Marathon QA 1.pdf
PDF 233 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 7172018
- Issued by
- Wisconsin
About this file
This is a Q&A document from Zuercher Technologies regarding Marathon County's City-County Information Technology Commission (CCITC) Request for Proposals for an IP-Based NG9-1-1 System replacement. The CCITC is seeking a qualified vendor to design and implement a new 911 system of the vendor's choice to replace the existing hosted solution currently provided by Frontier. The proposal submission deadline is Friday, August 10, 2018. The project requires vendors to provide design solutions for both call handling and a private network to support the system. Marathon County will provide wide-area network (WAN) connectivity and networking to a backup site, though the backup site location has not yet been determined. The current Marathon County 911 operation includes 8 stations with 6 used during normal staffing, and the county plans to add 4 additional stations in the near future, plus 4 stations in a mobile communications trailer. The system must integrate with the existing Superion CAD system and support radio/telephone headset integration at each answering position. Training requirements include 20 end users and 4 administrators.
Key technical specifications and current environment details include 1GB available bandwidth at Marathon County, backup battery power to be provided at the backroom and answering positions, and a current Frontier-hosted solution with no CAMA trunks on site. The ALI database is currently provided by Frontier, though the vendor response should indicate whether SALI (stand-alone local ALI) database provision is optional. Marathon County currently uses an unknown method for call recording (digital or analog) and intends to transition from the current Frontier hosted environment to SIP trunking or a state-provided ESInet in the future. Several specifications remained unknown at the time of the Q&A response, including the total number of circuit interfaces required, the exact number of administrative lines and phones, the backup site location, current call recording methods, NTP time source clock specifications, and whether the county desires a geo-diverse solution with specifics on CAMA trunk and ALI circuit distribution across host sites.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFP Marathon-County NG9-1-1 Final.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
In regards to the City-County Information Technology Commission (CCITC) request for proposals for a Marathon County IP-Based NG9-1-1 System, Zuercher Technologies has the following questions:
• Section I Solicitation states, “the vendor will need to provide a design for a call handling solution and a private network to support the proposed solution.” Will the CCITC confirm that the wide-area network will be provided by Marathon County? Yes, CCITC will provide WAN connectivity.
• Page 5, Section B. Submission of Proposals states that proposals must be received by CCITC on Friday, August 3, 2018; however, all other mentions throughout the RFP indicate that Friday, August 10th is the due date. Will the CCITC please confirm that the RFP due date is Friday, August 10, 2018? Yes, Friday August 10th.
• Page 9, Section H. Costs of the RFP states that “vendor shall present the costs individually for each of the 4 entities.” Other additional references to the “individual counties” are made throughout the RFP. Will the CCITC please confirm that vendors only need to provide costs for Marathon County 911 in response to this RFP? Yes, only Marathon County
• Will the CCITC confirm that admin integration to the phone system listed in the chart in Section V Current Situation (page 14 of the RFP) is a requirement? Yes
• With reference to Section VI, B. System Telephone Circuit Interfaces, will the CCITC provide the total number of lines (interfaces) at Marathon County for each of the following bullet points in this section: 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Unknown
• With reference to Section VI, C. System Remote ALI Retrieval Interface, does the CCITC expect the vendor to provide the SALI (stand-alone local ALI) database? This is optional
• Section VIII, B. Administrative Local PBX Functionality, item 1 states, “XX extensions should be provided…”.
Will the CCITC provide the number of administrative lines and number of administrative phones for the front office operation of CCITC? Unknown at this time
• Will the CCITC please confirm the total number of positions at Marathon County that are required as part of the response for the actual installation? Please also confirm the number of backup positions and positions with a phone only. We have 8 stations currently, 6 are used at normal staffing. We hope toad 4 additional stations in the near future. These 4 are in addition to the 4 in the mobile communications trailer.
• Will the CCITC provide the location of the backup site and confirm that networking to the site will be provided by the CCITC? The location has not been determined. Yes, CCITC can provide networking to the site.
• Will a KVM switch (keyboard/mouse arbitrator) be required? No
• Will the CCITC confirm that a radio/telephone headset integration is required at each answering position?
Yes
• Will the CCITC confirm the CAD system currently in use? Superion
• Will the CCITC provide backup battery power at the backroom and each answering position? Yes
• How does Marathon County record calls? o Digital or analog? Unknown o Position-based, line-based, or both?
• Will the CCITC provide the number of CAMA trunks that serve Marathon County in the current hosted environment? Is it expected that this number will grow in the next 5 years and/or be replaced by SIP trunking or a state-provided ESInet? Frontier hosted solution, no CAMA trunks on site. We are hopeful that this will move to SIP
• How many end users will need training? 20
• How many administrators will need training? 4
• Who is the ALI database provider? Is the ALI database local or hosted through Frontier currently? Frontier
• Is the ALI database NENA compliant? Unknown
• Will the CCITC provide the make and model of the NTP time source clock that will be provided? Unknown
• Will the CCITC provide the available bandwidth at Marathon County? 1GB
• Does the CCITC desire to purchase a geo-diverse solution? How many CAMA trunks would be terminated at each host site? How many ALI circuits will be available at each host site? Unknown, would be determined once secondary location is determined.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .