Company name

RFP #21118 - Integrated Capital Program Management System

Addendum #1

August 17, 2021

Question:  Confirming the agency is the responsible party for selection and hiring of a third party for vulnerability and penetration testing?

Response:  Yes, the County will be responsible for selection and hiring of a third party vendor. 

August 13, 2021

Question:  Are existing Legistar and Oracle BOSS APIs currently in use by LCDOT (within CPMS or elsewhere)?

Response:  There are no API’s currently in use by LCDOT within the  current CPMS system.

Question:  Would users perform these queries ad-hoc, or would the system query these sources based on the project viewed or report run?

Response:  Preferably the system would query these sources based on the project viewed, but the County would be open to ad-hoc as well.  Legistar tracks specific project phases brought though the county board, the board meets monthly so the data from Legistar would likely not need to be refreshed more than monthly.  The County uses Oracle for accounts payable and accounts receivable and it is desirous to see actual expenditures for a project, so that data would likely need to be refreshed more frequently. 

Question:  Will a general mockup of the visualizations work (illustrative example) or will each visualization stated require a distinct mockup?

Response:  A general mockup would be acceptable.

Question:  Does LCDOT have a complete list of the Integrations needed for go-live?

Response:  As LCDOT currently does not have any integrations, they could be added after go-live.  Right now, the County desires to integrate with Legistar, Oracle for expenditures and revenues tracking and some integration with the County’s GIS system.

Question:  Does LCDOT have a complete list of the sources and directions of data flow (e.g., inbound only - into the system, outbound only - out of the system, both directions)?

Response:  LCDOT does not have this list as there are not integrations with the current system.  It is anticipated that the system would pull in data from Legistar and Oracle as ‘read-only” it is not anticipated that there would be any modification of data or sending of data out to those sources.  For GIS the county is looking for the ability to send projects to be incorporated into our current GIS system. 

August 11, 2021

Question:  What is the integration architecture standard used at Lake County?

Response:  The County does not have a standard.   

Question:  What is the data collection architecture standard used at Lake County?

Response:  The County does not have a standard.

Question:  What is the projected number of projects this application will support?

Response:  This varies, there are currently 429 projects, however it changes year to year. 

Question:  Can you share the current data architecture for the existing application?

Response:  Relational Database Structure (SQL) utilizing   2 Tier design where clients access the DB Server.  Current system has independent databases, assigned to manage their job function.  Currently 11 databases within the system instance.

Question:  What is the current database size for the application?

Response:  800mb.

Question:  Regarding Integrations, the RFP mentions "Integration of the database with other internal and external data sources through API’s is also required. Data must be collected from the web interface, mapping application, and via imports from other databases/spreadsheets internal and external to LCDOT." We understand the sources are "Legistar, Oracle, and the GIS system". For Legistar and Oracle, what type of data is pulled?

Response:  The current version of CPMS does not have this functionality this is something the County is seeking to expand on.  For Legistar, which tracks funding appropriations brought the County Board we want to be able to track the resolution number, what fund source has been appropriated, and how much. This would be an ongoing load, for Legistar a monthly load to pull appropriations would be sufficient.  For Oracle which is used for the Count’s accounts payable and accounts receivable, we would like to trans actual expenditures for a given project, which Oracle uses Section # to track.  It would also be an on-going pull, at least weekly would be desired. As our current system doesn’t have this capability we are not yet sure how many file or tables would be included for each.

Question:  Is there an entity relationship diagram for the existing application? I'm looking to understand the objects and attributes in the current model. For example, I would expect to see Project, Financial Line Item, Line Item Section, Reference data (Municipalities, Fiscal Years, Phases, etc) included.    

Response:  We do not have an entity relationship diagram for the existing application.  The RFP details the data fields to be included in the system. Each project has specific attributes (locations, schedule, project managers, letting dates) but the program also tracks all projects across multiple years  and maintains fiscal constraint for each fund source in each fiscal year.

Question:  Regarding Project Histories, I see that all changes must be logged for auditing. How many project attributes are in-scope for tracking? All attributes or a subset? Do Financial Line Item attributes need to be tracked or only the Financial Summary? All attributes would need to be tracked. 

Response:  Financial Line item attributes would need to be tracked, not just a financial summary.  Fund sources could change without the cost changing, project schedules could change without costs changes, all of those changes should be tracked. 

August 6, 2021

Question:  How many internal end users does LCDOT anticipate for this system? Will all those users require system training by the selected vendor?

Response:  It is not anticipated that training would be required for all users, currently only IT and one staff person had edit rights to CPMS, it is expected that a small group of staff would require training as most users have read only privileges. 

There are approximately 60 staff members that use CPMS:
•            Administration and Finance: 8
•            Planning Department: 9
•            Traffic Department: 4
•            Design Department:10
•            Construction Department: 17
•            Maintenance Department: 6

Question:  Does Lake County anticipate supporting this system with departmental IT resources, the enterprise technology team or a hybrid of the two?

Response:  Departmental IT

Question:  What is the current and expected user groups (internal, external, other agencies) that would engage with the system and or process?

Response:  It is expected that IT staff would have full administrator privileges, one-5 staff would have full edit rights for all project data entry and changes, and the remaining users would have read only access for project changes but could access report functions.

Question:  Do you have a defined cloud strategy for LCDOT or the County as a whole? If so, could you share it?

Response:  The County currently does not have a defined cloud strategy. Its up to the vendor on what platform they use.  As long as the security, redundancy, etc. have been met. 

