Questions 1-3 relate to Item 4 Data Sheet on page 12:

Transcription

1 Florida Division of Emergency Management RFP-DEM Florida Statewide Emergency Alert and Notification System Questions and Answers (Answers are in bold) Questions 1-3 relate to Item 4 Data Sheet on page 12: 1. How are points awarded across the four criteria listed (rate to process records, contacts via telephone, contacts via SMS and contacts via )? See formula outlined in Exhibit C, p seconds of recipient confirmation and system processing (see below) seems excessive. How should a vendor modify their response if system processing would be less than a second? Guaranteed minimum number of concurrent recipient contacts via telephone per minute, assuming multiple concurrent notifications across multiple jurisdictions (i.e. disregard theoretical capacity of a given area s Central Office or Branch Exchange instead focus on your specific capacity). For this measure, a one-minute call segment is based on 15 seconds for dialing & answer wait time, 30 seconds of recorded message delivery, and 15 seconds of recipient confirmation and system processing of the response Guaranteed minimum number of concurrent recipient contacts via telephone per minute entails message initiation, receipt, and confirmation as defined by FDEM. The vendor is required to report data as outlined in Exhibit C, to ensure comparison of data across vendor submissions. 3. As posed, the question assumes no other usage on the vendor s system other than usage generated by FDEM Florida users. Since vendors have other customers who may also need to use the system at the same time (for example, Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes often represent multi-state events) in which case users may compete for a vendor s resources. How will FDEM adjust the theoretical capacity to real-world conditions, if at all? Questions 4 15 relate to Exhibit A and specifically about items 3. Minimum System Requirements, 4. Minimum Geographical Information System Requirements and 5. Minimum Notification Requirements. Except for Q.4., which is more general, we have included the items and subsection for cross-reference, so, for example 3.G. refers to the specification at the top of page 23. FDEM is solely concerned with the ability of the vendor to provide the consistent services we have outlined. Other customers and commitments shall not in any way diminish the stated level of service the vendor provides in response to the RFP. Page 1 of 6

2 4. Page 13, 4 e) states that the technical plan must meet the Minimum System Requirements, but these requirements are sometimes written to require a specific method, rather than addressing the underlying need addressed by the requirement. Is FDEM willing to entertain technical specifications that meets or exceeds the functional requirement (i.e. accomplish the same objective), but in a different manner than described? We would note that paragraph 5, on page 3, reads in part: However, the Division reserves the right to consider a proposal that contains a minor deviation or irregularity so long as that minor deviation or irregularity does not provide a competitive advantage over the other proposers. For example: 5. 3.G. Assumes that E911 phone data is properly and completely geo-coded and that the data can be used as-is without data correction, rather than specifying a standard of geo-coding success to make the imported data as useful as possible. How will FDEM differentiate vendors who provide superior geo-coding and data correction? There will not be differentiation as long as the minimum requirement is met L, specifies only web-based registration, rather than requiring vendors to maximize citizen enrollment. How should a vendor which enables other means of registration, including telephone-based registration and text based registration and has been working to maximize registration describe those capabilities in its response? There will not be differentiation as long as the minimum requirement is met M. assumes a username and password method for securing registration information, rather than simply requiring a secure method for users to store and access their information. How should a vendor that has implemented superior methods designed to maximize citizen acceptance describe those methods? The vendor can describe their methods as part of the technical proposal as long the minimum requirement is met P. (i) specifies comparison to US Postal address information, but there are commercial vendors who offer superior address verification and correction services. How would a vendor describe those capabilities and will they be considered responsive? The minimum requirement as stated must be met P.ii) requires allowing citizens to manually input latitude and longitude. Does FDEM have any data to suggest that many citizens actually know their coordinates or how to look them Page 2 of 6

3 up? If no, what users does FDEM expect will want to use this functionality and for what purpose? Recipients may include more than citizens; as such, the minimum requirement as stated must be met. Purposes include but are not limited to assisting users in creating profiles for citizens and business who may not have a specific address E. (as well as similar requirements at 8 3) require that smart phone applications are designed for their specific device and run as native applications on that device. Will a proposal that includes only a mobile-formatted web application, providing the same functionality via a mobile device be considered nonresponsive? If so, can you explain why, since the same need could theoretically be met with no sacrifice in function, usability or access? The minimum requirement as stated must be met L. - specifies that The number of report formats shall be unlimited. Since there are only a handful of data elements to be reported (date/time of attempt, number or address, physical address, name, success status and derived values from those six), what does unlimited mean in this context? What objective does the requirement address? Unlimited refers to report customization at each account level. Different jurisdictions may wish to create different report titles or different ordering and labeling of fields. Therefore, the minimum requirement as stated must be met P. assumes the use of postal addresses, rather than jurisdictional addresses. We know of many instances in which a postal address does not correspond to a political entity such as a municipality. Will system administrators be accessing recipient users based on postal address or on their political jurisdictions? Jurisdictional administrators will access recipient data based upon their political jurisdiction P. iii) specifies the ability for recipients to access a graphical user interface where they can view their location on a map and select point. Since there is no requirement stated about the scale at which a user would select his or her address, this functionality could potentially result in a highly inaccurate placement of the intended location. Again, what users does FDEM expect to use this functionality and for what purpose? All users (administrators and recipients) may use this functionality to identify a geographical point of interest on a map and save that point as one of the two recipient location points. The minimum scale must be 1-10, A. Does FDEM intend to allow jurisdictional administrators access to all data in the database, or only data within specific geographic parameters? If the latter, will those be based Page 3 of 6

