DJMS-11-Q-0010 RFI QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.doc

DJMS-11-Q-0010/SOURCES SOUGHT

-Questions submitted to the Government

-Government Responses The Web CMS shall have the ability to integrate with the forthcoming USMS taxonomy. Is the USMS taxonomy an application, database or just a list?

Answer: The USMS will be a database containing related tables of taxonomic root, subordinate, and related terms, and their definitions. The root terms will be sourced for classifying content.

This is very broad in scope. What actions would the workflows need to be able to handle?

Answer: The workflow feature should be flexible enough to meet the unique and changeable approval flows for each of our internal business units.

Where would content be pulled in from and in what format(s) is the content in?

Answer: The content will come from the current website AFTER it has been cleared of redundant/outdated/trivial (ROT) content, reorganized, and placed into a new, standardized template.

What specific devices would they like to be supported?

Answer: Currently, there is no standardized hosting environment, but the agency is moving to a Microsoft standard – IIS, and SQL server for the Web. The agency is also in the process of implementing SharePoint 2010.

Does USMS have a current CMS or is this a new requirement?

Answer: The current website does not utilize a Web CMS.

What is the estimated budgeted for the USMS CMS?

Answer: The purpose of this announcement is to gather cost information for budgeting purposes, as well as identify viable solutions.

How many users will be using the CMS?

Answer: We expect to have ~100 users to start but would like to get scaled user pricing and enterprise-wide, if available.

Is there an incumbent vendor working on the website?

No

· If yes, who is the vendor?

Answer: N/A

· Will the incumbent will able to respond to the RFI?

Answer: N/A

Is there a preference for a particular platform such as Java or .NET? Is USMS open to using open source software for the CMS?

Answer: Currently there is no standardized hosting environment, but the agency is moving to a Microsoft standard – IIS, and SQL server for the Web. The Web CMS will be a dedicated environment that needs to be able to leverage SQL Server and publish content to IIS. We are open to all solutions with those capabilities, including open source. The agency is also in the process of implementing SharePoint 2010.

Is this a stand-alone system or does it need to be integrated with other tools? If so what tools?

Answer: The Web CMS will need to be capable of integrating with an ECMS and a central USMS taxonomy system (a database containing related tables of taxonomic root, subordinate, and related terms, and their definitions) - as depicted in the HLA concept. Those systems are not yet in place. The taxonomy is under development.

Refer to Requirement 1: Alternate language/content support – what other alternate languages need to be supported?

Answer: It is likely that translations of some content into Spanish, or other languages may occur.

Is there a requirement for faceted browsing?

Answer: Requirement 17c covers this. We are open to hearing proposed solutions.

What is the estimated number of users?

Answer: We expect to have ~100 users to start but would like to get scaled user pricing and enterprise-wide, if available.

What is the expected content size?

Answer: Unknown. If there are size constraints, please describe them and any associated management plan/tools in your response.

Personalization – Are there any audience targeted features that are required – e.g. separate content for Eastern region vs. Western region?

Answer: We do want to be able to target audiences, and other facets of the taxonomy (e.g. geography).

Is there a need for event based alerts and notifications?

Answer: Yes. Alerts will be especially important for the intranet.

What other interaction channels apart from the web browser is needed – cell phone, PDA, etc.? Is email the only alert channel?

Answer: Yes (see requirements 33 and 26)

Work flows – is it purely a human workflow or do you need rules based data managed workflow?

Answer: Having the ability to use both would be optimal.

Is versioning a requirement?

Answer: Yes

Search within multimedia files – does metadata need to be captured for multimedia files?

Answer: Yes

Do you have any SLA that the solution should meet?

Answer: An SLA will developed between the Web Content Management Team and our [internal] hosting provider. Any considerations specific to the proposed Web CMS solution should be included in the response.

Refer to Requirement 17 a: See also links – is there a requirement for the related links to be static or dynamic links?

Answer: The links should be dynamic ally generated so that if the target content is moved or deleted the link is redirected or removed accordingly.

In what format would you like to receive responses (electronic or hard copies)?

Answer: Electronic

Is there an OMB exhibit 300 for this program? If so, can you please provide this documentation?

Answer: An OMB 300 is not appropriate for this project since it is still in the market research stage, and will not reach the OMB 300 cost threshold.

What is the status of items 1 (Develop the USMS Web Content Taxonomy and IA) and 2 (Develop a new look and feel for the USMS intranet and internet websites) of the USMS plan to revamp and reorganize its Web content?

