Question



The following is additional information regarding Request for Proposal (RFP) No 4504 - Work Schedule Time Project (WST) released on 06/22/2018. The due date and time for responses is 07/20/2018, 3:00 PM (Pacific). This addendum includes both questions from prospective proposers and the City’s answers, and revisions to the RFP. This addendum is hereby made part of the RFP and therefore, the information contained herein shall be taken into consideration when preparing and submitting a proposal.

|Item # |Date Received |Date Answered |Vendor’s Question |City’s Answer |RFP Revisions |

|2 |6/28/18 |07/03/18 |The RFP indicates that the solution will|There are sections on the price response sheet for providing cost for additional users. | |

| | | |be rolled out to the Seattle Fire |Please include any costs that will impact the addition of other users. That said, the | |

| | | |Department but may eventually be used by|expectation is that the pricing structure proposed for the Fire Department will be | |

| | | |additional City departments including |consistent with what is quoted to the other departments. | |

| | | |the Seattle Police Department. Should | | |

| | | |optional pricing be included to add on | | |

| | | |additional agencies to the solution’s | | |

| | | |platform? | | |

|3 |6/28/18 |07/03/18 |Except for CAD and RMS, the interface |At this point, CAD and RMS would be anticipated as future integrations. No specific | |

| | | |list details the type of information to |pricing for this integration is required, however we would like to understand vendors | |

| | | |be pulled-from and/or sent-to the |capabilities in this area. Describe the API/Interface you have used for similar systems. | |

| | | |proposer’s solution. Please clarify the| When the City plans to do this integration, we will provide more clarity for desired data| |

| | | |desired interface data exchange for CAD |exchange. | |

| | | |and RMS. | | |

|4 |6/28/18 |07/03/18 |In Section 7 – Scope of Work, the last |There is no specific timeframe for on-site support for post implementation. Please | |

| | | |bulleted item is for |describe what you believe is the most effective support model to ensure project success.  | |

| | | |‘post-implementation on-site support’. | | |

| | | |Please clarify the desired expectation | | |

| | | |of on-site support and length of time it| | |

| | | |is to be offered. | | |

|5 |6/28/18 |07/03/18 |On page 14, under Section 13 – Proposal |The Seller Certificate is only required if you are a reseller of the software. | |

| | | |Format and Organization, a ‘Seller |Manufacturers of the software who are proposing do not have to provide this certificate. | |

| | | |Certification’ if applicable with proof | | |

| | | |of reseller certification is listed. | | |

| | | |Please confirm that this is not required| | |

| | | |for the manufacturer of the software. | | |

|6 |6/28/18 |07/03/18 |In the Scope of Services, Special Events|Off-Duty is applicable to SPD only. This type of employment, also known as “secondary | |

| | | |is listed separately from Off-Duty. |employment,” is when an off-duty uniformed police officer is working for any employer | |

| | | |From the agency’s point of view, what is|other than the SPD in exchange for some financial benefit. They receive this benefit from | |

| | | |the difference between a Special Event |the third-party employer rather than SPD. | |

| | | |and an Off-Duty event? | | |

| | | | |Special Events is applicable to both SFD and SPD. It is when uniformed | |

| | | | |officers/firefighters are commissioned by the City to cover special events such as | |

| | | | |Sporting Events, Parades, Annual Events, Protests, etc. | |

|7 |6/28/18 |07/03/18 |In regards to the Scope of Services, Off|Third party employers should be able to request an officer directly through the vendor | |

| | | |duty section – Ability to receive and |solution. The request will then be assigned the shift and to a specific individual, | |

| | | |review third party requests for officers|connecting the third-party employer and the officer in question. This request process may | |

| | | |to perform off duty work; please provide|take place in a web form or it may consist of a staffed office that would take calls | |

| | | |specifics regarding the desired process.|directly. | |

| | | |For example, would the request be | | |

| | | |submitted by the third party via web | | |

| | | |form, etc.? | | |

|8 |6/28/18 |07/03/18 |In regards to the Scope of Services, |For SFD, approximately 15,000+ hires (OT hires) are made each year in OPS for overtime | |

| | | |Notifications and Alerts – Ability to |alone. Each hire is done by a STAFF10 member using a landline phone to call Operations | |

| | | |support multiple notification methods, |members directly. (STAFF10 is not involved in FAC/FIU/FMO OT hiring.) So, based on the | |

| | | |including telephone; please advise what |15,000+ overtime hires completed by STAFF10 last year, STAFF10 made AT LEAST 15,000+ | |

| | | |your current average monthly call volume|individual outbound landline phone calls from the office. (This assumes that each overtime| |

| | | |is for inbound and outbound calls. |hire required only one phone call to reach a willing member, which is not accurate.) | |

| | | | |Divide that number by 12 to get an approximate average of at least 1250 outbound landline | |

| | | | |calls per month for just overtime hiring from the overtime sign-up lists. (There might be | |

| | | | |some seasonal adjustments not considered in such an average, such as summer vs winter | |

| | | | |hiring) | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |Inbound calls can be around 30/day just answering questions and providing other services | |

| | | | |not related to hiring. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |There is no current method allowed by L27 (International Association of Firefighters) for | |

| | | | |messaging of off-duty members to notify them of overtime hiring possibilities, needs, etc.| |

| | | | |Those messages generally come from the L27 office via their own text paging system, and/or| |

| | | | |Facebook posting. It is desirable to have a solution that would allow notifications and | |

| | | | |alerts (text/email/app-push, etc.) by STAFF10 to the entire membership when overtime needs| |

| | | | |exceed the members signed up. It is also desirable that any automated hiring process be | |

| | | | |able to notify members that are chosen to work (approximately 1250/month) by a variety of | |

| | | | |methods. | |

|9 |6/28/18 |07/03/18 |In regards to the Scope of Services, |On-duty layoffs, layoffs, returns, or members who receive time off via the member grid | |

| | | |Notifications and Alerts – Ability to |that affect shifts that are already hired for require notifications to staffers. Within a | |

| | | |notify schedulers if there are staffing |certain time period, we would want staffers to have the ability to manually control | |

| | | |shortages due to a variety of user-set |granting of time off. | |

| | | |scenarios; please provide an example of | | |

| | | |a “user-set” scenario. |Also, projecting how many members are off in total days for training or backfill would be | |

| | | | |required to plan/project for shortages. Example: 25 members released of duty for training,| |

| | | | |30 members off on vacation, 20 members on long term disability. If another request came in| |

| | | | |for 20 more members for release of duty, we want to compare our overtime sign up data and | |

| | | | |determine if we will be able to cover the missing members if time off is granted. | |

| | | | |Currently time off is granted via memo without comparing against staffing data to analyze | |

| | | | |which would assist with projecting impacts on staffing if additional members were granted | |

| | | | |time off. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |User-set scenario example: The HazMat team has a minimum staffing level of 11 members. A | |

| | | | |member lays-off the night before scheduled to work due to illness. A) STAFF10 needs to be | |

| | | | |notified of this. There needs to be a mechanism for STAFF10 to be alerted of changes to | |

| | | | |projected staffing levels pre- and post-hiring, assuming there are no HazMat technicians | |

| | | | |signed up on the voluntary overtime list: B) STAFF10 needs to be able to send a message to| |

| | | | |all members assigned to the HazMat team (but not the rest of the Operations members) | |

| | | | |notifying them of the hiring need. | |

|10 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |Please explain forecasting for minimum |For SPD, standard hours are how many officers are on deck. Special events are forecasted | |

| | | |staffing requirements |to determine how many officers are needed for special events. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |For SFD, they require 210 members on duty every day in operations. Forecasting is done to | |

| | | | |plan for shortages, based on how many people are needed to cover leaves, vacations, sick, | |

| | | | |training. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |For SFD, Special Events are also forecasted to determine how many people are needed in | |

| | | | |advance to cover for special events. | |

|11 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |How do you forecast special events |Forecasting special events for SFD and SPD is a manual process. | |

| | | |today? | | |

| | | | |For SFD, Staff10 or Staffing Coordinator receives an email/memo requesting a special | |

| | | | |event, the memo is highlighted and put in a tickler file. The actual special event hiring | |

| | | | |is done 4 days in advance to fill the spots. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |SPD does the special event hiring 3 to 4 days in advance. | |

|12 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |In regard to scope, it includes rates of|For SFD, we want to be able to differentiate when Firefighters are working “Out of Class” | |

| | | |pay for each employee What are you |and what rate should be applied based on the current work they are doing.   Out of Class | |

| | | |hoping to accomplish in rate of pay in |is the process of paying staff for time worked at a higher level of responsibility than | |

| | | |the scheduling system? |their permanent roles. | |

|13 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |Please explain requests for” “late |Tracking is used to determine when they arrive and when they depart and account for late | |

| | | |arrivals” requirement. Is this a |arrivals.  For this requirement, we are not looking for someone to come in and punch a | |

| | | |requirement for employees to clock in or|clock. | |

| | | |clock out? | | |

|14 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |Are you looking for a hardware or |We are looking for a software program to enter the data, not a hardware solution. We are | |

| | | |software solution (such as a scanner or |not looking for scanner or a card reader. | |

| | | |card reader) to document clock in and | | |

| | | |clock out? | | |

|15 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |If you are not looking for hardware |Yes, Mobile device is of interest. We are not looking for someone to come in and punch a | |

| | | |solution, would that include or exclude |clock. | |

| | | |mobile devices? If the solution has the | | |

| | | |ability to enter time from a mobile | | |

| | | |device or enter location or event, is | | |

| | | |that something of interest? | | |

|16 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |How do you handle shift bidding and |For SPD, each department handles shift bidding and vacation bidding in a different way | |

| | | |vacation bidding process today? |based on different rules. Shift bidding and vacation bidding is currently being handled | |

| | | | |via manual paper process. | |

| | | | |For SFD, the scheduled-vacation bidding process is seniority-based and done manually and | |

| | | | |performed once a year. It runs September - October and takes a month to complete. It | |

| | | | |requires sending out email, spreadsheets, using whiteboards and phone calls. The process | |

| | | | |includes compiling how much vacation time firefighters receive and sending a questionnaire| |

| | | | |to sign up for various shifts. Once the questionnaire is returned, a resource meeting is | |

| | | | |held. This meeting lasts a couple of weeks as SFD works through all the questionnaires to | |

| | | | |make sure all the requests fit into the schedule. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |Vacation time off can change throughout the year. This is currently done through a mobile | |

| | | | |application in the PTS System. However, all requests must still go through the staffing | |

| | | | |office who manually verifies and enters the change. | |

|17 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |Do you have to go through the re-bid |No, it’s not required to go through the re-bid process to change a vacation day. | |

| | | |process to change a vacation day? |Uniformed personnel can go through the Member Portal (in-house system) and trade a | |