August 5, 2021

Question:  Changes to the County’s current business process and systems may be required when implementing any new solution due to the differences between the County’s current CPMS system(s) and a new COTS system. Is the County looking for a solution that could require the County to adjust some of its current processes to align with the new COTS solution?  Or is the County looking for a solution that must be fully customized to match the County’s current processes?

Response:  The County recognizes that some business process may be required to change to adapt to a new system, and the County is willing to change processes if necessary.  Ideally there would be a balance between some customization to the County’s processes and the County adapting to meeting the requirements of a new system. 

Question:  Has a budget been approved for this project? If so, please provide the budget range for implementing the new solution.  Please also provide the budget range for yearly software licensing costs.

Response:  There are funds programmed in the County’s current 5-year Highway Program, however each project phase needs to be appropriated by the County Board before funds can be spent.  It is anticipated that an appropriation will be brought to the County Board with a contract award. Right now, the funds programmed are serving as a place holder rather than a budgeted amount.

Question:  Would you please provide a breakdown and numbers of the expected user community of the new solution?   

Response:  There are approximately 60 staff members that use CPMS:

•            Administration and Finance: 8
•            Planning Department: 9
•            Traffic Department: 4
•            Design Department:10
•            Construction Department: 17
•            Maintenance Department: 6

 

Question:  Currently, the County’s CPMS has one user performing data entry. Is it the intent of selecting a new solution to spread the data entry responsibilities amongst multiple users?  Or does the County intend to keep one person as the single point of data entry?

Response:  In the short term the County anticipates a single staff member continuing to do data entry but depending on the chosen solution in the longer-term additional staff may submit project changes or data entry.

Question:  Would you please confirm the project timeline dates?  There is a misalignment of the start and go-live dates in 5. Project Timeline and Detailed Submittal Requirements / Implementation/Project Plan.

Response:  It is anticipated that the project will begin in January of 2022 and include the planning phase to design system with some initial data conversion and testing to take place over the next several months.  The May 2022 go live data is meant to be when the final data conversion takes place and the County begins to use the new system on a daily basis for capital project management.  The timeline is subject to change, and the County anticipates updating the schedule with the chosen vendor once a contract is in place.

Question:  F. Examples of Supporting Materials calls for hyperlinks to client websites. As we are a SaaS application, we cannot provide direct access to other environments not under the control of the County or the vendor. Can we provide just screenshots of system capabilities that align with the RFP?

Response:  Screen shots are acceptable to demonstrate the capabilities of a vendor’s system.

Question:  Integrations – The County has indicated there need to be integrations with Legistar, Oracle, and a GIS system. Can the County provide more detail around the integrations?  Or can the vendor provide a rough-order-of-magnitude based upon the vendor’s past system integration experiences?    

Response:  An order of magnitude would be acceptable to include in the RFP response.  The County would like to integrate read-only access from the chosen system to Legistar and Oracle.  The County appropriates funding for each phase of a project through the county board and those appropriations are entered into Legistar for County Board action.  The County would like to be able to view items in Legistar to the appropriation including when it was appropriate, what fund source and how much funding, it is not anticipated that there would need to be any editing of information in Legistar or Oracle, just viewing of data in those systems. 

Question:  Data Migration – The County indicates there are 440 current projects. Does the data migration of those projects need to be included in the scope? If so, can you please provide more detail about the data tables/rows that need to be migrated? Also, from a timing perspective, does the migration have to be completed by go-live, or can it occur afterward?

Response:  Data migration should be included in the scope, however depending on the system selected the County would consider entering existing projects manually into the new system.  Ideally the data migration would happen by the go-live data and as mentioned previously the County is open to adjusting the development schedule for the go-live date.

Question:  For “outside revenue,” please clarify that the County simply needs the ability to identify if a line item counts towards revenue and there are no other actions required.  If there are other actions or requirements, can you please clarify?

Response:  For outside revenue the County needs the ability to identify that the funds are coming from an outside agency and that they will county towards the revenue of a specific tax fund.  For example, a project funded with Sales Tax Funds in the Current CPMS would have outside revenue programmed and Sales Tax Revenues and count towards the available funds in the Sales Tax Fund. 

Question:  Would you please provide the names of any vendors who have demonstrated their capital program management system(s) or capabilities for the County?

Response:  The County has not had any vendors provide demonstrations of products.  The County may request demonstrations or interviews from short list finalist vendors as part of the selection process.

Question:  Due to timing and resource constraints, will the County extend the RFP due date to allow vendors more time to provide a quality proposal?

Response:  At this time Lake County will not be extending the RFP opening date.

Question:  The County requires the new solution to be integrated with a mapping application (ArcGIS) and “draw” new projects. Can you confirm if the County expects to have a project be initiated (started) by making a drawing on a map? If so, can you confirm if this is “desired” or “required” functionality.

Response:  The County does not expect to have a project started by drawing on a map, although that could be a way a project is started depending on the solution selected.  The county anticipates data fields with Route, From, To and other project information would be populated to start a project and that a project could then be drawn on a map.  The ability to draw each project on a map is required. Deeper GIS integration to be able to show all expansion or all preservation projects on single map is desired but not required.

July 28, 2021

Question:  Whether companies from Outside USA can apply for this?

Response:  The RFP is open to all companies.

Question:  Whether we need to come over there for meetings?

Response:  The project may require in person meetings.

Question:  Can we perform the tasks (related to RFP) outside USA?

Response:  This will be decided with the award vendor.

Question:  Can we submit the proposals via email?

Response:  Lake County is only accepting electronic responses via the Lake County Purchasing Portal.

Phone: 1.800.555.5555

© Copyright 2022, Company name. All Rights Reserved.