Elizabeth Basso Lead State Connecticut PROCUREMENT SERVICES IT Vendor Managed Service Provider CONTRACT Elizabeth Basso Lead State Connecticut PROCUREMENT SERVICES

Tim Hay & Dugan Petty, NASPO ValuePoint Sourcing Team Connecticut Indiana Len Smith Mark Hemple Delaware Nebraska Karen Esposito Connie Heinrichs & Nancy Storant New Jersey Julie McGowan & Josh Descoteaux Tim Hay & Dugan Petty, NASPO ValuePoint

Purpose Leverage buying power by combining states and participating entities future purchases in information technology contingent workforce and managed services of such. Reduce and regionalize hourly rates for IT contingent workforce. Create efficiencies by using one contract for all IT contingent workforce needs. To establish multiple Master Agreements for the purchase of Parks & Recreation Equipment and Related Services by state governments (including departments, agencies, institutions), institutions of higher education, political subdivisions (i.e., colleges, school districts, counties, cities, etc.), the District of Columbia, territories of the United States, and other eligible entities subject to approval of the Participating Entity’s procurement director and compliance with local statutory and regulatory provisions (“Purchasing Entities”).

Scope of Services Contractors will deliver an end to end technology solution that provides the processes, components, and attributes described within this RFP. Contractors will Perform the overall program management and candidate engagements of an organization's contingent IT workforce. Contractors will provide program reporting and tracking, and candidate evaluation and selection. Contractors will provide supplier management tool(s), performance oversight, need analysis and consultation, as well as consolidated billing and help desk support.   Contractors will provide IT Professionals, via a VMS System if required by the Participating Entity, The resulting Contract is intended to establish new, replace and/or supplement current IT temporary staffing contract(s) as they expire or are otherwise terminated. Incorporation of this Contract shall be at the Participating States discretion, though it is understood there will be an overall cost savings.

RFP Process RFP Process Date RFP Advertised Links to posting sent to NASPO and all sourcing team states August 16, 2016 Pre-Proposal Conference Meeting held in Hartford. Attendees could listen in via teleconference September 13, 2016 Question Due Date September 26, 2016

RFP Process RFP Process Date Answers Issued Answers were posted over three dates: Sept. 14, Oct. 12, and Oct. 24 Closing (Proposals Due) November 1, 2016 November 17, 2016 December 1, 2016 2:00 PM ET Evaluation Period December 2, 2016 through January 28, 2017

Evaluation Criteria The Sourcing Team reviewed and scored all proposals that met requirements. The following information, in addition to the requirements, terms and conditions identified throughout the RFP, were considered part of the Selection process and are listed in order of relative importance. All proposals were evaluated using the following approach: Proposals were evaluated only to ensure that they adhere to Proposal Requirements. Any proposals not meeting the Proposal Requirements were not considered for evaluation. The proposals that met the Proposal Requirements were then scored based on the following criteria. All proposals were ranked on the basis of their combined scores. This ranking was used to create a “short list”. Any proposal not making the “short list” was not considered for further evaluation.

Evaluation Criteria Demonstrated Performance, Experience, Capabilities and Resources (Placement History, Government Experience, Top Customers, Supplier Recruitment) Management and Quality Assessment (Performance, Background Check Process, Escalation Procedures) Business and Financials (Company Information, Financials) Approach (Implementation, Assessment) Technology (System, Narrative, Reporting Accessibility, Disaster Recovery) Small/Minority Enterprise Subcontractor Commitment (Subcontractors)

Evaluation Criteria The short-listed proposals were then evaluated based on cost. 1. Cost (Fees, Discounts, Rates, Terms) The selection committee conducted additional rounds of discussions as well as a BAFO round.

Evaluation Summary Fourteen (14) Proposals were received Six (6) Proposals were deemed non-responsive An individual evaluation of the remaining eight (8) Proposals was completed by each Sourcing Team Member All Sourcing Team Members met and evaluated the proposals via consensus Proposals were ranked and three scored well above the remaining five (“natural break”) The team then scored the top three proposals for costs BAFOs were requested from the three highest scoring proposers.

Evaluation Results Three Master Agreements have been awarded! All Contractors proposed coverage for ALL 11 regions Regions are: New England Northeast & Caribbean Mid-Atlantic Rocky Mountain Southeast Sunbelt Great Lakes Heartland Greater Southwest Pacific Rim Northwest Arctic Capitol (DC) Contract Term September 1, 2017 through September 1, 2020 The Agreements allows for a one year extension

Highlights Increasing the overall availability and quality of a wide range of IT contingent workforce positions Reducing direct costs associated with IT Professional engagements Implementation of a web based system increasing efficiencies, that is also customizable to Participating Entities Adding value in the areas of purchasing, utilization and historical information as they relate to IT contingent workforce Contractor(s) contractual commitment to small/minority/disadvantaged local business. Input of Participating State on vendor pool and processes used to determine successful candidate(s)

Highlights Reducing direct and indirect costs associated with invoicing and time sheet verification and processing Minimizing the time spent engaging IT Professionals and ensuring compliance with the Participating Entities’ policies and procedures. Tracking, monitoring, and managing Contractor Parties (subcontractors) performance.

Master Agreements were awarded on August 25, 2017 Contracts Awarded Master Agreements were awarded on August 25, 2017 14PSX0338 AA Uwork dba Covendis 14PSX0338 AB Computer Aid, Inc. 14PSX0338 AC Guidesoft, Inc. dba Knowledge Services

At a glance Covendis Computer Aid Knowledge Services 14PSX0338AA   Covendis Computer Aid Knowledge Services 14PSX0338AA 14PSX0338AB 14PSX0338AC VMS solution: PeopleFluent dotStaff States in which Contractor has performed work: Colorado, Georgia, Nebraska, Oregon Arkansas, Delaware, Iowa, North Carolina, Virginia Arizona, Florida, Indiana, Maine, Ohio, Tennessee, Utah VMS Fee Range $0.49 to 1.00 $0.99 to 2.68 $1.35 to 1.50 Hourly Rate Range $9.00 to $183.50 $12.71 to $112.45 $12.83 to $169.65 Implementation 5 weeks 7 weeks SBE commitment 60% 30 – 45% Will meet user goals Direct employee fill rate 5% 10% 1099 employee fill rate 0% Subcontractor fill rate 90% 80%

Master Agreements and Pricing Refer to the NVP website for the most current information

Getting Started Start purchasing!!!! For the best solution for your needs, it is recommended that all three contractors demo their product to your organization. Plan your Participating Addendum and implement to your plan. Negotiate with the contractor(s). Start purchasing!!!!

Questions? Contract Lead: Elizabeth Basso State of Connecticut Department of Administrative Services Procurement Services (860) 713-5611 Elizabeth.basso@ct.gov .

Participating Addendum PROCESS

NASPO ValuePoint cooperative Master Agreement PA Process All 50 states and The District of Columbia have Memorandum Of Agreement allowing them to be eligible to use any NASPO ValuePoint cooperative Master Agreement 20

Through the Participating Addendum States/Entities may: Select Contractors Include their own State Administrative Fee Include required (unique) terms and conditions Identify options for States or their political subdivisions Request state-specific reporting or other requirements

Opportunities for Participation Three Options for Participation State signs a Participating Addenda for entire state Every legally eligible entity in the state can participate State signs a Participating Addenda for non state entities Every legally eligible entity that is not a STATE agency can participate State does not sign a Participating Addenda Political subdivisions wishing to participate may contact the NASPO ValuePoint Cooperative Development Coordinator who will contact the STATE CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICIAL asking for approval for that entity to sign their own Participating Addendum. Entities may be given approval on an individual basis or State CPO may give approval to all entities within the state to execute their own Participating Addendums. 22

