Y27GA_LibertyCountySchoolSystem_ERateRFP_LICE.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 37 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- PE-68910-NONST-2024-000000008
- Issued by
- Georgia
About this file
This document is a Request for Proposals (RFP) issued by the Liberty County School System for E-Rate eligible and ineligible networking equipment and licenses. The RFP covers wireless equipment licenses, switch licenses, and other fees. The quantities listed are estimates, and the district reserves the right to increase or decrease quantities as needed. Vendors must submit proposals by March 08, 2024 at 2:00PM. The RFP outlines the evaluation criteria, which includes price of E-Rate eligible services (30%), technical sufficiency (20%), technical support (20%), prior experience (10%), other cost factors (10%), overall suitability (5%), and conformance of the proposal (5%). Vendors must provide discounted billing, maintain detailed records, and comply with E-Rate program requirements. The RFP also lists reasons for potential disqualification, such as being on FCC Red Light status, not having been in business for 5 years, or not agreeing to provide discounted billing.
The RFP requires vendors to fill out a pricing spreadsheet with detailed information on the proposed products and services, including part numbers, quantities, and unit prices. Vendors must ensure that any proposed equivalent products are interoperable and compatible with the district's existing Meraki network. The district will accept proposals for functionally equivalent products. Taxes, shipping, and other fees must be included in the pricing.
View the file
Other files
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
Directions
DIRECTIONS FOR THE PRICING SPREADSHEET:
Please fill in the following spreadsheets with Description of Products, Part Numbers (if applicable), Quantity, and Price for the items proposed by your company.
The district is open to all manufacturers and will accept quotes for any and all equivalent products. Vendor quoted equipment compatibility: Although functionally equivalent equipment may be submitted for consideration, the equipment quoted must be interoperable and compatible with the District’s existing Meraki network. The District reserves the right to increase or decrease the quantity of product and services to be purchased after the pricing proposals are received.
Additional line items or parts may be added if needed to reflect a complete proposal.
Formulas included in the spreadsheet are for convenience only - each bidder is required to confirm that the pricing and formulas are correct.
This pricing workbook is the RFP response.
LOWEST CORRESPONDING PRICE (LCP):
Lowest corresponding price is defined as the lowest price that a service provider charges to nonresidential customers who are similarly situated to a particular applicant (school, library, or consortium) for similar services. See 47 C.F.R. § 54.500.
Service providers cannot charge applicants a price above the LCP for E-rate Program services. See 47 C.F.R. § 54.511(b).
This ensures that: 1) service providers do not charge applicants more than they would charge their other customers for the same services. See First Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 8776, 9031-32, para. 484; and 2) any lack of experience in negotiating in a service market does not prevent applicants from receiving competitive prices. See First Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 8776, 9031, para. 484.
A service provider – regardless of the size of the company or the category of service provided – must ensure that the LCP is provided to applicants. The applicant is not obligated to ask for it, but must receive it. See 1996 Universal Service Order, 12 FCC Rcd 87, 383, para. 540.
E-Rate Requirements
E-RATE INFORMATION AND REQUIREMENTS
| Vendors submitting proposals under this RFP must agree to meet the following conditions relating to the E-rate program and be willing to include such requirements in the Vendor’s contract: | Vendor must maintain and enforce an internal E-rate audit process that ensures that Vendor complies with all E-rate program rules and regulations. This process must include the following: |
| Discounted Bills: Should the District so choose, Vendor must agree to provide discounted bills to District which reflect the net charges due to the District after E-rate discounts have been reflected (also known as the “non- discount” amount). The Vendor will then invoice USAC using the Form 474 SPI form for the E-rate discount amount. Vendor shall be solely responsible for timely filing invoices with USAC. Accordingly, Vendor understands and agrees that District will NOT be liable to Vendor and Vendor shall have no recourse against the District for any discounted amount that Vendor submits late to USAC for payment, if USAC refuses to pay the invoice due to late filing. Further, Vendor understands and agrees that District shall not be liable to Vendor and Vendor shall have no recourse against the District for any discounted amount that Vendor submits to USAC for payment if Vendor is at fault for USAC’s refusal to pay. If the District’s actions or failure to act are responsible for the non-payment of the Vendor’s invoice with USAC, the District shall not be liable to Vendor and Vendor shall have no recourse against the District for the amount at issue until both the District and the Vendor have exhausted their administrative remedies of appeal to USAC and/or the FCC. | • Where labor is involved, maintaining detailed, signed individual timesheets |
• Ensuring that ineligible charges are not submitted to USAC
• Invoicing to USAC that is consistent with the contract and the District’s Form 471.
• Ensuring that services or products are not provided to the District without District’s express written permission or official purchase authorization
• Ensuring that District-approved substitute services or products are prominently noted on invoices submitted to USAC and the District
• When E-rate eligible services or equipment are allocated or installed in multiple buildings, support for the allocation consistent with the amount and buildings identified in the Form 471
• Documenting that E-rate funded services were provided within the allowable contract period and program year
• Charging proper FRN(s)
• Ensuring that invoices and USAC forms are submitted to the District in a timely manner
• Ensuring that USAC forms are filled out completely, accurately and on time
• Ensuring that Forms 472 are signed/dated by Vendor’s representative in a timely manner
• Maintaining fixed asset list of E-rate-supported equipment provided to the District with detailed information for each item (model number, serial number, product description) and made available to the District in electronic format upon project completion
If Vendor learns of any federal, state or local investigation conducted by any regulatory authority or law enforcement authority that could have an adverse impact on the District’s ability to continue to receive the benefit of E-rate funding, Vendor must notify the District within 30 calendar days of learning of such investigation. The District reserves the right to cancel the agreement without penalty if the investigation impedes the District’s ability in any way to receive the benefit of E-rate funding, subject to any investigation of wrongdoing.
Vendor shall maintain all bids, quotes, records, correspondence, receipts, vouchers, delivery information, memoranda and other data relating to Vendor’s services and any subcontractors to the District. All such records shall be retained for 10 years following completion of services and/or installation of equipment, and shall be subject to inspection and audit by the District.
Questions & How to Return
Questions for this bid should be directed to currieasutton@epicinc.org.
Questions will be accepted until February 23, 2024 at 12:00PM.
Pease return this workbook in its entirety to:
currieasutton@epicinc.org by March 08, 2024 at 2:00PM.
Vendor Information and SPIN
| BID SUBMISSION FORM | |
| COMPANY NAME: | |
| E-RATE SPIN NUMBER | |
| ADDRESS: | |
| CITY, STATE ZIP: | |
| Company Contact: | |
| (This person must be able to answer questions about the quote submitted.) |
| Contact Phone: |
| Contact Email: |
References
| REFERENCES |
| REFERENCE #1: |
NAME OF REFERENCE
CONTACT
PHONE NUMBER
EMAIL ADDRESS
REFERENCE #2:
NAME OF REFERENCE
CONTACT
PHONE NUMBER
EMAIL ADDRESS
REFERENCE 3:
NAME OF REFERENCE
CONTACT
PHONE NUMBER
EMAIL ADDRESS
Bill of Materials- Eligible
| Liberty County School System |
| The District will accept Functionaly Equivalent Products |
Equivalent Products must be Interoperable and Compatible with Existing Meraki Network
| WIRELESS EQUIPMENT LICENSES | ||||
| Manufacturer Part # | Description | Qty. | Unit Price | Extended Price |
| LIC-ENT-5YR | Cisco Meraki MR Series Enterprise - subscription license, 5YR | 977 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| SWITCH LICENSES | ||||
| LIC-MS225-24P-5YR | Meraki MS225-24P Enterprise License and Support, 5YR | 13 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| LIC-MS225-48FP-5YR | EOS Meraki MS220-48FP Enterprise License and Support, 5YR | 182 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| LIC-MS250-48FP-5YR | Meraki MS250-48FP Enterprise License and Support, 5YR | 35 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| LIC-MS425-32-5YR | Meraki MS425-32 Enterprise License and Support, 5YR | 2 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| LIC-MX75-ENT-5Y | Meraki MX75 Enterprise License and Support, 5YR | 1 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| Other Fees | Taxes (if applicable) Shipping, etc., must be included to be considered for E-Rate | 1 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| Total: | $0.00 | |||
| The quantities shown on the spreadsheets are estimates. The District reserves the right to increase or decrease quantities or timeframes as is needed to meet District needs. | ||||
| Please include all part numbers being proposed, even if not included above. Feel free to correct any existing part numbers if different in the proposed solution | ||||
| If licensing or other items are required for the solution being proposed, please include. | ||||
| Please add additional rows if necessary. | ||||
| The Service Provider is responsible for pricing and formulas in this spreadsheet. |
Bill of Materials-Ineligible
| Liberty County School System |
| The District will accept Functionaly Equivalent Products |
Equivalent Products must be Interoperable and Compatible with Existing Meraki Network
| WIRELESS EQUIPMENT LICENSES | ||||
| Manufacturer Part # | Description | Qty. | Unit Price | Extended Price |
| LIC-ENT-5YR | Cisco Meraki MR Series Enterprise - subscription license, 5YR | 74 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| SWITCH LICENSES | ||||
| LIC-MS225-24P-5YR | Meraki MS225-24P Enterprise License and Support, 5YR | 1 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| LIC-MS225-48FP-5YR | EOS Meraki MS220-48FP Enterprise License and Support, 5YR | 19 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| LIC-MS250-48FP-5YR | Meraki MS250-48FP Enterprise License and Support, 5YR | 8 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| Other Fees | Taxes (if applicable) Shipping, etc., must be included to be considered for E-Rate | 1 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| Total: | $0.00 | |||
| The quantities shown on the spreadsheets are estimates. The District reserves the right to increase or decrease quantities or timeframes as is needed to meet District needs. | ||||
| Please include all part numbers being proposed, even if not included above. Feel free to correct any existing part numbers if different in the proposed solution | ||||
| If licensing or other items are required for the solution being proposed, please include. | ||||
| Please add additional rows if necessary. | ||||
| The Service Provider is responsible for pricing and formulas in this spreadsheet. |
Disqualification
| Reasons for Disqualification | |
| Responders should be aware of the following reasons for potential bid response disqualification. | |
| 1. | The District may reject an erroneous bid after the bid opening if any, some, or all of the following conditions exist: (1) an error was made; (2) the error materially affected the bid; (3) rejection of the bid would not cause a hardship on the district, other than losing an opportunity to receive commodities at a reduced cost; and (4) enforcement of the part of the bid in error would be unconscionable; |
2. Vendor is on Red Light status with the FCC or is delinquent on a debt to a state or federal government agency or entity.
3. Vendor has not been in business for at least 5 years performing the services or furnishing the equipment required in this RFP.
| 4. | Vendor does not have an E-Rate SPIN number. |
| 5. | Vendor does not agree to provide discounted billing to the District if requested. |
Evaluation Criteria
Proposal Evaluation: Proposals received on-time will be evaluated based on the E-Rate criteria as outlined below. The following factors will be used in evaluating bid responses; price is weighted higher than any other single factor
| Factor | Weight |
| Price of E-Rate Eligible Service: E-Rate eligible costs: the total cost of ownership for the eligible components of the proposed service. Total cost of ownership takes into account all one-time and recurring costs. This criterion must be the highest weighted per E-Rate program rules. The lowest eligible cost offer receives the greatest number of points. | 30 |
| Technical Sufficiency: How well the offered product will work within the existing network infrastructure, considering proprietary protocols, feature sets, management interfacing, and other technical factors. The most sufficient and compatible offer receives the greatest number of points. | 20 |
| Technical Support: A measure of the ability of school IT staff to effectively operate, manage, and support the offered products. The most supportable offer receives the greatest number of points. | 20 |
| Evidence of prior successful experience is detailed and related to the proposed services; References provide assurance that vendor can deliver the services and/or required products. Prior Experience in a similar K-12 education environment of size and project scope.Strong and unequivocal evidence that proposing organization’s human, organizational, technical, and professional resources (including Education and E-Rate expertise) and abilities can support the proposed project, which will meet the full scope of the requirements specified in the RFP in a timely manner. | 10 |
| Other Cost Factors: Including price of ineligible goods and services, price of changing providers, price for breaking contract, contract terms and conditions, interoperability with current networking environment, training, downtime for migration, loss of use or efficiency, etc. | 10 |
| Overall suitability: Appropriateness, acceptability, or in accordance with what is desired or called for within the current and future needs of the District. | 5 |
| Conformance of proposal to instruction for format and contents of proposal and Quality of Response (A substantially responsive Bid is one that conforms to all the terms, conditions, and specifications of the Bidding Documents without material deviation, reservation, or omission) | 5 |
| Overall suitability: Appropriateness, acceptability, or in accordance with what is desired or called for within the current and future needs of the District. | 5 |
| Total | 100 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .