 4.1 Logical Process Model.......................................................................................................................... 28 4.2 Investigations Processes ...................................................................................................................... 29 4.3 Investigator Logical Access Model....................................................................................................... 30 4.4 Future Logical Data Model................................................................................................................... 31 5. Current Technology Environment.......................................................................................................... 31 5.1. Network Infrastructure.................................................................................................................. 31 5.2. Remote Security............................................................................................................................. 32 6. Instructions to Proposers....................................................................................................................... 32 6.1. Instructions .................................................................................................................................... 32 6.2. Availability of Documents.............................................................................................................. 32 6.3. Pre-proposal Conference............................................................................................................... 33 6.4. Special Access to the Pre-Proposal Conference (As applicable).................................................... 33 6.5. Clarifications .................................................................................................................................. 33 6.6. Delivery of Proposal Package......................................................................................................... 33 6.7. Uniformity...................................................................................................................................... 33 6.8. Proposal Material........................................................................................................................... 34 6.9. Addenda......................................................................................................................................... 34 6.10. Proposer’s Responsibility for Services Proposed....................................................................... 34 6.11. Errors and Omissions ................................................................................................................. 34 6.12. RFP Interpretation...................................................................................................................... 34 6.13. Confidentiality and Response Cost and Ownership................................................................... 34 6.14. Use of Subcontractors................................................................................................................ 35 6.15. MBE/WBE Participation Goals ................................................................................................... 35 6.16. Proposer’s Disclosure and Conflict of Interest........................................................................... 35 6.17. Cook County RFP Form............................................................................................................... 35 6.18. Pricing......................................................................................................................................... 35

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 4 of 110 6.19. Period of Firm Proposal.............................................................................................................. 36 6.20. Awards ....................................................................................................................................... 36 6.21. Cook County Rights.................................................................................................................... 36 6.22. Alteration/Modification of Original Documents........................................................................ 36 6.23. Recycling .................................................................................................................................... 36 7. EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS................................................................................................ 37 7.1. Responsiveness Review ................................................................................................................. 37 7.2. Acceptance of Proposals................................................................................................................ 37 7.3. Evaluation Process ......................................................................................................................... 37 7.4. Right to Inspect.............................................................................................................................. 37 7.5. Best and Final Offer........................................................................................................................ 37 7.6. Selection Process ........................................................................................................................... 37 8. Evaluation Criteria.................................................................................................................................. 38 8.1. Responsiveness of Proposal........................................................................................................... 38 8.2. Technical Proposal ......................................................................................................................... 38 8.3. Reasonableness of Overall Price.................................................................................................... 38 9. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS.................................................................................................................. 39 9.1. Number of Copies .......................................................................................................................... 39 9.2. Time for submission....................................................................................................................... 39 9.3. Format............................................................................................................................................ 39 9.4. Complete submission..................................................................................................................... 39 9.5. Packaging and Labeling.................................................................................................................. 39 9.6. Timely delivery of Proposals .......................................................................................................... 39 9.7. Late Proposals................................................................................................................................ 39 9.8. Schedule of Revisions to RFP Schedule.......................................................................................... 40 10. Required Proposal Content................................................................................................................ 40 10.1. Cover letter ................................................................................................................................ 40 10.2. Executive Summary.................................................................................................................... 40 10.3. Qualifications of the Proposer ................................................................................................... 40 10.4. Propose System Solution and Project Plan................................................................................ 40 10.5. Key Personnel............................................................................................................................. 41 10.6. MBE/WBE Participation ............................................................................................................. 41

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 5 of 110 10.7. Subcontracting or teaming ........................................................................................................ 41 10.8. Financial Status .......................................................................................................................... 41 10.9. Legal Actions .............................................................................................................................. 41 10.10. Conflict of Interest ..................................................................................................................... 41 10.11. Economic Disclosure Statement ................................................................................................ 42 10.12. Insurance Requirements............................................................................................................ 42 10.13. Return on Investment................................................................................................................ 42 10.14. Contract...................................................................................................................................... 42 10.15. Other.......................................................................................................................................... 42 Appendix I (System Requirements Matrix).................................................................................................... 43 Appendix II (Pricing Proposal Form)............................................................................................................... 44 Quick Payment Discounts .......................................................................................................................... 44 Appendix III (OIIG Complaint Form)............................................................................................................... 45 Appendix IV (OIIG Current Data Schema)...................................................................................................... 46 Appendix V (Economic Disclosure Statement) .............................................................................................. 47 Appendix VI (Professional Services Agreement)............................................................................................ 26