| | | | |vacation day. | |

|18 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |Explain what you mean by vacation trade?|A vacation trade is when 2 people want to switch vacation days with each other. | |

| | | | |Lieutenants and Firefighters can trade days with another member. Members can switch | |

| | | | |vacation days, but must fax Officer for approval, as well as the Battalion Chief. Once | |

| | | | |approved, it goes through Staff 10 to verify and manually enter into the system | |

|19 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |When performing a vacation trade, do you|For SFD, vacation trades do not require the same skill set; however, there are rules that | |

| | | |have to trade with someone of the same |will only allow only so many of a certain skill set off on vacation for any given day. | |

| | | |skill set? | | |

|20 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |How should Vendor’s respond to the |Vendors should respond by providing examples of the level of complexity and capabilities | |

| | | |business rules criteria without knowing |they have used with other agencies in the past. | |

| | | |the details of the criteria? | | |

|21 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |For an on-premise solution does the city|The City will supply the hardware, but the vendor needs to list the type and quantity of | |

| | | |desire the vendor to provide hardware |hardware needed in the pricing cost sheet. The City will calculate this into the proposal | |

| | | |pricing for servers or will the city be |costs. | |

| | | |utilizing their own server | | |

| | | |environment?   | | |

|22 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |Does the city prefer a system that |Yes, we would like to track both. The Off-Duty requirement is for SPD. We are aware that | |

| | | |combines regular duty hours with off |the Off-Duty capability might be an add-on module. What we want to know is if you can | |

| | | |duty hours in order to ensure all |provide the Off-Duty capability. | |

| | | |business rules (fatigue rules etc.) are | | |

| | | |adhered too?  | | |

|23 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |In regards to creating a web portal for |Yes, the Vendor should provide this portal. This is specific to off-duty work for SPD. | |

| | | |3rd party services, is the Vendor | | |

| | | |required to provide the web portal for | | |

| | | |the 3rd party services? | | |

|24 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |Does the scope include Dispatch? |Yes, the scope includes Dispatch for SPD and SFD | |

|25 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |In regards to Dispatch, are there |For SFD, Dispatch does their own hiring and scheduling and draws upon operations to fill | |

| | | |systems being used today that need to |in openings. Dispatch will need to be integrated with the new time and attendance system. | |

| | | |integrate with the time and attendance |The City desires a single solution that has the capability of scheduling all departments. | |

| | | |system? | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |For, SPD they do have an existing system for Dispatch scheduling with a complex set of | |

| | | | |rules. The existing scheduling system will have to be part of the future system. | |

|26 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |What is the number of users for SFD and |SFD has 1100 users (includes all departments (sworn/civilian) | |

| | | |SPD? |SPD has 2000 users (includes all departments (sworn/civilian) | |

|27 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |How should the vendor quote on the |Vendors should include an estimate. We want to know if the solution can technically | |

| | | |integration with the systems listed as |support the integrations listed. We won’t know until configuration about the integration | |

| | | |part of scope of services, when we don’t|details. If there is a unique functionality that the Vendor can’t meet, we will address it| |

| | | |have specific details how it’s to be |as we move through the process. | |

| | | |done? Or is this to be provided post | | |

| | | |award? | | |

|28 |6/29/18 |07/03/18 |Does the City intend for the Solution to|The City is focusing on SFD and SPD at this time, but there is an opportunity to go | |

| | | |be deployed Citywide to other |Citywide | |

| | | |departments? | | |

|29 | |07/03/18 |Modification to estimated demo dates. |The estimated Interview/Demo date located on the 1st page, Schedule of the RFP has been |Please save date of 8/20 to 8/24 as a holder|

| | | | |changed → |for Interview/Demo. This has been updated |

| | | | | |from the dates listed in the schedule on |

| | | | | |page 1 of the RFP. This is an estimated time|

| | | | | |and may change depending on how the process |

| | | | | |progresses. |

|30 |07/04/18 |07/10/18 |Question in regard to item 4 on the |Vendor must provide separate complete bid packages if providing multiple software | |

| | | |Pricing Response which states: |scenarios as stated on Item 4 of the Pricing Response. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |“If you choose to bid multiple software |Section 1 of the RFP also states, “If multiple solutions are proposed by the same | |

| | | |scenarios (i.e., cloud, onsite), a |Proposer, the City requests that the Proposer provides a separate RFP response for each | |

| | | |complete bid package for each scenario |proposed solution.” | |

| | | |is required. The City will not accept | | |

| | | |one bid package with two pricing |If submitting multiple software scenarios, please submit them separately as they will be | |

| | | |scenarios.” |evaluated separately for all criteria even if they are the same or similar. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |Can you please provide some | | |

| | | |clarification on this item? If Vendor is| | |

| | | |providing both a cloud and onsite | | |

| | | |deployment option but the proposed | | |

| | | |solution is the exact same and contains | | |

| | | |the exact same functionality. Can you | | |

| | | |confirm the city still wants two | | |

| | | |completely different bid submissions | | |

| | | |even though the only difference in the | | |

| | | |submissions will be the costs laid out | | |

| | | |on the Pricing Response sheet? If yes, | | |

| | | |this would mean instead of 1 original | | |

| | | |and 4 copies, the city would need 2 | | |

| | | |originals and 8 copies (one for cloud | | |

| | | |and one for onsite) total, is this | | |

| | | |correct? | | |

|31 |07/06/18 |07/10/18 |If the fire department and police |Yes, it is possible that the Police Department will decide to move forward with | |

| | | |department were to implement the Work |implementing the chosen solution at the same time or soon after. Both departments would | |

| | | |Schedule Time Project (WST) system |like to implement solutions quickly. To accelerate deployment SPD would consider a | |

| | | |during the same time, the project would |standalone system and assume some manual processes with no interfaces for an initial | |

| | | |realize a few economies of scale from a |implementation.  | |

| | | |services perspective, i.e. reduced | | |

| | | |project management hours and travel | | |

| | | |time. | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |With that in mind, is it possible the | | |

| | | |two department would implement the | | |

| | | |solution at the same time? | | |

|32 |07/06/18 |07/10/18 |If No to Question 31: |N/A - Answer to Question 31 was Yes. | |

| | | |What is an estimated date the police | | |

| | | |department would begin their own WST | | |

| | | |project? (The answer to these two | | |

| | | |questions not only affecting pricing, | | |

| | | |but also the proposed project schedule.)| | |

|33 |07/06/18 |07/10/18 |The scope of services indicates the need|For SPD, all users will need to have access to the service through both at MDT (laptop) | |

| | | |for access to the application via mobile|and phone. Approx. 2000 users. This includes Windows (for laptops), IOS and Android (for | |

| | | |devices. |phones). | |

| | | |Is the provider to quote mobile device | | |

| | | |pricing for all 1,100 users in the Fire |For SFD, all SFDs users (approximately 1100) need to have access to the application | |

| | | |Department? |through both department (Windows) and home computers/laptops/tablets (Windows and iOS), | |

| | | |Is the provider to quote mobile device |and personal mobile devices. Members use both Android and iOS platforms. | |

| | | |pricing for all 2,000 users in the | | |

| | | |Police Department? | | |

| | | |Fire: Are your users primarily on | | |

| | | |Android or IOS devices? | | |

| | | |Police: Are your users primarily on | | |

| | | |Android or IOS devices? | | |

|34 |07/06/18 |07/10/18 |On Page 9 of the RFP it states that a |There is not a mandatory inclusion response. |Please disregard paragraph 2 of section |

| | | |woman and minority inclusion plan is | |12/19 regarding the mandatory inclusion |

| | | |mandatory. However, during the pre-bid | |requirement. There is no inclusion |

| | | |conference it was stated that this is | |requirement for this RFP. |

| | | |not a requirement. | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |Please confirm that this inclusion plan | | |

| | | |is not required. | | |

|35 |07/06/18 |07/10/18 |On the Vendor Questionnaire form under |SMC 14.16, 14.19, and 14.20 all pertain to (Vendor’s) employees working within the | |

| | | |the Social Equity Compliance section it |geographic boundaries of the City of Seattle. | |

| | | |asks: “Does your firm comply – to the | | |

| | | |extent required - with three of the City|Please reference Seattle Municipal Chapter 14 to help in understanding and responding to | |

| | | |of Seattle's Labor Standards |this section of the Vendor Questionnaire. | |

| | | |requirements from Seattle Municipal Code| | |

| | | |Chapter 14.” As a business with no | | |

| | | |offices or labor force in the City of | | |

| | | |Seattle, answering this question either | | |

| | | |yes or no appears problematic. | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |Is it sufficient for the proposer to | | |

| | | |respond by listing the State our | | |

| | | |workforce is in and that we comply with | | |

| | | |our State’s labor standards? And if | | |

| | | |not, please help to clarify since we are| | |

| | | |not located in Seattle. | | |

|36 |07/06/18 |07/10/18 |On the Insurance Requirements page 1, #2|All checked items in #2 are the equivalencies. | |

| | | |states a requirement for “COMMERCIAL | | |

| | | |GENERAL LIABILITY (CGL), MARINE GENERAL | | |

| | | |LIABILITY (MGL) OR EQUIVALENT INCLUDING”| | |

| | | |and continues to list the line items | | |

| | | |that are inclusive. | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |By stating ‘or equivalent including’ are| | |

| | | |we to understand that if we comply with | | |

| | | |all the check listed items below #2 we | | |

| | | |comply? Our concern is that due to the| | |

| | | |nature of our software offering, our | | |

| | | |company has never required ‘Marine | | |

| | | |General Liability’ insurance. But if | | |

| | | |you are stating that all check listed | | |

| | | |items under #2 is the equivalent and | | |

| | | |thus would pass compliance, we are good.| | |

|37 |07/06/18 |07/10/18 |In the Scope of Services: |Q1: | |

| | | | |SPD IVR is not a requirement | |

| | | |Notifications and Alerts – Ability to |SFD does not currently have an IVR provider | |

| | | |support multiple notification methods, | | |

| | | |including IVR: |Q2: | |

| | | | |For SFD/SPD, the desired reports will need to be ad hoc and pulled from data within the | |

| | | |Q1: Does the FD or PD already have an |system.  A list of specific reports needed will be provided during configuration. | |

| | | |IVR provider? | | |

| | | | |Reports should be customizable and able to include the following fields, among others: | |

| | | |Reporting |Employee name/serial number, Unit Name and Number, Rank/Title, Court Code, Status | |

| | | |Ability to write customized report: |(permanent vs. on-loan), Supervisor, Dates/Times worked, Civilian/Sworn status, Dates | |

| | | |Please provide examples of the types of |Available to Work, etc. | |

| | | |reports. | | |

| | | |Ability to view and print employee |Example: Query number of members with a specific skill set or from a particular work group| |

| | | |rosters based on multiple customized |that were hired for overtime in a specific date range | |

| | | |criteria: | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |Q2: Please provide a listing of the | | |

| | | |‘customized criteria. |Q3 | |

| | | | |For both SFD and SPD, train the trainer approach is acceptable. SFD would like to see a | |

| | | |Comprehensive’ end user training: |“Super-User” level of training for a select few as well. | |

| | | |Please clarify the expectation of | | |

| | | |‘comprehensive’ end user training. | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |Q3: Is a train-the-trainer approach | | |

| | | |acceptable? | | |

|38 |07/06/18 |07/10/18 |Off-Duty management: |Currently, off-duty work is not managed by SPD at all. Employers pay officers directly and| |

| | | | |SPD has no role. In the future, we would like the solution to offer electronic payment and| |

| | | |Q1: Is the off-duty time worked being |invoicing. | |

| | | |manually entered into an invoicing | | |

| | | |system or is it to be sent | | |

| | | |electronically? | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |Q2: And if electronically, what system? | | |

|39 |07/06/18 |07/10/18 |Does the Fire Department have volunteer |SFD has no volunteer members. All members are career/professional status. | |

| | | |agencies? And if yes, how many total | | |

| | | |volunteers? Are they to be included | | |

| | | |with career personnel? | | |

|40 |07/06/18 |07/10/18 |Does the Police Department need the |Court feed notifications are out of scope at this time. | |

| | | |ability to issue court notifications as | | |

| | | |part of the solution? | | |

|41 |07/06/18 |07/10/18 |Is either the Fire Department or the |For SPD, Training Management is out of scope at this time | |

| | | |Police Department interested in | | |

| | | |including a curriculum-based training |For SFD, Training management is within the scope via future integration | |

| | | |management module that is part of the | | |

| | | |solution to manage training courses, | | |

| | | |classrooms and field training -- with | | |

| | | |the ability to schedule courses, send | | |

| | | |notifications and tracks employee | | |

| | | |attendance results? | | |

|42 |07/06/18 |07/10/18 |From the Business Functions / Desired | |BR-89 -This requirement is no longer |

| | | |Behaviors Table: | |required.  |

| | | | | | |

| | | |BR-5: Please define the terms | | |

| | | |“release-from-duty” and “detail to |BR-5 - SFD: | |

| | | |admin”. |RELEASE OF DUTY (1 hour - 24 hours): This is used for hourly release (and rare exception | |

| | | | |used for full shift). Examples: Attending a meeting/short training and then return to duty| |

| | | | |for the remainder of shift. Someone will be hired to replace you only during the time you | |

| | | | |were specified to be released. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |DETAIL TO – ADMIN (1 hour to 24 hours): This is used to detail members to an | |

| | | | |administrative schedule for the purpose of filling an administrative assignment. No action| |

| | | | |is taken by human resources to change member to an 80-hour administrative pay for this | |

| | | | |short duration. Example: A member is going to travel for a HazMat conference and be gone | |

| | | | |for two 24-hr shifts. They are temporarily detailed to Admin for staffing purposes and | |

| | | | |someone will be hired overtime for the entire time they are gone. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |BR-7 - SFD employees may sometimes work across divisions within SFD. For example, Admin | |

| | | | |may work OT in Operations, in limited circumstances, but not across agencies (SFD working | |

| | | |BR-7: “The solution should allow for |in SPD and vice versa). | |

| | | |assigning various roles to an employee | | |

| | | |within single shift as needed while | | |

| | | |adhering to Collective Bargaining | | |

| | | |Agreement (CBA) scheduling policies. | | |

| | | |For example, a member begins a shift as | | |

| | | |a firefighter and later in that shift is| | |

| | | |called in to backfill at the dispatch | | |

| | | |center. The solution will need to be | | |

| | | |able to split the member's shift to | | |

| | | |identify the specific roles worked and | | |

| | | |hours in each role.” | | |

| | | |Do any employees work across different | | |

| | | |agencies? | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |BR-8: How does off-duty and special | | |

| | | |event personnel assignments factor into | | |

| | | |minimum staffing levels? |BR-8 – “Off-duty work” pertains to SPD only. As SPD currently operates, off-duty is | |

| | | | |handled completely outside of SPD and doesn’t affect minimum staffing. Special Event | |

| | | | |assignments must be given out such that minimum staffing levels are maintained in patrol. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |Off-shift (overtime) hires for SFD count as a member in the minimum staffing of 210 when | |

| | | | |hired for a full 24-hr period. Special Event hiring for SFD (sporting | |

| | | | |events/concerts/etc.) does not count toward minimum staffing. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |BR-13: “Ability to display who has |BR-13 | |

| | | |specific skill sets and where those |Example 1: A member from Staff10 (HazMat team) is hired elsewhere in the City. Staffing | |

| | | |skills are deployed, in real time.” |personnel needs to be able to determine where that member is in case they are needed later| |

| | | |Please clarify what is meant by ‘where |at Staff10. | |

| | | |those skills are deployed’. |Example 2: Dive status for members of Tech Rescue Team (Staff14) need to be shown at | |

| | | | |Staff14 staffing level to determine that there are always 4 of 6 assigned members on-duty | |

| | | | |with active Dive status | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |BR-18: “The solution should provide a |BR-18 - For SPD, Vehicle and Asset Management are out of scope | |

| | | |daily staffing roster that accommodates | | |

| | | |staffing by various criteria such as; |SFD staffing needs to be able to change apparatus qualifiers (Ladder 1 normally assigned | |

| | | |Shift, Organizational Levels, Special |an apparatus that is a tractor-driven tiller, but due to periodic maintenance needs has | |

| | | |Units, Event Deployments, Assignment, |moved into a straight-frame ladder company. Staffing would like to be able to reflect the | |

| | | |Assigned Vehicle, Assigned equipment, |difference in apparatus type and personnel needs, at least temporarily. | |

| | | |absences etc.” | | |

| | | |• How are vehicles and equipment |SFD is not currently interested in a full-on management module, but perhaps would | |

| | | |currently being managed and assigned? |entertain in future. | |

| | | |• Is vehicle and equipment data for | | |

| | | |assignments to be manually entered, | | |

| | | |imported, or received via an additional | | |

| | | |interfaced system? | | |

| | | |• Is either the Fire Department or the | | |

| | | |Police Department interested in | | |

| | | |including an asset management module | | |

| | | |with the solution that manages agency | | |

| | | |equipment and tracking assignments at | | |

| | | |the employee, assignment and unit level?| | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |BR-21: Please define what is meant by | | |

| | | |“assignment vacancies.” | | |

| | | |• Does the ability to bid for | | |

| | | |'assignment vacancies' refer to internal| | |

| | | |job postings or to annual schedule | | |

| | | |bidding? | | |

| | | |• Does this capability apply to both the| | |

| | | |FD and PD? | | |

| | | | |BR-21- Assignment vacancies are internal job postings. Members are allowed to bid for | |

| | | |BR-28: “Overtime rules can be customized|internal transfer from one apparatus to another via well-defined, seniority-based rules. | |

| | | |by department, team, group, etc.” |This applies to SFD. | |

| | | |Please provide examples of personnel | | |

| | | |that would make up a “team” or “group.” | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |BR-36: “The solution should support the | | |

| | | |various departmental processes of | | |

| | | |approval/denial for submitted vacation | | |

| | | |requests. Time off may include | | |

| | | |comp/merit pay, vacation, floating |BR-28 – Examples of personnel that would make up a group: | |

| | | |holiday, etc.” | | |

| | | |Please provide an example of a |HazMat team: Only members that have satisfied certain criteria and are assigned to Staff10| |

| | | |departmental process for approval and |can work overtime at E10, L1, A10, STAFF10, AIR10. | |

| | | |denial. |Battalion 3: Only members that are certified paramedics and are assigned to Battalion 3 | |

| | | | |can work on any ALS ambulance company (M1/M10/M16/M18/M28/M32) | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |BR-36 - SFD uses a well-defined grid system of number and type of time-off opportunities | |

| | | | |available on any given day. After Regularly-Scheduled vacation (typically about 20 | |

| | | | |spots/day) is processed during the previous year for the current year, a defined number | |

| | | | |(approximately 8 spots/day) of other types of time-off are available (comp time, saved | |

| | | | |vacation, off without pay, etc. These are applied for two months out from the desired | |

| | | | |date, via the PTS portal (in-house internet application), which sorts requests based on | |

| | | | |time of receipt of request. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |Staffing reviews the time-off requests in order of receipt and grants them in the Grid | |

| | | | |(puts the member “off”) until the Grid is full of all allowed types of time off. | |

| | | | |Subsequent requests are denied as “Grid is Full”. | |

| | | |BR-40: Please explain merit trades in | | |

| | | |detail. |For SPD, each department has specific vacation processes. Attached is an example of CBA | |

| | | |• How is 'merit time' calculated? |language for the Communication Center (911) vacation process. | |

| | | |• How are employees currently able to |[pic] | |

| | | |transfer 'accrued hours of pay' to | | |

| | | |another member to work their shift? | | |

| | | |• Are these consider regular working | | |

| | | |hours that the employee is giving, and |BR-40 - Merits are considered “Compensatory Time”. Merits can be earned by accepting | |

| | | |the other employee is receiving? |compensatory time instead of money for overtime, by working for other members, and in | |

| | | | |limited other circumstances. A time record of each member’s compensatory time activity is | |

| | | | |maintained in The Finance Division, Payroll Section. One “merit” is equivalent to one hour| |

| | | | |of work and can only be transferred from one member to another on a “one-for-one” basis. | |

| | | |BR-44: “The solution should display the |Members may request a transfer of compensatory time from their compensatory time record to| |

| | | |order in which employees should be |the compensatory time record of another member who has agreed to work as a substitute | |

| | | |contacted to work Special Events based |during a mutually agreed upon time. This is done via a Trade module in PTS (current | |

| | | |on standing business rules and |in-house system) and is only allowed if both members agree to the trade (can be performed | |

| | | |Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) |via Proxy). There are guidelines set out in the contract that define when, who, and how | |

| | | |scheduling policies” |members are allowed to trade merits. | |

| | | |Is it possible to provide a little more | | |

| | | |detail or an example of a business rule | | |

| | | |for working Special Detail? |BR-44 – Excerpt from the SPOG CBA | |

| | | | |[pic] | |

| | | |BR-45: What is the specific type of | | |

| | | |special event information a 3rd party | | |

| | | |vendor would be submitting via a web | | |

| | | |portal? | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |BR-50: “The solution is able to | | |

| | | |maintain record of who worked each day | | |

| | | |and what roles or duties each member | | |

| | | |performed during said shift. Information| | |

| | | |to be archived and accessible as |BR-45 - Special Events are handled internally, while off-duty involves third party | |

| | | |needed.” |vendors. For Off-Duty work, they would be requesting an officer for a specific job (type, | |

| | | |• What does "as needed" mean. |location, date, time, etc.) | |

| | | |• What period of time? | | |

| | | |• How long are rosters to be accessible | | |

| | | |before being archived? |BR-50 - Past staffing, time-off, disability and hiring data should be stored as records | |

| | | | |that can be queried and researched. Exact storage duration requirements need to be | |

| | | |BR-52: “The solution is able to maintain|determined. Currently, hard-copy documents are stored a minimum of 6 years. There may be | |

| | | |an audit trail of procedures followed |need for a shorter or longer period, depending on the type of data. (Disability | |

| | | |when contacting staff to fill vacancies.|information, for example, will almost assuredly be required to be stored longer than | |

| | | |This includes but is not limited to: |staffing data.) Staffing rosters need to be stored with easy accessibility at least two | |

| | | |listing the date/time a voice mail was |years prior to archiving. | |

| | | |left for a member offering them a shift;| | |

| | | |a notation that a member verbally | | |

| | | |declined a shift; a snapshot of the | | |

| | | |member's year-to-date overtime hours | | |

| | | |worked for the date in question.” | | |

| | | |Would this process be done via an | | |

| | | |automated IVR call out or is the | | |

| | | |employee being called from the staffing |BR-52 | |

| | | |officer? |SPD does not require IVR | |

| | | | |SFD would like BOTH. It is preferable that the solution can be run in a variety of | |

| | | |BR-57: “The solution is able to provide |“modes”: fully automatic, fully manual, and a hybrid model where some hiring is done | |

| | | |ability to view and print employee |automatically via IVR (or similar notification system) and supplemented with manual | |

| | | |rosters based on multiple customized |operation as needed. | |

| | | |criteria.” | | |

| | | |Please define what is meant by | | |

| | | |'customized' criteria. | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |BR-63: “Payroll data can be exported as | | |

| | | |numerous summary reports.” | | |

| | | |More clarification is needed on this | | |

| | | |requirement. Is the requirement to | | |

| | | |export data in different formats or | | |

| | | |something similar? | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |BR-69: Is the desired Disability | | |

| | | |History report for each member | | |

| | | |considered an FMLA history report? Or | | |

| | | |is it based on other criteria? |BR-57 – For SFD, this would include criteria such as skill sets. Example: number of | |

| | | | |Paramedics, Rescue Swimmers, HazMat members, Bike EMTs, Dispatch Pool members, etc. | |

| | | | |currently on-duty in the City for a given shift | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |BR-63 - For SFD/SPD the ability to extract data in a way that allows users to manipulate | |

| | | | |and customize that data (Excel or .csv) | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |BR-69 - For SFD, the "Disability History Report" should provide information for each case | |

| | | | |when the member provided notification/documentation of an injury or illness.  This would | |

| | | | |include both occupational and non-occupational causes.  Each disability case could be: | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |Notification only without medical treatment or time loss. (i.e. Precautionary) | |

| | | | |Notification with medical treatment but without time loss. (i.e. No Time Loss) | |

| | | | |Notification with medical treatment and time loss - time loss could be covered by workers'| |

| | | | |comp, sick leave, a medical leave of absence or unpaid. (i.e. Time Loss) | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |Additionally, each disability case could change/evolve from not requiring treatment and/or| |

| | | | |time loss to requiring one or both.  For example:   | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |FF Smith notifies the department that they injured their knee on at work but don't care to| |

| | | | |seek medical treatment or use time loss at the time, hoping the knee will heal on its | |

| | | | |own.  A "Precautionary" disability case is created.   | |

| | | |BR-78: “Solution should have the ability|After some time, FF Smith decides their knee is not getting better so they open a Workers'| |

| | | |to determine which employees to schedule|Comp claim to receive medical evaluation and treatment but still incur no time loss. The | |

| | | |for Over Time/Shift extension/Special |"Precautionary" case becomes a "No Time Loss" case.  | |

| | | |Events, based on several criteria |After a period of treatment and evaluation, the physician decides time away from work is | |

| | | |governed by various ordinances and |necessary, so time loss begins (starting as Workers' Comp but could become a medical leave| |

| | | |policies. Data Center has minimum |of absence like FMLA if time loss is of an extended duration). | |

| | | |staffing requirements and very specific |. | |

| | | |rules dictating the order in which | | |

| | | |members are "up next" for staffing open |BR-78 | |

| | | |slots. The data center roster is based |The Data Center has two processes, one for last minute calls and the other for future | |

| | | |on historical staffing data.” |coverage. When a shift goes below minimum staffing, comp or paid overtime will be | |

| | | |Is there a possibility to receive a |authorized by the Data Center Manager for shift coverage. The following scheduling | |

| | | |sampling of the ‘specific rules’? |guidelines are used when additional shift coverage is needed. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |Send an email to all Data Center employees requesting a volunteer to cover the day on the | |

| | | | |affected shift. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |If more than one volunteer is received, determine who worked shift coverage overtime last | |

| | | |BR-80: The solution should have the |by referring to the overtime sheets, located on the bookshelf in the Dayshift Supervisor’s| |

| | | |ability to propose officers for off duty|office. | |

| | | |work based on several criteria that can | | |

| | | |include; last and or next date of off |If an employee volunteers to move a furlough, work half of the affected shift or works the| |

| | | |duty/Over Time worked, last and next |affected shift in place of their own shift, the supervisor will select the employee with | |

| | | |mandatory rest period taken etc. |the request that least impacts the unit. | |

| | | |• Define "propose". | | |

| | | |• Are you looking for the system to send|If no volunteers are received, appoint an employee to cover the affected shift. | |

| | | |a notice to only those meeting criteria?| | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |• Are you looking for a drop down to be |BR-80 - What we mean by “propose” is the solution should have the ability to suggest | |

| | | |specified? |officers for off duty work based on specific criteria. Yes, the system should send | |

| | | | |notification to only those that meet the criteria. | |

| | | |BR-89: “The solution would enable | | |

| | | |Seattle Police Operations Center | | |

| | | |supervisor to manually assign employees | | |

| | | |to Special Events rosters after the | | |

| | | |event has occurred”. | | |

| | | |Please explain why a manual assignment | | |

| | | |is required after the event has | | |

| | | |occurred. | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |BR-94: “The solution is able to maintain| | |

| | | |a history of employee shifts worked for | | |

| | | |no less than two years. The Data Center| | |

| | | |bases its scheduling in part upon an | | |

| | | |employee's history of shifts worked. | | |

| | | |This is incorporated into the scheduling|BR-89 -This requirement is no longer required.  | |

| | | |in that it is a decision point used when| | |

| | | |determining who will fill a specific | | |

| | | |shift.” | | |

| | | |Please explain the exact criteria used | | |

| | | |from the ‘history of shifts worked’ as | | |

| | | |the determining factor in filling | | |

| | | |specific shits. | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | |BR-96: “Solution needs to provide | | |

| | | |ability to enter specific payroll | | |

| | | |criteria defined by bargaining | | |

| | | |agreements. SPD bargaining groups all |BR-94 - The Data Center will call the people who sign up to be on the “Coverage list” | |

| | | |have different rules for payroll-related|based on history first, then they move onto people who are not on the list based on | |

| | | |entries. Having the ability to assign |history. By history, we are referring to those who worked OT last for coverage. | |

| | | |rules to SPOG, SPMA, Local 117, etc., | | |

| | | |will allow those rules to be properly |[pic][pic] | |

| | | |assigned to union members” |[pic] | |

| | | |Is there a possibility to receive a | | |

| | | |sampling of the bargaining agreements? | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |BR-96 You can access collective bargaining agreements at | |

| | | | |. SPD employs members of SPOG, | |

| | | | |SPMA, SPDG, SPEOG, and possibly others. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|43 |07/06/18 |07/10/18 |From Addendum No. 1 Dated 7/3/18: |No. 6: | |

| | | |No. 6: Special Events: Is the time |For SPD, Special Event shifts may be regular time or overtime. | |

| | | |worked to cover special events |For SFD, Special Event hiring is overtime | |

| | | |considered overtime? | | |

| | | | |No 8: | |

| | | |No. 8: Inbound/outbound IVR calls: |SFD is interested in IVR for an automated version of hiring, and/or providing | |

| | | |• Does the Seattle Police Department |notifications to its members. Hiring alone would generate thousands of outgoing calls | |

| | | |also want to include IVR in their |(15,000 in 2017); hundreds more could be added for notification purposes alone. | |

| | | |solution? | | |

| | | |• And if yes, what is the historic |For SPD. IVR is not a requirement. If it is available, SPD may use it. | |

| | | |and/or anticipated inbound and outbound | | |

| | | |call volume for the police department? | | |

|44 |07/09/18 |07/10/18 |Are we to understand that any potential |Yes, vendors are to document any exceptions to the City’s terms and conditions as part of | |

| | | |edits to the city’s contract must be |its submittal. The City’s expectation is once the intent to award has been announced, no | |

| | | |included at this time with the vendor’s |additional items are presented for us to consider unless such items are introduced as a | |

| | | |RFP response? Or, is this something |result of the negotiations. For example: If we are negotiating “License for Use” and the | |

| | | |that could be deferred to after an |conversation takes us to other options to come to an agreement, that is fine; on the other| |

| | | |intent to award has been announced? |hand, if “License for Use” was not listed as an exception in your response, we would not | |

| | | | |expect it to be introduced during negotiations… The City understands that there may be | |

| | | | |oversight on some items and reserve the right allow for such during the negotiations. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |In reference to the RFP: | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |As stated in section 12.11, “Proposers are to price and submit proposals to reflect all | |

| | | | |the specifications, requirements, in this RFP and terms and conditions substantially the | |

| | | | |same as those included in this RFP. | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | |Any specific areas of dispute with the attached Contract must be identified in Proposer’s | |

| | | | |Response and may, at the sole discretion of the City, be grounds for disqualification from| |

| | | | |further consideration in award of a contract.” | |

|45 |07/10/18 |07/10/18 |Number of required submittals has |Due to an increase in the evaluation team, the number of required copies listed in section|Section 13, b of the RFP has been modified |

| | | |changed (increased) |13 of the RFP has increased from 4 to 7. 7 to 9. All other requirements remain the same. |to read: |

| | |07/17/18 | | | |

| | | | | |The City requires the following when |

| | | | | |responding to the RFP: |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | |One (1) original |

| | | | | |Seven (7) Nine (9) copies |

| | | | | |One (1) Electronic (CD, flash drive, etc.) |

| | | | | |One (1) additional flash drive containing a |

| | | | | |redacted copy if you believe your proposal |

| | | | | |contains records that are exempt under the |

| | | | | |State of Washington’s Public Records Act. |

|46 |07/15/18 |07/17/18 |Will the City consider extending the due|Not at this time. | |

| | | |date to 07/30/2018? | | |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download