AMENDMENT - REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP)

Transcription

1 AMENDMENT - REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) Amendment No. 001 RFP No COMPANY NAME AND ADDRESS (To be completed by Proposer) The hour and date specified for receipt of proposals is: [ ] Not extended [X] Extended to 04/02/2018 at 2:00 pm local time Project No. Issued By Date Amendment Issued 03/12/2018 METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY Procurement Division 1900 Main Street Houston, Texas P. O. Box Houston, Texas The RFP is amended as follows: 1. The Proposal Due Date/Time is extended to April 2, 2018 at 2:00pm Houston local time. The Question and Answer period remains closed. 2. All references to the period of performance are changed to a four-year base period plus a two-year optional period. 3. The Evaluation Criteria entitled Compliance with and Exceeding the Scope of Services is revised as follows: 1. Compliance with and Exceeding the Scope of Services 20 points a. Proposers Solutions will be evaluated on the extent that they exceed the minimum requirements in the Scope of Services. a. Proposers Solutions will be evaluated on the amount customization, new development, configuration, and product setup required to meet the requirements of the Scope of Services. b. Proposers Solutions will be evaluated on how modular and scalable they are. c. Proposers shall provide a copy of their latest PCI Compliance Audit. d. Proposers will be evaluated on the level of service described in their proposed Service Level Agreement (SLA). 4. Please see the attached Questions and Answers Except as provided herein, all instructions and provisions of the RFP, as heretofore changed, remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

2 Proposers must acknowledge receipt of the amendment prior to the hour and date specified for proposal delivery, by one of the following methods: 1. By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on the Proposal form; 2. By signing and returning one (1) copy of this amendment with your Proposal; 3. By separate letter acknowledging receipt. FAILURE TO ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT MAY CAUSE FOR PROPOSAL REJECTION BY METRO. PROPOSER (Authorized Representative) BY NAME: SIGNATURE: TITLE: DATE: BY NAME: Alan Scanio METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY (Authorized Representative) SIGNATURE: //Signed copy on file// TITLE: Sup. Contract Specialist

3 Project Name: Mobile Ticketing Application Solicitation #: Amendment #: 001 Contract Administrator: Alan Scanio SCHEDULE QUESTIONS Q1 Given the proposals must be submitted as hard copies, would you consider changing the due date to Tuesday, March 20? That would give us the weekend to finish the proposal if needed, and still be able to ship on Monday. Q2 [Our] project team requests a delay of the due date until April 12, Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 We respectfully request that the proposal submission deadline get extended by two weeks. To allow the technical team to complete a full review of the requirements and specifications included in the RFP, we request to extend the questions submission deadline to March 12th Can the agency extend the proposal deadline at least 4 weeks in order to give proposers sufficient time to deliver a creative solution? Page 4 Section 1. The current due date for the Proposal is March 19, We are requesting an 8 week extension. Today, the scheduled RFP due date is March 19, and we would like to ask to see if that could be extended to Friday, March 30th? We really appreciate your consideration A1-7 This RFP is extended by two weeks. See Amendment 001. Q8 A8 Q9 A9 Q10 A10 Q11 A11 Q12 A12 When are you planning on releasing a solicitation for the Automated Fare Collection System? METRO is working to finalize the scope and requirements. We anticipate releasing the solicitation in the Summer When does the Department want this solution to be implemented by? METRO would like to solution to be implemented as soon as possible after NTP. Does the Department need to replace or upgrade any of the integrated systems in the next 5 years? If so, which system and when? METRO is working to define requirements for an Automated Fare Collection system which is anticipated to be implemented within the next 5 years. At minimum, the consolidated account-based back-end system, along with validator equipment will need to be integrated with a mobile ticketing solution. Page 41 Section XI.1.C.4 Please confirm that the AFC contractor will be available and ready to perform the integration to the mobile solution during the design and development phase of this contract. This will not happen during the design and development phase of this Contract. It will happen at a much later date. METRO is currently defining requirements for a new Automated Fare Collection System that is separate from this Contractor s Solution. METRO also anticipates to have the Mobile Ticketing Contractor perform all necessary updates and provide assistance to the Automated Fare Collection System Integrator necessary to complete this integration. Could you advise on the timeline for the procurement of the Automated Fare Collection? Could you also advise on the current specifications or dependencies of the Automated Fare collections for scoping and pricing purposes under this RFP? See responses to the questions above.

