ESBD_371227_1724886444857_CIO-24-199 Addendum 1.pdf

THE TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY SYSTEM

Office of Procurement & HUB Program

ADDENDUM NO. 1

Date: August 28, 2024 RFP Due Date: September 10, 2024 RE: RFP01 CIO-24-199 – Maestro Refresh Project

Respondents shall acknowledge receipt of addendum(s) on the Execution of Offer (Exhibit A).

Questions/Responses:

1. What is the annual budget of the contract?

Response: This information will not be provided. Section 3.2 and 3.3 provide details regarding the scope and staff augmentation requirements that shows the level of effort needed on this project.

2. Do you need actual resumes or sample resumes?

Response: Section 4.2.9 requires actual names and resumes. Samples are not acceptable.

3. Is this bid refresh?

Response: No

4. Is there any Incumbent for this opportunity?

Response: No

5. If there is an incumbent then why you are looking for other companies? Are you not happy with them?

Response: Not applicable.

6. If there is an Incumbent then are they bidding for this opportunity?

Response: Not applicable.

7. What is the allocated budget for this opportunity?

Response: See response to question #1 above.

8. Can firms provide the references from ongoing projects/contracts?

Response: Yes

9. Can firms provide us the commercial references?

Response: Yes

10. Can firms demonstrate their experience providing similar services to commercial agencies?

Response: Yes

11. Can firms meet the minimum qualifications/requirements through a subcontractor?

Response: No

12. Could A&M System please clarify whether the requirements enlisted under section 3.4 Vendor Qualifications must be met by the firm or by the consultants who will be placed to perform the requested services under this solicitation?

Response:

Firm:

• Has experience in staff augmentation using Angular, Spring Boot, Jenkins, Git, Java

• Must have user design experience capability

• Self-managed team able to internally coordinate efforts.

• Can provide a highly responsive, collaborative, and transparent communication process

• Track record of success delivering custom software and digital platform solutions

• Delivered projects using the staff augmentation model

• Ability to provide Experienced full stack developers and agile business analysts

• At least 5 years of experience providing Quality Assurance, User design experience expertise

Consultants

• Available for meetings between 8:00 a.m. – 10:00 a.m. Central Time

• Ability to work with complex requirements

• Firm grasp on agile methodologies

• Must have 5 years providing

13. Are firms requested to provide resumes and rates for each level (senior, intermediate, junior) for all the roles/positions requested under this engagement?

Response: Yes

14. Is the A&M System looking for firms to recruit the requested positions or for firms to provide in-house personnel to perform the services?

Response: A&M System is looking for firms to provide the personnel to perform the services.

15. If firms must present actual personnel, can these be replaced by equally qualified candidates if they are no longer available at the time of contract award?

Response: The process described in section 3.5 B. must be followed. However the vendor may only replace up to 25% of the proposed personnel without mitigating circumstances.

16. Is A&M System looking for staff augmentation services or consulting services?

Response: Section 1.1 clearly states in the first paragraph this RFP is for augmentation services.

17. Section 4.3, Cost Proposal states: “The format and sub-sections of the Cost Proposal shall conform to the tabbed spreadsheet structure (Attachment A) outlined below.” Could A&M System please indicate where firms can find Attachment A?

Response: See attached spreadsheet

18. Is it mandatory for firms to have prior experience providing similar services to higher education agencies/systems?

Response: No. It may however be a factor in the evaluation of the proposal responses.

19. Is the team configuration proposed in the RFP mandatory, or is there room to suggest changes?

(1 Design Architect, 4 Agile Analysts, 8 Full stack Devs, 6 Testers, 1 Scrum Master)

Response: There is room to suggest changes and it is welcomed.

20. Is there an option to be selected on individual profiles or as a whole team?

Response: The intention is to select a single Respondent that can provide the full team.

21. Is there a security requirement regarding the equipment and network of each profile, considering that the project is remote?

Response: Yes, there will be a document that needs to be signed by each individual assigned to the team. As an example, see the attached draft Confidentiality Acknowledgement form.

22. Are you open to vendors that work in a nearshore model with operations in the US and Latam?

Response: Yes

23. Based on your experience, do you have a budget range for the first 2-year contract?

Response: See response to question #1 above.

24. When will the award date and the official kickoff of the project be?

Response: The Maestro refresh project is already underway. While we do not have an anticipated award date, per section 1.5 of the RFP we expect the awarded agreement to be effective October 1, 2024 with commencement of services to begin immediately thereafter.

25. Section 2.1, 2nd paragraph of RFP says "A statement to this effect should be contained in the Respondent’s cover letter" and Section 2.3 and 2.4 specifically asks for two separate pdf files.

