OCPF Online Training RFQ Q and A.pdf
PDF 496 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Treasurer Online Training Course
- Solicitation number
- BD-23-1383-1383C-1383L-77213
- Issued by
- Massachusetts
About this file
This document is a Questions and Answers (Q&A) for a Request for Quote (RFQ) issued by the Office of Campaign and Political Finance (OCPF) of Massachusetts for the development of an online training course for campaign finance treasurers. The RFQ covers the development of a single course with branched content for different types of political committees, as well as the implementation of a Learning Management System (LMS) to host and administer the training. The course is required to be available in English, Spanish, and Portuguese. OCPF estimates there are currently 2,500 political committees registered, with a potential of 3,500 users accessing the system at any given time. OCPF will provide subject matter experts and training materials to the selected vendor to develop the course content.
Regarding pricing and contracting, OCPF prefers an off-the-shelf authoring tool that can be maintained by OCPF staff or a vendor through a support agreement. The RFQ does not mention any set-asides, incumbents, or specific funding sources, but it does indicate that the selected vendor will be responsible for integrating the training completion data with OCPF's internal systems.
View the file
Other files
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
Updated 7/19/2022 12:36 PM
Vendor Questions and Answers
OCPF Online Treasurer Training Course
Q1. For Part 1, do you have subject matter experts for which we can interview, record if needed and can provide supporting assets for course development such as Powerpoint, policy documents and anything else needed? I am trying to gauge how much writing we need to do from scratch versus if this is more of a service to take existing content and make it beautiful against the requirements in the RFP? Either is fine, but it will drive how I price this.
A1. The project is being developed essentially from scratch. However, we have subject matter experts and training documents which can be used to develop the script of the course.
Q2. While Part 1 is asking for a single course to be developed, your use of "branched content" has different meanings for me. When you say branch to job-specific content, do you want this part of a single course where the user selects a job type and content is presented in the course? An alternate interpretation is job-specific content is a micro-learning lesson that becomes available after the core training is done. For example, we have anti-harassment courseware that covers the common topics that is universal for this sort of training and then has micro-learning lessons to deal with state specific details such as what the law says for those states with mandated anti-harassment training like California and Connecticut. Still another option is to build a custom learning path for the course, although a better term here is a learning program, where the course is built as a series of micro-lessons linked to answers to a questionnaire. In this approach, they user answers questions, questions might lead to more questions, and ultimately an question is linked to a learning module. When the questionnaire is completed, a custom learning program is created exposing only the lessons they need to take. In addition the answers to the questionnaire are kept showing the date, device and answers selected so in the event it is ever needed, you can refer back to how the questions were answered. In our world branching might be simple or might have additional needs to be considered, so any insight as to what is meant by branching will be helpful to scope this out properly.
A2. There will be a general course regarding statutes, regulations and procedures that are common to all political committee treasurers. There are different filing schedules or methods of filing for some committees. The branched content would involve the schedules or methods of filing for the different types of committees. At this time, we expect there to be additional five branches – legacy, legislative, IEPACS, LPCs, municipal.
Q3. For Part 1, what languages do you need to support?
A3. We anticipate needing the course to be available in English, Spanish, and Portuguese. We expect there to be one course with translations from English into Spanish and Portuguese provided via subtitles and/or voiceovers. Separate quotations for multiple or additional translations would be encouraged.
Q4. For Part 2, if self registration is used, besides whatever fields you need for self-registration, are there any other controls desired such as a limited use authorization/subscription code your office gives out or approval workflows?
A4. In order to access the online training, the political committee treasurer would have to sign in to their OCPF account to get to the link for the training module.
Q5. For Part 2, If self registration is not used, can you please outline how you would want users to get into the LMS?
A5. See A4 above.
Q6. For Part 2, is there any integration need to external systems to pass compliance, utilization, engagement data? If yes, can you describe wants here please? Of course a good LMS can give you excellent reporting and KPIs and this is more to understand if integration is needed to better define scope.
A6. It is expected that the data from the LMS could be imported to the OCPF account indicating that the training has been completed. For example, an Excel spreadsheet containing completion data that could be imported to the OCPF system. Suggestions for alternative methods would be encouraged.
Q7. For Part 2, how many users will take the training over the course of the contract?
(needed to properly size server(s) for compute capacity.)
A7. Each political committee treasurer must take training within thirty days of appointment and then every two years thereafter. There are currently approximately 2,500 political committees registered with OCPF. This number fluctuates as new committees form or old committees dissolve. We suggest planning on 3,500 users at any given time.
Q8. For Part 2, what is the most number of users to have access the current system in a single day? (needed to properly size server for compute concurrency.)
A8. See A7 above. Once the online training module is launched, we anticipate significant use as the current political committee treasurers come into compliance. Current treasurers would not have to use the system again for two years. Over the course of the year, new committees will form and the treasurers of those committees will use the system. At the same time, some committees will dissolve and those treasurers will no longer need access to the system.
Q9. For Part 2, is the current course and user environment available for review? If yes, can you please provide a URL as a user for access and review.
A9. The current course will be sent to the Vendor by email.
Q10. Will you be providing us with a storyboard or do we need to develop a storyboard for the course? (Either is fine and just goes to scope)
A10. OCPF will provide materials that the vendor can be use to develop a storyboard.
Q11. The RFP mentions branching to content for additional roles and if I read it correctly approximately 10 minutes +- of content per role. How many roles are there?
A11. There will be a general course regarding statutes, regulations and procedures that are common to all political committee treasurers. There are different filing schedules or methods of filing for some committees. The branched content would involve the schedules or methods of filing for the different types of committees. At this time, we expect there to be additional five branches – legacy, legislative, IEPACS, LPCs, municipal.
Q12. There is an authoring tool component mentioned as a requirement. Once the course is delivered would you want to take on responsibility for changes to the course or would you want us to maintain course maintenance with you having access to the content for approval prior to promotion to production?
A12. OCPF would prefer a supportable off-the-shelf authoring tool that could be used by OCPF staff and/or a vendor through a maintenance and support agreement.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .