Arlington County Government Sealed Solicitation
Title: 22-DTS-RFP-602 Electronic Agenda Management System
Deadline: 5/18/2022 3:00 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)
Status: Awarded
Solicitation Number: 22-DTS-RFP-602
Description: The purpose of this Request for Proposal (RFP) is to establish a five-year contract (1 base year plus 4 option-year periods) for the provision of a product that provides electronic agenda management and video streaming services, as well as associated training, implementation, maintenance, and other support services.
Documents:
| Documents as of 4/8/2022 |
|---|
| 22-DTS-RFP-602 Electronic Agenda Management System.pdf |
Addition 1
Posted: 4/19/2022
Type of Addition: Addendum 01
Overview: The purpose of this Addendum 01 is to change the due date for questions to 4/25/22 at 5:00. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.
Addition 2
Posted: 4/26/2022
Type of Addition: Addendum 02
Overview: The purpose of Addendum 02 is to respond to questions received by the due date and time.
Solicitation #: 22-DTS-RFP-602
Documents:
Addition 3
Posted: 5/18/2022
Type of Addition: In Review
Question 1
Posted: 4/19/2022
Question: 1. Could you provide a more detailed explanation of the County’s requirement for an open API for integration with the County’s current/future agenda module and Board report workflow system (page 8)? What integration points does the County envision as necessary? Can a use case be provided? 2. Regarding Functional Requirement #2 – Please provide details on how BRASS supports agenda preparation. Do the BRASS components currently integrate with the County’s Granicus platform? 3. As a follow-on to the previous question, could you please provide a detailed explanation of the County’s processes, workflows, and applications that are currently used to create and approve agenda items, prepare full agenda packages with supporting documents, conduct meetings and capture/draft minutes, publish meeting artifacts to the County website (agendas, minutes, video), as well as the file formats for artifacts. 4. Regarding Requested Element #13 – What kind of video editing functionality is desired? 5. Regarding Requested Element #14 – What kind of non-meeting content is desired to be streamed? Is this for a 24/7 streaming PEG channel or something of that nature (for example)? 6. Regarding Requested Element #16 – What details would the County like to see in the post-meeting action item report? 7. Regarding Data Migration – Where (in what systems) do the County’s meeting artifacts reside (agendas, minutes, media). What is the data volume of agendas and minutes? What is the volume of video and audio files? How many meetings are expected to be migrated? How many years back are expected to be migrated? 8. Can the County rank which requirements are “must-have” and which are “desired”?
Response: Please see Addendum 02
Question 2
Posted: 4/25/2022
Question: The County states that it is looking for "cloud-based services" for its Electronic Agenda Management system that integrates with the County's Board Reports and Agenda Support System (BRASS/OnBase). We understand that Brass/OnBase is currently self-hosted on-premise and has not been migrated to the cloud yet. Would the County consider a proposal that meets all of the Functional Requirements with a native OnBase solution as a compliant bid, even if the proposed OnBase Agenda Management solution would not be in the cloud until the County decides to migrate Brass/OnBase to the cloud?
Response: Please see Addendum 02
Question 3
Posted: 4/25/2022
Question: The definition of Key Personnel in the RFP is vague and the requirements for changes to Key Personnel are restrictive. The County states the Contract Award Date as "TBD" and a kickoff meeting must occur within 10 days of the "Notice to Proceed" date, please provide specific dates for these milestones and what project roles the County considers "Key". Does the County agree that any changes to its Award Date and/or Notice to Proceed date may impact a vendor's ability to provide the proposed Key Personnel? What is the County's process for reviewing and approving changes to Key Personnel?
Response: Please see Addendum 02
Question 4
Posted: 4/25/2022
Question: Does the County have any issues or concerns with continuing to leverage YouTube for storing and streaming meeting videos, if properly integrated with its new Agenda Management system? Does the County have an active Google AdSense account, which is required by YouTube in order to view streaming video? If not, has the County's YouTube channel reached 4,000 watch hours, which is required to create an AdSense account?
Response: Please see Addendum 02
Question 5
Posted: 4/25/2022
Question: What are the County's expectations around its requirement for technical support during Board meetings? Onsite? Remote? Dedicated? Any particular SLAs that must be met during these events?
Response: Please see Addendum 02
Posted: 4/19/2022
Type of Addition: Addendum 01
Overview: The purpose of this Addendum 01 is to change the due date for questions to 4/25/22 at 5:00. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.
Posted: 4/26/2022
Type of Addition: Addendum 02
Overview: The purpose of Addendum 02 is to respond to questions received by the due date and time.
Solicitation #: 22-DTS-RFP-602
Documents:
Posted: 5/18/2022
Type of Addition: In Review
Posted: 4/19/2022
Question: 1. Could you provide a more detailed explanation of the County’s requirement for an open API for integration with the County’s current/future agenda module and Board report workflow system (page 8)? What integration points does the County envision as necessary? Can a use case be provided? 2. Regarding Functional Requirement #2 – Please provide details on how BRASS supports agenda preparation. Do the BRASS components currently integrate with the County’s Granicus platform? 3. As a follow-on to the previous question, could you please provide a detailed explanation of the County’s processes, workflows, and applications that are currently used to create and approve agenda items, prepare full agenda packages with supporting documents, conduct meetings and capture/draft minutes, publish meeting artifacts to the County website (agendas, minutes, video), as well as the file formats for artifacts. 4. Regarding Requested Element #13 – What kind of video editing functionality is desired? 5. Regarding Requested Element #14 – What kind of non-meeting content is desired to be streamed? Is this for a 24/7 streaming PEG channel or something of that nature (for example)? 6. Regarding Requested Element #16 – What details would the County like to see in the post-meeting action item report? 7. Regarding Data Migration – Where (in what systems) do the County’s meeting artifacts reside (agendas, minutes, media). What is the data volume of agendas and minutes? What is the volume of video and audio files? How many meetings are expected to be migrated? How many years back are expected to be migrated? 8. Can the County rank which requirements are “must-have” and which are “desired”?
Response: Please see Addendum 02
Posted: 4/25/2022
Question: The County states that it is looking for "cloud-based services" for its Electronic Agenda Management system that integrates with the County's Board Reports and Agenda Support System (BRASS/OnBase). We understand that Brass/OnBase is currently self-hosted on-premise and has not been migrated to the cloud yet. Would the County consider a proposal that meets all of the Functional Requirements with a native OnBase solution as a compliant bid, even if the proposed OnBase Agenda Management solution would not be in the cloud until the County decides to migrate Brass/OnBase to the cloud?
Response: Please see Addendum 02
Posted: 4/25/2022
Question: The definition of Key Personnel in the RFP is vague and the requirements for changes to Key Personnel are restrictive. The County states the Contract Award Date as "TBD" and a kickoff meeting must occur within 10 days of the "Notice to Proceed" date, please provide specific dates for these milestones and what project roles the County considers "Key". Does the County agree that any changes to its Award Date and/or Notice to Proceed date may impact a vendor's ability to provide the proposed Key Personnel? What is the County's process for reviewing and approving changes to Key Personnel?
Response: Please see Addendum 02
Posted: 4/25/2022
Question: Does the County have any issues or concerns with continuing to leverage YouTube for storing and streaming meeting videos, if properly integrated with its new Agenda Management system? Does the County have an active Google AdSense account, which is required by YouTube in order to view streaming video? If not, has the County's YouTube channel reached 4,000 watch hours, which is required to create an AdSense account?
Response: Please see Addendum 02
Posted: 4/25/2022
Question: What are the County's expectations around its requirement for technical support during Board meetings? Onsite? Remote? Dedicated? Any particular SLAs that must be met during these events?
Response: Please see Addendum 02