Addendum #1. To: Interested Vendors Melody Greig, Richardson RISD Chris Carr Plante Moran Date: 6/21/2018. From:

Transcription

1 Addendum #1 To: From: Interested Vendors Melody Greig, Richardson RISD Chris Carr Plante Moran Date: 6/21/2018 Re: RICHARDSON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT Finance/HR/Payroll System Request for Competitive Sealed Proposals (RFCSP) # 1521 Below are clarifications and answers to vendor questions to date: 1. Based on the short response deadline of July 11th and the detail that RISD and Plante Moran have asked for we are requesting a two week extension on the response deadline. 2. With the July 4th holiday (and the number of people who take vacation during that time period), will RISD consider an extension to the due date? (preferably 2 weeks to Jul 25) 3. Will proposing parties be required to attend meetings onsite at Richardson ISD? 4. Can proposals be submitted by ? Richardson ISD is unable to extend the due date for RFCSP responses. RFCSP responses will be due on July 11th, 2018 at 1:30 PM CT, as stated in Section 1.3 of the RFP. Please see response to Question 1 above. Proposing parties may be required to attend product demonstrations onsite at Richardson ISD, anticipated to be held during the week of August 27 th, Proposals may not be submitted by . Proposals must be delivered to the following address: Richardson Independent School District 1123 S. Greenville Ave. Richardson, Texas ATTN: Ms. Melody Greig Please see Section 1.4 of the RFCSP for proposal submission requirements.

2 5. Would the district prefer to have the professional services travel costs included in the proposal or billed as incurred? 6. Can companies from outside the United States respond to the RFP? 7. Will a listing of the vendors that participated in the pre-bid call be provided? Vendors should provide estimated Travel & Lodging costs in their proposal and pricing. The required Pricing form in Appendix A of the RFCSP includes a line item for Travel & Lodging costs under the Services section. Vendors are to provide estimated travel costs on this line, and indicate whether the costs are Time & Materials or Fixed Fee in the space provided. Companies based outside of the United States may submit proposals; however, proposals and responding parties must comply with all RFCSP requirements, including, but not limited to the following: Section 1.18.E (Applicable and Governing Law Clause): The Agreement shall be subject to all laws of the Federal Government of the United States of America and to the laws of the State of Texas. All duties of either party shall be legally performable in Texas. The applicable law for any legal disputes arising out of this contract shall be the law of (and all actions hereunder shall be brought in) the State of Texas, and the form and venue for such disputes shall be of the appropriate district, county or justice court C (Hosting Requirements): All data must reside in the United States at all times. Yes, a listing of vendors and parties who participated in the Pre-bid Conference Call has been provided at the end of this Addendum.

3 8. Will RISD consider an option to upgrade/procure and implement/reimplement existing EBS components? 9. If RISD will consider implementing/re-implementing existing EBS components, will you consider a HYBRID solution consisting of both on-premise and cloud applications? 10. Again, if RISD will consider implementing/re-implementing existing EBS components, will RISD consider hosting these applications in the cloud (IaaS and PaaS)? Richardson ISD will consider proposals to upgrade and re-implement Oracle E- Business Suite; however, Richardson ISD has a strong preference for vendors to propose with ERP solutions that incorporate modern technological capabilities and best practices for K-12. Vendors who support multiple ERP products should respond with the solution that most closely matches Richardson ISD s needs as stated in the RFCSP and Functional Specifications. Richardson ISD will consider hybrid solutions as described in the question. Vendors responding with hybrid solutions should provide detailed descriptions of all infrastructure, hardware, and additional services required for such a solution in their proposals, and should explain any advantages or disadvantages of such a solution. Richardson ISD will consider proposals to upgrade and re-implement Oracle E- Business Suite and host the application in the cloud. Richardson ISD has a strong preference for vendors to propose with ERP solutions that incorporate modern technological capabilities and best practices for K-12. Vendors who support multiple ERP products should respond with the solution that most closely matches Richardson ISD s needs as stated in the RFCSP and Functional Specifications.

4 11. Is RISD fixed to the implementation timeline presented in the RFP or can vendors propose a recommended timeline and then discuss further the positives and negatives with each project timeline if selected as a finalist for the project? 12. On section 2.5 the RFP states RISD is looking for pricing on both SaaS and Premise based software. Will bids be disqualified for only submitting pricing on SaaS? 13. Is RISD open to alternate proposals on schedule and sequencing? Example: Finance going live in parallel. 14. What are the expectations for Roadmaps? i. Application Development Roadmap ii. Technical Architecture Roadmap iii. Current Architecture Diagram Richardson ISD will accept proposals with alternative recommended timelines; however, Richardson ISD has a preference to maintain the key go-live dates outlined in the Implementation Schedule presented in Section 1.3 of the RFCSP. Vendors proposing alternative timelines should provide as much detail as possible regarding schedules, key milestone and go-live dates, and the rationale for their alternative timeline recommendations. Additional detail regarding Implementation Schedule requirements can be found in Section 2.4 of the RFCSP. Proposals including pricing for SaaS solutions only will not be disqualified; however, vendors are encouraged to submit proposals for both SaaS and On- Premise solutions if possible. Please see the response to Question 11 above. Vendors are to provide Application Development Roadmaps, Technical Architecture Roadmaps, and Current Architecture Roadmaps for their proposed solution. Would RISD provide us the above or these must be prepared by the vendor? 15. Did RISD perform any Change impact analysis? If so can a copy be obtained? Change impact analyses related to this RFCSP are not available.

5 16. Data Migration - Please provide key data volumes in all business areas. 17. Any known performance issues with the current system? 18. In section 2.1 (INTENT), it is stated that the District intends to replace the existing system(s). Does this mean upgrading Oracle EBS R as an on-premise solution, is not an option? 19. Is this just a US only implementation? Any localization requirements? 20. Do have any other systems that you need to integrate with HCM? 21. Could examples be provided of the type of local and state assessment data that the district would want to capture and how they might be applied during an evaluation? 22. Could examples be provided of the type of observational and conference data that the district would want to capture and how they might be applied during an evaluation? 23. Do you plan on bringing over history data from their current ATS solution? If so, what is the volume? Key data processing volumes are provided in Appendix A Key Volumes. Data conversion requirements are provided in Appendix A Conversion Data. As the District continues to streamline and optimize operations and is more reliant on data for decision-making, RISD s current Oracle E-Business Suite system is no longer meeting needs. The District intends to replace this system with a system that is capable of providing improved efficiency, as well as the additional reporting and visibility the District now requires. Please see the response to Question 8 above. Please see response to Question 6 above. Required interfaces are listed in Section 2.1 of the RFCSP and in Appendix A Interfaces tab. Selection Criteria is described in Section 1.25 of the RFCSP. Selection Criteria is described in Section 1.25 of the RFCSP. Data conversion requirements are included in Appendix A Conversion Data.

6 24. Will the District provide the resources to extract data from the source system? 25. Is the District open to a train the trainer approach? 26. How much historical data do you need included Actuals, Budget? Vendors should propose with their recommended/best-practice approach to data conversion. Vendors should indicate who will be responsible for data extracts in Appendix A Vendor Questionnaire, row 105. RISD anticipates having resources available to perform data extracts if required. Yes, RISD is open to a train-the-trainer approach. Data conversion requirements are included in Appendix A Conversion Data. 27. How many POs do you create a year? Richardson ISD issues around 28,500 purchase orders per year, as specified in Appendix A Key Volumes. 28. How many Suppliers do you have? RISD currently has 41,127 vendors, as indicated in Appendix A Key Volumes. 29. How much financial data do you want to move to the new solution? 30. Would you consider extending the due date (such as a week) due to the 4th of July holiday? 31. Is the District open to a faster implementation schedule? Data conversion requirements are included in Appendix A Conversion Data. Please see response to Question 1 above. RISD is open to expedited implementation schedules, if the vendor believes they are feasible, realistic, and in line with the vendor s best practices and recommendations. Vendors proposing alternative timelines should provide as much detail as possible regarding schedules, key milestone and go-live dates, and the rationale for their alternative timeline recommendations. Additional detail regarding Implementation Schedule requirements can be found in Section 2.4 of the RFCSP.

7 32. In regards to the following Minimum requirements: Installed Base. The proposed system must have an installed base in K-12 school districts in Texas. Can this requirement be relaxed to include Public Sector (not just K-12) or other K-12 throughout the US? 33. On RFP Page 7, under the heading Proposal Overview and under c) Hardware/Technical Overview, there are two items that read as follows: v. Overview of hosting / cybersecurity environment and included services vii. Hosting & Cybersecurity Environment These seem very similar. Can you please expound on the differences between these sections and what you expect to see in each one? 34. Is there any flexibility in the implementation schedule in phasing? Vendors may submit proposals that do not meet the minimum requirement for an installed base in K-12 districts in Texas; however, this is an important component of RISD evaluation criteria, and RISD reserves the right to reject proposals that do not meet this requirement (or any other requirement included in the RFCSP, as stated in Section 1.11 Right of Refusal). This is a mistake; the items are duplicated. Vendors will only be required to include one section with an overview of hosting/cybersecurity environment and included services. This section should include the vendor s ability to meet hosting requirements specified in Section 2.19 of the RFCSP, as well as any additional relevant detail regarding hosting and cybersecurity. Please see response to Question 11 above. Vendors and companies who attended the Pre-bid Conference Call on June 14, 2018 include the following: AspireHR AST Corporation everge Group Focus School Software Frontline/Prologic Infolob Solutions Infor Oracle Phoenix Business Consulting PowerSchool SAP SAP Success Factors Skyward ST Tech, Inc. Tyler Technologies - End of Addendum #1 -

8