4 These two sections appear to contradict each other. Will the award be a 6-year contract, or a 1-year contract with 1 year extensions? 2 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE Q13 1. A. This Contract shall be for a period of Six (6) years from the effective date of the Contract, unless otherwise extended or terminated by METRO in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Contract General Requirements Contractor must provide a base contract for 1 Year, with 1 Year extensions A13 This is inconsistent and is corrected via Amendment 001. Q14 Q15 What is the timeline for awarding the contract and expected launch? Page 41 Section XI.1.D. Please define when (schedule) the integration to the AFC system will happen. A14-15 The anticipated timeline for completing evaluations, obtaining board approval and award is late Summer METRO RESOURCE QUESTIONS Q16 A16 Q17 A17 Q18 Who is the technical contact and/or project manager for the Mobile Ticketing Application? METRO has a Project Manager assigned to this project, however, please direct all questions to the Contract Administrator. Who is the Executive Sponsor of this project and what is their expected engagement? METRO has an executive sponsor for this project who will have a moderate level of involvement. What resources from METRO will be available to promote the Mobile App to the riders? A18 Q19 A19 Q20 A20 Q21 A21 Q22 METRO s Communications Office will be engaged in the promotion of the app. How is the Department funding the Mobile Ticketing Application? Through which source (budget, CIP, state/federal grant, etc.) This procurement is locally funded. Will additional technologies be acquired to complete the future open payment architecture other than the Mobile ticketing app and the automated fare collection? If so, what type, through what procurement vehicle and approximately when? None planned. Does the Department anticipate any professional or consulting services may be needed through separate procurements to accomplish this effort? (i.e. project planning/oversight, PM, QA, IV&V, staff augmentation, implementation services etc.)? If so, what services does the Department desire and how do they anticipate to procure? None planned. What about third party professional or consulting services related to the overall open payment architecture such as project planning/oversight, PM, QA, IV&V, staff augmentation, implementation services etc.? If so, what services does the Department desire and how/when do they anticipate to procure? A#22 None planned.

5 Can you share the AFC RFP or scope so we can estimate the integration costs requested on the cost Q23 sheet? A23 The requirements documents for that procurement are still being generated. Q24 A24 What is the estimated cost of the Mobile Ticketing Application? We estimate the total evaluated price will fall in the $500K-$1M range, which includes all line items in the Schedule of Items and Prices, therefore this range includes all six years. TECHNICAL QUESTIONS Q25 A25 Q26 A26 Q27 A27 Q28 A28 Q29 A29 Q30 A30 Q31 A31 In section 2, Form III, the table references to estimate the Support & SLA services per year from system acceptance date. Could you advise on what would be an acceptable Service Level Agreement for METRO? Please provide your most favorable SLA terms, these will be reviewed by our Evaluation Committee. What other systems will have to integrate or interface with the Mobile Ticketing Application, and what vendor provides those systems? METRO anticipates that the Contractor will provide APIs that will allow integration and/or linking to disparate systems including trip planning, messaging and service alerts as well as geo-location as allowed by the customer. Proposers may offer additional interfaces and features if they desire. Would METRO real-time information such as AVL / APC and service disruption information be made available to the selected [C]ontractor? Yes, the AVL data is available in the form of a GTFS-RT feed on our web site. The APC data is not readily available. What is the intent of the EMV Certification? Does the agency plan to allow open payments in the future? To protect METRO and its customers data. We do plan to allow open payments in the future. Item F, Task 2.6 Deployment section makes reference to a Security Certification Audit, what is the outcome and expectation from this audit request? METRO will use this audit as assurance that the Contractor remains PCI and EMV Compliant, and to monitor the Contractor s security practices. Under item D section Mobile Ticketing Application Specification/Requirements, please clarify the expectations and scope for the following; the mobile solution must have the capability to incorporate a certified Point-to-Point Encryption solution (P2PE) as well as tokenization to provide maximum security of customer sensitive data.? We believe the requirement is clear. However, to further explain, we are only requesting tokenization on banking information only, not account data. Also, end-to-end encryption at the server level is required. Section IX, Exhibit A, Article 6, General Requirements Matrix, Item , what is an "ILA"? An Interlocal Agreement. PROCUREMENT QUESTIONS Q32 A32 Q33 A33 Please confirm that there is no SBE requirement for this procurement. Confirmed, there is no SBE subcontracting goal assigned to this procurement. Please confirm that... (our parent company[ s]) audited financial statements are acceptable in response to Question P: Have you attached a copy of your firm's last annual financial (profit/loss) statement? Yes.

6 With respect to Section XI - Exhibit E (Disputes Resolution Process), is it METRO s intention that both Q34 options presented ultimately provide METRO s President & Chief Executive Officer with final binding authority to unilaterally resolve any disputes between the parties under the agreement? A34 Yes. Q35 A35 Q36 A36 Q37 A37 Q38 A38 Whether companies from Outside USA can apply for this? (like, from India or Canada) Yes, but we will need support during our business hours (4:00am-2:00am, Houston time). [If we are located outside the USA, will] we need to come over there for meetings? We expect to see the Contractor in person from time to time during the implementation process. This is not explicitly required, but we believe the work cannot be successfully accomplished on an entirely remote basis. Can we perform the tasks (related to RFP) outside USA? (like, from India or Canada) We expect to see the Contractor in person from time to time during the implementation process. This is not explicitly required, but we believe the work cannot be successfully accomplished on an entirely remote basis. Can we submit the proposals via ? No, proposals submitted via will not be accepted. Note 1: Please register in our SAP system to ensure you receive notification of any changes throughout this procurement. Instructions are available here: Note 2: This QA document does not include questions received on 03/09/2018. These will be answered in a forthcoming document.