Attachment A - Response Questions Worksheet.docx

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION: ONLINE EDUCATOR CREDENTIALING, PREPARATION, AND INVESTIGATION/CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

ATTACHMENT A – RESPONSE QUESTIONS WORKSHEET

THIS IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) ONLY.

THIS IS NOT A FORMAL BID SOLICITATION. NO AWARD WILL RESULT FROM THIS RFI.

Vendors may respond to as few or as many RFI Questions or parts of Questions as they would like, with as little or as much information as they are able to provide. Pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-103-201.5, submission of pricing information is voluntary although greatly appreciated by CDE. All vendor responses to requests for information are confidential until after an award based on a subsequent, future solicitation has been made or until the procurement official determines that the state will not pursue a solicitation based on the request for information.

Provide a description of vendor’s organizational experience with the development, deployment, hosting, and maintenance of an online educator credentialing, preparation, and investigation/case management system similar in size and scope to the system described in CDE’s Request for Information and System Functionality excel sheet. Vendor should describe, at minimum, three (3) similar online educator credentialing, preparation, and investigation/case management system projects from the past five years (preferably at a state-level or that had a statewide impact). These descriptions should include: the name of the customer, a brief description of the scope of work, the performance period dates, and the budget of that contract.

VENDOR RESPONSE 1: Please fill in your response below:

Provide feedback regarding the required functionalities and features shown as the red highlighted items on the System Functionality Information excel worksheet. Does vendor’s COTS/MOTS/or SaaS program currently have all the required functionalities and features? If not, what functionalities and features would vendor need to develop? Are there any required functionalities and features that the vendor would not be able to develop or provide? If so, why? Also provide feedback on whether vendor would recommend that Educator Preparation and Development (EPD) functionalities should be included as part of the teacher licensing system or whether it should be a standalone system. Please explain the "why" behind your recommendation. CDE is seeking this information to try to understand the current market space and what functionalities currently exist or are possible.

VENDOR RESPONSE 2: Please fill in your response below:

Provide feedback regarding the desired functionalities and features (the ones that are not highlighted on the System Functionality Information excel worksheet). Does vendor’s COTS/MOTS/or SaaS program currently have all the desired functionalities and features? If not, what functionalities and features would vendor need to develop? Are there any desired functionalities and features that the vendor would not be able to develop or provide? If so, why? CDE is seeking this information to try to understand the current market space and what functionalities currently exist or are possible.

VENDOR RESPONSE 3: Please fill in your response below:

Are there any functionalities or features that CDE has not listed on its System Functionality Information excel worksheet that vendor would recommend CDE consider as a benefit to either educators or CDE users. If so what are those features and functionalities, and why would they be beneficial?

VENDOR RESPONSE 4: Please fill in your response below:

What type of solution does your company recommend in response to this RFI (COTS/MOTS/SaaS, a custom solution, etc.)? Please explain your recommendation in detail. What type of hosting options does your company provide? Is it hosting directly through your company or is the hosting a third party vendor? Describe the intellectual property ownership associated with your product.

VENDOR RESPONSE 5: Please fill in your response below:

Provide a timeline that shows the vendor’s major tasks and activities necessary to provide an online educator credentialing, preparation, and investigation/case management system. Be sure to address and consider when developing the timeline, the amount of time needed to migrate the Department’s existing data into the vendor provided system; the length of time and major tasks required for set-up prior to the system being operational; the time to develop, set-up, modify or customize required features and functionalities in order for the vendor’s product to meet the required functionalities and features in the System Functionalities Information excel worksheet; and any necessary training for CDE staff and educators. CDE seeks this information so we can determine how long a start-up period may be needed for most systems before they could be operational.

VENDOR RESPONSE 6: Please fill in your response below:

Provide cost/price itemizations that will allow CDE the ability to understand the detailed costs of purchasing the system. Please do not provide large pricing ranges as this is not as helpful to the Department. This information may be used by CDE to make future budget requests or budgetary decisions.

For example, if a COTS, MOTS, or SaaS product provide cost/price itemizations such as for licensing, hosting, and maintenance; system modifications needed to meet CDE’s required and desired functionalities and features; user testing, user acceptance, data migration from the current system; meeting accessibility requirements (see RFI Response 8 below); providing training to CDE staff and educators; and other applicable costs. If the system is to be custom built for CDE, include the cost for development, user testing, user acceptance, data migration from the current system, hosting, maintaining, and updating the system, meeting accessibility requirements (see RFI Response 8 below); providing training to CDE staff and educators; and any other applicable costs.

Be sure to separate the costs for implementation and start-up from annual hosting/maintenance/and licensing costs so CDE has a clear understanding of potential budget needs across several years. If any of the required or desired functionalities as shown in the System Functionality excel sheet would be over $8,000 to develop or implement, please list those functionalities and costs separately.

Additionally, be sure to separate out pricing for Educator Preparation and Development (EPD) functionalities to give CDE a clear understanding costs associated with these functions.

VENDOR RESPONSE 7: Please fill in your response below:

A vendor’s system must meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) version 2.1, levels A and AA criteria developed by the World Wide Web Consortium. In addition, a vendor’s system must meet all OIT accessibility standards. OIT rules establishing OIT accessibility standards can be found on the OIT website and a vendor accessibility guide to assist vendors in understanding the rules and standards to be met.

By state law, CDE must require in any future RFP or any contract resulting from a future RFP language addressing §§24-85-101, et seq., C.R.S. and we are not able to change this language. The required language is reproduced below for convenience.

Vendor shall comply with and the Work Product provided under this contract shall be in compliance with all applicable provisions of §§24-85-101, et seq., C.R.S., and the Accessibility Standards for Individuals with a Disability, as established by OIT pursuant to Section §24-85-103 (2.5), C.R.S. Vendor shall also comply with all State of Colorado technology standards related to technology accessibility and with Level AA of the most current version of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), incorporated in the State of Colorado technology standards. Vendor shall indemnify, save, and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties against any and all costs, expenses, claims, damages, liabilities, court awards and other amounts (including attorneys’ fees and related costs) incurred by any of the Indemnified Parties in relation to Vendor’s failure to comply with §§24-85-101, et seq., C.R.S., or the Accessibility Standards for Individuals with a Disability as established by OIT pursuant to Section §24-85-103 (2.5), C.R.S. The State may require Vendor’s compliance to the State’s Accessibility Standards to be determined by a third party selected by the State to attest to Vendor’s Work Product and software is in compliance with §§24-85-101, et seq., C.R.S., and the Accessibility Standards for Individuals with a Disability as established by OIT pursuant to Section §24-85-103 (2.5), C.R.S.

Would vendor be willing to agree to this required language? And would your online educator credentialing, preparation, and investigation/case management system meet all the accessibility requirements?

VENDOR RESPONSE 8: Please fill in your response below.

Please provide any additional information for consideration by CDE that has not been specifically asked for in the above RFI Questions.

VENDOR RESPONSE 9: Please fill in your response below.

image1.png