2339_Addendum 1.pdf

OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON

RFP #2339 – Addendum No. 1 Page 1 of 2

Request for Proposals (RFP)

Digital E-Paper Real-Time Information Signs #2339

Addendum No. 1

This Addendum takes precedence in resolving inconsistencies in any parts of the RFP contract documents.

This Addendum consists of two (2) pages. Proposers are to acknowledge receipt of this Addendum in their submittal. Proposers are hereby notified that the documents have been amended as follows:

Questions and Responses:

The following questions from Proposers have been received and are answered as follows:

Question 1: Is there a budget for the initial deployment of this contract that can be provided?

Particularly for the start of RTIS and CMS deployment work associated with Olympia Transit Center work.

Response 1: Given that the RFP includes cost-based components, the budget for the deployment is not provided with this solicitation.

Question 2: Please provide the API and source data information on all transit feeds that the CMS must connect to as listed in the RFP. myAvailAPI, Intercity Transit GTFS-RT, GTFS, Mason Transit, Grays Harbor Transit, Greyhound, Lewis County Transit, and FlixBus, etc.

All these data points need to be reviewed to comply with the CMS requirements to provide a cohesive RTIS system proposal.

Response 2: Data feeds:

Intercity myAvail API: https://its.rideralerts.com/InfoPoint/swagger/ui/index Intercity GTFS-RT: https://www.transit.land/feeds/f-intercitytransit~rt Mason Transit GTFS: https://www.transit.land/feeds/f-c22-mason~wa~us Grays Harbor Transit GTFS: https://www.transit.land/feeds/f-c22-graysharbortransit Lewis County Transit GTFS: https://www.transit.land/feeds/f-twintransit~wa~us Greyhound & Flixbus GTFS: https://www.transit.land/feeds/f-9-flixbus

*Note: GTFS-RT feeds are also forthcoming for Mason Transit, Grays Harbor Transit, and Lewis County Transit. Links to the GTFS-RT feeds will be provided as soon as available.

Question 3: To better provide the ongoing initiative to enhance public transit services of Intercity Transit ridership, is there any desire during the contract term for the RTIS to be different digital signs other than Epaper as well as only Text to Speech for audio? Epaper has its value but limits what types of enhanced content be displayed. HD Full Color LED and LCD provide more suitable digital canvases towards content, colors, graphics, motion, and video. Also, there are other audio systems that can be provided such as Speech to Text, Public Address systems, and Live Announcements, in particular at Transit Centers.

Please advise on this, and how a proposer could provide options such as these.

Response 3: Intercity Transit completed a needs assessment that informed the development of the RFP requirements and LED and LCD displays and public address systems and live announcements do not meet the requirements established for this project.

RFP No. 2339 – Addendum No. 1 Page 2 of 2

Question 4: Regarding the RTIS work at Amtrak Centennial Station, is this limited to deployment solely with Intercity Transit for bus stop information, or is it with Amtrak train information as well? Amtrak has their own set of rules and branded digital signage and public address across the nation called NPIDS. A RTIS system can be provided by a company combining both PIDS and RTIS. Please advise.

Response 4: The Amtrak RTIS deployment is limited to displaying bus arrival information only. No integration with Amtrak is required.

Question 5A: Regarding the CMS for the RTIS:

Where is the CMS to reside, and who is to provide the service to host the CMS? OnPrem server, Cloud Hosted, Virtual Server provided by Intercity Transit? There is hints towards the CMS being cloud hosted provided by Vendor from 4.5 Cybersecurity, but On Prem or Virtual Server deployments we have deployed on Cybersecurity fully doesn’t apply.

Please advise.

Response 5A: The CMS shall be cloud based subscription as a service (SaaS) hosted by the Vendor.

Question 5B: Does the CMS require redundancy (A-B) for autofailover in case the main CMS running is lost and secondary CMS is backup until main CMS is recovered.

Response 5B: The CMS SaaS shall be capable of meeting the system availability requirements as listed in Section 4.2.M of the RFP.

Question 5C: There is no accounting for the CMS on the Performance Period list. How is this to be proposed with the RTIS.

Response 5C: Performance period of the CMS shall align with the Performance Period for the RTIS.

Refer to the Content Management System Section of the Cost Proposal.

Question 5D: Is the CMS for the RTIS to be proposed into this project for a 2-year span or a 5-year span to meet the contract term? This is a costs factor when proposing and providing a CMS SaaS and subscription-based hosting versus OnPrem servers and a one-time perpetual licensing of CMS.

Response 5D: A 5-year span should be assumed when providing annual software licensing fees per display for the CMS SaaS in the Content Management System Section of the Cost Proposal.