20190418_Solicitation_Questions_Response.pdf

Part 5.1 Systems/IT LSP Functionality

7. At the time of the migration the vendor shall provide on-site system consultation, workflow analysis and system training for TRADOC and Army University staff. During migration 3-4 visits expected per location, with total visits not to exceed 55 in-person visits across the consortia in the base year. Option years should include 1 in-person visit to each location, with total visits not to exceed 17 per option.

Q1. For the migration visits, what are your expectations for the duration of each visit?

A1. -Initial on site consultation, length as needed for collection size and complexity

-Working meeting for data migration transfer, length as needed for collection size and complexity.

-Training on each section of the LSP, length as needed for staff size and complexity of system

-Additional Training, or troubleshooting as needed. Length as needed for issue.

Q1. P2. Is it 1 day, 2 days, ect?

A1. P2. See above

Q1. P3. What will be covered during these visits?

A1. P3. See above

Q2. For the Option year’s visits, what are your expectations for the duration of each visit?

A2. For the option years we expect training on the ILS for the staff members of each location, including any new enhancements and questions/answer session for staff for any issues, to include troubleshooting.

Q2. P2. Is it 1 day, 2 days, ect?

A2. P2. It would depend on the amount of training that needed to be covered. If there were minimal changes then I would expect 1 day.

Q2. P3. What will be covered during these visits?

A2. P3. See answer above.

The solicitation for the TRADOC RFP indicates that vendor responses are to be returned to the issuing office. The FBO bid site indicates that responses can be submitted either electronically via email or submitted as hard copy via carrier.

Q3. Can you confirm that either an electronic submission via email or hard copy response are acceptable?

A3. Both email and hard copy responses are acceptable.

Q3. P2. If either is acceptable, do you have a preference for how we submit?

A3. P2. Digital copy is preferred, whether sent by email or courier.

Q3. P3. Are emails with our response to be sent to you at this email address?

A3. P3. Emailed responses should be sent to david.r.wirt.civ@mail.mil

Q4. For the on-site system consultation, workflow analysis, and system training, are we training everyone in one location or each location?

A4. Each location.

Q4. P2. Is the workflow analysis done in one location or each location?

A4. P2. Each location.

Q4. P3. Is the on-site system consultation done in one location or in each location?

A4. P3. Each location.

Q5. Will all sites be included in a single purchase option?

A5. All sites listed in the base period are being purchased. The sites are broken out by line item so as to allow the contractor to bring sites online with the system and to bill each as a site is completed.

Q5. P2. Or will they have the opportunity to opt-in or opt-out?

A5. P2. Sites identified in the Base Period for setting up do not have the option to opt-out. Sites identified as optional CLINs have the ability to opt-in or opt-out

Q6. Will one contract cover all sites for the base and option years outlined?

A6. One contract will be written for all sites and all years.

Q6. P2. Or will each site be invoiced separately based on their implementation schedule?

A6. P2. On the contract there will be an ability to invoice separately based upon implementation. The sites are broken out by line item so as to allow the contractor to bring sites online with the system and to bill each as a site is completed.

mailto:david.r.wirt.civ@mail.mil

The reasoning behind the grouping of questions below is because it is important for us to understand how the various TRADOC libraries share records, administrative duties, and services today and how they would like to work together in the future. It is particularly important for us to understand the relative autonomy of the individual member libraries within the existing subgroups.

Currently the TRADOC libraries operate independently. This conversion will implement the plan to coordinate one single system for all libraries.

The considerations for making a topology recommendation for our library system are complex and take into account both the consortium’s current operating practices and its goals for the future. Multiple factors are considered, including the relationships among libraries and campuses, the number and type of external systems that must be integrated with the system, and the shared service models that the institution currently supports or plans to implement in the future. Generally speaking, institutions adopt a single-institution topology when they wish to move towards more centralization in their operations and systems, and they adopt a multi-institution topology when they require or desire separation of data or services in certain functional areas.

This solution is to centralize operations for the TRADOC libraries. The goal at this time is to allow for the centralized search of all the resources of the TRADOC libraries. Patron databases are expected to be shared with role based permissions. Bibliographic records are expected to be shared with local customization allowed. Circulation rules, including lending policies, are expected to have a shared general vocabulary, with base rules with local libraries being able to customize as needed. Libraries are all run independently, with a staff of 4 at Army University facilitating an enterprise level solution, with cooperative centralization of some tasks.

Using the following questions about existing and future consortial functionality, please describe the composition and consortial relationships that exist today among the TRADOC libraries. As a general guideline, we are interested in understanding whether the member libraries are moving more towards sharing of information or more towards separation of information.

The libraries are currently siloed in systems and resources. We are looking to create a way to search across all libraries so resource and needs can be better understood and shared. We are looking to create more sharing of information and duplicate tasks. Tasks that will be shared must be of a digital nature as the libraries are very far apart geographically. Also we are looking to streamline those duplicated tasks when feasible.

Q7. Do you have a central unit that manages acquisitions operations for members? If yes, describe the central operation (the central negotiation, central acquisitions, and central activation of e-resources).

A7. Currently resources are purchased at the local level, other than the LSP. Future plans include centralized acquisition at the consortia level, and perhaps central negotiation as well.

Q8. Do you have a central receiving department?

A8. No

Q8. P2. If so, which members would like to continue centralized receiving after moving to a new system?

A8. P2. N/A

Q9. Do members of your organization share the same vendor file (manage administration of vendor details centrally)?

A9. No, each member

Q9. P2. If so, which members would like to continue to share this information after moving to a new system?

A9. P2. N/A

Q10. Do members of your organization share the same funds file (manage administration of fund details centrally)?

A11. Funds are managed at the local level.

Q10. P2. If so, which members would like to continue to share this information after moving to a new system?

A10. P2. N/A.

Q11. Do members of your organization share the same license file (e.g., for electronic resources)?

A11. Currently most license files are separate, only a few resources are shared amongst libraries.

Future centralized e-resources are expected.

Q11. P2. If so, which members would like to continue to share this information after moving to

A11. P2. N/A

Q12. Do members of your organization share a single financial system (ERP)? If there are multiple systems, provide details.

A12. Yes, but it would not feed into the LSP.

Q13. Do members of your organization share the same user file (manage administration of user details centrally)?

A13. Three (3) libraries currently share the same patron data base, all others have their own patron data.

Q13. P2. If so, which members would like to continue to share this information after moving to

A13. P2. It is intended that there be one patron database, but that patron roles can be restricted to allow access to both consortia and local e-resources.

Q14. Do members of your organization use a separate authentication system?

A14. Currently only two (2) members have authentication systems. The intent of this contract is for the vendor to provide a single authentication system for the consortia with the ability to restrict roles.

Q15. Do members of your organization use a separate student information system? Provide details.

A15. Yes but at this time the LSP won’t be allowed to integrate due to government restrictions, student data will be either entered manually or batch uploaded.

Q16. Can patrons borrow resources from any member (walk in and borrow resources from another member)?

A16. Yes but with different privileges than a local user.

Q17. Can patrons access e-resources licensed by any member?

A17. No, we require patron roles that can be restricted to allow access to both consortia and local e-resources.

Q18. Regarding your electronic resource management, do you share subscriptions with other institutions? If yes, please describe the sharing model.

A18. Some members have access to subscriptions purchased at a higher level, and in future shared subscriptions may be purchased, but most resources should be available to only the local library.

Q19. What do you expect your patrons to search in the discovery interface (for example your own institution only, the entire consortia)?

A19. They should default to search the individual locations and have the ability to switch to other location or the entire consortia.

- The total number of staff users is 100 according to appendix A, however you mention in 5.4 the need for 200 “seats.”

Q20. Can you explain the need for the additional 100 users?

A20. Users often work at multiple locations that need to be logged on at the same time, also to allow for self-checkouts.

Q21. Please provide the total number of unique e-journal titles that you plan to manage in the new system. “Unique e-journal titles” means, the total number of e-journal titles obtained by counting e-journals once even if they are available from multiple sources. This includes all e-journal titles managed in the system and is not dependent on the manner they are accessed or acquired (e.g. subscriptions from content providers, open access collections, databases, etc.).

A21. We have no plans of managing the e-journals in ILS. Plan to manage single purchase e-journals in the ERM. For the Discovery current databases are listed in Appendix A and B.

Q22. The vendor is currently working towards our FedRAMP-Tailored certification. Is

TRADOC able to consider vendors with this certification level, or is FedRAMP Level 4 a mandatory requirement?

A22. FedRAMP level 4 is a mandatory requirement.

Q23. Note that regarding the provision of barcode scanners, the vendor does not sell this type of hardware and therefore cannot meet this requirement. Are we able to state “not applicable” in this case?

A23. This is one of the pieces that will be evaluated for acceptance of the quotes received. If the contractor cannot provide either directly or indirectly, then the contractor will be rated as not acceptable for this item.

Q24. Page 17, XX, (45) (i) 52.224-3, Privacy Training: Please note that Contractor staff undergoes extensive privacy training conducted by the Contractor; please clarify if this training is expected of Contractor staff for the services solicited.

A24. Privacy training is still required by the Government and is expected of all staff working directly on the awarded contract. This is not qualified as a service contract.

Q25. Pages 21-26, 252.211-7003, ITEM UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION AND

VALUATION: Please clarify how the provisions about unique identifiers pertain to SaaS

Services hosted and delivered over the cloud.

A25. This is not a services contract. The Item Unique might apply to some of the CLINs and not to others. The clause is required for any line items over $5,000. If it does not apply, then the clause should be filled out as such.

Q26. Page 33, A/T and OPSEC REQUIREMENTS: Please clarify how these various training courses apply to SaaS Services hosted and delivered over the cloud.

A26. A/T OPSEC Requirements are required through management of the database where they will have access to customer information.

Q27. Pages 34-37 and pages 44-59: Is the Contractor expected to complete these pages and include them in the Solicitation, or may the Contractor include its SAM registration?

A27. Page 34-37 need to be completed and sent with signed packet. SAMs covers FAR 52.212-

3 on pages 44-56. The clauses on 57-59 252.225-7000 and 252.225-7020 need to be completed.

Q28. We would like to request an original Word document version of each of the two PDFs sent to us: 20190405_Attachment1_RequirmentsDescription_Final and

20190405_Sol_W91QF419Q0018, to aid us in our response.

A28. Only PDF copies will be provided as part of our internal control requirements.

Q29. Page 2, 1.5 Period of Performance: To successfully manage project implementations of this size, a project planning/onboarding period before the project kickoff is essential, the timing requested here would not allow for that. Is this schedule flexible? What would an alternative schedule look like?

Q29. See Appendix C. Current legacy systems have forecasted sunset dates. All migration and

GO Live dates must be completed three (3) months prior to sunset date.

Q30. Page 25, Appendix C Migration Timeline: Project implementation data migration dates require scheduling and data preparation which is generally done well in advance. Please provide more information regarding needs around Go Live dates and what other possible Go Live dates might be considered. Also, a confirmed topology recommendation would be needed to provide accurate timing for migration and Go Live dates.

Q30. Go Live dates were identified to provide the libraries with a minimum of a three (3) month overlap to sunset old system. Discovery setup must begin NLT 1 Sept 2019. All migration and

GO Live dates must be completed by 3 months prior to forecasted sunset of legacy ILS as identified in Appendix C.

Q31. We would like to request an extension until 5/31.

A31. Quotes will be due EOD 17 May 2019.