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 6 of 110 1. Introduction 1.1. Background The mission of the Office of the Independent Inspector General (OIIG) is to detect, deter and prevent corruption, fraud, waste, mismanagement, unlawful political discrimination and misconduct in the operation of Cook County government with integrity, independence, professionalism and respect for both the rule of law and the people. The OIIG conducts investigations and issues findings and recommendations to Cook County government officials. The OIIG also investigates potential criminal violations involving the conduct of Cook County employees acting in their official capacities and refers such matters for prosecution. Because the OIIG is a fact-finding agency, it cannot dictate a legal outcome. The OIIG also serves as a liaison between the County and outside law enforcement authorities and prosecutorial agencies when cases are referred. The OIIG’s jurisdiction includes employees, elected and appointed officials in the performance of their official duties, as well as contractors and subcontractors doing or seeking to do business with Cook County government. 1.2. Business Goals and Objectives The OIIG through the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer (“Procurement”) is issuing this Case Management System (CMS) Request for Proposal (RFP) to manage the receipt, processing, reporting, and closure of investigations. The system must allow for access of greater than 25 end-users at any given time. Upon successfully completing this initiative the County expects to meet the following goals and objectives: A. Streamline/reengineer the process described herein; B. Increase operational visibility; C. Improve efficiencies; D. Eliminate redundancies in data entry; E. Automation of manual case handling; F. Reduce manual steps; G. Reduce paper processes; H. Reduce processing time; I. Track and manage work load distribution; J. Retrieve information easily; K. Enable robust statistical analysis and research; L. Track and manage cases and, M. Improve reporting;

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 7 of 110 1.3.Schedule The County anticipates the following Schedule: Activity Estimated Date 1. RFP posted to the website February 14, 2014 2. Pre-Proposal Conference February 21, 2014 at 10:00 AM CST 3. Proposer Inquiry Deadline February 26, 2014 4. Response to Inquiries (tentative) March 4, 2014 5. Proposal Due Date March 13, 2014 no later than 3:00 PM The County may opt to conduct a site visit, if geographically feasible, to locations where the recommended solution has been implemented. 2. Current State The Office of the Independent Inspector General (OIIG) currently uses desktop computer systems running the Microsoft Windows operating system, and desktop productivity applications. Local and remote applications are accessed via the Cook County wide area network. Tool Tech Description /platform /DB Microsoft Active Directory Multiple AD implementations across the County. One Active Directory to support the OIIG Microsoft Office Tools Office 2007, 2010, 2012 PC OS Windows XP, Windows 7 Web based system See the Structure chart in the Appendix Section. System in PHP using MySQL (4.1.22). One part is for Administration which is on a Windows Server (2003) using the County Intranet (CCNET) The Public Facing view is in the DMZ, Windows Server 2008 R2. There are currently 2,500 records, 24 tables, 108 fields 2.1 Client The proposed software solution shall be compatible with Microsoft Windows 7 (or better) 32-bit and 64- bit Operating Systems. 2.2 Database If on-premise, the database for the proposed application shall be compatible with Microsoft SQL Server 2008 (or better). 2.3 File Servers Any files related to the proposed solution that need to be stored on a file server shall be compatible with Microsoft Server 2008 (or better). 2.4 Application Servers The preferred application server is Microsoft IIS 7.0 (or better). If additional modules are required for other application servers the modules shall be compatible with Microsoft Server 2008 (or better).

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 8 of 110 2.5 Integration Proposers should propose a solution that is Open Database Connectivity (ODBC) compliant. The proposed solution may be required to interface with Microsoft Active Directory to support single sign on. See current state section for details on Cook County’s technology environment. Data sources may include text based files as well as data from other ODBC compliant databases. 3. Scope The County is requesting proposals from vendors that have the technology (solution) and expertise to install, configure, train, provide periodic maintenance support and updates to an onsite or offsite hosted Case Management System. The proposed solution may be an On-Premise, Cloud, or Hybrid Hosting solution. Proposer should already have a solution proven in this industry and have the experience to reengineer and implement the proposed system in alignment with the requirements described in this RFP. In addition, the Proposer shall have the capacity to deploy the system in a time and cost effective manner, following all pertinent information reliability and security standards. Specific technology requirements are listed in the System Requirements Matrix (See Appendix). For any Scope sections herein, it is not sufficient to state “not applicable.” If not applicable, Proposers shall provide a rationale. Furthermore, and if awarded, Proposer’s responses may be incorporated into the final contract. Proposers shall complete the tables on the following sub-sections only for their proposed solution (i.e On-premise, Cloud, or Hybrid). 3.1 Proposed Project Approach and Implementation Methodology Although a detailed approach format is included in the following sections, Proposers are expected to propose a best-industry methodology and solution, and are encouraged to provide innovative ideas to meet the needs of the County in a timely manner. The proposed project plan shall adhere to an industry project delivery methodology. The Proposer shall describe the methodology in detail. Proposers shall provide a detailed project plan and methodology that clearly demonstrates how their team will initiate, reengineer and automate the processes described in this RFP. Proposals shall include a detailed work breakdown structure that conveys how work will be performed and communicated in an organization of similar size and complexity. The County requires a managed implementation that accomplishes tangible deliverables by a date agreed to within a joint project task list and timeline. Immediate functionality priorities are defined in the System Requirements Matrix. These priorities highlight the functionality that the County will use within the completed solution. The proposed approach and methodology shall include, but should not be limited to, the following sections.

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 9 of 110 3.1.1 Overview of the Implementation Methodology The Proposer must agree to comply with the County’s project delivery methodology for tracking progress and documents for the duration of the project. In addition, the Proposer will submit weekly status reports to the County. This will be done on the County’s Sharepoint site. These reports will include: 1. Work accomplished each week from the task list and timeline. 2. Updated GANTT charts. 3. Tasks for the next week from the task list and timeline. 4. List of deliverables for the current week and next week. 5. Status of risks or issues that affect delivery in accordance with the Provider task list and timeline. 6. Invoice requests and payment schedules 7. Other items relevant to project delivery. Proposers should provide an implementation methodology and include: 1. Brief description of the project delivery methodology. 2. Project phases. 3. Team roles. 4. Milestones for each phase and deliverables. 5. Quality delivery plans 6. Test Policies and Processes 7. Change Management Processes 8. Training methodology 9. Customer care processes and procedures 10. Requirements traceability procedures 3.1.2 Project Task List and Timeline Proposers should provide a task list and timeline down to the resource level. This should include 1) phases, in accordance with the implementation methodology, 2) milestones, 3) governance, 4) tasks, 5) assumptions, and 6) dependencies with the Cook County delivery team. The selected Proposer is responsible for accurately estimating effort and presenting a comprehensive plan reflecting careful assessment of the requirements in this RFP document and related attachments. 3.1.3 Requirements Validation and System Design Proposers should provide a detailed description of its approach to validating business and technical requirements, in order to design a system solution and related architecture that adheres to industry best practices and the current Cook County technology environment. The County expects this section to include at a minimum: 1. Business requirements validation checklist. 2. Technical requirements validation checklist. 3. System design validation checklist. 4. Cook County responsibilities.

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 10 of 110 3.1.4 System Implementation and Configuration Proposers shall provide a detailed description of the proposed build and release approach. Describe the level of effort and timeline based on the expected configuration and customization work. List the Provider difference in level of effort (different tasks, if any) for On-Premise, Cloud and Hybrid Hosting environments. The County expects this section to include at minimum: 1. Proposed environments 2. Software configuration at the desktop. 3. System architecture 4. System design 5. List of deliverables to Cook County 6. List of deliverables from Cook County required by the Provider On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting Environments Software configuration System architecture System design Deliverables Cook County project deliverables 3.1.5 Quality Planning, Assurance and Control Proposers shall provide a detailed description of the proposed quality methodology adhering to best practices and clearly identifying control tasks and testing. The County expects this section to include at minimum: 1. Provider quality policy. 2. Provider test policy. 3. Provider test plans. 4. Provider testing procedures. 5. Provider test levels and types.

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 11 of 110 Proposer shall conduct unit and integration testing prior to delivering the solution to Cook County for User Acceptance Testing (UAT). The test cases and test results from unit and integration testing will be provided as a stage gate for Cook County approval to start UAT. The test cases and test results shall be mapped back directly to requirements identified by Cook County using a traceability matrix. Requirement Test Case Test Results List requirement List steps for each test case List results 3.1.6 Knowledge Transfer, Training, and Transition Proposers shall describe the recommended knowledge transfer, training and transition processes. Describe the County’s responsibilities. This plan should include at minimum: 1. Knowledge transfer plan: location, format, total hours, number of employees trained. 2. End user training plan: location, format, total hours, number of employees trained 3. Application administrator training plan: location, format, total hours, number of employees trained 4. Transition plans from old to new system. 5. Support provided during roll-out of the new system: location, format, total hours, number of employees trained 6. Cook County responsibilities during each milestone during knowledge transfer, training, and transition. Provide the response in this format: On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting Knowledge transfer plan End user training plan Application administrator training plan Transition plan from old to new system Support provided during roll-out Cook County responsibilities

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 12 of 110 3.1.7 Contract Performance Review and Acceptance Proposers should describe all expected contract performance metrics and steps to transfer all assets to the County. This close out plan should include at a minimum: 1. List of deliverables. 2. Acceptance criteria for all deliverables: who will be submitting, timeframe for acceptance from submission and any default acceptance timelines On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting List of documentation Acceptance criteria Contract payment shall be based on milestones in the baseline project schedule. Payment will be accelerated or delayed based upon actual delivery dates. 3.2 System Solution Overview Proposers must describe the proposed on-premise or hosted solution and related functionality to capture and track all steps of the described processes including but not limited to data migration, data validation, data storage, data security, auditing capabilities, reporting, case tracking, interfaces, and system requirements at the desktop and network level. Every proposal shall include the following sub-sections. This Section of the Proposer’s response will be incorporated into the final Contract. 3.2.1 Software Requirements Proposer shall provide a detailed description of the product(s) and product versions being proposed. The response to this section shall detail the system features and capabilities and indicate if these are native to the software or if integration with a 3rd party software is required or recommended. Include the following: 1. Operating system at the desktop and server level. 2. User interfaces 3. Development tools 4. New version release schedule, to include how the release would be accomplished at the user level and into a hosted or non-hosted data center. 5. Application architecture 6. Backup and recovery procedures 7. Documentation to include operations, technical manuals, online help, and training materials.

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 13 of 110 On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting Operating System User Interfaces Development tools New version release schedule Peripherals and wiring required Web based technology Mobile technology Application architecture Backup and recovery procedures Documentation 3.2.2 Hosting and Platform Requirements The Proposer shall give an overview of all hosting and platform requirements associated with the proposal; if Proposer determines any of the following requirements to be inapplicable, Proposer shall state so and shall also state the basis for determining each such requirement to be inapplicable; proposer must describe the following: 1. System Environments – The proposer shall state all environments (e.g., production, development, and test) included in the proposal. If such environments are limited in functionality, scope or otherwise, the proposal shall describe such limits. 2. Shared Components of the System: - The proposer shall clearly state and describe all shared components of the System (e.g., network segments, back-up tapes, etc.). The proposer shall assume responsibility that any System components not identified as shared components are provided by the proposer as System components dedicated for the County’s use only. 3. Data Storage Limits and Overages – The proposer shall clearly state all data storage limits associated with the System. Where exceeding such data storage limits would cause the County to incur additional cost, the proposer shall state such costs in its separate pricing proposal. 4. Data Transfer Limits and Overages – The proposer shall clearly state all data transfer limits associated with the System. Where exceeding such data transfer limits would cause the County to incur additional cost, the proposer shall state such costs in its separate pricing proposal.

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 14 of 110 On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting System Environments Shared components Data storage limits Data transfer limits 3.2.2.1 Cloud Solutions If the proposal relies upon Cloud Computing, the proposer shall clearly state and describe: a. Its proposed service model (e.g., SaaS, PaaS, IaaS); b. Its proposed Cloud deployment model (e.g., Private Cloud, Public Cloud, Community Cloud or Hybrid Cloud); c. Whether it relies upon any third parties in the provisioning of its Cloud deployment model; d. Proposer’s rationale for its choice of Cloud deployment model; e. Whether the proposer offers any other Cloud deployment; f. How another of proposer’s Cloud deployment models might impact the County’s data security and any compliance obligations; g. How another of proposer’s Cloud deployment models might impact pricing, but the proposer shall state such costs in its separate pricing proposal Proposed service model Proposed cloud deployment model 3rd party provisioning Rationale for cloud deployment model Other cloud deployment solutions Data security and compliance considerations

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 15 of 110 3.2.3 Hardware and Equipment Requirements The proposer must give an overview of all hardware and equipment requirements associated with the proposal. If the proposer determines any of the following requirements to be inapplicable, proposer shall state so and shall also state the basis for determining each such requirement to be inapplicable; proposer shall describe the following: a. Required hardware and equipment, including minimum specifications of each; b. Responsibility for procuring all hardware and equipment (e.g., proposer or County); c. Responsibility for installation of all hardware and equipment (e.g., proposer or County); d. Ownership of all hardware and equipment (e.g., whether County holds title to hardware and equipment that proposer provides); e. Warranties associated with all hardware and equipment; f. Any terms and conditions accompanying the required hardware and equipment. On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting Required hardware Required software Procurement responsibility Installation responsibility Ownership of hardware and software Warranties for hardware Terms and conditions for hardware and software 3.2.4 Physical Environment Requirements The proposer shall give an overview of all physical environment requirements associated with the proposal; if proposer determines any of the following requirements to be inapplicable, proposer shall state so and shall also state the basis for determining each such requirement to be inapplicable; proposer shall describe the following: a. Physical location requirements (e.g., cooling, space, connectivity, etc.) b. Cable and wiring requirements and party responsible for procuring (e.g., proposer or County); c. County’s additional power requirements for operating required hardware and equipment.

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 16 of 110 On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting Physical location requirements Cabling and wiring requirements Party responsible for procurement Power requirements 3.2.5 Network The proposer shall give an overview of all network and bandwidth requirements associated with the proposal; if proposer determines any of the following requirements to be inapplicable, proposer shall state so and shall also state the basis for determining each such requirement to be inapplicable; proposer shall describe the following: a. Normal Bandwidth Requirements– The proposer shall include a reasonable estimate of minimum bandwidth required for concurrent application access and data access for “normal” daily operational use for cloud, hybrid and/or on-premise systems. Proposer shall also provide its definition of “normal daily operational use.” b. Peak Bandwidth Requirements– The proposer shall include a reasonable estimate of peak volume/times for each retrieval and uploading transactions for cloud, hybrid and/or on-premise systems. c. Typical Impact – The proposer shall include a reasonable estimate of the typical impact expected on the network post implementation. d. Other Network Requirements – The proposer should describe the optimal physical network infrastructure required for an on-premise solution to effectively mitigate latency and data speed issues. If proposing a Cloud-based or Hybrid Hosting solution, please describe the physical network infrastructure, connectivity testing and performance assurance. Network architecture diagrams must be included with details regarding the management of remote systems

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 17 of 110 If any assumptions are made to support the answers, clearly state those as part of the response. On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting Normal bandwidth requirements Peak bandwidth requirements Typical impact Other network requirements 3.2.6 Data Extract, Transform, and Load The proposal shall give an overview of all data migration, conversion, and transformation requirements associated with the System or Hosting. If proposer determines any of the following requirements to be inapplicable, proposer shall state so and shall also state the basis for determining each such requirement to be inapplicable. Proposer shall describe the following: a. Data Extract– The proposer shall include the cost of extracting the data from the source system as part of their price proposal. The provider will explain the process to convert the data into a single format for the transformation processing and any tools that will be used. If the performance of this task will cause the County to incur additional cost, the proposer shall state such costs in its separate pricing proposal. b. Data Transform – The proposer shall include the cost of transforming the data from the source system to the proposed system as part of their price proposal. The proposer will explain the transformation type required to meet the business and technical needs of the target database and the tools that will be used. If the performance of this task will cause the County to incur additional cost, the proposer shall state such costs in its separate pricing proposal. c. Data Load – The proposer shall include the cost of loading the data to the proposed system as part of their price proposal. The proposer will explain the load process and tools. If the performance of this task will cause the County to incur additional cost, the proposer shall state such costs in its separate pricing proposal. On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting Data extract Data transform Data load

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 18 of 110 3.2.7 Data Ownership, Access and Retention If awarded, all County Data shall be and remain the sole and exclusive property of the County. The selected Proposer will treat County Data as Confidential Information. The selected Proposer will be provided a license to County Data hereunder for the sole and exclusive purpose of performing its obligations under the resulting Agreement, including a limited non-exclusive, non-transferable license to transmit, process, and display County Data only to the extent necessary in the provisioning of the Services and not for the storage or recording of County Data. The selected Proposer will be prohibited from disclosing County Data to any third party without specific written approval from the County. The Selected Proposer will have no property interest in, and may assert no lien on or right to withhold County Data from Cook County. Proposer is expected to acknowledge and accept, or state any objections to, Cook County Data use and ownership. Proposer shall also provide a statement of its data protection practices and its responsibilities to protect and prevent the use or sale of County data to/or by external entities. The Proposer’s full Data Protection Policy shall be included as an attachment to its proposal. Furthermore, the proposal shall state that the Proposer will meet the following data-related system requirements: a. At all times, the County shall be able to receive County data, associated metadata, and reasonably granular subsets thereof, as well as any associated files or attachments, from the System in a useable, encrypted format. b. Upon termination of the contract and at the County’s written request, the Proposer shall destroy County Data, including backups and copies thereof, according to NIST standards or as otherwise directed by the County. c. The System shall have the ability to retain County data in a manner that is searchable and capable of compliance with records retention laws and best practices. d. At no time may Proposer suspend or terminate County’s access to County Data or the System for breach of contract or term or condition relating to the System without giving the County reasonable notice and opportunity to cure according to the County’s dispute resolution process. 3.2.8 Licensing, Warranties and other Terms and Conditions The proposer shall provide sufficient detail on licensing agreements, warranties, and other terms and conditions associated with the proposal; if proposer determines any of the following requirements to be inapplicable, proposer shall state so and shall also state the basis for determining each such requirement to be inapplicable; proposer shall describe the following: a. Licenses – The proposer shall attach complete copies of software licensing agreements that the proposal requires. The proposer shall also succinctly state: 1. The duration of the software licenses (e.g., perpetual) 2. The County’s rights under the license (e.g., use, disclosure, sale, etc.) 3. other license restrictions; b. Warranties – The proposer shall state the length and scope of all warranties that accompany the proposal’s software.

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 19 of 110 c. Additional Terms and Conditions – The proposer shall agree that the County’s [General Conditions | Professional Service Agreement], as well as any special conditions to which the County and the proposer agree, will precede additional terms and conditions of the provider or third parties. If the proposal would require the County to agree to any of the following, proposer shall include complete copies of same: 1. License agreements; 2. Acceptable use policies; 3. Privacy policies; 4. Other terms and conditions. 3.2.9 Intellectual Property Proposer’s deliverables may be considered “works made for hire” or otherwise assigned to or owned by the County. Proposer must state its agreement or must state any objection to this section. Specifically, the Proposer shall address intellectual property ownership individually with respect to each of the following in its proposal: a. Commercial-off-the-shelf software or software components; b. Software customizations; c. Database schemas; d. Workflows; e. Project plans; f. Documentation; g. Training materials; h. Other Deliverables. On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting COTs or software components Software customizations Database schemas Workflows Project plans Documentation Training materials Other deliverables

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 20 of 110 3.2.10 Support and Maintenance The proposal shall individually address each the following requirements and provide sufficient detail on how it meets the following requirements: a. Multi-tiered support – The proposal shall provide multiple tiers of support and shall state whether the County is assumed to provide Tier 1 support. Define the tier support level and the criteria for each. b. Severity levels – The proposal shall provide support and maintenance response proportionate to varying levels of incident severity. Define the severity levels and define the response criteria. c. Multiple contact method – The proposal should provide for multiple methods of reporting an incident to the proposer. Define the methods to initiate support for each tier. d. First-tier support scripts – If the proposer assumes that the County will provide Tier 1 support, the proposer shall deliver sufficient scripts and training to County help desk staff to adequately function as Tier 1 support. Define the script format, training requirements and if the provider is able to provide training. On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting Multi-tiered support Severity levels Multiple contact method First-tier support scripts The proposal shall individually address the following service level agreements (SLAs) for support and maintenance services, whether such SLAs are offered, any additional cost for such SLAs, and detail on such: a. Proposer’s Help Desk Availability SLAs – Help Desk Availability refers to the required time frames during which certain Services provided by the Help Desk must be available to End- Users, and response to automatically generated Help Desk Incidents must be achieved. b. Proposer’s Response Time SLAs – Response Time is the number of seconds it takes an End-User to connect with Respondent’s contact center live representative. Respondent will provide toll-free telephone lines in adequate quantity to handle call volume; ACD system(s) to record call date, time and duration information; and electronic interfaces to all systems for monitoring and reporting. c. Proposer’s Incident Resolution SLAs – Incident Resolution is the time elapsed from the initiation of the Help Desk Incident until Service is restored. d. Proposer’s End-User Account Administration SLAs – Routine functions, such as setting up End-User IDs, changing End-User authorization tables, changing account codes and similar functions, which are handled by Respondent. e. Proposer’s Client Satisfaction SLAs – Measures the level of End-User satisfaction in relation to Help Desk services.

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 21 of 110 For each SLA, the proposer shall state: f. Detail on what written reports proposer will provide to the County to demonstrate compliance with the SLAs in addition to the reports specified in this Section. g. Detail on any tiering of SLAs, whether by severity or other classification. h. Detail on offered service level credits, fee reductions, and/or earn backs. On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting Help desk availability SLAs Response time SLAs Incident resolutions SLAs End-user account administration SLAs Client satisfaction SLAs 3.2.11 Data Security and Compliance The proposal shall give an overview of the System’s software, hardware, and other controls supporting the System’s data security. The proposer shall provide sufficient detail on whether and how the proposal possesses data security controls that comply with (If proposer determines any of the following requirements to be inapplicable, proposer shall state so and shall also state the basis for determining each such requirement to be inapplicable): a. HIPAA, HITECH and the rules promulgated thereunder; b. Payment Card Industry standards, including but not limited to PCI DSS and PCI PA-DSS; c. 28 CFR 20 and the FBI’s CJIS Security Policy; d. IRS Publication 1075; e. NIST 800-53, as revised; f. ISO 27001/27002, as revised.

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 22 of 110 On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting HIPAA, HITECH PCI standards: PCI DSS, PCI PA-DSS (any others) 28 CFR 20 & FBI CJIS Security Policy IRS Publication 1075 NIST 800-53 ISO 27001/27002 The proposer shall also provide a reasonably detailed explanation as to how the proposal protects the System and County Data within each of the following additional data security categories (NOTE: the County recognizes that reasonable descriptions of each security attribute below will vary in length, some attributes requiring little explanation, others not). If proposer determines any of the following requirements to be inapplicable, proposer shall state so and shall also state the basis for determining each such requirement to be inapplicable: g. Password configurations (e.g., complexity, aging, etc.); h. Authentication configurations (e.g., active directory, encrypted data exchange, hash, etc.); i. Encryption configurations (e.g., symmetrical AES-256, asymmetrical RSA 2048, etc.) for both data at rest and data in motion; j. Logging/Auditing capabilities (e.g., verbose user tracking and reporting, etc.); k. Physical security (e.g., 24-hour security, alarms, restricted access, etc.); l. Personnel security (e.g., extensive background checks, annual recheck, etc.); m. Web Application configurations (e.g., SQL injection protection, buffer overflow, etc.); n. Network transmission security (LAN and VPN); o. Data that is to be transmitted off-site must be encrypted end to end. On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting Password: complexity, aging, presentation Authentication Encryption Logging & Auditing

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 23 of 110 Physical security Personnel security Web application configuration Network transmission security Data encryption 3.2.12 Incident Response Requirements In response to this section, the proposal must state the Proposer’s approach to meeting the following data security incident response requirements: a. Maintenance of the Proposers’ Incident Response Plan; b. Conformance of such plan to Illinois Personal Information Protection Act and the breach notification laws of the fifty states; c. Cook County’s rights of review, approval and reasonable modification to Proposer’s incident response plan; d. Proposer’s approach to provide detailed reports on the nature of incidents and identified data lost or stolen; identify the format and method to communication. e. Proposer must describe its plan to address security incidents and data breaches in alignment with the following requirements. For events within the control of Proposer, the Proposer shall : i. Immediately notify the County of incidents and breaches; ii. Identify immediate plan of action to mitigate further incident progression; iii. Identify protection measures for affected individuals; iv. Provide outbound and inbound incident-related communications, as requested and directed by the County; On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting Maintenance of Incident Response Plan Conformance to Illinois Personal Information Protection Act and breach notification laws Review & approve Incident Response Plan Reports of incidents and data lost

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 24 of 110 Plan to address security incidents and data breaches 3.2.13 Development and Configuration Practices Proposer shall describe its application development methodology and how its methodology adheres to applicable best practices and standards regarding both data security and data privacy. Proposer shall state how it will tender its deliverables in a manner that reasonably protects the security, confidentiality and privacy of County Data and any individuals who may be considered data subjects as to the County, Deliverables, or County Data. Specifically, the proposer shall state whether it conforms to the following: a. Microsoft Secure Coding Guidelines for the .NET Framework; b. CERT Secure Coding Standards; c. OWASP Secure Coding Principles; d. Privacy by design principles; and e. Federal Trade Commission’s Fair Information Practice Principles. On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting Development & Configuration Practices 3.2.14 Business Continuity and Recovery The proposal shall individually address each the following requirements and provide sufficient detail on whether and how it meets the following requirements. These should be addressed within the 3 scenarios requested for an 1) on premise, 2) hosted, and 3) hybrid solution. a. Proposers shall have an automated backup and recovery capability for the system and application, including incremental and full backup capabilities. Additionally, system backups shall be accomplished without taking the application out of service and without degradation of performance or disruption to County operations. b. Proposers shall be able to provide the service from at least two geographically diverse data centers that do not share common threats (e.g. the data centers cannot be in the same earthquake zone, likely hurricane path, same flood zone, etc.). The data centers shall at a minimum meet Tier III standards for redundancy of power, telecommunications, HVAC, security, fire suppression and building integrity. c. Proposers shall specify whether, in the event of a technology or other failure at the primary processing center, the alternate system will meet the following tiers, for which the County’s use should be identical regardless of which location is processing the County’s work:

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 25 of 110 Category Alternate system characteristics High Availability Continuous operation without interruption or degradation in service. Standard Availability Available for County use within 48 hours with no degradation in service. Non-Critical Availability Available for County use within 96 hours with no degradation in service. d. Proposers shall implement crisis management, business continuity and disaster recovery plans, subject to County approval, which the County will not reasonably withhold. These plans shall outline how the proposer will support the County’s recovery at the alternate site, including backup staff required to implement the plan in an emergency if the proposer’s primary staff is unavailable. Such plans shall also include a minimum of annual testing in coordination with the County e. Proposers shall specify the System’s proven RTO and RPO in case the primary site becomes unavailable. f. Proposers shall specify whether the System will meet the following availability tiers, which tier, and shall specifically describe how the System meets such tier: Category Availability RTO Characteristics & RPO High Availability 99.982% Intra- day Typically involves data replication to a hot- site for each transaction or at short intervals, like 15 minutes. Standard Availability 99.741% 24 to 48 Hours Nightly tape backups shipped to a warm-site data center. System reestablished at time of disaster from tape. May lose up to one day of data. Non- Critical Availability 99.671% 48 to 96 Hours Nightly tape backups shipped to offsite warm or cold site data center. System reestablished at time of disaster from tape after more critical systems are restored. May lose up to one day of data.

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 26 of 110 On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting Automated backup * recovery Data centers Availability Business continuity and disaster recovery plans Recovery time objective and recovery point objective Availability tiers 3.2.15 Audit Requirements The proposal shall individually address each the following requirements and provide sufficient detail on whether and how it meets the following requirements for Cloud or Hybrid Hosting solutions: a. The proposer shall provide annual SOC 2 audit reports to the County or otherwise upon County’s request; b. The County shall have the right to access and audit proposer’s System and Hosting; c. County shall have the right to request reasonable adjustments at the proposer’s expense where those requests are based upon audit findings pertaining to the System or Hosting. If a hosted solution is not proposed, this section is not applicable. 3.2.16 Transition Out and Exit Requirements The proposal shall individually address each the following requirements and provide sufficient detail on whether and how it meets the following requirements: a. The proposal shall reasonably specify all foreseen exit and transition out requirements and associated costs, including those related to time, documentation, proposer’s employees and County’s employees; b. Upon termination of the contract and County request, the proposer shall destroy County Data, including backups and copies thereof, according to NIST standards or as otherwise directed by the County:

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 27 of 110 On-Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting Exit and transition out requirements 3.3 System User Requirements Proposer shall present a high-level overview describing the components of the proposed solution. The solution must align with evident experienced reengineering processes in this industry. The proposed solution shall be compatible with the Current Technology Environment described in this RFP. Proposer shall provide a detailed description of the product(s) and product versions being proposed. The response to this section shall detail the system features and capabilities and indicate if these are native to the software or if integration with a 3rd party software is required or recommended. Specific requirements are included as Appendix II, System Requirements and need to be provided in the following format referencing the requirement number and requirement description. On Premise Cloud Hybrid Hosting 1.001 System will have been previously installed at three (3) other referenced organizations of equal size and be able to provide addresses, contact names, and phone numbers or email. 1.002 System can send email notification, real time, to an individual or a group. 1.003 System has full system audit trail and views capability. E.g. authorized users are able to see who and when a record was modified and what the change were conducted. 1.004 System is/ can expand and automate other internal manual processes. 1.005 System will automate paper forms 4. Current OIIG Process The OIIG currently processes cases within their current CMS and through paper files. Cases are assigned within the current CMS and the case is managed through updates to the case and separate paper case files. As shown in the high level process map, the OIIG process typically starts through the input of the case and ends when a recommendation is made by the OIIG to the responsible Bureau or Agency.

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 28 of 110 4.1 Logical Process Model High Level Logical Process Model Item submitted Review Process Case Conduct Investigation yes Disposition Process no Close out Archive case Logical Process Map Detailed Description Description Requirements Items submitted The request may be sent via several means: email, web page, fax, walk-in to the office, or telephone call. Review Process An investigator will review the initial submission for merit and make a recommendation on whether to pursue as a case. A case number is assigned to the submission regardless of the decision. Case Yes: the case is assigned to an investigator. No: the case is closed and all reference materials are archived Disposition Process The case is determined not to be within the jurisdiction of the OIIG or does not have merit to be opened as a case. The case is administratively closed out and is archived for future reference. Conduct Investigation The assigned investigator gathers information from a variety of sources to confirm the facts of the case and make a recommendation on the disposition. Close out The investigation is completed and a recommendation is made on the disposition in a formal written response to the appropriate agency or bureau. The agency or bureau has 30 days to respond with the actions they have taken on the recommendation. The case is administratively closed out when the final written response is sent to the agency or bureau. Archive case The case has been closed out in the case management system and is no longer active. The archived case may be referenced for future cases of the same type, for the same bureau or agency, and reference the same parties.

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 29 of 110 4.2 Investigations Processes Item submitted Review process Case Assign investigator Determine if it is a case Submitted via: Fax, letter, internet page, in person, via phone call Case information entered into CMS. Requirements: tracking number and submission data. Complete investigation Closeout Archive process Case management database Scan document Entry via keyboard Web form Email Entry methods External data sources No Investigations – Process Detailed Description Step Description Item submitted Items are submitted to the OIIG via numerous means. Review process Information is entered into the case management system. Assign investigator An investigator is assigned to the case. Determine if it is a case Submitted items are reviewed for relevance to the complaint. Determine if complaint and information are valid and within scope. Confirm if the submission will be pursued as a case. Complete investigation Gather all information relevant to the case for analysis. Closeout Create case disposition based on case information. Provide recommendation on disposition of the case. Archive process Move all relevant documents to the case file for future reference.

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 30 of 110 4.3 Investigator Logical Access Model Investigations –Investigator Logical Access Model OIIG Case Management Application Investigator PeripheralsDesktop PCApplication External Applications & Databases Case Management Database COOK COUNTY DOMAIN Database Investigations – Investigator Logical Access Model Description Description Requirements Investigator to PC Investigator enters data into various forms or enters queries into applications to get information. Peripherals This includes printers, scanners, or fax machines External applications & databases These are sources of information that are not within the OIIG office. OIIG Case Management Application This is the CMS that the stakeholders within the OIIG office use to support investigations Case Management Database This is the repository of information in the CMS

Cook County Government Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution RFP No. 1418-13402 Page 31 of 110 4.4 Future Logical Data Model Investigator’s Logical Data Model Internal Data Sources External Data Sources Public Data Sources CMS Portal Internet Telephone Walk-in Recommendation/ ResolutionCase Management System (CMS) OIIG INPUT OUTPUT Inv

Add a comment

Related presentations

Related pages

Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 1418-13402 for Office of ...

The OIIG through the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer (“Procurement”) is issuing this Case Management System (CMS) Request for Proposal (RFP) to ...
Read more

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) - lakecountyfl.gov

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) ... 2.1.2 General Requirements The solution shall meet the following minimum requirements: ... In no case will the County
Read more

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) NO.: 2000000170 LEARNING ...

los angeles unified school district request for proposal (rfp) no.: 2000000170 learning management system issued date: july 11, 2014
Read more

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS - illinois.gov

Proposals shall be received in the office of: ... A copy of the Request for Proposal (RFP) ... General Information, ...
Read more

SMEF2010 Request For Proposal Management Ask The Right ...

Request For Proposal Management ... Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 1418-13402 for Office of the Independent Inspector General Case Management Solution.
Read more

Request for Proposal for E-Surveillance System

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) ... Head Office. In case the ... independent advice. Bank makes no representation or warranty and shall incur no liability
Read more

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL - lcrconline.com

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS ... Issuing Office The RFP is issued by ... consultant shall note any areas that may need to be stabilized and discuss solutions ...
Read more

Proposals - cdn2.hubspot.net

In general, there are two types of proposals we can offer potential LegalShield ... In either case, a proposal ... Go to the Request for Proposal (RFP) ...
Read more

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS - medicaid.ms.gov

Page 1 of 89. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS Recovery Audit Contractor . RFP #20150130 . Contact: Matthew Nassar . Procurement Officer . Matthew.Nassar@medicaid.ms.gov
Read more