· web viewmassachusetts department of transportation – registry of motor vehicles division ....

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTSMASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Registry of Motor Vehicles Division

Attachment 2 Bid Response

ATLAS

Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) Division Core System Replacement

RFR Number: BD-16-1030-0R100-0R011-00000007660Date of Issue: April 14, 2016

Revision Date: May 11June 8, 2016Review Version: 43.0

Joan ValleyProcurement Contact Person

Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division

25 Newport Avenue ExtensionQuincy, MA 02171

[email protected]

Please Note: This is a single document associated with a complete Bid (also referred to as Solicitation) that can be found on www.COMMBUYS.com. All Bidders are responsible for reviewing and adhering to all information, forms and requirements for the entire Bid, which are all incorporated into the Bid. Bidders may also contact the COMMBUYS Helpdesk at [email protected] or the COMMBUYS Helpline at 1-888-MA-STATE. The Helpline is staffed from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM Monday through Friday Eastern Standard or Daylight time, as applicable, except on federal, state and Suffolk county holidays.

THIS RFR IS PUBLIC RECORD. ALL RESPONSES HERETO INCLUDING THE WINNING BID SHALL BECOME PUBLIC RECORD AS OF THE DATE THE CONTRACT REFERENCED HEREIN IS AWARDED, AND CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, LEGAL UNIT BY SENDING AN EMAIL TO [email protected]

ANY PORTIONS OF A RESPONSE THAT ARE LABELED AS CONFIDENTIAL WILL STILL BE CONSIDERED PUBLIC RECORD UNLESS EXCEPTED UNDER APPLICABLE LAW.

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.COMMBUYS.com/

mailto:[email protected]


Contents1.0 Bidder’s Response to Introduction..................................................................................................3

1.14 Bid Submittal..............................................................................................................................3

1.14.1 General Instructions.............................................................................................................3

1.14.2 Response Format.................................................................................................................4

1.14.3 Incurring costs......................................................................................................................6

3.0 Bidder’s Response to Requirements................................................................................................7

3.1 Program Management.................................................................................................................7

3.1.1 Program Management Approach.........................................................................................7

3.1.2 Program Methodology and Tools.........................................................................................7

3.1.3 System Development Life Cycle (SDLC)................................................................................8

3.1.4 Program Governance.........................................................................................................10

3.2 Bidder Business Qualifications...................................................................................................12

3.2.1 Bidder References..............................................................................................................12

3.2.2 Bidder’s Financial Qualifications........................................................................................12

3.3 Business Requirements..............................................................................................................13

3.3.1 Vision of Customer Experience..........................................................................................13

3.3.3 Channels............................................................................................................................13

3.4 Functional Requirements...........................................................................................................14

3.4.3 Functional Requirements...................................................................................................14

3.4.4 Customer Journeys............................................................................................................14

3.4.6 Business Service Catalog....................................................................................................14

3.4.7 Websites............................................................................................................................14

3.4.8 Customer 360° View..........................................................................................................15

3.4.11. Knowledge Management.......................................................................................................15

3.4.12 Business Intelligence..........................................................................................................15

3.4.13 Additional Supporting Services..........................................................................................17

3.5 Technical Requirements............................................................................................................19

3.5.1 Solution Overview..............................................................................................................19

ATLAS RFR #. BD-16-1030-0R100-0R011-00000007660 Bid Response (v.43.0)Page 1

Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 3.5.2 Extensibility........................................................................................................................21

3.5.3 Future Proofing..................................................................................................................21

3.5.4 Security..............................................................................................................................22

3.5.5 Administration...................................................................................................................23

3.5.6 User Interface Technology.................................................................................................23

3.5.7 Availability.........................................................................................................................23

3.5.8 System Performance..........................................................................................................23

3.5.9 Process and Transactional Integrity...................................................................................24

3.5.10 Integrations........................................................................................................................24

3.5.11.2 Environments.......................................................................................................................28

3.5.12 Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery.......................................................................28

4.0 Bidder’s Response to Testing.........................................................................................................29

4.1 Testing Requirements................................................................................................................29

4.2 Defect Severity and Priority.......................................................................................................29

4.3 Test Entrance and Exit Requirements........................................................................................29

4.4 Reporting Requirements for Testing..........................................................................................29

5.0 Bidder’s Response to Implementation...........................................................................................30

5.1 Implementation and Support Strategy and Plan........................................................................30

5.2 Organizational Change Management......................................................................................32

5.2.3 Organizational Change Management Artifacts to be provided with the proposal.............33

5.3 Knowledge Transfer.........................................................................................................................33

5.3.1 Knowledge Transfer Plans..................................................................................................33

5.3.2 Knowledge Transfer Activities............................................................................................33

5.3.3 Business and Technical Documentation.............................................................................34

6.0 Bidder’s Response to Support and Maintenance...........................................................................35

6.1 Maintenance and Support Agreements for COTS Software Components.......................................35

6.2 Support and Maintenance...............................................................................................................35

6.3 Vendor Support for Core System Enhancements............................................................................37

8.0 Bidder’s Response to General Terms & Conditions.......................................................................38

8.4 Accessibility Standards....................................................................................................................38

9.0 Bidder’s Response to Representations and Warranties.................................................................40

9.1.2 Scope of Warranty Obligations..........................................................................................41



1.0 Bidder’s Response to Introduction In the RFR Bid Response, the Bidder must provide a detailed narrative response to the Requirements identified throughout the RFR. Refer to Section 1.14 - General Instructions.

1.13 Cost Response & SLA

Complete Attachment 15- Cost Response following the instructions provided in attachment.

1.14 Bid Submittal

1.14.1 General InstructionsEach Bidder must review this section carefully prior to submitting its Response in order to avoid disqualification.

The Response of the Apparent Successful Bidder, including all amendments, attachments, exhibits, Bidder presentations/demonstrations, clarifications, and supplements, becomes part of the Contract

o Attachment 26 - Assumptions, Qualifiers, and Constraints Table, requires Bidders to clearly disclose all of the assumptions, qualifiers, or constraints that Bidders used to develop their Responses to this RFR. For all instances of assumptions, qualifiers or constraints in the Responses, Bidders must document in the Attachment the corresponding requirement numbers, exact location(s) (e.g., page, section) in the Response, descriptions of the assumptions used, and the significance or impact to the RMV of the assumptions.

Each submission must include all attachments outlined in the Bidder’s Response Checklist (Attachment 1-Bidder’s RFR Checklist)

Narrative type must be a font size of 12 point. Text in tables and/or graphics may be smaller provided it is legible

The Response must be double sided on 8 ½ X 11” paper, the proposal will be evaluated on the basis of content, not length

Responses transmitted by facsimile or solely electronically are not acceptable. Responses must include a Table of Contents and Table of Exhibits

All attachments to a Response must be identified clearly and separated by tabbed dividers Responses must not include videotapes, animation, audiotapes, software, or promotional

information

The evaluation and selection of a Bidder will be based on the information submitted in the proposal plus references and interviews/presentations or demonstrations. Bidders must respond clearly and completely to all requirements. Failure to respond to each of the requirements in the RFR may be the basis for rejecting a proposal.


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division Elaborate proposals (e.g. expensive artwork), beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal, are not necessary or desired. Proposals with poor quality copies of materials may be rejected.

Environmental Response Submission Compliance

In an effort to promote greater use of recycled and environmentally preferable products and minimize waste, all Responses submitted should comply with the following guidelines:

All copies should be printed double sided All submittals and copies should be printed on recycled paper with a minimum post-consumer

content of 30 percent or on tree-free paper (i.e., paper made from raw materials other than trees such as kenaf)

Unless absolutely necessary, all Responses and copies should minimize or eliminate the use of non-recyclable or non-reusable materials such as plastic report covers, plastic dividers, vinyl sleeves, and GBC binding. Three-ringed binders, glued materials, paper clips, and staples are acceptable

Bidders should submit materials in a format that allows for easy removal and recycling of paper materials

Bidders are encouraged to use other products that contain recycled content in the Response documents. Such products may include, but are not limited to, folders, binders, paper clips, envelopes, and boxes

Unnecessary samples, attachments, or documents not specifically requested should not be submittedThe SST requires the following:

Bidders must submit their Responses between the hours of 8:30 AM and 3:00 PM ET, Monday through Friday, excluding state holidays, to the address in Section 1.14.2 Response Format

If delivery is to be made prior to the RFR deadline date, please notify the Procurement Contact Person 24 hours in advance of the anticipated delivery date and time via the email at [email protected]

Responses must be brought to the first floor lobby security desk. Upon delivery, Bidders should ask the security officer to contact the Procurement Contact Person

Responses must not be left at the lobby or in the RMV Mailroom Whether a Response is delivered by hand or by mail, it must be received by the date and time

specified in Section 1.11 Estimated Procurement Calendar. A late Response will be rejected. If the location at the address in Section 1.14.2 Response Format is unexpectedly closed on the Submission Deadline, the RMV will post the new Submission Deadline on COMMBuys as soon as possible.

Response Due Date: Responses are due no later than June 1, 2016 (no later than 3:00 PM) and MUST be delivered to the address listed below.

LATE RESPONSES WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED

The proposal must contain the following:

Cover Letter:

Each RFR Response shall contain a cover letter entitled “Commitment Letter” stating that all elements proposed by the Bidder and contained in the RFR Response remain valid until and through the effective date on which the Agencies execute a Contract.


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division The Commitment Letter shall include a statement that the Bidder has reviewed and agrees to all of the requirements of this RFR, and that all parties to any proposed joint venture or team arrangement proposed by the Bidder (including but not limited to all subcontractors) also agree to all requirements of this RFR. In addition, the Bidder, as the prospective Prime Contractor, must expressly affirm in the Commitment Letter that the Bidder possesses all of the attributes required in RFR as stated below. The Commitment Letter shall be signed by an officer of the responding organization who is authorized to bind the Bidder to all the RFR terms, conditions, and requirements, the MassDOT Standard Terms and Conditions, and all provisions of the RFR Response.

As an attachment to the Commitment Letter, the Bidder shall: (1) identify (by name) any persons who are current or former state employees or current or former special state employees as defined in M.G.L. c. 268A of the Agencies who have participated or will participate, either directly or indirectly, in the preparation of the Bidder’s Response to this solicitation; (2) state the capacity in which such persons participated directly or indirectly in the preparation of the Bidder’s Response; (3) provide a complete description of such participation; and (4) state the capacity in which such persons are or were employed by the Agencies and the duration of such employment. This attachment to the Commitment Letter (but not the Commitment Letter itself) will be made public upon the Agencies’ opening of the bids, and will be posted for this solicitation on the COMMBUYS website. Upon receipt of the information contained in the attachment to the Commitment Letter, the RMV reserves the right to consult with the Massachusetts State Ethics Commission, and, if appropriate, to disqualify any Bidder’s response and/or cancel the Contract award if the information disclosed through the attachment presents either a conflict of interest or another violation of M.G.L. c. 268A with respect to any Bidder, future Contractor, or any employee or special state employee associated with any Bidder or future Contractor. The RMV’s determination regarding any issues of conflict of interest shall be final.

Bid Bond:

A Performance Guarantee shall be required by the RMV prior to execution of the Contract, unless otherwise agreed to by the RMV, to ensure the faithful performance of the Contract. This may be either a Performance Bond or an Irrevocable Stand-By Letter of Credit. The structure of this guarantee may include, but is not limited to: Performance Bond or an Irrevocable Stand-By Letter of Credit obtained through banking or lending institution. Bidder shall clearly detail the amount of security provided to the RMV. Bidder shall clearly specify how, in the event of a deliverable’s failure to perform, this security will enforce the commitment that the Bidder will complete the Project. The financial guarantee must remain in full force and effect during the full term of an awarded contracted, including any extensions thereto. The value of the financial guarantee will be evaluated by the Solution Strategic Team. The RMV reserves the right to further negotiate the terms of and value of the financial guarantee, during contract negotiations with the apparent awarded Bidder. The Commitment Letter more particularly described in the preceding section shall be accompanied by a bid bond in the equal to the value of the Bidder’s Core System cost response made payable to the


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division RMV. The Bid bond shall be in the form of both a Performance Bond Guarantee and a Completion Bond Guarantee. The bid bond shall be: (1) in a form satisfactory to the RMV, and (2) with a surety company qualified by the Commonwealth’s Division of Insurance to do business in the Commonwealth. The bid bond shall guarantee that the Bidder will not withdraw its RFR Response until the Agencies have awarded and executed the Contract. All Bidders are required to submit an Ink Signature executed Bid as part of the RFR Response in a separately sealed envelope and must also submit an identical executed electronic copy of the Bid Bond as part of the RFR Response.

Bidder’s Response Check List (Attachment 1)

Response to Proposer Information and Solutions:

Using the Bid Response document Attachment 2-Bid Response. Within the Bid Response document, instructions for completing the document will be included. It is the Bidder’s responsibility to read and follow the instructions provided. It is the Bidder’s responsibility, if there are any questions concerning the instructions, to submit their written questions/clarification request by email [email protected] by the Bidder Question deadline found in Section 1.11 Estimated Procurement Calendar

Cost Response :

Using Cost Response and Instructions - Attachment 15, provide cost information as detailed in the attachment

1.14.2 Response FormatEach Response and applicable attachments must be posted on COMMBuys (see Section 11.0 – RFR Required Specifications). In addition, the Bidder must provide two separately packaged and sealed sections for the Bidder’s Response and Cost Response that is clearly marked with the RFR reference number BD-16-1030-0R100-0R011-00000007660, by the Response Due Date/Time, to the following address:

Registry of Motor Vehicles

25 Newport Avenue Extension

Quincy, MA, 02171

ATTN: Joan Valley/Procurement Contact Person

Telephone: 857-368-7708

E-Mail: [email protected]

Response Packaging

Responses must be submitted in a sealed envelope and include one (1) original signed copy, nine (9) duplicate copies and one (1) electronic device containing identical copies of the submitted proposal and


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division cost proposal documents. All components of the Response must be provided in searchable PDF format with commenting rights enabled and in MS Word/Excel 2007 format.

Files must not be encrypted, password protected, or otherwise restricted. Bidders must not format their Responses to restrict or prevent the RMV from printing or copying electronic copies in whole or in part.

Cost Response Packaging

The Cost Response contains the Bidder’s cost proposal. One (1) sealed original and nine (9) sealed copies of each Cost Response must be submitted.

One (1) sealed electronic copy of the Cost Response (e.g., a compact disc) must be submitted. The electronic file must be in MS Word/Excel 2007 format and labeled “Cost Response XYZ” where XYZ is the Bidder name or initials. Each jewel case must clearly indicate the name of the Bidder, RFR Name, RFR number, and “Cost Response.”

The Cost Response must be presented in the order provided in Attachment 15 – Cost Response and Instructions.

1.14.3 Incurring costsThe MassDOT is not liable for any cost incurred by Bidders in replying to the RFR.



3.0 Bidder’s Response to Requirements

3.1 Program Management

3.1.1 Program Management ApproachThe Bidder Response to Program Management Approach must include the following:

Description of Bidder’s overall approach to program management and including examples of previous success and examples where the level of success was less than desired by the customer

Description of the key values utilized that reduce risks and guarantee delivery Description of Lessons Learned and metrics from previous successful projects Describe the strategies Bidder will employ to achieve and sustain an integrated high

performance and collaborative team

3.1.2 Program Methodology and Tools

3.1.2.3 Program ToolsWhile it is desirable that the Bidder uses the specified program tools, the RMV recognizes that the Bidder may have developed their SDLC and Project practices using other viable tools. Using the table below Bidders must indicate their agreement on use of the specified tool or provide a detailed explanation as to why the use of a different tool is materially beneficial to the Program.

Domain Tool Confirm If No- Explain Alternative

Business related documents and deliverables

MS Office suite:

ProjectExcelWordPowerPoint

Artifact Repository ATLAS SharePoint

Business Process Modeling IBM Blueworks

Requirements use case artifacts, source code repository, test plans and scripts, and defect tracking

Rational Suite:

Rational Requirements Composer (RRC)

Rational Team Concert (RTC)

Rational Quality



Manager (RQM)

Task management and project definition tracking

ASANA

Change, risk, issue and decision management

ServiceNow

3.1.3 System Development Life Cycle (SDLC)The Bidder’s methodology must provide for consistent traceability and support between all well-defined groups. This methodology must include and be supported by a set of formally defined activities, work products, and artifacts following an Agile methodology.

The Bidder must submit a concise Program Management Plan that at a minimum documents the program organization, approach and timeline, work planning and management, program controls, resource management, tools, and communication plans that will be used to execute a successful program and create deliverables that meet program requirements. At a minimum the plan must include:

Program Management Plan: Risk, Issue and Decision Management Plan Scope Management Plan Quality management, Metrics and Performance improvement plan Requirements Traceability Plan and Proposed Tool Resource Management Plan and Proposed Tool Information and stake holder management plan

The Bidder is expected to propose a robust and proven systems development life cycle (SDLC) model that aligns with the Enterprise Process Approach illustrated in Section 3.1.2.2 of the RFR. Bidder must describe their proposed SDLC phases, activities and artifacts to be used to manage the development and stage reviews involved from the initial feasibility assessment through maintenance of the completed solution.

The Bidder must describe in full the SDLC methodology they propose to use, the disciplines that will be employed and the tool sets that will be utilized to support the SDLC.

The proposed SDLC must at a minimum include the following:

Program management, risk analysis and mitigation plan Quality management, metrics and performance improvement plan Requirements traceability plan Workflow analysis and business process engineering plan Functional analysis, technical design, and environment configuration plan Software configuration/development, and change management plan Data migration and operations conversion plan


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division External interface management plan Information and stake holder management plan Testing strategy and quality control plan Release plan and implementation strategy Training, knowledge management and knowledge transfer plan Disaster recovery and business continuity plan Organizational change management plan Post-implementation support and maintenance strategy

The Bidder must describe how they will integrate between toolsets for modeling, source code management, automated builds, automated testing, and issue tracking so that dependencies and traceability can be established across phases. Details are required on how the toolsets will support an ongoing, coordinated point-in-time view of all related artifacts, change sets, and documentation.

The Bidder must include how it intends to include MassDOT and RMV program, business and technical personnel for this purpose and the roles they will fill.

3.1.3.2 Monitor and ControlMassDOT and the RMV expect the Bidder to implement and follow practices consistent with the accepted professional and technical standards in the execution and delivery of this solution. To ensure the quality of the foundation material, the RMV will require approval gates for each phase of the Project.

Bidder Response must include:

Describe the review, feedback and approval process for work products, deliverables, releases and implementations

Describe the standard timing commitments for the review, sign-off, and accept steps in the deliverable management process

Identify and describe program controls used during your engagements Describe the processes for managing scope Explain your change control process and confirm that the impact analysis scope is included in your

Response. What are the most common obstacles and potential risks encountered during this step/phase and

what mitigation strategies are recommended?

3.1.3.3 Program Work Plan ApproachBidder must submit the following table to detail the purpose, content and tool used for each type of work plan to be used in managing the project schedule.

Purpose Content Tools Used

Master Plan

Release Work Plan



Subsidiary Plan

Bidder must submit a draft project schedule that illustrates how they intend to complete the Project in alignment with the Enterprise Process Approach within the desired timeframes.

Bidder Response must include the following:

Describe the approach used to develop the proposed schedule Describe any assumptions, risks or constraints associated with the proposed schedule Describe the weekly work plan management process you will follow to manage schedule

and tasks Describe the critical success factors necessary for achieving the proposed schedule Describe the metrics to be used to monitor and report schedule status

The Bidder shall propose a project schedule based on the phased delivery of functionality and releases that align with the Enterprise Process Approach described in the RFR.The Bidder shall use Microsoft Project to maintain all project schedules. The use of MS Project Server may be required by the RMV and if so it will be provided and managed by MassDOT. The Master Project Schedule shall be reviewed with the RMV weekly or as determined by the RMV.

3.1.3.4 Risk and Issue ManagementThe Bidder shall describe its approach to Risk and Issue management and specifically describe risks related to this program and any mitigation or remediation considerations.

3.1.4 Program GovernanceBidder must submit a revised governance model as part of the Response. Key interest areas are:

Role of executives Decision making authority defined according to role Frequency and types of meetings needed Program governance teams and team member roles Project teams and team member roles.

If the Bidder believes no revisions to the existing governance model are needed, the Bidder must fully explain why they believe so.

3.1.4.1 Project ManagersThe Bidder’s proposed Project Manager must:

Be able to demonstrate a history of successful program implementations of similar size, nature, and complexity

Have a bachelor’s degree Be able to demonstrate a minimum of 10 years’ program management Demonstrated use of agile/scrum methodologies The Bidder’s designated Project Manager must have Project Management Professional (PMP)

certification from the Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI)


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 3.1.4.4 Decision Making and Approvals

Describe an approach to decision making and approvals your company has successfully used and supported to ensure the program stays on schedule and budget.

Identify the challenges your clients have faced with using these approaches, and the solutions used to overcome these challenges along with your company’s role in this process.

Describe how your past approaches may compliment or conflict with the proposed MassDOT/RMV governance structure.

Describe your approach to managing the criteria associated with each of the release gates described in the Enterprise Process Approach (COTA/Scrum Framework).

3.1.4.5 Status Meetings and ReportingDescribe and submit sample reports, methods and tools used to report on program status that would reflect an objective, outside consultant’s view of the actual/true program and project status.

Bidder is to describe the frequency, audience, source of information, reviews required, and process for finalizing and publishing. A description of the process for resolving disagreements on status is to be included in the Response to this section.

3.1.4.6 Performance Assessment and ImprovementThe Bidder shall establish and manage processes for program performance assessment and improvement through periodic lessons learned sessions and program evaluation reviews.

Proposed improvement measures and recommendations shall require MassDOT and RMV approval through the Program Manager. When appropriate, adjustments will be routed through the agreed upon change management process.

Bidder Response must:

Describe the envisioned assessment process and why it will contribute to success of the program

Provide references and examples where the process was successfully implemented

3.1.4.7 Program Team StructureBidder shall provide an organizational chart illustrating the lines of authority, and highlight key personnel who shall be responsible for the completion of each service component and deliverable of the RFR. The proposal Response must describe each role in terms of its scope of responsibility and authority. The Response must also describe how the roles align with RMV’s EPM.

Vendor Key Personnel

Resumes of key personnel who shall be assigned to perform duties or services under the contract must be provided. MassDOT/RMV considers key personnel to be:

Program Manager Functional Lead Principle Business Architect Solution Architect(s) Technical Architect(s) Business Architect(s)


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division Data Architect(s) Data Conversion Lead Quality Assurance/Testing Lead Configuration Manager Deployment/Release Manager Lead Developer

Please indicate whether any key personnel are Project Management Professional (PMP) certified. Each resume of key personnel shall detail each individual’s title, education, certifications, current position with the Bidder, and employment history inclusive of beginning and ending dates. Three professional references will be required for each of the proposed individuals.

The Bidder must notify the Program Manager of any change in the name, address, telephone number, fax number, or e-mail address of the Bidder Project Manager. At the RMV’s discretion, the RMV may require that the Bidder remove the Bidder Project Manager and replace the Bidder Project Manager with an employee satisfactory to the RMV. The Bidder Project Manager will be the principal point of contact with the RMV. It is desirable that the key personnel has DMV experience

Bidder must provide a roster of all key personnel participating in the program and the estimated number of hours that each individual will devote to the program. In addition, Bidder must provide a high-level staff plan that includes staff role, number of staff per role per year, and indicate whether staff will be onsite or offsite during program. Bidder must complete Attachment 3 -Bidder Team Roster Spreadsheet.

If off site is indicated, the name of the location/office, street address, city and state must be provided.

3.2 Bidder Business Qualifications

3.2.1 Bidder References Provide three (3) scanned copies of commercial or governmental client references from other agencies, not from MassDOT, MassDOT– RMV Division or the MBTA. A reference letter shall be submitted on client’s letterhead by the Bidder. The reference letter shall include the name, address, contact person, telephone number, length of service and a description of the goods and services that the Bidder provided to the client. It is required that the client references demonstrate the Bidder’s ability to perform a Project of similar size, nature and complexity as that described in the RFR. Specifically, references must address quality of product, customer service, Bidder’s abilities to address and resolve problems and overall value the Bidder brought to client. References must be for clients or customers to whom goods and services were provided within three (3) years prior to the RFR Response due date. Additionally, business references are required to be recipients of Bidder business services with whom there is or has been a standing business relationship of one (1) year or greater duration. The RMV reserves the right to contact the reference if necessary. In addition, the Bidder must provide at least two (2) references for each subcontractor who is providing at least 10% of the total services.

These references must demonstrate the Bidder’s experience implementing projects of comparable size and complexity (preferably, but not limited to, government organizations).

At least one (1) of the references must be from an organization where the Bidder has implemented a similar solution as described in in the RFR. While a motor vehicle agency specific implementation is desirable, an alternative experience with a similar industry is acceptable


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division where Bidders can demonstrate how that experience would be transferrable to an RMV environment.

At least 1 of the Bidder’s references must be from a state government of similar size. Complete Attachment 4 (Bidder Reference Form)

3.2.2 Bidder’s Financial QualificationsEach Bidder must provide the information listed below about its organization, including, but not limited to, information regarding any Major Subcontractors that will be part of the Bidder’s proposed team for the duration of the Contract. The Agencies request that the Bidder limits the use of marketing materials when responding to these requirements.

The Bidder must:

1. Provide a statement that the Bidder has not been in bankruptcy in the last 3 calendar years and has no present intent to file for bankruptcy.

2. Explain how its financial capability and its resources will not be adversely affected by any other existing or potential contracts they hold or by any other major business commitment(s) including senior liens and other financial pledges.

3. Identify any subsidiary or affiliated companies in which the Bidder has a financial interest.4. Submit a statement which identifies any parent, affiliate, or subsidiary organization to the

Bidder and describes the Contract work the parent or subsidiary plans to perform.5. Provide information on all direct and indirect business activities or contractual obligations that

may pose a potential conflict or otherwise affect or influence the Bidder’s abilities to fulfill the Contract in full accordance with the requirements of the RFR

6. Provide a Dun & Bradstreet’s Comprehensive Report (http://www.dnb.com/us) for the Bidder’s organization, which must be dated no earlier than two months prior to the RFR Response date. The Bidder is responsible for paying the costs associated with this report

7. Provide audited financial statements of the Bidder for its last three fiscal years. If the Bidder does not have audited financial statements, it must provide unaudited financial statements that include the following:

a. The types of financial statements or schedules generally provided by audited organizations, including balance sheets, income statements, and a statement of cash flow

b. Explanation of the size and financial stability of the Bidder’s organizationc. A signed un-audited financial statement by an officer of the Bidder’s organization that is

comparable to the Chief Financial Officer of a publicly traded organizationd. A Statement on Standards for Attestation Engagements (SSAE) No.16, Service

Organizations Audit in order to provide an understanding of the control environment of the company

e. If publicly traded, the Bidder’s corporate tax filings for the last 3 years and the Bidder’s most recent 10-K and 8-K statements and prospectuses over the last 12 months



3.3 Business Requirements

3.3.1 Vision of Customer Experience

1. The Bidder must describe, in detail, how they will partner with RMV to become an industry leader in dynamic RMV services and signature customer experiences

2. Provide examples from previous engagements that detail an improved customer experience

3.3.3 Channels

1. Bidder must describe how the solution supports cross-channel communication2. Describe how solution supports RMV goal of increasing the use of online channel and expanding

business with partners

3.4 Functional Requirements

3.4.3 Functional Requirements

1. Complete the Functional Requirements tab in Attachment 5 – EPM, Enabling Services, and Functional Requirements.

2. The Bidder must confirm that the proposed solution will provide users with the ability, through the Bidder’s core system, to complete all the processes listed in EPM and Enabling Services Attachment 5.

3. The Bidder must explain how their solution will meet all the requirements outlined in Attachment 5. Unless the Bidder responds with exceptions, the RMV assumes that the core system shall deliver each of these functions/processes.

3.4.4 Customer JourneysThe RMV has presented the Customer Journeys as proposals as referenced in Attachment 6. The RMV would be interested in the Bidder’s approach to all of the processes. The Bidder must indicate if the proposed Future State is within their current core product, how much could be done using configurations and how much would require customizations. The RMV is interested in understanding the product the Bidder uses for any verifications identified in the Customer Journeys.

The Bidder must address each of the Journeys with a narrative response on how your core system replacement solution will meet the technical and business demands of the referenced Customer Journeys. Reference the enterprise process model and include any mapping sequences that would be used to communicate seamlessly between internal and external interfaces or architectures. Also indicate, where applicable, how your solution will impact the customer experience. For the purpose of responding to the customer journeys, the Bidder must describe the B2C and B2B portals as they would envision them functioning.

The RMV requires the Bidder provide a list of the proposed web services to support the verifications and a flow that shows the sequence that would be invoked to complete the transaction(s).

3.4.5 Business Service CatalogThe Bidder must describe, in detail, how their solution will align with the current Business Service Catalog, allow for future development of services, create channel growth, and decrease transaction times. (Refer to attachment 8)


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 3.4.6 Websites The Bidder is required to provide web services to support the RMV B2C and B2B portals. The Bidder must describe how their proposed solution will integrate with a B2C and B2B portal and provide the necessary information and services.

It is desirable the Bidder submit a B2B Portal and B2C solution priced separately from the full system solution.

For the B2B Website:

1. Describe how the B2B website operates, how it is integrated with the Bidder’s core solution for Business Self-Managed Account and Business Partners and identify any limitations

2. Describe how your solution will secure business partner users to ensure only authorized functions, products and accounts can be accessed

3. Provide 3 different sample business partner user interfaces (for example, driving schools, insurance agents, Fleets, etc.)

For the B2C website:

1. Describe the overall website organization and its look and feel2. Describe how the proposed website will integrate with the proposed web services3. Describe the web account for individuals and its functionality, the difference in the ability to

process transactions an account customer will experience from a casual customer, and the proposed web version of the Customer 360°View.

4. Describe the transactions that would be available on the proposed website.

3.4.7 Customer 360° View The Bidder must organize the customer record in to a 360° view of all the motor vehicle department issued credentials, privileges, obligations, correspondence and interactions, sanctions and driving history past, present and future, in to a standard launch page that can be used to drill in to specific details.

a. Explain your approach to the customer-focused motor vehicle record including design, presentation and navigation

b. Provide sample 360° view that contains the features listed abovec. Identify how your solution supports a personalized customer experience

3.4.9.2Business Process Cycle Times The Bidder must describe how the proposed solution will improve the cycle times for the processes in the table provided in the RFR.

3.4.10 Knowledge ManagementThe Bidder’s Response must describe how the solution will satisfy the RMV’s Messaging and Online Help requirements.

3.4.10.1 Business RulesBidder must describe its methodology for capturing and maintaining business rules.

3.4.10.2 MessagingProvide wireframes that contain examples of confirmation messages, alerts, error messages, warning and success messages, and field level edits.


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 3.4.10.3 Online HelpDescribe how the solution will incorporate the RMV’s requirement of Online Help.

3.4.11 Business Intelligence1. The Bidder must describe the general methodology for Business Intelligence, Data Reporting, a

Data Warehouse and Dashboards. 2. The Bidder must describe how the Business Intelligence, Data Reporting a Data Warehouse and

Dashboard tools can be configured to enable customized look and feel for all user roles. 3. The Bidder must describe the mechanisms to alert management when a process surpasses a

threshold and needs to be addressed.4. Bidders must provide samples of Reports and Dashboards.[5.] Bidder must propose a reporting system and a reporting tool. It is desirable that the Bidder use

RMV owned Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition (OBIEE) as the reporting tool.5.[6.] Bidder must agree to create at least 200 unique reports to the RMV’s specifications.6.[7.] It is desirable that the reporting database is separate and distinct from the transactional

system.7.[8.] It is desirable that the reporting database use Oracle RAC 12c on Exadata or another standard

product that will allow the RMV Informatica toolset to easily port normalized data into the Oracle RAC 12c format to load the current data warehouse.

8.[9.] It is desirable that the proposed reports has, based on the Bidders experience, out of the box functionality to identify transactional anomalies, high risk transactions and other behavior that is outside of established norms.

9.[10.] It is desirable the Bidder has developed analytics that assist management is analyzing user behavior and in establishing the business norms.

10.[11.] It is desirable the proposed solution has the capability to visually and textually articulate real time operational performance metrics by a specific channel (branch, Web, etc.) via a dashboard. The expectation is the dashboard would be able to present the “who, what, when, where” and velocity of transactional data.

11.[12.] It is desirable that the same dashboard tool could present data from the proposed reporting data base in the same visual manner

[13.] Bidder must provide the following information for the proposed business intelligence tool:In the event the Bidder uses a tool other than what is specified above (OBIEE):

[a.] Bidder must explain rationale for the proposed business intelligence tool proposing a tool other than OBIEE

[b.] User must easily find what they need in the BI toola.[c.] The tool must be designed so it is easily understandable to data analystsb.[d.] The tool must contain more functionality such as help, support information and

documentation


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 3.4.11.3 Transaction Auditing and Logging

1. The system must maintain a complete and accurate customer history that includes all contact with the RMV and MRB including previous data.

2. The system must maintain multiple addresses and change the history for a customer (e.g., mailing, physical, e-mail, website).

3. The system must provide the ability to calculate the correct distribution of funds collected to the appropriate entity and must maintain a history of same.

4. The system must maintain a complete history for every user of the following system activity:a. record the account viewed b. result of system access: successful / unsuccessfulc. time of system accessd. record that was accessede. duration of sessionf. function performed

5. The system must capture activity logs by: user ID, location, date, time, transaction type, and data element changed that can be viewable and reported on.

6. The system must create audit history records for every inquiry response transaction including transactions that update the database and transactions that only view.

7. The history records must contain submitter (user) ID, date/time, transaction type, and full data contents of the transaction.

8. The system must provide an audit application for creating audit reports from the audit history based on user defined requirements.

3.4.12 Additional Supporting ServicesThe Bidder must describe how the proposed solution will provide the functionality to enable users to complete the processes associated in the Supporting Services Section. In addition, the Bidder must confirm the following:

3.4.12.1Revenue Services1. Must provide for and/or be able to use the “Account” structure present in the proposed core

product for both a person and an entity (company). By Account we are referring to the name, address, and contact information for a person or entity and for entities, users by role from both a security and business prospective.

2. The proposed revenue system must record all financial transactions in a manner that records:

a. Records “who” processed the transactionb. Records the “what”, specifically, what the transaction was forc. Records the charge amounts by fee typed. Records the payment types associated with the transactione. Records the “where” the transaction occurred (the logical office) f. Records when the transaction occurred


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 3. If fee calculation is not present in the Core system, the revenue system must calculate all fees,

taxes, penalties, interest and other defined charges.4. It is desirable the proposed revenue system has the ability to accept real-time payments inputs

from other MassDOT systems.5. Bidder must propose a PCI compliant payment process system and process that either interfaces

with or is part of the proposed revenue system and the Commonwealth’s new payment processor Vantiv.

a. It is desirable that the proposed process utilize the existing PCI compliant card readers (Verifone MX915)

b. It is desirable that the proposed process minimize MassDOT PCI compliance effortc. The proposed process must comply with the current Payment Card Industry Application

Data Security Standards (PA-DSS)d. It is highly desirable that the Bidder’s product road map accommodates new payment

types and all new PCI compliance requirements over the proposed 10 year life span of the contract

e. It is desirable that the proposed payment process minimizes additional charges from Vantiv (the necessity for numerous merchant id’s for example)

f. It is desirable that the proposed process is architected in a manner that would facilitate moving from one payment processor to another with a minimum of effort/change

g. It is desirable that the proposed system and process is currently capable of working with a number of different payment processors

6. The Bidder must describe how the payment process/revenue system will accommodate processing payments when: (1) the card is entered by the clerk on whatever screen the Bidder is proposing (typically in the call center), (2) the card is entered by the customer as part of a web or IVR transaction (3) the card is inserted into a credit card device on a kiosk and (4) the card is inserted on a credit card device (EMV) that is physically attached to a branch office work station. The Bidder must provide a visual depiction of this process that is similar to the depiction in Section 3.4.12.1 Revenue Services provided by the RMV.

a. It is desirable that the payment processor is architected in a manner that isolates the transaction system from PCI compliance

i. Bidder must describe how, for each of these channels, the proposed solution minimizes MassDOT PCI compliance efforts

b. It is desirable that the payment processor facilitates the acceptance of cards in a manner that minimizes the per transaction charges

c. It is desirable that the payment process accommodates the scanning of checks at the branch office counter (assuming the presence of a check scanner at each counter location)

3.4.12.2Case/Customer Relationship ManagementThe RMV assumes that the case/customer relationship management features/functions are logically interwoven into the overall product offering. With this in mind, the Bidder must focus their Response to


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division this section on how the features/functions listed below enable a customer as opposed to a product focus and helps the RMV manage the business processes to produce and deliver better service.

1. The proposed system must record the details of each customer interaction.2. The proposed product must have a rules based automated workflow with reminders, alerts and

case/task assignment.3. The proposed system must be functionally/logically integrated with the transaction system and

promotes/tracks collaboration across functional areas of the agency.

3.4.12.3CorrespondenceThe Bidder is responsible for creating all correspondences related to all business processes that are delivered through the Bidder’s solution, including:

1. The Bidder must confirm that the correspondence be deliverable via the channel mentioned in Section 3.3.3 of the RFR.

2. Bidder must provide sample templates for email, credential, receipt, letters, and driving history.3. Bidder must provide secure correspondence delivery capabilities, such as a secure FTP.

3.4.12.4 Printing1. The Bidder’s solution must support the RMV’s printing requirements which include the auto-

generation/printing (and reprinting) of all types of credentials, correspondence (including certified copies) and receipts.

2. RMV requires that the solution provide for local printing of documents at all authorized RMV locations, generate print files of forms and other documents that can be sent to third-party printers (e.g., publishing houses) or local network printers.

3. RMV requires that the solution provide mail-merge printing capabilities for letters, newsletters and other correspondence that can be sent to the Commonwealth Print and Mail facility or other third-party Print and Mail providers.

3.5 Technical Requirements

3.5.1 Solution OverviewThe Bidder must describe how the software and technology of its solution will meet the following requirements:

1. The RMV requires that the proposed solution support RMV's evolution to a Service Oriented Integration Architecture, using web services based APIs for integration between multiple solutions employed by MassDOT and RMV.

2. The RMV requires that the proposed solution be comprised of infrastructure, framework, and application components that reflect accumulated experience with good design and engineering practices.


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 3. The RMV requires information about the proposed solution’s components including the

component’s original release date, release dates of major version updates, and a statement on the maturity level of the component.

4. Bidder must complete Attachment 17 – Software and Infrastructure List.

3.5.1.1 Solution ArchitectureThe Bidder will need to respond to the following Solution Architecture requirements:

1. RMV requires that the proposed solution provide a Web Services-based API for integration purposes and adhere to key integration standards, for example SOAP, XML, UDDI, WSDL, BPEL4WS, and SAML 2.0.

2. RMV requires that the proposed solution integrate, as needed during interim releases, with legacy applications (including applications based on IBM zOS CICS and IDMS, .NET and Oracle platforms), using service-based interfaces.

3. RMV requires the Bidder to outline and describe the proposed solution’s application batch/automated processing capabilities. The description must include:

a. The proposed solution’s internal batch/automation scheduling componentb. The proposed solution’s batch/automation processes capability to be launched and

controlled through a third party enterprise schedulerc. Any experiences the Bidder has had in integrating third party enterprise schedulers and

best practices recommendations4. RMV requires that the architecture support each of the contact channels and customer types

supported by the current system as provided in the EPM and user stories, with the flexibility of including future channels and customer types.

5. RMV requires that the proposed solution provide report, document, and correspondence delivery capabilities, including:

a. Provide "Executive Dashboard" reporting with drill-down capabilities.b. Provide the choice of whether to view, print, or e-mail report.c. Generate a web page, spreadsheet file, or text file directly from a report.d. Generate print files of forms and other documents that can be sent to third-party

printers (e.g., publishing houses).e. Provide for electronic archival and reprinting of system-generated documents including

reports and notices.6. RMV requires that the proposed solution provide mail-merge printing capabilities for letters,

newsletters and other correspondence that can be sent to the Commonwealth Print and Mail facility or other third-party Print and Mail providers.

The Bidder’s must describe how their solution meets the following RMV desired objectives.

1. RMV desires that the proposed solution support development of an enterprise view that extends beyond the boundaries of the RMV to that of partner solutions owned by other government agencies or business entities.

2. RMV desires that the proposed solution avoid multiple web service implementations that substantially overlap in providing the same functionality.

3. RMV desires that the proposed solution broadly utilize a business rules component as the primary means for specifying business rules, and widely-used static data.


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 4. RMV desires that the proposed solution incorporate an architectural component that supports

encapsulation of business rules and promotes flexibility by separating business rules and static data from the tiers that depend on them. The use of this component must be supported across all tiers of this solution. If multiple components are proposed to support this requirement, then a single integrated view must be provided. Change management of Business Rule configurations must be addressed in the description of this component.

5. RMV desires that the proposed solution provide cross-cutting framework and architectural support for monitoring and logging.

6. RMV desires that the proposed solution accommodate reporting and business intelligence inquiry-only application components without impact or dependence on the availability of the operational/transactional database.

7. RMV desires that the proposed solution fully support non-disruptive rules-based data archival and subsequent retrieval. The system must not be unavailable for extended periods of time during the archival process. The solution must identify data that has been archived and provide a means to restore the archived data. The process to retrieve archived data must execute within predictable times.

8. RMV desires that the proposed solution fully support non-disruptive rules-based data purge. The system must not be unavailable for extended periods of time during the purge process.

3.5.1.2 Solution TechnologyThe RMV is seeking the Bidder to describe the role of each technology component in their proposed solution and how the component is used to meet the RMV’s business needs.

1. The RMV requires that the proposed solution platform include a richly-featured business rules engine (definition, management, and execution capability).

2. The RMV requires that the proposed solution incorporate functionality to support each of the RMV's delivery channels as described in the Section 3.3.3 Channels of the RFR.

3. The RMV requires that the proposed solution provide a Web Services-based API that supports each of the contact channels and customer types supported by the current system as provided in the EPM and user stories, with the flexibility of including future channels and customer types.

4. The RMV requires that the proposed solution incorporates and integrates with existing Driver’s License Imaging and document scanning and authentication infrastructure through Web Services based interfaces (documented in the Web Services Catalog).

5. The RMV requires that the solution have intelligent mail capabilities, i.e. barcode printing and USPS confirmation of receipt of correspondences, e.g. suspension letter mailings.

3.5.2 ExtensibilityThe Bidder must address the following Extensibility requirements:

1. The RMV requires the Bidder to describe how the proposed solution can include the registering of boats, ATV, Snowmobiles and the administrative processing of professional licenses (Electrician and other trades).

2. The RMV requires that the Response include a System Extensibility Plan detailing the Bidder’s techniques for enabling extensions of the application without redesign and for enabling such extensions to be carried forward through the regular maintenance and upgrade of the proposed solution.


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 3. The RMV requires that any Bidder proposed product configurations and/or customizations do

not significantly impede the ability to apply major and minor version updates providing maintenance and functionality updates to the Core System product.

4. The Response must also address extensibility through the separate modes of configuration changes and application customization.

5. The Response must also address extensibility through facilitating and leveraging community best practices.

3.5.3 Future Proofing

1. The RMV desires that the proposed solution be deployable to market-viable Relational Database Management Systems, such as Oracle Database or Microsoft SQL Server.

2. The RMV desires that the proposed solution be deployable to market-viable operating systems, such as Red Hat Linux or Microsoft Windows Server.

3. The RMV desires that the proposed solution be deployable to market-viable hardware and virtualization platforms.

4. The RMV desires that the proposed solution be deployable to market-viable storage platforms.5. The RMV desires that there be no technical constraints in the proposed solution that would

prohibit its deployment to a cloud.

3.5.4 Security

1. The RMV requires that the proposed solution be designed to protect customer information in conformance with all applicable Massachusetts state and US federal laws, regulations, and security best practices.

2. The RMV requires that the proposed solution adhere to the requirements articulated in all Federal and Commonwealth “security drivers” to which MassDOT is subject. The list of these “security drivers” includes:

a. Federal - Drivers Privacy Protection Act (DPPA)b. Federal - Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)*c. Federal - Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH)*d. Federal - Internal Revenue Service Publication 1075e. Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA)f. Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Order 504g. M.G.L. Chapter 93H Security Breaches;h. M.G.L. Chapter 93I Dispositions and Destruction of Recordsi. 201 CMR 17.01 Standards of Protection of Personal Informationj. Section 205 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. s405)k. Section 1106 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. s1306)l. The Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. s552a(b)(3))m. M.G.L. c. 66, section 10n. M.G.L. c. 66A

3. The RMV requires the Bidder propose a detailed description of their security controls plan, which may include but not be limited to the ISO 27k series, NIST (especially SP 800-53 and SP


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 800-95), OWASP, and the SANS Institute. RMV desires that the implemented security controls be demonstrated during systems testing.

4. The RMV requires support for controlling and auditing user access to different classes of data, including specifically restricted data, including logging of events and user actions. RMV requires that the proposed solution support integration with an identity and access management solution providing role-based access control, such as IBM’s Security Identity and Access Manager products.

5. The RMV desires that the proposed solution allow the RMV to determine which users and services have access to specific information based on the RMV’s determination of acceptable degree of risk for information sharing. The RMV desires that the proposed solution allow the RMV to determine the how data elements are classified and the access provided to them.

*If the RMV is required to become a HIPAA- covered entity or business partner, the Bidder must design around HIPAA rules and security.

3.5.5 AdministrationThe RMV requires the Bidder to outline and describe the proposed solution’s ability to monitor application components and business processes/ services and alert on performance issues. If the application does not have the ability to monitor application components and processes within the application, the Bidder can outline and describe their experience in establishing Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) for measuring application performance, and recommended tools for best practices implementation.

3.5.6 User Interface TechnologyThe Bidder proposed solution must meet the following User Interface requirements:

1. RMV requires that the proposed solution support interactive browser-based access to the solution via the Internet and RMV's intranet.

RMV requires that any web browser-based component of the solution operate consistently and fully across all web browsers in widespread use. RMV desires that any web browser-based component of the solution operate consistently and fully on desktop, laptop, and mobile devices in widespread use. RMV expects the application to provide a responsive design for all contemporary/current versions of the browser for both internal and customer facing portals. Industry standard acceptable practice for support of older browsers is expected as well. Below are browser versions that Bidder must support.*Safari 8 and aboveIE 8 and aboveFirefox 46 and aboveEdge 12 and aboveChrome 48 and aboveAndroid Browser 4 and aboveOpera

The RMV desires that any web browser-based component of the solution use responsive design to support different display configurations.


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 2. RMV requires that the proposed solution support multiple modes of screen navigation including

tabbing, mouse selection, shortcut keys and other modes outlined in the Accessibility section of the RFR.

3. RMV requires that the proposed solution be designed and implemented so that users who encounter usage or technical problems have clear and consistent error handling. All errors must generate error messages to the user and be logged to a monitoring subsystem for administrator use in correcting systems issues.

The Bidder must indicate if they meet the listed requirements.

3.5.7 Availability

1. All categories of internal end-user interaction must be available, with no scheduled interruptions, between 6:00 AM and 11:00 PM, seven (7) days per week.

2. All categories of external (e.g., public) interaction must be available 24 hours a day, seven (7) days per week, except for a maximum of 60 minutes of scheduled interruption per calendar month. No interruptions may be scheduled between 6:00 AM and 11:00 PM on any day.

3. The total duration of unscheduled interruption of solution availability (to either internal or external users) may not exceed 30 minutes per calendar month.

4. The total duration of scheduled interruption for maintenance of solution availability (to either internal or external users) may not exceed 60 minutes per calendar month.

3.5.8 System PerformanceThe Bidder must describe the technical capabilities and architecture of the proposed solution that addresses the following System Performance requirements.

1. The RMV requires the proposed solution to simultaneously support the interactive operations performed by internal employees, the external interactive operations by end-users and partners, the non-interactive external operations performed by business partners, and the internal reporting and background operations necessary for the operation of the RMV.

2. The RMV requires that simultaneous internal and external operations execute without significant impact between operation types.

The Bidder must propose a method to monitor the performance of the proposed Core System and the tools to undertake this monitoring. The monitoring of performance must be at least the equivalent of the current monitoring and it is desirable that is better both in terms of quality and administration. Although RMV reserves the right to reject and or modify the proposed methodology via contract negotiations; we intend to carefully and fully evaluate whatever the Bidder proposes.

3.5.9 Process and Transactional IntegrityThe Bidder must describe the technical capabilities and architecture of the proposed solution that addresses the following Process and Transactional Integrity requirements.

1. The RMV requires that all business processes defined for the solution, including asynchronous activities, support reliable messaging and transactional processing in order to ensure process and data integrity, including timely restoration of service after technology failure.


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 2. The RMV requires that the proposed solution employs complete logging of all transactions in all

modules that encounter error conditions. Log entries must be generated using standard fault mechanisms and must follow a common structure (or XML schema) with common data elements.

3.5.10 IntegrationsThe RMV expects the proposed solution to integrate with both internal and external systems which already exist or are in the process of being developed and implemented.

3.5.10.1 Internal

The proposed solution must integrate with the following internal MassDOT systems:

1. Individual Customer Web Portal (B2C)2. Crash Data System3. MorphoTrust Licensing Solution4. Knowledge Testing Solution5. Road Test Tablets6. Branch Management Solution (Queuing and workforce management)7. Identity and Access Management (for example, IBM Security Identity Manager, IBM Security

Access Manager)8. Document Storage (for example, FileNet)9. Document Scanning Software 10. Email services (for example, MS Exchange)11. Fax machines – networked or online fax service 12. Printing service, enterprise13. Printing service, local printers14. Credit card processing services (such as point of sale PIN Transaction Security devices with end-

to-end encryption)15. Security Incident & Event Manager (SIEM) (for example, QRadar)16. International Registration Plan (IRP) (a locally hosted application with web services interface)17. Mail-In Registration scanner (Unisys)18. Massachusetts Management Accounting and Reporting System (MMARS)

The Bidder must provide a list of any of these interface types that will not be supported by the proposed solution.

3.5.10.2 External

External interfaces are described by type rather than individually as there is a significant quantity of some types.

The current real-time interface types are:

1. Web services2. CICS Guest/Host software3. AAMVANet leased line with UNI software4. Advantis Leased line5. Metaframe


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 6. SQL*Net

CICS Guest/Host software is described in the Technical Summary (Attachment 10) in Section 3.3.1 (Physical Architecture). CICS Guest/Host software uses a custom Client/Server approach for supporting multiple RMV partner interfaces. Communication between the Guest and Host applications is accomplished using LU6.2 protocol. IBM MQSeries is also utilized as an alternate path for Host software access.

The current batch interface types are:1. FTP (migrating to SFTP or Interchange where possible)2. SFTP3. Interchange (for details, see Attachment 10)4. Email5. Web download

The Bidder must provide a description of the interface types that can be supported by the proposed solution and whether that support requires configuration or customization. Bidders must fill out the Third Party Interface Catalog (Attachment 11), indicating:

Whether the interface will be retained or replaced How each interface will be supported by configuration or customization Which technology will be used to implement each interface Supporting comments.

Bidders must provide a description of their methodology for working with the RMV to develop and execute a transition plan that describes how the RMV will migrate interfaces from current state to the future state system. This description must include how risks inherent in migrating multiple business partners from an existing to a new interface will be identified, what steps will need to be taken to plan transitions from one interface type to another where needed, and the expected division of roles and responsibilities between the Bidder and the RMV during the planning and implementation of each interface transition. The Bidder must keep in mind that the RMV does not desire an approach that requires all business partners to be implemented on one “go live” date. The methodology must show how transition plans are developed that track to each of the proposed Implementations in the Project Plan Schedule and describe how the approach ensures the business partner is always connected to or pointed at the RMV’s system of record.

The Bidder must propose an Interfaces Plan where the future state third party interfaces will utilize modern non-proprietary technologies and expose web services as its preferred communication mechanism for real-time interfaces. Bidders must rationalize all the interfaces, decide which interfaces will need conversion from batch to real-time (or vice versa) and add additional functionality where necessary to enhance customer experience.


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 3.5.10.3 Industry StandardThe RMV requires that the proposed solution provide interfaces with the following industry standard services, or suitable alternatives (suitability to be determined by the RMV):

Service Description

VIN Validation VINtelligence validates a VIN and if it is a valid VIN, returns vehicle information (including the correct make and model)

National Change of Address(NCOA)

National Change of Address (NCOA) address changes updated monthly for Massachusetts from Anchor.

Commercial Driver’s License Information System (CDLIS)

A nationwide computer system that enables state driver licensing agencies (SDLAs) to ensure that each commercial driver has only one driver’s license and one complete driver record.

U.S. Passport Verification Service (USPV)

An application that allows a jurisdiction to verify U.S. passport information presented by an applicant with Department of Homeland Security (DHS) passport records.

Help America Vote Verification (HAVV)

A system that allows a jurisdiction MVA to verify voter registration and identity information with Social Security Administration (SSA) records for an individual.

Digital Image Access and Exchange (DIA)

A program in which AAMVA works cooperatively with jurisdictions to develop image capture, recognition, and verification solutions that meet jurisdictional needs, while continuing to focus on frontline staff and customer service.

National Association for Public Health Statistics and Information Systems (NAPHSIS) - (Electronic Verification of Vital Events -EVVE)

A system that allows a jurisdiction motor vehicle agency (MVA) to verify information on a birth certificate presented by a driver license or ID card applicant.

National Driver Register (NDR) - Problem Driver Pointer System (PDPS)

A system that is used to search the National Driver Register (NDR), which is maintained by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). This is a repository of information on problem drivers provided by all U.S. jurisdictions.

Receive OOS Status/History Request

A process that uses Commercial Driver’s License Information System to transmit out-of-state convictions and withdrawals. This process is also leveraged to respond and make requests for driver status and history from other jurisdictions.



Social Security Online Verification (SSOLV)

A package that provides jurisdictions with system specifications, test plans, and other materials to implement social security number verification with the Social Security Administration (SSA).

State 2 State (S2S) A means for states to electronically check with all other participating states to determine if the applicant currently holds a driver license or identification card in another state.

Verification of Lawful Status (VLS)

An application that allows a jurisdiction MVA to verify an applicant's lawful status prior to issuing a state-issued driver’s license or ID.

National Motor Vehicle Title Information System (NMVITIS)

A system that allows titling agencies to instantly and reliably verify information on a paper title against the electronic data from the state that issued the title.

Commercial Skills Test Information Management System (CSTIMS)

An Internet-based tool that provides a consistent way to track the scheduling and entry of test results for commercial skills tests by jurisdiction and third-party examiners.

Report Out-of-State Test Results (ROOSTR-Lite)

An AAMVA web application strictly designed to support rule §383.79 of the new Commercial Learner’s Permit (CLP) regulation, which provides that a state that issued a CLP to an individual must honor the Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) skills test results for that individual if he or she takes the CDL skills test in another state. The ROOSTR Lite solution only applies to jurisdictions that do not plan on utilizing AAMVA's Commercial Skills Test Information Management System (CSTIMS) application for managing CDL Skills Testing, Training, and Audits.

Driver Vehicle Data (DVD) A system that provides access to driver and vehicle records to approved third-party service providers. It is an electronic means for jurisdictions to sell their records using approved third-party service providers.

Electronic Vehicle Registration (EVR)

An application that allows jurisdictions' business partners to apply for registrations and titles electronically.

Electronic Lien and Title Program (ELT)

An application that allows lienholders and motor vehicle agencies to electronically exchange lien and title information.

National Auto Dealers Association (NADA) Data

NADA provides monthly updates to data related to the blue book values of vehicles.

HIS Automotive (formerly RL Polk Vehicle Data)

Provides automotive information and data solutions to the automotive industry, insurance companies, and related businesses.


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division Finalist Application that optimizes address data to comply with strict USPS®

standards. It verifies, standardizes and corrects address elements, and appends postal codes.

Address Doctor Informatica’s Address Doctor is able to parse, analyze, verify, correct, and format addresses according to local postal standards

National Information Exchange Model (NIEM)

This is an interagency initiative to provide the foundation and building blocks for national-level interoperable information sharing and data exchange. The NIEM project was initiated on 28 February 2005 as a joint venture between the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) with outreach to other Government departments and agencies.

The Bidder must provide a list of any of these interface types that will not be supported by the proposed solution.

3.5.11.2 EnvironmentsRMV requires the Bidder to outline and describe the solution’s System Development Lifecycle with respect to how the Bidder will utilize the proposed infrastructure environments described. The Bidder must indicate which stages of the lifecycle will be performed at the Bidder’s facility if applicable. If additional environments are required for the solution’s development and implementation, describe the additional environment (and components) required and how it will be used to meet solution best practice implementation and support.

3.5.12 Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery

1. The RMV requires that the solution support business continuity and disaster recovery. In particular, the solution must be architected so as to support timely restoration of service following catastrophic loss of a single site of operation.

2. The RMV requires the Bidder to outline and describe the solution’s ability to support High Availability. The Bidder must provide examples of how they supported Disaster Recovery at other implementations including how failover scenarios were exercised and tested. The Bidder must clarify the limits of what the solution can support in terms of recovery time objective (RTO) and recovery point objective (RPO).

3. The RMV requires that the restart/recovery of the solution be synchronized with the restart/recovery of interdependent legacy components.

4. The RMV requires that the solution incorporate robust and rigorously tested backup and restore capabilities.



4.0 Bidder’s Response to Testing The Bidder Response to the Testing Requirements section must detail what skills would be necessary of the Bidder’s QA team in order to adequately complete all of the testing requirements described in this section. Further, the Bidder must demonstrate their ability to provision this testing team and describe the experience of the various QA Team members the Bidder anticipates using for the Massachusetts RMV implementation.

4.1 Testing RequirementsThe Bidder must detail their experience with each of the forms of testing laid out in Section 4.1 of the RFR, as well as provide sample test plans for System, Performance, AAMVA, and Accessibility testing so as to illustrate how the Bidder anticipates to completing testing throughout the duration of the Program, including the Bidder’s plan to automated testing wherever possible.

4.2 Defect Severity and PriorityThe Bidder must confirm their agreement with the definitions of Severity and Priority outlined in Section 4.2 of the RFR. If the Bidder uses alternative nomenclature for Severity and Priority, or uses different ranking criteria, the RMV must be made aware of this alternative language. It is desirable for the Bidder to conform to the terminology used by the RMV.

4.3 Test Entrance and Exit RequirementsThe Bidder must detail a step by step guide of their best practices for test entrance and exit requirements. The Bidder is expected to meet the requirements as specified in Section 4.3 of the RFR. The Bidder is expected to respond with a confirmation that they will adhere to these requirements. The RMV will adapt, at its sole discretion, the test Entrance and Exit Requirements in order to create what it (the RMV) deems best practices for this implementation.

4.4 Reporting Requirements for TestingThe Bidder must provide a sample of their test reports that display their ability to meet the requirements of Section 4.4 of the RFR. The RMV also requires the Bidder to explain how it plans to provide test reporting in a way that is consistent with the RMV’s operating methodology.



5.0 Bidder’s Response to Implementation

5.1 Implementation and Support Strategy and PlanThe Bidder must propose an implementation plan in accordance with the outline described below.

Implementation PlanThe Bidder must submit an Implementation Plan that includes the following items:

A Microsoft Project Plan to a mid-level of detail (Release) and associated discussion that addresses:

1. Project Kick Off and Start Up including on-boarding /logistics2. Initial Project plan Delivery, review and reconciliation with existing RMV project plans3. PMO Management Activities that include:

a. Change Management Processb. Release Deliverable and Review process and how the proposed approach will minimize

schedule, scope and budget risksc. Risk and Issue Management Processesd. Document Repository (SharePoint) architecture and setup

4. Proposed Sprints and the resulting Releasesa. Bidders must indicate any assumptions that have been made regarding RMV personnel

both in terms of count and role 5. Proposed Implementation(s) to include the following:

a. The included Releasesb. Rollout Plan that includes a general discussion of the overall approach, logistics,

sequencing, and timing to ensure the following business readiness considerations are addressed. Bidder must indicate the required RMV staff and duration for these tasks:

i. Implementation of new business processes ii. Implementation of changes to existing business processes

iii. Deployment of new or revised business policies created or changed as a result of the implementation

iv. Readiness of all end-user, support, and business partners roles impacted by the implementation

v. Deployment of any new or upgraded hardware/peripherals required for the implementation

vi. All new operating procedures or revisions to existing operating procedures developed as a part of the implementation

vii. Suggested Go/No Go Criteria for implementationviii. A specific recommendation for implementing the branch offices, the call center,

and QHQ i.e. all on one day or a another approach and desired outcomes to measure success

ix. How the proposed approach will minimize disruptions in service at the branch office locations

c. Business Partner Implementation Plani. CJIS


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division ii. Insurers

iii. EVRiv. Non-Renewal Biddersv. Others

d. External Interface Plane. Data Conversion Plan to include a discussion of the proposed team(s), their roles and

responsibilities, the areas of focus, required staff/time commitments, proposed assumptions and timings for the conversion and the desired outcomes to measure success

f. Data Synchronization Plan6. A Revised Engineering Sequence that illustrates the proposed Implementation Plan7. A description of why the proposed Implementation Plan best meets the RMV goals with the

least amount of risk8. An articulation of any assumptions that have been made in preparing either the Implementation

Plan or the Engineering Sequence9. Proposed Implementation Plan for Technology Components

a. RMV requires the Bidder to outline and describe the proposed solution’s infrastructure and operational requirements along with specific infrastructure configurations for the solution’s best practices implementation.

i. Server configuration requirements (e.g. OS, CPU, RAM, Disk)ii. Network requirements (speed, port)

1. Reference/standard configuration2. Protocol and port descriptions in accordance with RFC 6335 - Internet

Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Procedures for the Management of the Service Name and Transport Protocol Port Number Registry

iii. Storage requirements (e.g. size, speed/IOPS, tiered, etc.)iv. Cluster configuration requirements (if applicable)v. Installed component applications (e.g. Tomcat, Apache, IIS, Java, .NET, etc.)

b. The Bidder is required to describe the infrastructure components recommended for the solution’s development and best practices implementation

i. Can the proposed solution run in a 100% VMware virtual environment?ii. Is the proposed solution compatible the VMware’s Site Recovery Manager

(SRM) and vSphere Distributed Resource Scheduler (DRS)?c. The RMV requires the Bidder to outline and describe the proposed solution’s

architecture and capabilities for scalability, resiliency and high availability. Describe the proposed solution’s best practices implementation to:

i. Maximize uptimeii. Prevent data loss in event of a component failure

iii. Scale infrastructure to meet consumer demandd. The RMV requires the Bidder to describe proposed solution recommendation and

options available for a multi-data center implementation and operation (e.g. active-active, active-cold standby, active-warm standby)

e. The RMV requires that the Response include detailed listings of the physical and virtual equipment and software required within each environment that Bidder is planning on using. Provide recommended specifications for hardware acquisition


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 10. An articulation of any issues and concerns

The Bidder may submit more than one proposed Implementation Plan. If the Bidder chooses to submit more than one plan, the benefits and determinants of each must be noted and discussed.

5.2 Organizational Change Management As a minimum the Bidder must provide the following as part of the OCM series of implementations (i.e. for each major release):

5.2.1.1 User Support Items Designed and Developed by the VendorThe Bidder must supply examples of the following for the core system or implementation of a comparable system:

User utility that describes the screens, fields, error messages, and workflows of the Core system, based on RMV configuration.

Troubleshooting Guide (based on RMV configuration written for business user and Help Desk audiences)

Help Desk job aids End-User job aids

5.2.1.2 Professional Services from Vendor

Personnel with sufficient knowledge of the core solution must be assigned to the RMV OCM team to provide Core system and related work-flow subject matter expertise in support of the design, development, and delivery of OCM artifacts and activities. In no case should this be less than 6 person months per Implementation although the Bidder is welcome to suggest more based on their experience.

Activities to include:1. Providing demonstrations and walk-throughs of Core system functionality.2. Providing walk-throughs of Core system workflows and related use cases.3. Providing on-site consulting and support in the design, development and delivery of the

RMV’s OCM artifacts including, but not limited to: Training Needs Analysis documents, Training Plans, Training/Performance Support solution design documents and storyboards, Training/ Performance Support materials (Student and Facilitator training materials, end-user job aids, eLearning solutions), Business Impact Assessment documents, Readiness Assessment tools and Transition Plans, Communication Plans, and Organizational Architecture recommendations.

4. Staging data records in Training Environment in support of hands-on activities to be performed in training classes.

5. Providing instructions and best practices for future staging of data for hands-on training activities.

6. Supporting RMV Trainers during Train-the-Trainer activities.



The Bidder is also expected to attend pilot and initial classroom-based training sessions as resident SME in the training classes

Bidder must provide a description of how they will support the Go-Live team and provide type and number of Bidder resources needed to accomplish this

5.2.3 Organizational Change Management Artifacts to be provided with the proposalThe following artifacts must be included in the proposal provided by the Bidder:

1. Sample of a full Organizational Change Management Plan and/or Business Readiness Plan used to support a previous implementation of the Core system or implementation of a comparable system.

2. Samples of the training materials provided to end-users in support of a previous implementation of the Core system or implementation of a comparable system..

3. Samples of a Training/Knowledge Transfer Plan for IT professions used to support a previous implementation.

4. Samples of CMMI Level 2 business processes and procedures to support a previous implementation.

5. Samples of Technology changes that may be required to implement the new system, e.g.:a. New or upgraded operating systemsb. New or upgraded client-based workstationsc. Any new aspects of system monitoring required by the Bidder’s solutiond. Any new aspects of on-going maintenance or operations that needs to be considered as

a result of the technical aspects of the Vendor’s solution6. Business Impact Analysis plan from a comparable Core system implementation or

implementation of a comparable system.

5.3 Knowledge TransferTraining and Knowledge Transfer activities are a crucial part of ensuring the RMV and MassDOT’s readiness to help support the operation, administration, maintenance and on-going configuration and development activities of the core system. Based on the support and maintenance model described in Section 6 Support and Maintenance of the RFR, the Bidder must provide a detailed description of the training/knowledge transfer approach to ensure that the RMV and MassDOT (or their designees) are prepared to provide the necessary operational support, maintenance and development activities.

5.3.1 Knowledge Transfer Plans For each role identified to perform the operational support, maintenance and development activities, the Bidder must provide role-specific training/knowledge transfer plans that describe the training, knowledge transfer and mentoring activities (including objectives for each activity), that the Bidder will deliver. The Bidder must propose the velocity and timelines for executing the training/knowledge transfer plans.

Bidders should be prepared to participate in the interviewing and assignment decisions of those key roles.

The Bidder must provide a Knowledge transfer from a previous successful engagement.


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 5.3.2 Knowledge Transfer ActivitiesThe Training/Knowledge Transfer plans must ensure that RMV and other MassDOT employees are sufficiently trained and supported to perform their roles to ensure ongoing operational support and maintenance of the core system. As part of implementing the training/knowledge transfer plans, the Bidder must include the following training/activities:

1. Provide training on any standard products used to support and maintain the core system, (such as training on standard monitoring products that will be used to monitor the core system.)

2. Provide role-specific mentoring and job shadowing activities with clearly defined performance goals and documentation that details the progress in mastering the targeted goals.

3. Deliver formal walk-throughs on key technical and operational documents and deliverables for the appropriate roles, for example, standard operating procedures and troubleshooting guides.

4. Conduct debrief sessions with key RMV/MassDOT team members after formal training to ensure they can apply concepts in their roles of supporting/administering the core system solution.

5. Perform a formal evaluation process that periodically assesses the progress of the RMV/MassDOT team members in knowledge transfer activities. The assessment must focus on the role-specific performance objectives that the knowledge transfer activities target.

RMV/MassDOT will provide feedback regarding the knowledge transfer process to the Bidder and would expect any necessary adjustments be accommodated by the Bidder.

5.3.3 Business and Technical DocumentationThe Bidder is expected to prepare and deliver copies of all operational and technical documentation required to support the system once it is in production as well as any other pertinent reference documents.

The Bidder must meet the following Business and Technical Documentation requirements:

1. The Vendor will provide a list of files/records they consider relevant to the Project for us to retain and update. The list will contain the names and locations of all such files/records.

2. The Vendor will provide turnover documentation and training should the solution require a MassDOT system administrator. In addition, classes for ad-hoc and standard reporting are required.

3. The Vendor will be responsible for providing a list of key contacts and details/definitions of each relationship with the key contact. The list will include name, organization, phone, and email of the key contacts.

4. The Vendor will propose and include any other pertinent information that will enable the RMV/MassDOT to meet its needs in supporting the operation and maintenance of the core system.



6.0 Bidder’s Response to Support and Maintenance The Bidder’s support methodology must describe the Bidder’s recommended approach per tier for eventual transition to the Bidder’s recommended steady-state support model. MassDOT IT has defined the following support tiers.

Tier 1 (Low) – Basic system support and troubleshooting. This tier includes issues that can be resolved by the first line of support (MassDOT Service Desk and the RMV Support Center)

Tier 2 (Medium) – This tier includes issues requiring more complex support and/or subject matter expertise on the application, business process and/or hardware; it is usually an escalation of a Tier 1 issue

Tier 3 (High/Critical) – This tier includes issues that require complex application, hardware, operating system and network expertise. These issues could be a result of an escalated customer support calls or system-wide issues observed from infrastructure monitoring/support

6.1 Maintenance and Support Agreements for COTS Software ComponentsThe Bidder must submit in its Response a maintenance and support agreement for each proposed COTS software component, regardless of whether the software is provided by the Bidder or by third-party Bidders, which agreement shall include a requirement that the third-party Bidder for such COTS software component cooperate with the Bidder. Each agreement must extend for a period beginning on the expiration acceptance of the core system and extending for 10 years. The agreements will be subject to review and revisions by MassDOT.

6.2 Support and MaintenanceFor the Operations, Monitoring and Production Support of all environments defined in Section 3.5.11.2, the Bidder must propose an overall maintenance plan and associated team with the appropriate skills and experience to successfully execute the plan. The Bidder must describe which organization has primary responsibility for each tier. The RMV has provided a draft SLA in Attachment 16. The Bidder must propose an SLA per tier based on their experience with Motor Vehicle Systems and a plan that is appropriate to that service level as follows:

1. The Plan must be for 24x7x365 coverage. 2. The plan must describe any differences in support based on business hours.3. The plan must describe the Bidder’s approach per tier for eventual transition to the Bidder’s

proposed steady-state support and maintenance model. 4. The Bidder must propose a staffing model per tier indicating the skillset for each category of

individuals proposed to support. o The proposed support and maintenance plano The support team must include RMV, MassDOT IT and Bidder representatives. o The transition effort to recommended steady-state o The enhancement request queue process

5. The plan must define clear roles and responsibilities aligned with the staffing model.


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 6. The Bidder must indicate the location(s) of the proposed team members. It is required that

some to all of the team is located at the RMV Headquarters in Quincy.7. The Bidder must describe how development and support issues are investigated. Included in

this description should be whether a Bidder or MassDOT provided environment will be used for this investigation and resolution.

8. RMV requires that the Bidder incorporate and configure standards-based components for monitoring and reporting the status and health of the solution.

o Develop reports, dashboards, procedures and processes to ensure that the overall availability of each system is met

o Establish SLA’s and metrics for each interface to our business partners, both current and future

o Provide system logging capabilities, performance reporting mechanisms, and historical metrics

o Establish basic process and procedures for notifications, outages, and escalation to qualified personnel

9. RMV requires the Bidder to describe their implementation experience and process in addressing the intricacies of infrastructure component configuration (e.g. Virtualized Server configuration and tuning, Database Server configuration and tuning, Load Balancing configuration and tuning, web server configuration and tuning, middleware configuration and tuning.)

10. The RMV requires the Bidder to outline and describe the solution’s ability to monitor infrastructure components and resources (e.g. CPU, Ram, Disk Space, and Network) and alert on performance issues. If the application does not have the ability to monitor infrastructure within the application, the Bidder can outline and describe their experience in establishing Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) for measuring infrastructure performance, including recommended tools for best practices implementation.

11. The RMV requires the Bidder to describe its approach and tool choice for scheduled/ batch operations.

12. The Bidder must address their process for applying system and application patching and version upgrades.

13. Design and configuration of a support and maintenance workspace (RMV will manage any necessary build out.)

14. MassDOT has standardized on the ServiceNow incident ticketing system. Bidder must provide recommended configuration for tracking of incidents (For example, category, hierarchy, and workflow) within ServiceNow for their support and maintenance plan.

15. Bidder proposed support and maintenance plan must account for all integration points of the core product with the various external technologies.

16. The Bidder must include a support and maintenance agreement for each proposed third-party COTS software component, which agreement shall include a requirement that the third-party Bidder for such COTS software component cooperate with the Bidder with respect to the obligations set forth in this section of this RFR. Each agreement must extend for a period beginning on the acceptance of the core system extending for 10 years.


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division 17. Tier 3 support issues may result in a product or software enhancement request. Bidders must

describe the process for determining which support issues will be handled as enhancement requests. Bidders must propose the process for transitioning issues from the support queue to the enhancement request queue.

18. The Bidder must propose a methodology for implementing a process that will be used to evaluate enhancement requests. Enhancement requests may result from a support issue or a business change request. This methodology must include prioritization, SLAs on providing analytical responses, and developing change request proposals.

6.3 Vendor Support for Core System Enhancements

The Vendor must propose a Core System Maintenance Team to address changes and enhancements. The RMV has not specified a specific team size and or location; rather we are leaving this to the vendor to propose based on their experience in other states with similar sized systems.

1. Tier 3 support issues may result in a product or software enhancement request. Vendors must describe the process for determining which support issues will be handled as enhancement requests. Vendors must propose the process for transitioning issues from the support queue to the enhancement request queue.

2. The Vendor must propose a methodology for implementing a process that will be used to evaluate enhancement requests. Enhancement requests may result from a support issue or a business change request. This methodology must include prioritization, SLAs on providing analytical responses, and developing change request proposals.

3. Vendor must describe how they will manage changes to MA specific customizations.



8.0 Bidder’s Response to General Terms & Conditions

8.4 Accessibility StandardsThe RMV requires Bidders to submit the Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (“VPAT”) for each Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) component that the Bidder proposes will be used by end users to the extent that a VPAT is available to the Bidder. If the VPAT is not readily available to the Bidder, the Bidder shall provide alternative accessibility testing information and results from a third party if any such testing has been performed and such information and results are available.

Bidders must:

Prior to contract execution

Provide a VPAT or accessibility testing results for any pre-existing software, including Third Party Software, that Bidder is delivering to the Commonwealth

If Bidder is delivering a SaaS offering, provide access to the offering for accessibility testing Cooperate with the Commonwealth on addressing accessibility issues and entering into a

mitigation letter if necessary

After contract execution

Build accessibility into every phase of the Project Collaborate with the Commonwealth and the AAC on accessibility issues Test for accessibility before delivery and include testing results with all deliveries Cooperate with the Commonwealth’s accessibility testing after delivery Work to resolve any issues identified in testing and in the mitigation letter

8.4.2.10 Requirements for Publicly Held SaaS Vendors1. Bidder must submit a VPAT for the applicable cloud products with its bid. The extent to which

the applicable cloud products, at the time of delivery, capable of providing comparable access to individuals with disabilities consistent with the applicable provisions of the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board standards set out in 36 CFR Part 1194 (known as 'Section 508'), in effect as of the date of this Agreement, and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), must be indicated by the comments and exceptions (if any) noted on the VPAT.

2. Prior to contract execution, and preferably at the time that Bidder responds to the RFR:

a. Bidder will provide the Commonwealth with access to the applicable cloud products for purposes of conducting accessibility testing. The Commonwealth may conduct such accessibility testing directly and/or through a third party engaged by the Commonwealth at its expense.

b. Upon request, Bidder must provide the Commonwealth with accessibility-related content in the technical reference manual or program documentation for the applicable cloud product.


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division c. In connection with its accessibility testing as permitted above, the Commonwealth shall

have the right to configure the applicable cloud product in accordance with the technical reference manual or program documentation for the Commonwealth’s accessibility needs.

3. Based on the results of the Commonwealth’s accessibility testing, the Commonwealth will determine whether it can proceed with considering Bidder’s bid. In the event that the Commonwealth does elect to keep Bidder’s bid in consideration, the Commonwealth (1) may require Bidder to enter into an agreement detailing the results of the accessibility testing, (2) will assume the risk of any non-conformance with the Commonwealth’s accessibility standards, and (3) requests that the selected Bidder make commercially reasonable efforts to correct any serious accessibility issues during the course of the engagement.



9.0 Bidder’s Response to Representations and WarrantiesThe Bidder must make the following representations and warranties in its Response:

Each deliverable and Completed System will conform to the criteria established in the applicable release(s) and, the relevant release specifications, and the requirements set forth in the Bid Response and applicable attachments, including any requirements and designs incorporated by inclusion of prior deliverables

No software provided to the RMV (whether or not via a subcontractor, sublicense, etc.) will contain disabling devices. A disabling device includes any virus, worm, built-in, or use-driven mechanism, injurious or damaging algorithm, time bomb, or other software or hardware that can disable or adversely affect the use of the software (delivered by the Vendor) or harm any of the RMV’s data, network, or other software

All of the technology-related components of the Completed System will be interoperable with one another, as intended, including, backward and forward compatibility among versions and interoperability with components/systems

The Completed System will comply with all applicable security requirements during the duration of the Contract as required by the security standards and regulations specified in section 8.3. From time to time during the duration of the Contract, the RMV will notify the Vendor of such applicable security requirements and the Vendor must modify the Completed System or any deliverables previously accepted, as applicable, to meet such security procedures at no additional cost to the RMV

The Vendor will obtain all necessary government authority or other third-party permissions, clearances, licenses, and consents to perform the services and deliver the deliverables, copies of which shall be provided to the RMV upon execution of the Master Agreement and otherwise upon the RMV’s request

Throughout the duration of the Contract, the services will be performed, and all deliverables will be developed and provided under the Contract, in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, rules, and regulations that may be applicable to the Vendor’s duties under the Contract

The Vendor has sufficient rights in the deliverables to grant to the RMV the rights and licenses granted under the Contract and is not aware of any asserted or unasserted third-party claims challenging or affecting any right granted under the Contract

The services and/or the deliverables, including, without limitation, the Completed System, provided under the Contract will not infringe or misappropriate any intellectual property, contractual, or other proprietary right of any third-party

If any COTS software component included in the deliverables (including software developed by the Vendor and software that has been supplied by third-party suppliers) is subject to a separate shrink-wrap or click-wrap license, the RMV’s operation of the COTS software component or licensed deliverables (including, without limitation, opening the shrink-wrapped package or clicking “accept” or “OK” or the like) shall not limit any of the RMV’s rights or the Vendor’s obligations under the Contract, except as specifically set forth in the Contract or in a writing signed by the RMV and the Vendor

The (i) Vendor has the right, power and authority to enter into and perform its obligations under the Contract; (ii) the individual executing the Contract is authorized to do so; (iii) nothing contained in the Contract or the performance of the Contract will cause the Vendor to


Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Registry of Motor Vehicles Division materially breach any other contract or obligation; and (iv) the Vendor and its subcontractors are sufficiently staffed and equipped to fulfill the Vendor’s obligations under the Contract.

The services will be performed (i) by appropriately qualified and trained personnel; (ii) with due care and diligence and to a high standard of quality as is customary in the industry; (iii) in compliance with the applicable schedules; and (iv) in accordance with, all applicable professional standards for the field of expertise

The Vendor may, upon receipt of prior written approval by the RMV (i) incorporate any open source software into, or combine open source software with, the deliverables or use open source software to provide the deliverables; or (ii) distribute open source software in conjunction with or for use with the deliverables

Documentation provided by the Vendor under the Contract shall be in sufficient detail so as to allow suitably skilled, trained, and educated RMV personnel to understand the operation of the deliverables. The Vendor shall promptly, at no additional cost to RMV make corrections to any documentation that does not conform to this warranty

9.1.2 Scope of Warranty ObligationsIn the Bidder’s Response, propose for each of the Severity Levels 1-4 the following:

Initial Response Time Action Upon Receipt of Issue Action to Resolve Issue Prioritization process for each defect Continuing Communication schedule during defect resolution Maximum time allowed to provide Resolution Process to be followed if resolution cannot be provided within maximum time.


· web viewmassachusetts department of transportation – registry of motor vehicles division ....

Documents