11-1 - 26RFP14 Williamson County EAM RFP Specifications.pdf

26RFP14 Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) System

Due: Wednesday, March 4, 2026, at 2:00 PM CT

Purchasing Department 100 Wilco Way, Suite P101 Georgetown, TX 78626 512-943-3553 Wilcotx.gov

Wilco.org Page Purpose 3

Definitions 3

Background 4

Scope of Work/Specifications 6

Contract Term and Renewals 16

Evaluation Criteria and Award Process 20

RFP Schedule of Events, Due Date, Submission and Delivery 24

Instructions and Response Requirements 28

Terms and Conditions Acknowledgements 32

Federal Requirements 48

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Version November 2024

PURPOSE

Williamson County, Texas, herein “the County”, is issuing this Request for Proposal (RFP) to Respondents capable of meeting the needs for turnkey software, consulting, and implementation services for a new Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) software system with the goal of an initial ten (10) year term.

In addition to soliciting written responses, this document provides information to assist Respondents in preparing their submittal and outlines the subsequent evaluation process. In that regard, this RFP:

• Provides information essential to soliciting meaningful Proposals and realistic commitments from the Respondents;

• Specifies the desired format and content of Proposals in response to this RFP;

• Outlines the County’s evaluation and selection procedures;

• Establishes a schedule for the preparation and submission of Proposals in response to this RFP.

This solicitation document and the Successful Respondent’s submittal will be incorporated into the contract resulting from this solicitation.

DEFINITIONS

Addendum/Addenda - means any written or graphic instruments issued by the County prior to the consideration of Proposals which modify or interpret the Proposal Documents by additions, deletions, clarifications, or corrections.

Buyer - means the designated Williamson County Purchasing contact.

Contract - means this RFP and the Proposal of the Successful Respondent shall become a Contract between the Successful Respondent and the County once the Successful Respondent's Proposal is properly accepted by the Williamson County Commissioners Court (sometimes referred to herein as the Commissioner's Court"). In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions contained in this RFP and the Proposal, an Ensuing Agreement may be required.

Commissioners Court - means the Williamson County Commissioners Court.

County - means Williamson County, a political subdivision of the State of Texas.

Ensuing Agreement(s) - means the Successful Respondent may be required by the County to sign an additional agreement containing terms necessary to ensure compliance with the RFP and the Respondent's Proposal. Such Ensuing Agreement(s) shall contain the Proposal specifications, terms and conditions that are derived from the RFP.

Proposal Documents - means the RFP including attachments, and any Addenda issued by the County prior to the consideration of any Proposals.

Proposal - means the complete, properly signed document, and ALL required forms and documentation listed in the proposal package which have been submitted in accordance with this RFP package. A Proposal submitted in accordance with this RFP is irrevocable during the specified time period for evaluation and acceptance of Proposals, unless a waiver is obtained from the Williamson County Purchasing Agent. Submission of any Proposal indicates a Respondent’s acceptance of the terms and conditions contain in this RFP, unless clearly and specifically noted otherwise in the Proposal. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions contained in this RFP and the Proposal, an Ensuing Agreement may be required.

Public Announcement – The newspaper advertisement and Bonfire posting of the solicitation.

Respondent - means a person or entity who submits a Proposal in response to this RFP.

Request for Proposals (RFP) - means this document, together with the attachments thereto and any future Addenda issued by the County.

Successful Respondent - means the responsible Respondent who, in the County's sole opinion, submits the Proposal which is in the best interest of the County, taking into account factors identified herein, and to whom the County intends to award the Contract.

BACKGROUND

Williamson County is home to more than 617,000 residents according to the US Census Bureau. Located in the Central Texas Hill County just north of the state capital in Austin, and the University of Texas, Williamson County has emerged as an exceptional place to live.

The Commissioners’ Court is the overall governing and management body of Williamson County and is responsible for all budgetary decisions in addition to setting the tax rate each year. Among its duties is the administration of all County business, including the building and maintenance of County roads and bridges. Commissioners' Courts are governing bodies of County government in several US states, including Texas. The principal functions of the Commissioners' Court are legislative and executive.

Although called courts, Commissioners' Courts generally exercise only limited judicial powers. The Commissioners' Court consists of five members. The County judge presides as Chairman and is elected every four years by voters countywide. Four Commissioners are elected by single-member precincts every four years.

The following table contains statistics related to the County. These statistics are estimates and are provided for planning purposes only. Additional information has been provided in Table 3: Functional Area Statistics.

Table 1: Statistics

No. Area Statistic

1 Operating Budget Approx. $635,129,938

No. Area Statistic

2 Population Served Approx. 617,000

3 Total FTEs Approx. 2,000

4 Fiscal Year October 1 – September 30

PROJECT OBJECTIVES

The overall goal of this project is to procure the newest technology and harness efficiencies to enhance existing business processes performed by the County departments. The County is planning to replace its current EAM software systems environment with a new system or combination of software systems, and to adopt systems functionality to support core processes. In doing so, the County seeks to address several challenges in the current environment, and gain future efficiencies, including, but not limited to:

• Key Objectives and Outcomes:

o Enhance operational effectiveness by making more timely, accurate, and complete information available to citizens and County personnel;

o Enhance integrations with the County’s third-party software solutions, as well as reduce the number of third-party solutions currently in use by selecting a fully integrated EAM platform;

o Adopt a user-friendly interface that will help minimize the learning curve and maximize user adoption;

o Enhance features and functionality to support increased automation and operational efficiencies by streamlining and integrating use of systems;

o Increase productivity by eliminating redundancy and unnecessary tasks.

• Primary Challenges in the Current Environment o The County lacks mobile functionality which has resulted in manual and duplicative data entry;

o The County does not currently have an online public portal for County residents to report issues, submit photos, and provide location-specific details;

o The County has difficulty in validating and transferring infrastructure asset data from new roadway project construction, newly constructed subdivisions as-builts, and the development permitting software into the current system to begin maintenance activities;

o Service requests and work order entry effort is time-consuming in the current process, as it includes creating service requests from incoming service (via calls and email), gathering and transferring data, often rekeying the data to a work order and assigning the service request for validation;

o County staff have difficulty in communicating status of requests back to the requestor, as the system does not currently have notification configuration;

o The County currently has no map or building plan capability to show any vertical building assets, and all assets are only tied to one address point.

In order to address these challenges and others, the County has initiated this project to adequately plan for, select, and implement a replacement or upgraded the EAM software environment. The Scope of Work/Specifications contained herein, outlines the features and functionality desired in a future system(s), as well as the professional services necessary to implement that system(s).

SCOPE OF WORK/SPECIFICATIONS

FUNCTIONAL AREAS

The following table contains the list of functional areas of the desired future systems environment.

Table 2: Functional Areas

Functional Areas

No. Functional Area No. Functional Area

1 Public Portal 4 Asset Management

2 Service Requests 5 Inventory Management

3 Work Orders 6 Facilities Maintenance

The List of Functional and Technical Requirements/Capabilities contained in Attachment B – Functional and Technical Requirements/Capabilities contains the detailed functionality the County requires within each functional area in a future systems environment, as well as general and technical system requirements, data conversion and interface scope.

The following table contains functional statistics of the County. These statistics are estimates and are provided for planning purposes only.

Table 3: Functional Area Statistics

No. Functional Area/Metric Statistic

Facilities Assets

Number of County buildings/facilities maintained 78

No. Functional Area/Metric Statistic

Number of Structures (pavilions or non-enclosed) Approx: 84

Square Footage Maintained 1.5 million

Number of building/facilities work orders per year 13,957

Monthly Preventative Maintenance Inspections 111

Parks Assets

Number of Parks Maintained 6 developed/1 undeveloped/16 preserve areas

Acres of Fields Maintained Approx: 51 acres of sports fields

Acres of Open Areas Managed 2,992.66 acres parkland/1,851.20 acres preserves

Number of Parks Equipment Units Maintained Approx: 75

Specialized facilities: utilities: hydrants, septic, power lines, irrigation, sports fields, trails, campsites, playgrounds, wildlife blinds

Water system, wastewater system, hydrants, septic tanks/drain fields, power lines, irrigation systems, sport fields, sport courts, trails, parking lots, roadways, campsites, playgrounds, wildlife blinds, signs, area lighting, sports field lighting

Number of work orders per year 3,000

Number of Preventative Maintenance Inspections per year 300

Infrastructure Road and Bridge Assets

Service Requests Per Year 1,900

Work Orders Per Year 12,000

Roadway Miles Maintained 1,622

Bridges Maintained 300+

Miles of Guardrail Maintained 30

Culverts Maintained 4,000+

Signs Maintained 20,000+

School Zone Lights Maintained 70

Traffic Signals Maintained 13

Roadway Resurfacing Per Year (miles) 132

Miles Mowed Per Year (miles) 3,694

No. Functional Area/Metric Statistic

Asphalt Patches Applied Per Year (Tons) 23,587

Useful Links

• FY2024 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report:

https://wilco.mygovcenter.com/uploads/cms/2024ACFR-1743184068715-1743184069093.pdf

• 2024 – 2025 Adopted Budget: https://www.wilcotx.gov/DocumentCenter/View/12751/Williamson-County-

Adopted-Budget-for-2024---2025-PDF

• Facilities Management: https://www.wilcotx.gov/376/Facilities-Management

• Parks: https://www.wilcotx.gov/564/Parks

• Road and Bridge: https://www.wilcotx.gov/474/Road-Bridge

ALTERNATE PROPOSALS, PARTNERSHIPS AND RESPONDENTS

OF SUBSETS OF FUNCTIONALITY

Alternate Proposals:

• The County will not be accepting alternate Proposals for evaluation.

• Respondents may submit multiple Proposals for evaluation. For example, if a Respondent offers one or more “branded” products that may meet the needs of the County they are encouraged to separately propose each software package for consideration.

• Software companies that deliver their solution through one or more consulting firms (system integrators) are also allowed to submit more than one Proposal for consideration through differing consulting firms.

• A separate Proposal package submitted in accordance with Section 4 is required in order for the County to accurately evaluate each Proposal independent of the other.

Partnerships:

Respondents are encouraged to establish partnership relationships to fully provide all requirements defined by the RFP.

• Respondents engaged in a partnership relationship shall submit a single proposal in response to this RFP.

• Partnership relationships shall be clearly defined by proposal responses. Such definition shall identify the entity in the partnership relationship deemed to be the Prime Respondent.

• Each Respondent engaged in the partnership shall respond to any and all applicable portions of this RFP that relate to the work that will be performed, or the capabilities provided. For example, each Respondent shall provide references, and each Respondent shall respond to the Company Background and History questions.

https://wilco.mygovcenter.com/uploads/cms/2024ACFR-1743184068715-1743184069093.pdf https://www.wilcotx.gov/DocumentCenter/View/12751/Williamson-County-Adopted-Budget-for-2024---2025-PDF https://www.wilcotx.gov/DocumentCenter/View/12751/Williamson-County-Adopted-Budget-for-2024---2025-PDF https://www.wilcotx.gov/376/Facilities-Management https://www.wilcotx.gov/564/Parks https://www.wilcotx.gov/474/Road-Bridge

Respondents of Subsets of Functionality:

As part of this process the County will be allowing Respondents to submit point solutions (best of breed), and encourages Respondents to participate in this process in order to consider and evaluate a range of marketplace offerings.

• The County recognizes that the scope of functionality in this RFP may be met through a combination of systems that specialize on a modular or functional area basis. The County is willing to consider best-of-breed solutions (“point” solutions), subject to certain conditions as outlined in this section.

• The County has a preference on software solutions that provide for the highest level of fit, and facilitate the exchange of information between any disparate systems.

• Respondents are encouraged to propose a subset of functionality if the proposed software cannot provide functionality for all requested modules. Respondents may propose solutions that address a subset of functionality, provided the software is able to address, at a minimum, one of the following areas:

i. Facilities Maintenance System (Tab 7 of Attachment B) – Respondents must also respond to Tabs 1 and 8 – 9.

This does not preclude Respondents from partnering or addressing more than one of the above areas but is rather intended to identify the minimum scope that must be presented in each proposal.

The County will consider Respondents of a subset of functionality on the relative merit of the functionality proposed based on the evaluation criteria laid forth in this RFP, and reserves the right to enter into negotiations for one or more Respondents in order to achieve a “best–of-breed” solution.

The County reserves the right to make one or more awards to competing Respondents for subsets of functionality as a result of this RFP. In the event the County should make awards to one or more competing Respondents, it shall be expected that additional discussion will take place between the County and the Respondents to define requirements and an approach to building an integration or interface between the selected systems. In such instance, the County expects that the Respondents will work together as necessary to develop the necessary integration once one has been identified.

COUNTY PROJECT STAFFING

The County intends to have functional and technical resources available during Project implementation, though it is noted that the County does not anticipate dedicating staff full-time to the implementation in addition to managing their core job responsibilities. This applies to both functional resources as well as technical resources internal to the County. It is anticipated that some functional leads will serve as the functional lead, or a subject matter expert, across one or more modules during the implementation process.

Staffing considerations are a factor for the County in terms of both the implementation process as well as supporting the software once in an operations mode. Respondents are encouraged to submit questions to the County during the RFP questions period to solicit such additional information as is necessary to adequately estimate the resource commitments that would be expected of the County during implementation, and post go-live for ongoing support of the system(s). Additional resource planning will be performed based upon the selected Respondent(s).

Respondents shall clearly indicate in the proposal responses the estimated level of the County resource involvement in the implementation process, in order to allow the County to perform adequate planning.

The County will utilize the response to Respondents’ Resource Hour Estimates in Tab 3 of Attachment A

– Project Approach and Implementation Methodology, of Proposals as an input into the staffing plan the County develops, and requests that Respondents clearly articulate estimated staffing considerations in their responses.

DEPLOYMENT MODEL

The County is open to considering various deployment models, and has structured the RFP to allow for the evaluation of the deployment model as but one factor in the overall procurement process. The County wishes to evaluate the greatest range of marketplace offerings feasible through this process.

The County recognizes there are many factors contributing to a comparison of cost Proposals for these various deployment methods including needed infrastructure and/or hardware costs, the potential for reduced hardware and support costs in hosted/SaaS models, a particular Respondent’s approach to managing upgrades, and technical staffing needs. The County has a strong preference toward a Software as a Service (SaaS) deployment model, but also recognizes that the scope of this opportunity may result in the award to two or more Respondents to address all functionality and the County wishes to evaluate the greatest range of available solutions in the market including those that may be locally hosted by the County. As such, the County is open to considering deployment models in light of the breadth of functionality and available solutions in the marketplace to address those functional areas. The County will consider, in no particular order, the following deployment models:

a. On Premise (locally hosted at the County on a virtualized server, perpetual licenses)

b. Respondent hosted (hosted and managed by the Respondent, perpetual licenses)

c. Software as a Service (SaaS or subscription-based models)

Cost sheets have been provided under Attachment C1 – Cost Worksheets for pricing each of the deployment models.

This solicitation is not a bid process nor will it follow a lowest-priced responsive Proposal process, but will be based on most advantageous Proposal(s) utilizing the Evaluation Criteria listed in the RFP, including the review of life cycle costs (i.e., recurring costs, hardware, third-party licenses, etc.).

In developing proposals, Respondent’s shall clearly define the proposed deployment model including the licensing model as well as any perceived benefits of the proposed model. In the event two or more products are proposed under the same proposal (e.g., through a partnership or offered by the same company) the Respondent shall clearly indicate in both the technical proposal (Attachment A, Tab 2) and cost proposal (Attachment C1) the deployment model for each proposed software product.

bookmark://_Evaluation_Criteria/

The County does not have a preference as to a specific hosting location but does have a requirement toward the hosting being within the contiguous United States. Respondents are requested to specify the hosting location in proposal responses, specifically as part of Tab 8 to proposal responses (please see Attachment A for further instruction).

NUMBER OF USERS

The following user counts by module contained in the table below are estimates and are provided for planning purposes only. The number of users represents the anticipated future number of users of a new system.

Table 4: Number of Users (Facilities)

Functional Area Anticipated Core (SME) Users by Functional Area

Mobile/Field Users by Functional Area

Anticipated Read-Only Users by Functional Area

Public Portal 0 0 0

Service Requests 35 30 0

Work Orders 35 30 0

Asset Management 35 30 42

Inventory Management 10 10 42

Facilities Maintenance 35 30 42

Table 5: Number of Users (Parks)

Functional Area Anticipated Core (SME) Users by Functional Area

Mobile/Field Users by Functional Area

Anticipated Read-Only Users by Functional Area

Public Portal 2 0 50

Service Requests 15 30 50

Work Orders 15 30 0

Asset Management 15 30 0

Inventory Management 15 30 0

Facilities Maintenance 15 30 0

Table 6: Number of Users (Road and Bridge)

Functional Area Anticipated Core (SME) Users by Functional Area

Mobile/Field Users by Functional Area

Anticipated Read-Only Users by Functional Area

Public Portal 5 0 20

Service Requests 20 5 35

Work Orders 35 40 100

Asset Management 10 10 50

Inventory Management 15 3 5

Facilities Maintenance 0 0 0

POTENTIAL PHASING AND TARGET LIVE DATES

The County requests that offerors provide potential phase start and target go-live dates in proposal responses per Attachment A – Proposal Response Forms, Tab 5. These dates should be estimates based on anticipated resource requirements and dependencies between functional areas. These dates are subject to negotiation. The County anticipates that implementation activities would begin in August 2026. The County follows an October 1 – September 30 fiscal year.

CURRENT APPLICATIONS ENVIRONMENT

The County Infrastructure (Road and Bridge), Facilities, and Parks Departments use DTS VUEWorks as the asset management and work order solution. County staff primarily leverage the Service Request and Work Order modules, with limited use of Resource Manager for the purpose of tracking equipment, labor, and material inventory and costs.

Table 7: Current EAM Functions

Current EAM Functions

1 Resource Manager

2 Service Requests

3 Work Orders

4 Mobile

OTHER MAJOR APPLICATIONS

The County also uses a wide variety of applications to provide capability and functionality in specialized areas. Many of these applications are listed in Table 8. Identification of any potential future system interfaces is provided in Attachment B to this RFP.

Table 8: Additional Software Applications

Additional Software Applications

No. Application Use/Summary

1 Active Directory Security Management

2 ActiveNet Parks Rental and Facility Reservations

3 Adobe Electronic Document Editor

4 CivicPlus Recreations Management System

5 Esri ArcGIS Geographic Information System

6 FASTER Asset Solutions Fleet Asset Management

7 Laserfiche Document Management System

8 MS 365 Suite of Applications Productivity Tools

9 MS OneDrive Cloud-Based Application Management

10 MyGovernmentOnline Electronic Permitting and Licensing System

11 Oracle E-Business Suite Enterprise Resource Planning System

12 Origination Procurement Processor

13 Power DMS Workflow Management

14 Samsara Automatic Vehicle Locator

15 ServiceNow IT Service Management

SharePoint Document Repository and Workflow Management

SharePoint Document Repository and Workflow Management

17 VUEWorks Work Order and Asset Management System

18 Wasp Barcode Technologies Inventory and Asset Tagging

PROJECT MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTATION

The following information establishes the expectation of the minimum level of project management documentation to be provided by Respondents as a part of, but not exclusively, the resulting implementation services offered. As part of the implementation scope, following signing of a contract, the selected Respondent(s) shall develop and provide the County with the following items:

• Project Management Plan: a detailed Implementation Project Plan that, at a minimum, includes the following:

o Objectives o Deliverables and Milestones o Project Schedule o Resource Management Processes o Scope Management Processes o Schedule Management Processes o Risk Management Processes o Quality Management Approach o Communication Management Approach o Organizational Change Management Approach o Status Reporting

• Data Conversion Plan

• Training Plan

• System Interface Plan

• Testing and Quality Assurance Plan

• Pre- and Post-Implementation Support Plan

• System Documentation

• Risk Register

Additional documentation about each Plan may be found in Attachment A – Proposal Response Forms, Tab 3, attached to this RFP.

BUDGET

The County is committed to funding the one-time and recurring annual costs for the acquisition of the software (whether a licensed model or a subscription model is selected as a result of this process). The County does not have an established budget in place for this project, but intends to use the proposals received through this process to inform the budget development process. The County has performed initial, high-level estimations, for the acquisition of either a hosted or cloud-based software solution including professional services and recurring maintenance/subscription costs. Recognizing the cost and payment differences between deployment models, a final budget will be programmed based on the results of this RFP and final contract negotiations.

The County is sensitive to the total costs, and has listed cost as one of the several evaluation criteria in the RFP; however, this is not an opportunity to identify the lowest priced solution. This RFP opportunity is being presented as a best value solicitation, and not a lowest priced bid, opportunity.

PERSONNEL

All of Respondent’s personnel providing goods and services under the contract shall possess the necessary skills, experience, and knowledge, to perform their assigned duties. In the event assigned personnel are providing non-conforming or unsuitable services, the County shall notify Respondent and provide the opportunity to rectify the deficiency. If unable to cure the nonconforming services, Respondent shall remove from the project and replace the Respondent’s personnel that the County deems unsuitable for the project with a resource possessing the necessary skills, experience, and knowledge, to perform their assigned duties in a satisfactory manner.

SOFTWARE UPGRADES

The County shall be entitled to any and all upgraded versions of the software covered in the contract that becomes available from the Respondent. Such upgrades shall be provided at no cost to the County so long as a valid maintenance and support agreement, or if applicable software as a service licensing agreement, is in place.

PERFORMANCE REVIEW

The Respondent may be required to meet with the County’s Project Manager not less than once per quarter to conduct a performance review of the Respondent. These meetings will be either in person at the County offices, or via teleconference or web-conference. This performance review will include a review of the pricing, delivery performance, customer service, and improving operational efficiencies.

SILENCE OF SPECIFICATIONS

The apparent silence of these specifications as to any detail or to the apparent omission from it of a detailed description concerning any point, shall be regarded as meaning that only the best practices are to prevail. All interpretations of these specifications shall be made on the basis of this statement.

AMBIGUITY, CONFLICT, OR OTHER ERRORS IN THIS RFP

If a Respondent discovers any ambiguity, conflict, discrepancy, omission or other error in this solicitation, the Respondent shall immediately notify the County Purchasing Department of such error in writing and request modification or clarification of the document.

Modifications will be made by issuing Addenda. If the Respondent fails to notify the County prior to the date and time fixed for submission of responses of an error or ambiguity in the solicitation known to the

Respondent, or an error or ambiguity that reasonably should have been known to the Respondent, then the Respondent shall be deemed to have waived the error or ambiguity or its later resolution.

The County may also modify the solicitation, no later than seventy-two (72) hours prior to the date and time fixed for submission of responses, by issuance of an Addendum. All Addenda will be numbered consecutively, beginning with one (1).

CONTRACT TERM AND RENEWALS

If applicable, at the end of the Initial Contract Term, the Commissioners’ Court reserves the right to renew the Initial Contract Term, by mutual agreement of both parties, as it deems to be in the best interest of the County.

However, the County may terminate the contract at any time if funds are restricted, withdrawn, not approved, or if service is unsatisfactory. Any renewal will be in twelve (12) month increments with the terms and conditions remaining the same. The renewal of the contract is contingent on the appropriation of necessary funds by the Commissioners’ Court for the fiscal year in question. Upon the failure of the Commissioners’ Court to appropriate in any year, the Successful Respondent may elect to terminate the contract, with no additional liability to the County. The County and the Successful Respondent agree that termination shall be the Successful Respondent's sole remedy under this circumstance.

EVALUATION CRITERIA AND AWARD PROCESS

EVALUATION AND AWARD

The County reserves the right to use all pertinent information (also learned from sources other than what is disclosed in the solicitation process) that might affect the County's judgment as to the appropriateness of an award to the lowest and best evaluated solicitation. This information may be appended to the solicitation evaluation process results. Information on a Respondent from reliable sources, and not within the Respondent’s response, may also be noted and made part of the evaluation file. The County shall have sole discretion for determining the reliability of the source.

