Loren Data's SAM Daily™

Home Today's SAM Search Archives Numbered Notes CBD Archives Subscribe

70 -- National Portfolio Management System

Notice Date
Notice Type
Special Notice
541519 — Other Computer Related Services
Contracting Office
Department of Veterans Affairs;Western New York Healthcare System;3495 Bailey Ave.;Buffalo NY 14215
ZIP Code
Solicitation Number
Archive Date
Introduction This is a Request for Information (RFI) for potential sources to provide product offerings and information to VHA to help formulate options and strategies for selecting a decision support system designed to facilitate standardization of business processes for requesting, reviewing and approving the acquisition of capital assets. Vendors should provide basic information regarding offerings and capabilities as to how they would approach the VHA to achieve this document's outlined objectives below. Agency Name: Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Agency Overview: The VHA is one of three organizations (the other two being the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) and National Cemetery Administration (NCA)) within the Veterans Administrations (VA). The VHA is made of 21 integrated health care service networks (VISNs) that include 157 medical centers throughout the 50 states. Capital assets include equipment (medical and non-medical) and real property, both of which are acquired in a variety of ways by local medical centers and networks that oversee their operation. Project Name: National Portfolio Management System (NPfMS) Project Project Background: Currently within VA/VHA, the acquisition (which include request, review and approval) of high-dollar capital assets - over $500,000 (including equipment and fixed/real assets) is centralized in the Capital Investment Program (CIP) and managed centrally/nationally via the CIP portfolio management system & database. The CIP portfolio management system is a web-based decision support tool that automates the request/review/approval process and which enables objective scoring and prioritization or equipment requirements. Acquisitions over $500k typically must be reviewed and approved nationally before local purchases can be executed. Within each network and medical center, a variety of local business processes, review/approval thresholds and business/data systems are used to execute the capital equipment request, review and approval process. To date, there is no standardized business process or system to manage capital equipment requests, reviews and approvals across all medical centers and networks. Project Details: Before an integrated business process/system solution can be developed or implemented, it is essential that VHA conduct a current state assessment of its existing business processes and systems with regards to capital asset acquisitions. The NPfMS Project represents the initial phase in conducting that assessment and is comprised of three major components: 1. Current state assessment of business processes, 2. Marketplace assessment of decision support systems for acquisition of capital assets (including portfolio management systems), 3. Stakeholder assessment to evaluate key VHA stakeholders in the capital asset request, review and approval process. This RFI is designed to identify and provide basic information is support of Item 2. above. Based on the results of the current state assessment of business processes, stakeholder assessment, and responses to the RFI, a comprehensive assessment will be completed which will include recommendations for possible development of a standardized business process/system for managing the request, review and approval process for capital assets (i.e., an integrated portfolio management system) across all medical centers and networks. Should a decision to move forward with an integrated process/system solution be established, a Request for Proposal (RFP) may be issued. Should that RFP be issued, it will contain more detailed requirements for the product, contractual details, and key criteria for successful bidders. The marketplace assessment of decision support systems for acquisition of capital assets (including portfolio management systems) includes the following core categories: 1. Strategic Alignment 2. Process & Metrics 3. Investment Domains and Portfolios 4. Reporting and Analytics 5. Communication & Collaboration 6. User Interfaces 7. Architecture, Security & Cost 8. Investment Optimization Each of these categories contains a number of specific questions that address an array of anticipated functional and operational requirements. The specific questions are listed in the Requirements Section below. REQUIREMENTS Business background of the project: To evaluate the feasibility of developing and deploying an integrated solution (business process and systems) that standardizes the capital asset request, review and approval process within VHA. The core categories of the marketplace assessment are provided immediately below. Within each of these categories is a series of questions designed to obtain additional information regarding vendor offerings. Vendor offerings should address each of the categories and associated questions therein. Additional information associated with each category (but which may beyond the scope of the specific questions therein) should be incorporated into the vendor's response. The vendor may also submit product information outside of the categories listed below, as well as a capability statement (which may include information such as staff expertise, consulting experience, IT systems experience, etc.). Core Categories/Requirements (Section 1-9): 1. Strategic Alignment 2. Process & Metrics 3. Investment Domains and Portfolios 4. Reporting and Analytics 5. Communication & Collaboration 6. User Interfaces 7. Architecture, Security & Cost 8. Investment Optimization 9. General Information Core Category Questions: SECTION 1: Strategic Alignment 1. Can questions/evaluation criteria be easily created to align with strategic business objectives such as cost, access, quality & satisfaction? 2. Can the system be easily configured to align with business objectives at multiple levels within the organizations (dollar value, approval authority, network/local, department/carelines, etc.)? 3. Can the system be configured to align with organizational responsibilities and structure such as care lines, systems, management responsibilities, projects, and assets? 4. Can the system be configured easily to adapt to changing business rules (e.g., approval thresholds)? Is it flexible enough to accommodate different business rules in different locations? 5. Does the system contain/support objective scoring, rating, analytics and decision-making? 6. Does the system support local configuration needs and prevent unauthorized configuration changes? 7. Does the system support alignment of equipment investment with business processes and objectives? Can it be easily configured to support the alignment? SECTION 2: Process & Metrics 1. Does the system support a wide variety of processes and methodologies (quantitative vs. qualitative, approval thresholds, various stakeholder groups)? 2. Does the system support automation and measurement or key capital equipment processes - such as request, review, analysis, and approval? 3. To what degree does the system control/restrict automation of workflow (e.g., is the workflow hard-wired into the application)? 4. Does the system support measurement of business process efficiency and effectiveness? 5. Does the system support "phased/gated" approaches to equipment request, review and approval (e.g., dollar thresholds, organizational authorizations, etc.)? 6. Does the system support establishment of flexible portfolios that align with organization structure, budgeting cycles, archiving, and equipment-type classification? 7. Does the system permit use of scorecards, automated forms, investment maps and process mapping, calculation of return on investments, etc.? 8. Is the system easy to navigate between work processes, scorecards, forms, investor maps, analytics, reports, etc.? 9. Does the system support efficient management of large amounts of data and multiple stakeholder involvement (including users, requestors, reviewers, and management)? SECTION 3: Equipment Investment Domains & Portfolios 1. Does the system permit creation and management of any type of investment (medical, vs. non-medical equipment, IT, capital construction projects, programs, real assets, special initiatives, etc.)? 2. Does the system permit a single investment to simultaneously exist within multiple portfolios (e.g., equipment, facility, care line, department)? 3. Is the system flexible enough to permit users to define their own evaluation/scoring criteria, portfolios, approval criteria/thresholds, etc.? 4. Does the system permit analytics and reporting that align with strategic and operational business objectives and organizational responsibilities? 5. Does the system permit portfolio creation based on budget/fiscal criteria (e.g., appropriation types, fund control points, etc.)? SECTION 4: Reporting & Analytics 1. Can the system be easily configured to support analytics and reporting at multiple levels within the organization (e.g., department, care line, facility, network, equipment types, dollar value, etc.)? 2. Can system generated reports be easily configured and modified to meet strategic and operation needs? 3. Does the system interfaces with other existing applications easily (e.g., MS Office, MS Excel, MS Access, etc.)? 4. Does the system support integration with existing systems and anticipated systems/databases that are expected to be deployed in the foreseeable future (AMES/MERS, MAXIMO, SAM, etc.)? 5. Does the system support easy archiving of data? Can the archiving be aligned with existing report and organizational structure? 6. Does the system support creation of multi-dimensional/multi-factorial investor maps and reports? 7. Does the system support easy creation of ad-hoc reports in a variety of formats? 8. Is report data easily transferable to other applications such as MS Excel? 9. Does reporting and analytics support return on investment (ROI) and trade-off analysis? SECTION 5: Communication & Collaboration 1. Does the system provide for automatic notifications (via email or some other electronic mechanism) for reviewers/approvers in accordance with existing business processes and rules? 2. Can the system be easily configured to imbed business rules/processes into the software? 3. Is the system easily adapted to existing Microsoft applications to facility communication and sharing of information? 4. Can the system be configured to support automatic sharing of reports, analytics, etc.? 5. Does the system support on-line status reporting that is aligned with business rules and thresholds? 6. Is collaboration facilitated via sharing process information in folders or other commonly used tools and applications? SECTION 6: User Interfaces 1. Does the system support 100% web-based usage? 2. Is the system easily configurable to standardize "look" and "feel" for multiple users? 3. Can the system be configured to align with standard business/workflow processes, yet flexible enough to accommodate unique thresholds and approvals? 4. Does the system support easy navigation between modules/sections within the system and between external systems and applications? Does it support navigation between multiple web portals? 5. Does the system support configuration of rule-based or role-based access? Does it support easy modification of this configuration? 6. Does the licensing structure support enterprise wide access? SECTION 7: Architecture, Security & Cost 1. Does the system support existing and future security requirements, including those covered under NIST 800-53 standards and all applicable VA Directives (including but not limited to VA Dir 6500, 6504, and 6601)? 