Participation Opportunity #1 Step by Step: Participating Addendum templates are available on each Master Agreement page on www.naspovaluepoint.org States may have submitted Intents to Participate during solicitation, this will provide the information for contractors to contact states interested in signing a Participating Addendum. States may also contact contractors directly to begin Participating Addendum process. State Chief Procurement Officials (or designated representative) will be the signatory on the Participating Addendum. They will also be the NASPO ValuePoint point of contact throughout the process. State completes the draft Participating Addendum for each contractor and then forwards the draft to the contractor. Negotiations will be handled directly between state and contractor. Upon agreement, the state sends a final copy of Participating Addendum to the contractor for signature. Contractor signs Participating Addendum and sends back to state for signature. State sends fully executed copy to both contractor and NASPO ValuePoint at PA@naspovaluepoint.org Executed Participating Addendum will be maintained in a repository.

Participation Opportunity #2 Step by Step: Same Process as Opportunity #1 Participating Addendum templates are available on each Master Agreement page on www.naspovaluepoint.org States may have submitted Intents to Participate during solicitation, this will provide the information for contractors to contact states interested in signing a Participating Addendum. States may also contact contractors directly to begin Participating Addendum process. State Chief Procurement Officials (or designated representative) will be the signatory on the Participating Addendum. They will also be the NASPO ValuePoint point of contact throughout the process. State completes the draft Participating Addendum for each contractor and then forwards the draft to the contractor. Negotiations will be handled directly between state and contractor. Upon agreement, the state sends a final copy of Participating Addendum to the contractor for signature. Contractor signs Participating Addendum and sends back to state for signature. State sends fully executed copy to both contractor and NASPO ValuePoint at PA@naspovaluepoint.org Executed Participating Addendum will be maintained in a repository.

Participation Opportunity #3 Step by Step: Participating Addendum templates are available on each Master Agreement page on www.naspovaluepoint.org An email request should be sent to info@naspovaluepoint.org from entity (email may also be sent from contractor). The email needs to provide the following details: main point of contact from entity, full name of entity, phone number, email address and physical address. NASPO ValuePoint will email State Chief Procurement Officer requesting approval for the entity to execute a Participating Addendum. NASPO ValuePoint will email both contractor and entity with the permission from Chief Procurement Official to proceed to complete the Participating Addendum. Entity completes the draft Participating Addendum for contractor and then forwards the draft to the contractor. Negotiations will be handled directly between entity and contractor. Upon agreement, the entity sends a final copy of Participating Addendum to the contractor for signature. Contractor signs Participating Addendum and sends back to entity for signature . Entity sends fully executed copy to both contractor and NASPO ValuePoint at PA@naspovaluepoint.org Executed Participating Addendum will be maintained in a repository.

PA Process Flow Chart

State Executed vs Polysub Executed PA’s If a state has executed a Participating Addendum that allows for Political Subdivision’s to conduct purchases, NASPO ValuePoint discourages individual entities and contractors from executing a separate or additional Participating Addendum. If a Political Subdivision needs to execute a separate contractual document, that contractual document should be maintained at the political subdivision level. Do not forward to NASPO ValuePoint.

Things to Remember Sample PA’s are located on the NASPO ValuePoint Website under each master agreement portfolio. Executed Participating Addendum will be maintained on www.naspovaluepoint.org and in a repository. Participating states and entities will be identified on the map of the USA on each Master Agreement page on www.naspovaluepoint.org The Lead State and NASPO ValuePoint do not get involved with negotiations. Only submit completed and negotiated PA’s with signatures from both parties. Submit completed PA’s in PDF Format. 28

QUESTIONS? *Tim Hay THay@NASPOValuePoint.org (503) 428-5705 Contact the Lead State or our NASPO ValuePoint Cooperative Development Coordinators if there are any questions about our expectations! *Tim Hay NASPO ValuePoint Cooperative Development Director THay@NASPOValuePoint.org (503) 428-5705 * NASPO ValuePoint Point of Contact for these Master Agreements. 29

Thank You!