The County reserves the right to reject any or all responses, or delete any portion of the response, or to accept any response deemed most advantageous, or to waive any irregularities or informalities in the response received that best serves the interest and at the sole discretion of the County. In addition, the County reserves the right to make one or more awards to competing Respondents for subsets of functionality as a result of this RFP. The County reserves the right to abandon the Project and/or to re-advertise and solicit other Proposals. The County reserves the right to create a Project of lesser or greater expense than described in this RFP or the Respondent's reply, based on the component prices or scope submitted. The County reserves the right to cancel this solicitation or to change its scope if it is considered to be in the best interest of the County.

EX PARTE COMMUNICATION

Please note that to ensure the proper and fair evaluation of a response to a solicitation, all inquiries concerning this procurement are to be directed only to the County’s Purchasing Agent in writing. The County prohibits ex parte communication (e.g., unsolicited communication) initiated by the Respondent to any Elected Official/Department Head, County Employee or Committee Member evaluating or considering the responses prior to the time a formal decision has been made. Questions and other communication from Respondents will be permissible by the means established by the County’s Purchasing Agent until the day and time specified as the deadline for questions. Any communication between Respondent and the County after the deadline for questions will be initiated by the appropriate County Official or Employee in order to obtain information or clarification needed to develop a proper and accurate evaluation of the response. Ex parte communication may be grounds for disqualifying the offending Respondent from consideration or award of the solicitation then in evaluation. If a Respondent violates these provisions more than once in a three (3) year period, the Purchasing Officer may debar the Respondent from the sale of goods or services to the County for a period not to exceed three (3) years.

The issuance of a written addendum is the only official method by which interpretation, clarification, or additional information will be given by the County. Only questions answered by formal written addenda will be binding. Oral and other interpretations or clarifications will be without legal effect.

CLARIFICATION

Respondents shall submit questions or requests for clarification through the solicitation portal:

https://wilco.bonfirehub.com/. All responses to said question or requests shall be posted in the portal.

RESPONSIBILITY AND RESPONSIVENESS

The County intends to award a Contract to the Respondent whose response will be most advantageous to the County. In accordance with Texas Government Code and Local Government Code, the County may consider, to the extent allowed by law, the following:

1. Price.

2. The Respondent's experience and reputation.

3. Quality of the Respondent's goods and/or services.

4. The Respondent's safety record.

5. The Respondent's proposed personnel.

6. The Respondent's financial capabilities; and

7. Any other relevant factors specifically listed in this solicitation or authorized by law.

All Proposals received by the designated date and time will be evaluated based on the Respondent's Proposal. Other information may be taken into consideration when that information potentially provides an additional benefit to the County, and further helps the County in receiving the services listed in the RFP.

https://wilco.bonfirehub.com/

Respondents' proposals must meet all mandatory (minimum) requirements in order to be scored. Scoring may also be based on total information gathered by the County at its discretion, including but not limited to respondent's ability to perform without delay or interference, character, responsibility, integrity, and experience or demonstrated capability; quality of prior work; compliance with laws; and noncompliance with requirements as to submission of relevant information.

Additionally, the County has the sole discretion and reserves the right to cancel this RFP, to reject any and all proposals, and/or to readvertise with either identical or revised specification if it is deemed to be in the County’s best interest. The County reserves the right to accept or reject any or all of the items in the Proposal, and/or negotiate any or all items with individual Respondents if it is deemed in the County’s best interest.

The County reserves the right to enter into a Contract, Ensuing Agreement or a Purchase Order with a single award, split awards, non-award, or use any combination that best serves the interest and at the sole discretion of the County.

Evaluation Committee and Selection Process

All Proposals will be evaluated by a County appointed Evaluation Committee. The Evaluation Committee may be composed of County Staff that may have expertise, knowledge, or experience with the services and/or goods being procured hereunder. Those Respondents meeting all requirements and deemed most qualified may receive further evaluation via telephone or in-person interviews with members of the Evaluation Committee. The County will select a Respondent determined to be the best and most responsible Respondent meeting minimum specifications and qualifications.

Respondents are advised that the Evaluation Committee, at its option, may recommend an award strictly based on the initial RFP responses, or in addition, may have interviews with firms to determine its final recommendation. The Evaluation Committee will present its recommendation to the Williamson County Commissioners' Court for approval and award of contract.

Finalists shall be determined by the Respondent receiving the most points in relation to the Evaluation Criteria outlined herein. Additional scoring may be conducted based upon Respondent's presentation during the interview process and may or may not include previous scores from Respondent's Proposal.

Respondent Interviews shall be conducted in person and not remotely.

The County also reserves the right to communicate with select Respondents at any time to gather additional information.

A. Respondent shortlist: the County evaluation committee will initially review and evaluate each proposal received to determine the Respondent’s ability to meet the requirements of the County.

The evaluation criteria described herein will be the basis for evaluation. The evaluation committee will determine the Respondents best suited to meet the needs of the county based on the scoring of the evaluation criteria. These Respondents will form the Respondent shortlist.

B. Respondent demonstrations: the County, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to have system demonstrations with those Respondents on the Respondent shortlist, or any other Respondent.

Demonstrations may be conducted at the County offices. Demonstrations will involve a scripted demonstration. The schedule, scripts, and demonstration requirements will be provided with the invitation to participate in demonstrations. A pre-demonstration Respondent web conference will take place for those Respondents that have been shortlisted, and Respondents will have an opportunity to review the format of the demonstrations and ask questions related to procedure and specific demonstration scenarios. Respondents that are invited to participate in demonstrations are advised that the provided scripts must be strictly adhered to while presenting. Optional modules or functionality shall not be presented if they fall outside the scope of requested functionality or that functionality which has been proposed by the Respondent. The proposed version of the software must be shown and must not include any software that is under development or in beta testing. Evaluation committee members will view the demonstrations, and additional county staff may also be in attendance to observe and provide informal feedback.

C. Reference checks: the County may employ a process of contacting references provided through Respondents’ proposals. This process may include teleconference meetings, web conferences, and in-person meetings with references. The County reserves the right to conduct reference checks at any point in the evaluation process, and to contact other known users of the proposed system(s) beyond just those references provided.

D. Best and final offer and request for clarification: a best-and-final-offer process may be initiated if it is determined to be in the best interest of the County. Such process may be initiated following the identification of the Respondent shortlist or at any other evaluation process step. Additional processes of scope and cost clarification may be employed as part of the evaluation process if it is deemed to be in the County’s best interest.

COSTS INCURRED

Costs incurred in the submission of a Proposal, making necessary studies or designs for the preparation thereof, or attending an interview are the sole responsibility of the Respondent. Furthermore, no reimbursable cost may be incurred in the anticipation of award.

CLARIFICATION AND DISCUSSION OF PROPOSALS

Under the direct supervision of the County Purchasing Agent, the County may request clarifications and conduct discussions with any Respondent that submits a Proposal, including requesting additional information. The County reserves the right to select the Proposal or Proposals that it believes is the most responsive as determined by the County Evaluation Committee, which will best serve the County business and operational requirements, considering the evaluation criteria set forth below. Respondents shall be available for a system demonstration to the County staff on dates specified in the RFP or as otherwise requested by the County if selected for system demonstrations. Failure of a Respondent to respond to such a request for additional information, clarification, or system demonstrations may result in rejection of the Proposal. The initial evaluation may be adjusted because of a clarification under this section. The County reserves the right to waive irregularities in the Proposal content or to request supplemental information from Respondents.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

As described in the preceding Evaluation process sub-section, the County intends to follow a cumulative approach to scoring based on key evaluation activities (e.g., scoring is conducted in a progressive manner, following various steps in the process). The County hereby reserves the right to evaluate, at its sole discretion, the extent to which each Proposal received compares to the stated criteria. Respondent proposals shall be evaluated in accordance with the following criteria, subject to variation at the sole discretion of the County:

Short-List Identification: The County intends to utilize the criteria presented in Table 9 following the Evaluation Team’s review of Proposals. Cost Point Allocation: The County will evaluate cost proposals based upon this criteria. The County reserves the right to review cost proposals at any stage in the process to ensure pricing is within internal budget planning ranges. Cost points may be refined or replaced in the event of a subsequent Request for Clarification or Request for Best and Final Offer

(BAFO).

Table 9: Short-List Identification Criteria

Criteria Description Points

Functionality

This criterion considers but is not limited to the following:

• The Respondent’s written responses to the Functional and

Technical Requirements for proposed turnkey functional areas and how the overall software solution meets the County’s needs.

• The ability for the proposed software to integrate with the County systems environment.

Technical

This criterion considers but is not limited to the following:

• Alignment of the proposed software to the County’s preferred technical specifications.

• The Respondent’s written response to each Potential Interface.

• The level of integration among proposed functional areas.

Criteria Description Points

Approach

This criterion considers but is not limited to the following:

• The described approach to implement an enterprise system to achieve the County’s goals and objectives.

• The alignment of the proposed implementation timeline to the

County’s desired timeline.

• The distribution of implementation tasks among the County and

Respondent teams.

• The proposed resource hours among the County and

Respondent teams.

• The Respondent’s approach to key implementation tasks including but not limited to data conversion, testing, and training.

• The Respondent’s planned ongoing support and maintenance services.

Respondent Experience

This criterion considers but is not limited to the following:

• The Respondent’s experience delivering the services requested in the RFP.

• The Respondent’s experience with similar implementations for comparable organizations.

• The Respondent’s experience deploying comparable interfaces to the County’s related applications.

Proposed Staff Experience

This criterion considers but is not limited to the following:

• The experience of named staff delivering services requested in the RFP.

• The experience of named staff with similar implementations for comparable organizations.

• The qualifications of named staff to deliver the services requested in the RFP with a focus on business process optimization.

Criteria Description Points

Cost

This criterion considers, as applicable, the price of the software licensing, services, and terms of any offered ongoing maintenance and support (including applicable service level agreements, disaster recovery, etc.) proposed in response to the information solicited by this RFP. Respondents will be evaluated on their pricing scheme, as well as on their price in comparison to the other Respondents.

In evaluating cost, the County may evaluate on a fully loaded ten-year cost of ownership. Fully loaded is defined to include (but is not limited to): software purchase and implementation costs; ongoing support and service costs; hardware costs; and associated hardware support costs.

The County reserves the right to add their own estimates of the costs (including any anticipated savings) associated with the required level of internal staffing (business users and IT staff) for implementation and for ongoing support, hardware and overhead costs and savings, and may rely on the Respondent’s resource estimates as a basis for their calculations.

Respondents of point solutions may be compared against other proposals for the respective functional area group.

Finalists Identification: The County intends to utilize the criteria presented in Table 10 following the demonstrations by Short-List Respondents.

Table 10: Finalist Identification Criteria

Criteria Description Points

Functionality Demonstrated

This criterion considers information learned through Respondent demonstrations including but not limited to the demonstrated user interface and the alignment of demonstrated functionality with preferred business processes.

Technical Capabilities

This criterion considers information learned through the Technical Discussion as part of Respondent demonstrations as well as other sessions.

Approach Discussion

This criterion considers information learned through the Implementation Approach Discussion as part of Respondent demonstrations as well as other sessions and the quality of engagement demonstrated by the Respondent’s proposed implementation team.

Experience Discussion

This criterion considers information learned through the Company Overview Discussion as part of Respondent demonstrations as well as other sessions.

Criteria Description Points

Reference Feedback

This criterion considers the feedback received from references related to the Respondent’s performance in the implementation including meeting project objectives and timelines, as well as the knowledge, skills, and experience of implementation staff; capabilities of the software; and ongoing Respondent performance with support and maintenance.

Comparable References

This criterion considers the relevance of references related to organization size and location, structure of the organization, entity type (e.g., County/City/Town), comparable scope, similar software version, and deployment model.

Additional Evaluation Information

The evaluation process may reveal additional information for consideration. The county reserves the right to modify, without notice, the evaluation structure and weighted criteria to accommodate these additional considerations.

CONSIDERATION OF LOCATION OF PRINCIPAL OFFICE

Pursuant to Texas Local Government Code, Section 271.905, in purchasing any real property or personal property that is not affixed to real property, if the County receives one or more Proposals from a Respondent whose principal place of business is in Williamson County and whose Proposal is within three (3) percent of the lowest bid price received by the County from a Respondent who is not a resident of Williamson County, the County may enter into a contract with: The lowest bidder; or the Respondent whose principal place of business is in Williamson County if the Commissioners Court determines, in writing, that the local Respondent offers the County the best combination of contract price and additional economic development opportunities for Williamson County created by the contract award, including the employment of residents of Williamson County and increased tax revenues to Williamson County.

ANNOUNCEMENT

Award announcement will be made upon Commissioners Court approval of staff recommendation and executed agreement (if applicable). Award announcement will appear on the County’s website at Williamson County (bonfirehub.com).

REJECTION OR ACCEPTANCE

The County reserves the right to reject any or all responses, or to accept any response deemed most advantageous, or to waive any irregularities or informalities in the response received that best serves the interest and at the sole discretion of the County.

Any exceptions to or additional terms and conditions attached to the response will not be considered unless respondent specifically and clearly references them on the front of the solicitation response document. WARNING: Exception to or additional terms and conditions may result in disqualification of the response.

https://wilco.bonfirehub.com/portal/?tab=pastOpportunities

CONTRACTUAL DEVELOPMENT

The Commissioners Court may award the Contract on the basis of the initial Proposals received, without any further or additional discussions. Therefore, each initial Proposal should contain the Respondent's best terms and offer. The contents of the RFP and the selected Proposal will become an integral part of the Contract, but may be modified, at Williamson County's sole discretion, by provisions of an Ensuing Agreement. Therefore, the Respondent must agree to inclusion in an Ensuing Agreement of the Proposal specifications, terms, and conditions of this RFP. Williamson County may, at its discretion, opt to conduct further discussions with responsible offerors and request the highest ranked firm's Best and Final Offer

(BAFO).

CONTRACTUAL FORMATION AND ENSUING AGREEMENT

The RFP and the Respondent's Proposal, when properly accepted by the Commissioners Court, shall constitute a Contract equally binding between the Successful Respondent and the County.

The Successful Respondent may be required by Williamson County to sign an additional agreement containing terms necessary to ensure compliance with the RFP and Respondent's proposal.

RFP SCHEDULE OF EVENTS, DUE DATE, SUBMISSION

AND DELIVERY

The following RFP Schedule of Events represents the best estimate of the schedule the County will follow, which is subject to change at the County’s discretion. Respondents are encouraged to hold the demonstration dates listed. If a component of the schedule is accelerated or delayed, it shall be anticipated that the remaining components may also be adjusted by a similar number of days via RFP Addendum prior to the submittal deadline.

Table 11:…