ESBD_File_347858_Addendum #1 .pdf

(1/31/24)

ADDENDUM NO. 001

To: All Proposers

From: Charles Cavanaugh, Buyer

Re: REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL # RFP-24-001

The purpose of this addendum is to provide a listing of written questions about this RFP and the answers to those questions. This information is being provided to assist proposers in preparing their responses.

GENERAL

1. QUESTION:

RFP Reference:1.3- 1.3.1- [Integration with Texas Wildfire Risk Assessment] (Smart Cities) Question: could you elaborate on the anticipated depth and complexity of this integration? Particularly, we are interested in understanding if there are specific data exchange formats or APIs that should be given priority. For instance, are formats like GeoJSON or APIs following RESTful principles essential for seamless data communication and interoperability? How critical is the real-time data exchange capability between the two systems, and are there any specific performance benchmarks or latency thresholds that the integration should meet?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks forward to evaluating all proposed solutions. Performance benchmarks and thresholds may be determined during project discovery. Texas A&M Forest Service will work with the development team to ensure data accessibility.

2. QUESTION:

RFP Reference: 1.3- 1.3.2- [User Experience and Accessibility] Question: Could you provide further insights on the specific accessibility standards the application should meet, particularly in alignment with the Texas Administrative Code (TAC) 206 Subchapter C? Furthermore, are there certain compliance levels within the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), such as WCAG 2.1 AA or AAA, that are crucial for ensuring broad accessibility? Would you prioritize certain aspects of accessibility, such as screen reader compatibility, keyboard navigation, or contrast ratios, to cater to a diverse range of users with varying abilities?

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL # RFP-24-001 ADDENDUM #001

ANSWER:

Refer to section 2.1.1.2 in the RFP (Texas Administrative Code (TAC) 206 Subchapter C).

Texas A&M is committed to achieving a balance between geospatial requirements and inclusivity, and we are dedicated to finding solutions to make our applications accessible for all users. While TEXAS A&M FOREST SERVICE is dedicated to ensuring accessibility, we acknowledge the challenges that the geospatial nature of this application may present for visually impaired users. Despite limitations, we're open to exploring alternative solutions to enhance accessibility without compromising core features.

3. QUESTION:

RFP Reference:1.3- 1.3.3- [Engaging and Educative Features] Question: Are there particular formats or approaches, such as immersive video tutorials, interactive quizzes, or scenario-based learning modules, that you believe would significantly enhance user engagement and knowledge transfer?

How crucial is the adaptability of these educational components to different user groups, ranging from wildfire professionals to community members?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks forward to evaluating all proposed solutions. By placing emphasis on the development of Community Wildfire Protection plans, we aim to create an educational experience through the collaboration of all stakeholders involved in the process. In doing so, the resulting application will provide those involved in the process a learning opportunity to better understand the risks posed to their community by wildfires. It will also help them identify available resources in the event of a wildfire threat and adopt proactive measures to effectively mitigate those risks. The application shall also be engaging, encouraging the commitment of diverse stakeholders and subject matter experts, which will be essential to ensure the project’s continuity. Taking this into account, the application shall provide a proper interface to track activity and project status.

4. QUESTION:

RFP Reference: 1.3- 1.3.5- [Scalability and Performance Requirements] Question: is it possible to provide specific parameters around the scalability requirements?

We are particularly interested in understanding the expected number of users accessing the system simultaneously during peak wildfire events. This insight is crucial for ensuring the tool's architecture is robust enough to handle such scenarios efficiently. Besides, are there particular performance benchmarks you expect in terms of data processing and load handling? Do you envisage the need for high-capacity cloud solutions like AWS or Azure to manage large-scale data loads and provide real-time responsiveness?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks forward to evaluating all proposed solutions. Performance benchmarks and thresholds may be determined during project discovery. While we anticipate normal performance under standard usage, our goal is to ensure the application can handle a large user base, manage regular data loads, and ensure real-time responsiveness. The number of users may vary across projects, depending on the size and significance of the focus area.

https://texreg.sos.state.tx.us/public/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=4&ti=1&pt=10&ch=206

5. QUESTION:

RFP Reference:2.1- 2.1.1.5 - [Data and Mapping Integration] Question: We seek further details on the specific types of geospatial data and functionalities that are critical to this integration. Are there certain categories of geospatial data, such as topographical layers or historical fire data, that are essential?

Are functionalities like real-time data feeds, interactive map layers, or custom geospatial analysis tools vital for the integration?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks forward to evaluating all proposed solutions. Performance benchmarks and thresholds may be determined during project discovery. Texas A&M Forest Service is primarily interested in sharing the generated data with external applications such MS Office and ArcGIS Online for additional analysis.

6. QUESTION:

RFP Reference:1.3- 1.3.6- [Security and Compliance] Question: Are there particular protocols or compliance benchmarks, such as the ISO 27001 standards for information security management or NIST cybersecurity frameworks, that are deemed critical for this project?

Also, could you clarify if compliance with any specific federal or state-level data security regulations, such as HIPAA for health data or FISMA for federal data, is required?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks forward to evaluating all proposed solutions. This section refers to ensuring secure access to the application and data protection standards. It is imperative that all application data, including information pertaining to registered users, be comprehensively protected, and held to the highest industry standards. This includes implementing measures to safeguard sensitive information, ensuring the integrity of data, and adhering to established protocols for data security and protection.

7. QUESTION:

RFP Reference: 2.1-2.1.2.1- [Focus Area Manager Component] Question: We seek detailed clarification on the envisioned data visualization capabilities. Are there particular types of visualization tools or techniques that you prioritize for presenting comprehensive statistics and data analyses?

Would advanced visualization formats such as interactive heat maps, dynamic statistical charts, or layered geographical information systems (GIS) be integral to this component?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks forward to evaluating all proposed solutions. Specific requirements may be determined during project discovery.

8. QUESTION:

RFP Reference:2.1- 2.1.2.2- [Strategies Manager Component] Question: What would be the level of detail and granularity required for organizing these strategies? To elaborate, is there a need for features that allow for categorization based on various risk factors, geographical areas, or community impact levels?

How essential is the integration of decision-support mechanisms?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks

9. QUESTION:

RFP Reference: 2.1- 2.1.2.3-[Collaborative Engagement Tool] Question: Are there particular types of geospatial data representations, such as detailed heat maps, layered GIS data, or interactive spatial analysis tools, that you consider vital for this component of the tool? Could you as well specify if there are expectations for the tool to support real-time data integration and visualization, for example, live updates of fire spread or resource deployment?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks

10. QUESTION:

RFP Reference: 2.1- 2.1.2.4-[Plan Writer Component] Question: Are there preferred formats, such as Microsoft Word or PDF, for exporting the Community Wildfire Protection Plans?

Both Microsoft Word and PDF.

11. QUESTION:

Are there any predefined templates or content guidelines that need to be adhered to, which might include specific headings, sections, or formatting standards?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks

12. QUESTION:

RFP Reference:2.1- 2.1.2.5- [Implementation Manager Component] Question: Could you furnish more insight into the desired project management approaches and tools for this feature? Specifically, are there certain methodologies, such as Agile, Scrum, or Waterfall, that you would prefer for managing the various phases of wildfire mitigation planning projects within the tool?

ANSWER:

This functionality shall be designed to identify specific actions within the focus area that will contribute to achieving the objectives outlined in the plan. Examples of such actions may include fuel treatments, community events, news/media releases, and more. The application shall provide an interface to prioritize them and capture all relevant information related to each of these actions, including their details, completion date, status, and other pertinent information.

13. QUESTION:

Are there expectations for incorporating specific project tracking functionalities, like Gantt charts, milestone tracking, or resource allocation tools, that would enhance the management and oversight capabilities of this component?

Specific requirements may be determined during project discovery.

14. QUESTION:

RFP Reference:2.2- 2.1.2.2.6- [Dashboards] Question: Could you explicate the particular key metrics or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that are deemed essential for inclusion in these dashboards? Particularly, are there certain indicators related to wildfire risk levels, resource allocation, community engagement, or environmental factors that should be prominently displayed?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks

15. QUESTION:

RFP Reference:2.2- 2.1.2.2.6- [Real-time Monitoring via Dashboards,] Question: Could you specify the requirements for response time metrics and data refresh rates that are critical for the real-time monitoring features of these dashboards?

For instance, is there a need for the tool to support near-instantaneous data refresh rates for dynamic wildfire situations, and are there thresholds for data latency that we need to consider?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks

16. QUESTION:

RFP Reference: 2.1-2.1.1.7.1.2- [API Functionality] Question: Could you elucidate the specific third-party services or systems for which seamless API integration is paramount, particularly focusing on geospatial data services or emergency response systems? Are there predefined data exchange protocols or formats, such as JSON or XML, that are crucial for facilitating this integration?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks

17. QUESTION:

Is it the contractor's responsibility to monitor and document treatments/unplanned disturbance and adjust fuelscapes based on landscape changes?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks forward to evaluating all proposed solutions. Specific requirements may be determined during project discovery.

Texas A&M Forest Service has recently updated the Texas Wildfire Risk Assessment and is planning to use the outputs derived from this effort as the initial baseline.

18. QUESTION:

Is the contractor required to re-run fire modeling when there are adjustments made to the fuelscape?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks

19. QUESTION:

How frequently are data inputs and fire modeling expected to be executed and integrated into the product?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks

20. QUESTION:

What is the preferred fire model for this project?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks

21. QUESTION:

Are there plans to allocate additional annual budgets for the management of fuelscape data, refresh costs, and tool maintenance expenses?

ANSWER:

This work would be handled as a separate project and not included within the scope of the RFP.

22. QUESTION:

Which fuelscape rulesets are expected to guide the incorporation of changes?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks

23. QUESTION:

Are there specific regulations or considerations regarding intellectual property and ownership rights?

Please see Texas A&M Forest Service Terms and Conditions. Revised 2/18/2020 sect. 25.

24. QUESTION:

How does the state manage software licensing agreements and protect intellectual property?

ANSWER:

It is Texas A&M Forest Services’ intent to completely own the resulting application. A solution requiring recurring licensing will not be acceptable.

25. QUESTION:

Would Texas A&M entertain the possibility of adopting an off-the-shelf solution that fulfills all the requirements outlined in this RFP?

ANSWER:

It is Texas A&M Forest Services’ intent to completely own the resulting application. A solution requiring recurring licensing will not be acceptable.

26. QUESTION:

If considering an off-the-shelf solution, is there flexibility in the IP ownership as specified in the terms and conditions, section 25?

Not applicable.

27. QUESTION:

Could you provide clarification on the expected frequency of data updates and the level of responsibility for developing the following: Fire Hazard, Fire Risk, Vegetation Metrics, HVRAs

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks

28. QUESTION:

Can you describe the anticipated level of risk modeling within dense urban environments (structure-to-structure transmission) as part of this RFP?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks

29. QUESTION:

Question: Programming Language and Framework Requirements: Are there specific programming languages or development frameworks that the Texas A&M Forest Service prefers for the Wildfire Community Hazard Mitigation Planning Tool? (For example, .net for server side, Angular for client side, and PostgreSQL for database)?

ANSWER:

FRONTEND

• Presentation Layer: HTML, CSS, JavaScript

• Framework Library: Vue.js 3x

• Frontend framework: Boostrap, OpenLayers

BACKEND

• Database Management: PostgreSQL, SQL Server

• Backend Framework: ASP.NET, .NET Core, .NET 5, or later

GIS Server: GeoServer, ArcGIS Server, MapServer

30. QUESTION:

Where should the application be hosted? Does the Texas A&M Forest Service have any specific requirements for hosting providers or environments (e.g., cloud-based, on-premises, specific cloud vendors)? If AWS is permitted, are there specific sub services that developers cannot use, such as AWS Lambda or AWS Gateway?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has hosting capacity. However, we are trying to determine if vendor hosting is financially feasible. Reference RFP section 2.1.3 & pricing schedule optional line-item number 1. Texas A&M Forest Service doesn’t have particular preferences on hosting locations or vendors. Specific requirements may be determined

31. QUESTION:

What are the specifications and requirements of the Texas Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal and other systems the tool needs to integrate with? This includes understanding the APIs, data formats, and protocols used by these systems.

a. APIs to be used for integration. Please provide all details possible about the APIs, including the number of API calls, any throttling to be considered when pushing data to these other systems, and any additional information available.

a. Access to third-party systems. Please confirm the selected developer will receive dev or stg access to these systems during the first 60 days of the project for testing and refinement of integrations.

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks forward to evaluating all proposed solutions. Performance benchmarks and thresholds may be determined during project discovery. Texas A&M Forest Service will work with the development team to ensure data accessibility.

32. QUESTION:

What are the specific security standards and compliance requirements to which the application must adhere? Are there any specific industry or governmental regulations that must be considered?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks forward to evaluating all proposed solutions. This section refers to ensuring secure access to the application and data protection standards. It is imperative that all application data, including information pertaining to registered users, be comprehensively protected and held to the highest industry standards. This includes implementing measures to safeguard sensitive information, ensuring the integrity of data, and adhering to established protocols for data security and protection.

33. QUESTION:

What are the expected scalability needs? Are there specific performance benchmarks or metrics that the application should meet?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks forward to evaluating all proposed solutions. Performance benchmarks and thresholds may be determined during project discovery. While we anticipate normal performance under standard usage, our goal is to ensure the application can handle a large user base, manage regular data loads, and ensure real-time responsiveness. The number of users may vary across projects, depending on the size and significance of the focus area.

34. QUESTION:

Are there detailed accessibility standards beyond the general TAC 206 Subchapter C requirement and those specified in RFP sections 2.1.1.2 and 5.5.4?

Refer to section 2.1.1.2 in the RFP (Texas Administrative Code (TAC) 206 Subchapter C).

Texas A&M is committed to achieving a balance between geospatial requirements and inclusivity, and we are dedicated to finding solutions to make our applications accessible for all users. While TEXAS A&M FOREST SERVICE is dedicated to ensuring accessibility, we acknowledge the challenges that the geospatial nature of this application may present for visually impaired users. Despite limitations, we're open to exploring alternative solutions to enhance accessibility without compromising core features.

35. QUESTION:

Are there any user interface/user experience guidelines beyond those specified in RFP section 2.1.1.6 (Texas A&M AgriLife website guidelines) that need to be followed?

User interface/user experience guidelines may be determined during project discovery.

36. QUESTION:

How should data and mapping features be shared and integrated with external applications, particularly ArcGIS Online? What are the specific functionalities expected in this regard?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service has not established minimum operating thresholds and looks forward to evaluating all proposed solutions. Performance benchmarks and thresholds may be determined during project discovery. Texas A&M Forest Service is primarily interested in sharing the generated data with external applications such MS Office and ArcGIS Online for additional analysis.

37. QUESTION:

Post-launch, what are the expectations for maintenance and support? Are there specific SLAs (Service Level Agreements) or response times that need to be adhered to?

ANSWER:

Optional line items 2 & 3 on the pricing schedule will be used as needed for training support & maintenance.

38. QUESTION:

What are the requirements for disaster recovery and data backup? How frequently should data be backed up, and what are the recovery time objectives?

ANSWER:

We back up (replicate) servers x2 daily, we also have backups onsite and offsite that run weekly, all files and data storage supplied through Microsoft (OneDrive/SharePoint) are housed in the MS cloud atmosphere and available for recovery from any version.

39. QUESTION:

Are there specific requirements for mobile and cross-platform compatibility? What specific devices and browsers must be supported?

https://texreg.sos.state.tx.us/public/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=4&ti=1&pt=10&ch=206

To the extent possible, Texas A&M Forest Services goal is for the application to be compatible with all browsers in Android and IOS mobile devices.

40. QUESTION:

What level of training and documentation is required for the Texas A&M Forest Service staff and other stakeholders?

ANSWER:

The vendor is responsible for ensuring that Texas A&M Forest Service development team fully understands how to operate the application. Cost for training Texas A&M Forest Service development team should be included in line item 1 “Development of Application” in the pricing schedule. If additional training to stakeholders is needed, hours will be paid from line items 2 & 3 from the optional sections in the Pricing Schedule.

41. QUESTION:

Are there additional legal or regulatory compliance issues specific to Texas or the domain of forest services and wildfire mitigation that need to be considered in the development of the application?

No

42. QUESTION:

Would any aspects of the solution need to support an offline mode?

No

43. QUESTION:

a. Are there requirements for implementing Single Sign-On (SSO) for the Wildfire

Community Hazard Mitigation Planning Tool? If so, does the Texas A&M Forest Service have a preferred SSO protocol, such as Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML), OAuth, or another? This will be handled by the Texas Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal administration interface.

b. Will the application need to integrate with any existing identity provider or directory service for authentication, like Active Directory, LDAP, or other institutional identity management systems?

This will be handled by the Texas Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal administration interface.

44. QUESTION:

For role management and access control within the application, are there specific requirements or guidelines that must be followed? Should the application have its own role and access management system, or will it rely on the role definitions and permissions provided by the authenticating system (like an external directory service)?

Access control will be handled by the Texas Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal administration interface. Preferably role management will be handled internally within the application interface.

45. QUESTION:

If the application is expected to handle role management internally, could you provide details on the types of user roles and access levels required? For instance, are there specific roles such as administrators, editors, and viewers, and what are the expected permissions and restrictions for each role?

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service looks forward to evaluating all proposed solutions.

Performance benchmarks and thresholds may be determined during project discovery.

46. QUESTION:

a. Could you provide an estimate of the expected number of users who will be accessing the Wildfire Community Hazard Mitigation Planning Tool?

b. What is the anticipated maximum number of concurrent logged-in users at any given time? This information will help us ensure that the system is appropriately scaled for user demand.

While we anticipate normal performance under standard usage, our goal is to ensure the application can handle a large user base, manage regular data loads, and ensure real-time responsiveness. The number of users may vary across projects, depending on the size and significance of the focus area.

47. QUESTION:

Are there components of the Wildfire Community Hazard Mitigation Planning Tool that are intended to be publicly accessible without requiring user login? If so, could you detail these public features or sections?

No, this application will require users to login.

48. QUESTION:

For the public-facing aspects of the system, do we have an estimate or projection of the volume of public users or site visitors? This would assist in understanding the traffic demands and ensuring robustness for public engagement.

Not applicable.

49. QUESTION:

could you provide insights into the user demographics, such as technical proficiency, which could influence the design and usability (UX) of the system? This would help in tailoring the user experience to the specific needs of the user base.

ANSWER:

Texas A&M Forest Service intends to allow access to the general public, Texas A&M Forest Service staff and other state and federal partners, local community groups, government officials, professional hazard-mitigation planners, and wildland fire managers.

50. QUESTION:

Once the system is wireframed and the specifications are authored, can you tell us about the approval process and what stakeholders and timelines would be involved?

ANSWER:

Access control will be handled by the Texas Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal administration interface. Preferably role management will be handled internally within the application interface. Timelines will be further defined during discovery.

Stakeholders include the general public, Texas A&M Forest Service staff and other state and federal partners, local community groups, government officials, professional hazard-mitigation planners, and wildland fire managers.

51. QUESTION:

The Optional Line-Item table in the Pricing Schedule shows a quantity of 100 hours for the Senior Project Manager - Training Support and Maintenance (Line Item 2) and 250 hours for the Senior Software Engineer - Training Support and Maintenance (Line Item 3). Are we correct in assuming the optional line items commence upon launch and would recur annually? If so, for how many years do you anticipate this engagement will be required?

ANSWER:

No, these line items are optional. We are not guaranteeing to make an award on these line items.

52. QUESTION:

The Optional Line-Item table in the Pricing Schedule includes columns for Unit Price and Extended Price. For Line Item 1, does the Unit Price pertain to 1 month and the Extended Price pertain to 12 months? For Line Item 2, does the Unit Price pertain to 1 hour and the Extended Price pertain to 100 hours? For Line Item 3, does the Unit Price pertain to 1 hour and the Extended Price pertain to 250 hours?

ANSWER:

Please enter the price per unit in each highlighted box. The extension will calculate automatically.

53. QUESTION:

RFP Section 2.1.2.3 states, “… the tool will provide stakeholders with an interface to provide feedback and prioritize ideas.” Could you characterize which stakeholders will use this interface?

ANSWER:

Stakeholders include the general public, Texas A&M Forest Service staff and other state and federal partners, local community groups, government officials, professional hazard-mitigation planners, and wildland fire managers.

54. QUESTION:

It is helpful for us to know our audience in order to assist evaluators in making an informed decision. What are the positions of those that will be evaluating this proposal?

Texas A&M Forest Service cannot disclose evaluators.

55. QUESTION:

RFP Section 5.18 states, “Seller/Contractor will obtain and maintain at its own expense, and in its name, all necessary licenses and permits required to perform the services required herein.” Do such licenses include platform licenses such as those provided by Amazon, Adobe, and others, and is the contractor required to maintain these licenses in perpetuity? If so, how will these licensing costs be invoiced and paid?

The final application cannot have recurring licensing costs.

56. QUESTION:

Are proposed prime contractors that are certified by the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts as Texas Historically Underutilized Businesses (HUB) required to submit a completed HUB Subcontracting Plan.

Yes.

57. QUESTION:

RFP Section 1.1. RFP Text “Agreement / Contract shall mean the contractual agreement entered into between the Texas A&M Forest Service and the Seller as a result of this RFP. An agreement shall consist of the following documents, listed in order of precedence: TEXAS A&M FOREST SERVICE purchase order, this RFP, Texas A&M Forest Service Terms and Conditions, Vendor’s accepted response to this RFP.” Questions 57- 59.

In order for Esri (“Seller”) to provide Licenses/ Software and Professional Services, TFS will need to also agree to Seller’s Terms and Conditions that govern Seller’s Software and Seller’s provision of Professional Services. If certain exceptions are allowed, Seller can also agree to all non-conflicting terms under the RFP and the attached Terms and Conditions. Esri will include those requested exceptions (with alternate language) with the Proposal. ***Please see the list of exceptions further down in this document.

Please see the questions below regarding the Agreement/ Contract.

Will TFS agree to Seller’s Services Agreement terms ((Esri’s Master Agreement for Services (MSA)) that encompass the Seller’s terms regarding the provision of the specific types of Services (Time and Material, Firm Fixed Price, Esri Managed Cloud Services, and Training) that will include terms for invoicing, acceptance, and the provision of these types of Services? If so, the Those terms can be provided under a separate document or link.

ANSWER:

No, Texas A&M Forest Service will not allow exceptions to the Texas A&M Forest Service terms and conditions.

58. QUESTION:

For the terms that govern the purchase of License and Software, will TFS leverage the existing Software Master Agreement between Esri and the Texas A&M University, Agreement No. 00260782.0, formerly 335332?

No, pricing should be provided as outlined in the RFP and pricing schedule.

59. QUESTION:

If TFS’ answer to the above-listed questions is “no,” would TFS be willing to leverage the State of Texas Master Purchase Agreement (Esri Agreement No. 00298018.0/ State of TX DIR Contract No. DIR-CPO-4699) between Esri and The State of Texas, acting by and through the Department of Information Resources (“DIR”) effective July 18, 2022? If yes, Seller can agree to the terms under the RFP and the attached Terms and Conditions, with the exceptions listed further down.

No, pricing should be provided as outlined in the RFP and pricing schedule.

60. QUESTION:

RFP Section 1.3/1.3.1/ RFP Text “Compatible and integrated with the Texas Wildlife Risk Assessment.”

What is the technology behind the Texas Wildlife Risk Assessment Portal?

ANSWER:

FRONTEND

• Presentation Layer: HTML, CSS, JavaScript

• Framework Library: Vue.js 3x

• Frontend framework: Boostrap, OpenLayers

BACKEND

• Database Management: PostgreSQL, SQL Server

• Backend Framework: ASP.NET, .NET Core, .NET 5, or later

GIS Server: GeoServer, ArcGIS Server, MapServer

61. QUESTION:

RFP Section 1.3 Scope of Proposal. RFP Text “Successful seller/contractor shall develop an agile, geospatially enabled, web software application that is:”

What specific types of Services will be required under the Scope of Proposal? Example, Time and Materials (hourly consulting)? Managed Cloud Services? Deliverables-based Services under a Firm Fixed Price Model?

Deliverables-based Services under a Firm Fixed Price Model.

62. QUESTION:

RFP Section 2.1, 2.1.1.1, RFP Text “Is compatible with and fully integrated with the Texas Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal.”

Can the State describe what fully compatible means in this context? What type of integration with the Texas Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal is expected?

ANSWER:

In this context, "fully compatible" means the resulting application shall integrate seamlessly with the Texas Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal (TxWRAP). This involves users accessing the application directly from TxWRAP, integrating it into TxWRAP's Admin framework for user access management, and managing user registration and authentication within the existing TxWRAP’s operational processes for user management. This level of compatibility ensures a streamlined user experience and effective administration.

63. QUESTION:

RFP Section 2.1.1.6 Statement of Work, RFP Text “Follows the Texas A&M AgriLife website guidelines as outlined at this link:

Can the State provide an attachment of the Link? This link is not opening, and it’s difficult to be bound by a link that may change without the Proposer’s/ Seller’s knowledge.

https://agrilife.tamu.edu/website-training-resources/

64. QUESTION:

RFP Section 2.1.3.1 Service Level Agreement, RFP Text “Texas A&M Forest Services may consider entering into an SLA with Seller/Contractor for hosting, training, support, and maintenance. The SLA will encompass pricing for hosting of the application, training, support, and maintenance.”

Will the State accept an exception to this language with the language added below?

https://agrilife.tamu.edu/website-training-resources/

“Texas A&M Forest Services may consider entering into an SLA with Seller/Contractor for hosting, support, and maintenance. SLA’s will encompass support in maintenance that are within the Seller’s control and shall be mutually agreed to between the Parties.

Fees are dependent on the level of support requested.”

No, pricing needs to be provided as outlined in the RFP and Pricing Schedule.

65. QUESTION:

RFP Section 4.9 Terms and Conditions. RFP Text “The attached Texas A&M Forest Service Terms and Conditions revised 2/18/2020, and all other terms and conditions, and requirements contained in this RFP shall govern any purchase order issued as a result of this RFP. Additional or attached terms and conditions which are determined to be unacceptable to TEXAS A&M FOREST SERVICE may result in the disqualification of the proposal. Examples include, but are not limited to, liability for payment of taxes, subjugation to the laws of another State, and limitations to remedies.

Can you clarify if exceptions to specific terms is allowed?

Are exceptions to the following sections under the RFP allowed?

5.5 Warranties (Section 5.5.1)

5.7. Title, Risk of Loss, and Freight (Not applicable to Services that Esri will be providing).

5.8 Acceptance of Goods and Services

5.11 Reporting

5.18 License and Permits

Are exceptions to the attached Texas A&M Forest Service Terms and Conditions revised 2/18/2020 allowed?

1.Payment Terms

20. Records Retention

25. Work Made for Hire

None of these exceptions will be accepted.

66. QUESTION:

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

No, this application does not currently exist.

67. QUESTION:

If there is an incumbent, then are they bidding for this opportunity?

Not Applicable

68. QUESTION:

What is the percentage of HUB Goal?

26%

69. QUESTION:

If a proposer does not have a financial statement to share. Will this be a disqualification? How about if a proposer submits the financial statement after post-award? Is this acceptable?

ANSWER:

Proposers must provide financial statements if requested, such request would happen pre-award.

70. QUESTION:

What is the allocated for this RFP?

Texas A&M Forest Service is not releasing a budget for this project.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The person signing the Execution Of Offer for the RFP must also sign and date this addendum as requested below and return addendum with Proposal.

Addendum Received By: ________________________________ Date: __________

Contact Charles Cavanaugh @ 979-458-7383 if additional information is needed in regard to this Addendum.