San Francisco Paratransit

Transcription

1 San Francisco Paratransit Mobile Data Computers RFP No Addendum #2 August 19, 2011 Proposal Submission Deadline: Thursday, September 8, 2011 (2 pm PDST) 1

2 Table of Contents I. Responses to Questions Concerning the RFP II. Vehicle Information III. Pre-proposal Sign-In Sheet IV. Revised Pricing Form V. Certification of Primary Contractor Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters VI. Acknowledgement of Receipt of Addendum o 2

3 Attachment I Responses to Questions Concerning the RFP Veolia s response to Question #1 was published in Addendum #1, dated August 1, Question #2 What physical address to deliver proposals to and how many copies are being requested? Response: Proposal submittals must be received no later than Monday, September 8, 2011, at 2 pm Pacific Daylight Saving Time. Your submittal may be delivered in person; sent via courier, or U.S. mail. Proposals are to be submitted to Veolia s Contracts Administrator, Kent Hinton at the following address: Attn: Kent Hinton Veolia Transportation Services, Inc th Street, 1 st Floor San Francisco, CA Include one (1) typed or printed original Technical Proposal; six (6) copies of the Technical Proposal, one (1) of which shall be printed in 16 point font (large print); and one (1) electronic copy on a MS Windows readable CD or DVD in MS-Word 2003 format. One Braille copy must be provided upon request. RFP Exhibit 1, Technical Specifications is also a required form, to be completed and submitted as part of Proposers Technical Proposal. Additional requirements of the Technical Proposal may be found in Section of the RFP. Proposer must complete and submit separately a cost proposal valid for nine (9) months from submission, on the form provided. The form must be submitted in a separately sealed envelope marked: COST PROPOSAL. Contents of the cost proposal envelope shall include only one (1) signed original of the cost proposal and one diskette copy (MS Excel Office 2003 version). Additional requirements of the Cost Proposal may be found in Section of the RFP. Question #3 The RFP refers to cellular communication as well as CDPD communication for MDT data, which wireless communication technology is requested, both or one or the other? Please specify. Response: Proposer should specify which cellular data technology it proposes as part of its solution for SF Paratransit. Cellular Digital Packet Data (CDPD) is not required. Question #4 What is the meeting location for the site visit and how many service provider locations will be visited, will Veolia provide transportation to these locations? 3

4 Response: It is not feasible at this time to conduct van service provider site visits, as Veolia is currently procuring new provider contracts. However, Proposer may anticipate that there will be up to six (6) service provider locations. Question #5 Would it be possible to get a MS Word version of the compliance matrix that is in the RFP document so that it can be used for our submittal without recreating it for our submittal? Response: A MS Word version and a form enabled PDF version of the compliance matrix is available on the SF Paratransit website ( In the event there is a conflict between the stated requirements of the MS Word version submitted by proposer and the PDF version published by Veolia, the PDF version shall prevail. Question #6 Regarding the Clipper Card, what type of card encryption is used (i.e. MifareDESfire, Plus, Calypso, etc.) and what are the specifications? Where is the transaction data processed and in what form does the data need to be delivered? Response: The smart card format and encryption used in the Clipper fare collection system is governed by International Standards Organization (ISO) standard ISO The cards and tickets procured by the Clipper Program are encrypeted using the Mifare Desfire specification. In the circumstance that San Francisco Paratransit were to become a participant in the Clipper Program, the specific encryption details and data formats would be shared under a non-disclosure agreement between the successful contract awardee, Cubic Transportation Systems, Inc., the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Generally, any equipment proposed to be compatible with the Clipper system should be designed in compliance with ISO which is the dominant standard for electronic fare payment systems in North America. Question #7 In how many depots are the 120 vehicles located? Response: Veolia anticipates that there will be a total of up to six (6) vehicle depots. Question #8 Does the proposer have to provide central WLAN equipment? If yes: On how many locations? How many access points should be included? Response: No. Proposers are not required to provide a central WLAN. Proposers are only responsible for the WI-FI capability of their units. Should Veolia elect to pursue 4

5 a Wi-Fi option, Veolia will work with Proposer to determine the best way to implement Wi-Fi at each depot selected for Wi-Fi. Question #9 Could you please provide a vehicle list (vehicle type, quantity per type ) Response: Please see the vehicle roster included as Attachment II. Question #10 Would it be possible to get a copy of Trapeze Pass Mon ICD documentation for Trapeze ver.8? Response: Veolia has not yet purchased the Mon module for Trapeze PASS. Veolia anticipates that Proposer will already have an established and approved MON interface. Proposers should contract Trapeze directly with any questions related to the interface with PASS-MON. Question #11 Shall the Trapeze Dispatcher dispatch the traffic condition/ or weather information or shall this be done by an additional dispatcher workplace provided by the vendor. Response: It would be a function of the main dispatcher and should be possible from each workstation. It is acceptable to use Trapeze's MDC messaging capabilities to accomplish this function. Question #12 Is the Trapeze Pass system able to distribute the traffic condition/ or weather information to single vehicles, to the entire fleet or to vehicles within a certain area? Will this functionality be implemented via text messages for each relevant vehicle provided via the Trapeze PASS MON interface? Response: San Francisco Paratransit does not yet operate PASS-MON. Proposers should address any questions regarding the technical capabilities of PASS-MON directly to Trapeze. It is acceptable to propose the use of Trapeze's MDC messaging capabilities for this function. If the vendor has any enhancements to make this function easier, they should be identified here. Question #13 What payroll data shall be recorded in the vehicle? Response: Technical specification #36 is changed to read: System captures necessary operational data which improves reporting and may also support some driver payrollrelated indicators. At a minimum, the driver should be able to record when they enter the vehicle (depot Actual Arrive Time), when they leave the depot (depot Actual depart time), when they arrive back to the depot (Actual Arrive Time, when they leave the vehicle (Actual Depart Time), and the start and ending time of each break or out of service event. 5

6 Question #14 Shall the provider establish an interface to the payroll system or shall the information transferred to the Trapeze PASS system and Trapeze shall handle the interface. Response: All data, including the specific operational data described in the response to Question #13 above, should be transmitted to and stored within Trapeze. If the vendor has the ability to capture data not currently captured in Trapeze, it should be described in detail here. Question #15 Shall the system provide this information for maintenance reporting to Trapeze via the Trapeze-PASS interface or shall the vendor offer his own Vehicle Health Reporting System. Response: Either solution is acceptable. Question #16 These two requirements (#26 & #32) appear to be in conflict. Please clarify your desired operation for requirement 26. Response: Item #26 is revised to read, "System allows the driver to transmit appropriate traffic condition and/or weather information to dispatch." If the dispatcher thinks one or all fleets should be notified, the dispatcher can do this. Question #17 The stated unit count is 120. Does this include maintenance spares? If not, should the vendor propose a recommended spare count? Response: Veolia plans to purchase up to 120 units maximum. Spares are included in this count. The actual number of vehicles is less than 120. Question #18 For IVR integration, what is the current make and model of the telephone system, PBX in use? Response: Veolia intends to have this feature only apply to the SF Access service at this time. We anticipate that the SF Access service provider will utilize a Mitel 5000 Communications Platform. Contact information for Mitel may be found at Question #19 Is there an existing wireless network in place? If not, is the proposer expected to supply fixed wireless LAN equipment? Response: No, please see the response to Question #8. 6

