UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS
Procurement & Contract Services E-Solicitation REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) NO. 14P0007SAS TITLE OF SOLICITATION: Project Name: Information Technology Service Management (ITSM) software replacement project.
The University of Alaska is requesting proposals to contract for an Information Technology Service Management (ITSM) system as specified. EMAIL OR DELIVER PROPOSALS TO: For Delivery of electronic media: University of Alaska Fairbanks Procurement & Contract Services 3295 College Rd, Rm 103 Fairbanks, AK 99709 For Email:
[email protected] PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: April 2, 2014 at 10:30 ADT DEADLINE FOR QUESTIONS: April 4, 2014
PROPOSALS MUST BE RECEIVED NO LATER THAN:
April 10, 2014
4:00 PM. Alaska Time (FAX PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED)
SUBMITTAL DEADLINE
ISSUE DATE:
March 17, 2014
NOTE: Faxed, telegraphed proposals, or proposals submitted by means other than those indicated on the Electronic Signature Page are not acceptable and shall be rejected as non-responsive.
NOTICE TO OFFERORS: POINT OF CONTACT FOR RFP INQUIRIES: Scott Snedden, Senior Contracting Officer email:
[email protected] Phone: 907.474.7787 Fax: 907.474.7720
MAILING ADDRESS: University of Alaska Fairbanks Procurement & Contract Services 3295 College Rd, Rm 103 Fairbanks, AK 99709
The person designated above in this notice shall be the only contact for all inquiries regarding any aspect of this RFP or its requirements. Offerors who seek or receive information regarding this solicitation from any University official other than those listed above may be declared non-responsive and removed from further consideration. A copy of this solicitation, support documents and any amendments issued shall be accessed from the UAF Procurement and Contract Services (P&CS) Website at the following starting link: http://www.uaf.edu/procurement/community/solicitations/current-solicitations/index.xml .
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDING:
A contract resulting from this RFP shall only be issued subject to the availability of funding. The funding source allows or does not allow application of Alaska preference laws.
PROCUREMENT OFFICER:
Scott A. Snedden,
Senior Contracting Officer
RFP Support Document
E-Signature Form
University of Alaska Fairbanks
Electronic Signature Page The following sections are integral to this solicitation and have legal implications. Signature indicates agreement and/or compliance with all marked sections. Any exceptions must be indicated on the Statement of Compliance Form and submitted with the proposal. Failure by an offeror to disclose all such information as required may result in disqualification of that proposal as being non-responsive and removed from further consideration.
Solicitation Support Documents & Checklist of Required Submittals: Marketing Group Project Specific Requirements Cover Electronic Signature Page RFP Document
Legal/Risk Group Instructions to Offerors Modified Insurance Award Contract Non-Personal Services Contract Professional Services Contract Special Conditions
(SOW & Requirements) State of Alaska Business License URL: http://commerce.alaska.gov/ occ/home_bus_licensing.html
Administrator Group Proposal Transmittal Form Statement of Compliance Representations & Certifications
Purchase Order T&C
Instructions: The documents listed above are combined into a single Adobe portfolio file for convenience and may be downloaded with the RFP. Solicitation and contracting forms are available at the following address: http://www.uaf.edu/procurement/community/solicitations/solicitation-boilerplate/index.xml . Forms may be completed by accessing the tools bar typewriter function and saving the document. Combine your files into a single pdf as part of your technical offer in the order indicated in the diagram below. Complete only the required and check marked forms above to be submitted in the order illustrated below. If there are questions regarding format, please contact the responsible procurement officer listed on the cover page.
Order documents for submittal in the following manner: Save all of your documents as one Adobe PDF file with a separate rate sheet PDF. Administrator Group Forms to submit
Marketing Group
Reps & Certs Statement of Compliance Electronic Signature Transmittal or Cover Sheet .PDF
Marketing Group
Rate Offer
Technical Offer
+
Alaska Business License
+
+
Offers will be received in the following format(s): USB Flash Memory CD or DVD Email
[email protected]
Preparer signature: ................................................................................................................................ i Please list Company Name and staff member (with authority) that reviewed documents: Company Signature
i
Date
Name
__________________________________________
Date Date
__________________
Bidders/Offerors agree by submittal of their bid or offer by electronic means that: Email and fax responses may not be as secure or confidential as if delivered or mailed in a sealed envelope; The risk of busy signals or delayed transmissions, especially as the submittal deadline approaches, is substantial; Electronic responses must include all required pages, and information and shall be received in its entirety prior to the submittal deadline; An Incomplete electronic response, or a response not received in its entirety prior to the submittal deadline are late and shall be rejected as untimely; That no accommodation will be made for receipt of electronic responses that are late due to busy phone lines and networks, malfunction of the fax machine of either the sender or receiver, equipment incompatibility, or delays in transmission, and that rejection of a bid due to the above causes is not grounds for protest; The bidder bears sole responsibility for follow-up to ensure that the entire document has been received timely.
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES
IT RELATED PROCUREMENT: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICE MANAGEMENT (ITSM) SOFTWARE REPLACEMENT UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS RFP NO. 14P0007SAS ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL PROCESS 1. The University of Alaska Fairbanks, Procurement & Contract Services (P&CS) Division is modifying the solicitation process to better serve clients, vendors, and staff in the following manner:
match the current business process by leveraging web services and availability
reflect the way vendors do business in response to a solicitation by parsing sections out to staff members by functional area
save on resources to include staff and vendor preparation time
enhanced communication
bolster competition
2. The current document describes the project. The solicitation is complemented by a number of support documents that are identified in the checklist on the electronic signature page. Any strikethroughs of text shall indicated that the term or condition does not apply to this solicitation. 3.
ACTION PLAN:
Vendors may download, review, and print sections at their option. The documents are organized into three groups. Marketing Group I-identified as one document that outlines the purpose of the proposal with specification or statement of work details, evaluation criteria, and the rate response form (all included in this document). Legal/Risk Group II-identified by check list to standardized documents such as a contract document, general provisions, statement of compliance, and special conditions (if applicable). Administrator Forms Group III-also identified by check list to several forms for vendor completion; transmittal, cover, electronic signature, representation and certification documents.
4. The documents (organized by group) are to be downloaded and reviewed by the appropriate authority. Administrative staff may prepare, print, and distribute the support documents to vendor staff members with the appropriate expertise. Make a special note of documents that require signature and must be submitted with an offer. The documents and offer shall be assembled in the proper order and combined into a single PDF to make a valid offer. This will be accompanied by a second PDF file with the vendor’s rate response information. The University
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES website provides access to all solicitation support documents, opens communication with the correct personnel, and facilitates a team response to a solicitation. SUBMITTAL FORMAT & ORDER 5. The proposal shall remain valid for at least one hundred twenty (120) days after the closing date for receipt of proposals. 6. COPIES OF OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS 7. Offerors may request an MS Word copy of the RFP documents to include all forms that require a response and submittal. The University of Alaska Fairbanks, P&CS, Administrative Policy indicates the following: "This solicitation is provided as an MS Word document in order to allow offerors the ability to more easily prepare a response to the RFP. The offeror may not add, delete, or alter any language provided by the University in the solicitation. In the event that there is any difference between the language contained in the MS Word version of the solicitation and the Adobe pdf version located on the UAF Procurement website, the language on the website prevails."
PURPOSE OF SOLICITATION 8.
PROJECT: The University of Alaska, Office of Information Technology (OIT) is looking to replace the current ITSM system. As such, this request for proposal to procure and deploy an ITSM system which is scalable to support from 1 to 3 major campuses and up to 14 remote and/or community campuses.
ANTICIPATED SCHEDULE FOR AWARD Negotiate Contract..................Apr 2014 Contract Award (approx): .......Apr 2014
PROJECTED TIMELINE
NORTH AMERICAN INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (NAICS) CODE: 518210
In order to qualify as a small business for this solicitation, the business receipts of the concern and its affiliates during the preceding twelve (12) month period must not exceed $25.5 million.
NAICS CLASSIFICATION NAME:
See ITSM Timeline Cyliner
Application hosting
BASIS OF AWARD - BEST VALUE 9. Award will be made, pending availability of funding, to the responsive, responsible Offeror whose proposal receives the highest total number of evaluation points as outlined herein. 10. The University reserves the right to make award to other than the lowest price Offeror without conducting negotiations. Likewise, the proposal with the top technical ranking may not necessarily receive the award. Proposals that are unrealistic in terms of program commitments, price, or reflect an inherent lack of comprehension of the complexity and risks of the proposed contractual requirements may be rejected (determined not to be within the competitive range). Marketing Group I
2|Page
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES 11. UAF intends to evaluate proposals and make award without discussions with offerors. However, UAF reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Procurement Officer later determines them to be necessary. 12. Proposals shall be subjected to an evaluation process consisting of a preliminary evaluation of administrative compliance followed by a technical evaluation of proposal content. The administrative evaluation will be performed by UAF P&CS. The technical evaluation will be performed by a committee of qualified UAF personnel. PERIOD FOR ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSALS 13. The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted as an Adobe pdf in the following order:
Transmittal or cover sheet
Electronic signature
Statement of compliance
Representations and certifications
Alaska Business License (if available & current)
Technical offer (Response to Attachment A)
Rate offer form submitted as a separate document
CONTRACT TYPE 14. The contract awarded as a result of this solicitation shall be a fixed price contract for which the offered rates will include all plant, labor, hardware, software, travel, shipping, and administrative costs associated with providing the services listed herein. See Rate Sheet. CONTRACT TERM 15. One year with four (4) one (1) year renewal options. QUESTIONS RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE DEADLINE FOR RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS 16. All questions must be directed to UAF (P&CS) (Attn: Scott Snedden) per the instructions of the RFP Cover Page. There are generally two types of questions. One requires directing the questioner to the specific section of the RFP where the answer may be found. At the option of the University, response to these questions may be given over the telephone; such questions and answers are unofficial and in no case may an oral response to a question affect any aspect of this RFP process. The second type of question involves clarifying or interpreting parts of the RFP or the intent of the RFP. While the University has no obligation to respond to such questions, this type of question, and any response, shall be made in writing. Any written responses conveying material information shall be provided to all recipients of the original solicitation. If any oral responses are given, or claimed to be given, no person may rely upon them and they will not affect any aspect of this RFP process. Offerors who seek or receive Marketing Group I
3|Page
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES information regarding this solicitation from any University official other than those listed above may be declared non-responsive and removed from further consideration for award. 17. Offerors’ questions and any University answers will become public records. Written questions must be submitted to UAF Procurement and Contract Services, PO Box 757940, Fairbanks, AK 99775, faxed to (907) 474-7720 (Attn: Scott Snedden), or emailed to
[email protected] . APPROVAL OF CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL 18. The University reserves the right to approve or reject the use of any personnel used by the Contractor in the performance of any contract(s) issued as a result of this solicitation without prejudice. CONFIDENTIALITY 19. All companies receiving this RFP are required to keep all data strictly confidential and are required to follow all applicable FERPA, GLBA, HEOA, HIPAA, and UA Cloud Computing Guidelines April 2012 (pdf) at (https://www.alaska.edu/oit/services/computersecurity/standards/index.xml ). Failure to do so will result in elimination of the Offeror from consideration for award and in possible litigation. PROPRIETARY INFORMATION 20. Proposals shall clearly indicate any information which is of a proprietary nature. Proprietary information must be limited to confidential information as defined in Instruction to Offerors (Public Information). Proposals will become public information after award of this RFP, in accordance with Alaska law. Once submitted, all proposals become the property of the University.
EVALUATION AND AWARD 21.
GENERAL:
All proposals shall be subjected to an evaluation process consisting of a preliminary evaluation of administrative compliance followed by a secondary, technical evaluation of proposal content. The administrative evaluation will be performed by UAF P&CS. The technical evaluation will be performed by a committee of qualified UAF personnel.
ADMINISTRATIVE EVALUATION: 22. All proposals will be evaluated to determine that they are responsive to the administrative and submittal requirements of the RFP. Proposals will be reviewed based on the following criteria:
The proposal was received on time.
The correct files were submitted with all documents in designated order (one file of the technical proposal and one Rate Response Form submitted as indicated on the Electronic Signature Page.
The proposal was submitted in the correct format.
Marketing Group I
4|Page
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES
All other necessary forms were included.
Proposal forms were properly signed.
All material alterations or erasures, if any, were initialed by signer of the proposal.
The offeror shall have a valid Alaska business license at the time the contract is awarded. To qualify as an Alaska bidder under AS 36.30.321, an offeror shall have a valid Alaska business license at the time designated, in the request for proposals for opening of the proposals.
Prior to contracting, UAF must be satisfied that the Offeror has current insurance coverage, licensing and certification(s) to do the business required in this proposal.
23. This evaluation will be performed by UAF P&CS. Proposals failing to comply with all administrative requirements may be declared non-responsive and removed from further consideration. TECHNICAL EVALUATION 24. All proposals meeting the administrative requirements of the RFP will be forwarded to the evaluation committee. Non-price, technical evaluations shall be completed for each proposal, independently by each individual member of the Committee, with no initial attempts being made to reach a scoring consensus. The Committee may discuss the details and features contained in an offer for the purpose of ensuring there is agreement about what is contained in an offer and/or to clarify parts of an offer which may be unclear. 25. For this solicitation the technical evaluation shall consist of evaluating the offeror’s response to the requested information subject of this proposal. Proposals will then be subjected to technical evaluation using the Criteria Table. The limit of response pages for each criterion is an effort to encourage concise, pertinent communication and discourage general descriptive literature. Excess pages may be disregarded and not evaluated. SCORING METHODOLOGY: 26. The individual members of the evaluation committee will rate each of the criteria for each offeror’s technical proposal on a scale of 1 to 10. See Criteria Table. The scaled rating multiplied by the weight will provide the weighted score for each criterion. The sum of the weighted scores for each proposal will result in a total weighted score from each member of the evaluation committee. The total weighted scores of all evaluators will be summed to determine an average total weighted score for each proposal. A ranking, from highest score to lowest score, of the technical proposals will be made based on the average total weighted score for each proposal. 27. The University provides the above weights to advise the Offeror of the relative importance assigned to the criteria. The scaled scoring is provided as an aid to the evaluators in assigning a tangible expression of their assessment of the Offer relative to each technical criterion and to identify an Offer’s deficiencies and weaknesses. Based upon the results of the scoring the University may seek clarifications from all offerors in the competitive range. The competitive range shall include all offers receiving both a minimum score of 500 points in the technical evaluation AND, at the sole discretion of the procurement officer, achieving a technical score high enough to remain under consideration for award when ranked with other offers received. Marketing Group I
5|Page
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES This is not a strict mathematical formula and may not be challenged on that basis except in the case of obvious arithmetic errors. 28. Concurrently, the sealed Rate Response Forms will be opened by a responsible procurement officer. The procurement officer will coordinate the price ranking of the proposals. The ranking of the Rate Response Forms and the forms themselves will be provided to the evaluation committee after the completion of the technical evaluation. BEST VALUE DETERMINATION 29. The evaluation committee will then begin its overall evaluation of proposals in order to make a determination of the Offeror(s) whose proposal offers the overall best value. The committee will follow the procedures outlined below to make its determination of best value. 30. The University shall award a contract or contracts to the offeror(s) whose proposals provide the best value to the University, price and technical factors considered, and pursuant to the processes listed herein. For the purpose of the paired comparisons, the offeror’s technical proposal is considered by the University to be approximately equal in importance to price. 31. If the Offeror with the highest technical score is also the Offeror with the lowest price, then this Offeror's proposal represents the best value and the University may award to this Offeror. However, if the Offeror with the highest technical score is not also the Offeror with the lowest price then the evaluation committee will compare proposals in a series of paired comparisons. In comparing two proposals, if one proposal has both a higher technical score and the lower price, then the University will consider that proposal to be a better value. If one proposal has the higher technical score, but a higher price than the other proposal, then the evaluation committee will determine if the difference in the technical proposal is worth the difference in price. If the evaluation committee decides that the better technical proposal is worth the higher price, then the University will consider the Offeror with the better technical proposal and the higher price to be the better overall value. If the University decides that the better technical proposal is not worth the higher price, then the University will consider the Offeror with the lower technical proposal score and the lower price to be the better value. The evaluation committee will continue to make paired comparisons until it has identified the Offeror(s) whose proposal represents the best overall value. ORAL PRESENTATIONS 32. During the evaluation process, the Committee may, at its discretion, request that offerors rated as the best overall value, participate in on-site demonstrations. The offeror(s) will demonstrate the implementation of university-specific use-cases to provide proof-of-concept and suitability. UAF reserves the sole right to determine the number of offerors included in the best overall value range. On-site demonstrations will include a maximum of two vendor representatives for approximately one day on site. BEST AND FINAL OFFER (BAFO)
Marketing Group I
6|Page
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES 33. UAF reserves the right to request clarifications and request a best and final offer (BAFO) from each Offeror within the competitive range. However, UAF reserves the right to make award based exclusively on the submitted proposals without seeking a BAFO.
Marketing Group I
7|Page
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES EVALUATION CRITERIA
Criteria Table
Required
Weight
Understanding of the Project Limit submittal to __ 5 __ pages
10
Vendors must provide a comprehensive narrative statement that illustrates their understanding of the requirements of the project.
Methodology use for the Project Limit submittal to __ 5 __ pages
20
Vendors shall provide a comprehensive narrative statement that sets out the methodology they intend to employ and illustrates how their methodology will serve to accomplish the work and meet the University’s project objectives. This statement shall include a proposed strategy for deployment, training, system configuration and implementation.
Vendors Experience in Higher Education Limit submittal to __ 5 __ pages
20
Vendors shall provide a comprehensive narrative statement that details prior experience with other Higher Education Institutions.
Product alignment with the University’s Requirements (Attachment A) Limit submittal to __5__ pages
40
34. Vender shall indicate the products ability to meet the criteria provided in Appendix A. Vendor may also indicate features which differentiates the proposed product from similar product in the marketplace. References (working relationships within Higher Ed preferred)
10
Limit submittal to __ 5 __ pages Vendors shall provide a list of no more than five (5) (minimum should be three (3)) current or former customers for whom they have provided similar goods or services. The customer names, phone numbers, email, and point of contacts shall be included. The University may contact these references to evaluate the Vendor’s past performance. Vendors who do not provide a minimum of 3 references will receive an appropriately diminished score.
TOTAL OF ALL WEIGHTS
Marketing Group I
100
8|Page
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES BACKGROUND 35. The University of Alaska is the only public institution of higher learning in the State of Alaska. It is a statewide system of higher education that consists of three separately accredited Universities, and 14 remote campuses located throughout the state. Chancellors lead each of the three Universities: the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) located in Fairbanks and its six branch community campuses; the University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA) located in Anchorage and its six branch community campuses; and the University of Southeast (UAS) located in Juneau and its two branch community campuses. UA's system administration is conducted by Statewide Programs and Services headquartered in Fairbanks, Alaska. It oversees, coordinates and provides leadership for UA's three main campuses, also referred to as Major Administrative Units (MAUs). Current student enrollment is over 32,000 students. 36. Responsibility for the University's information resources is shared across each of the four MAUs: Statewide, UAF, UAA and UAS. Each MAU, consistent with Board of Regents Policy and University Regulation, establishes the rules and procedures for the use of information resources under their control and has an Information Technology (IT) organization that supports the local needs of their organizations. This responsibility extends to the branch campuses that each of the MAUs oversee. STATEWIDE AND UAF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INFORMATION 37. Information resources for UA Statewide and UAF are managed by the Office of Information Technology (OIT). OIT reports directly to the University President and is responsible for system wide information resources that are utilized across all of the campuses, as well as statewide administrative computing functions. It reports as well to the UAF Chancellor and is responsible for centralized academic and administrative computing on the UAF campus and its associated branch campuses. OIT's mission is to provide University consumers with the technology, tools and resources to support and enhance learning, research and outreach for Alaskans. 38. OIT's organizational structure reflects the primary services OIT provides for the UA and UAF Community: 39. Applications Services (software) are directed toward the end-user community without regard for MAU boundaries. Applications Services include: Core Applications (Web, Email, Calendaring), Enterprise Applications (SGHE Banner), and Infrastructure Architecture. 40. Infrastructure Technology Services provides the underlying services common to all deployed IT systems. Infrastructure Technology Services includes: Data Center Operations, Security Administration, Systems Services (Unix/Linux, Windows Server and DBA) and Telecommunications Services (Telephones, Network Engineering, Network Operations). 41. The Technology Oversight Services department provides coordination, direction and guidance in various areas of OIT including, but not limited to: Project and Contract Management, Strategic Planning, Communications, Security and IT Services coordination. 42. User Services is the customer liaison group responsible for ensuring delivery of IT services for students, faculty, and staff. User Services includes: Campus Technology Services, Desktop Support, Research Support, Support Center, and Video Conferencing Services. Marketing Group I
9|Page
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES UAA INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INFORMATION 43. Information resources for the University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA) campus locations are managed by Information Technology Services (ITS). ITS reports to the UAA provost and is responsible for UAA telecommunications, network infrastructure, and academic technology support services. The mission of UAA ITS is dedication to increasing the meaningful and effective use of technology in teaching, learning, research and service in meeting the needs of the UAA communities served. UAS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INFORMATION 44. Information resources for the University of Alaska Southeast (UAS) campus locations are managed by UAS Information Technology Services (ITS). ITS reports to the UAS Vice Chancellor for Administration and is responsible for UAS telecommunications, network infrastructure, and academic technology support services. The vision of IT Services is to help make the University of Alaska Southeast an exceptional place to learn, work and live by providing services and technology responsive to the needs of the university community. IT SERVICE MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE 45. The University of Alaska utilizes a typical two-tier service management structure to facilitate the resolution of incidents and problems. Tier 1 consists of a consolidated support center which provide support via phone, email and walk-ins. Tier 2 support is provided by the appropriate department in relation to the issue at hand. Additionally, a number of units have local IT support personnel which are referred to as Distributed Technicians. The Distributed Technician role is a blend of Tier 1 and Tier 2 support. Community Campuses provide local technicians, which resolve most issues. The MAUs provide elevated support to the Community Campuses. 46. The University of Alaska is distributed across a large geographic area. A number of the community campuses are in remote areas with limited connectivity, which makes effective training challenging. As such, ease of use and flexible access is important.
SCOPE 47. The University of Alaska is looking to procure and deploy an ITSM system. The University system consists of three Major Campuses: University of Alaska Fairbanks, University of Alaska Anchorage, and University of Alaska Southeast. The new system must be able to support all three major campuses and up to 14 community campuses located throughout the state of Alaska. The university is interested in a Software as a Service (SaaS) solution which can be accessed from anywhere in the state including remote campuses. 48. Proposals must describe licensing structure and differentiate costs between multiple licensing offerings. Additionally, the proposals must include the estimated cost of professional services required for a typical implementation of the product. Proposals must provide the cost based on two implementation scenarios:
Scenario #1 – Implementation at the University of Alaska Fairbanks Campus. o
Number of customers (students, faculty and staff): 15,200
Marketing Group I
10 | P a g e
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES
o
Number of IT Staff (includes distributed techs): 175
o
Licensing requirements: 175 named/seat licenses or 65 concurrent
Scenario #2 – Implementation at all three Major University of Alaska Campuses. o
Number of customers (students, faculty and staff): 46,000
o
Number of IT Staff (includes distributed techs): 250
o
Licensing requirements: 250 named/seat licenses or 100 concurrent
OBJECTIVES 49. The objectives of this procurement are to: 50. Identify and select the ITSM software that best supports the service management practices of the university. The product must follow Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL) best practices, and be priced to align with the IT operating budget. 51. Determine a feasible implementation strategy and schedule 52. Ascertain the required professional service required to support training, implementation and ongoing maintenance.
SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS 53. Requirements are listed in Appendix A. The vendor will indicate whether the product meets the requirement and if appropriate a short description of the applicable feature. Additionally, the vendor will indicate if the product can be modified to meet the requirement through code-level customization. Estimated training required for system Administration. Administrators will be required to perform configuration changes to go beyond out-of-the-box functionality. Preferred training includes over-the-shoulder training to implement real-world forms, workflows, views and reports.
Marketing Group I
11 | P a g e
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES ATTACHMENT A – SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS Place an “M” in the response code column if the proposed solution meets/exceeds the system requirement. Where the proposed solution exceeds the system requirement vendors should elaborate. Place a “C” in the response code column if the proposed (alternative) solution requires code-level customization in order to meet the system requirement. The vendor must specify the estimated number of hours required for customization in the far right column and provide a clear explanation under “Response Narrative” describing a proposed alternate solution. Place an “X” in the response code column if the proposed solution cannot meet the system requirement. Requirements are coded as Critical (“C”), Desired (“D”) or Informational (“Info”). C o d e
Requirement Description
REQ1
C
Shall be SaaS solution
REQ2
C
Shall be scalable to support 1 to 3 major campuses and 14 community campuses
REQ3
C
Shall provide multiple functional domains within one implementation. Unique configurations for each campus
REQ4
C
Shall support a minimum of 250 operators (IT Staff) and 50,000 customers (Faculty, Staff, Students)
REQ5
C
Product shall be self-contained with no reliance on third party software for full functionality
REQ #
Resp Code
Response Narrative
System
Marketing Group I
12 | P a g e
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES REQ6
D Web client should support major browser’s (Explorer, Firefox, Safari, Chrome, etc)
REQ7
C
REQ8
D Product should include ITIL V3 or later process integrations for Service Asset and Configuration Management
The product shall use ITIL v3 or later process terms and include ITIL v3 or later workflows and process integrations
INFO1
Does product include ITIL V3 or later process integrations for Portfolio Management?
INFO2
Does product include ITIL V3 or later process integrations for Financial Management?
INFO3
Does product include ITIL V3 or later process integrations for Availability Management?
INFO4
Does product include ITIL V3 or later process integrations for Capacity Management?
INFO5
Does product include ITIL V3 or later process integrations for Release & Deployment Management?
INFO6
Does product provide both web and thick client?
Marketing Group I
13 | P a g e
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES Workflow REQ9
C
Product shall include visual drag-anddrop workflow creation (Visio style)
REQ10
C
Workflows shall be able to execute actions based on business rules
REQ11
C
Workflows shall be modifiable only by authorized administrators
REQ12
C
Product shall be able to integrate with Active Directory and LDAP for single sign on and user account setup
REQ13
D Product should be able to accept formatted emails allowing integration of messages from other monitoring applications to trigger service events and incidents
REQ14
D Product should be able to easily integrate with Microsoft Configuration Manager
REQ15
D Product should be able to easily integrate with Microsoft asset discovery and management tools
REQ16
D Should integrate with event/alert monitoring tools. Allow for automatic creation, update and closure of tickets
Integration
Marketing Group I
14 | P a g e
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES Mobile Shall be able to log into the system via a mobile component (iOS or Android) & to update incidents, service requests, and changes
REQ17
C
REQ18
D Should be able to provide alerts and notifications to mobile users via text, email and voice
REQ19
C
Shall provide the ability to "acknowledge" incidents and service requests via the mobile application.
REQ20
C
Shall support major mobile devices such as Android/iOS phones and tablets
User Interface Shall provide browser based portal for requesting services, viewing the status of service requests and incidents, reporting service incidents, canceling incidents/service requests, and obtaining general information
REQ21
C
REQ22
D Should allow elevated users (super users) to view their entire department's incidents and service requests
Marketing Group I
15 | P a g e
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES EQ23
D Should provide the ability to view IT staff’s entire workload including; incidents, service requests, problems, changes, and projects within dashboards
REQ24
D Should provide the ability to submit and store attachments as part of incidents and service requests from the self-service portal
REQ25
D Should provide multiple means to find services within the self-service portal (e.g. keyword search and category navigation)
REQ26
D Should provide the ability to capture customer satisfaction information regarding closed tickets using questions and responses configured by IT Staff
REQ27
D Should provide the capability to configure the graphical user interface by using drag and drop for windows and fields
REQ28
D Should provide the ability to configure graphical user interface based on individual, group or role-based preferences (colors, layout, buttons, etc.)
REQ29
D Should support hot topic or news flash items within the graphical user interface
Marketing Group I
16 | P a g e
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES REQ30
D Should be able to make fields mandatory within incident, change, etc.
REQ31
D Should be able to customize dashboards by roles
REQ32
D Should provide capability for scrolling messages and/or notifications within application notifying users of important events
REQ33
D Should allow customers to access online help through the customer selfservice portal
REQ34
D Should allow IT staff to access online help within the application
System Administration REQ35
C
Shall allow IT Staff add custom fields and validation rules as needed
REQ36
C
Shall preserve IT Staff’s configurations during application upgrades
REQ37
C
Shall provide the ability to control the entry/tab sequence of fields on each screen
REQ38
C
Shall provide ability to configure all menu choices
REQ39
C
Shall log all Administrative activities (application modifications)
Marketing Group I
17 | P a g e
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES Incident Management REQ40
C
Product shall include ITIL V3 or later process integrations for Incident Management
REQ41
C
Incident Management shall meet the criteria as defined by PinkVerify i
REQ42
C
Product shall differentiate between an incident and a service request
Problem Management REQ43
C
Product shall include ITIL V3 or later process integrations for Problem Management
REQ44
C
Problem Management shall meet the criteria as defined by PinkVerify
Change Management REQ45
C
Product shall include ITIL V3 or later process integrations for Change Management
REQ46
C
Change Management shall meet the criteria as defined by PinkVerify
Knowledge Management REQ47
C
Product shall include ITIL V3 or later process integrations for Knowledge Management
Marketing Group I
18 | P a g e
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES REQ48
C
Knowledge Management shall meet the criteria as defined by PinkVerify
Service Catalog Management REQ49
C
Product shall include ITIL V3 or later process integrations for Service Catalog Management
REQ50
C
Service Catalog Management shall meet the criteria as defined by PinkVerify
Service Level Management REQ51
C
Product shall include ITIL V3 or later process integrations for Service Level Management
REQ52
C
Service Level Management shall meet the criteria as defined by PinkVerify
Configuration Management REQ53
C
Product shall include ITIL V3 or later process integrations for Configuration Management
REQ54
C
Configuration Management shall meet the criteria as defined by PinkVerify Financial/Billing Integration
INFO7
Describe the products ability to interface with third party billing software. Specifically Pinnacle Billing Software
Marketing Group I
19 | P a g e
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES INFO8
Describe the ability to charge and account for costs per trouble call
INFO9
Describe the ability to support the input, tracking, and scheduling of annual maintenance contracts
INFO10
Describe the ability to store warranty start and end dates
INFO11
Describe the ability to track software licenses and license keys by hardware and user
INFO12
Describe the ability to track specific technician’s time and costs
INFO13
Describe the ability to print specific technician’s time and cost
INFO14
Is the product able to export csv monthly billing files to banner/financial systems?
INFO15
Describe the ability to provide detailed billing/customer invoices
INFO16
Describe the ability to tie costs to all IT Services
Security & Audit REQ55
C
Shall enable access and privileges based on roles that are configurable by IT Staff
Marketing Group I
20 | P a g e
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES REQ56
C
Shall generate audit trail records showing the history of modifications to incidents, service requests, and changes by user ID
REQ57
C
Shall log failed login attempts and restrict access after a number of consecutive repeated failed attempts
REQ58
C
Shall be able to restrict viewing of certain data fields based on role
INFO15
Application Security- If vulnerability issues exist, what is the time to remediation? Workarounds?
INFO17
Application Security- Does vendor software undergo regular security testing and evaluation?
Service Level Integration REQ59
C
Shall provide the ability to set "timers" for SLA's at multiple stages of an incident or service request
REQ60
C
Shall provide the ability to send autogenerated emails to specific personnel when an incident or service request has or is close to breaching an SLA
REQ61
C
Shall be able to provide alerts and notifications when SLAs are approaching a threshold
REQ62
C
Shall be able to report on SLA achievements vs. SLA targets
Marketing Group I
21 | P a g e
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES Reporting REQ63
C
Shall provide IT Staff the ability to create custom reports, in addition to containing a set of standard reports
REQ64
C
Shall provide the ability to schedule reports on a specified date and time and to generate reports on demand
REQ65
C
Shall provide the ability to export queries and report results in a variety of formats (including CSV files, PDFs, etc.)
REQ66
C
Shall provide the ability to generate reports with graphical representations (including bar graphs and pie charts)
REQ67
D Shall provide the ability to secure reports through permissions
INFO18
Describe the ability for users and administrators to use drag and drop methods to create their own custom reports
INFO19
Describe the ability to have scheduled reports which are sent automatically to subscribers
INFO20
Describe the ability to support a realtime dashboard display for each process that is customizable based on individual, role or informational needs
Marketing Group I
22 | P a g e
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES Support and Implementation INFO21
Describe the ability and skills required to customize vendor software to better meet UA business needs
INFO22
Describe the ability of the solution to carry forward, to new releases, the modifications and customizations created
INFO23
Describe vendor schedule for new software version releases, updates, patches
INFO24
Describe how software maintenance is applied and the impact to vendor’s customers
INFO25
Describe how the customer is notified of an upgrade/update. Are upgrades mandatory in the SaaS model? What is the outage to vendor’s customers during the upgrade?
INFO26
Describe any issues with support agreements if an upgrade/update is not performed
INFO27
Describe how customers’ input is incorporated into vendor’s next release upgrade
INFO28
Describe vendor’s backup and recovery processes and tools
Marketing Group I
23 | P a g e
PROCUREMENT & CONTRACT SERVICES INFO29
Describe ability to meet backup, restore, high-availability and disaster recovery requirements
INFO30
Describe how/if local processing can continue if network connectivity to the vendor site fails
INFO31
Describe support after implementation including vendor’s organization's response times and SLA's
INFO32
Describe the types of professional services or service packages vendor provides during and after implementation
Training INFO32
Describe options for training and vendor’s recommended approach
INFO33
Define minimum training requirements for end users to ensure a successful solution deployment
i
PinkVERIFYTM is an internationally recognized IT Service Management (ITSM) tool suite assessment service. A service that objectively assesses a software tool’s enabling applications against ITIL terminology, definitions, functionality and workflow requirements.
Marketing Group I
24 | P a g e
RATE OFFER FORM Offerors must complete this Rate Response Form and submit it, as a separate Adobe PDF file. Complete all forms and submit with your proposal in the order indicated on the Electronic Signature Page as a single Adobe PDF file. Do not include rate information in the technical offer or any other part of your proposal. Offers will consist of two PDF files. Note: Faxed or telegraphed proposals are not acceptable and shall be rejected as non-responsive.
OFFERS WILL BE RECEIVED IN THE FOLLOWING FORMAT(S): USB Flash Memory
CD or DVD
Email
Vendor is instructed to use the table below and outline all initial and recurring costs. Training and professional services will be based on typical vendor experiences. The University intends to calibrate a vendors proposal against expectations for this project. The rate offered for software and licenses is firm-fixed-price which includes all costs relating to the cost of total ownership of the product. Training and professional services are estimates. Offeror shall list proposed hours to assist with rate comparison.
Scenario #1 Cost Summary o Implementation at the University of Alaska Fairbanks Campus only o Number of customers (students, faculty and staff): 15,200 o Number of IT Staff (includes distributed techs): 175 o Licensing requirements: 175 named/seat licenses or 65 concurrent Initial Cost Quantity (Year 1) Named/Seat Licensing 175 Concurrent Licensing 65 Additional Licensing Maintenance Costs (Recurring) Other Costs/Fees Days/Hrs Unit Cost Estimate of Professional Services Required for initial implementation and deployment. Based on a typical outof-the-box functionality configured for the universities’ environment. (For comparison only) Estimated training required for system Administration. Administrators will be required to perform configuration changes to go beyond out-of-the-box functionality. Preferred training includes over-the-shoulder training to implement real-world forms, workflows , views and reports. (For comparison only)
Annual Cost (Years 2-5)
Total Cost
Scenario #2 Cost Summary o Implementation at all three Major University of Alaska Campuses o Number of customers (students, faculty and staff): 46,000 o Number of IT Staff (includes distributed techs): 250 o Licensing requirements: 250 named/seat licenses or 100 concurrent Initial Cost Quantity (Year 1) Named/Seat Licensing 250 Concurrent Licensing 100 Additional Licensing Maintenance Costs (Recurring) Other Costs/Fees Days/Hrs Unit Cost Estimate of Professional Services Required for initial implementation and deployment. Based on a typical outof-the-box functionality configured for the universities’ environment. (For comparison only) Estimated training required for system Administration. Administrators will be required to perform configuration changes to go beyond out-of-the-box functionality. Preferred training includes over-the-shoulder training to implement real-world forms, workflows , views and reports.
Annual Cost (Years 2-5)
Total Cost
The offeror’s rate response form shall contain all pricing information in order to perform the services described in this request for proposals. The rate response shall include all direct and indirect costs including all out-of-pocket expenses (e.g., travel, lodging and subsistence) and including cash flow projections, life cycle analyses, etc. The University of Alaska is not responsible for expenses incurred in preparing and submitting the technical proposal or the rate response form. Any such costs shall not be included in the proposal. Company: .................................................................................................................................................... Business License: ........................................................................................................................................ Fax Number: ............................................................................................................................................... Investor/Contractor: ..................................................................................................................................
