Technical support services Request for Proposal

[Pages:30]Technical support services Request for Proposal

1.1 Brief Summary and Purpose

The purpose of this Request for Proposal (RFP) is to acquire technical and business analysis support services to assist the Electronic Real Estate Task Force (ERERTF) to implement and evaluate pilot programs implemented by five counties in Minnesota to test the feasibility of electronically processing real estate documents.

For more information about the task force, see , or call the LCC at 651.296.9002 to request printed reports from the Task Force.

1.2 Schedule of Events

1.2.1 Addenda

Any requests for interpretation of this RFP are required to be submitted no later than 12:01 PM CST on December 20, 2002. Any addenda resulting from requests for interpretation will be issued to all proposers who have requested this RFP from the legislative coordinating commission by no later than the close of business, December 23, 2002.

1.2.2 Proposal Delivery

Proposals must be delivered by 1:00 p.m. on January 2, 2003, to the Legislative Coordinating Commission, 85 State Office Building, 100 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd, St. Paul, MN 55155. Faxed proposals will not be accepted. Proposals that are date and time stamped after 1:00 p.m. January 2, 2003 will not be accepted.

Deleted: 13

Deleted: 16

Deleted: 3:00 Deleted: December 20, 2002 Deleted: 100 Constitution Avenue Deleted: 3:00 Deleted: on December 20, 2002

Draft 021205

Deleted: 021126

2. OVERVIEW, PROJECT GOALS AND BACKGROUND

The ERERTF has developed standards by which counties and private sector real estate companies will work to file transaction documents. This process is currently a paper-based operation and the Task Force is looking at the future of a fully automated process process. The Task Force has selected a number of counties to pilot test these standards. More information on this standards creation process can be found on the Task Force web site at:

2.1.1 The ERERTF seeks to acquire technical and business analysis support services from a reputable and experienced individual or organization that can provides specialized technical and business analysis support services for the Task Force and counties participating in pilot programs.

2.1.2 The main goal of the Task Force's project is to provide functional and business standards that facilitate the management of electronic real estate recording. Electronic real estate recording means a publicly owned and managed county process, defined by statewide standards, that does not require paper or "wet" signatures, and under which real estate documents may be electronically:

? Created, executed, and authenticated ? Delivered to, recorded with and returned to, as well as indexed, fees recorded,

archived, and retrieved by public and private sector users ? Retrieved by anyone from both on- and off-site locations and which satisfy the fiscal

and oversight requirements of all government or private sector users

3. REQUESTED SERVICES

3.1 The ERER Task Force is seeking technical support professionals with the following skills: Required skills: ? Experience with XML-based applications and schema development

? Business Analysis experience of processes in collaboration with XML automated workflow

? Skills in providing clear and detailed gap analysis

? Strong presentation and communications skills

Desirable skills:

? Standards maintenance experience

? Knowledge of real estate recording processes in the government and/or

2

Formatted: Left Formatted: Normal, Indent: Left: 0"

Deleted: 2.1 Description Deleted: ? a

private sectors

3

3.2 The primary services to be provided by the consultant are: 3.2.1 Phase I ? The consultant will learn and understand the ERER standards and how they are implemented. With this knowledge the consultant will assist the Task Force in assessing and evaluating the pilots.

? The consultant will report to and work with the Task Force's project manager to monitor and measure the pilots' progress and results.

? The consultant will assist the Task Force in determining whether the ERER standards as originally adopted address the needs of both county and private sector participants and conform to national standards as they are technologically implemented.

The consultant will analyze, document and present any recommended changes to the standards for the review of the ERERTF Pilot Subcommittee and the approval by the Task Force.

This work will be carried out and completed by the February 28, 2003. The contractor must remain available for revisions, clarification or additional related work.

3.2.2 Phase II

? Consultant will document an Implementation Guide to include core and common implementation needs along with unique and specific county needs.

? Consultant will work with Pilot Counties to develop project plans for each pilot county that reflect workflow and business process needs for Phase 2 documents. This plan will include:

? information architecture design and planning, ? connectivity and integration needs for current back office system, ? expected costs, ? a risk and assumptions document

? The consultant will report to and work with the Task Force's project manager to monitor and measure the pilots' Phase II progress and results.

? The consultant will assist the Task Force in determining whether the ERER standards address the needs of both county and private sector participants and conform to national standards as they are technologically implemented.

? The consultant will analyze, document and present any recommended changes to the standards for Phase II for the review of the Pilot Subcommittee and the approval by the Task Force.

This work will be carried out and completed between February 1, 2003 and June 30, 2004. The

4

Deleted: responsibilities of the

Comment: We need to either define what a pilot is, or point to a status report so that proposers know what we are talking about

Comment: Is this date still viable?

Comment: Sounds like the Guide was already adopted on August 8th. I don't think this needs to detail when we decided we needed this document. Deleted: adopted by the Task Force on August 8, 2002

Comment: Do we need to show this removed text? Deleted: as originally adopted

contractor must remain available for revisions, clarification or additional related work.

3.3 The contractor is required to submit bi-weekly status reports to the ERER Project Coordinator.

3.4 The contractor must disclose to the ERERTF any relationships or affiliations with other consultants, members of the Task Force or vendors. The contractor cannot be employed by any of the other consultants or vendors hired or be involved in any other bids let as part of the project, or otherwise be employed or under contract with any county participating in the pilot program.

3.5 Availability starting two weeks after execution of the contract and continuing for the duration of the terms of the contract. This contract may be amended for additional duties as approved by the Task Force and the contractor.

3.6 Contractor will provide the following for their own use:

Office Space Office Furniture Office Supplies and Equipment Computing Equipment and Services Telecommunications Equipment and Services

4. COMPENSATION

4.1 Each proposal should include a specific proposed compensation amount. Payment amounts and schedules will be negotiated with the successful proposer.

4.2 . Failure to meet negotiated timelines for ERERTF milestones and objectives may result in impositions of penalties pursuant to the contract.

5. PROPOSAL CONTENT

This section describes the content of the proposals submitted in response to this RFP. Each proposal must be in two parts. The first part contains information about the proposer and how the proposer will manage the project. The second part is the pricing proposal. The two proposals must be submitted together but the pricing proposal must be under separate cover in a sealed envelope. There should be no pricing information contained in the first part of the proposal.

5.1 Overview

The proposer should provide an overview of their proposal in this section.

5.2 Approach

5

The proposal should describe the approach to undertake and complete the interviews of content listed in Appendix C of the WorkPlan, assessment, recommendations and pilot specifications.

5.2 Proposer Profile

The proposal must include background information about the company or individual that includes the proposer's lines of business, size, and the types of customers served. A copy of the proposer's annual report, if any, should be included in the appendix. Also, include any other qualifications for work similar to the work being requested by ERERTF.

The proposal must provide a profile of the resources that will be applied to this project. The proposal should identify any subcontractors and their role in the project.

The proposal must provide brief biographies and resumes of the individual or individuals who will work on the project.

The proposal must provide a list of three references that are familiar with the work of the Proposer. Provide a description of at least one similar project you did with each reference. Provide a contact name, address, phone number and email address for each reference.

5.3 Pricing

The pricing proposal must be under separate cover in a sealed envelope. Only one copy of the pricing proposal is required. It should contain components described in this section. The ERERTF will negotiate a fixed priced, deliverable-based contract.

5.3.1 Services This section of the pricing proposal should be an outline of the milestones and deliverables and the associated cost for each deliverable.

5.3.2 Incidental Costs

Incidental costs such as mileage to and from meetings with the Project Coordinator, are to be borne by the Proposer. Other expenses, such as travel to county offices outside of the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area, may be reimbursed as provided in the Commissioners Plan, found at

6. PROPOSAL EVALUATION

6.1 Overview of Evaluation Methodology

6.1.1 Phases The evaluation will be conducted in four phases (see Section 6.3 for details): Phase 1 ? Validation of RFP Responses Phase 2 ? Evaluation of Proposals (content) Phase 3 ? Evaluation of Pricing Proposals

6

Deleted: 3

Deleted: 4 Deleted: 4 Deleted: 4

Phase 4 ? Selection of the Successful Proposer

6.1.2 Non-disclosure During the evaluation process, all information concerning the proposals submitted, including identity and number of proposers, will remain private and will not be disclosed to anyone whose official duties do not require such knowledge, to the extent permitted by law.

6.1.3 Competitive Negotiations In the event the ERERTF determines it appropriate to enter into competitive negotiations with responsible proposers who have submitted proposals within the competitive range, each proposer selected to participate in such negotiations will be offered an opportunity to submit price, technical, and other revisions to its proposal during negotiations. Participating proposers will be informed of the date of the closing of negotiations and that revisions to proposals must be submitted by that date.

6.1.4 Non-selection Non-selection of any proposal will mean that either another proposal was determined to be more advantageous to the ERERTF or that the ERERTF exercised the right to reject all proposals.

6.1.5 Award If a contract is awarded, the award will be made to a financially responsible proposer and which is most advantageous to the ERERTF with quality, price and other factors considered. The ERERTF will notify the successful Proposer in writing of the award of the contract. The ERERTF will notify the unsuccessful proposer(s) in writing that their proposals have not been accepted.

6.2 Evaluation Committee

An ERERTF committee will evaluate the proposer's proposals. Other professional staff (non-ERERTF) may also assist in the evaluation process. This assistance could include requirements review, contacting references, or answering technical questions from evaluators. The ERERTF reserves the right to alter the composition of the Evaluation Committee and their specific responsibilities at any time.

6.3 Evaluation Phases

6.3.1 Phase 1 ? Validation of RFP Responses The purpose of this phase is to determine if each proposal responds to terms and conditions in the RFP. A responsive proposal must comply with all instructions listed in this RFP and contain the proposal contents defined in Section 5, Proposal Content. The ERERTF reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, to modify these RFP specifications, or to waive any formalities or other nonmaterial specifications required by this RFP. Any proposal found to be non-responsive will be eliminated from further evaluation.

6.3.2 Phase 2 - Evaluation of Proposals (content)

7

Only those proposals found to be responsive under Section 6.3.1 will be considered in Phase 2. Reference checks may also be made. However, the ERERTF reserves the right to make an award without further clarification of the proposals received. Therefore, it is important that each proposal be submitted in the most complete manner possible. The ERERTF will evaluate the proposer(s) response to each of the specific proposal submission requirements which are identified in Section 5, Proposal Content. The evaluation of proposals will include ranking of each proposal after consideration of the details requested in Section 5 (Proposal Content).

6.3.3 Phase 3 - Evaluation of Pricing Proposals Only those proposals found to be responsive under Sections 6.3.1 and 6.3.2 will be considered in Phase 3. Cost or price will be an important criterion for selecting among proposers that are deemed qualified to provide the requested services, but will not be the sole determining factor.

6.3.4 Selection of the Successful Proposer Only those proposals found to be responsive under Sections 6.3.1, 6.3.2, 6.3.3 and 6.3.4 will be considered. The Evaluation committee will review the rankings of the proposals and make a recommendation of the successful proposer The evaluation team may request that the finalist(s) make a set of structured presentations to clarify their proposals. The clarifications may include site visits to one or more of the proposer(s) facilities or references.

7. ADMINISTRATIVE

7.1 Calendar of Events

December 9, 2002 December20, 2002 December23, 2002

The Notice of Availability is published in the State Register; the RFP is available. Questions from proposers are due by 12:01 P.M. CST. Questions must be submitted to Greg Hubinger (contact information listed in 7.2, below). An addendum to this RFP will be available in response to vendor questions.

January 2, 2003Proposals are due and must be received by1:00 P.M. CST.

Post

January 2, 2003

Qualifying proposers will be notified to arrange a presentation if

required.

7.2 Inquiries

Questions regarding this proposal may be addressed solely and only to:

Greg Hubinger Legislative Coordinating Commission 85 State Office Building 100 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr Blvd.

8

Deleted: 2 Deleted: 13 Deleted: 16 Deleted: December 20, 2002 Deleted: 3 Deleted: December 20, 2002

Deleted: 100 Constitution Ave.

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

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

Google Online Preview   Download