4 on County lines? If not specifically county lines, then what jurisdictional parameters must be supported? Jurisdiction administrators and message originators will only be able to access data within their jurisdiction. The jurisdictions may include any political subdivision within the State of Florida. Jurisdictional parameters are set by Florida law for counties, municipalities, and agencies M. Does FDEM want users to be able to set the desired delivery rate, or would it prefer to have those rates set by the vendor? Does FDEM expect that users will know the throughput capacity for the local telephone system? Or would a throttling function built into the vendor s system be considered responsive? FDEM expects that jurisdictional administrators should be able to independently set delivery rate for their jurisdiction, if variation from default is needed. 16. Where was the funding allocated for the system? Will each agency that plans to operate on the system help fund it, or will the Division of Emergency Management fund the entire system? If grant funding is being used, please disclose which grant. This information is not required to submit a responsive RFP. 17. We would like to respond to RFP-DEM and was wondering if it is mandatory that the vendor must be a FEMA IPAWS Alert Origination Software provider? Yes, it is mandatory. 18. Regarding RFP p. 2, Item 1 Background, please clarify and further define the possible authorized agencies, entities, and political subdivisions intended for this system (e.g., state departments, educational institutions, counties, cities, other taxing or municipal authorizes). See Fla. Stat (2)(b) for a definition of political subdivisions. See Fla. Stat (11) for a definition of state agencies. 19. Regarding RFP p. 9 Item 21 and RFP p. 11 Item 27c, does the State require the vendor to disclose if they are currently seeking new investment funds or are in the process of changing the filing status of their business? 20. Regarding RFP p. 10, Item 24 Reservations, will time be allocated for system demonstrations as part of the evaluation process? No, there will not be time allocated for system demonstrations. Page 4 of 6

5 21. Regarding RFP p. 10, Item 22 Protest of Request for Proposal Specifications, the agency references [ ] the bond or other security required [ ]. Please clarify if a bond is required for this project? If so, please specify the amount. A bond is only required when filing a protest. 22. Regarding RFP p. 11, Item 27 Technical Proposal (Part I), please clarify how many proposal copies must be submitted. Submit 1 original, 7 copies, and 1 CD. 23. Regarding RFP p. 11, Item 27d, does the FDEM require a detailed summary of company history, including prior corporate structures and names? 24. On RFP p. 22, Item 3C, does the State require a seamless, single launch process for GIS, staff, and IPAWS notifications involved with a single event? 25. On RFP p. 22, Item 3F, the state requires a system that fully interface[s] with IPAWS. To clarify, are all five (5) of the alerting protocols, as recognized by FEMA, required (e.g., WEA, EAS, NWEM, COG to COG, and the public alerts feed)? IPAWS integration with WEA, EAS, NWEM, and public alerts feed is required. 26. RFP pp , Item 5B lists functionality that is repeated on RFP p. 28, Item 8c. Please clarify whether this aspect of the project is a Minimum Requirement or a Task. This is a task to be completed on or before January 1, Regarding RFP p. 27, Item 8b, does the state require an automatic, native translation feature for converting English into the recipient s preferred language for voice, text, and messages? A native translation feature is not required. 28. Regarding RFP p. 29, Exhibit B Price Proposal Sheet, the FDEM states that services will start January 1, 2015, through June 30, Please confirm the dates listed. January 1, 2016 through June 30, If a prospective bidder utilizes third parties for completing the RFP requirements, shall the bidder s service level agreements (SLAs) with those third parties be submitted within the proposal response? Page 5 of 6

6 Yes. 30. Page 20 of the RFP document, Communicate in multiple languages. Which languages does the state require/want to have represented? Please see 3.B p Page 22 Message Originator: An individual authorized to initiate a notification message and monitor the status of other notifications originated within the jurisdiction. Should notifications originate and be labeled as from state or local owned phone lines and networks? Please see 5.H p What type of agreements may the vendor rely upon for free, unlimited access and bandwidth from wireless carriers and phone companies? As a vendor-hosted system, the vendor is required to provide all connectivity and network capacity required to meet minimum requirements of RFP. 33. May we submit our financial information separately from the main proposal to only be reviewed by your Financial Team? Page 6 of 6