Attachment G - Commonwealth's Response to Vendor Written Questions - RFP 758 2600000490 .xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 24 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Campground Reservation Management System
- Solicitation number
- RFP 758 2600000490 3
- Issued by
- Fayette County, Kentucky
About this file
This document is the Commonwealth of Kentucky's written responses to vendor questions regarding RFP 758 2600000490 for a Campground Reservation Management System. The responses address inquiries submitted by potential bidders during the procurement process, clarifying requirements and specifications related to the system implementation. The document provides official guidance on technical requirements, functional specifications, and operational parameters that vendors must understand to develop compliant proposals. Key topics covered in the vendor questions include system capabilities, integration requirements, data management protocols, and implementation timelines, with the Commonwealth's responses establishing baseline expectations for the proposed solution.
The responses indicate the Commonwealth's priorities regarding system functionality, user accessibility, and compliance with state operational standards. The document serves as an amendment to the original RFP, ensuring all interested vendors have consistent and authoritative information for proposal development. These clarifications help establish a level playing field among bidders and reduce ambiguity in evaluation criteria. The responses reflect the Commonwealth's commitment to procuring a system that meets operational needs while maintaining transparency throughout the competitive bidding process.
View the file
Other files
Show all 12
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
RFP 758 2600000490
| ATTACHMENT G -Commonwealth's Response to Vendor Written Questions - RFP 758 2600000490 | |||||
| Question # | RFP Section / Requirement Number | Document | Document Page Number | Vendor Questions | Commonwealth Response |
| 1 | Attachment A - Terms and Conditions RFP 758 2600000490 | 1 | To ensure an apples-to-apples comparison of proposals and consistent volume assumptions among all vendors, please provide the total number of reservations processed by Kentucky Horse Park during each of the past three completed calendar years. | 2023 - web 9,171; call center 1,795; field 2,224 2024 - web 9,098; call center 1,184; field 1,981 2025 - web 9,233, call center 1,282, field 1,747 | |
| 2 | Section 1.1 Schedule | RFP | 3 | Would the agency consider extending the proposal submission deadline by one to two weeks to allow vendors adequate time to prepare comprehensive responses to the technical requirements? | Yes, see revised Section 1.1 Anticipated Schedule of Activities |
| 3 | Section 1.3 / Agencies Served | RFP | 3 | Section 1.3 reserves the right to extend the resulting Master Agreement to other state agencies. Can the Commonwealth identify which other Kentucky state park campgrounds or agencies may be candidates for contract extension? This information will help vendors size their implementation capacity and pricing. | Vendors should respond to the RFP requirements as currently written for the KY Horse Park |
| 4 | Cost Proposal Table | Attachment B Cost Proposal Form | Page 1 | In order to accurately price our proposal, please provide annual reservation totals for 2025 | Reservations using the website and call center and field are 12,262. However, we have groups that pay for their event in bulk. |
| 5 | Please provide the total annual Reservation Fees retained by/paid to Aspira in 2025. | $81,198 | |||
| 6 | Please confirm the Per Reservation fee charged by your current vendor is $6.00. | yes | |||
| 7 | 2.2 / Attachment B | RFP | What is the approximate annual reservation/transaction volume for the campground, including the most recent 2–3 years of history? This is needed to accurately price the per-reservation fee. | approximately 13,000 reservations per year | |
| 8 | What is the annual cost to the KHP for the POS, website and call center channels? | Approximately $81,198 | |||
| 9 | Section 2.2 Background | RFP | 4 | Please provide the approximate total annual revenue collected from campers across all reservation types. | $1,955,625 |
| 10 | Please provide the revenue generated through the POS, website, and call center. | The approximate revenue to KHP was $1.9 million, with approximately $80,000 paid to Aspira | |||
| 12 | Section 2.2 / Background | RFP | 4 | Can the Commonwealth provide the total number of campsite reservations processed annually through the current Aspira/ReserveAmerica system? Please include online reservations and call-center reservations separately if available. | 2023 - web 9,171; call center 1,795; field 2,224 2024 - web 9,098; call center 1,184; field 1,981 2025 - web 9,233, call center 1,282, field 1,747 |
| 13 | Section 2.2 / Background | RFP | 4 | What is the average length of stay (in nights) per reservation at the KHP Campground, and what percentage of reservations are single-night vs. multi-night stays? | Reservations using the website and call center and field are 12,262. However, we have groups that pay for their event in bulk. In 2025, a total of 47,820 nights stayed. The average stay is 3.4 nights. |
| 14 | Section 2.2 / Background | RFP | 4 | How many reservations are currently processed via the call center versus online self-service? What is the current call center call volume (calls per month or per year)? | 68% are online reservations, 9.5% are call center reservations |
| 15 | Section 2.2 / Background | RFP | 4 | What is the current per-reservation fee charged to campers by Aspira/ReserveAmerica? Has there been a payment to the vendor in any form beyond the customer-paid reservation fee since 2005? | $6.00 fee per reservation |
No
| 16 | Section 2.2 Background | RFP | 4 | What is the current per-reservation fee that Aspira charges to campers? Approximately what percentage of reservations are completed online vs. via the call center? | $6.00 fee per reservation; approximately 68% are online reservations, 9.5% are call center reservations |
| 17 | Section 2.2 Background | RFP | 4 | Is there any agency-side payment to the vendor under any circumstances (e.g., implementation, setup, data migration), or is the compensation model strictly limited to the per-reservation fee charged to the camper? | No. Please refer to the Cost Proposal Form. |
| 18 | What is the volume of transactions across POS, website, and call center? | over 13,000 reservations are made annually | |||
| 19 | What is the annual cost to the KHP for the POS, website and call center channels? | $81,198 | |||
| 20 | Section 2.2 / Background | RFP | 4 | What is KHP's estimated annual campground revenue (site fees collected from campers), exclusive of reservation/transaction fees? This will help vendors size the financial scope of the contract. | The approximate revenue to KHP was $1.9 million, with approximately $80,000 paid to Aspira |
| 21 | Section 2.2 Background | RFP | 4 | What is the total number of reservations processed annually through the current Aspira system? Please provide a breakdown by campsite type (RV, tent, electric, primitive) if available. | On average, there are over 13,000 reservations made annually. Primitive and Primitive Electric reservations are made in the field only. 2025 had 1,000 primitive electric reservations, 384 primitive reservations and 12,183 paved site reservations. |
| 22 | Section 2.2 / Background | RFP | 4 | Will the Commonwealth require the incumbent vendor (Aspira) to cooperate with data transfer to the new system under the terms of their existing contract? Is there a contractual data portability clause with the incumbent that guarantees structured data export in a standard format? | There is a clause in the current contract; the incumbent will transfer data. Details will be negotiated with the awarded vendor. |
| 23 | Section 2.2 Background | RFP | 4 | What are the primary pain points or deficiencies with the current Aspira system that prompted this RFP? Are there specific functional gaps or service quality issues KHP is seeking to address? | KHP is seeking to separate our reservation contract from the combined state contract. We did not experience any deficiencies from the existing Aspira system to prompt the RFP |
| 24 | Section 2.2 Background | RFP | 4 | What is the current annual contract value paid to Aspira, or the total annual revenue generated through the per-reservation fee model? | In 2025, the value paid was $81,198 |
| 25 | Please provide examples of the challenges experienced and/or improvements sought relating to the current reservation system from a customer, field staff and administrative perspective that you are looking to address with this RFP. | KHP is seeking to separate our reservation contract from the combined state contract. We did not experience any deficiencies from the existing Aspira system to prompt the RFP | |||
| 26 | Req. 3.1–3.2 | RFP | For the interactive map, is a standard interactive availability map sufficient, or does KHP require satellite/aerial imagery or GIS/ArcGIS layers? | Per RFP Section 3.1.1.3, an interactive map is mandatory. Satellite or advanced imagery will not be required | |
| 27 | Section 3.1 | RFP | 4 | Does KHP require the reservation system to support any languages other than English (e.g., Spanish)? | No |
| 28 | Section 3.1 Item 1 / General | RFP | 4 | Can the Commonwealth confirm the exact number of reservable campsite units by type (standard electric, primitive electric, primitive non-electric, pull-through, group sites)? The RFP references 260 paved sites plus primitive options — please provide a complete inventory breakdown. | There are 260 paved sites with water and electric. 3 of these are pull through. We can support 55 primitive with electric sites and over 100 primitive non-electric. Primitive and primitive electric sites are reserved as first-come, first-serve in the field |
| 29 | 3.1 / Req. 2.4 | RFP | 5 | Beyond the 260 paved sites, how many primitive and other sites exist, and what is the total bookable inventory, including any group or overflow areas? | There are 260 paved sites with water and electric. 3 of these are pull through. We can support 55 primitive with electric sites and over 100 primitive non-electric. Primitive and primitive electric sites are reserved as first-come, first-serve in the field |
| 30 | Section 3.1.4 (4.1) | RFP | 6 | How many KHP staff members will need administrative access to the new system, and in what roles (e.g., campground manager, front desk, finance)? | approximately 10 front desk, 4 managers, 4 business office/admin |
| 31 | Section 3.1 Item 5 / Call Center | RFP | 6 | Does KHP require the vendor's call center to operate under the KHP brand (i.e., agents answer as 'Kentucky Horse Park Campground') or is a generic campground reservation center branding acceptable? | generic reservation center branding is acceptable |
| 32 | Section 3.1 Item 5 / Call Center | RFP | 6 | What are the specific call center performance standards referenced in Attachment F (KHP Operational Standards) that vendors must meet? Please define measurable KPIs such as target answer time, abandonment rate, and customer satisfaction score benchmarks. | This will be negotiated with the awarded vendor |
| 33 | Section 3.1 Item 5 / Call Center | RFP | 6 | Is the call center required to operate 365 days per year including holidays, or are there defined blackout/reduced-hours periods? Are there peak periods (e.g., spring event weekends) that require extended or surge capacity? | The call center is open 7 days a week, including holidays. Our peak camping season is considered March 1 to November 1 and off peak is December to end of February. However, call centers and online reservations may see higher activity as campers are securing their vacation plans. |
| 34 | Section 5.1 Call Center | RFP | 6 | Will the incumbent Aspira call center remain operational during the transition period to ensure continuity of camper service? If so, for how long and who bears that cost? | Yes, a parallel operation will be required during the new system installation. |
KHP and the State of Kentucky has a contract extension with the current reservation system that is in effect.
| 35 | Section 5 - Call Center Requirements | Page 6 | Please provide monthly call center volumes and average handle time for inbound calls in the last three years. | The Commonwealth does not currently capture call center volume/data | |
| 36 | Section 5 - Call Center Requirements | Page 6 | Are there specific call center service levels that the vendor is required to meet? | This will be negotiated with the awarded vendor | |
| 37 | Section 5.4 / Attachment F | RFP | 6 | Attachment F (KHP Operational Standards) is referenced as mandatory for call center compliance but was not included in the publicly posted solicitation package. Will it be posted as an addendum prior to the proposal deadline? | Attachment F is included in the RFP attachments posted to the vendor self service website. If you need assistance accessing this document, please call the Customer Resource Center at 502-564-9641. |
| 38 | Req. 5 / 14.4 | RFP | Can the agency share historical call-center volume, peak-season patterns, and average call duration to inform staffing? | The Commonwealth does not currently capture call center volume/data | |
| 39 | Section 3.1 Item 6 / Payment & Refunds | RFP | 7 | Are the cancellation and refund policy parameters described in Sections 6.3 and 6.4 fixed and non-negotiable, or may the vendor propose system-configurable rules that KHP can modify over time? Will refund rules be subject to change during the contract term? | The cancellation and refund policy described in Sections 6.3 and 6.4 reflects the Kentucky Horse Park's current policy. The proposed system shall support configurable cancellation and refund rules that may be modified by authorized KHP personnel during the contract term. The Kentucky Horse Park's cancellation and refund policy is subject to approval by the Kentucky Horse Park Commission and may be revised from time to time. Therefore, the successful Offeror's solution must be capable of accommodating future policy changes without requiring significant system modifications. |
| 40 | Sections 6.3 / 6.4 | RFP | 7 | The Cost Proposal requests a single 'Cost Per Reservation to the Camper.' Are cancellation fees and transaction fees (referenced in Sections 6.3 and 6.4) intended to be separate line items in the vendor's pricing, or are they included in the single per-reservation fee? Who retains those fees — the vendor or KHP? | The transaction fee is added as a separate line to the reservation fees and the cancellation fee is charged at the time of refund. Both fees are retained by the vendor. |
| 41 | Sections 3.1.6 (6.1) / 3.1.8 (8.1) | RFP | 7-8 | Is KHP open to using a vendor-proposed payment processor, or will KHP/COT designate a specific payment processor the new system must connect to? | Yes. KHP is requesting the vendor to propose a payment processor. Section 3.1 (1) (1.1), Section 3.1 (2.3) and 3.1(6), and Section 6.8 (B) |
| 42 | RFP | What type of hardare is used by the park? | Desktop computers | ||
| 43 | Is the vendor required to provide connectivity? | no | |||
| 44 | Is the vendor required to provide hardware? If so, please detail the requirements. | no | |||
| 45 | 6.8A / Req. 14.3 | RFP | 11 | Regarding “event-based demand management” and “revenue optimization,” is dynamic/yield pricing required, or are event blocking and configurable peak/seasonal rates sufficient? | We will not be using dynamic pricing at this time. |
We provide the event blocking and seasonal rates prior to populating the next reservable camping season 46 Section 3 Scopeof Work - Requirement 8.1 Attachment A - Terms and Conditions RFP 758 2600000490 8 Can you please clarify the gateway and merchant providers with which the vendor must integrate? KHP has not designated a specific payment gateway or merchant services/payment processor that the proposed reservation system must integrate with at this time. The requirement in Section 8.1 is intended to ensure that the proposed reservation system has the capability to integrate with a payment gateway and/or payment processor.
| 47 | Section 3 Scopeof Work - Requirement 8.1 | Attachment A - Terms and Conditions RFP 758 2600000490 | 8 | Please confirm who will act as Merchant of Record and be responsible to pay the payment processing and gateway fees, the Commonwealth or the vendor? | Vendor |
| 48 | Please confirm that the current vendor is responsible for all merchant/credit card processing costs in their current per reservation fee structure, and that this will continue in any resulting contract with a new vendor. | yes | |||
| 49 | Section 3 Scopeof Work - Requirement 8.3 | Attachment A - Terms and Conditions RFP 758 2600000490 | 8 | Can you please clarify whether the Horse Park has any existing access control systems or gates currently in place with which the vendor must integrate? If yes, please provide the manufacturer make and model and confirm the number in place. | we do not have any access controls or gates currently in place |
| 50 | Section 3.1.8 (8.3) | RFP | 8 | Does KHP currently use a campground gate access control system that the new reservation platform must integrate with? If so, what vendor/system is currently in place? | we do not have any access controls or gates currently in place |
| 51 | Req. 8.3 | RFP | 8 | For compatibility with access-control/gate systems: which specific gate system is in use, is integration in scope for initial implementation or a future option, and is the vendor expected to provide any gate hardware? | we do not have any access controls or gates currently in place |
| 52 | Section 3.1 Item 8 / System Integration | RFP | 8 | Section 8.3 references compatibility with campground gate/access control systems. Does KHP currently operate an automated gate system? If so, what make/model and protocol does it use (e.g., magnetic stripe, RFID, barcode)? Is gate integration a mandatory deliverable or preferred? | we do not have any access controls or gates currently in place |
| 53 | Section 3.1.8 (8.3) | RFP | 8 | Section 8.3 references compatibility with campground gate access control systems. Is this integration mandatory at go-live, or optional? If a gate system is in place, please provide the vendor and model. | we do not have any access controls or gates currently in place |
| 54 | Req. 8.4 | RFP | 8 | For optional integration with tourism and event platforms: are specific platforms targeted, and is this in initial scope or future/optional? | We are not currently targeting any platforms |
| 55 | Section 3.1.8 (8.4) | RFP | 8 | Does KHP have existing integrations (e.g., tourism platforms, KHP website, event management systems) that the reservation system should connect to at go-live? Are any of these mandatory? | KHP does not currently require integration with a specific existing system. |
The proposed reservation system shall support secure integration with a payment gateway and payment processor proposed in the solution for the processing of credit card transactions associated with campground reservations.
See revised Section 3.1.8.1
| 56 | Section 9.2 / Implementation | RFP | 9 | Will the Commonwealth or Aspira provide a structured historical data export (reservation history, customer records, site inventory) to support data migration to the new system? In what format(s) will this data be provided, and is there a defined cutoff date for historical data migration? | Per Reserve America, historical data information is provided as a .bak file which is an SQL backup file. All historical data is to be included. The KHP website would be linked to the reservation system. Historical data will be provided in a .bak format |
| 57 | Section 9.1 | RFP | 9 | Does KHP have a specific desired go-live date or transition deadline for the new system? | Considering procurement related activities such as; scoring, demos, negotiation process, these dates cannot be anticipated at this time. |
| 58 | Section 9.1 / 1.1 | RFP | 3, 9 | What is KHP's desired go-live date for the new reservation system? | Considering procurement related activities such as; scoring, demos, negotiation process, these dates cannot be anticipated at this time. |
| 59 | Is there a planned go-live date? | Considering procurement related activities such as; scoring, demos, negotiation process, these dates cannot be anticipated at this time. | |||
| 60 | Section 9.2 / Implementation | RFP | 9 | Is there a required go-live date or target season for system launch (e.g., before the April 1 peak season)? Will KHP require a parallel operation period during which both Aspira and the new system run simultaneously? | Considering procurement related activities such as; scoring, demos, negotiation process, these dates cannot be anticipated at this time. |
Yes, a parallel operation will be required during the new system installation.
| 61 | Section 9.2 | RFP | 9 | Is a phased rollout acceptable (e.g., online reservations live first, call center integration second), or is a full simultaneous launch required at go-live? | Our customers need both reservation platforms available, all platforms should be available by the go live date. |
| 62 | Section 9.5 | RFP | 9 | How many KHP staff will require training? Is on-site training required, or is remote/virtual training acceptable? | 10-15 staff will be trained. Online or virtual training is acceptable |
| 63 | Sections 9.2.7 / 12.1 | RFP | 9-10 | Is there historical reservation and guest data in the Aspira system that must be migrated to the new platform? If so, how many years of history must be preserved, and in what format does Aspira provide data exports? | KHP has used Aspira for 12 years and we would like to retain as much historical data as possible. |
Per Reserve America, historical data information is provided as a .bak file which is an SQL backup file.
| 64 | Section 9.2 / 12.1 | RFP | 9-10 | Will parallel operation of the Aspira system be permitted during the transition period, and if so, for how long? | Yes, a parallel operation will be required during the new system installation. KHP and the State of Kentucky has a contract extension with the current reservation system that is in effect. |
| 65 | Section 4 Commonwealth of Technology (COT) Requirements | Attachment B - Cost Proposal Form RFP 758 2600000490 | 12 - 24 | There are statements throughout this section indicating Vendor requirements, however we are unable to find a section in the response structure to address these requirements. Can you please clarify where vendors should address these requirements? | The vendor must comply with the "shall", "will" and "must" requirements which are mandatory requirements. The RFP does not include a section for the vendor to address these requirements unless there is a deviation which should be addressed per Section 6.7.A.i. |
| 66 | Section 4.1 / Hosting | RFP | 12 | Will the Commonwealth accept a commercial cloud solution hosted on a platform that holds HITRUST CSF certification as an alternative to FedRAMP certification, where a COT-managed cloud tenant is not proposed? If not, which specific FedRAMP-certified cloud platforms are pre-approved by COT? | Vendor should propose their own PaaS/SaaS Fedramp moderate cloud solution.FedRamp moderate PaaS/SaaS solution as opposed to COT cloud. AWS Commercial, Azure Commercial, GCP Commercial |
| 67 | Section 4.1 / Hosting | RFP | 12 | Is there an existing COT-managed cloud tenant (e.g., Azure Government, AWS GovCloud) that vendors may request to deploy their solution on? If so, what is the process for requesting access, and what is the estimated timeline for COT to provision an isolated tenant? | Vendor should propose their own PaaS/SaaS Fedramp moderate cloud solution. COT cloud may be used, but it is not ideal due to public access requirements. |
| 68 | Section 4.1 / Hosting | RFP | 12 | Does the Commonwealth require data to be hosted exclusively within a COT-managed environment from day one, or may a vendor operate on a commercially hosted FedRAMP/HITRUST platform during the contract term with a migration path to COT if required? | Vendor may operate on a commercially hosted FedRAMP/HITRUST platform during the contract term with a migration path to COT at contract termination. |
| 69 | Section 4.1 Hosting | RFP | 12 | Will the Commonwealth provide access to a COT-managed cloud tenant for hosting, or will vendors be required to independently maintain a FedRAMP-certified or HITRUST cloud environment? Is there a cost to the vendor for using a COT-managed tenant? | Vendor should propose their own PaaS/SaaS Fedramp moderate cloud solution. COT cloud may be used, but it is not ideal due to public access requirements. |
| 70 | Section 4.4 / Compliance Reporting | RFP | 13 | The RFP references ISO 9000, ISO 14001, and AT101 SOC 2 Type II as acceptable compliance reports. Will the Commonwealth accept a current SOC 2 Type I report plus a documented roadmap with a committed SOC 2 Type II attestation date as compliant for proposal submission, with the Type II report to be provided prior to go-live? | Please comply with the RFP requirements. |
| 71 | Section 4.4 / Compliance Reporting | RFP | 13 | Is the SOC 2 Type II (or equivalent) report required at time of proposal submission, at time of award, or prior to go-live? Please clarify the specific compliance milestone deadline. | The RFP requires the vendor to annually assert compliance and provide updated third-party audit reports throughout the life of the contract. |
| 72 | Section 4.17 / Application & Service Requirements | RFP | 18 | The RFP states that all business applications must support modern authentication (SAML 2.0, WSFED, OAuth, or OpenID Connect). Is SSO integration with a Commonwealth identity provider (e.g., Microsoft Entra ID / Active Directory) a mandatory requirement for this contract, or is it optional/preferred? | At this time, KHP is not requiring integration with a Commonwealth identity provider, such as Microsoft Entra ID (formerly Azure Active Directory), as part of this solicitation. The intent of the requirement is to ensure that the proposed system supports modern authentication standards, including SAML 2.0, WS-Federation (WSFED), OAuth, or OpenID Connect, and has the capability to support single sign-on (SSO) if required in the future. Offerors should describe the authentication methods supported by their proposed solution and identify any available SSO capabilities. |
| 73 | Section 4.17 / Application & Service Requirements | RFP | 18 | Does the Commonwealth have existing Enterprise Shared Services (GIS, ECM, ESB, Data Warehouse) that the campground reservation system must integrate with, or is standalone operation with API availability for future integrations acceptable? | There are existing enterprise shared services that could be integrated as needed by the application/solution and KHP, but not required. API availability is acceptable. |
| 74 | Section 4.17 (4) | RFP | 18 | What identity provider (IdP) does KHP/COT currently use for SSO/SAML authentication? Is modern authentication (SAML 2.0/OAuth/OpenID Connect) required for both administrative staff and end-user campers, or only for KHP staff? | At this time, KHP is not requiring integration with a specific identity provider (IdP) or single sign-on (SSO) solution as part of this solicitation. The proposed system shall support modern authentication standards, including SAML 2.0, WS-Federation (WSFED), OAuth, or OpenID Connect, to allow for future integration if required.Modern authentication requirements apply to administrative users of the system, not to campground customers making reservations. Offerors should describe the authentication methods supported for administrative access and identify any available SSO capabilities. |
| 75 | Section 6.7(D) / Secretary of State | RFP | 31 | For vendors not currently registered with the Kentucky Secretary of State, is the Certificate of Authority required to be submitted with the proposal, or may it be provided after selection but prior to contract award? What is the minimum lead time vendors should anticipate for SOS registration processing? | Refer to Proposal Submission Checklist on page 3. This requirement must be fulfilled prior to a contract award. |
| 76 | Section 6.7(C) / KY Tax Registration | RFP | 31 | Given that the vendor's compensation model is a per-reservation fee charged directly to the customer (not paid by KHP), is the vendor subject to Kentucky sales and use tax registration under Revenue Form 10A100? Please confirm whether the transactional reservation fee constitutes a taxable service under KRS 139.200. | Vendor should contact KY DOR for tax related questions at 502-564-5170. |
| 77 | Section 6.9 Cost Proposal | RFP | 34 | Does KHP have a target maximum per-reservation fee it is willing to accept? Is there a fee threshold that would render a proposal non-competitive? | No. No. |
| 78 | Section 7.3 / Cost Evaluation | RFP | 35 | For the Cost Proposal scoring (800 points), will all transaction fee types (online booking, call-center booking, cancellation fees, modification fees) be evaluated as a composite score, or will each fee type be evaluated independently? Will the Commonwealth weight high-volume transaction types more heavily? | Attachment B, Cost Proposal Form requires the vendor to provide one fee, the Cost Per Reservation to the Camper. No additional fees are to be included. |
| 79 | Section 7.4 / Oral Demonstration | RFP | 35 | If oral demonstrations are required, will they be conducted in person at KHP/Frankfort, or via video conference? What is the expected format and duration? Will vendors be expected to demonstrate a live system with KHP-specific campground configuration, or is a general platform demo acceptable? | If required, the top four (4) highest ranking vendors may be invited and held via MS Teams. The format and duration will be provided to those vendors, if necessary. |
| 80 | Section 9.2 / Contract Term | RFP | 37 | The initial contract term is 2 years with four optional 2-year renewals (up to 10 years). Is the per-reservation fee rate locked for the full initial term, and what is the process for requesting a rate adjustment at the time of each renewal option? | Please refer to Section 9.3 of the RFP regarding price adjustments. |
| 81 | Section 10.31 / Artificial Intelligence | RFP | 46 | If a vendor's platform incorporates AI-driven features (e.g., pricing optimization, demand forecasting, customer communications), is the vendor required to obtain prior written approval from KHP before each AI feature is activated, or is a one-time disclosure in the Transmittal Letter sufficient for all AI features described in the proposal? | Approval of the features must be prior approved by the AI Governance Committee. |
| 82 | Section 10.32 / Insurance | RFP | 47 | Is proof of all required insurance (CGL, Cyber Liability, Tech E&O) required at time of proposal submission, or only prior to contract award? May vendors provide a letter of intent from their insurer at submission with the formal Certificate of Insurance provided upon award? | Per RFP Section 10.32, Certificate of Insurance (COI) is required prior to contract award. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .