Sole Source Justification Form

Version 7.01 Page 1 of 6

Bulletin Reference Number 26-511CDB-PROCU-B-52327

Requesting Agency/University Capital Development Board

Sole Source Justification Form - Part I Section I - General Information

Department/Bureau/Section: Operations

Need Identified Date: Oct 23, 2025 Supply/Service Need By Date: Jun 30, 2026

Project Title: Trimble Unity Construct (eBuilder) Project Management Licensing Contract

Vendor: Trimble, Inc.

Provide a description of the supplies or services required: construction project management software subscription

Value: Actual Value of Initial Term, this Change Order or Amendment: 1,786,703.12

Will this Sole Source amend a Professional or Artistic Services contract? Yes No

*Sole Source may not be used for amendments for Professional or Artistic Services if the amendment would increase the value by more than 5% of the initial award or extend the term by more than 60 days.

Type: New Sole Economically Feasible Source

Section II - Proposed Term

One-Time Purchase Term Contract

Estimated Contract Begin Date: Jul 1, 2026

Estimated Contract End Date: Jun 30, 2029

Number of Potential Renewals: 0

Length of Each Renewal in Months: 0

Total Value of All Renewals: 0

If a Term Contract, does the term, including renewals, exceed 12 months? Yes No

If yes, provide a detailed justification including any economic benefit received for agreeing to a multi-year term:

The migration of CDB from its legacy system to a new cloud-based platform was a major undertaking. Hundreds of staff hours and more than $5,000,000 have been invested in the system CDB currently utilizes. This software is also used extensively by CDB’s vendors, who have already transitioned to the platform.

A multi-year license for the existing system is necessary to maintain operational continuity, avoid unnecessary transition costs, and secure favorable pricing while CDB completes the procurement and implementation of a replacement system. The annual increase for this product is 3.5%. By locking in a three-year term, CDB can reduce that increase by 0.5% each year, resulting in cost savings over the duration of the contract.

This multi-year term will also provide CDB, currently in the process of procuring a replacement construction management system, sufficient time to ensure that the upcoming RFP fully addresses agency needs. It also allows adequate time for vendor selection and implementation of the new system once awarded. Finally, the three-year contract allows CDB to secure a discounted price while maintaining operational continuity through the transition to a new construction management software platform.

Version 7.01 Page 2 of 6

Bulletin Reference Number 26-511CDB-PROCU-B-52327

Requesting Agency/University Capital Development Board

Section III - Funding Source Select the type of funding to be used (Check all that apply): State Appropriate Funds Federal Funds Other (Explain):

Section IV - Sole Source Justification

This purchase is economically only available from a single source primarily because it is: (If "Other" explain in one sentence)

Software License/Upgrade/Maintenance

Are there secondary justification(s) for this sole source? Yes No

Section V - Purchase History

Has the Agency or University Purchased these supplies or services in the past? Yes No

Term Term From Term To Value Description Contract Number Type

1 12/28/2016 12/28/2018 1,564,402.5 Construction Management Project Software - includes implementation Ebldr2017 RFP

2 5/23/2018 12/28/2018 382,650 Amendment to Construction Project Management Software Contract -implementation only

Ebldr2017 Amendment

3 10/2/2020 10/1/2023 1,981,822.02 Construction Management Software -implementation and licensing continued

Ebldr2019 Sole Source

4 10/2/2020 10/1/2023 22,082.4 Dataware house contract amendment Ebldr2019 Amendment

5 10/2/2020 10/1/2023 -31,109.27 Scope change contract amendment related to implementation Ebldr2019 Amendment

6 10/2/2023 6/30/2026 1,497,084.63 Construction Management Software -licensing continued Ebldr2023 Sole Source

If more than 10, or if other comments, explain:

Section VI - Business Rationale

1. Provide a detailed explanation of the need for the supplies or services:

CDB has spent several years implementing the Trimble Unity Construct (eBuilder) construction management software and must continue to license the system in order to use it. CDB recognizes that because this is a SaaS product, it is in the agency’s best interest to competitively procure the next contract through an RFP. However, additional time is needed to complete the resolicitation and full procurement process.

This contract will allow CDB to continue using Trimble Unity Construct (eBuilder) while it completes the IL CDB Construction Operations Application Modernization Project. The subscription fee provides unlimited Trimble Unity Construct (eBuilder) Enterprise Users and is based on an estimated average annual capital construction spend of up to $700,000,000.00. The subscription term will be aligned with the State fiscal year to avoid payments that cross fiscal years.

Version 7.01 Page 3 of 6

Bulletin Reference Number 26-511CDB-PROCU-B-52327

Requesting Agency/University Capital Development Board

2. Provide a list and describe in detail the specifications required to satisfy the need:

This contract will provide for the subscription and licensing to use the Trimble Unity Construct (eBuilder) construction management software that has been implemented by CDB and Trimble. The subscription includes unlimited user licenses, unlimited projects, unlimited document storage, 24x7 technical support, quarterly enhancements/upgrades, maintenance releases, and a subscription to EZ File Transfer tool, API, Quarterly Release Training, Data Warehouse, and API Integration maintenance.

3. Provide detail explaining the justification selected in Section IV to explain why the requested supplies or services are the only ones available that can satisfy the agency or university requirements?

To date, CDB has invested hundreds of staff hours and more than five million dollars in implementing this software. Trimble’s system is proprietary, and transitioning to an alternative platform would result in the loss of the time and financial resources already invested.

Furthermore, Trimble Unity Construct (eBuilder) provides critical functionality not available in CDB’s other systems by offering a user-friendly, collaborative, web-based environment that supports timely interactions among contractors, architects, and State staff working on construction projects.

4. What are the unique features of the supplies or services that are not available in any other product or by any other vendor? Provide specific quantifiable factors/qualifications:

Trimble Unity Construct (eBuilder) software is proprietary to Trimble. CDB staff has spent hundreds of hours working through implementation of Trimble Unity Construct (eBuilder) and has trained vendors in using the software as well.

5. Has the Agency or University considered alternative supplies or services to satisfy their need? Yes No

5a. If no, why weren't alternatives evaluated?

Alternatives were not evaluated at this time because CDB is already actively pursuing a competitive procurement for a future construction management system.

In the interim, CDB must maintain its existing system to avoid operational disruptions and preserve the State’s investment of time, funding, and data already committed to Trimble Unity Construct (eBuilder). The sole source term is therefore limited to the period necessary to complete the competitive RFP process and transition to the selected vendor.

6. Are there resellers or distributors?

Yes No N/A

7. What efforts were made to get the best possible price (i.e. did the agency/university negotiate) and how did you determine the price for this purchase is considered fair and reasonable?

Trimble’s year-over-year cost increase is a minimum 3.5% or higher. Through negotiation, CDB was able to secure a 0.5% reduction, bringing the annual increase down to 3% and locking in this reduced rate for a three-year term. The negotiated rate is lower than the rate paid during the 2020–2023 term and lower than the 3.5% increase in 2025 to 2026.

8. Will this purchase obligate the State to this vendor for future purchases such as maintenance, licensing or continuing need?

Yes No

9. What will be the financial or other impact to the State if this sole source is not approved and a competitive bid is required?

If this sole source is not approved CDB would incur significant financial and operational impacts. CDB has already invested hundreds of staff hours and more than four million dollars in implementing Trimble Unity Construct (eBuilder). Transitioning to a different vendor at this stage would result in the loss of that investment, as the system is proprietary and the work completed to date could not be transferred.

CDB is actively working on a competitive procurement for a future system, however additional time is needed to conduct the RFP process, complete the procurement, and ensure an orderly transition. From start to finish, the RFP will take about 12 -16 months, and once a vendor(s) is selected, it will take another 16 - 20 months to implement the solution and decommission the legacy solutions.

Approving the sole source contract avoids unnecessary duplication of costs and prevents operational interruption while the competitive procurement is completed.

Version 7.01 Page 4 of 6

Bulletin Reference Number 26-511CDB-PROCU-B-52327

Requesting Agency/University Capital Development Board

10. Is there any additional information you would like to add to justify this sole source?

Version 7.01 Page 5 of 6

Bulletin Reference Number 26-511CDB-PROCU-B-52327

Requesting Agency/University Capital Development Board

Section VII

Requesting Department Representative

Requesting Department Signature Required

I know and understand the contents of this Sole Source Justification and attest that all statements are true and correct and the fairness and reasonableness of the price was adequately confirmed.

Date May 1, 2026

Printed Name Kassandra Wilkin E-mail Address kassandra.wilkin@illinois.gov

Phone Number 217-557-3971

State Agency Bureau/Division Head or University Purchasing Director Approval and Signature Required

I know and understand the contents of this Sole Source Justification and attest that all statements are true and correct and the fairness and reasonableness of the price was adequately confirmed. (All prior form fields will lock once this e-signature is completed)

E-mail Address tamakia.edwards@illinois.gov

Phone Number 3128054283 Date May 3, 2026

Printed Name Tamakia Edwards

Agency Bureau/Division Head or University Purchasing Director and Not a Designee

SPO Approval and Signature Required

I have reviewed and understand the contents of this Sole Source Justification and agree with the State Agency or University determination.

I have reviewed and understand the contents of this Sole Source Justification and do not agree with the State Agency or University determination. As a result, the State Agency or University must explore other sourcing methods to satisfy their need.

State Purchasing Officer Signature Phone Number 217.299.4919 Date May 4, 2026

Printed Name John H.H. Demien, CPPB E-mail Address john.demien@illinois.gov

Version 7.01 Page 6 of 6

Bulletin Reference Number 26-511CDB-PROCU-B-52327

Requesting Agency/University Capital Development Board

Sole Source Justification Form - Part II Section I - General Information

Project Title Trimble Unity Construct (eBuilder) Project Management Licensing Contract

Vendor Trimble, Inc.

Initial Date of Procurement Bulletin Posting May 4, 2026

Was a Sole Source hearing held per 30 ILCS 500/20-25?

Yes - Complete Section II and III below (Section II will only be visible when this option is selected)

No - Section II not required, go to Section III below Section III - CPO Approval and Signature Required

Based on my review, I authorize the Agency/University to proceed in accordance with the published Notice referenced above.

Based upon my review, I authorize the Agency/University to proceed with the following Changes.

Based on my review, the Agency/University is not authorized to proceed with this sole source as presented and my recommendation is that it be cancelled.

Other

CPO Signature CPO Phone 217-622-1857

Printed Name Ellen H. Daley Date May 20, 2026

CPO E-mail Ellen.H.Daley@Illinois.gov

Version 7.01 Page of Sole Source Justification Form - Part I Section I - General Information Will this Sole Source amend a Professional or Artistic Services contract?

If yes, what was the original contract value?

*Sole Source may not be used for amendments for Professional or Artistic Services if the amendment would increase the value by more than 5% of the initial award or extend the term by more than 60 days.

Section II - Proposed Term If a Term Contract, does the term, including renewals, exceed 12 months?

If yes, provide a detailed justification including any economic benefit received for agreeing to a multi-year term:

Section III - Funding Source Select the type of funding to be used (Check all that apply):

Section IV - Sole Source Justification Are there secondary justification(s) for this sole source?

Section V - Purchase History Has the Agency or University Purchased these supplies or services in the past?

Term Term From Term To Value Description Contract Number Type Section VI - Business Rationale

1. Provide a detailed explanation of the need for the supplies or services:

2. Provide a list and describe in detail the specifications required to satisfy the need:

3. Provide detail explaining the justification selected in Section IV to explain why the requested supplies or services are the only ones available that can satisfy the agency or university requirements?

4. What are the unique features of the supplies or services that are not available in any other product or by any other vendor? Provide specific quantifiable factors/qualifications:

5. Has the Agency or University considered alternative supplies or services to satisfy their need?

5a. If yes, name the alternative vendors whose supplies or services were evaluated:

5b. If yes, what were the alternatives for each vendor and why were they unacceptable? Be specific with regard to features, characteristics, requirements, capabilities and compatibility:

5c. Explain how the market evaluation was conducted?

*This evaluation is to determine available options within a market. If the evaluation is to determine quality or best suited option, this is not the appropriate source selection. Under no circumstances shall the evaluation consist of testing alternative options. These activities must be conducted in a competitive transparent environment (i.e. IFB or RFP).

5a. If no, why weren't alternatives evaluated?

6. Are there resellers or distributors?

7. What efforts were made to get the best possible price (i.e. did the agency/university negotiate) and how did you determine the price for this purchase is considered fair and reasonable?

8. Will this purchase obligate the State to this vendor for future purchases such as maintenance, licensing or continuing need?

8a. If yes, please provide details regarding future obligations and/or needs:

9. What will be the financial or other impact to the State if this sole source is not approved and a competitive bid is required?

10. Is there any additional information you would like to add to justify this sole source?

Section VII Requesting Department Signature Required I know and understand the contents of this Sole Source Justification and attest that all statements are true and correct and the fairness and reasonableness of the price was adequately confirmed.

State Agency Bureau/Division Head or University Purchasing Director Approval and Signature Required I know and understand the contents of this Sole Source Justification and attest that all statements are true and correct and the fairness and reasonableness of the price was adequately confirmed. (All prior form fields will lock once this e-signature is completed) SPO Approval and Signature Required Sole Source Justification Form - Part II Section I - General Information Was a Sole Source hearing held per 30 ILCS 500/20-25?

Section II - Sole Source Hearing Details The State posted to the Illinois Procurement Bulletin a description of the State's need, the justification for the sole source decision, and information regarding the opportunity to submit comments and testify at a public hearing. Notice of the hearing was also posted outside of the hearing room 48 hours prior to the hearing.

The public hearing was conducted for the purpose of receiving testimony regarding the sole source determination. The Hearing Officer recommends the following:

The following relevant documents are attached:

Section III - CPO Approval and Signature Required 9.0.0.2.20101008.1.734229 Ellen.H.Daley@Illinois.gov

A multi‑year license for the existing system is necessary to maintain operational continuity, avoid unnecessary transition costs, and secure favorable pricing while CDB completes the procurement and implementation of a replacement system. The annual increase for this product is 3.5%. By locking in a three‑year term, CDB can reduce that increase by 0.5% each year, resulting in cost savings over the duration of the contract.

This multi‑year term will also provide CDB, currently in the process of procuring a replacement construction management system, sufficient time to ensure that the upcoming RFP fully addresses agency needs. It also allows adequate time for vendor selection and implementation of the new system once awarded. Finally, the three‑year contract allows CDB to secure a discounted price while maintaining operational continuity through the transition to a new construction management software platform.

This contract will allow CDB to continue using Trimble Unity Construct (eBuilder) while it completes the IL CDB Construction Operations Application Modernization Project. The subscription fee provides unlimited Trimble Unity Construct (eBuilder) Enterprise Users and is based on an estimated average annual capital construction spend of up to $700,000,000.00. The subscription term will be aligned with the State fiscal year to avoid payments that cross fiscal years.

In the interim, CDB must maintain its existing system to avoid operational disruptions and preserve the State’s investment of time, funding, and data already committed to Trimble Unity Construct (eBuilder). The sole source term is therefore limited to the period necessary to complete the competitive RFP process and transition to the selected vendor.

CDB is actively working on a competitive procurement for a future system, however additional time is needed to conduct the RFP process, complete the procurement, and ensure an orderly transition. From start to finish, the RFP will take about 12 -16 months, and once a vendor(s) is selected, it will take another 16 - 20 months to implement the solution and decommission the legacy solutions. Approving the sole source contract avoids unnecessary duplication of costs and prevents operational interruption while the competitive procurement is completed.