RFP Template Draft 6-24 Finallb.docx

Request for Proposals #LB-21-2778 issued by the University of Wisconsin System Office of Procurement for Survey Tool for UW System Campuses and UW Madison DATE OF ISSUE: [Date]

DUE DATE: July 23th, 2021 3:00 PM No late proposals accepted, regardless of circumstances.

Please plan accordingly.

There will be no public opening For further information regarding this RFP, contact:

Lew Bettinger Office of Procurement UW System Administration 660 W. Washington Ave, Suite 201 Madison, WI 53703 Email: lbettinger@uwsa.edu

TABLE OF CONTENTS

· Proposer Required Form

· Proposer References

· Designation of Confidential and Proprietary Information

· Bidder Agreement

· Proposer Certifications

· Attachment A - Bidder Response Sheet

· Attachment B - Source Level Agreement

· Attachment C - HECAVT

· Attachment D - Inoperability and Additional System Information Requirements

· Attachment E – Cost Sheet

· Attachment F – List of Campuses

1. GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1. Introduction and Background

The University of Wisconsin System (UW System) is seeking Survey Tool.

The purpose of this document is to provide interested parties with information to enable them to prepare and submit proposals for the Survey Tool at all UW System Campuses. The University of Wisconsin System intends to use the results of this Request for Proposal (RFP) to award to multiple vendors to make multiple awards. UW needs to be able to evaluate proposals to ensure that widely varying needs across multiple campuses are all covered by at least one awarded vendor. UW must evaluate software qualitatively rather than strictly on price alone.

1.1.1. The University of Wisconsin System

The University of Wisconsin System is one of the largest systems of public higher education in the country, serving more than 182,000 students (roughly 165,000 undergraduate and 17,000 graduate students).

The UW System consists of multiple institutions including two Research 1 universities (UW-Madison and UW-Milwaukee) and 11 four-year comprehensive universities with a total of 13 branch campuses, and a statewide UW-Extended Campus. UW System Administration provides oversight of all UW institutions and is responsible to the Board of Regents. The total UW budget is about $6 billion, with payroll expenses of more than $2 billion.

For more information on the UW System please see the UW System website at https://www.wisconsin.edu/

1.1.2. UW System Unique Characteristics

In addition to its multiple institutions with varying missions and sizes, the University of Wisconsin System has other unique characteristics. Each institution administers their own survey tools and student course evaluation tools. Having two Research 1 universities means there are large volumes of data in the current enterprise survey tool, Qualtrics, where longitudinal study data is stored and analyzed. Faculty tenure decisions depend on both the enterprise survey tool and the student course evaluation tool data so these tools must be reliable and easy to use for survey participants, students, faculty, and administration. Reporting and analysis of data from all the survey tools is essential to the ongoing operations of the UW System.

1.1.3. Current State

The UW System has defined three areas that this RFP addresses: Enterprise Survey Tool, Student Course Evaluation Survey Tool and Crowdsourcing Research Tool. The enterprise survey tool use across the UW System has expanded and the current contract no longer covers all the requirements. Many of the institutions are seeking a new student course evaluation survey tool to replace their self-hosted course survey tools or to enhance the functionality of their current solutions. The user experience with many of these tools is poor and fraught with inaccuracies and inefficiencies which negatively impacts student response rates and trend analysis. The crowdsourcing research tool is an emerging need where there is no standard solution identified across the UW System.

1.2. Objectives

The survey tool is expected to provide:

The solution(s) would provide modern, SaaS-based survey tool(s) that meets our needs as described in “Section 5: Specific Requirements and could be used by all UW System institutions. The solution(s) would also use a standards-based approach to integrate with other software, such as tools in the UW System Digital Learning Environment (DLE) including the Canvas Learning Management System, websites and other related tools. The solution(s) must be able to support a separate account for each UW System institution. Any vendor may choose to respond to one, two or all three of the award lots. The bid may be awarded to one or multiple vendors.

· Award Lot 1: Enterprise survey tool for the following groups

· General Academic Users, including Institutional Researchers

· Power Users with large amounts of existing research and survey data

· Partnerships with non-academic entity users for university related work such as business incubators, charter schools, community health clinics, federal government, etc

· Award Lot 2: Student course evaluation survey tool

· Award Lot 3: Crowdsourcing research tool

1.3. Definitions

The following definitions are used in this RFP:

Contractor: Proposer awarded the contract CA: UWSA Contract Administrator Proposer: Company which has submitted a proposal in response to this RFP RFP: Request for Proposal State: State of Wisconsin System Procurement Office: University of Wisconsin System Office of Procurement University: University of Wisconsin UW: University of Wisconsin UWS: University of Wisconsin System UWSA: University of Wisconsin System Administration

1.4 Calendar of Events

Listed below are specific and estimated dates and times of actions related to this Request for Proposal (RFP). The actions with specific dates must be completed as indicated unless otherwise changed by the UW System. In the event that the UW System finds it necessary to change any of the specific dates and times in the calendar of events listed below, it will do so by issuing an addendum to this RFP, through the Vendornet system (see Section 1.9). There may or may not be a formal notification issued for changes in the estimated dates and times.

All Proposals submitted shall remain fixed and valid for acceptance for a one hundred eighty (180) day period starting on the proposal due date, July 23th, 2021

1.5 Procuring and Contracting Agency

This RFP is issued for the State of Wisconsin/Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System by the University of Wisconsin System Administration Office of Procurement which is the sole point of contact for the University during the proposal evaluation process. The contract or contracts resulting from this RFP shall be between the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System, hereafter referred to as the "University," and the successful proposer or proposers hereafter referred to as the "Contractor" for the provision of a Survey Tool according to the terms set forth herein.

Lewis Bettinger or his successor or designee shall be the representative of the UWSA responsible for the administration of the contract and referred to herein as "UW Contract Administrator”.

1.6 Clarifications and Revisions

Any questions concerning this RFP must be submitted in writing via e-mail on or before July 8th, 3:00 PM, 2021, to:

Lew Bettinger, RFP Manager: lbettinger@uwsa.edu Questions regarding this RFP should reference “RFP LB-21-2778 Question” in the subject line.

Vendors are expected to raise any questions or exceptions they have concerning the RFP DOCUMENT at this point in the RFP process. If a vendor discovers any significant ambiguity, error, conflict, discrepancy, omission, or other deficiency in this RFP, the vendor should notify immediately the above-named individual of such error and request modification or clarification of the RFP.

If it becomes necessary to provide additional clarifying data or information, or to revise any part of this RFP, revisions/amendments and/or addendums will be provided to all recipients of this initial RFP.

Each proposal shall stipulate that it is predicated upon the requirements, terms, and conditions of this RFP and any supplements or revisions thereof.

Failure to acknowledge receipt of supplements or revisions, in accordance with the instructions contained in the supplement or revision, may result in proposals not being considered. Each proposal shall be predicated upon all the terms and conditions of the RFP and all supplements or revisions thereof.

If a proposer fails to notify the University prior to the Proposal due date of a known error in the Proposal (an error that reasonably should have been known to the Proposer) and a contract is awarded to that Proposer, the Proposer shall not be entitled to additional compensation or time by reason of the error or its correction.

All contact with University of Wisconsin System faculty, staff, students, administrators, executives, employees, volunteers, members of the Board of Regents, other State of Wisconsin employees, or other University of Wisconsin contractors concerning this RFP is prohibited, except as authorized in advance by the RFP manager, from date of release of the RFP until the resulting contract is fully executed. Unauthorized contact may result in disqualification of your proposal. This prohibition does not apply to other unrelated ongoing business including fulfillment of already existing contracts.

1.7 Reasonable Accommodations

The University of Wisconsin System Administration (UWSA) Office of Procurement will provide reasonable accommodations including the provision of informational material in an alternative format for qualified individuals with disabilities upon request. If you think you may need accommodations for the oral presentations, contact the RFP Manager, Lew Bettinger, (608) 263-2869 or lbettinger@uwsa.edu.

1.8 Contract Term

It is the intent of the University to commence the resulting three-year contract on or about November 1st, 2021.

The contract shall be effective on the date indicated on the contract and shall run through October 31st, 2024 with 2 possible 1-year renewal option.

The University may discontinue the contract, in whole or in part, without penalty at any time due to non-appropriation of funds.

1.9 VendorNet Registration

The State of Wisconsin’s purchasing information and vendor notification service is available to all businesses and organizations that want to sell to the state. Anyone may access VendorNet on the Internet at http://vendornet.state.wi.us to get information on state purchasing practices and policies, goods and services that the state buys, and tips on selling to the state. Vendors may use the same website address for inclusion on the bidders list for goods and services that the organization wants to sell to the state. A subscription with notification guarantees the organization will receive an email message each time a participating municipality, school district, or state agency, including any campus of the University of Wisconsin System, posts a request for bid or a request for proposal in their designated commodity/service area(s) with an estimated value over $50,000. Increasingly, state agencies also are using VendorNet to post simplified bids valued at $50,000 or less. Vendors also may receive email notices of these simplified bid opportunities.

1.10 Parking on UW Campuses

Parking on and near many UW campuses is limited. The University cannot reimburse vendors for parking fees or violations. Unauthorized vehicles parking in University lots or loading docks without permits may be ticketed and/or towed. The UW System Office of Procurement is not able to have tickets or towing fees reversed. Vendors invited to give in-person oral presentations will receive parking information and instructions at that time.

1.11 Smoke-free Environment

Most UW campuses prohibit smoking inside all campus buildings, including residence halls, and within 25 feet from any building entrance. Do not smoke on University grounds where smoking is prohibited. You should assume that smoking is prohibited anywhere that it is not explicitly permitted.

1.12 Reporting of Child Abuse and Neglect

If, in the course of providing services to the University, a contractor, entity, or individual (including employees, affiliates or volunteers) (hereinafter "contractor"), observes an incident or threat of child abuse or neglect, or learns of an incident or threat of child abuse or neglect, and the contractor has reasonable cause to believe that child abuse or neglect has occurred or will occur, the contractor must make a report of that abuse or neglect to law enforcement or to a county social service agency as provided by University policy. If the child abuse or neglect has any connection to the University, a report must also be made to the University as stated in University policy.

1.13 Promotional Materials

Supplier agrees not to use promotional or marketing materials that state expressly or by fair implication that the University endorses either the Vendor or any sponsor of such material.

1.14 Special Pandemic and Emergency Operations Considerations The University of Wisconsin System, individual campuses, municipalities, counties, or the State or Federal government may have emergency orders or guidelines in place mandating or recommending measures such as face masks, protective gear, hand washing, temperature checks, symptom reporting, social distancing, or other temporary public health and safety measures. All suppliers visiting UW campuses or participating in UW sponsored activities, whether on or off campus, must comply with all relevant University, campus, government, and public health and safety mandates and guidelines unless specifically exempted by the applicable legislation, executive order or public health order. UW reserves the right to impose additional health and safety requirements, processes, and procedures at any time. Proposers, contractors and suppliers and their support personnel present in person at any UW site or event must comply with all such applicable measures in effect at that location unless specifically exempted by advance written authorization.

2. PREPARING AND SUBMITTING A PROPOSAL

2.1 General Instructions

The evaluation and selection of a vendor and the contract will be based on the information submitted in the vendor's proposal plus references and any required on-site visits or oral interviews. Failure to respond to each of the requirements in the RFP may be the basis for rejecting a response.

Elaborate proposals (e.g., expensive artwork), beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal, are not necessary or desired.

2.1. Incurred Costs

The University of Wisconsin is not liable for any cost incurred by proposers in replying to this RFP including costs associated with traveling for on-site oral presentations or interviews.

2.2. Submitting the Proposal

All proposals should be delivered electronically to lbettinger@uwsa.edu and shall be considered sealed. To ensure confidentiality of the document, all proposals must be electronically labeled and show the following information on the Email:

· Proposer's name and address

· Request for proposal title (RFP: Survey Tool for UW Campuses and UW Madison)

· Request for proposal number (LB-21-2778)

· Proposal due date July 23, 2021 3:00 PM CST

Proposers must submit electronic proposal documents, marked as such, with all materials required for acceptance of their Proposal by the deadline shown on this Request for Proposal Document. Proposals must be received by email address lbettinger@uwsa.edu prior to or by 3:00 p.m. CST on the stated proposal due date. Proposals not received by that date/time shall be considered late. Submit Proposal documents as follows:

· One original Electronic document Copy of the Programmatic Proposal (Excluding the Cost Proposal Form).

· One Original Electronic Document Copy of the Cost Proposal Form

· An Electronic copy of both the Proposal and the Cost Proposal Form with all proprietary information redacted. These electronic documents must be clearly marked “Redacted Copy”. (Reminder: Cost Bid/Proposal is not Proprietary Information!)

· Late proposals shall be rejected.

· Electronic Proposals are frequently too large to be received by lbettinger@uwsa.edu. If electronic documents are too large to be received by lbettinger@uwsa.edu, an email to lbettinger@uwsa.edu of a secure on-line folder containing the electronic documents and access instructions will be considered delivery of electronic documents. This method is also required to be received by lbettinger@uwsa.edu prior to or by 3:00 p.m. CST on the stated proposal due date.

It is the sole responsibility of the proposer to insure all electronic proposal documents are received by UWSA Procurement at lbettinger@uwsa.edu by the date/time specified in this RFP document.

Receipt of a proposal by the University mail system does not constitute receipt of a proposal by the Purchasing Office, for purposes of this RFP. Only Electronic Proposals will be considered.

Proposers are advised not to wait until the last moment to deliver their Proposals. The University of Wisconsin cannot make exceptions to the deadline for packages delayed in transit, delivery personnel delayed by traffic, weather, accidents, strikes, Acts of God, or other circumstances. Wisconsin can and does at times experience severe weather that can delay parcel delivery. UWS strongly advises that proposers plan to deliver their proposals several days before the due date. This will build extra time into the schedule in the event of unexpected weather or other delivery delays.

2.3. Proposal Organization and Format

Proposals should be organized and presented in the order and by the number assigned in the RFP. Proposals must be organized with headings and subheadings. Each heading and subheading should be separated or otherwise clearly marked. All information should be included in the electronic proposal.

2.4. Submitting Multiple Proposals

Multiple proposals from a vendor will be permissible; however, each proposal must conform fully on its own to the requirements for proposal submission. Each such proposal must be submitted separately and labeled as Proposal #1, Proposal #2, etc. on each page included in the response. Alternate acquisition plans (varying Cost Proposals) do not constitute multiple proposals.

2.5. Oral Presentations and Interview

Top scoring vendors based on an evaluation of the written proposal may be required to participate in interviews and/or site visits to support and clarify their proposals, if requested by UWS. UWS will make every reasonable attempt to schedule each presentation at a time and location that is agreeable to the proposer. Failure of a proposer to interview or permit a site visit on the date scheduled may result in rejection of the vendor's proposal. The University of Wisconsin is not liable for any cost incurred by proposers in replying to this RFP including costs associated with traveling for on-site oral presentations or interviews, or configuring their own technology for virtual interviews and demonstrations.

2.6. Withdrawal of Proposal

Proposals shall be irrevocable until contract award unless the proposal is withdrawn. Proposers may withdraw a proposal in writing at any time up to the proposal closing date and time if the RFP manager receives such request. To accomplish this, the written request must be signed by an authorized representative of the proposer and submitted to the RFP manager via email. If a previously submitted proposal is withdrawn before the proposal due date and time, the proposer may submit another proposal at any time up to the proposal closing date and time.

2.7. Confidential and Proprietary Information

As the University is a state agency, Wisconsin’s Public Records law requires the release of most documents to requestors, including vendor responses to bids and RFPs. Any requested restrictions on the data contained within a proposal submitted must be clearly stated in Section 4: Designation of Confidential and Proprietary Information of the Required Form. Proprietary information submitted will be handled in accordance with applicable State of Wisconsin law. It is the proposer’s responsibility to defend the determination in the event of an appeal or litigation. Data, documentation and innovations contained in the proposal become the property of the University. Prices cannot be kept confidential. Excessive designation of information as proprietary may result in disqualification of your Proposal.

3. PROPOSAL SELECTION AND AWARD PROCESS

Accepted proposals will be reviewed by an evaluation committee and scored against the stated criteria. Proposers may not contact any member of an evaluation committee except at the direction of the RFP Manager. The committee may review references, request interviews, and/or conduct on-site visits and use the results in scoring the proposals. Proposals from certified Diversity Suppliers may have points weighted by a factor of 1.00 to 1.05 to provide up to a five percent (5%) preference to these businesses (Wis. Stats. 16.75(3m)). The evaluation committee's scoring will be tabulated for each part in each of the proposals evaluated separately based on the numerical scores received.

3.1. Preliminary Evaluation

The proposals will be reviewed initially to determine if mandatory requirements are met. Failure to meet mandatory requirements will result in rejection of the proposal. In the event that no vendors meet one or more of the mandatory requirements, UWS reserves the right to continue the evaluation of the proposals and to select the proposal that most closely meets the requirements specified in this RFP.

3.2. Cost Proposal Scoring

Various costing methodologies and models, including Total Cost of Ownership models, are available to analyze the cost information to determine the lowest cost to UWS. UWS personnel will select one method for scoring costs and will use it consistently throughout its analysis of all the cost proposals. UWS will determine in its sole discretion the cost proposal scoring methodology. Please refer to section 7.0 for more information

3.3. Evaluation Criteria

Each lot contained in each proposal will be scored separately using the following criteria:

Evaluation Scenario’s Award Lots (Section 6)

3.4. Right to Reject Proposals and Negotiate Contract Terms

The University of Wisconsin reserves the right to reject any and all proposals. UWS may negotiate the terms of the contract, including the award amount, with any proposer(s) reasonably likely to be awarded a contract upon successful completion of contract negotiations.

The University of Wisconsin System Office of Procurement reserves the right to request any additional information deemed necessary for the proper evaluation of proposals.

3.5. Awards and Final Offers

The University will compile the final scores for each part in each proposal. Awards will be granted in one of two ways. An award may be granted to the highest scoring responsive and responsible proposer at the conclusion of individual scoring. Alternatively, the highest scoring proposer or proposers may be requested to submit best and final offers. If best and final offers are requested by UWS and submitted by the vendor, they will be evaluated against the stated criteria, scored and ranked by the evaluation committee. Awards then will be granted to the highest scoring proposer or proposers. However, proposers should not expect that UWS will request a best and final offer. Awards may be granted to different vendors per lot.

3.6. Notification of Intent to Award

All vendors who respond to this RFP will be notified in writing of UWS's intent to award any contracts resulting from this RFP.

After notification of the intent to award is made, and under the supervision of agency staff, copies of proposals will be available for public inspection upon reasonable notice from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at 660 W. Washington, Madison Wisconsin. Vendors should schedule reviews with Lew Bettinger at rginzberg@uwsa.edu.

3.7. Appeals Process

Notices of intent to protest and protests must be made in writing to the head procuring agency. Protestors should make their protests as specific as possible and should identify statutes and Wisconsin Administrative Code provisions that are alleged to have been violated.

Any written notice of intent to protest must be filed with:

Mr. Brent Tilton Director of UW System, Office of Procurement 660 W. Washington Ave, Suite 201 Madison, WI, 53706 btilton@uwsa.edu and received in his/her office within five (5) working days after issuance of the solicitation or the notice of intent to award.

Any written protest must be received within ten (10) working days after issuance of the solicitation or the notice of intent to award.

The decision of the head of the procuring agency may be appealed to the Secretary of the Department of Administration within five (5) working days of issuance of the decision, with a copy of such appeal filed with the procuring agency. The appeal must allege a violation of a Wisconsin statute or a section of the Wisconsin Administrative Code.

3.8. Invoicing Requirements

· The Contractor shall invoice for completed work.

· Invoices presented for payment must be submitted in accordance with instructions contained on the purchase order including reference to purchase order number and submittal to the correct address for processing.

· Invoices submitted by Contractor must reference a Purchase Order (P.O.) and Statement of Work (S.O.W.).

3.9. Payment Terms

UWS normally will pay properly submitted Contractor invoices within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt providing goods and/or services have been delivered, installed (if required), and accepted as specified. The State of Wisconsin Prompt Payment Policy shall apply to the payment of all open invoices. No discount will be provided for early payment. A good faith dispute pursuant to s. 16.528, Wis. Stats., creates an exception to these prompt payment requirements.

4.0 MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS

4.1 Mandatory Requirements for all award lots

The following requirements in section 4.1 are mandatory and the proposer must satisfy them. See section 3.1 for clarification if necessary.

Proposers must include in their RFPs a list of at least five (5) organizations with whom the proposer has done business like that required by this solicitation within the last two (2) years. For each organization the Proposer must include the current, accurate name, title, address, and telephone number of a contact person along with a brief description of the project or assignment which was the basis for the business relationship. UWS will determine, at its sole discretion, which, if any, references to contact to assess the quality of work performed and personnel assigned to the project. The results of any references will be provided to the evaluation committee and used in scoring the proposal. Please be certain to supply accurate, current contact info for references. Individuals conducting reference checks will not track down references for whom inaccurate or outdated info has been supplied. Any reference that cannot be contacted with a reasonable amount of effort shall count as a negative reference.

Provide a high-level overview of your product and a high-level description of how it would address the needs of the University of Wisconsin System. Describe the overall solution proposed. Explain the award lot the solution covers. Include information on the modules, licenses, support, consulting/implementation or other services and software required to deliver the proposed solution. Describe the timeline and methodology for implementation of the solution. Include information on the resources needed from the vendor and client to implement the solution. Describe the typical administrative structure for the software.

Provide a completed copy of the full Higher Education Community Vendor Assessment Toolkit (HECVAT) https://library.educause.edu/resources/2020/4/higher-education-community-vendor-assessment-toolkit

5.3 Product Description

Describe how the proposed product / service, including its primary and administrative interfaces and any electronic reports, files, and documents it produces, meets WCAG 2.0, Level AA Accessibility including certification by an external agency. If the product does not meet WCAG 2.0, Level AA Accessibility standards, explain what functions are not accessible along with a timeline for updating those functions to meet the standard.

5.4 Proposed Solution vs. Industry Standard

Describe in detail any ways in which your proposed solution differs from the assumption that each proposed solution includes a common, industry-wide, survey toolset (e.g., secure survey creation and reporting, survey response, survey owner dashboards, etc).

5.5 Question Functionality

Provide a list and describe question types. Include information on the functionality related to the questions such as question content (rich text editor, embedded files, etc), question scale, question logic (skip, randomization, variables, piped text, etc.), question banks, question blocks, question validation, pagination, end of survey messages and links.

Describe how data audits and open records requests are supported.

5.8 Data Retention

Describe the data retention and archiving process included with the proposed solution.

5.9 Data integration

1. Describe the methods for integrating external data into the survey dataset and query data at the time of survey response.

2. Describe the methods for extracting data along with any limitations imposed.

3. Provide a full list of APIs included with the proposed solution.

4. Describe your approach to integration so that the performance of existing production systems is not affected when the APIs are used.

5. Describe the support for LTI interface standards including the version(s) supported. Include specific information on integration with Instructure’s Canvas LMS platform.

5.10 Data Analysis and Analytics

1. Describe the process for accessing raw data from the source systems.

2. List the standard reports and data elements available to users to build custom reports.

3. Describe the way user reports and associated data can be exported and list supported formats.

4. Describe how your solution supports conjoint analysis, such as through the randomization of thousands of possible conditions for a survey experiment. Identify other functions your solution provides such as MaxDiff, TURF, and pricing analysis. Briefly describe user-friendly reports that convey the results of these functions.

5.11 Support, Performance and Customer Satisfaction

1. Describe the software update cycle and the process used to notify customers. How do you incorporate client suggestions into your upgrade cycle?

2. Describe the support model for end users and administrators. Include information on end user and administrator documentation, SLAs, and recent customer satisfaction ratings for support

3. Describe training and support materials available for University system administrators and users, including any additional cost involved.

4. Describe the application performance SLA including the response an individual user should expect from the software.

5.12 Proposer Form

Proposer must submit the State of Wisconsin Proposer Required Form found in Section 11 of this document.

5.13 Vendor Overview

Proposer must submit the name and address of the operating firm on company letterhead. Names of owners or principles of your firm shall be included. If a corporation, provide date of incorporation and president’s name. If other than a corporation or partnership, describe organization and name of principals. If an individual or partnership, provide date of organization and name and address of all partners (state whether general or limited partnership). Describe any sub-contract relationship your firm intends to enter into to provide the services related to this contract. Please include all sub-contract agreements and contact information.

Proposer is requested to provide a brief description, with pertinent details, of their ability to provide the following services or products (items should be answered in the order given). Do not substitute already existing marketing materials for a response to the specific question asked. Clearly indicate the award lot in all responses.

The University of Wisconsin (UW) System is seeking enterprise survey tool solutions to support our institutions. More than one provider may be awarded a contract. The solutions will meet the needs of the following groups:

a. General Academic Users, including Institutional Researchers

b. Power Users with large amounts of existing research and survey data

c. Partnerships with non-academic entity users for university related work such as business incubators, charter schools, community health clinics, federal government, etc

Note: Any costs for services should not be listed in the answers to these questions but rather included in the separate Cost Proposal Form.

AWARD LOT 1 SCENARIOS

Each award lot will be evaluated separately.

Please read the following information carefully before responding.

The scenario method of evaluation allows the University to focus its evaluation most efficiently on those aspects of proposed solutions that matter most to us.

The University assumes that each proposed solution includes a common, industry-wide, survey toolset (e.g., secure survey creation and reporting, survey response, survey owner dashboards, etc). If your solution differs from this assumption, provide details in Section 5.1.

Each scenario will be scored based on innovation, creativity, simplicity, effectiveness, and completeness in addressing the challenges in the scenario, as well as ease of use.

HOW TO ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING SCENARIOS

For each scenario below, prosper must submit a narrative describing how it proposed solution would address the given scenario

Scenario 6.1.1 Sabrina is the team lead of an initiative to increase student enrollments at her institution. She sends out a survey to high school guidance counselors to gather information on their student populations. Survey participants are external to UW System and respond to the survey without being required to log in. To distribute the survey, Sabrina imports a list of guidance counselors and their contact information. All members of her team develop and administer the survey, import and export data, send invitations and reminders, conduct data analysis, etc. Sabrina is administering this survey with the help of the Admissions Department who are co-owners of the survey with differing permissions designated by Sabrina. When the survey participants start the survey, additional data is collected related to the participant and school demographics and is stored as contact profile data so it can be used in survey reporting. Blocks of survey questions are assigned based on the additional information stored in the contact profile such as high school size and location which could be gathered via upload as a part of the contact information or in response to questions in the survey. Some participants are randomly assigned to complete a block of questions in a survey. Comment by Renee Pfeifer-Luckett: and is Scenario 6.1.2 Chee is a graduate student collecting responses from various countries for her thesis with plans to distribute her survey to a large group of respondents. Due to the large number of completes Chee requires, she will need to distribute to multiple lists such as those she developed herself and those from panel providers, and process other completes received through intercept surveys. The system should store these completes in the same project and allow them to be analyzed either together or separately. The survey content, user interface and navigation must be in English, Spanish and Hmong as well as other languages (vendor: identify all languages supported). Because of the large group of participants, she includes a narrative written as preface to the survey to inform the respondent and solicit their consent. The survey must be accessible on a variety of devices, support responsive design, various browsers, and resolutions during development, testing and response. She wants the option to turn off mobile device access to respond to the survey and to specify what mobile devices are supported if the ability to complete the survey with a mobile device is allowed. She wants to preview and test the survey to ensure it is available on desktops and mobile devices that use different operating systems before she releases it. Data on the device used to complete the survey such as the device type (e.g., laptop, desktop, smartphone, or tablet), operating system (e.g., Android, Windows, Apple, etc.), browser, and screen resolution must be collected and reportable. When she travels to rural areas, she needs a downloadable application for Android and Apple devices to administer surveys without an internet connection. Her survey participants must also be able to answer their surveys offline with complete confidence that data collected offline will be protected and stored securely. Comment by Renee Pfeifer-Luckett: accessible Comment by Renee Pfeifer-Luckett: survey participants

Scenario6.1.3 Dr. Jones has been working with a series of graduate students on a decades long longitudinal study with many surveys, some that span the whole length of the study. With graduate student assistants coming and going he needs to allow multiple users to collaborate simultaneously on a study throughout the survey lifecycle with various levels of access. Describe how your solution supports collaborative capability for an individual survey and for a folder or group of surveys including sharing survey results with other collaborators on a per survey-level and by group or folder. He doesn’t know how many surveys he’s going to have to send out during the study so he needs an unlimited number and he may need to rename the surveys, move, delete and restore them. With so many surveys Dr. Jones needs a primary dashboard for managing them, a way to easily find and open another survey and a folder or categorization system for organizing his surveys. Describe your solution’s capabilities for derivative management dashboards or folders within the primary dashboard. Graduate Assistants need the option of creating a new survey by copying an existing one. When stepping into their predecessor’s shoes Graduate Assistants need to be able to review and download the distribution history of the invitations and reminders by email address as well as who has already completed the survey. Describe how your solution logs the sending of emails to invitees including when the email was sent, to whom it was sent, whether it was returned as undeliverable, and the individual link contained in the email. In some cases the standardized and customized reports from the existing study are copied to the new study. A library accessible to only authorized individuals is required for storing, sharing, and reusing questions, blocks of questions, messages, images, video and audio. The ability to add notes to surveys for easier collaboration and logging changes to questions for rollback is needed along with creating and running automated reports with tables and charts for Dr. Jones to review while the survey is still open. Describe how your solution reports responses summarized in tables and charts. Indicate whether reports support cross-tab analysis of data fields. If a survey or data related to a survey gets accidentally deleted, describe how it can be recovered. Describe any other tools your software has for managing and analyzing longitudinal studies. Comment by Renee Pfeifer-Luckett: is Scenario 6.1.4 Ashira works in the HR department and wants to prescreen candidates for open positions. She creates a survey for each job opening with a defined window for responses with a date and time set for the earliest point and/or the latest point a candidate may respond and prohibits any responses before and/or after that window. She needs the ability to customize the branding of the survey to fit the audience by embedding or removing UW System themes, logos, pictures and other images. The survey link must be easily read and typed by the invitee, this makes it friendly for electronic distribution (e.g., email) as well as other non-electronic means such as those who call or walk-in to apply. Because Ashira doesn't have a set list of people who will respond to the survey, she needs the survey link to allow multiple people to access it at the same time. Respondents can start the survey then return later to complete the survey while retaining their previous answers. Indicate whether your solution would allow or prevent that respondent to change his or her previous answers. Indicate how your solution would handle the requirement for an anonymous survey. Respondents need be able to return to any prior question, including those in a randomized block of questions, or in a rostered/table section. The survey should allow branching of survey questions based upon multiple conditions, for instance the answer to a previous question such as job experience and how long ago they gained the experience, where non-applicable questions should not be displayed. The survey needs to support an "other/specify/none of the above" answer type, which can be added to a list of choices. When selected, the solution should allow the respondent to enter a freeform text value to describe what "other" means. Ashira needs the option to require or make optional an entry in the freeform text field. Respondents must have the ability to upload documents like their resume and their references when completing the survey. Describe your solution's capability to automatically scan uploaded files for viruses. Summarize how your solution manages these files and notifies an administrator or survey creator about the creation or issues with the uploaded files. When the respondent has completed the survey there must be a customizable end of survey message and an automatically generated email based on one or more triggers with customizable content, “from” and “reply to” fields, and including URLs without the solution altering or redirecting that URL. Enhanced word processing functionality is very important to Ashira so that she may produce professional, polished survey downloads/exports and default reports using the solution. She also wants the ability to print her surveys out from the solution with the questions, headers, footers, and embedded images in an electronic report and on paper in an attractive and legible format to bring to a screening committee meeting.

Scenario 6.1.5 Travel Services wants to send out a survey to University staff members. Staff must log in with their NetID or use an invitation number before responding and each staff member can only respond once. Describe how your solution allows the survey creator the option to place a limit on the number of times a respondent may respond to the same survey. Survey invitations need to be sent to an unlimited number of recipients organized in contact lists (or subsets of contact lists). Since mailing lists aren't always clean, and in some cases multiple distributions are used in the same survey, your solution should prevent duplication by sending more than one invitation to the same email address. Indicate any survey allocation limits imposed by your solution. If your solution limits the number of emails that may be sent per day or week, indicate how your solution shows the user their usage and allotment allocation status. If applicable, describe how your solution allows the user to request increases in allotment limits. Travel Services uploads data about the respondent from another application and the respondent is asked to confirm or update the data as a part of the survey. Respondents need to be able to answer questions as free-form text (variable and fixed-width text options) and semantic differential scales such as “adequate’ to “inadequate.” Answers to questions must be carried forward and drive both the nature and behavior of a subsequent question for that respondent (i.e., branching). Travel Services wants to include a progress bar to show the respondent how much of the survey is completed with the ability to customize how and where the progress bar is displayed in the survey. They also want a schedule customized reminder messages that can be delivered based on criteria they define. The reminder emails should be sent to those who have begun but not completed the survey, those who have not yet started the survey, and those who have missed answering a specific question -- but not send an email to respondents who have completed the survey and those who have opted out.