RFP 25-020 Addendum 3 Questions Answers Final.pdf

SALEM AREA MASS TRANSIT DISTRICT

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS RFP 25-020

PROJECT MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE

ADDENDUM #3

Salem Area Mass Transit District is providing information as an Addendum to RFP 25-020.

The following changes, clarifications and SAMTD responses to questions posed to date are hereby provided to all proposers:

1. Question: Please note that the RFP lists three (3) different RFP numbers throughout the document.

Answer: We apologize for the confusion. The correct reference is RFP 25-020 Project Management Software. Please reference RFP 25-020 – Project Management Software in the subject line of your proposal.

2. In the RFP, you indicate scale to 30 users and 250 projects. Is this the total number of users or are there more? If there are more, how many more are expected?

We expect there to be only a maximum of 30 users of the software.

3. Have you had demonstrations of solutions and if so, which ones?

No. Demonstrations and interviews have not been scheduled.

4. How many staff will need to be trained for end user activities? Five

5. How many staff will need to be trained to handle the application administration? Five

6. No modification to code base – what if configurations do not support your business operations? Are you willing to change your process for a more “out of the box” type configuration? Proposers should suggest the best, most efficient way to support project management processes. The intent is for Cherriots PM processes to follow the design of the PM software.

7. For reporting, do you have PowerBI in place? Are staff trained on developing new reports?

No, we do not have a PowerBI. No, IT staff is not trained on developing new reports.

8. Will there be any migration of older / active projects? If so, what is the source system? Yes.

Google Sheets, Smartsheet, and MS Excel are the source programs used.

9. For integration with Tyler and Google sheets, will the Agency be responsible for their portion of the integration (i.e. The Tyler API;s)? Tyler Technologies will have a few API’s the contractor can try to work with.

10. Should we assume administrators are included within the 30 licenses? Or are they separate from end-user accounts? There will be only 5 administrators and the rest will be end-users.

11. The scope of work mentions the PM manual. Will you be sharing this with the proposers?

No. Proposers are to present your software’s PM capabilities. The hope is for your software to revise/enhance the existing PM Manual, so we don’t want to constrain your good ideas by sharing a document that may present technology barriers.

12. Can you describe the gaps and pain points between the smart sheets, and Microsoft project for the software you currently use? Cherriots is looking for a comprehensive solution that will centralize planning, scheduling, resource management, budget tracking, communication, risk assessment, and reporting. The platform will improve consistency, transparency, and efficiency across all projects, contracts, and purchases. Smartsheet and MS Project only provide scheduling, but we need something that can track budget, resources, risks, etc.

while also allowing for team collaboration and communication.

13. Do your projects focus solely on construction, or do they extend to other disciplines? Could you describe the types of projects for which this software will be utilized?” Our projects range from IT software and hardware acquisitions to construction projects. All divisions (IT, Communications, Safety & Security, Finance, Planning & Development, Operations, Maintenance, HR, and the General Manager’s Office) have projects that they will be using the software to organize.

14. License Model Preference:

RFP requests vendors describe named/per-seat/concurrent, etc. Please indicate any preference to ensure price comparability (e.g., named user vs concurrent) and whether contractor/consultant accounts count against the 30. The 30 users will all be named users, not concurrent.

15. Google Sheets “Project Control Plan” Integration:

Do you require read-only vs read-write integration? Any specific worksheets, schema, or update cadence to preserve? We prefer read-write integrations. We do not have existing dashboards or integrations, so there is no specific worksheet or schema specified. Updates should be customizable. Some could be monthly and others weekly.

16. ERP Product & Integration Scope

Ref: RFP mentions “Tyler Technologies MARTI/Munis / Tyler Enterprise EFP (ERP)” in different sections and seeks integrations for cost, milestones, invoices. SAMTD utilizes Tyler Munis ERP system.

17. Please confirm the exact Tyler product(s) and version(s) in use and whether you require real-time bi-directional sync vs periodic one-way exchange (and which direction), plus preferred integration method (API, flat files, iPaaS). Weekly 1 way exchange, where PM software ingests the data from Tyler Tech. Open to what the vendor has for integrations.

18. Public Dashboards (Deliverable #5)

Ref: Deliverable #5 requires dashboards on Cherriots.org with public summary and employee-only detail. Should vendors embed dashboards (iframes/JS) into your CMS or provide data feeds for your web team to render? Please detail security/SSO expectations for the internal view and any website tech stack constraints. We are Open to embed or data stream. With automatic updates

19. “Connectivity with Communication Platforms & Social Media”

Ref: Integration capabilities mention social media and Cherriots.org for Board/staff reporting.

Please clarify the use case for social media connectivity (e.g., auto-publishing project milestones, sentiment monitoring), or confirm this simply refers to website dashboards. We are looking for website dashboard

20. Custom Forms & Workflow Ownership

Ref: Change Orders, ICE, Sole Source Justification, etc. Should these forms and workflows be vendor-configured and then fully maintainable by SAMTD staff post go-live (no code/low code), or is ongoing vendor administration expected? Workflow edits should stay in house.

21. KPI Definition & Timeline

Ref: The RFP references APTA/NTD/FTA KPIs and notes the Executive Team will define KPIs by year-end. Please confirm the timeline (calendar year 2025?) and whether vendors should propose an initial KPI catalog and mapping as part of the response. Yes, Please propose an initial KPI catalog and mapping.

22. Burn-In Period

Ref: Deliverable #7 mentions a Burn-In period but no duration or acceptance criteria. Please define length, success metrics, and whether it precedes or follows Go-Live acceptance tied to payment. Is this like UAT? 31 days. Go live acceptance precedes final acceptance.

23. Training Modality & Volume

Ref: “Train-the-trainer” for two months. Please confirm expected modality (onsite vs remote), expected number of sessions, max class size, the split between admin vs end-user training, and whether recordings/materials must be provided. Proposers should provide a cost estimate for both on-premise training and virtual. Number of sessions, max class size, etc.

should be dictated by the proposer. Please propose and provide pricing on what our options are.

24. Service & Support SLAs Please specify any minimum response/restore targets and support hours expected (e.g., 8×5 PT vs 24×7), plus incident severity definitions and reporting cadence for KPIs.

US Support during business hours.

25. Security & Data Residency

Beyond GDPR mention, are there any U.S. residency or NIST/FTA security requirements to meet (e.g., NIST 800-53, FedRAMP-moderate preferred), and any Oregon public records retention requirements applicable to hosted data? If you are proposing a SaaS solution, you must meet the security requirements and provide your Moderate FED Ramp, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and Certified Safety Professional/Provider (CISP) certifications with your proposal. State of Oregon retention is 7 years.

26. Will the SAMTD please clarify how much historical project data (e.g., schedules, budgets, documents) must be migrated into the new system, and provide details in terms of size (GB) or approximate record volumes? Approximately 70 projects are in the initiation and/or execution phases and will need the project schedules, budgets, and other documents migrated to the new system.

27. Could SAMTD kindly elaborate on whether data cleansing and preparation for migration will be handled internally or by the vendor? All existing project data will be prepped by SAMTD staff.

28. Please explain the technical details about Cherriots.org, specifically, what technology it is built on and from which systems it sources data to display maps and reports. Wordpress

29. Would SAMTD confirm whether dashboards on Cherriots.org are expected to pull data directly from the project management system, or be published through an intermediate data warehouse? Yes, it will need to pull data directly from the project management system

30. Can SAMTD clarify whether any BI tools (e.g., Tableau) are used within Cherriots.org to render maps from data retrieved from other systems, or if all maps are custom-built on the website? No we do not have BI Tools

31. Could SAMTD kindly provide information on whether an API gateway is available for

Cherriots.org, and if so, whether the API specifications can be shared to assist with effort estimation? No API on current website

32. Please clarify whether the requirement to host dashboards specifically on Cherriots.org is mandatory, or if SAMTD would consider alternative solutions (e.g., dashboards displayed on an external portal that fetch data directly from the back-office system). Yes, host dashboards specifically on Cherriots.org http://cherriots.org/

33. Could SAMTD elaborate on how much customization is acceptable if the base product’s out-of-the-box functionality does not fully cover a workflow? As much as needed within the timeline.

34. Would SAMTD confirm whether there is a targeted timeline for go-live (e.g., Q2 2026)? All work must be completed and invoiced by 5/30/26.

35. Please clarify whether there are planned integrations beyond ERP and Google Sheets, such as GIS, HR, asset management, or other tools in the Google Suite. No

36. ERP Integration with Tyler ERP

Can SAMTD specify what financial/project data should be synchronized between Tyler ERP and the proposed system (e.g., budgets, invoices, schedule milestones)? At a minimum, budget and invoice information shall be synchronized between Tyler Munis (MARTI) and the PM Software.

37. Would SAMTD confirm whether ERP integration is expected to be real-time, or if batch/scheduled synchronization (e.g., nightly jobs) would be acceptable? Monthly and weekly updates are the minimum required synchronizations. Any additional frequency would not need to be in real time.

38. Could SAMTD kindly explain whether an API gateway is available for Tyler MARTI, or if integrations are limited to file exchanges (CSV/XML)? See above

39. Please confirm whether the listed forms (Change Orders, ICE, Sole Source, Closeouts, etc.)

are already standardized and documented, or if the vendor should facilitate design and workshop sessions. Rebuild SAMTD current forms in software

40. Could SAMTD elaborate on whether the 7+ types of custom forms are intended as intake forms for staff/partners to capture information and create records, or as editable PDFs stored/attached to other records (e.g., applications)? Types of custom forms are intended as intake forms for staff/partners to capture information and create records

41. Please clarify which forms are expected to be publicly accessible via the portal to be developed. None

42. Would SAMTD confirm whether the solution will require predictive analytics or forecasting features (e.g., schedule slippage detection, cost overrun prediction)? Nice to have, open to viewing solutions

43. Can SAMTD explain whether existing middleware solutions (e.g., ESB, iPaaS) are in use, or if the project management system should handle all API orchestration directly? No, existing middleware solutions

44. Could SAMTD kindly provide details on the different personas and departments that will use the system, and the distinct user types expected? See above

45. Please elaborate on the budget tracking requirements, including the levels of complexity in the current system or process, and if possible provide an example illustrating the depth of tracking required. Budget, Drawdown, Remaining funds

This is a reminder to acknowledge all addendums on Exhibit 1 of the Proposal Forms

Addendum #1 issued 9/8/2025 added a 2nd pre-proposal conference Addendum #2 issued 9/23/2025 extended the due date to 10/16/2025.

All other specifications and terms and conditions remain unchanged.

By: Charleen McCurdy Procurement & Contracts Analyst Salem Area Mass Transit District 555 Court Street NE, Suite 5230 Salem, Oregon 97301 September 26, 2025

All other specifications and terms and conditions remain unchanged.