THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED. THIS ADDENDUM SHALL BECOME A PART OF THIS SOLICITATION.

Transcription

1 Denver Public Schools Purchasing Department 900 Grant Street, Room 301 Denver, Colorado Request for Proposal BD1354 ADDENDUM NUMBER ONE THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED. THIS ADDENDUM SHALL BECOME A PART OF THIS SOLICITATION. Amend Request for Proposal BD1354, Sharepoint Tools, dated May 27, 2009, as follows: Questions submitted and corresponding answers. 1. Page 17, item 1.7 states that content must be synchronized between MOSS 2003 and Is this a one-time synchronization, done at time of migration to 2007, or will synchronization be expected to occur for a duration of time (days) Synchronization is expected to occur for a duration of time. Duration could be pre-set or could be an off/on. 2. Page 17, items 1.6 and 1.5 are worded such that they lead me to believe that site migrations will be done in an automated fashion. Is this true? Is this a requirement? Sites are migrated, generally with user intervention, rather than setting a batch to run at some point in time. We expect to be able to use a tool to schedule a migration that contains 1 or more sites. Example: scheduling migrations during non business hours. User Acceptance Testing would be conducted upon completion of the migration. 3. Exhibit A states the Maintenance and Support services agreement. Since the entire focus of this RFP surrounds third party software, do all of the terms in this exhibit apply? Some terms may not apply given a solution. Please address terms not applicable in proposal. 4. Page 23, section E, item 1 states that the vendor must be onsite for the duration of the technical implementation. This is worded to mean the vendor of the solution (Sogeti), NOT the vendor of the 3rd party software(s), correct? We expect to work with a single source who should expect to provide the management software and a Subject Matter Expert. 5. Sogeti will recommend and implement the software, but the Colorado Dept. of Education is responsible for acquiring the software, is this correct? We, Denver Public Schools, expect to work with a single, responsible party. Addendum #One BD1354 Page 1 of 5

2 6. Page 22, section 9.3(inclusive) states that Sogeti will provide at least 1 migration from 2003 to 2007 and 1 content move within What is the complexity and size of the site for each of the tasks? The time to complete this may vary greatly depending on this data. Expectation is to: a. Map tools to our SharePoint environment. b. Move at least one (1) 2003 SharePoint site that contains no customized content to the existing 2007 SharePoint architecture. c. Move at least one (1) 2007 SharePoint site within the existing 2007 SharePoint architecture. d. Move at least one (1) 2007 SharePoint list or item within the existing 2007 SharePoint architecture. e. Move at least one item from one 2007 SharePoint farm to another. This is to ensure the software is connected and operating properly. DPS reserves right to determine if the migration was a success or not. 7. What is the scale of your Sharepoint environment that you would like the capability to migrate? Number of servers? Number of sites? Collections? Recursive sites? Even an approximation would be helpful. Size of the 2003 environment is 13GB with 3 front end Servers and about 20 top level sites. This is a correction: The RFP stated there were 2 front end servers in the 2003 environment. Additionally, the SharePoint 2007 Environment has 3 front ends in production, 1 front end in QA, and 1 front end in Dev. 8. Are the current installations MOSS or WSS? A combination of both? The 2003 SharePoint environment is a combination of stand-alone WSS sites and enterprise SharePoint Portal Server. The 2007 SharePoint environment is an enterprise MOSS installation. 9. Will migrations from 2003 to 2007 be done on the same server or to new servers? New Servers. 10. We are unclear as to what the expectations of Sogeti are and what the expectations of the 3rd party toolset are. Should the 3rd party toolset be able to provide all of the functionality of Requirements (inclusive) 1 8? If not, what sections apply to consulting services and what sections apply to the 3rd party tools. We expect to work through a single responsible source for purchase, installation, test migration, validation, and knowledge transfer. 11. Are the MOSS/WSS 2007 environments already in place or will be responsible for setting them up? How many environments need to be setup? The 2007 environment and top site collections are already in place. 12. Is the June 26 due date firm? Addendum #One BD1354 Page 2 of 5

3 This date is somewhat flexible to + 1 week of that date The functionality Content Types is new to SharePoint In this section, are you referring to a document template for the library? If not could you clarify what you are referring to? This requirement contains a typographical error. It should refer to the 2007 environment only: Must be able to move content types between the SharePoint 2007 farms The term synchronize leads us to believe you are going to attempt to run both a 2003 environment and a 2007 environment at the same time. Is this the case? If not, could you clarify what functionality you are hoping for? We expect to have the option, yes Workflow did not exist in 2003 without a 3rd party tool. Have you installed a 3rd party tool or possibly written some custom code to reach this functionality? Could you provide additional details about the workflow tool or custom functionality? No, we only used the canned review/approve functionality in Is this referring to Outlook Public Folders? Are you wishing to migrate them into your SharePoint environment? This item does refer to migrating Outlook Public Folders to the 2007 SharePoint Environment, however, this is a future request/effort In each of these sections you refer to the ability to move different functionality. Can you clarify what you are meaning by move? Is this something you would like to happen within a site, between sites, between site collections, etc. Is a manual process ok for the move or are you looking for something automatic? We generally relate to migrate as migrating between farms. We generally relate to moving as re organizing content within a farm. We expect a tool to meet each of the conditions listed. Our idea is that a tool will automate and simplify the process Within SharePoint site collections are not nested, they have the appearance of being nested through the URL. In this section is the desire to be able to move the site collection to a different URL, for instance: moves to Correct, site collections are separate. We would like the flexibility of provisioning site collections and content databases within and between 2007 farms Could you describe the functionality you are looking for? Must be able to delegate rights to different support levels and technical personnel. Would be nice to have an easy to use, visual interface for supporting users on the fly. Addendum #One BD1354 Page 3 of 5

4 Could you describe the functionality you are looking for? Must be able to delegate rights to different support levels and technical personnel. Would be nice to have an easy to use, visual interface for supporting users on the fly. 21. Will DPS accept NASPO WSCA terms and conditions in lieu of the terms of the RFP? The Terms and Conditions that are set forth in this bid will be what Governs this agreement. The NASPO/WSCA terms would not be accepted. 22. Exhibit A states the Maintenance and Support services agreement. Since the entire focus of this RFP surrounds third party software, do all of the terms in this exhibit apply? The terms outlined in Exhibit A do indeed generally apply to this RFP. Any specific issues with these terms can be handled in any post award negotiations. 23. Will Denver PS accept NASPO WSCA terms and conditions in lieu of the terms of the RFP? Denver Public Schools will NOT accept NASPO/WSCA terms in lieu of those in the RFP Due date and time Remains: June 10, :00 p.m. local standard time at 900 Grant St, Room 301 If your proposal has been submitted and you wish to amend it, please modify your proposal on company letterhead. The amended proposal must be received prior to the time and date set for the proposal opening. Each modification submitted to the District's Purchasing Office located at 900 Grant Street, Room 301, must have Vendor s name and return address and the applicable RFP number and title of the RFP clearly marked on the face of the envelope. If more than one modification is submitted, the modification bearing the latest date of receipt by the District's Purchasing Office will be considered the valid modification. This addendum must be acknowledged, whether or not you amend your proposal. This Addendum may be faxed to Brian Swift at , providing you do not need to amend your proposal. PRINT OR TYPE YOUR INFORMATION Name of Company: Fax: Address: City/State: Zip: Contact Person: Title: Phone: Authorized Representative s Signature: Phone: Printed Name: Title: Date: Approved by: Date: Reviewed by: Date: Addendum #One BD1354 Page 4 of 5

5 Addendum #One BD1354 Page 5 of 5