Loading...
RFP Project Management Software - Addendum 1oCa Ottigrai - CALIFORNIA - DATE: July 25, 2024 TO: All Prospective On -Call CIP Project Management and Professional Engineering Services RE: RFP On -Call CIP Project Management and Professional Engineering Services ADDENDUM NUMBER 1 The following shall be considered as incorporated into the Request for Proposal (RFP) for the above - referenced services. Portions of RFP not specifically mentioned in this Addendum remain in force. ■ REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Question: The typical timeline for this type of RFP gives Proposers 4 weeks and a minimum of 3 weeks to develop a proposal. Without a 3 -week minimum, our team does not begin the process to evaluate the RFP and work on a proposal. In order for us to move forward, we are requesting the Submittal deadline be extended to August 16, 2024, and for the City to issue an addendum with that extension by July 26, 2024. This extension will give us the 3 -week minimum needed to develop a proposal for the City. Will the City extend the Submittal Deadline to August 16, 2024? Answer: Yes, please see revised timeline: RFP Issue Date: July 23, 2024 Deadline for Proposers' Questions: July 25, 2024 August 1, 2024 City's Response to Questions: July 26, 2024 August 5, 2024 Proposals Submittal Deadline: July 30, 2024 August 16, 2024 Complete Evaluations of Proposals: August 5, 2024 August 19 — 23, 2024 Agreement Negotiations and Signing, Proof of Insurance Coverage, Forms 700: August 26-30, 2024 City Council Consideration and Approval: September 17, 2024 Agreement Effective Date and Project Start Date October 1, 2024 78495 Calle Tampico I La [Luinta, Caliiomia 92253 I 7611.777.7 009 1 www Iaquiotaca,gou imEmEmm oCa Ottigrai - CALIFORNIA - Question: Along with extending the Submittal Deadline to August 16, 2024, will the City extend the Deadline for Proposers' Questions to August 1, 2024? Please include this extension in an addendum by July 26, 2024. Note that at least 10 days are needed between the time the City responds to questions and the Submittal Deadline. Answer: See revised timeline above. Question: Looking at RFP item 13. RFP TIMELINE on page 3, there is no mention of the City shortlisting Proposers, and no mention of the City receiving demonstrations from or conducting interviews with shortlisted Proposers. Can the City explain if events for shortlisting, demonstrations, and interviews will be part of the evaluation process and describe when these will occur on the timeline? Answer: City will request demonstrations as needed. Question: RFP item 10. NEGOTIATIONS AND FINAL AGREEMENT on page 2 suggests a review of the City's Draft AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES and that there will be negotiations to reach a final agreement. Should Proposers include exceptions or provide clarifications related to the RFP and the City's Draft AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT in the proposal, or will the City negotiate the final agreement with the awarded Proposer? Should Proposers include their standard terms and standard Service Level Agreement (SLA) in the proposal for the City's review? Answer: Yes, proposer should include any redlines to the agreement in their response. Question: Implementation Timeline: What is the City's roughly estimated ideal timeline for transitioning to and fully utilizing the Vendor's platform following the project kickoff, and how does this align with your strategic goals and operational readiness? Answer: End of 2024 calendar year. Question: Project Utilization: How many initial projects does the City initially intend to manage using the Vendor's platform, and what are the scalability expectations as the City expands its usage? Answer: The expectation would be to include all the CIP project which is approximately 12 per fiscal year. Question: Project Portfolio Management: Is it important to be able to roll up projects into portfolios? Answer: It is important to clearly identify the project in the system. 78495 Calle Tampico I La [Luinta, Caliiomia 92253 I 7611.777.7 009 1 www Iaquiotaca,gou ■ oCa Ottigrai - CALIFORNIA - Question: Project Planning Phases: Does the City prefer the flexibility to enter projects at various stages, from inception to later phases, and how does this capability support your planning and execution processes? Answer: Yes, since we may need to include a project at a later stage than inception. Question: Users: What level of permission control is the City wishing to have for it's various users? Answer: Ability to control how much each user can see. Question: Users: is the City wishing to have both internal and external users leveraging the platform? Answer: Yes Question: How many internal La Quinta users and how many external users will need access to the project management software? Answer: 20 Question: What systems does the City currently use to manage projects? Answer: Microsoft Office Software Question: Can you please identify the challenges with the City's current processes/systems that you are looking to improve upon with the new project management software? Answer: Clear filing system with clear understanding of where the project stands at any given time. Question: What is the City's total annual capital budget? Answer: $30M Question: How many capital projects does the City typically manage per year? Answer: About 20 Projects. Question: Is there a page or word count limit that should be applied to any section of our response? 78495 Calle Tampico I La auiota, Caliiomia 92253 1768377.7000 1 www,laquiotaca,gou oCa Ottigrai - CA LIFOR NIA - Answer: No, but it should be concise. Question: What departments will use? (i.e. engineering/architect team, project managers, finance, approval chain). Answer: CIP/Engineering City Group, Design Consultants, Contractors. Question: What is the estimated budget to invest in the said solution? Answer: Open depending on capabilities. Question: Will the city also seek to use the system for capital planning and tracking fund sources? Answer: No, but a bonus if included in base price. Question: Integrations with other software: what platforms do you plan to integrate to the Project Management software? Answer: We would like to see a list of base price with included integrations and integrations not included. Bluebeam is a bonus integration. Question: Is there an expectation for the implementation timeline? Given Oct 1 kickoff, when would the City expect to be in a productional state with the software? Answer: End of 2024 calendar year. Question: Public Information — reference is made to "all proposals will be opened on Jul 29, 2024" but the provided timeline (Section 13) profiles that Proposal Submittal Deadline is June 30, 2024. Please clarify. Answer: Please refer to the revised timeline above. Question: Conflict of Interest — should this form be completed with proposal? Even if no such conflict exists? No such form was provided as an attachment. Answer: No, one will be provided if needed. Question: Local Business Preference — are additional points given to vendors that are local? Answer: Yes, but for whole of United States of America and call support hours. 78495 Calle Tampico I La f}uinta. California 92253 I ?6I.777,7JOL11 www,laquintaca,gou imEmEmm oCa Ottigrai - CALIFORNIA - Question: Scope of Service (pg 5) — under Scheduling there is a reference to "MS Project". Please expand on functionality requested. As in, should the vendor propose using MS -Project for ALL schedule related services? Or simply be able to import and export MS -Project schedules? Answer: Minimum feature to import/export. Bonus if scheduling can be done in software. Question: Scope of Service (pg 5) — "existing data" import. Please expand on the size and structure of said data. Does City require a full turnkey import or simply import utilities that the City can use to perform such imports? Answer: Minimum feature to be able to file existing data into the system. State the limit for data in the offered base price. Question: Proposal Format, section 3, References — will City accept non -CA government agencies as references? Specific to other cities of like size and structure? How many references should be provided? Answer: Yes. There is no limit but top three that are relevant would be helpful. Question: Agreement — should vendors denote any contract term requiring further discussion? Can vendors submit their agreements as an attachment to ensure relative aspects (namely on SaaS and hosting) are fully addressed? Such as segmenting SaaS services from Implementation Services? Answer: Yes, however the vendor will need to enter into the City's agreement. If an appendix is needed it will need to be provided. Question: What is the expected Term for this agreement? (paragraph 3.4 of Agreement)? Answer: One-year term with potential of three (3) two-year extensions Question: Agreement, paragraph 5 — Insurance: confirm that Certificates are NOT needed with proposal, but at time of contract. Proposal SHOULD include Attachment 2 — Insurance Requirements Acknowledgement, correct? Answer: Correct Question: Exhibit B — Schedule of Compensation: are alternative approaches permitted. I.e., is monthly billing for SaaS services a mandate? If so, are these fees to be paid in advance or in arrears? Answer: Include in the proposal. 78495 Calle Tampico I La [Luinta, Caliiomia 92253 I 7611.777.7 009 1 www Iaquiotaca,gou oCa Ottigrai - CA LIFOR NIA - Question: Scoring — Unique Qualities: no specific section in proposal format defined for such parameters. Should we provide explicitly? Answer: Unique Qualities are defined as followed (see attachment 1 for revised scoring sheet with the definition included): • Anything Above Minimum Requirements • Locals (U.S.) • Support Hours • Cloud Based Server • Mobile Options • Creating schedules in software • Customizations a part of base price • Core business is with government agencies Question: Would someone on your team be willing to hop on a call to provide more details to better understand the structure you are looking for? Answer: Unfortunately, we are unable to. Please respond to RFP to the best of your ability. Question: Will budget information be tracked in the solution or in another platform requiring a connection or import of the data? Answer: Yes, does not need import. Question: Could you please provide an overview of your IT landscape including major systems and applications used? Answer: Not a hindrance to implementation of software and please describe installation requirement for your software needs. Question: How many employees does the agency have? How many employees/users will be using this new [SOLUTION]? Answer: 20 users Question: Will any external users (without access to your network/domain) be using this [SOLUTION]? If yes, how many external users? What information/content those external users need to view and/or edit? 78495 Calle Tampico I La Gornto, California 92253 I ?6I.777,7JOL11 www,laquintaca,gou ■ oCa Ottigrai - CA LIFOR NIA - Answer: Yes, part of the 20 users. Needs to be provided in response if there are different costs. Question: What is the volume of data/documents that needs to be migrated, if any? Answer: About 10GB Question: Did any vendor help the agency in preparing this RFQ document? Answer: No Question: Is there an incumbent and if so, please identify the current incumbent. Answer: No Question: Please provide your anticipated number of users and locations for training? Answer: 10 users and trainings can be through Teams or at La Quinta City Hall. Question: How many admin and end-users need to be trained for this new [SOLUTION]? Answer: 5 admin and 20 end-users. Question: What system does the City currently use for electronic signatures? Answer: Adobe PDF Question: Can you please share more about how you want to manage funds? E.g. Do you want to identify fund sources per year, establish rules (% and $ splits) allocate to projects and track actuals? Answer: Identify funding sources per project and track amount used per $ value. The Consultant is hereby notified; Addendum No. 1 must be acknowledged as required under Section 6, Addenda and submitted as part of the RFP. Failure to acknowledge and incorporate addenda will not relieve the proposer from the responsibility to meet all terms and conditions of the RFP and any subsequent addenda. 78495 Calle Tampico I La auiota, Caliiomia 92253 1768.777.7000 1 www,laquiotaca,gou ■ APPROVED: U Ido Ay ( 125, 02417:19 PDT) Ubaldo Ayon Assistant Construction Manager Attachments:1. Revised Evaluation Form END OF ADDENDUM NUMBER 1 tai a deo - CALIFORNIA - 78495 Calle Tampico I La auinta, Caliiomia 92253 1768377.7000 1 www,laquiotaca,gou Consultant: Reviewer: Date: ATTACHMENT 1 REQUEST FOR PROPSAL EVALUATION Project Management Software Services Refer to Scoring Breakdown on next sheet. Experience and Qualifications 30 Staffing and Scope of Work 25 Understanding and Approach 20 Cost 10 Unique Qualities 10 Presentation/Format 5 Total 100 Unique Qualities (Intangibles): (Explanation) Comments: Reviewer's Signature: TOTAL Contract Administrator's Initials: Date: Scoring Breakdown: Experience and Qualifications - 30 points maximum 0-10 points: Consultant does not include previous experience or has very minimal experience. 11-20 points: Consultant lists previous experience, but experience is not relevant or similar. 21-30 points: Consultant lists relevant previous experience with similar work. Quality of staff for work to be done/Scope of Work - 25 points maximum 0-10 points: Resumes not included or staff has little to no experience with similar project. 11-17 points: Staff list includes resumes, but experience is not relevant or similar. 18-25 points: Staff has relevant experience and is competent to perform scope requested. Understanding of work to be done and approach - 20 points maximum 0-10: Scope of work is off topic or is missing more than 5 key elements. 11-15: Scope of work is understandable but missing a few key elements. 16-20: Scope of work well justified and most or all key elements are included. Cost — 10 Points maximum 0-4 points: Consultant rates significantly vary from standard rates for similar services, and/or there are significant errors in calculations. 5-7 points: Consultant rates vary from standard rates for similar services and/or there are minor errors in calculations. 8-10 points: Consultant rates are within standard rates for similar services. Unique Qualities (Intangibles) - 10 points maximum • Anything Above Minimum Requirements • Locals (U.S.) • Support Hours • Cloud Based Server • Mobile Options • Creating schedules in software • Customizations a part of base price • Core business is with government agencies Presentation/Format - 5 points maximum 0-2: Scope of work is not or barely organized into tasks and subtasks, does not flow clearly. 2-4: Scope of work is organized into tasks and subtasks, but not in a clear logical order. 4-5: Scope of work is well organized into logical tasks and subtasks to complete a project.