Vendor Questions with IDOT Responses Amendment 1 4 1 24.docx

DOCX document 19 KB Posted

Attached to
eBIDS Electronic Letting/Bidding Software RFP
Solicitation number
24-494DOT-FINAD-B-38479
Issued by
St. Clair County, Illinois

About this file

This document contains vendor questions and responses related to an RFP issued by the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) for an Electronic Bidding System (eBIDS) solution. The RFP, identified as BidBy Bid #24-494DOT-FINAD-B-38479, seeks to procure a commercial off-the-shelf Software as a Service (SaaS) hosted solution for electronic letting and bidding. The RFP covers topics such as contract storage, integration with other IDOT systems, timelines, and terminology related to IDOT's bidding processes, such as "letting", "alternates", and "combination bids".

IDOT indicated they will pay for the services required by the new eBIDS solution and that the current solution's challenges and performance will be provided once the contract is executed. The RFP does not mention any set-asides, incumbents, or specific funding requirements and sources.

View the file

Other files

Show all 14

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

Electronic Bidding System (eBIDS) RFP BidBy Bid # 24-494DOT-FINAD-B-38479 Vendor Questions and IDOT Responses

1. Where are contracts currently stored?

Answer: This information will be provided once the contract is executed.

2.Is Illinois DOT looking to store Contracts within the new solution?
Answer: No
3.Does Illinois DOT run auctions?
Answer: No
4.Under Section “Interfaces and Integrations” (page 3), can you please expand on this use case? What data points are you looking to integrate?
Answer: This information will be provided once the contract is executed.
5.What external applications and systems will the solution need to integrate with?
Answer: This information will be provided once the contract is executed.
6.In Attachment G, Context Diagram, can you provide additional, specific detail about the other IDOT systems (system names/functions) that would be targeted in the scope of the future integration architecture?
Answer: This information will be provided once the contract is executed.
7.Can you provide additional detail and dates regarding IDOT’s desired timeline for selecting and implementing the new bidding solution?
Answer: Due to the procurement process, this is unknown at this time.
8.In Attachment A, Desirables Tab, #31, can you please clarify the meaning of “Letting”?
Answer: Please visit our website for a detailed explanation.
9.In Attachment A, Mandatory Without Evidence Tab, #31, could you please expand on this use case and clarify the meaning of additive and alternate pay items?

Answer: Alternates - This requirement has to do with IDOT’s project/bid setup on contracts that are advertised as “alternates”. An example of a contract with alternates is a resurfacing contract with an asphalt pavement option and a concrete payment option. Among the pay items on the contract, some items will be designated as BASE items that will be used on the contract regardless of asphalt or concrete paving, while others need to be designated as the A-alternate (asphalt paving items for example), or the B-alternate (concrete paving items). The department must have the ability to code projects into the system in this manner, giving contractors the ability to provide a bid on the contract that is either BASE + A, or BASE + B. The contract will then be awarded to the lowest bid received, whether that be on BASE+A or BASE+B.

Additives – IDOT occasionally may advertise a project that asks contractors to bid on the main project, and also provide a bid for 1, 2, or more additives on the project. This method is utilized to add additional scope of work to a contract if the base bid comes in under budget/program. If base bid is under program, the Department can elect to award the base project + one or all of the alternates.

10.In Attachment A, Desirables Tab, #32, Can you please expand on this use case and clarify the meaning of a combination bid?
Answer: Occasionally, when there are two (or more) related projects on the same letting the Department will allow combination bids to account for contractor efficiency if awarded both (or all) projects. The combination bid may be less than the total of the individual bids on each project. A contractor is not required to submit a combination bid. For example, a contractor may bid $1.5M on Contract A and $2.5M on Contract B and also submit a bid of $3.8M if awarded both contracts.
11.As a web application used by contractors for the submission of bids to the agency, there may be various ways for the cost of the application use, maintenance, hosting, etc., to be covered. Is it the preference of the State to pay a fee for these services or have individual contractors pay a subscription fee for the use of the contractor application in order to submit bids?
Answer: IDOT will pay for these services.
12.What challenges are you encountering with the current solution? Additionally, are you satisfied with the current solution and its performance and functionality?
Answer: This information will be provided once the contract is executed.
13.Please confirm if questions 19, 20, and 21 are missing from Attachment A, specifically in the sheet labeled "Mandatory Requirements without Evidence”.
Answer: There was a number error in Attachment A, specifically in the sheet labeled "Mandatory Requirements without Evidence “and there are no 19 ,20, and 21.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .