Response to Offeror Questions document.pdf
PDF 219 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 26RFP19836
- Issued by
- Harding County, South Dakota
About this file
This is a Response to Offeror Questions document for the South Dakota Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources (DANR) regarding RFP 26RFP19836 to develop a Wetland Screening Tool and associated products. The project requires development of predictive wetland models specific to Level III ecoregions, a publicly accessible web-based interactive map displaying wetland locations and extent across South Dakota, and data-sharing capabilities for flood and water quality modeling. Deliverables include polygon layers showing wetland boundaries with associated attribute tables, integration with Microsoft Power BI, ESRI, and Tableau platforms, machine learning capabilities for ongoing model improvement, and comprehensive training for DANR staff and program partners. The contract term is two years with an option for one additional one-year renewal at the State's discretion, with a target go-live date of June 2027 for the public-facing screening tool.
Key clarifications from the response indicate that third-party datasets must remain accessible throughout the website's life, licensing should be through the state's enterprise agreement with hosting in the state environment, and accuracy is paramount with periodic model retraining required. The contractor is responsible for all service costs including third-party software licenses, hosting, maintenance, and post-implementation support. Data storage must remain within continental United States data centers with no offshore access permitted, and the State retains exclusive ownership of all data created. Applications must be developed in C#, ASP.NET, MVC, UWP, or WPF frameworks and comply with South Dakota Information Technology Security policies including AES256 encryption, multifactor authentication, and Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2 Level AA compliance. Tribal lands should be included to the fullest extent possible, and a separate contract may be required for protracted, ongoing model training and retraining activities.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Security and Vendor Questions v3.3 Production.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFP Document.pdf | ||
| DANR RFP Wetland Screening Tool IT Clause Appendix B.docx | DOCX document |
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
South Dakota Wetland Screening Tool- 26RFP19836
1.
Third party datasets must remain accessible to the extent the publicly throughout the life of the website.
2.
model will be evaluated (ie:
verifying there are wetlands there; also looking at what are known wetlands and comparing it to what the model ide This selected
3.
: a method will be developed to , the wetlands will be mapped, a website will be also program partners/interested individuals maintenance for issues that may come up throughout the contract term.
periodic “training” of the model the map, and website maintenance will treated as post-
Yes. Licensing should be through our enterprise agreement and hosted in
5.
is using
6. : -there are .
current web the general public access to an accurate map of all wetlands throughout the state of South Dakota will be considered.
8. - - :
Yes.
9.
Documented access to these data sources and products is acceptable where the data the data work Neither a statewide or regional dataset nor GIS layer have been developed.
11. :
there is a desire to develop a means to collect or obtain site- and train models in the future, this process has not been developed.
12. :
paramount concern.
throughout all of South Dakota.
13. :
While there is no stated standards found in the Wetland Mapping Standard ( -STD- -2009 while also providing for landowner privacy.
Yes, June 2027 is the desired “go live” date for the public facing screening tool. other deliverables such as
, training, 15.
an convey product feature availability and associated cost.
16. -consist of a polygon layer showing wetland boundaries and a table of plain wetlands in the
18. -
No.
19.
A training cadence has not been established or determined. Likewise, factors driving this cadence have not been determined.
21. -
-going maintenance.
22.
a data portal, we
BIT
place that need a data exchange or mandate, though
23.
proprietary data /products are source those as needed.
Acceptability of datasets will be determined by the ability of those datasets to cost of that license should be included in the proposal.
25.
Yes. It can be done and we already have the licensing to accommodate them if they want to go that route. If it is a GIS system that they are having built it should be hosted in our environment.
26.
This is to be determined, but most likely in response to new data availability and the perceived need to improve accuracy.
28.
be found here:
site can be found here:
29.
provide to the selected .
31.
-meter
32.
33.
Yes.
The target go- -based map of all
(approximately 1 : on-going and interested party train on- and model training among other things . The 1-year extension is not
35.
While there are discuss their approach to accomplishing the two seemingly contradictory
-STD- - ding for landowner privacy.
36.
Yes, tribal lands should be included to the fullest extent possible.
to many program
Accuracy is paramount.
that will be used to recalibrate the model. A process to periodically gather, use and retrain the model w
. protracted, on-going training/re will be performed under a separate contract.
38. -
BIT will assign an architect to work with the vendor for the single sign-on
39.
Two separate proposals is likely the if one proposal encompassing both web-based map of acceptable if those models
Thresholds for acceptancy can be developed during the contract how best to obtain appropriate datasets for this purpose.
verifying the model, but prior
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .