ERP System

Title: ERP System Deadline: 4/7/2021 3:00 PM   (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada) Status: Open Solicitation Number: 103-21 Description: The County of Calhoun, MI is interested in soliciting proposals from qualified providers of municipal software whose product offering meets or exceeds current County requirements and whose complete product offering provides a robust solution set that will allow the County to continue to leverage this investment well into the future as the needs of the County grow and evolve. Pre-Bid Meeting Date: 3/10/2021 1:00 PM Pre-Bid Meeting Details: This pre-proposal meeting will be held virtually. Meeting details can be found in RFP#03-21, Section 2.4 "Pre-Proposal Meeting". This pre-proposal meeting is not mandatory. Problem Occurred × Please retry Ok Confirmation × Are you sure you want to remove line item? Yes No Missing Information × Ok Confirmation × Are you sure you want to remove attachment? Yes No Documents: Login to view documents Login to view

documents Login to view documents Login to view documents All Additions Questions Addition 1 Posted: 3/24/2021 Type of Addition: Pre-Bid Q&A Overview: Attached are the questions that were asked by potential respondents to the ERP RFP and the corresponding answers provided by the County.  Any vendors providing a proposal in response to ERP Financial System RFP#103-21 will be responsible for this information.  Documents: Login to view documents Addition 2 Posted: 3/29/2021 Type of Addition: Addendum Overview: County Responses to Pre-Bid Meeting Questions Deadline: 3/29/2021 3:00 PM Solicitation #: #103-21 Documents: Login to view documents Question 1 Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 1. Could the County provide us with the total number of users that would be accessing the Cashiering module, including supervisors? Read-Only users are no charge, so please do not include those. We need this data for accurate pricing. Response: 27 Question 2 Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 2. Outside a real-time integration with the Financial and Financial A/R system, for the integration of remaining applications for cashiering/receipting purposes is it the intent of the County to (1) have a batch integration (ex. End of day) for pulling payment information in or (2) have the new cashiering solution record transactional receipts and have a real-time bi-directional interface to those applications. Please note for the requested interface applications. 1. Precision Replacement 2. Other applications not listed Response: The most responsive proposal would include a totally integrated financial system that includes cash receipting, which would not require integration to accommodate a separate application. Question 3 Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 3. What credit processor is the County currently using? Response: AllPaid Question 4 Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 4. Would the County like POS equipment to be included in the RFP response (receipt printers, scanners, cash drawers, check imaging/MICR devices, encrypted credit card swipe and EMV/chip/tap-to-pay devices). Response: No Question 5 Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 6. Would you like the POS/Cashiering solution to also have the option to accept online payments? Please note which applications you would like to have included in this option. Response: No Question 6 Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 7. Would the County like the cashiering solution to create an Image Cash Letter (ICL) with scanned checks for deposit and send to your bank? If so, what bank would be used for the ICL destination? Response: No Question 7 Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 8. Does the County have a multi-check scanning process in place for recording checks and bills/invoices in batch? If not, should this be included in the response? What is the annual volume that the County would scan using this process? Response: Not required for this project Question 8 Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 9. Does the County have scenarios where different departments/agencies need to submit end of day receipt summary information? If so, would the County like to automate that? Response: Not required for this project Question 9 Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 10. Could the County elaborate on the 5 years of requested conversion data for cashiering to coincide with the UB history. Would it be sufficient if the subsidiary ledger, ex. A/R held that information. Response: The County does not bill for utilities and we are not requesting this functionality. Question 10 Posted: 3/10/2021 Question: S.No Area Questions 1 HR & Payroll In case if we go with "Option 2" finance only, do we need to consider interface with any HR and payroll application. If yes, please provide details related to expected interface i.e. it is only related to Accounting entry interface for payroll cost posting or need to interface for some more information. 2 Option 1, 2, 3 Preference Is there an order of preference for the response Options? For example, is an Option 1 reponse preferred over an Option 2 response. How is this criteria weighted in selection? 3 Project Accounting Generally what is the County's count of active projects at one point of time. 4 POS Terminal for Cash receipts Since county is having POS at 6 collection stations for cash receipts, do we also need to consider interface for these receipts as part of scope. 5 Start and Go Live dates What is the expected Start and Go Live dates of the project. Response: 1. At a minimum, we would need a GL interface so that we can post the payroll JE to the GL. Other potential interfaces could include, projects, fixed assets, work orders, etc. 2. We are looking for a full replacement but will consider a best of breed. We do not have a preference over a single vendor implementation or a dual vendor implementation. 3. We have over 9000 active projects. 4. We do not current use or have future plans to use POS terminals. Users enter receipts into the ERP system from their PCs. 5. We do not have a required start or go-live dat Question 11 Posted: 3/10/2021 Question: Will you allow the use of off-shore resources for this project? Response: The most responsive proposal would not include the use of off-shore resources. Question 12 Posted: 3/10/2021 Question: In regards to RFP Section 3.6.4 – Data Conversion Plan, is there a minimum/desired number of years of data that Calhoun expects to be converted into the new system? Response: The County would like to convert information to meet minimum retention schedules. Question 13 Posted: 3/10/2021 Question: In regards to the Specifications Excel, Section 4.3 – Budgeting, Requirement #2 (Ability to maintain budget history based on user defined requirements), please provide a use case for the requirements for budget history. Response: The County would like to be able to see where the budget started as well as the incremental changes made to arrive at the final budget. Question 14 Posted: 3/10/2021 Question: Can you please confirm the total count for current employees as well as specify how many of them are full time versus part time? Response: Approx. 650, about 60 PT/590 FT. Question 15 Posted: 3/10/2021 Question: 1). Does the County have any specific requirement for go-live dates (e.g. start of Fiscal year)? 2). Can you provide detail on the County's budget cycle (dates)? 3). Is the County open to a parallel implementation of ERP & HCM (assuming there are no resource constraints on County staff)? Response: 1. We’d like to go live at the start of the fiscal year (Jan 1) if timing allows. 2. We have two budget cycles: a. County: Position budgeting is done in May/June. Budget worksheets are sent out to departments in August and returned in September. Internal review and development in October including budget hearings. Public Hearing at last BOC meeting in November with adoption at first meeting in December to start 1/1 budget cycle. b. Health Dept: Position budgeting is done in April/May. Budget worksheets sent out to departments in June and returned in July. Internal review and development in August including budget hearings. BOH adoption at August meeting and BOC adoption first meeting in September to start 10/1 budget cycle. 3. No Posted: 3/24/2021 Type of Addition: Pre-Bid Q&A Overview: Attached are the questions that were asked by potential respondents to the ERP RFP and the corresponding answers provided by the County.  Any vendors providing a proposal in response to ERP Financial System RFP#103-21 will be responsible for this information.  Documents: Login to view documents Posted: 3/29/2021 Type of Addition: Addendum Overview: County Responses to Pre-Bid Meeting Questions Deadline: 3/29/2021 3:00 PM Solicitation #: #103-21 Documents: Login to view documents Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 1. Could the County provide us with the total number of users that would be accessing the Cashiering module, including supervisors? Read-Only users are no charge, so please do not include those. We need this data for accurate pricing. Response: 27 Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 2. Outside a real-time integration with the Financial and Financial A/R system, for the integration of remaining applications for cashiering/receipting purposes is it the intent of the County to (1) have a batch integration (ex. End of day) for pulling payment information in or (2) have the new cashiering solution record transactional receipts and have a real-time bi-directional interface to those applications. Please note for the requested interface applications. 1. Precision Replacement 2. Other applications not listed Response: The most responsive proposal would include a totally integrated financial system that includes cash receipting, which would not require integration to accommodate a separate application. Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 3. What credit processor is the County currently using? Response: AllPaid Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 4. Would the County like POS equipment to be included in the RFP response (receipt printers, scanners, cash drawers, check imaging/MICR devices, encrypted credit card swipe and EMV/chip/tap-to-pay devices). Response: No Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 6. Would you like the POS/Cashiering solution to also have the option to accept online payments? Please note which applications you would like to have included in this option. Response: No Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 7. Would the County like the cashiering solution to create an Image Cash Letter (ICL) with scanned checks for deposit and send to your bank? If so, what bank would be used for the ICL destination? Response: No Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 8. Does the County have a multi-check scanning process in place for recording checks and bills/invoices in batch? If not, should this be included in the response? What is the annual volume that the County would scan using this process? Response: Not required for this project Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 9. Does the County have scenarios where different departments/agencies need to submit end of day receipt summary information? If so, would the County like to automate that? Response: Not required for this project Posted: 3/5/2021 Question: 10. Could the County elaborate on the 5 years of requested conversion data for cashiering to coincide with the UB history. Would it be sufficient if the subsidiary ledger, ex. A/R held that information. Response: The County does not bill for utilities and we are not requesting this functionality. Posted: 3/10/2021 Question: S.No Area Questions 1 HR & Payroll In case if we go with "Option 2" finance only, do we need to consider interface with any HR and payroll application. If yes, please provide details related to expected interface i.e. it is only related to Accounting entry interface for payroll cost posting or need to interface for some more information. 2 Option 1, 2, 3 Preference Is there an order of preference for the response Options? For example, is an Option 1 reponse preferred over an Option 2 response. How is this criteria weighted in selection? 3 Project Accounting Generally what is the County's count of active projects at one point of time. 4 POS Terminal for Cash receipts Since county is having POS at 6 collection stations for cash receipts, do we also need to consider interface for these receipts as part of scope. 5 Start and Go Live dates What is the expected Start and Go Live dates of the project. Response: 1. At a minimum, we would need a GL interface so that we can post the payroll JE to the GL. Other potential interfaces could include, projects, fixed assets, work orders, etc. 2. We are looking for a full replacement but will consider a best of breed. We do not have a preference over a single vendor implementation or a dual vendor implementation. 3. We have over 9000 active projects. 4. We do not current use or have future plans to use POS terminals. Users enter receipts into the ERP system from their PCs. 5. We do not have a required start or go-live dat Posted: 3/10/2021 Question: Will you allow the use of off-shore resources for this project? Response: The most responsive proposal would not include the use of off-shore resources. Posted: 3/10/2021 Question: In regards to RFP Section 3.6.4 – Data Conversion Plan, is there a minimum/desired number of years of data that Calhoun expects to be converted into the new system? Response: The County would like to convert information to meet minimum retention schedules. Posted: 3/10/2021 Question: In regards to the Specifications Excel, Section 4.3 – Budgeting, Requirement #2 (Ability to maintain budget history based on user defined requirements), please provide a use case for the requirements for budget history. Response: The County would like to be able to see where the budget started as well as the incremental changes made to arrive at the final budget. Posted: 3/10/2021 Question: Can you please confirm the total count for current employees as well as specify how many of them are full time versus part time? Response: Approx. 650, about 60 PT/590 FT. Posted: 3/10/2021 Question: 1). Does the County have any specific requirement for go-live dates (e.g. start of Fiscal year)? 2). Can you provide detail on the County's budget cycle (dates)? 3). Is the County open to a parallel implementation of ERP & HCM (assuming there are no resource constraints on County staff)? Response: 1. We’d like to go live at the start of the fiscal year (Jan 1) if timing allows. 2. We have two budget cycles: a. County: Position budgeting is done in May/June. Budget worksheets are sent out to departments in August and returned in September. Internal review and development in October including budget hearings. Public Hearing at last BOC meeting in November with adoption at first meeting in December to start 1/1 budget cycle. b. Health Dept: Position budgeting is done in April/May. Budget worksheets sent out to departments in June and returned in July. Internal review and development in August including budget hearings. BOH adoption at August meeting and BOC adoption first meeting in September to start 10/1 budget cycle. 3. No