7 Question #20 Can you provide specifications for the Client ID photos? In what format are they currently? Where are they stored and accessed from? How is the presentation of these images desired within the mobile application? Response: Client ID photos are stored in industry standard JPEG file format, 295 x 243 pixels, 24-bit color. Filename syntax is Client_ID.jpg. These files are stored in an SQL database located in the same domain as the Trapeze databases, all of which are accessible through standard web services that will be made available to the successful Proposer upon award of contract. Veolia envisions that the client (rider) ID photos will be available to the driver only as needed, such as if the driver wants to familiarize himself/herself with the appearance of the client prior to approaching the door of a common pick up location. Proposer should describe its approach to presenting client photos in an easily accessible, meaningful way that does not lead to information clutter or overload. Question #21 Is the expectation to have "all" client ID photos downloaded at the start of shift or just those currently scheduled within the route manifest? Response: It would not be feasible to download all photos. It would be ideal to retrieve a photo only when the driver access the screen that contains photo information, but it would also be acceptable to transmit the photo with the trip data. Question #22 Can you provide the specification or a link to the specification for the Regional Clipper Card program? Response: Generally, any equipment proposed, in order to be compatible with the Clipper system, should be designed in compliance with ISO which is the dominant standard for electronic fare payment systems in North America. Please see the response to Question #6 for further information. Question #23 Does the customer have a current or preferred wireless carrier relationship? Response: Yes, Veolia currently has preferred relationships with Sprint, Verizon, and CrossBridge Solutions. The SFMTA also currently has a preferred relationship with Verizon. Question #24 As the actual term of contract can include extended warranties and optional extensions, we would request specific bonding language to limit Performance Bond requirements to "Up to System Acceptance" If bonding is required beyond this event, then a Warranty Bond could be secured. 7

8 Response: Proposer would only need to supply a performance bond through final system acceptance, plus any optional Contractor services extensions. Veolia does not require a warranty bond for this project. Question #25 Can you provide greater clarity to the proposed liquidated damages? Things such as defined events or constraints to elements under the vendors direct control? Failing that, an agreement to negotiate liquidated damages items as part of the final SLA agreement post award would be acceptable. Response: Veolia may assess liquidated damages against Contractor in such amounts as are described in Section 21 of the RFP, for instances where Contractor s performance falls below the standards set forth therein. The intent of liquidated damages is to compel performance improvement and Veolia shall be reasonable in deciding whether to assess liquidated damages giving due regard to the circumstances causing the below standards performance. Prior to assessing liquidated damages Veolia shall provide written notice to Contractor of each instance for which it proposes to assess liquidated damages and afford Contractor the opportunity to assert reasons why said liquidated damages should not be assessed. Question #26 Can you provide the Trapeze API for the ID card functions? Is there a difference between a cardswipe entered ID or a manually entered ID? Response: Veolia seeks a solution where a card swipe is the primary mechanism for relaying the rider s ID to Trapeze and to trigger the collection of trip data, such as GPS coordinates, confirmation that the vehicle is where it should be when the driver records a rider no-show, etc. The ability to manually enter the ID is a fallback capability in the event the card is unreadable. The Trapeze system can distinguish between manual and card events. Trapeze should be contacted directly for technical details. Please contact Jeff Lougheed at (905) x4837 or Jeff.Lougheed@trapezegroup.com. Question #27 Can you provide the Trapeze API for this messaging? Does Trapeze have the ability to enforce trip order and or allow out of order trip completion? Response: The Trapeze system does support enforcing trip order. Trapeze should be contacted directly for technical details. Question #28 Please clarify the extent of payroll data expected to be captured by the MDT. Response: Please see the above response to Question #13. 8

9 Question #29 Is there a corresponding system to which vehicle fluid use data is to be sent/stored/retrieved? Response: No. Question #30 Is the intention to only disable input, yet leave the screen readable if in manifest mode, not navigation. Response: Yes, the only requirement is to disable input. There are various ways to accomplish this when the driver starts moving when on various screens, so the vendor should describe how their unit performs this function. Question #31 In what format are the maps, photos transmitted? Is the intent to transmit during pull out, all potential images, or just those desginated within the assigned manifest at time of pull out? Response: Veolia is interested in Proposers implementation of GPS mapping and whether that involves map data pre-loaded to the MDC or downloaded on-the-fly. Proposers should identify the proposed map data format and the source of the data. Please see the response to Question #21 regarding the downloading of client photos. Question #32 Requirement # 10 includes a mandatory requirement to process swipe cards. However the swipe card readers are listed as an option. Are the readers truly optional? Is Veolia expecting perhaps to acquire readers themselves? If so, what interface should be expected? Response: Respondents should propose an optional card swipe feature. Veolia will determine whether or not to include the card swipe feature in the final contract after assessing the overall project cost and value to SF Paratransit. Item 10 refers to the generic ability to be able to support ID cards of various formats and properly record that activity in Trapeze. Even if Veolia does not install swipe cards initially, the proposed system is required to support future expansion for them. Question #33 What is the number of total daily trips (ADA + Group Van Service) Of the total how many are: i. Demand Response trips (one-offs) ii. Standing orders (subscription/reoccurring trips) 9

10 Response: As of June 30, 2011, the average number of total daily trips (SF Access + Group Van service) is 1,379. Approximately 257 of the daily average are demand responsive trips (50% of SF Access) and 1,122 are standing orders (50% of SF Access and 100% of Group Van). Question #34 Does the authority assume the cost of providing Trapeze PASS/MON licenses to be used with the IVR or does that need to be included in the proposal? Response: Proposer should include in their proposal the cost of any additional Trapeze PASS/MON licenses required for Proposer s IVR solution to connect to PASS/MON. Phone numbers will be provided with the trip data, so there should be no specific Trapeze license required for IVR. If the proposer chooses to implement a solution provided by Trapeze, all license fees should be included in the proposal. Question #35 Does the authority want the IVR service to be hosted on-premise or is an offpremise solution is acceptable? For off-premise hosted IVR solution, what sort of remote connectivity can be supplied (bandwidth? Dedicate site-to-site VPN? Etc.). This also applies if for the provision of providing service via PDAs/smartphones, website, etc. Response: Either solution is acceptable. Veolia s third-party housed data center located in San Francisco has a 2-port, 3Mbps bandwidth connection. Data is tunneled via a Cisco VPN device with secure point-to-point client profiles. Bandwidth usage for the primary port averaged 155k inbound and 195k outbound for the month of July Bandwidth usage for the alternate port averaged 549bps inbound and 143bps outbound. The peak usage during the period was 4.3Mbps. Proposer should be cognizant of the 3Mbps bandwidth soft-ceiling. Although the bandwidth is burstable beyond 3Mbps, Veolia is looking for solutions that will minimize bursts so as to not incur additional bandwidth expenses. Proposers should fully describe the anticipated impact their proposed solution will have on the data center bandwidth usage. Question #36 Please provide the make/model of the phone system the authority uses? Response: Please see the response to Question #16. Question #37 Does the phone system support SIP? Response: Yes. Question #38 What is the maximum phone system capacity? Can it be increased if required? 10

11 Please provide daily or monthly call totals (call coming into the call center) as well as a % breakdown of calls by function if available (i.e. 25% for trip booking, 10% for lost & found, 50% for trip confirmation, etc.) Response: The system offers a maximum capacity of 171 sets (including up to 75 IP phones, actual number determined by system configuration) and four ports of built-in voic . Capacity may be increased to a maximum capacity of 271 sets (including up to 175 IP phones) through an upgraded processor expansion card. Paul: SF Access call center statistics, even though CB thinks Broker will host the IVR. Question #39 Page 1 - last paragraph - "The predictive calling function shall be configurable per rider." Can you please clarify what type of configurability you are looking for. Does this mean that you should be able to turn off / on different types of messages for the rider? Response: Yes, the user should be able to specify which rider will receive each type of call, the time of day the rider may be called, and whether to call the rider s cell phone, if available.. Question #40 Is TDD necessary to meet the ADA needs of the contract? Or can the vendor propose alternative means for speech impaired riders to receive notifications based on their profile? (i.e, make SMS mandatory for outbound notifications) Response: TDD is not required for the IVR function. Any solution that makes the system more accessible should be fully described. Question #41 What would be the peak number of vehicle arrivals in an hour? Response: The peak number of vehicle arrivals in an hour is 542, broken down as follows: SF Access = 92 SFMTA Group Van = 382 DAAS Group Van = 61 Shopping = 7 Question #42 Do you want to provide messages for both demand and subscription style trips? Response: Yes, the system should eb able to provide messages for all types of trips. Question #43 Do you want to provide night before reminders to your clients? If so, for both demand and subscription trips? 11

12 Response: Reminders are not required, but can be provided as a value added option. If offered by Proposer, Veolia should be able to rely on this capability. If offered, such messages should be configurable by client and type of trip. Question #44 What is the average number of trips per rider each day? Response: For the fiscal year ending June 30, 2011 the average number of trips pre rider each day was Question #45 With regards for the optional inbound IVR system allowing review and cancelling of trips: Did you want the IVR system to gate calls to your agent queues, or reside behind an existing PBX What type of peak call traffic are you currently seeing for your agent queues? Do you have a breakdown of the types of requests? What is the average time in queue for an agent? What is the average duration of time for each type of request? Is there any spare capacity on the PBX (if applicable), and if so, what type of ports are available (analog, digital, sip)? Does the existing PBX support Automated Number Identification (caller id being passed through). Response: We have no particular preference whether the IVR system should gate calls to agent queues or reside behind the existing PBX. Veolia is open to either method. Question #46 Can there be some technical requirements added to the Technical Compliance Matrix that deal with IVR / Predictive Dialling? Response: Our interest here is for the vendor to propose solutions and associated costs for IVR functionality. Currently, there are no specific requirements related to this item. Question #47 Do you have a preference for a hosted or on-premise IVR system? Response: No. Question #48 If on-premise, will you provide all the phone line infrastructure and the associated monthly phone charges? Response: Yes. Question #49 If on-premise, what phone system / PBX would we need to interface with? Make, Model, and preferred integration method. Please provide phone system vendor contact information if possible. 12

13 Response: Please see the response to Question #18. Question #50 Please clarify who will be responsible for providing/procuring cellular data component of the system. (i.e. who will be contracting with the cellular company for the data for the system) Response: Contractor s price for cellular communications setup and on-going expenses shall be priced as an option. Veolia reserves the right to omit cellular communications expenses from the contract and to contract directly with a cellular service provider of its choice. Question #51 Please provide more information regarding the Smart Card technologies that the MDC system will be expected to support. (i.e. type of card, functionality, etc.) Response: As a required element the MDC system shall be capable of reading a CR-80 magnetic swipe card for purposes of verifying rider eligibility for use of the service. Generally, any equipment proposed, in order to be compatible with the Clipper system, should be designed in compliance with ISO which is the dominant standard for electronic fare payment systems in North America. Question #52 Please confirm who will be responsible for the procurement, installation and configuration of thewi Fi network. Response: Veolia will be responsible for the WIFI network and related costs. (We should make sure we want to fund this since having WIFI can add costs to each unit.) Question #53 Requirement #36 System captures necessary payroll data for support of contractor payroll functions. Please elaborate on necessary payroll data. Response: Please see the response to Question #13. Question #54 Requirement #24 MDC capable of displaying real-time traffic conditions Please provide examples of how you envision this to be accomplished (i.e. actual traffic patterns on a map view in vehicle (red green orange), updating of manifests based on actual arrival /departure, etc. Response: Currently, there is no specific requirement. The vendor should propose their solution. Question #55 The Certification of Primary Contractor Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters is a required submittal; however, this form was not included in the RFP. Can you please send us the form? 13

14 Response: Please see Attachment V to this addendum. Question #56 How many copies of the Technical Proposal are required? The RFP only states how many copies to send of the Cost Proposal. Also, do you require a CD of the Technical Proposal? Response: Please see the response to Question #2. Question #57 Please confirm that a certified cheque or letter of credit are acceptable alternatives to the proposal and performance bonds required under Section 10 and Section , 3rd bullet, respectively. Response: Section 10 is changed to read, Contractor shall obtain a performance bond for the use of Veolia, which bond shall be executed by a corporate surety registered in the State of California and shall be in the amount of two hundred thousand U.S. dollars ($200,000). The performance bond shall be kept in full force and effect at all times during the term of the contract. The amount of the performance bond is intended to cover the costs to Veolia to re-procure the project and the costs in delay of implementation, should Contractor default. Certified checks, letters of credit, and other forms of surety are not acceptable to Veolia for this project. The performance bond is due within 30 days of the date that a Notice to Proceed with work under the contract is issued by Veolia. Section , third bullet refers to a separate proposal bond, in the amount of ten thousand U.S. dollars ($10,000), which must be included in any proposal submitted. Failure to include a proposal bond as specified will result in the proposal being deemed non-responsive and discarded. A certified check in the same amount is acceptable in lieu of the proposal bond. Question #58 Please confirm that the term of the performance bond will expire on the first anniversary of system acceptance (the end of the warranty period). Response: The performance bond will expire on the date of final system acceptance, unless Contractor has contracted for any optional services continuing beyond system acceptance. Please see the response to Question #24. Question #59 Please provide the website link to the San Francisco Administrative Code website that was missing from Section 23, First Source Hiring Program of page 19 of the RFP. 14

15 Response: The same link may be found in Section 19, page 17 of the RFP. Question #60 What is the definition of a Consultant as used in Section!V. TRAINEES on pages of the RFP? Is this title interchangeable with Contractor for the purposes of this project? Response: The use of the term Consultant in this context is synonymous with Contractor for the purposes of this project. Question #61 Please provide technical specifications and interface details of the Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission s proximity reader for the Clipper card program. Response: Please see the response to Question #6. Question #62 Cell # 49 a) of the Technical Specification requires that the system must be able to withstand storage temperatures in excess of +60 C (158 F), yet Cell # Requires Bidders to provide test results for the onboard equipment demonstrating a storage temperature of up to +175 F (79.4 C). Please confirm the +175 F storage temperature requirement. Response: Cell #49 is changed to read, The device shall not be installed in immediately proximity to a direct heat source. Question #63 If a Bidder requires a server in their solution that has maximum performance requirements that are significantly lower than the specifications listed in Cell #122 of the Technical Specifications, may Bidder s propose a similar server with a more economical configuration? Response: NO, in order to be an approved equal the proposed server must meet or exceed the standards specified in the RFP. Question #64 Does Veolia or the San Francisco Paratransit operate any WLAN access points that can be used to support the Wi-Fi option, or are Bidder s required to include the pricing for this equipment and its installation in their proposals? If Bidder s are to include this pricing, please indicate how many locations will need access points. Response: Please see the response to Question #8. Question #65 Would Veolia please provide a complete breakdown of their paratransit vehicle fleet (i.e. make / model/ year)? 15

16 Response: Please see Attachment II of this addendum. Question #66 With respect to the vehicle installations: a. What is the minimum and maximum number of vehicles available for installations per day? b. What is the location where installations will take place? c. During what hours will the vehicles be available for installations (i.e. weekdays or evenings/weekends)? d. Will a driver be provided to move vehicles for installation and testing purposes? Response: Vehicles are generally available for MDC related installations weekdays between 5pm and 5am and during weekends. Up to 6 of the 61 SFTMA-owned vehicles may also be available on weekdays during daytime hours. Generally the smaller providers do not have sufficient spare vehicles to commit vehicles during the daytime hours. Veolia expects that installations will take place within the City and County of San Francisco or in the City of Brisbane in northern San Mateo County; however, until completion of the selection of van service providers, Veolia is uncertain of the exact locations. Proposer shall include in its proposal all costs related to installation, including a licensed and qualified driver to move vehicles for testing purposes. Proposers are reminded of the $2,000,000 auto liability policy requirements of the RFP. Question #67 To facilitate the call out feature and/or interactive voice response systems, more information is needed regarding the existing telephone system. Regarding the switch: i. Who is the switch provider? ii. What is the model and revision of the switch? iii. What kind of telephony lines are provisioned? iv. When was it installed? v. How many lines does it support? vi. Would you consider expanding the capacity of the switch if necessary to support an IVR? 16

