MARYLAND STATE TREASURER S OFFICE Louis L. Goldstein Treasury Building 80 Calvert Street, Room 109 Annapolis, Maryland 21401

Transcription

1 MARYLAND STATE TREASURER S OFFICE Louis L. Goldstein Treasury Building 80 Calvert Street, Room 109 Annapolis, Maryland QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS FOR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR MERCHANT SERVICES RFP #MCARD August 19, 2015 Q-1. A-1. Q-2. A-2. Key Information Summary Sheet - Would the State extend the due date? The due date is only 14 days after questions are due and it is unknown when answers will be received. We respectfully request a new date of five weeks from the date answers are provided by the State. Please see the Amendment to the RFP regarding the revised schedule of events. Section 2.19 (pg. 8) - The order of precedence is stated which includes the executed contract as the primary document. Would the State be open to an order of precedence which is 1) the executed contract, 2) the offeror s proposal and 3) the RFP? We anticipate everything being included in the executed agreement; however, there may be items to which the Offeror cannot adhere which are not addressed in the agreement but addressed in the response. Section 2.19 Order of Precedence, will not be modified. Section 3.02 Q-3. A-3. Q-4. A-4. Q-5. A-5. Q-6. (Pg. 10) - The RFP indicates that the Maryland MVA has in-house developed systems that take and process transactions using cash, credit cards, and checks. How does this system connect to your current acquirer? Is there a gateway in use? If so, which one? The current system uses the current provider s gateway. Is the MVA system EMV compliant? The MVA purchased Ingenico ISC250s and were assured that the machines can be updated in the fall for EMV compliance. Is the MVA volume included in the volumes provided? Is the POS/software system PCI compliant (via a QSA Audit)? 1

2 A-6. Q-7. A-7. We expect the Vendor to ensure PCI compliance. Will STO allow a different gateway to be proposed? SECTION 3.03 Q-8. A-8. Q-9. Is the State PCI compliant today? Can the State please provide the following: a. Current payment hardware or software being used by the State for each of its Merchant IDs. (Example: for the POS locations processing credit card transactions, please provide the terminal make and model and the connectivity for the terminals i.e. analog or IP or the virtual terminal name and version number. For E-Commerce, IVR or CSR channels please provide the Payment Gateway name or VAR name in use for each MID, with the software name and version #.) b. In addition to the aggregate processing volumes that have been provided in Exhibit 1, can a breakout of processing volumes by-channel be provided? In other words, can the State provide the volume ($) and transaction count for Card-Present versus Card- Not-Present payments? c. Is the Debit volume and transaction count provided in Exhibit 1 only related to Pin Debit (as opposed to off-line debit )? A-9. a b. The STO does not currently have this information available. However, this information will be part of the vendor s responsibilities under the new contract. c. The volumes in Exhibit 1 are all inclusive. Q-10. A-10. Q-11. A-11. Q-12. A-12. In general, it would be helpful to understand which of the State s current payment hardware/software is slated to be replaced versus the hardware/software that is slated to be kept for ongoing use. Can the State provide this information? With the exception of recent equipment purchases by the MVA, it is anticipated that all other equipment will have to be updated for EMV compliance. Please provide a list of all gateway and software vendors, along with the application name, version number and the acquirer they connect to. Bank of America is the gateway provider. Does the Hosted page or gateway need to be EMV compliant? Will the Hosted page be supporting card present transactions? Yes, everything needs to be EMV compliant. The Hosted page will be supporting every transaction type. 2

3 Q-13. A-13. Q-14. A-14. Q-15. Hosted payment processing for Internet Transactions, is the State looking for a hosted payment form to be available for their internet customers to be re-directed to, or a hosted payment processing gateway for the existing payment form to integrate with? Either may be appropriate depending upon the Agency. Are there any interfaces or CIS/CRM systems you want the credit card processing to integrate with? Different Agencies have different interface systems with which the Vendor must integrate. With the states API payment processing, does each Agency design their own applications, or do they use third party POS/Application software that would need to be integrated to our payment processing platform? a. If third party POS/application software applies, which provider/software are the using for the various industry types (in-person, internet, MOTO, etc.)? A-15. There are multiple third party and in-house POS/application softwares. Q-16. A-16. Q-17. A-17. Does the State use more than one acquirer? This Contract will align applicable State transactions under one acquirer. Does the State s acquirer provide a hierarchical approach to reporting? No. However the STO expects hierarchical reporting to be provided by the selected Offeror. SECTION 3.04 Q-18. A-18. Q-19. A-19. Q-20. A-20. Item 2 (pg 11) - Does not allow any deduction from any State account without prior authorization. Will the State provide up-front general authorization for certain deductions such as fees or chargebacks? It is stated in the RFP that this item is not negotiable. Would the State allow this to be a negotiable item? No. The State cannot provide general authorization for certain deductions. This is not negotiable. Item 3 (pg. 12) - States that the Offeror must agree to all terms and conditions provided in the RFP. It is expected that the terms and conditions that comprise the final, executed agreement, would be negotiated and agreed upon by both parties. We would not be able to commit to all terms and conditions without exception and discussion. It is stated in the RFP that this item is not negotiable. Would the State allow this to be a negotiable item? The provisions presented in item 3 of Section 3.04 General Requirements, are not negotiable. Please see the last paragraph of this section for further clarification. Item 3 (pg. 12) Would the State allow Offerors to include with their proposals, a request to negotiate an additional contractual provision, that limits the Contractor s liability? Limits of liability will not be negotiated. 3

4 Q-21. A-21. Q-22. A-22. Item 3(f) (pg. 12) - States that the Contractor does not have the right to terminate the Contract prior to its expiration. While the Offeror does not anticipate, nor wish, to cancel the agreement early, it is important for the Offeror to maintain termination rights for certain circumstances. An example of this may be that that Payment Brands require the agreement to be terminated. It is stated in the RFP that this item is not negotiable. Would the State allow this to be a negotiable item? This is not negotiable. The last paragraph of this section indicates that any conflicts in the Contractor s proposed terms and conditions, agreements, etc. will be revised by the STO or negotiated and approved by the STO before Contract award. If the successful Offeror and the STO are unable to reach mutually agreeable revisions to the Offeror s proposed terms and conditions, agreements, operating documents or forms, will the successful Offeror be free to decline to enter into a contract with the STO? While the STO agrees to negotiate in good faith to finalize the Contract, to the extent you propose to incorporate into the Contract certain other terms and conditions or agreements, you should be aware that the provisions stated in Section 3.04 of the RFP are not negotiable. Pursuant to Section 4.01, in order to be awarded the Contract, any conflicts in an Offerors proposed terms and conditions or agreements will need to be revised to be consistent with these provisions. Section 3.05 Q-23. A-23. Q-24. A-24. Q-25. A-25. Q-26. Item 1(pg. 12) - PIN-less debit is being requested as a minimum service requirement. When debit card acceptance is noted as PIN and PIN-less, is PIN-less debit processing referring to processing a debit card like a credit card (i.e. no PIN entered) which is often referred to as signature-based debit? Or is this referring to the service that allows PIN debit cards to be processed online in a special environment? Signature-based debit is the correct interpretation. Are re-occurring payments supported by any agencies? Some Agencies have re-occurring payments. Item 1 (pg. 12) - Please describe the State s acceptance and needs related to the Pre-Paid card category. The State requires Pre-Paid cards in order for its customers to meet their obligations. Item 1 (pg. 12) - There is mention of Electronic Check in the RFP. Can the State advise on what your requirements are related to Electronic Check? Is the State utilizing a check guarantee service and if yes, please provide: a. Number of locations using POS ECheck services b. Annualized check volume and count 4

5 c. Whether service is a Guarantee or Verification Only A-26. a. The number of locations using POS E-Check services varies. b. Not available. c. Guarantee. Q-27. A-27. Q-28. A-28. Q-29. A-29. Q-30. A-30. Q-31. A-31. Q-32. A-32. Are there any in-person e-check transactions, or are the e-check payments through MOTO/internet? (Summary statement mentions e-check through internet, but scope of services does not specify.) a. If processing in-person e-check transactions, are check readers required to be provided? If check readers are currently in use, please provide a list of the make and model? e-check payments are through MOTO/internet. a. No. (pg. 12) - Please further describe the State s current use of echecks today. Is this accepted online, over the phone, in person? For the purposes of this contract, e-checks are accepted online and over the phone. Mobile devices/payments, is the State looking for an application that they can use to process mobile payments with, or an application that cardholders would submit payments from? Parks and Recreation is looking for mobile devices to process transactions. Mobile devices and payments appear to be the future for payment acceptance and therefore the State (and the selected Vendor) must be prepared. Item 2 (pg. 12) - What services does the vendor need to provide to support "mail in transactions"? Is the State Treasurer looking for high-speed mailing services and paper check conversion (Check 21)? The STO will require the vendor to provide support only for credit card transactions that are mailed in. The State s current Lockbox Provider handles the processing of mailed-in checks. Item 2 (pg. 12) - In the minimum service requirements section, it is noted that the State will require PC-based, batch processing. Please describe this use-case in further detail. The State currently has these processes in place. The selected Vendor will, at a minimum, have to support these processes in the interim. What payment types must the self-service kiosks support? Does the vendor only need to integrate with existing kiosks, or does the vendor also need to provide and support kiosk services (e.g. maintenance)? Both; the Contractor will be expected to integrate with existing kiosks and also to provide new kiosks as requested by the State Agencies. 5

6 Q-33. A-33. Q-34. A-34. Q-35. A-35. Q-36. A-36. Q-37. A-37. Q-38. A-38. Q-39. Item 2(f) (pg. 12) The State mentions Self-service Terminals (SST). Are you referring to a customer self-activated system, such as a parking garage kiosk for paying for parking tickets? With which solutions can your SST integrate? Yes, parking garage kiosks is one version of the SSTs. Item 4 (pg. 13), the State indicates that, The contractor must set aside a block of merchant account numbers (MIDS) for use by the State. Further, the vendor will allow the State to manipulate certain digits of each number. How many digits within the Merchant ID does the State require the ability to manipulate? Specifically, does the State foresee needing a certain number of digits at the beginning or the end of the number sequence, or both? How many characters will the State need for customization? The State is seeking a succinct way to organize the MIDs. Ideally the MID would identify not only the Agency but the site and program. Item 4 (pg. 13) - If the contractor can provide another type of identifier without changes to the MID, would that be acceptable? Currently many internal reconciliation programs are based on the MIDs, therefor a new identifier will not be considered. Item 4 (pg. 13) - Please describe the reconciliation challenges the State is having that are driving the need to manipulate MIDs. The State uses the MID to reconcile to the appropriate Agency, site, program, cost center, and transaction. Item 7 (c) (pg. 13) - The State requests open architecture to easily connect to other systems. Please provide more information about this requirement. Different Agencies have different subsystems for their reporting. The information from the merchant services transactions must be easily uploaded to their systems. Item 7(i) (pg. 13) - Our services are currently in the process of EMV certification, and we will support EMV by the end of As EMV is not mandated for Oct 2015 (and the liability shift should have minimal to no impact on government entities), would the State Treasurer disqualify bids based on this EMV timeline? All Offerors must be PCI complaint as required in Section 3.03 Minimum Qualifications of the RFP. Item 8 (pg. 13) - The RFP ask for the Contractor to allow the State to develop proprietary data formats/reporting for credit card authorization and settlement but it also asks for API to integrate to. Please explain how the State plans to use proprietary data formats and still us an API? 6

7 A-39. Q-40. A-40. Q-41. A-41. Q-42. A-42. Q-43. A-43. Q-44. A-44. Q-45. A-45. Q-46. A-46. The Contractor will provide programming services that create multiple customized Application Programming Interfaces (API s) from vendor credit card authorization and settlement data to be used by State of Maryland proprietary reporting systems. Item 8 (pg. 13) - The State details several reporting requirements pertaining to the passage of specific data to ensure seamless reconciliation. In many instances, back-end reporting capabilities are directly related to the payment capture and the ability of the paymentcapture hardware/software to pass unique identifying data. What payment-capture hardware/software is in place today and how is the State currently populating and passing key-stone data fields (i.e. Remittance ID) for use in reconciliation? Various Agencies have different hardware/software. The selected Vendor will have to create workable secure interfaces. Item 8.C. (pg. 13) - The State requires the following: Identify and return as raw data any State Agency created code contained within VAR or VAN industry standard market data. Please clarify exactly what you mean by VAR or VAN industry standard market data. Item 8.c. is deleted. Item 8.C (pg. 13) - Please provide an example. Item 8.c. is deleted. Item 8 (pg. 13) Please define Remittance ID. How with it be used? In some cases customers are assigned a Remittance ID (in lieu of their social security numbers). The Remittance ID is used to identify the transaction. Item 8 (pg. 13) - How long is the remittance ID? How many positions? The remittance ID must be minimally 9 digits. Are any agencies storing any payment data on their systems(s)? Item 16 (pg. 15) - In #16 in Section 3.05, the State stipulates that the contractor shall provide the ability to pass the MID with each transaction. The MID shall accompany the transaction so that it will post to the account statement. Please describe the State s use of the word transaction in this instance. Is the State referring to the need that the MID# is passed during the funding-run? (i.e. settlement of funds to the State s deposit account) The STO has to have the ability to identify the State Agency and payment for each transaction. 7

8 Q-47. Item 16 (pg. 15) Understanding that the State accepts payments for an array of services, fees, taxes, and activities at over 600 sites; a. Has the State purchased EMV capable POS devices for all 600 locations? b. Are the already purchased EMV devices certified to EMV in the current end to end MD use or just EMV capable? A-47. a. No. b. MVA has purchased Ingenico ISC250s which are EMV capable. It is not certain if any other equipment currently owned is EMV capable. Q-48. A-48. Q-49. A-49. Q-50. A-50. Q-51. A-51. Q-52. A-52. Q-53. Item 16 (pg. 15) Please lists all devices, agencies, and gateways used so that we can access our current certified EMV matrix vs. your requirements. This information is not currently available. Please describe the problems the reconciliation departments are having in identifying transactions? There are issues with easily correlating transactions. In the cases of certain fees the dollar amounts of the transactions are the same and not easily identifiable. Do your agencies use any unique identifiers like invoice number on transactions? Often the unique identifier is a tax identification number which only complicates the transactions further. Item 19 (pg. 15) - States that the Contractor shall notify the Agency if a merchant is found to be non-compliant. Typically this type of audit would be performed by a QSA or the State s internal staff. Is this referring to an instance where there is a PCI breach or a general notification that an Agency is not PCI compliant? The State expects the selected Vendor to be involved in the process as well as the State s internal staff. Item 21 (pg. 16) - The State mentions the Ingenico ISC0850 device. Can you please verify the Ingenico device model number? Did you intend to show the model number as ISC0850? How is the State using the Ingenico device? Is the device connected to a Point-of-Sale system (or payment software), or is it being used as a stand-alone terminal? Please specify product names and versions of any VAR, middleware, or gateway with which it s being integrated. The correct model number is Ingenico ISC250. The State is using the Ingenico ISC250 to process merchant services transactions. Transactions are processed through Bank of America, N.A. Item 22 (pg. 16) - As per requirement (The Contractor shall allow convenience fees to be passed through to customers for credit card usage according to the most current card association rules) the State Treasurer requires the vendor to support convenience fees. However, "APPENDIX A - PRICE PROPOSAL" contains only per transaction pricing, and does 8

9 not allow for the submission of percentage based convenience fee pricing. Does the State Treasurer intend for the vendor to provide percentage based convenience fee services? A-53. Q-54. A-54. Q-55. A-55. Q-56. A-56. Q-57. A-57. Different Agencies assess different fees for accepting credit cards and some of them are percentage based. The selected Vendor must be able to support collection of percentage fees on credit card transactions. This is separate from what the selected Vendor charges for processing transactions. Item 22 (pg. 16) - States that the Contractor shall allow convenience fees to be passed through to customers. Is the State utilizing a solution/company that sets and collects these convenience fees or would the State set and collect the convenience fees? Please explain the solution and process in place today. Collection of convenience fees vary with State Agencies, however in most cases the convenience fee is charged and paid to the Agency separate from the payment collected. Item 22 (pg. 16) - States that the Contractor shall allow convenience fees to be passed through to customers. Is the State utilizing a solution/company that sets and collects these convenience fees or would the State set and collect the convenience fees? Please explain the solution and process in place today. See the response to Question 54 (above). What is the split of convenience fee transactions versus transactions where the cost is absorbed by the department for the volume provided in "Exhibit 1 - Merchant Services Transaction Volumes"? Not available. Can you provide a list of agencies and payment type which currently support convenience and service fee payment models? (What industry segments are currently processing convenience fees from?) Not available. SECTION 3.06 Q-58. A-58. Q-59. A-59. Q-60. A-60. Item 2 (pg. 16) Is next day funding required? How many Ingenico ISC0850 devices did the State purchase? The MVA purchased 375 Ingenico ISC250s for their operations. How many total cashiering stations are there? Not available. 9

10 Q-61. A-61. Q-62. A-62. Q-63. A-63. Q-64. A-64. Q-65. A-65. Q-66. A-66. Q-67. A-67. Q-68. Which cashiering software(s) (if any) does the State use? Depends upon the Agency. Item 12 (pg. 17) - States that the Offeror is responsible for purchasing, testing and implementation of all hardware and software required. It is anticipated that the State would purchase hardware required. Please further explain what the intention of the State is with this item. For the Agencies that will conduct merchant card services through this Contract, the selected Offeror is expected to provide a list of equipment for Agencies to purchase from to meet their individual needs (i.e., POS, SST, mobile devices ). The selected equipment must be PCI complaint. Item 14 (pg. 17) - Is Fidelity bonding required for this RFP? Yes, Security - Is P2P encryption and/or tokenization desired, required or optional for this procurement? If so, what types of security measures are in place today? The State fully expects the selected Vendor to have the highest standards in encryption, and where necessary tokenization. The State is seeking a Vendor who is as committed as the State to security for the safety of all. Section 3.07 (pg. 19) - Please further describe the transition assistance that the State is seeking should a new provider be selected. Generally, we are able to assist our clients with information needed but are unable to work with third parties due to privacy and confidentiality requirements in place. The State fully expects the selected Vendor to assist during transition to the fullest extent possible. Please describe the State s requirement for billing and payment of fees related to merchant services. All fees must be invoiced and paid by the appropriate Agency. Section c (pg. 21) - The Offeror s financial report is over 200 pages long. Can the Offeror provide an electronic copy on the technical CD in lieu of the one printed copy? Yes, an electronic copy of Offeror s financial report, or web link, is acceptable. Appendix A (pg. 28) - Echeck Guarantee Service fees are usually based on the dollar volume of checks, rather than the number of checks. Can the State provide the dollar volume of checks in 2014? A-68. $208,214,

11 Q-69. A-69. Q-70. A-70. Q-71. A-71. Q-72. A-72. Q-73. A-73. Q-74. A-74. Q-75. A-75. Request a copy of a transaction report that shows the rates and fees that was charged for processing of merchant cards; the copy can be one from over the last 90 days. Merchant card services are paid by the respective Agency and the STO does not have this information readily available. Rates and fees will however be tracked by STO under the new Contract. If available, please provide a list of payment networks (Vital/TSYS, NOVA/Elavon, FDMS, etc.) to which the State is currently authorizing and/or settling electronic payment transactions. The payment networks are selected by the provider at the current time. It appears that Maryland State Treasurer s Office will assess a service fee to citizens to offset processing expense. Which, if any, of the price structures below would you prefer? Variable percentage rate on all transactions Flat rate on all transactions Tiered rate based on transaction dollar amount Different Agencies assess different fees depending upon their mission. There will not be one across the board fee structure. Some Agencies charge a percentage of the amount owed, some a set per payment fee, some no fee at all. The fees for credit card use are mission based. Does the State anticipate that any additional departments, not currently accepting payments today, will desire to implement a merchant services program for payment acceptance in the future? While there is no guarantee, it is expected that most Agencies will use this program. Appendix B (pg. 30) - Please note whether or not there is a MBE/WBE requirement for this RFP. If there is a requirement, will an Offeror be disqualified if this is not met? See Section 2.16 Minority Business Enterprises. Visa and MasterCard require all acquirers to enter into contracts containing specific provisions with its merchants, provisions which are not included in the form contract and/or which provisions conflict with the terms and conditions of the RFP. Therefore, will the State agree to include the acquirer's standard terms and conditions as a part of the contract? The State will agree to comply with each issuer s Organizational Rules as long as the State has designated them as an acceptable provider. Because issuer organizations develop and revise their rules unilaterally, the State will not agree to incorporate the Organizational Rules as part of the Contract. Must the card present solution support EBT? 11

12 Q-76. A-76. Q-77. A-77. Q-78. A-78. Q-79. A-79. Q-80. A-80. Q-81. A-81. Q-82. A-82. Q-83. A-83. Must the Card not present solution support EBT? Which bank is the State Treasurer s banking services provider? (i.e. where funds are deposited)? Bank of America, N.A. Who is the State s current merchant provider? Bank of America, N.A. Please provide a copy of the current contract(s) that this procurement will be replacing. The Contract awarded as a result of this RFP will not be replacing the State s Depository Contract. Merchant card services will be a separate contract. What is the expiration date of the current contract? See response to Question 79. The term for the Contract for Merchant Card Services is provided in Section 3.09 of the RFP. Can the State please provide a Microsoft Word Version of the RFP? your request to the Procurement Officer at: procurement@treasurer.state.md.us. A copy of the RFP in Microsoft Word format will be sent to you by Reply . Can the State confirm where we should acknowledge receipt of amendments? Can we acknowledge receipt in the transmittal letter? Receipt of Amendments may be confirmed in the transmittal letter provided the acknowledgement of said amendment is not requested prior to the submission due date. Can the State Treasurer provide any additional information regarding the evaluation process? (i.e., specific points or weights applied to the evaluation criteria in sections 5.03 and 5.04) See Section V in its entirety regarding technical evaluation and price. 12