Where should the Respondent's cover letter be included? Is the cover letter part of the Proposal pdf or a different document?

Response: It may be included as part of the Proposal pdf.

26. The RFP asks for Resumes of proposed candidates, Is a 1 page brief resume good enough?

Response: Yes

27. Should the cost proposal include only a 2 year initial term or should it also include the option to extend additional 1 year term as stated in section 1.5?

Response: Only the 2-year initial term.

28. Section 4.3.2 of RFP asks the respondent to include travel and other expenses. Can you provide more insight into this. How often does A&M System or Texas A&M Research Information System (RIS) department anticipate this travel per year and how many personnel from the team are expected to travel per year?

Response: This would be a one-time meeting to establish the protocol and meet in person. And potentially at the yearly review.

29. Section 4.4 talks about filling HUB Subcontracting Plan (HSP) Form. Does this apply for respondent companies outside the USA.

Response: Yes, per Section 2.4 and 4.4 this is a required document to complete and submit with your proposal response. If you need assistance with completion, please reach out to so-hubprogram@tamus.edu.

30. Is there an expectation that the external team will be available beyond the performance period to provide training, support, or knowledge transfer?

Response: No mailto:so-hubprogram@tamus.edu mailto:so-hubprogram@tamus.edu

31. Is there an expected or desired warranty period after performance period for recipients to resolve defects in the code?

Response: No

32. Is the majority of the business logic in the database? Or in the application layer? For example stored procedures, triggers, input validation, permissions, etc.

Response: Both the database and the application layer

33. If there is significant business logic in the database, will it be migrated into the application layer as part of this effort or remain as it is?

Response: No migration of the database code will be performed it will be used as is unless the changes make sense (for example migration from Oracle AQ to RabbitMQ).

34. Is the current migration to cloud database a 1-for-1 mapping from the existing Oracle ADF data store (table schema, stored procedures, etc.)?

Response: Yes

35. If changes are required to the migrated cloud database to facilitate improvements to specific workflows, is that work intended to be executed by the External team or the Internal team (e.g.

changes to schema, stored procedures, etc.)?

Response: Each unit of work will be executed by the team responsible for it from end to end.

36. Is the reimplementation of the existing screens intended to be a like-for-like adaptation of the existing UX patterns and workflows or has a new design been drafted for the new implementation?

Response: Like for like migration with a few ease-of-use UI changes along the way.

37. Can you give a better understanding of what it would mean to “have minor improvements on the UI” and expectations around who would be responsible for driving the scoping of the improvements (UX design, End-user validation, UAT, etc.)?

Response: This should be driven by the business analysts for each team.

38. Will business analysts work with end users to understand the intended use cases for screens and potential improvements?

Response: No, they would be building the specifications off the existing screens and should not need to have access to the business users.

39. Is there any expectation that the application can be rolled out in phases as given modules/workflows are completed or is a full scale replacement rollout expected?

Response: It will be rolled out in phases

40. Will end-users be able to get hands on and provide feedback after given milestones before the project roadmap is complete?

Response: Yes

41. Will the application need to meet accessibility requirements? If so is there a target in mind (ex:

WCAG 2.2)

Response: Yes, WCAG 2.1 TAC 213.30

42. Are there a set of testing practices that you would like the team to adhere to? For example unit testing, human testing, automated web testing.

Response: Follow the current standards for unit testing in place and human testing as part of https://texreg.sos.state.tx.us/public/readtac$ext.TacPage?sl=R&app=9&p_dir=&p_rloc=&p_tloc=&p_ploc=&pg=1&p_tac=&ti=1&pt=10&ch=213&rl=30 the software life cycle – automated web testing would be great but would need to be included in the proposal.

43. Will the internal team be responsible for validating the performance and scalability of the system; given that the external team will not have access to production level data?

Response: Yes

44. Is A&M System looking for staffing services, consulting services, or both?

Response: Per section 1.1, this is for staff augmentation services as stated in section 3. This is not for consulting services.

45. Is A&M System looking for firms to provide in-house personnel or for firms to recruit consultants to perform the requested services under this contract?

Response: The awarded firm is to provide personnel to perform the services. This is not for recruiting services.

46. Can firms comply with the requirements enlisted under section 3.4 Vendor Qualifications through a subcontractor?

Response: No

47. Can firms comply with the experience requirements enlisted under section 3.4 Vendor Qualifications by demonstrating the requested experience/expertise in the private sector?

Response: Yes

48. Can firms provide references from ongoing contracts/projects?

Response: See response to question #8 above.

49. Can firms provide commercial references?

Response: See response to question #9 above.

50. If the proposed personnel are no longer available, can firms replace them with equally qualified personnel after the award?

