CAD and RMS Vendor Question and Answer November 11, 2016 General Administrative Questions 1. Could the proposal due date be extended? Will extend to December 13th at 2:00 p.m. CT 2. Has funding for a new system been secured? If not, what sources are being considered? Funding will be handled internally and secured through a committee and board approval process. 3. Has an estimated system cost been identified? No. 4. Does the firm have to be US based? No. 5. Could we perform RFP related tasks outside the US? Unsure of what tasks would be performed for the project. 6. Will the firm need to come onsite for meetings? Reference the training requirements for the system. 7. Could we submit proposals via email? Reference main RFP Section 13.0 8. An RFI was released in the summer of 2016. What vendor provided information on that RFI? Beta 80, Hexagon, Infor, Logisys, Mark43, Securus, Spillman, SunGuard, Tritech, Tyler, ProPhoenix and Zuercher. 9. If a vendor is submitting for Option #1 (CAD and RMS for all Counties), should Tab 9 (Fire only CAD), Tab 10 (EMS Only CAD) and Tab 11 (Jail only JMS) be left as black sections or entirely omitted from the proposal? If you are not submitting options for only one of those systems, include the Tabs as referenced in the RFP, but leave each section blank. 10. Should the spreadsheet attachments remain editable Excel files submitted electronically with a reference to the files in their corresponding tabs within the printed proposal? Or should they be included as populated by non editable files with the final proposal pdf? For the printed proposal and corresponding copies, the Excel files shall be printed and included in their associated tabs.
General System Questions 1. Why are you replacing your system? Are you facing any issues? System was underbuilt by vendor, upgrade will be costly. There are consistent ongoing issues from upgrades to correct functionality, to issues with functionality. 2. What systems will the CAD/RMS have to integrate/interface with? Reference the various RFP attachments which list the interfaces required. 3. There does not appear to be a request from Outagamie for an interface to NCIC/State (only Calumet). Does Outagamie want an interface to the state? Yes, Outagamie does. Listed under 1.7 Interfaces Portals 100 (WI TIME System). 4. Specifics on how Appleton Fire Department is to be priced does not appear to be addressed. Will the agency be group in with Outagamie? Appleton Fire shall be priced separately (high level cost) as requested under Tab 9. 5. Clarify what inquiry means as far as the types of users are concerned. Inquiry access is retrieving and viewing information without the ability to add or change the data. 6. It is our understanding the County was interesting in a solution with redundant fallback to Brown County. Confirm if the County needs that redundancy. It was a consideration. Vendor to list what redundancy they have available. 7. There does not appear to be any information regarding the 55 participating agencies within Outagamie County. To better understand the project scope, please provide a list of the planned participating agencies. List of agencies posted. 8. Will the software installed at Outagamie, Winnebago and Calumet run off the same server or will these be separate installations? Same server but three separate databases. 9. How many workstations are in Outagamie County for dispatchers, call takers and dispatch supervisors? 45 10. How many workstations are in Winnebago County for dispatchers, call takers and dispatch supervisors? 68
11. How many workstations use Police Mobile in Outagamie County? 235 12. How many workstations will use Fire Mobile in Outagamie County? 42 13. How many of the Police mobile workstations will use Field Reporting in Winnebago County? 0 14. How many of the Police mobile workstations will use Field Reporting in Calumet County? 29 Technical System Requirements 1. For Attachment H, Tab 1, Table 12 clarify what is expected for Graphically display the GIS architecture for the proposed solution. A hardware/software schematic that shows the required hardware with the required software that will be used for each component. Similar to a network diagram that would be drafted in Microsoft Visio or similar tool. This does not have to fit in the Excel tab, it should be a supporting graphic. 2. For Attachment H, Tab 1, Table 12 a graphic, as requested, will not fit in the excel spreadsheet provided. Verify vendor may submit responses on separate documents whenever the space provided is insufficient. Yes, items such as graphics could be provided on a separate sheet included in that tabbed section of your proposal. The response section of the Excel file should clearly direct the reviewer where to find the item (such as page number). 3. For Attachment H, Tab 1, Table 18 what do you mean by Provisioning and Records Clerk? The amount of training hours for each. 4. For Attachment H, Tab 1, Table 18 do you want training for each line in that Table? Yes. 5. For Attachment H, Tab 1, Table 1 Req #T1.1 provide confirmation specifications for the eleven existing HPZ440 desktop computers, to include attached video monitors, in order to verify compatibility with the proposed CAD application. 3.5GHZ 8GB 265GB.AMD FirePro. Graphic card W5100 4GB. Monitors: 19 inch monitors
6. For Attachment H, Tab 1, Table 3 Req #T3.3 provide confirmation specifications for the Panasonic CF 31, CF 53 and CF 54 mobile computers in order to verify compatibility with the proposed applications. CF31 256GB, SSD, 8GB Memory CF54 256GB, SSD, 8GB Memory CF53 256GB, 8GB Memory 7. For Attachment H, Tab 1, Table 6 Req #T6.10 clarify what data is being exchanged between CAD and the TraCS application. As required by the State of Wis for accident reporting. 8. For Attachment H, Tab 2, Table 6 Req #T6.10 and T6.11 clarify the version of TraCS being used. Tracs10 9. For Attachment H, Tab 2, Table 6 Req #T6.17 expand on the requirement and business flow for the TIPPS interface. Currently it is only from LRMS to TIPPS, request it be two way flow. 10. For Attachment H, Tab 2, Table 11, Req 11.5 clarify what full ARL means. Personnel tracking as well as units? Automated Resource location to track more than just vehicles, such as officer location. 11. Does the County prefer a physical or virtual system for the servers? Prefer Virtual 12. Does the County have a hardware vendor preference (e.g. Dell, HP, IBM, etc)? HP 13. If Winnebago and Calumet County join the project would they host their own servers or be hosted by Outagamie and access the server through VPN? If hosted by Outagamie would they join as multi juris agencies sharing the same database while maintaining their own records or as separate databases? Yes 14. Will the County accept only recommendations for hardware to that the county may procure the hardware separately? Nicole s comment Something to consider If we just have them give a recommendation we will not know the true initial system cost. I think if we allow this we should have all vendor s just give recommendation so apples to apples without hardware. Or just keep as is, they need to give cost and we know true cost. We reserve the right to purchase our own hardware but wish a quote from the vendor for the hardware.
CAD / Mobile Questions 1. Does each County have a separate CAD system? No, they currently use the same. 2. Is there a combined Communication Center for all three counties? Will it remain the same or change with the project? No there are 3 separate PSAPS, this will remain the same. 3. Clarify how many concurrent mobile users Outagamie and Winnebago County have. We do not have CONCURRENT mobile users and do not wish to do so with the new system. 4. Define CAD dispatch stations as opposed to CAD workstations on page 2 of the main RFP document. Dispatch stations actually dispatch, workstations the product sits on a PC in another location other than the dispatch center. 5. On page 2 of the main RFP it states Outagamie has 33 CAD workstations and in Attachment G it says 35. Which is correct? 35 6. On Attachment D (CAD Functional) under Resource Dispatch is a requirement stating Hiplink or other interface is the County using HipLink and simply looking for its new vendor to provide an interface? The county is currently using Hiplink and when a CAD screen is dispatched it sends it through Hiplink to our Fire/EMS units. And if needed to other interfaces. 7. On Attachment D (CAD Functional) item 14 Explain the requirement. Remote access to CAD to perform what operations, using what devices, etc? From an admin workstation. 8. On Attachment D (CAD Functional) item 83 provide an example on how this would be used. If flag was on an address where there is a working fire, the call taker could forward the incident to the fire dispatcher. Or Law. 9. On Attachment D (CAD Functional) item 222 provide an example of non dispatched incidents. Not all initiated CAD screens are assigned to a field unit and may be closed out by a dispatcher.
10. On Attachment D (CAD Functional) item 408 Explain the requirement. Is this for officer or unit? How is it used? During field training of an officer, they may be in separate squads, the FTO will need to see the same screen information as the trainees. 11. On Attachment D (CAD Functional) item 544 Elaborate on what kinds of query would be executed when selecting an address. Example would be previous history or premise hazard. 12. On Attachment D (CAD Functional) item 689 Explain the requirement. Overridden while call is in progress or after call is closed? Supervisor rights would allow for overriding actions. RMS Questions 1. On Attachment F (RMS Requirements), Tab 1 OUSO RMS, Items 83, 240 259 is the County requiring an interface to BEAST in lieu of an integrated Evidence Management system or an integrated Evidence system? We are interested in an integrated Evidence system if it would have same features as the Beast. If not we are interested in the cost of the interface. 2. On Attachment F (RMS Requirements), Tab 1 OUSO RMS, Items 97 106 provide the following information for eprotect which is actually EReferral interface to Protect Database format and accepted file formats. Information regarding the ereferral interface to PROTECT can be found here - http://dait.state.wi.us/section.asp?linkid=965&locid=13 Scroll down to (3). There is also a link to the technical documentation at the bottom of the page Contact information Brenda Ray Section Chief District Attorney IT Program Wisconsin Dept. of Administration email: brenda.ray@wisconin.gov Specific fields/tables to be submitted. Information regarding the ereferral interface to PROTECT can be found here - http://dait.state.wi.us/section.asp?linkid=965&locid=13 Scroll down to (3). There is also a link to the technical documentation at the bottom of the page Expected functionality (one way push of data from County to DA; two was push from County to DA back to County) One way push 3. On Attachment F (RMS Requirements), Tab 1 OUSO RMS, Item 124 would the other stakeholder (government departments) be inside the SO or outside? Both
4. Is the County expecting the other stakeholders to have full RMS access? No, inquiry only. Or does the system only need to provide the ability to send a copy of the report to the other stakeholder? They also must be able to inquiry permissible reports. 5. On Attachment F (RMS Requirements), Tab 1 OUSO RMS, Item 125 what does this mean? Are you requesting the vendor provide a chart of their workflow program, or is this a software feature that would be displayed to the user? It should be a feature that allows the user to track the progress of the workflow of an incident. 6. On Attachment F (RMS Requirements), Tab 1 OUSO RMS, Items 157 and 200 clarify if the County and participating agencies are submitting UCR or WIBRS. WIBRS 7. On Attachment F (RMS Requirements), Tab 1 OUSO RMS, Item 165 describe how this feature would be viewed by a system user. The user should be able to view the progress of the incident in a format such as flow chart, spider web, or other graphic view to easily identify the case activity. 8. On Attachment F (RMS Requirements), Tab 1 OUSO RMS, Item 290 is there a current interface or data export being provided to the agency from the regional pawn shops? Describe how pawn data is being transmitted to the agency. The current system for the county is to log into the regional pawn shop software Leads on Line for inquiring. 9. On Attachment F (RMS Requirements), Tab 2 Interfaces, Items 14 and 15 For the requested interface, clarify the support requesting. Are mugshots the only requested output from Beacon to the RMS? If an interface is available, arrest information and photos should be accessible. 10. On Attachment F (RMS Requirements), Tab 2 Interfaces, Item 25 describer this interface, what types of data would be included and rom which system to which system? TIPPS is a municipal RMS court system that provides disposition and information into the Law RMS system. 11. On Attachment F (RMS Requirements), Tab 3 Field Base Reporting, Item 86 is the County requesting to export arrest information to the Beacon JMS? If it is possible or if the arrest information is able to be routed to the booking clerk. 12. Will the County also break down RMS into its separate components? LRMS/FRMS/JMS At this time we are looking at LRMS. Fire agencies and the Jail have separate RMS systems but will consider looking at what vendors offer.
Winnebago County Interfaces 1. On Attachment J (Winnebago Interfaces), Item 5 expand on the requirement and business flow for the COMSYS interface. COMSYS is an interface from the current Premier One CAD interface to the State Queries. 2. On Attachment J (Winnebago Interfaces), Item 7 expand on the requirement and business flow for the Corona interface. Corona is a reporting tool used by the Winnebago Sheriff and Oshkosh police to pull data from the Premier One CAD system. 3. On Attachment J (Winnebago Interfaces), Item 1 expand on the requirement and business flow for the P1 reports interface. This would include PremierOne reports. Jail RMS Define the Jail RMS (JMS) solution as listed in the RFP. At this time we are looking at LRMS. Jail has a separate RMS system, Beacon but may consider looking at what vendors offer. Is this intended to replace the current Beacon JMS? At this time we are looking at LRMS. The Jail has a separate RMS system, Beacon but may consider looking at what vendors offer.