Opportunity Detail

Questions and Answers

LBRS Data Maintenance Application RFP
Document #:  0A1294


Question:   As the creator of the current LBRS is DDTI eligible to bid (as prime or subcontractor) on the LBRS replacement?

Answer:   Yes.

Date: 5/27/2021

Inquiry: 85106


Question:   In Supplement 1 Section 6.4, the short paragraph about Steady-State Run Services mentions “Such Ongoing Operations must include the following tasks and activities” (at the end of the paragraph), but no further information is included. Please provide more detail.

Answer:   Offerors must describe their proposed Steady-State Run Services under 6.4.1. No specifics on tasks and activities are provided in 6.4.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85110


Question:   4.3 Project Development Phases and Requirements Page 15 Could you please share the expected start and finish dates for the overall LBRS implementation as per the RFP scope?

Answer:   Dates for the overall LBRS implementation are not available at this time.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85100


Question:   4.3 Project Development Phases and Requirements Page 15 We assume that OGRIP will be open for incremental implementation approach wherein the pilot counties could be implemented first. Based on successful implementation and adoption in the pilot county, rest of the counties could be divided into the logical batches for implementation. Can you please validate?

Answer:   Other security levels to be implemented are not known currently.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85098


Question:   Could you please share the logs for known risks or challenges or issues? This will help us in implementation and  mitigation plan.

Answer:   The logs requested are unknown at this time.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85102


Question:   Please indicate some predictive  and prescriptive analytics use cases that will help OGRIP in predicting better compliance. 

Answer:   No predictive analytics required.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85101


Question:   4.3 Project Development Phases and Requirements Page 15 "Is it required to run the legacy and new system in parallel for a definite time frame? OR, A successful exit from the user acceptance testing phase will be good to go for Go Live?"

Answer:   No legacy system currently exists. Current process is manual in nature.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85099


Question:   1.4 Key Solution Functionality Elements (Sub Section 9: Security Compliance) Page 5 Apart from 3 User based security, are there any other security levels to be implemented as part of this solution? Please kindly indicate.

Answer:   Incremental implementation approach is preferred.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85095


Question:   2.4 System Environment Changes Page 8 Will the deployment of the new system in PRODUCTION be a joint responsibility between OGRIP and Vendor or it will be sole responsibility of the vendor?

Answer:   Deployment with be a joint responsibility.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85097


Question:   1.5 Service Operations and Help Desk Function Page 6 Assuming the support will be provided during US working hours and for 5 working days , please validate the assumption.

Answer:   Help desk will be required during normal working hours 5 days a week.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85096


Question:   1.4 Key Solution Functionality Elements (Sub Section 7: Reporting) Page 5 Are there any preferences to use any particular reporting tools? Please do state the reasons.

Answer:   No preference as long as results can be imported in to ESRI applications for display of validation error and associated geographic location.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85094


Question:   1.4 Key Solution Functionality Elements (Sub Section 7: Reporting) Page 5 Please indicate the approximate number  of canned reports per county that need to be part of this scope. List of KPIs (Existing and new from the backlog). 

Answer:   Reporting function should be configurable be system administrator and/or designated users.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85093


Question:   1.4 Key Solution Functionality Elements (Sub Section 5: Access) Page 5 Assuming we have at most 300 users, please indicate the number of concurrent users on the system.

Answer:   Estimate total number of concurrent users to be 50.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85092


Question:   1.4 Key Solution Functionality Elements (Sub Section 4: Data Load/Import) Page 5 Please indicate the number of source systems for the ongoing process and also please indicate the typical data types of the source systems like .CSV, RDBMS, Documents, XML, etc.

Answer:   Data will ultimately be required to be imported from all 88 counties. LBRS datasets stored in ESRI shapefile and/or ESRI geodatabase formats.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85091


Question:   1.4 Key Solution Functionality Elements (Sub Section 4: Data Load/Import) Page 5 Could you share data catalog and volume and size of historical data? Overall and recent most frequent volume?

Answer:   84 counties currently maintain a LBRS centerline and address dataset that will be imported. Approximately 840 MB in size.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85090


Question:   1.4 Key Solution Functionality Elements (Sub Section 2: Database Structure) Page 4 We plan to propose a public cloud based solution for this application. Do you have any preferences for the cloud platform? Also would prefer to retain any data on-Premise or private cloud?

Answer:   All proposals will be considered.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85089


Question:   1.4 Key Solution Functionality Elements Page 4 Does OGRIP have any technology landscape in mind or considering any for this solution?

Answer:   Solution should be compatible with ESRI GIS.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85088


Question:   1.2 Current System Page 4 Can you please share the current legacy systems architecture and technology landscape?

Answer:   Solution should be compatible with ESRI GIS. LBRS datasets stored in ESRI shapefile and/or ESRI geodatabase formats.

Date: 5/24/2021

Inquiry: 85087


Question:   How many workshop participants would there be in total? How many by role (see question regarding roles)?

Answer:   Approximately 200 participants. Would anticipate regional training sessions.

Date: 5/20/2021

Inquiry: 85112


Question:   What participant roles would attend the workshops (e.g., roles such as GIS analyst, emergency response coordinator)?

Answer:   Selected State Agency GIS staff, County GIS staff and PSAP staff involved in the maintenance of roadway centerlines and address datasets.

Date: 5/20/2021

Inquiry: 85111


Question:   Please provide more information about the current LBRS architecture and software. a. Please provide a system diagram. b. Please describe whether the current system is cloud-based. c. Please describe the underlying technology. What is it built on: COTS, Esri, other...?

Answer:   Majority of LBRS datasets are maintained using ESRI products. Format could vary by county.

Date: 5/20/2021

Inquiry: 85107


Question:   Which components of the current LBRS, if any, are expected to remain in place to be integrated with the new data maintenance solution?

Answer:   No changes to native datasets maintained by counties, Application should provide ability to extract and modify format for use by state using solution.

Date: 5/20/2021

Inquiry: 85108


Question:   It is our understanding that the current LBRS for ODOT has been in place for more than a decade. It is also our understanding that the current LBRS provides a mechanism for local data maintenance activity. a. What are the deficiencies in the current LBRS data maintenance capabilities? b. What are the deficiencies in the LBRS system generally that need to be addressed? c. Is it a potential outcome of this RFP process that the current LBRS system (and vendor) will be renewed/upgraded and extended?

Answer:   Although there has been a process in place, it is a very manual process with limited ability to perform validation and report results to data maintainers.

Date: 5/20/2021

Inquiry: 85105


Question:   Does OGRIP have a preferred Requirements Traceability Matrix and/or Application Lifecycle Management software? If so, will the contractor be expected to use these applications rather than an application or method the contractor may already use?

Answer:   The State does not have a preferred application.

Date: 5/19/2021

Inquiry: 85074


Question:   Since all of our staff are currently working remotely, our company has adopted a corporate practice of using Docusign for the signing of documents. Is it acceptable to submit proposal forms that have been signed in this way - through a secure platform that is commonly used for signing legal and other documents?

Answer:   Throughout the RFP, originally signed is intended to refer to a physical signature within the Original copy of the proposal. Currently, electronic signature has not been made acceptable for validating the original proposal on the Opening Date to certify its on-time response. Offerors must ensure that the Original is physically signed (preferably on Tab 1, Cover Letter).

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 85083


Question:   Since all of our staff are currently working remotely from home, we have adopted a corporate practice of using Docusign for the signing of documents. Is it acceptable to submit proposal forms that have been signed in this way, rather than with an original signature?

Answer:   Throughout the RFP, originally signed is intended to refer to a physical signature within the Original copy of the proposal.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 85002


Question:   Section 6.20 of Supplement 1 states that “Contractor must finalize the Business Continuity Plan submitted with its proposal”. We assume that since this is just the initial Business Continuity Plan, it would not include full detail relevant to OGRIP at the time of proposal submission. Please confirm.

Answer:   The term Contractor is reserved for the Offeror selected upon award. Offerors, at the time of proposal submission, are not expected to finalize the Business Continuity Plan.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 85079


Question:   Please confirm that the price provided in our proposal response is meant to include one year of maintenance and operations support, after the solution has gone into production.

Answer:   Twelve months of Support after the solutions has gone into production is to be defined as a deliverable on the Cost Proposal form.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 85078


Question:   Page 3 of the RFP states “Additionally, it will provide an export of the data that can be used by ODOT to update their LRS and inventory systems”. In addition to format, structure, and standards for this data export, can you provide example export datasets?

Answer:   Application should have the ability to create and modify format of provisioned data to meet current format requirements, as well as, future format requirements.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 85077


Question:   In the RFP document, requirement 7 states: “The proposed solution describes provisioning statewide GIS database for facilitating data exchange with other Federal and State Agencies (see Supplement 1, Scope of Work, page 3).” However, additional detail is not found in Supplement 1. Can OGRIP please indicate the section that includes this detail, or provide information about what data exchange will be needed with “other Federal and State Agencies”?

Answer:   Application should have the ability to create and modify format of provisioned data to meet current format requirements, as well as, future format requirements.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 85075


Question:   Page 3 of the RFP states “Additionally, it will provide an export of the data that can be used by ODOT to update their LRS and inventory systems”. Can you please clarify what these exports need to include including their formats, data structures, and any standards they need to meet?

Answer:   The requirement for ODOT will consist of Location Reference System (LRS) validations.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 85076


Question:   Supplement 4 SR03 and SR25: The System must provide real-time quality control checks and ensure the integrity of the dataset to support multiple business needs. Will the data validated through the proposed solution be subject to further or additional quality control checks using an external or third-party application? If so, please specify which application(s) will be used to perform additional validations.

Answer:   Solution should include ability to validate associated attributes, geometry and topology.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 85080


Question:   Supplement 1, pg 20 4.6 Build Phase: 2) Develop interfaces Contractor must develop application interfaces required to communicate with OGRIP, LHDs, Ohio agencies and external vendors systems, including the ability to import/export data via national standards, and other external entities. What external or third-party entities will the successful respondent be required to interface with?

Answer:   Application should provide ability for counties to submit datasets to OGRIP upon completion of validations. Application should have ability to aggregate county based datasets into a statewide file. It should also have ability to produce derivative products for use by other Federal and state partners.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 85080


Question:   Supplement 1, pg 20 4.6 Build Phase: 2) Develop interfaces Contractor must develop application interfaces required to communicate with OGRIP, LHDs, Ohio agencies and external vendors systems, including the ability to import/export data via national standards, and other external entities. Which external vendor systems and OGRIP, LDH, and Ohio agency applications will the proposed solution be required to interface with?

Answer:   Application should provide ability for counties to submit datasets to OGRIP upon completion of validations. Application should have ability to aggregate county based datasets into a statewide file. It should also have ability to produce derivative products for use by other Federal and state partners.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 85080


Question:   RFP pg. 2/3 PART ONE: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Project will leverage existing county and state Location Based Response System (LBRS) resources to advance intelligent transportation technologies in support of the State's transition to Next Generation 9-1-1 services and future technological advancements by providing a mechanism to take the individual County data (Roads and Addresses) and ensure that they meet the LBRS specification and requirements for inclusion into the OGRIP LBRS Data Store. Can the State clarify how these existing county and state LBRS resources are currently being utilized and how the State expects these resources will continue to be utilized as this Project is implemented?

Answer:   Existing LBRS datasets should be utilized. Application should have ability to perform validation and convert datasets to current LBRS standards if required.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 85080


Question:   RFP pg. 2/3 PART ONE: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Project will leverage existing county and state Location Based Response System (LBRS) resources to advance intelligent transportation technologies in support of the State's transition to Next Generation 9-1-1 services and future technological advancements by providing a mechanism to take the individual County data (Roads and Addresses) and ensure that they meet the LBRS specification and requirements for inclusion into the OGRIP LBRS Data Store. Can the State provide a list and describe the existing county and state LBRS resources this Project will be required to leverage?

Answer:   Existing LBRS datasets that were developed and being maintained by counties. Link to LBRS Status Map: https://ogrip.oit.ohio.gov/ProjectsInitiatives/LBRS/LBRSStatus.aspx

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 85080


Question:   Reference: Proposal Submittal, pg 7 - provide ‘searchable’ copy using formats ‘as appropriate’. Question 8: Can the State confirm that only the Project Plan, and Supplements 1-3 are required to be submitted in Word format, with the remaining tabbed sections being at the proposer’s discretion? Thank you!!

Answer:   The State expects that in the searchable, electronic copy of the submitted Proposal, Offers will provide a copy of all pages in Microsoft Office (native format), Microsoft Word (native format), Microsoft Project (native format), Microsoft Excel (native format) and Adobe Acrobat format, as appropriate. For the searchable, electronic copy, submitting Supplement 4 as a spreadsheet and the Project Plan as a Gantt Chart as a separate native file would be acceptable.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 84899


Question:   Do you expect local jurisdictions to maintain state highway systems? How about non-state NHS?

Answer:   State System Highway System (IR, US & SR routes) will be maintained by the State DOT.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 84903


Question:   SR09 - "Designated addressing authorities must be able to simultaneously edit the GIS data (spatial and attribute) and publish their changes in real-time." Please clarify what is meant by real-time, such as 1) updates can be seen by the editors who are online editing, 2) seen by end-users in ArcGIS, 3) seen by consumers using web map/feature services, 4) seen when end users through data download.

Answer:   Editors should be able to observe changes as they are made.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 84905


Question:   SR07 - "The System must provide local addressing authorities with the capability to add, modify, or delete roads and addresses within their assigned jurisdictions." It appears that address data is handled by "address authorities," while centerline data is under "county governments." Please clarify whether "address authorities" and "counties" are separate entities.

Answer:   In some counties, different entities are responsible for maintaining centerline data and others maintain address data.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 84904


Question:   Attachment One, Requirement 6 states the need to support "emergency response boundary" data in addition to "street" and "address" data. This appears to be the ONLY place in the RFP where boundary data is referenced, please confirm.

Answer:   Solution will be required to update and maintain emergency response boundaries

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 84901


Question:   Reference: RFP, pg 54: Software Licenses. - "NOTE: The State will own all software licenses/systems procured through this RFP." Question 6: Will the State accept a SaaS-based solution delivered through a subscription model which does not require the state to purchase licensing or own the proposed software solution?

Answer:   All proposals meeting mandatories will be accepted and evaluated against specified criteria.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 84899


Question:   Reference: SUPPLEMENT 1: SCOPE OF WORK: LBRS DATA MAINTENANCE APPLICATION pg. 4, 6, 13 and 20 Sections 1.4.2, 1.4.6.c, 3.5 and 4.6 Question 5: Based on a comprehensive review of the RFP and related supplement documents, it appears the State is requesting the development of an on-premise LBRS data management application. Will the State accept and favorably evaluate proposals for Software as a Service (SaaS) solutions which are commercially available and meet or exceed the State’s requirements for the LBRS Maintenance Application?

Answer:   All proposals meeting mandatories will be accepted and evaluated against specified criteria.

Date: 5/18/2021

Inquiry: 84899


Question:   Regarding Tab 4, what is the evidence that must be provided to show that we are registered with the Ohio Shared Services to do business in the State of Ohio?

Answer:   Please provide the Vendor ID number assigned after registration with Ohio Shared Services.

Date: 5/14/2021

Inquiry: 84908


Question:   Please provide examples of "evidence" of registering with the Ohio Shared Services to do business in the State of Ohio, as required by technical proposal item 4.

Answer:   An active registration may be verified at https://businesssearch.ohiosos.gov/. The resulting search provides an option to 'print details' which will give a printable document that may be provided.

Date: 5/14/2021

Inquiry: 84907


Question:   Could you provide a url to or pdf of the existing LBRS specifications or requirements?

Answer:   https://www.dot.state.oh.us/lbrs/Documents/LBRS_Specifications_3.2.1_2019_01.pdf - Other related links have been added to the procurement page for this solicitation as 'PreProposal Conference Exhibit A'.

Date: 5/14/2021

Inquiry: 84902


Question:   Attachment One, Requirement 6 references SDX format. Please clarify.

Answer:   The reference to SDX format may be ignored. A recent Amendment has revised this requirement to remove the reference.

Date: 5/14/2021

Inquiry: 84900


Question:   Reference: Proposal Submittal, pg 7 - contain one (1) originally signed technical section Question 7: Would the State be willing to accept electronic signature due to COVID restrictions?

Answer:   No.

Date: 5/14/2021

Inquiry: 84899


Question:   Reference: RFP, pg 54: General Warranties. Paragraph 3. Question 4: Would the State be willing to remove the first sentence of paragraph 3: “The warranties regarding material defects, merchantability, and fitness are one-year warranties.”

Answer:   Requirements in the RFP are expected to be met as-is. Offerors that take exceptions to the terms and conditions or require further negotiations may be rejected.

Date: 5/14/2021

Inquiry: 84899


Question:   Reference: RFP, pg 54: General Warranties. Paragraph 1. Question 3: Will the State be willing to modify the General Warranties paragraph 1 to read: “General Warranties. The Contractor warrants that the recommendations, guidance, and performance of the Contractor under this Contract will: (1) be in accordance with sound professional standards and the requirements of this Contract and (2) unless otherwise provided in the RFP Documents, be the work solely of the Contractor. The Contractor also warrants that: (1) no Deliverable will infringe on the intellectual property rights of any third party and (2) the Contractors work and the Deliverables resulting from that work will be performed with that professional standard of care ordinarily observed by like professionals performing similar services under similar circumstances and as described in the RFP Documents.”

Answer:   Requirements in the RFP are expected to be met as-is. Offerors that take exceptions to the terms and conditions or require further negotiations may be rejected.

Date: 5/14/2021

Inquiry: 84899


Question:   Reference: RFP, pg 46: MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE #5 Waiver of Subrogation Question 2: Will the State accept evidence of Waiver of Subrogation coverage for all insurance requirements except Technology Professional Liability and Cyber Liability?

Answer:   Requirements in the RFP are expected to be met as-is. Offerors that take exceptions to the terms and conditions or require further negotiations may be rejected.

Date: 5/14/2021

Inquiry: 84899


Question:   Reference: RFP, pg 45: MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE #5 Cyber Liability Question 1: Will the State accept cyber liability coverage of $5M/$5M rather than $5M/$10M?

Answer:   Requirements in the RFP are expected to be met as-is. Offerors that take exceptions to the terms and conditions or require further negotiations may be rejected.

Date: 5/14/2021

Inquiry: 84899


Question:   Attachment One, page 16 of the RFP states this: “2 - Specialized expertise, capabilities and technical competence, of either the offeror or subcontractor, as demonstrated by the proposed approach and methodology to meet the project requirements (see RFP, Project Plan, page 37).” Does this evaluation criteria pertain to ATTACHMENT SEVEN, OFFEROR PROFILE, OFFEROR SCORED REQUIREMENT 2? Or does this evaluation criteria pertain to the Project Plan? Both of these are mentioned. Could the state please clarify?

Answer:   The proposal will be evaluated based on the criteria of “Specialized expertise, capabilities and technical competence, of either the offeror or subcontractor, as demonstrated by the proposed approach and methodology to meet the project requirements (see RFP, Project Plan, page 37).” The Offeor Profile form provided under Attachment Seven, Project Plan, and/or an in-line narrative may be used by offerors as necessary to complete their response.

Date: 5/11/2021

Inquiry: 84938


Question:   How many evaluation points is Tab 7 Project Plan worth?

Answer:   The Project Plan is not an individual scored item and may factor into one or multiple scored components of the technical proposal. Once all technical scores have been determined, the highest technical score will receive 700 points and all others will be proportionally given their scored based on the formula on page 17.

Date: 5/11/2021

Inquiry: 84937


Question:   What are the specific evaluation criteria for Tab 7 Project Plan?

Answer:   Project Plan requirements are provided on page 37 of the RFP.

Date: 5/11/2021

Inquiry: 84936


Question:   Regarding Tab 7 Project Plan, is it acceptable to use a Gantt chart such as SmartSheet rather than Microsoft Project Gantt chart?

Answer:   The State is expecting a complete Gantt Chart that provides the information necessary for review. For the purposes of a providing an electronic copy, a Gantt chart file must be exported (for the purposes of viewing in Microsoft Project/Excel).

Date: 5/11/2021

Inquiry: 84909


Question:   Tab 6 Offeror Profile, page 37 - Should Tab 6 include ONLY the completed Attachment Seven forms, or should Tab 6 also include a narrative discussion?

Answer:   Tab 6 must include a narrative as well as the forms from Attachment Seven.

Date: 5/10/2021

Inquiry: 84879


Question:   We respectfully request that the State extend the proposal deadline by one week, e.g., move it from Monday 5/24 to Friday, 5/28 or Friday 6/4. It can be difficult to arrange shipments over a weekend and most firms are still operating without full access to their office resources for printing and binding a complex proposal such as this one.

Answer:   An extension is being amended to the RFP, that will move the Opening date to Wednesday June 6, 2021.

Date: 5/10/2021

Inquiry: 84878


Question:   In Attachment 7, is there a limit to the number of projects that can be presented for OFFEROR SCORED REQUIREMENT 1 and OFFEROR SCORED REQUIREMENT 2?

Answer:   A limit was not placed on the Offeror Scored Requirements 1 and 2.

Date: 5/10/2021

Inquiry: 84877


Question:   Could the State confirm that references required in Attachment 7 are for personnel, rather than for the bidder’s organization as a whole?

Answer:   Attachment Seven includes several forms. Scored Requirements 1, 2 and 5 are intended for the Offeror or Subcontractor. Scored Requirement 4 is intended for the Project Manager. Scored Requirement 3 is for the personnel proposed.

Date: 5/10/2021

Inquiry: 84876


Question:   Regarding Tab 8, Supplement 1 Response, page 38, could the State clarify whether the proposal should be limited to the completed Supplement 1 MS Word document? Or is the State requesting a written narrative in ADDITION to the completed Supplement 1 document?

Answer:   Tab 8 must include the in-line responses (written narrative) to requirements as listed in Supplement 1 and Supplement 4, each in their respective formats.

Date: 5/10/2021

Inquiry: 84875


Question:   Regarding Tab 8, Supplement 4 Response, page 39 of the RFP, could the State clarify whether a completed Supplement 4 AND a written narrative are required? Or is the State asking for any and all written narrative to be incorporated into Supplement 4, and not delivered as a separate component of Tab 8?

Answer:   The State is expecting direct responses to each requirement provided in the spreadsheet. The State recommends, if there is a technical/functional limit to the cell, add a new line underneath the requirement in order to continue.

Date: 5/10/2021

Inquiry: 84874


Question:   Page 37 of the RFP states “The Project Plan must be provided by the offeror and are not subject to page count limitations that are applicable to the Supplements of this RFP”. What are the page counts that are applicable to the supplements, aside from the 2-page limit for resumes in Supplement 1?

Answer:   A page count limit was not placed on Supplements for this RFP.

Date: 5/10/2021

Inquiry: 84873


Question:   Tab 20 request for customer staff information seems to be the same as asked for in Tab 7, and also in Supplement 1 in Tab 8. Each of those asks for the same information about customer staff requirements. Do you want us to repeat the information in each section, or is something different being asked for? Please clarify.

Answer:   Please provide the responses as indicated where requested.

Date: 5/10/2021

Inquiry: 84872


Question:   Can the State clarify how to handle the redundancies that exist in the required responses to elements of Tab 7 and Tab 8? Tab 8 Supplement 1 requires detailed information about project management, state staff requirements, resumes, project staff capabilities, and other elements that appear to be similar to or are exactly the same as requirements asked for in Tab 7. Please clarify.

Answer:   Please provide the responses as indicated where requested.

Date: 5/10/2021

Inquiry: 84871


Question:   Regarding Tab 7 Project Plan, is it acceptable to use an interactive web-based Gantt chart other than Microsoft Project Gantt chart?

Answer:   The State must be able to review the native file supplied. Not enough detail has been provided to understand what interactive web-based Gantt chart is being proposed.

Date: 5/10/2021

Inquiry: 84870


Question:   Regarding Attachment 3, Response Specifics, page 35, is font size 10 a suggestion, or is font size 10 a requirement?

Answer:   Font size 10 is a recommendation and will accept an alternative so long as the formatting remains consistent throughout the response.

Date: 5/10/2021

Inquiry: 84869


Question:   Is there a page limit or size limit of any kind associated with responses to Supplement 4?

Answer:   There is not a page or size limit.

Date: 5/10/2021

Inquiry: 84868


Question:   For Supplement 4, are bidders expected to fit their entire responses to each item in the spreadsheet inside the spreadsheet itself? Or can they provide a written document with the detailed answers that is referenced from the spreadsheet in Supplement 4?

Answer:   The State is expecting responses to be in the spreadsheet. The State recommends, if there is a technical/functional limit to the cell, add a new line underneath the requirement in order to continue.

Date: 5/10/2021

Inquiry: 84867


Question:   Will the State provide a one or two-week extension to the proposal due date?

Answer:   The State will post an amendment soon to extend the due date. It is expected to become June 2, 2021 at 1:00 P.M. Eastern Time. The Inquiry period will also be extended to May 19, 2021 at 8:00 A.M. Eastern Time.

Date: 5/6/2021

Inquiry: 84788


Question:   The submission date is due 5.24.21 - what is the time in which the response needs to be received? 12PM ET?

Answer:   Proposals are due no later than 1:00 p.m. on the May 24, 2021. Additional details regarding the Bid Desk accepting packages and the allowance of sufficient time can be found under Proposal Submittal (page 7 of the RFP).

Date: 4/28/2021

Inquiry: 83738


Question:   Please confirm there is not an MBE, WBE and/or VBE mandatory requirement.

Answer:   There is not a mandatory or scored MBE requirement in this solicitation.

Date: 4/28/2021

Inquiry: 83627


Question:   Is there a proposed or set aside budget for this initiative?

Answer:   No budget information is being made available at this time.

Date: 4/28/2021

Inquiry: 83626


back

Inquiry period ended:  5/19/2021 8:00:00 AM