Office of the State Treasurer (OST) MERCHANT BANKCARD ...

OST RFP: BC-2019-01 November 21, 2019

Office of the State Treasurer (OST) MERCHANT BANKCARD SERVICES

RFP BC2019-01

Offeror’s Questions and Responses

November 21, 2019

1) 2.2.1. PROCESSING FOR MULTIPLE CARD ASSOCIATIONS AND BRANDS, C. The selected Vendor

must have the ability to support EBT payments.

Question: Can the state clarify “the ability to support EBT payments”? Does this mean to be

able to accept at the POS, route and obtain authorization?

Response: The vendor must be able to support the ability to accept EBT at Point of Sale

within state agency offices, and authorize and settle those transactions. Currently there

is only one agency (WSDOT Tolling) and one participating College (Washington State

University’s Global Market) accepting the EBT card.

2) 2.2.4. GOVERNMENT SERVICE FEE, B. The state has multiple agencies assessing a fee under the

card associations “Government Service Fee” program(s). Please describe how you would

support these Agencies under the scenarios below. Assume for each scenario the Agency is

collecting the fee both for in-person and for internet processing. For each, include how many

Merchant IDs would be required per location. If you cannot support a scenario, please provide

what your alternative would be.

Question: Can the state identify the agencies that are enrolled in the “Government Service Fee”

program(s)?

Response: Our current acquirer has registered the following agencies with the

appropriate card associations to assess the Government Service Fee:

Department of Agriculture

Department of Ecology

Department of Health

Department of Licensing

Department of Labor and Industries

Department of Revenue

Employment Security Department


Utilities and Transportation Commission

3) Exhibit B Volumes

Question: Can the state identify the agencies that are enrolled in the “Government Service Fee”

program(s) as well as break out the fee volumes similar to wat is referenced in Row 33 for L&I

“Internet w/svc fee”?

Response: Department of Agriculture – Charges fee on all transactions listed Department of Ecology – Charges fee on all transactions listed Department of Health– Charges fee on most transactions listed. Not included are their in-person processing, which is a minimal amount of transaction. Below is a listing of their October 2019 transaction for reference:

Department of Licensing – In Person Processing (VitalChek) assesses the fee

Department of Labor and Industries – Internet w/svc fee

Department of Revenue – Charges fee on all transactions listed

Employment Security Department – Charges fee on all transactions listed

Utilities and Transportation Commission – Charges fee on all transactions listed

4) 2.2.6. INTERNET PROCESSING, C. 3rd Party Processors

Question: Does the OST plan on replacing the existing Processor’s and/or Gateways (i.e., CyberSource, Payeezy, Authorize.net, FirstData PayPoint, Official Payments/ACI) with one vendor?

Response: State agencies have chosen processors for a variety of reasons. Some have purchased software or solutions that was certified to a specific processor and our current vendor was able to support that option. Some agencies had specific requirements like compatibility with restrictive card association rules surrounding either the Tax Fee program, the various convenience fee programs or most recently the Government Service Fee programs. The state must always take into consideration the effort required for conversion to new system(s) as well as the benefit of having a uniform processor across multiple agencies.

There is not a common back end system in use across state agencies. Each is responsible for their own IT infrastructure with requirements that are often different than similar agencies.

5) 5.5. PROCUREMENT INSTRUCTIONS, 5.5.1 Submitting Responses

MasterCard Visa Discover Debit Card Total

Agency Transactions Amount Transactions Amount TransactionsAmount Transactions Amount Transactions Amount

Department of Health - No Service Fee 237 10,825 894 49,969 12 826 887 55,556 2,030 117,176

Department of Health - With Service Fee 4,716 642,875 18,876 2,695,396 36 3,384 0 0 23,628 3,341,655


Question: To confirm, electronic copy of proposal is to be emailed to

[email protected] by 4:00 PM PT on December 6, 2019 and the 3 hard copies are due

by 4:00 PM PT on December 9, 2019 to:

OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER

ATTN: JEN MERCHANT, RFP Coordinator

Office of the State Treasurer

416 Sid Snyder Ave SW, Room 230

PO Box 40200

Olympia WA 98501-0200

Response: Yes, electronic copies are due by 4:00 PM PT December 6, 2019 and 3 hard copies are due by 4:00 PM PT December 9, 2019.

6) Question: What is the “Commodity Code” for the RFP that a Vendor uses for Vendor

Registration?

Response: The state’s default Merchant Category Code (MCC) is 9399. In certain circumstances, we have been required to use other MCCs. For example, our Department of Transportation was required by the card associations to switch from 9399 to MCCs in the Transportation Services category (MCCs 4000-4799) as appropriate. This includes 4111 for State Ferries and 4784 for WSDOT Tolling.

7) 2.2.9. INTERNET CHECK (ACH DEBIT) PROCESSING The State of Washington has multiple

Agencies who prefer to have one common processing option for both their bankcard and ACH

processing. Because of State law regarding the protection of public funds, all our ACH is

processed through the state’s concentration bank, currently US Bank. OST has the need for a

processor who can produce this NACHA formatted ACH file and forward it on to the Office of the

State Treasurer for further processing at our concentration bank.

Question: In reading this requirement it sounds as if the OST is looking to maintain their current process in place with US Bank for their bankcard and ACH processing because of State law; a) Is this process going to stay in place for some Agencies therefore it wouldn’t be a requirement for them and only other Agencies would still need the bankcard and ACH processing option with a new vendor and b) will ACH processing through other banks be allowed for the other Agencies?

Response: We need any solution that provides Internet ACH processing to produce a properly formatted ACH file and send it to the Office of the State Treasurer for further processing by our concentration bank (Currently US Bank.)

8) RFP Section Number 2.2.4.B.i. page 8

Question: What solution (software, terminal, etc.) is used for this service fee scenario?

Response: First Data’s PayPoint Gateway is the current solution.

9) RFP Section Number 2.2.4.B.iii. page 8

mailto:[email protected]


Question: What solution (software, terminal, etc.) is used for this service fee scenario?

Response: First Data’s PayPoint Gateway is the current solution.

10) RFP Section Number 2.2.4.B.v.i. page 8

Question: If the 3rd party vendor is charged the fee, is it acceptable to them to pay fees that

have been negotiated by the State? Or do they have their own processing arrangement where

they have negotiated fees to determine the appropriate service fee they wish to charge?

Response: Each agency has negotiated a separate agreement with the processor(s) to determine the Service Fee Charged and any additional processing fees. From our acquirer’s perspective, the merchant account(s) is still owned by the state agency and the fees are covered under the master contract for Merchant Bankcard Services.

11) RFP Section Number 2.2.5.B page 9

Question: How many Clover stations does the State have? Are they leased or owned by the

State?

Response: Currently Four Agencies/Colleges have the Clover Stations.

12) RFP Section Number 2.2.5.C.v. page 11

Question: If the current gateway can continue to be used, do the PINPads need to be re-injected

with new encryption keys? It appears that they do not but we wanted to confirm.

Response: These terminals are currently setup to use the LexisNexis Gateway that authorizes and settles through First Data’s Nashville Rapid Connect. If any of this changes, then new encryption keys would need to be injected.

13) RFP Section Number 2.2.6.c page 14

Question: Is it the intention of the State to retain ACI or are you looking for alternatives?

Response: The answer to this is highly dependent on the responses received and each agency’s need. Retention of ACI is a “nice to have” because of the time and cost of conversion, but the state would like to have a service like this as part of our Merchant Bankcard Services agreement for new processes.

14) RFP Section Number 3.1.2.D page 23

Question: This item (sic) requires settlement within 48 hours. Since funding cannot occur on

weekends, we typically state that funding would be within two business days. We assume this is

the State’s intent but wanted to confirm.


Response: Yes, the State’s intent was for settlement to occur within two banking days.

15) BC2019-01ExhibitB Volumes.xlsx

Question: For each in-scope department / agency / application, please indicate the:

a. Estimated number (#) of transactions per year by Credit/Debit Card

b. Estimated value ($) of transactions per year by Credit/Debit Card

c. Estimated number (#) of transactions per year by ACH

d. Estimated number ($) of transactions per year by ACH

Response: a. in the YTD 2019, 2018, 2017 and 2016 tabs, Column L has the total transactions.

Column J is just PIN Debit transactions.

b. in the YTD 2019, 2018, 2017 and 2016 tabs, Column M has the total net sales.

Column K is just PIN Debit transactions.

c. See worksheet posted below for FY 2019*

d. See worksheet posted below for FY 2019*

*Note, currently the TOLL file is NOT being produced by our current vendor. We are in a project to have our vendor produce this file for us with a go live in 2020. These numbers are included to give potential vendors an idea of the future anticipated volume. In addition, Employment Security Department just started their new Paid Family Medical Leave program in June 2019, so these numbers are not reflected below. For that program since June, they have had approximately 90,000 transactions processed as ACH transactions.


Department of Health = files DOHOP and DOHP

Ecology = ECY1

Department of Transportation Tolling = TOLL

$10,815,587.86 sales

491,140 transactions

$24,206.00 reunds257 transactions

State of Washington

Date: 11/18/2019

Time: 8:42 am Transaction Settlement ReportFiscal Year 2019 - By Effective Date

DEBITS

Jul-2018 Aug-2018 Sep-2018 Oct-2018 Nov-2018 Dec-2018

0.00 1,038.00 402.00

TotalJan-2019 Feb-2019 Mar-2019 Apr-2019 May-2019 Jun-2019

DOHOP 0.00 205.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 857.00 1,133.25 6,994.50 442.60 $11,072.55

0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 4 1 3 2 14

DOHP 126,822.00 145,960.00 123,887.50 146,315.00 155,276.50 121,665.50 166,115.00 136,402.00 134,184.50 176,826.00 153,036.50 138,628.50 $1,725,119.00

1,836 2,004 1,798 1,932 2,138 1,726

32,911.00 31,346.45

23,7682,196 1,884 1,930 2,292 2,130 1,902

ECY1 105,672.20 53,788.00 58,289.00 47,884.00 33,689.66 28,255.19 71,846.99 47,145.00 62,748.00 122,340.00 $695,915.49

1,678988 302 318 260 187 108

0.00 0.00 0.00

CREDITS

4,692153 112 139 169 278

DOHOP 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.00

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

DOHP 326.00 245.00 860.50 854.50 1,482.00 1,168.50 6,284.50 72.50 245.00 353.00 304.50 866.50 $13,062.50

4 4 6 6 16 18

0.00 0.00

13458 2 4 4 6 6

ECY1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.00

0 0 0 0 0 0

5 123

00 0 0 0 0 0

5 15 13 6 5 1

298.00 59.30 49.65 89.90 $11,143.50

16 12 8 22 15

462,666

TOLL 426.75 180.00 1,012.65 516.60 664.75 124.50 519.50 7,201.90

695,276.26 $8,383,480.82

38,487 36,538 38,333 32,657 35,200 37,744 37,107 37,777

648,397.30 649,636.50 565,510.83 638,769.65 710,864.39 685,740.27TOLL 750,781.16 833,717.02 733,348.55 755,732.75 715,706.14

42,632 44,435 40,500 41,256


16) BC2019-01ExhibitB Volumes.xlsx

Question: For each in-scope department / agency / application, please indicate the estimated

number (#) of POS workstations / devices.

Response: Below is a listing of existing Point of Sales devices by agency:

Agriculture 1 FD130

Admin for the Courts

Board of Accountancy

Statute Law Committee(Code Revisor) 1 FD130

Corrections

Criminal Justice Training Commission

Dept of Early Learning

Dept of Ecology

Department of Enterprise Services 2 BridgePay

Dept of Financial Institutions

Dept of Health

Dept of Licensing 1127 LexisNexis

Department of Natural Resources

Dept of Revenue

Dept of Social and Health Services


Eastern WA Historical Society 2 FD130/Clover

Fish and Wildlife 8 FD130

Gambling Commission

Historical Society 1 Vx570

Legislative Gift Center 3 FD130

Labor and Industries

Office of Insurance Commissioner

OMWBE

Office of the Supr of Pub Ins (OSPI)

Parks and Recreation Commission-11

Parks APS

Parks EA 4 FD130/Clover

Parks EA CRS

Parks HQ 3 FD130/FD400ti

Parks NW 6

Parks NW CRS FD130

Parks Rsrv CRS

Parks Wireless 42 FD400GT


Parks SMS

Parks SW 10 FD130/Clover

Parks SW CRS

Pollution Liability Insurance Agency

Secretary of State

Utilities and Transportation Commission 2 Vx570

Veterans Affairs 5 FD130

Dept of Transportation (WSDOT) FD130

Liquor and Cannabis Board

Washington State Patrol

Universities

University of Washington

Eastern WA University 14 FD130/FD400GT

Western WA University 4 T7PLUS

512/T4210

Washington State University 48 FD130/T4220

State Board for Community and Technical Colleges -27

Grays Harbor College

Highline 1 FD130

Green River

Renton Tech

South Puget Sound

Shoreline

Bellevue

Bellingham Tech 3 FD130

Skagit Valley College

Tacoma

Walla Walla

Whatcom

Olympic College

Pierce College

Wenatchee Valley College 2 FD130

Centralia College 6 FD130

Everett 3 FD130

Seattle 7 FD130/CloverS


Community Colleges of Spokane 15 FD130

Edmonds

Bates Tech

Clark College

Lower Columbia College

Lake Washington Institute of Technology 2 FD130

Big Bend Community College

Clover Park Technical College

Cascadia Community College

17) BC2019-01ExhibitB Volumes.xlsx AND 2.2.4 AND BC2019-01ExhibitD Fee Schedule xlsx

Question: For each in-scope department / agency / application, please indicate the target-

funding model:

a. No payer-paid Government Service Fee is applied. RFP-Vendor’s solution is State/Agency-

funded (a.k.a. “absorbed”) in an interchange pass through model with the RFP-Vendor being

funded by fees to be identified in BC2019-01ExhibitD Fee Schedule.xlsx charged to the

State/Agency.

b. Payer-paid Government Service Fee is applied and retained by the Vendor in a Managed

Model under which the State/Agency bears no processing expenses (2.2.4-B-i).

c. Payer-paid Government Service Fee is applied and retained by the Agency. RFP-Vendor’s

solution is State/Agency-funded (a.k.a. “absorbed”) in an interchange pass through model

with the RFP-Vendor being funded by fees to be identified in BC2019-01ExhibitD Fee

Schedule.xlxs charged to the State/Agency. (2.2.4-B-ii).

d. Payer-paid Government Service Fee is applied and retained by the Agency’s existing 3rd Party

Vendor. RFP-Vendor’s solution is State/Agency-funded (a.k.a. “absorbed”) in an interchange

pass through model with the RFP-Vendor being funded by fees to be identified in BC2019-

01ExhibitD Fee Schedule.xlxs charged to the State/Agency. (2.2.4-B-iv).

Response: a. Our contract does not support this option currently. Reference RFP section 2.2.4Bi.

b. On YTD 2019 Tab, Row 4 (Dept of Agriculture), Row 17 (Dept of Health) and Row 25

(Employment Security). reference RFP section 2.2.4Bii

c. Department of Licensing’s Professional License System just went live with this model

in Nov 2019. This was facilitated by a change in VISA’s rules that allowed it. No

volumes available yet. Reference RFP section 2.2.4Biii.

d. On YTD 2019 tab: row 21 (Dept of Revenue), row 33 (Labor and Industries), row 20

(Dept. of Licensing) and row 50 (Utilities and Transportation Commission).

Reference RFP section 2.2.4Biv

18) 2.2.5 page 10

Question: Does Chas Footprint POS interface to a gateway for authorization/settlement?


Response: Currently First Data Nashville Rapid Connect.

19) 2.2.5 Page 11

Question: Does LexisNexis Gateway interface to a middleware/gateway for

authorization/settlement?

Response: LexisNexis Gateway on Nashville Rapid Connect.

20) 2.2.2 page 7

Question: Debits to OST for fees are not permitted. Can the provider debit Agencies separately

for their related fees?

Response: Most banking for state agencies is managed by the Office of the State Treasurer and most settlements are to the state’s concentration or concentration subsidiary account(s). By default, we require fees to be invoiced. In the case of those agencies and colleges who might have settlement to an account outside the Treasury we can leave it to those agencies and colleges whether they would like to allow a debit for fees.

21) Page 5 – Section II – Statement of Work 2.1 B – The state’s four (4) year Colleges and

Universities are responsible for their own banking agreements, including those for Merchant

Bankcard Services.

Question: Will those four-year Colleges and Universities have the option to participate under

the State of Washington Master Agreement?

Response: Yes, the 4 Year Colleges and Universities have the option to participate. This is voluntary for them, which is why the summary page of the volumes shows the overall total with those currently participating and without.

22) Page 8 - Section 2.2.5. Stand Alone Equipment

Question: Please provide a description of Code Reviser and how this solution is being used.

What payment gateway is being used with this solution?

Response: The Code Reviser is an Agency within the State that deals with laws and

amendments for the State of Washington. Code Reviser uses an in-person terminal to

accept payments for publications.

23) Page 10 – Section 2.2.5. Front of House Equipment to Backend Processing Server(s)

Question: Please confirm which payment gateway is being used in conjunction with Ventek for

DES Parking kiosk.


Response: Ventek Car Gateway to Rapid Connect on First Data’s Nashville platform.

24) Page 10 – Section 2.2.5. Front of House Equipment to Backend Processing Server(s)

Question: Please confirm which payment gateway is being used in conjunction with Cash

Footprint POS for DES Surplus.

Response: Bridgepay to FDC Nashville

25) Page 12 – Section 2.2.6 Hosted Payment Page

Question: Are any of the agencies looking to replace CyberSource or First Data PayPoint?

a. How are these solutions being used today? Card present and card not present

transactions? e-Commerce?

Response: The answer to this is highly dependent on the responses received and each agency’s need. Retention of current processors is a “nice to have” because of the time and cost of conversion, but we will evaluate responses on how they can provide equal services like we have today along with any enhancements that might be offered. a. For a Hosted Payment environment, these are all card not present transactions, mostly

e-Commerce. There are a few circumstances where an agency might use the back-office

functionality of the processor(s) to manually key enter a transaction, usually from a

phone call.

26) Page 7 – Section 2.2.4 Government Service Fee

Question: Please confirm if the state is looking to pass a service fee in both a card present and

card not present environments.

a. Do you currently reconcile the service fee, or do you have a processor managed

program in place?

b. If currently processing a service fee in a card present environment, can you describe the

current hardware / software, along with agency that is accepting?

Response: Yes, we have agencies currently passing the Government Service Fee in both card present and card not present environments and will expect our vendor to support both. a. Both:

i. (see RFP section 2.2.4Bii) – Agriculture, Dept of Health, Dept of Licensing’s

Professional Licenses and Employment Security Department all have the service

fee settled to them and reconcile themselves

ii. (see RFP section 2.2.4Biv) – Dept of Revenue, Labor and Industries and Utilities

and Transportation Commission all have a 3rd party (ACI) who receives and

reconciles the service fee for these agencies.

b. see RFP 2.2.5 c iv for Department of Licensing’s Vitalcheck process.


27) Page 15 – Section 2.2.6 Internet Processing

Question: Please advise which versions of PeopleSoft, SalesForce, and Microsoft Dynamics are

currently in use.

Response: Our Community and Technical College system are currently in a process to convert their backend system(s) to Peoplesoft: FSCM 9.2, HCM 9.2, and CS 9.2.

We currently have no agencies taking bankcards using SalesForce, but there has been interest in Salesforce Commerce Cloud (unified B2B and B2C).

We have one agency using Microsoft Dynamics 365 for Finance and Operations, Enterprise v7.3, in conjunction with a hosted payment processor.

28) Page 11 – 2.2.6 Hosted Payment Page

Question: Can you describe the current need for tokenization if in a hosted payment

environment? Is there a current agency that is leveraging a solution like this now?

Response: Currently there is no agency doing this. Department of Transportation has a need for tokenization, but they use an api to pass transactions.

29) Page 11 – 2.2.6 Hosted Payment Page

Question: Does the processing platform provide tokenization for those Agencies with recurring

transactions?

Response: Currently there is no agency doing this. Department of Transportation has a need for tokenization, but they use an api to pass transactions.

30) Page 5 – Section 1.2 Authority

Question: Would OST consider awarding the merchant bankcard contract to multiple bidders

and allowing the agencies to choose their preferred service provider? This approach is

becoming more common for bankcard processing services because it allows state governments

to leverage statewide buying power while offering participating agencies the flexibility to choose

the provider that can best meet their needs.

Response: Not under this procurement.

31) Page 32 – Section 5.5.2 Transition Plan

Question: Does the State’s current processing agreement allow for transition time past the

contract end date of June 30, 2020, to allow for conversion to a new system?


Response: If necessary, the current agreement could be amended to allow further transition time.

32) Page 27 – Section 5.3 Schedule of Procurement Activities

Question: Due to the size and complexity of this Merchant Bankcard Services RFP, would the

State consider extending the Offeror’s Proposal Due Date beyond December 6, 2019, to allow

Offeror’s more time to provide the State with a thorough response that fully addresses each of

the requirements?

Response: The State needs to receive proposals by December 6, 2019 in order to select the Apparently Successful Offeror before the end of the year. The current contract expires in July 2019 and we need time to negotiate the contract and have time to transition to a new vendor, if necessary, before July 2019. Offeror’s proposals are due to OST by 4:00PM PT December 6, 2019 as published in the RFP. Please refer to Section 5.5.1 for complete details.

33) Regarding 2.2.1.c

Question: How may locations accept EBT?

Response: The vendor must be able to support the ability to accept EBT at Point of Sale within state agency offices, and authorize and settle those transactions. Currently there is only one agency (WSDOT Tolling) and one participating College (Washington State University’s Global Market) accepting the EBT card. Total of 4 locations.

34) Regarding 2.2.5.a

Question: Will the state consider lease terms tied to the initial term of the agreement?

Response: We will consider all options a responder puts forth.

35) Regarding 2.2.13, of the 1104 MIDs

Question: How many fall under each PCI level 3 & 4?

Response: We have the following list by agency. Approximately 60% of the individual MIDs will be under agencies/colleges at level 3 or 4:

Agency Name PCI

Ievel

Dept of Licensing 2

WSDOT-Tolling - SAQ-D 2

WSDOT-Ferries 2

WSLCB - SAQ-AEP 3


Dept of Revenue 3

Fish & Wildlife -SAQ-D 3

Dept of Labor & Industries 3

Office of Insurance Commissionioner- SAQ-A-EP 3

Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction - SAQ-A 3

Dept of Agriculture -SAQ-BIP 4

Admin Office of the Courts - SAQ-A 4

WA Board of Accountancy - SAQ-AEP 4

Code Revisers Office - SAQ-D 4

Correctional Industries - SAQ-AEP 4

Criminal Justice - SAQ-A 4

Dept of Early Learning - SAQ-A 4

Dept. of Ecology - SAQ-A 4

Dept of Enterprise Services - SAQ-D 4

Dept of Financial Institutions -SAQ-A 4

Dept of Health - SAQ-D 4

Dept of Social & Health Services -SAQ-A 4

Employment Security Dept. - SAQ-A 4

Gambling Commission - SAQ-AEP 4

Guaranteed Education Tuition- SAQ-D 4

Historical Society - SAQ-D 4

Legislative Gift Center - SAQ-D 4

WA State Parks - SAQ-D 3

Secretary of State -SAQ-D 3

Utilities & Transportation Commission - SAQ-A 4

Veteran's Affairs - SAQ-BIP 4

WA State Patrol - SAQ-D 4

Participants Name

Washington State University 2

Western Washington University 3

Eastern Washington University 4

University of WA 4

Community College Name

Grays Harbor College - SAQ-AEP 4

Highline Community College- SAQ-D 4

Green River Community College- SAQ-AEP 4

Renton Technical College- SAQ-A 4

South Puget Sound Community College- SAQ-AEP 4

Shoreline Community College- SAQ-A 4


Bellevue Community College- SAQ-D 3

Bellingham Technical College- SAQ-D 4

Skagit Valley College- SAQ-AEP 4

Tacoma Community College- SAQ-AEP 4

Walla Walla Community College- SAQ-A 4

Whatcom Community College- SAQ-D 4

Olympic College- SAQ-D 4

Pierce College- SAQ-AEP 4

Wenatchee Valley College- SAQ-D 4

Centralia College- SAQ-D 4

Everett Community College- SAQ-D 4

Seattle Community College- SAQ-D 4

Community Colleges of Spokane- SAQ-D 4

Edmonds Community College- SAQ-AEP 4

Bates College- SAQ-AEP 4

Clark College- SAQ-D 4

Lower Columbia College- SAQ-D 4

Lake Washington Institute of Technology- SAQ-D 4

Big Bend Community College- SAQ-AEP 4

Clover Park Technical College- SAQ-AEP 4

Cascadia College- SAQ-AEP 4

WA SBCTC- SAQ-A 4

36) Question: Regarding Exhibit B, for the locations assessing a service fee can you share the annual

volume processed by credit card, ACH, and check? As well as the annual numbers of credit card

payments, ACH, and check payments?

Response: For credit cards, please see RFP Exhibit B(volumes):

a. On YTD 2019 Tab, Row 4 (Dept of Agriculture), Row 17 (Dept of Health) and Row

25 (Employment Security). reference RFP section 2.2.4Bii

b. Department of Licensing’s Professional License System just went live with this

model in Nov 2019. This was facilitated by a change in VISA’s rules that allowed

it. No volumes available yet. Reference RFP section 2.2.4Biii.

c. On YTD 2019 tab: row 21 (Dept of Revenue),row 33 (Labor and Industries) and

row 50 (Utilities and Transportation Commission). Reference RFP section

2.2.4Biv

For ACH please see the answer to question 15 above that has ACH volumes


37) Question: Is the State looking to consolidate and utilize a single payment processor?

Response: Only if that single payment processor can support the requirements outlined in the RFP. It was not our intent to only require a single processing option, since we have not yet seen a processor that can do everything for every agency’s specific business need.

38) 2.2.6 C. and 2.2.8

Question: Please clarify the differences between 3rd Party Processors and 3rd Party Vendors, and

if possible provide example of 3rd Party Vendor agencies might use.

Response: Under our current agreement, a 3rd party processor is a transaction

processing option that is not included under our agreement, but is able to use Merchant

IDs issued by our acquirer and authorize and settle transactions with our acquirer.

Current examples include ACI, CyberSource Enterprise and Authorize.net.

A 3rd Party vendor is usually a software or service provider that is being used by the

agency to build a new system. Often these new systems have a card processing

component and may even use a 3rd party processor. We need to know what your

requirements are when our provider is touching card data at any point in the

transaction.

39) 2.2.8 B – As described in this scenario, where a 3rd party is certified to their own processor

Question: Please provide clarification that the 3rd party is not referring to the bank card

partner/settlement bank of the processor.

Response: A 3rd Party vendor is usually a software or service provider that is being used by the agency to build a new system. Often these new systems have a card processing component and may even use a 3rd party processor. We need to know what your requirements are when our provider is touching card data at any point in the transaction.

40) 1)A – Vendor must have the knowledge and expertise to advise the State on any changes to law

or card associated rules that would affect our ability to charge the Government Service Fee.

Questions: Can we request to change language to the below as there are no laws made by the Cardbrands?

i. Vendor must have the knowledge and expertise to advise the State on any changes to

Regulations or card association rules that would affect our ability to charge the

Government Service Fee.

Response: This can be negotiate language. We do however rely upon our partners if there is any change in law, regulations and/or card association rules that could affect our ability to charge a service fee.


41) RE 2.2.4 – For the “Managed” Convenience Fee Section

42) Questions:

a. Could OST supply the volumes processed for each vendor?

b. Could OST supply merchant statements showing interchange for each vendor?

c. Is AMEX (American Express) being utilized for the Managed Convenience Fee today with

each vendor?

Response: a. See RFP Exhibit B:On YTD 2019 tab: row 21 (Dept of Revenue),row 33 (Labor and

Industries), row 20 (Dept of Licensing) and row 50 (Utilities and Transportation

Commission). Reference RFP section 2.2.4Biv

b. Because the Merchant Accounts are setup under the state’s master contract, that

contract pricing is applied. All interchange and assessments are pass through from

the card associations and are based on card type presented. Statements are bases

on Merchant ID, so it would be a large project to produce the approximate 2000

pages+ of statements for these just for one month.

c. Yes, American Express is being used. Amex is 2.15% per our agreement with

American Express.

43) RE page 11 – For the DOL

Question: Please identify the 800+ Ingenico make/model.

Response: The information provided in the RFP was out of date. Dept. of Licensing now have 1127 Verifone Vx805 terminal that replaced the Ingenico equipment. These connect to the LexisNexis Gateway and authorize and settle through First Data’s Nashville Rapid Connect.

44) Page 9 – RE 2.2.5 A

Question: For the agencies and colleges with stand alone terminals, please identify the stand

alone hardware used for each agency and college identified under 2.2.5 A.

Response:

Agriculture 1 FD130




Corrections



Dept of Ecology




Dept of Health



Dept of Revenue





Gambling Commission





OMWBE



Parks APS


Parks EA CRS


Parks NW 6

Parks NW CRS FD130

Parks Rsrv CRS


Parks SMS


Parks SW CRS


Secretary of State




Liquor and Cannibis Board



Universities




512/T4210




Highline 1 FD130

Green River

Renton Tech

South Puget Sound

Shoreline

Bellevue



Tacoma

Walla Walla

Whatcom

Olympic College

Pierce College



Everett 3 FD130



Edmonds

Bates Tech

Clark College






45) Question: What standalone make/model are you using today?

Response: Our standard issued Point of Sale Terminal is the First Data FD130 Duo.


46) Question: Which ones are EMB enabled?

Response: We require all new terminals process EMV transactions. Our standard terminal, the FD130 is EMV capable.

47) Question: What gateway is used with Ventek parking?

Response: Ventek Car Gateway to Rapid Connect on First Data’s Nashville platform.

48) Question: What gateway is used with Cash Footprint POS?

Response: BridgePay Network Gateway to FDC Nashville.

49) Question: What gateway is used with Gateway ticketing?

Response: Our State Ferries division of the Depart. Of Transportation is using Galaxy POS Version 7.3.20.10.89 with Gateway Ticketing that is connecting directly to Fiserv.

50) Question: What devices are used today with the DOL that require being replaced at 200

locations?

Response: The information provided in the RFP was out of date. Dept. of Licensing now have 1127 Verifone Vx805 terminals that replaced the Ingenico equipment.

51) Question: The DOL, UTC, LNI and DOR use ACI, which product of theirs is being used along with

device types?

Response: All are using the hosted payment product Official Payments

52) Question: How many departments charge a service/convenience fee, and what third party

processors is the state using for this?

Response: Currently, seven of our agencies charge a service fee. Four agencies use PayPoint, two agencies use Official Payments, and one uses VitalChek as the processor.

53) Question: What specific equipment is in place today at the locations in which you noted have

stand-alone terminals?

Response:

Agriculture 1 FD130





Corrections



Dept of Ecology



Dept of Health



Dept of Revenue





Gambling Commission





OMWBE



Parks APS


Parks EA CRS


Parks NW 6

Parks NW CRS FD130

Parks Rsrv CRS


Parks SMS


Parks SW CRS


Secretary of State







Universities




512/T4210




Highline 1 FD130

Green River

Renton Tech

South Puget Sound

Shoreline

Bellevue



Tacoma

Walla Walla

Whatcom

Olympic College

Pierce College



Everett 3 FD130



Edmonds

Bates Tech

Clark College







54) Question: Which technology solutions for payment processing are you leveraging to implement

“Government Service Fee” programs today? Please also confirm the “3rd Party Vendor”

mentioned that is leveraged today.

Response: Currently, seven of our agencies charge a service fee. Four agencies use

PayPoint, two agencies use 3rd party provider Official Payments, and one uses 3rd party

provider VitalChek as the processor.

55) Question: Does each agency have its own deposit account or does everything fund to a

concentration account?

Response: Most banking for state agencies is managed by the Office of the State

Treasurer and most settlements are to the state’s concentration or concentration

subsidiary account(s). By default we require fees to be invoiced. In the case of those

agencies and colleges who might have settlement to an account outside the Treasury

we can leave it to those agencies and colleges whether they would like to allow a debit

for fees.

56) Question: Can you please confirm the (three) vendors that varying agencies use to manage a

cardholder fee (i.e. Service Fee) assessment?

Response: Currently, seven of our agencies charge a service fee. Four agencies use

PayPoint, two agencies use 3rd party provider Official Payments, and one uses 3rd party

provider VitalChek as the processor.

57) Question: Please confirm the vendor that DOL is using for all hardware and software necessary

for face-to-face and telephone transactions. Also, please confirm that this vendor leverages the

LexisNexis Gateway in a semi-integrated configuration with Ingenico hardware (Pin Pads).

Please provide the model of the Ingenico Pin Pad.

Response: The information provided in the RFP was out of date. Dept. of Licensing now have 1127 Verifone Vx805 terminal that replaced the Ingenico equipment. They are using the LexisNexis Gateway.

58) In section 2.2.8. (B), the State indicates: “Agency hires a 3rd party Agency program…3rd party has

their own processor they have already certified to.”

Question: Please expound upon this scenario, given that “If” the 3rd party has exclusivity with

another processor, how would we (offeror) be involved?

Response: Our current agreement allow us to “bring our own processor” as long as they can use our provider’s merchant IDs and can authorize and settle the transaction to one


of our provider’s back end gateways. For example if one of our agencies were to purchase a new ERP system that already had the programing in place to authorize and settle transactions using Processor A’s api; we currently have the flexibility to allow this if Processor A can meet our provider’s requirements (which also includes registration with our provider as a 3rd party service provider). If this was not an option, then the agency would have to pay their software vendor to build an interface for them, usually at a substantial cost.

59) Question: As it relates to Internet Check (ACH Debit) Processing, can STO please provide the

dollar ($) volume and payment count (#) at the agency level? (annualized or avg. monthly)

Response: See worksheet posted below for FY 2019*

*Note, currently the TOLL file is NOT being produced by our current vendor. We are in a project to have our vendor produce this file for us with a go live in 2020. These numbers are included to give potential vendors an idea of the future anticipated volume. Also, Employment Security Department just started their new Paid Family Medical Leave program in June 2019, so these numbers are not reflected below. For that program since June they have had approximately 90,000 transactions processed as ACH transactions.


Department of Health = files DOHOP and DOHP

Ecology = ECY1

Department of Transportation Tolling = TOLL

$10,815,587.86 sales

491,140 transactions

$24,206.00 refunds257 transactions

TOLL 750,781.16 833,717.02 733,348.55 755,732.75 715,706.14

42,632 44,435 40,500 41,256

648,397.30 649,636.50 565,510.83 638,769.65 710,864.39 685,740.27 695,276.26 $8,383,480.82

38,487 36,538 38,333 32,657 35,200 37,744 37,107 37,777 462,666

TOLL 426.75 180.00 1,012.65 516.60 664.75 124.50 519.50 7,201.90 298.00 59.30 49.65 89.90 $11,143.50

16 12 8 22 15 5 15 13 6 5 1

0

5 123

00 0 0 0 0 0

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.00

0 0 0 0 0

ECY1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

13458 2 4 4 6 6

0.00

866.50 $13,062.50

4 4 6 6 16 18

1,168.50 6,284.50 72.50 245.00 353.00 304.50DOHP 326.00 245.00 860.50 854.50 1,482.00

0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00 0.00 $0.00

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

187 108

0.00 0.00 0.00

CREDITS

153 112

DOHOP 0.00

71,846.99 47,145.00 62,748.00 122,340.00 $695,915.49

1,678 4,692139 169 278

ECY1 105,672.20 53,788.00 58,289.00 47,884.00 33,689.66

988 302 318 260

32,911.00 31,346.45

23,7682,196 1,884 1,930 2,292 2,130 1,902

28,255.19

1,836 2,004 1,798 1,932 2,138 1,726

136,402.00 134,184.50 176,826.00 153,036.50 138,628.50 $1,725,119.00

2 14

DOHP 126,822.00 145,960.00 123,887.50 146,315.00 155,276.50 121,665.50 166,115.00

0 1 1 4 1 3

857.00 1,133.25 6,994.50 442.60 $11,072.55

0 2 0 0 0

DOHOP 0.00 205.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,038.00 402.00

TotalJan-2019 Feb-2019 Mar-2019 Apr-2019 May-2019 Jun-2019

State of Washington

Date: 11/18/2019

Time: 8:42 am Transaction Settlement ReportFiscal Year 2019 - By Effective Date

DEBITS

Jul-2018 Aug-2018 Sep-2018 Oct-2018 Nov-2018 Dec-2018


60) Question: As it relates to Internet Check (ACH Debit) Processing, if an offeror’s technology will

not support routing ACH transactions to a separate end-point whereby the ACH data is

aggregated, batched and transmitted to STO for further processing, does that preclude the

offeror from proposing on (and being awarded) the “Merchant Bankcard Services” outlined

within the broader RFP?

Response: The section on Internet Check (ACH DEBIT) Processing is not a mandatory requirement. However, if the choice came down to the top two responders and everything else was equal; the ability to provide this service could be the deciding factor because of the convenience and portability this provides the state. If you are able to process ACH Debits, but are unable to adhere to the deliverables outlined in this section, please provide your suggested alternative solution(s).

61) Question: How many standalone Terminals does the State of Washington use? Can you please

provide a breakout including the Make and Model of the standalone terminals in addition to the

quantity of each Make/Model?

Response:

Agriculture 1 FD130




Corrections



Dept of Ecology



Dept of Health



Dept of Revenue





Gambling Commission






OMWBE



Parks APS


Parks EA CRS


Parks NW 6

Parks NW CRS FD130

Parks Rsrv CRS


Parks SMS


Parks SW CRS


Secretary of State






Universities




512/T4210




Highline 1 FD130

Green River

Renton Tech

South Puget Sound

Shoreline


Bellevue



Tacoma

Walla Walla

Whatcom

Olympic College

Pierce College



Everett 3 FD130



Edmonds

Bates Tech

Clark College






62) Question: Is it the State’s intent to contract the payment gateway and Acquiring/Processing

services together? Said another way… Is the state in-contract with CyberSource (and/or other

gateway providers) directly, or do you utilize these technologies under the existing Merchant

Services agreement?

Response: At a minimum we do need to have the Acquiring services and at least one processing option for in-person, internet hosted payments, api integrated payments (both in-person and internet), and mobile payments. Under our current agreement, we have 6 different processors that our provider makes available to us. We do not have to contract separately with any of these 7 options, which makes it much easier for our agencies and colleges to start new payment programs.

63) Question: As it relates to the Clover Station:

a. How many Stations do you currently have?

b. Which Clover Printer does you use and how many?

c. Are you using a Clover Cash Drawer and/or other accessories and how many?

d. Are you tethering a Clover Mini to the Clover Station today?

Response: a. Four


b. PS500 and four.

c. Yes, and four cash drawers.

d. No.

Office of the State Treasurer (OST) MERCHANT BANKCARD ...

Documents

Transcript of Office of the State Treasurer (OST) MERCHANT BANKCARD ...