2. Is the system auditable? Can it support tracking entries, changes of data fields over time? 3. Is the system scalable to large organizations (from facility to network to national levels)? Does it simultaneously provide flexible reporting and analytics that can be tailored to facilities, networks or central office needs? 4. Can the system be configured to interface easily and inexpensively with existing fiscal and management systems? 5. Does the system support dynamic (flexible) portfolio definition and content? 6. Does the system support LDAP or Active Directory synchronization? 7. Does the system provide for role-based security? 8. What are the technical requirements for the system regarding the following: i. Bandwidth requirements. ii. Server requirements. iii. License structure. iv. Client-based or web-based. v. Communication protocol. vi. Security configuration requirements. 1. Communication ports. 2. Anti-virus requirements and compatibility. vii. Data configuration requirements. viii. Storage capability requirements. ix. Service/Support requirements. 9. Please estimate your costs for each of the following: i. Basic Software Cost: ii. License Cost: 1. Client-based: 2. Web-based: iii. Server costs: (Providing this information does not establish any obligation on the part of the respondents or the Government and is used for informational purposed only) SECTION 8: Investment Optimization 1. Can the system be easily configured to automatically find the optimal investments to achieve specific goals? 2. Does the system support scenario analysis that permits identification of multiple investment opportunities based on defined parameters? 3. Does the system support user/customer defined selection criteria that can be used in optimizing investments? SECTION 9: General Information 1. Company name 2. Company address 3. Parent company 4. Describe ownership and/or strategic partnerships of your company 5. Name and signature of the person responsible for the information contained in this RFI 6. Phone number 7. Fax number 8. E-mail address 9. Web site URL 10. Company location (corporate office; other offices) 11. Total number of employees (include breakdown per department, if possible) 12. When was your company's initial year of operation? 13. How long have you been providing this type of product? 14. Please identify/list other public and private sector entities that are currently using existing versions of your product offering. 15. Have you supplied this product to customers in a similar industry, with a similar growth profile that would act as a reference site for your product? If so, provide contact information for these references. 16. Does your organization have any third-party relationships/alliances? Describe these. 17. Was your product offering (software) written and acquired from a third party, or was it written by your organization? SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS Submit responses, via e-mail, in MS Office standard document formats to the point of contract identified below. All responses should be received by 4:00pm on August 13, 2007. SOLICITATION This is a request for information only and no solicitation currently exists. Therefore, do not request a copy of the solicitation as there is no assurance that a solicitation will result. POINT OF CONTACT For additional information, submit questions in writing or e-mail to: Julie A. McCann VA Western New York Healthcare System (90NCA) 3495 Bailey Avenue Buffalo, NY 14215 julie.mccann@va.gov Restrictive or Proprietary Data Vendors that include in their responses data that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, will: (1) Mark the title page with the following legend: This response includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed-in whole or in part-for any purpose other than to evaluate this quotation. If, however, a contract is awarded to this Vendor as a result of-or in connection with-the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting contract. This restriction does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets [insert numbers or other identification of sheets]; and (2) Mark each sheet of data it wishes to restrict with the following: Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this response. The Government will gladly accept questions regarding this RFI. However, there is no intention to distribute submitted questions and the Government response to interested parties; this includes the original party submitting the question. The Government intends to use submitted questions to further clarify any potential future activities regarding this effort. All inquiries must be submitted in writing. Telephonic inquiries will not be accepted. Please note: We are conducting market research per FAR Part 10, and that we disclaim any responsibility for expenses or resources that respondents may incur in responding to the RFI. There is no guarantee that a formal solicitation (request for proposals) will be issued, as we are not obligated to issue one. DISCLAIMER This RFI is issued solely for information and planning purposes only and does not constitute a solicitation. All information received in response to this RFI that is marked as proprietary will be handled accordingly. In accordance with FAR 15.210(e), responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. Responders are solely responsible for all expenses associated with responding to this RFI.
SN01340585-W 20070714/070712221011 (fbodaily.com)
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)

FSG Index  |  This Issue's Index  |  Today's FBO Daily Index Page |
ECGrid: EDI VAN Interconnect ECGridOS: EDI Web Services Interconnect API Government Data Publications CBDDisk Subscribers
 Privacy Policy  © 1994-2020, Loren Data Corp.