Response: See response to question #15 above.

51. How many references must firms provide along with every proposed personnel’s resume?

Response: References are intended for the company and not for each individual resume.

52. Are electronic signatures allowed?

Response: Yes, see the NOTE in section 2.4 of the RFP.

53. Could A&M System please clarify if firms can provide the same client contact information requested under section 4.2.4 Compliance with Mandatory Requirements as one of the references requested under section 4.2.8 References?

Response: Yes

54. Under section 3.4 Vendor Qualifications, subsection “Required” states that vendors must have 5 years of providing User design experience expertise and at least 5 years of experience providing Quality Assurance expertise. Could A&M System please clarify how firms can demonstrate these requirements (case studies, examples of placements, etc.)?

Response: Examples of placement, references, and potentially other software development UIX projects delivered.

55. Is it mandatory for firms to have previous experience with similar projects for higher education agencies/systems to bid on this solicitation?

Response: See response to question #18 above.

56. Could A&M System please clarify whether the requirements enlisted under section 3.4 Vendor Qualifications must be met by the firm or by the consultants who will be placed to perform the requested services under this solicitation?

Response: See response to question #12 above.

57. Are firms requested to provide resumes and rates for each level (senior, intermediate, junior) for all the roles/positions requested under this engagement?

Response: Yes

58. Section 4.3, Cost Proposal states: “The format and sub-sections of the Cost Proposal shall conform to the tabbed spreadsheet structure (Attachment A) outlined below.” Could A&M System please indicate where firms can find Attachment A?

Response: See response to question #17 above.

59. Under section 4.2.3 Executive Summary, the following is requested: “Documentation of why the service provider(s) assembled in the proposal are best qualified to perform the work required herein.” Could A&M System please elaborate further on what type of documentation vendors must provide to suffice this point?

Response: References and a company profile detailing past successes and any other documentation that might support your case as a provider of services.

60. Are there scores for the evaluation criteria? If yes, could you please disclose it?

Response: That information will not be disclosed.

61. In case firms are submitting confidential information in the response, is it required to provide a redacted version?

Response: No, not at this time. You can simply mark confidential within the document. Refer to section 5 G. for additional information.

62. Could A&M System please confirm what is the suggested font size and type for the proposal?

Response: There are no requirements or suggestions on font size or type.

63. Is the estimated budget meant for all the vendors collectively? If so, what is the allocated budget for each vendor?

Response: Refer to the response for questions #1 and 20.

64. If a vendor exhausts their assigned budget, can the purchase order (PO) be extended with additional funds?

Response: This question is not applicable as written.

65. Are the vendors allowed to subcontract at the Task Order Level?

Response: No

66. Please confirm if the staff required will work across the Maestro Project Modules and if the professionals are needed on-site.

Response: Yes, they will work across the Modules and no professionals will be needed on site.

67. The agency mentions that they intend to utilize the internal resources. Please confirm if the agency intends to award a vendor who has a capacity to augment the staffing needs using their internal employees and not by conducting recruitment process.

Response: See response to question #14 above.

68. In the Section 3.3.2 please provide more information with the type of internal and external resources by detailing the definition of each. If by internal resource the agency is referring to their own employees or vendor’s internal resources. And, by external resources, the agency is detailing about the resources the vendor will provide by conducting the sourcing and recruitment process.

Response: Internal resources are specifically Texas A&M Universities internal team. External resources are those provided by the awarded Respondent.

69. Please provide the project budget under this contract.

Response: See response to question #1 above.

70. Is there any local preference?

Response: No

71. Upon receiving the contract award intent, there is a possibility that the proposed personnel are unavailable. In such event, can the vendor propose a replacement to the proposed personnel?

Response: See response to question #15 above.

72. Is this a new contract? If not, please provide more details about the previous contract including the incumbent vendors, and the spending on the contract.

Response: Yes

73. As per our understanding, this a project in execution and the agency is looking for a vendor to augment the staffing needs of the project while ensuring the project management tasks too.

Please confirm the need and suggest the alternate understanding if it is not correct.

Response: No, the project management will be done by the internal team but the vendor can propose a project management resource if they find it is necessary for the expedited delivery of the development tasks.

74. Please provide more details on what does the agency expect under the response of Section 4.2.7- Proposed Roles and Responsibilities, since we have limited knowledge regarding the project in execution.

Response: A list of proposed available resources and to make up a contained software team for example: Two teams that contain 1 Business Analyst, 3 Software Developers and a Test analyst each that will work together.

75. Can we provide same references in the Section 4.2.4 and 4.2.8?

Response: Yes

END OF ADDENDUM NO. 1