Answer: Those are independent projects. The requirements attached to this announcement contain the information necessary for the Web CMS response. Any proposed Web CMS solution must address those requirements (12 and 13 primarily).

Will the USMS downselect vendors from among those who respond to the RFI to submit a formal proposal for this effort?

Answer: That is likely, depending on the responses received.

Is the USMS currently working with a vendor(s)/system integrator(s) on USMS websites or CMS development?

Answer: There is no vendor/implementer working on the USMS websites. The agency is implementing SharePoint 2010, which may serve as its ECMS. This Web CMS announcement is specific to Web content production and maintenance and associated business process requirements.

Will the future enterprise systems provide standards-based data exchange (i.e., SOA based using XML and Web services)?

Answer: Yes. The agency plans to implement SharePoint 2010 as its ECMS. SharePoint supports the Content Management Interoperability Services (CMIS) standard: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_Management_Interoperability_Services.

The RFI states that the solution must render identically across various versions of Internet Explorer (IE), Firefox, and Opera, but does not mention other popular browsers such as Chrome and Safari. Does the Government require that these other browser platforms be accommodated as well?

Answer: In a separate effort, the agency will develop new, CSS-based templates to establish flexible, consistent branding across its websites. While these templates will be tested for cross-browser functionality, we also want to ensure that it is maintained in the content produced/edited by the Web CMS. We would like our site to be consistent across as many browsers as possible, but place an emphasis on the browsers used by the largest portion of our audience (IE, Firefox, and Opera). Solutions that have a broader browser reach will be favored for this requirement. Please list all supported browsers in your response.

Does USMS anticipate using Microsoft products as standards in support of this project?

Answer: Currently there is no standardized hosting environment, but the agency is moving to a Microsoft standard – IIS, and SQL server for the Web. The Web CMS will be a dedicated environment that needs to be able to leverage SQL Server and publish content to IIS. We are open to all solutions with those capabilities, including open source. The agency is also in the process of implementing SharePoint 2010.

Under requirement 12b, can the bullet "Render the same in IE (6 and newer), Firefox (3 and newer), Opera [versions]" be clarified?

Does this mean the display must be the same or that functionality must be the same between all versions?

Answer: Both. Any browser-specific issues should be identified/explained in the response.

a. What is the primary browser used by the organization internally?

Answer: IE7

We understand the desire to have the CMS rendered in the same way across various Web browser platforms (IE, Firefox, Opera, etc.). Can the Government please clarify whether the “no-tables” requirement will be strictly enforced, or will the Government consider table-based layout as an option where needed for consistent rendering?

Answer: The table-less layout is a USMS-specific content requirement. It will be enforced. The table-less templates will be designed in a separate effort and the Web CMS must be able to implement those templates.

What is the anticipated timeline for implementation?

Answer: Once the agency is ready to move forward, we have a tentative start time frame of FY2011, Q3-Q4. Stakeholders (including the implementer) will be informed/consulted on the development of the final schedule, and any schedule changes.

The RFI does not mention a disaster recovery (DR) plan. Does USMS expect offerors to propose and price for DR measures?

Answer: The disaster recovery plan will be addressed when we get to the prototype stage, and a final HLA and support plan are developed. Our IT department will be engaged at that time as well. If there are out-of-the-box DR features you’d like to mention, please do so in your response.

The RFI does not mention security measures or expectations. Does USMS have specific security requirements regarding the CMS?

Answer: Specific security requirements will be addressed at the prototype stage. If there are out-of-the-box security features you’d like to mention, please do so in your response.

Is participation in this RFI mandatory for potential bidders on the final RFI? (I.e., will offerors be precluded from submitting a proposal if they do not submit a response to the RFI?)

Answer: When the agency is ready to proceed beyond the RFI, it may choose to select a Web CMS solution from the list of best qualified respondents who are also on the GSA schedule. Those who do not respond cannot be on that list, since they will not have addressed the requirements.

Does the Government desire electronic submission of the RFI response?

Answer: Yes

Due to the nature of our questions and the complexity of accurately formulating a response to the Government after receiving the answers to questions, we respectfully request a 2-week extension to the RFI due date.

Answer: There are no plans to extend the response period at this time. Should the deadline be extended, the extension will be made known via the announcement on fbo.gov.

On page 2 of the Sources Sought - USMS Web CMS (USMSWebCMS.doc) file, Submission Requirement #3, bullet #4 in the Description column: “Software customization cost (see item 1); programming language(s) used for the customization”, please explain what “item 1” is in reference to.

Answer: Item 1 is previously listed in the same table: “A cost estimate for any required customization.” If the feature is not offered out of the box, what’s the estimated customization cost to satisfy the requirement.

What is your current language translation process (manual/automated/etc…)? Which languages will need to be supported for the redesigned site? How does USMS envision its future translation process?

Answer: At present, we do not have alternate language content. That will likely change. When it does, we will use a centralized manual translation/review process to ensure accuracy and consistency.

What are your primary WCMS user roles, and what are their typical functions today?

Answer: Site-wide administrators, site-wide approvers, site-wide authors, area approvers, area authors.

How many sites/microsites/pages will need to be managed in the WCMS during each of the phases (POC, Pilot, and full Implementation)?

Answer: The current website has ~3500 pages, but we expect that number to change. The Web CMS should be capable of handling a large volume of pages and files. The POC should be based on a sample set of content and a sample taxonomy to demonstrate the functionality specified in the requirements.

How many different design templates will be used for the first phase and for each subsequent phase of implementation?

Answer: We expect to have 5-10 templates for various levels of the internet and intranet websites (10-20 total). The POC should use at more than one template to demonstrate the functionality specified in the requirements.

What current blog, search, wiki, and calendaring capabilities are in place? Are there any specific applications you would like to continue using or use in the future?

Answer: None. The agency uses MS Exchange and we would like to leverage that engine for the calendar, if possible.

How does your organization currently manage content? What do users like about the current process? What do users dislike about it—what are the “pain points”?

Answer: Content is currently posted/managed manually by a team of two. Like: single point of contact for posting. Dislike: occasional posting bottleneck.

What is the main goal of your website? What would you like it to drive visitors to do, meaning, what are the users “top tasks”?

Answer: The goal of the website is to allow end users to find the content of interest to them efficiently and effectively, and keep them abreast of USMS activities. We are seeking a Web CMS that allows us to adjust the content as needed.

What are your top three concerns about the success of this Web content management project?

Answer: 1 - Wasting resources on a Web CMS that is unable to meet our needs, 2 - Tightening budgets in the current economic climate, 3 – Issues with IT implementation.

How will you define the success of this project?

Answer: Identifying and implementing the best-fit, best-value Web CMS for the agency.

Could you please describe your planned phases in further detail (number of sites, microsites, pages, etc…)?

Answer: We are still in the planning and scoping phase so those details are still be determined.

What is the timeframe for each phase of the WCMS selection, POC, Pilot, and full Implementation?

Answer: We are still in the planning and scoping phase so those details are still be determined.

What types of devices (mobile, tablet, etc…) does USMS anticipate supporting? Does USMS’s entire site need to be mobile accessible or only priority areas?

Answer: We would like to be able to support both smartphone and tablet access. Having the entire site accessible to those devices would be ideal.

Is Opera browser compliance required for WCMS users, or site visitors?

Answer: We would like our site to be consistent across as many browsers as possible, but place an emphasis on the browsers used by the largest portion of our audience (IE, Firefox, and Opera). Solutions that have a broader browser reach will be favored for this requirement. Please list all supported browsers in your response.

Can you give additional details of the POC for scoping purposes, such as a detailed description of the sections of the site to be implemented, the number of templates, and the number of pages to be migrated, as they can greatly affect the cost and schedule estimate?

Answer: The POC can make use of sample content and a sample taxonomy to demonstrate the functionality specified in the requirements. The USMS may provide content (~40 pages) for the POC that has been optimized.

How will the POC be scored/judged? Which categories will be evaluated?

Answer: Details about the scoring and evaluation for the POC will be provided prior to that phase of the selection.

What USMS groups, roles, job-types will be testing the POC, and what skill-sets will they posses?

Answer: Details about the scoring and evaluation for the POC will be provided prior to that phase of the selection.

Will WCMS and site end users evaluate the POC? What will they be looking for during their evaluation?

Answer: Details about the scoring and evaluation for the POC will be provided prior to that phase of the selection.

Will technical individuals be evaluating the POC? What will they be looking for during their evaluation?

Answer: Details about the scoring and evaluation for the POC will be provided prior to that phase of the selection.

How much is budgeted for POC?

Answer: The purpose of this announcement is to collect coast data for budgeting.

How much has been budgeted for software?

Answer: The purpose of this announcement is to collect coast data for budgeting.

How much has been budgeted for implementation?

Answer: The purpose of this announcement is to collect coast data for budgeting.

How many pages are there across all USMS Web properties which would be slated for migration into the WCMS?

Answer: The requirement specifies the need for a migration tool only, however respondents can also provide cost information for migration of legacy content on a per page(s) basis. We estimate that 10-15K pages will ultimately be migrated.

What are your current Web management skill sets and what technology are they using?

Answer: The Web CMS will be used primarily by non-technical users and must be intuitive and user friendly.

What analytics are current used and what is desired?

Answer: Beyond the scope of this RFI.

What systems will be integrated with CMS?

Answer: The Web CMS will need to be capable of integrating with an ECMS and a central USMS taxonomy system (a database containing related tables of taxonomic root, subordinate, and related terms, and their definitions) - as depicted in the HLA concept. Those systems are not yet in place. The taxonomy is under development.

Regarding WCM Worksheet Requirements 14 and 15:

a) The list of meta tags in the centralized source may change over time and must be trigger an update in all pages

b) This list of meta tags is being stored in a centralized source. Does this mean that if they update a keyword title in one of the Meta Tags, USMS would want ALL content using that Tag to re-publish? Or does it just mean that the new values are immediately available to contributors to use in the system?

Answer: There will be a required set of meta tags included in the templates. Most will be pre-populated with values based on the author, organization, taxonomic category, etc. If USMS wants to add to that required set of tags, the new tag would be immediately available to contributors and included on pages that are subsequently edited (mandatory field). If the new meta tag will be populated with default data, it would generate a republish task that the administrator can execute during off-peak hours, or it could be an automated task with a delayed start. Changing the source of the default data for a meta tag would also initiate republication.

Default metadata for all page assets (images, referenced files) are inherited from the parent page: our concern here is that this metadata can be embedded in the Images/Assets, and if USMS wants to reuse images across the website (see Item 15), there may be some conflict as to which parent's metadata is inherited. Can you please provide additional insight/information regarding the use of metadata?

Answer: Excellent point. This requirement will be amended and noted on the announcement.

The online synopsis references a Statement of Work; does this refer to the CMS Worksheet document, or is there an additional document that has not yet been posted?

Answer: The Web CMS Requirements Worksheet is what is being referred to.

Can the USMS reference architecture be provided to better align the proposed solution and High-Level Architecture Concept with the overall agency architecture?

Answer: It cannot. Please provide your best response with the information given.

Will USMS consider a hosted (e.g., Cloud-based) solution for the Web CMS requirements?

Answer: Hosting is outside the scope of this RFI. USMS cannot consider SaaS options.

Is there an existing or preferred web analytics tool, and/or would built in web-analytics be a helpful addition for the system?

Answer: Web analytics are beyond the scope of this RFI, but a Web analytics may be a useful feature of a Web CMS.

Are there any existing web usage metrics available to better understand scale requirements? Specifically, concurrent user data or estimates for intranet, internet, and cms console?

Answer: We expect to have ~100 users to start but would like to get scaled user pricing and enterprise-wide, if available.

HLA concept diagram depicts LDAP/AD instance, is there an enterprise instance we can leverage or should this be included in the estimate?

Answer: The Web CMS will leverage the existing LDAP/AD instance.

Is there a preferred hardware/OS environment at USMS? Are all related costs to be included in estimate?

Answer: Currently there is no standardized hosting environment, but the agency is moving to a Microsoft standard – IIS, and SQL server for the Web. The Web CMS will be a dedicated environment that needs to be able to leverage SQL Server and publish content to IIS. We are open to all solutions with those capabilities, including open source. The agency is also in the process of implementing SharePoint 2010.

Would USMS be interested in an integrator’s commercial customers in addition to federal if the solution implemented was relevant to this effort?

Answer: Yes.

How many total users would be accessing the system?

Answer: We expect to have ~100 users to start but would like to get scaled user pricing and enterprise-wide, if available.

How many would use it per day?

Answer: Potentially all users will use the system daily.

How many total sites will be implemented on the new system?

Answer: The Web CMS will be used to post content to the USMS internet and intranet websites. Each site will have sub-areas (for management) that align with our organizational structure. Sub-areas may also be based on topics, geography, audience, or other taxonomy facet.

Do they require high availability in Production?

Answer: Yes.

Do they require a high availability authoring environment?

Answer: Yes.

Content migration related questions:

Do they have existing content that should be migrated to the new environment?

Answer: The requirement specifies the need for a migration tool only, however respondents can also provide cost information for migration of legacy content on a per page(s) basis. We estimate that 10-15K files will ultimately be migrated.

If so, what product(s) are they using to author/render that content?

Answer: The current content is static.

How many content types do they have? Please list each type and describe the components (text, rich text, images, files, video, etc.).

Answer: The respondents should indicate what content types are supported by their Web CMS solution. They are also welcome to scan our current website to determine existing types.

How many total content items will be migrated (ie. 10,000 content items) and what is the total size of the content to be migrated (ie. 500GB)?

Answer: See #1 above.

How many languages must be supported?

Answer: It is likely that translations of some content into Spanish, or other languages may occur.

Is content personalized based on the user that is viewing it?

Answer: Limited personalization is useful so long as it can be accomplished using non-persistent (session) cookies. Persistent cookies are forbidden.

If so, do different user groups see completely different sets of content, or do they see the same content that is slightly different based on rules derived from their profile?

Answer: That level of personalization is not sought at this time.

How many workflows are used to author content?

Answer: Workflows should be fully customizable. The Web CMS must be able to support as many workflows as are necessary for USMS Web publication.

Proof of concept/Prototype questions:

How many end users would be given access to the POC environment?

Answer: We expect no more than 10-20 will evaluate the POC.

How many content authors would be given access to the POC environment?

Answer: See above.

How much content would be migrated to the POC environment? Please provide detailed scope for the POC (see content migration questions above).

Answer: The POC should be based on a sample set of content and a sample taxonomy to demonstrate the functionality specified in the requirements. The POC should use more than one template to demonstrate the functionality specified in the requirements.

Has USMS standardized on a Content Management platform?

Answer: The agency plans to implement SharePoint 2010 as its ECMS. SharePoint supports the Content Management Interoperability Services (CMIS) standard: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_Management_Interoperability_Services.

Because of the inherent development components of this work, would CMMI Level 3 be a required evaluation component?

Answer: No.

Would this work be conducted at client site or contractor site?

Answer: The site of the POC is undetermined. If there is a cost differential based on the location, please indicate that in your response.

Does USMS have a preference for Java or .NET technologies?

Answer: Currently there is no standardized hosting environment, but the agency is moving to a Microsoft standard – IIS, and SQL server for the Web. The Web CMS will be a dedicated environment that needs to be able to leverage SQL Server and publish content to IIS. We are open to all solutions with those capabilities, including open source. The agency is also in the process of implementing SharePoint 2010.

Is USMS leveraging a WCMS for its current site?

Answer: No.

Does the WCMS need to integrate with a language translation service as part of the workflow?

Answer: No.

Will the internet, intranet, and extranet all share the same look and feel?

Answer: No.

What are the user’s authenticating against (e.g. Active Directory)?

Answer: The Web CMS must support either LDAP and/or AD (see requirement 9)

How many pages make up each of your current sites – internet, intranet and extranet?

Answer: ~10K each. Please indicate any content limitations in your response.

The current http://www.usmarshals.gov site looks to be all HTML and JavaScript, are the intranet and extranet similar in complexity and technology? If not, what technologies are being used (i.e. ASP, JSP, etc.)?

Answer: The intranet is also HTML and JavaScript Is there an incumbent on this project/contract?

Answer: No

What is the current content management system/platform the site utilizes?

Answer: None

Is the use of Open Source Content Management Systems (e.g. Drupal, Joomla) possible for this contract?

Answer: Yes

Does the Justice Department have an approved and/or preferred enterprise content management system?

Answer: The agency plans to implement SharePoint 2010 as its ECMS. SharePoint supports the Content Management Interoperability Services (CMIS) standard: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_Management_Interoperability_Services.

Will the contractors be required to possess a level of clearance? If yes, will the Department of Justice provide sponsorships for the clearances?

Answer: Outside the scope of this RFI. If there is a cost differential based on clearance, please indicate that in your response.

What is the total number of web site entities to be included in this contract (Internet, Intranet and Extranet total)?

Answer: At present, two sites will leverage the Web CMS (internet and intranet), with multiple sub sites/content areas.

What is the timeline for the proof-of-concept?

Answer: Undetermined. This RFI will be used to help make schedule determinations.

What group will verify that the site meets 508 compliance and what does that testing include? If it is automated, what tools will be used?

Answer: USMS is developing 508 compliant templates that will be implemented in the Web CMS. The Web CMS should include tools that verify 508 compliance for new content that is created using those templates. The standard can be found here: http://www.section508.gov/index.cfm?fuseAction=stdsdoc#Web.

Are security clearances required for the proof-of-concept effort? If so, what level of clearance?

Answer: Outside the scope of this RFI. If there is a cost differential based on clearance, please indicate that in your response.

What are the exact requirements to be included in the proof-of-concept?

Answer: The POC and Web CMS requirements are one and the same. The POC should be based on a sample set of content and a sample taxonomy to demonstrate the functionality specified in the requirements. The POC should use more than one template to demonstrate the functionality specified in the requirements.

Does USMS have a preferred or pre-selected implementer?

Answer: No

solicitation including the timeframe for the government’s responses to vendor questions and the release of the draft and/or final request for proposal?

Answer: This is a sources sought announcement only.

Answer: USMS plans to implement SharePoint as its ECMS. The Web CMS will need to integrate with that system via CMIS (see requirement 22)

the published site itself?

Answer: Yes. Help functionality is highly desired.

Added: Dec 08, 2010 3:44 pm

The purpose of this Request for Information (RFI) is to search for qualified vendors capable of meeting the U.S. Marshals Service's requirements for a Web Content Management System. This RFI provides an opportunity for respondents to submit their ideas, initiatives, and/or processes related to this request.

This Market Research is issued for information and planning purposes only and does not constitute a solicitation, nor does it restrict the Government as to the ultimate acquisition approach. In accordance with FAR 15.201(e) responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. Any contract that might be awarded based on information received or derived from this market research will be the outcome of a competitive process.

Please provide the following information about your company in response to this RFI:

a) Is your company on GSA Schedule ? If yes, list the applicable contract number.

b) Under this GSA Contract, does your company anticipate being able to satisfy all Statement of Work requirements. If not, provide reasons why.

c) List your company's Business Size and Socioeconomic Status.

d) In regard to the attached Statement of Work, recommend the preferred contract type for this requirement.

e) Provide an estimated cost for each CMS Requirement (listed on the attached statement of work).

f) Written Questions are due back by 5:00pm est on December 23, 2010.

Item e) in the solicitation notification states "Provide an estimated cost for each CMS Requirement (listed in the attached statement of work)." It is our understanding that this cost estimate is required only for those requirements that are non-standard and therefore require product customization or Add-on, whereas requirements that are satisfied by a standard product feature, whose costs are part of the aggregate licensing cost, do not require this requirement-by-requirement breakdown of cost. Please confirm.

Answer: That is correct.

· A cost estimate for the development of a proof-of-concept (a functional test environment - vendor hosted) that demonstrates the required features and functionality

· Whether or not an evaluation copy of their software is available for on-site (USMS) proof of concept development What would be the size and scope of the POC?

Answer: The POC shall address all of the requirements in the Web CMS Requirements matrix, and will be based on an sample set of content and a sample taxonomy.

With regard to the proof-of-concept / functional prototype, is the vendor's scope only to set up the proof-of-concept / functional prototype site (vendor hosted), that USMS users will then use to populate content to confirm functionality, or is the expectation that the vendor will populate the site with content to demonstrate functionality? If the latter, will USMS provide the content to be used for demonstrating the proof-of-concept / functional prototype, or are vendors expected to develop/provide their own sample content for this purpose?

Answer: The USMS will provide a sample set of content and a sample taxonomy for the POC

– to allow for an apples to apples comparison of proposed solutions.

Can VMware images be used for the POC or will the trial software need to be natively installed on USMS hardware?

Answer: Yes. If possible please, provide cost estimates for both scenarios.

Opp Report

What will be the preferred delivery method for the RFI to the Primary Point of Contact?

Answer: Email.

Answer: There is no WCM solution being used for USMS websites currently. The agency is in the process of implementing SharePoint for enterprise network services and plans to use it as its ECMS. The WCM should be capable of integrating with that system via CMIS (see requirement 22).

Answer: We expect to have ~100 users to start but would like to get scaled user pricing and enterprise-wide, if available. The user breakdown is undetermined at this time.

provide services for achieving this migration? If so, how many sources are there, and what volume of content (number of pages, number of documents, etc.) are there that need to be migrated into the new system?

Answer: The requirement specifies the need for a migration tool only, however respondents can also provide cost information for migration of legacy content on a per page(s) basis.

We estimate that 10-15K files will ultimately be migrated. The current content is not uniform.