Addendum #1 BID NO.: RFP

Transcription

1 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION BUREAU OF CONTRACTS, GRANTS AND PROCUREMENT MANAGEMENT SERVICES 325 West Gaines Street 332 Turlington Building Tallahassee, Florida Addendum #1 BID NO.: RFP SAFE SCHOOLS SECURITY ASSESSMENT TOOL AUGUST 29, 2013 This addendum is being issued to provide the Answers to Questions submitted timely by vendors during the Question and Answers period. Please be advised all questions are keyed as submitted. Risk Solutions International LLC 1. Is the project funding source operating funds or a grant? If it is a grant, by what providing government entity? ANSWER: This project is funded by a one-time appropriation of general revenue to the Department of Education by the Florida Legislature. 2. Does the Department have an existing incumbent consulting firm that is bidding on this work, or that assisted in writing the RFP? If so, can other vendors be assured that they have an equal opportunity to bid and succeed? ANSWER: There is no incumbent firm. 3. Has the Department seen demonstrations, features, functionality or specifications of assessment tools that meet the requirements of this RFP? If so, are their providers considered "frontrunner" vendors in this solicitation? ANSWER: No to both questions. RFP Q&A ADDENDUM Page 1 of 8

2 4. Language in the RFP suggests that the Department is looking for a firm to do custom software development of the online assessment tool, and to be able to develop it to the Department's functionality and feature specifications after the initial development. Is this accurate? Can an existing and commercially installed online tool also compete in this solicitation, if it supports the required functionality, even if the vendor may have less flexibility for modifying features to later requirements changes? ANSWER: An existing off shelf solution with minimum customization that best meets the needs outlined in the RFP is acceptable. 5. How much total storage capacity is required in the document repository? ANSWER: This will be dependent upon the vendor s specifications and the completion of Deliverable #1 in section 7.1 of the RFP. 6. If in Deliverable #7 the Department will host the final tool, it will be far more difficult for the contractor to technically maintain the tool, because the application code is not locally maintained; will the Department consider an online tool that the contractor hosts, as long as strict performance, availability and support standards are maintained? ANSWER: The Department will consider all options but an option for the Department to host the tool should be contemplated as part of the proposal. Aegis Bleu 1. Would an existing web based software system that meets Florida standards and content be acceptable? ANSWER: The Department will consider all options but the specifications in the Scope of Work as outlined in the RFP must be met. 2. Would it be acceptable to lease the product without Florida owning the source code, etc. as listed in the sample contract Article XI E 1-9? ANSWER: No. Forefront, LLC 1. Is the Safe Schools Assessment content to be utilized currently available to collate and extrapolate, or will the Contractor need to create and develop Safe School Security Tool content from scratch? ANSWER: The proposal seeks a vendor with expertise in this area who has a familiarity with content required for this type of tool. The Department may provide certain internal products for use by the vendor. 2. What is the platform that will host the tool? ANSWER: SharePoint or equivalent platform. RFP Q&A ADDENDUM Page 2 of 8

3 3. Do we need to provide hosting services or is hosting not part of the scope of services? ANSWER: Yes, hosting services should be included as part of the services. 4. Additionally, if hosting is already available, what is the level of access that can be expected for product implementation? ANSWER: Full access during product implementation, development and maintenance. 5. If access cannot be provided, will it be right to assume that the vendor would need to only provide implementation support and not implement it? ANSWER: The vendor will need to implement and support the solution. 6. Also if hosting is not provided by the vendor, what is the kind of maintenance that the vendor is supposed to provide? ANSWER: Vendor should outline hosting services per answer to question #3. Maintenance would include any correction of potential errors or problems stemming from the development of the tool. 7. Are we looking at creating an authoring tool to support content changes in the future? ANSWER: Vendor is welcome to propose such a tool as part of the overall system. 8. What is the extent of detail to be covered in the System Administration Guide and User Guide? ANSWER: Information that provides the end user sufficient information to install, use and/or administer the final system. 9. Is Train-the-Trainer for both Admin and user activities part of scope? ANSWER: Yes. 10. What will be the maximum number of users that the tool needs to support? ANSWER: What will be the maximum number of concurrent users that the tool needs to support? ANSWER: What is the expected storage type, local or server? ANSWER: Server Storage. RFP Q&A ADDENDUM Page 3 of 8

4 13. What are the expected archiving frequency, process and level s of access? ANSWER: Full backup s weekly and daily intermittent backups. 14. Would it be safe to assume that the reports and action plan generated by tool needs to be stored on the server or needs to be automatically sent to the assigned person? ANSWER: The reports should be automatically sent to the assigned person. 15. What level of content search is needed? Material access stored in the tool or access to any material stored in a remote location? ANSWER: Vendors should make recommendations in their proposal based on the scope of work and their experience with these types of systems. 16. Are we looking business intelligent report creation and generation? ANSWER: Vendors should make recommendations in their proposal based on the scope of work and their experience with these types of systems. 17. Application Usage/Deployment - As per the RFP, the application would be used by State Department, Schools & District Officials. Is the application targeted for a single department with multiple school assessment or is there multiplicity even at District level? ANSWER: Multiplicity at each level. 18. Performance SLA - Are there any specific criteria set for the application performance? Performance might refer to things like Page load time, Total uptime time and Data retrieval & load time etc ANSWER: It is expected that the final product will function at a maximum level in regards to the performance standards in your question. There are many factors that can affect response times but in our expectations would be that pages load within 1 to 2 seconds, queries/reports are building efficiently and are presented within 5 to 10 seconds, and system uptime stays above 99%. 19. Localization - The Localization process makes it possible to store, retrieve, and present application content for any locale, preferably using the same application code base. Locale is the combination of both language like Spanish and cultural environment, including the format of dates, times, currencies, telephone numbers, and so on. This implies isolating locale-dependent from locale-independent content and also preparing code to dynamically format that content according to locale. The end result of application internationalization supports its localization. Is this a part of the non-functional requirements? ANSWER: Localization as defined by your question is not required by the terms of this RFP, however; vendors are welcome to make it a part of their proposal. RFP Q&A ADDENDUM Page 4 of 8

5 20. Usability Requirements - Is there any specific requirement for usability aspects in terms of User Interface (Look and feel), browser compatibility, screen resolution etc? ANSWER: The interface should be user friendly and compatible across the most common browsers, etc. The vendor should be prepared to provide multiple User Interfaces for consideration. Compatibility with the top four browsers and their previous two releases should be contemplated in each proposal. Currently these would be Internet Explorer, Chrome, Firefox, and Safari. 21. Security Requirements - This includes management of usernames and passwords; encryption of data transfers both internally and across external systems such as the internet, firewalls and kinds of malicious code attacks including Denial of Service, SQL Injection Attack. Are there any specifics to be kept in mind for this? ANSWER: Vendors should make recommendations in their proposal based on the scope of work and their experience with these types of systems. A very high level of security and encryption is expected due to information in the system being sensitive and exempt from public records. 22. Scalability Requirements - Scalability includes all steps that are to be taken to scale the application/portal against increased user/data load and environmental change. This includes designing web, business and data tier in such a fashion that, these two (2) tiers should be able to span across the physical box, on need basis. Specifically, the web tier should be installable in web farm scenario. What is the kind of data load expected and specifications for providing scalability in the application? ANSWER: Vendors should make recommendations in their proposal based on the scope of work and their experience with these types of systems. 23. Exception / Error Handling Requirements - Exception/Error handling varies from a simple error handling to a detailed Exception Logging policy. Are there any specific standards to be followed here? ANSWER: Vendors should make recommendations in their proposal based on the scope of work and their experience with these types of systems. 24. Design and Implementation Constraints - Is there any specification or standard that needs to be followed? For example, the application should be a 3-Tier or an N-tier application. It should be a cloud based application with SaaS based licensing (if any) and so on? ANSWER: Potential vendors are encouraged to make recommendations in this regard and to justify why they wish to use their potential solution for this issue. RFP Q&A ADDENDUM Page 5 of 8

6 25. Operating Environment - Although a generic environment like SharePoint has been proposed. Are there any constraints regarding the environment like availability of specific software & hardware licenses that might be kept in mind while proposing the suggested platform/environment? ANSWER: As detailed in the RFP the product should be housed in SharePoint or an equivalent platform. RiskWatch 1. In the RFP, there is a reference made to 100 sub-portals for the storage of the assessment and other district level safety and security materials. Does this mean that there should be 100 isolated instances of the application running one for each school district? Or, does it mean that there should be 1 single instance for the entire state with document management capability to store district level assessment and security materials? ANSWER: Within the tool there should be the ability for each school district and other identified entities up to 100 to safely store under password protection vital documents for their school district or entity that only they and other first responder s and law enforcement officials will have access to at the discretion of the entity assigned the space. Applied Research Associates, Inc. 1. What is the anticipated budget for the Safe Schools Security Assessment Tool (RFP )? ANSWER: The Legislature appropriated $1,000,000 for this project and all related (contractual and internal) Departmental costs for this project. Risk and Security LLC 1. Does the FLDOE have an existing Risk Tool they are currently using? ANSWER: We are not clear on your definition of Risk Tool but all applications/systems are scanned with Qualys before being moved to production. This process will include Vulnerability and application scans. The vendor will be expected to deliver a solution that passes these scans. 2. Does the FLDOE have an existing Risk Methodology, if so, can we have access to it, to assist with the Proposal process. ANSWER: No. 3. Does the FLDOE have a preference for online or onsite training on the final software program? ANSWER: The RFP calls for both options to be offered and all training materials to be turned over to the Department at the conclusion of the required training. RFP Q&A ADDENDUM Page 6 of 8

7 4. Will the FLDOE invite the regional training participants, if that is their choice? ANSWER: DOE will handle invitations. 5. What is the approximate budget range for this project (within $50,000.00)? ANSWER: The Legislature appropriated $1,000,000 for this project and all related (contractual and internal) Departmental costs for this project. 6. Will the FLDOE give other Florida County and City agencies potential access to the final developed software solution? ANSWER: Yes, the Department will do so at its discretion. Inquesta Corporation 1. Does the Florida DOE have a must have timeline for the deliverables in Attachment 1? Or if not for specific deliverables, by when will the DOE require the completion of the final deliverable, the successful transfer of the online assessment tool to the Department s servers with full functionality of the tool tested? ANSWER: These will be determined with the Contractor and is dependent upon when the work is authorized to begin. 2. What operating system do the Department s servers use? ANSWER: Windows 2008 R2 3. Is there a maximum value or a budget for this product/deliverable? ANSWER: The Legislature appropriated $1,000,000 for this project and all related (contractual and internal) Departmental costs for this project. Potential proposers have 72 hours from posting of addenda to protest the requirements of each addendum. Failure to file a protest within the time prescribed in Section (3), or failure to post the bond or other security required by law within the time allowed for filing a bond shall constitute a waiver of proceedings under Chapter 120, Florida Statutes. RFP Q&A ADDENDUM Page 7 of 8

8 YOUR PROPOSAL WILL NOT BE COMPLETE WITHOUT THIS PAGE SIGNED AND INCLUDED! Vendor Name written: Authorized Signature: Authorized Signature - written: Mailing Address: City, State & Zip Code: Telephone: Address: RFP Q&A ADDENDUM Page 8 of 8