17 vii. Does the current system provide a main menu and call steering to different extensions (e.g. customer service, operations, main office) Response: Please see the responses to Question #18 and Question #38. Installation of this system is anticipated to be completed by mid-november Question #68 Regarding call volumes: i. What are the days and hours of the call center? ii. How many calls does the call center receive in a day/month/year? iii. How many agents are on duty in a shift? iv. What is the average duration of call? v. What is the average hold time of a call? vi. What is the abandonment rate? vii. What is the purpose of the calls by percentage (e.g. Where s My Bus? ). Scheduled Arrival, Fare Information, Lost & Found, Complaints, etc.) Response: The SF Access call center(s) accepts calls between 7 am and 6 pm, 365 days per year. Currently there are two separate call centers, a local call center which handles ETA ( Where s My Ride ) inquiries and a remote call center which handles trip reservations and cancellations. Beginning mid-november 2011, Veolia anticipates having a single call center with up to 6 reservations call agents and 5 ETA call agents. Currently, the SF Access call center(s) receive approximately 199,000 calls per year: 116,000 reservations calls and 83,000 ETA calls. The average call handling time is 2.15 minutes for reservations and 1.05 minute for ETA. The average hold times are 0.16 minute and 0.49 minute, respectively. During the most recent fiscal year ending June 30 th, the reservations call center had 591 abandoned calls and the ETA call center had 7,611 abandoned calls. 17

18 Attachment II Vehicle Information { 18

19 19

20 20

21 21

22 Attachment III Pre-proposal Conference Sign-in Sheet 22

23

24

25

26

27 PRICING FORM RFP Mobile Data Computers Line Item Description Total Price Notes 1.1 Project Management $. A 1.2 Systems Design, Engineering, and Documentation $. B 1.3 Software Development $. C 1.4 Training and Training Documentation $. D 1.5 Mobile Data Computers and other hardware $. E Total Cost of Required Elements $. 2.1 Monthly communications/hosting costs $. F 2.2 Wi-Fi Connectivity $. F GPS Map Data Updates (120 units twice annually) Direct Communications Between Supervisory and Drivers $. F $. F 2.5 Route Shadowing $. F 2.6 Magnetic Swipe Feature $. F 2.7 Predictive Dialing $. F 2.8 MDC Interface for Future Clipper Card Support $. F Total Cost of Desired Elements $.

28 PRICING FORM RFP Mobile Data Computers Note A B C D E F Description Covers program management including all contract deliverables through completion of pilot and system acceptance Represents the cost for engineering, design and documentation development. Includes engineering review, quality assurance, testbed setup, and all testing performed through system implementation. Includes all proprietary software and customization of existing software developed for the MDC project only. Includes Contractor training costs (labor and materials) for all project components as specified in the technical specifications. Includes all MDC components and related hardware, MDC installation, and predictive dialing system hardware Optional Desired Element Proposer understands and agrees that the rates proposed on this Pricing Form shall be valid for a minimum of nine (9) months from the date of submittal. Signature of Authorized Representative Date Printed Name Name of Firm

29 RFP /19/2011 Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters This contract is a covered transaction for purposes of 49 CFR Part 29. As such, the contractor is required to verify that none of the contractor, its principals, as defined at 49 CFR , or affiliates, as defined at 49 CFR , are excluded or disqualified as defined at 49 CFR and The contractor is required to comply with 49 CFR 29, Subpart C and must include the requirement to comply with 49 CFR 29, Subpart C in any lower tier covered transaction it enters into. By signing and submitting its bid or proposal, the bidder or proposer certifies as follows: The certification in this clause is a material representation of fact relied upon by San Francisco Paratransit. If it is later determined that the bidder or proposer knowingly rendered an erroneous certification, in addition to remedies available to San Francisco Paratransit, the Federal Government may pursue available remedies, including but not limited to suspension and/or debarment. The bidder or proposer agrees to comply with the requirements of 49 CFR 29, Subpart C while this offer is valid and throughout the period of any contract that may arise from this offer. The bidder or proposer further agrees to include a provision requiring such compliance in its lower tier covered transactions. Signature of Authorized Representative Date Printed Name Name of Firm SF Paratransit

30 Attachment VI Acknowledgement of Receipt of Addendum The undersigned acknowledges receipt of Addendum #1 to RFP This receipt must be included with firm s technical proposal. Any proposal submitted without a completed Acknowledgement of Receipt of Addendum will be deemed non-responsive and discarded. Authorized Signature Dated Printed Name Company 30