HomeMy WebLinkAboutRFP - 9908 LICENSING, PERMITTING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS & IMPLEMENTATION SERVICES
Financial Services
Purchasing Division
215 N. Mason St. 2nd Floor
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6775
fcgov.com/purchasing
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
for
Licensing, Permitting and Code Enforcement Systems
& Implementation Services
RFP # 9908
RFP RESPONSE DUE: 3:00 PM MST, February 9, 2024
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 2 of 55
Table of Contents
1 RFP INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND .............................................................................. 5
1.1 Letter from Procurement Director ....................................................................................... 5
1.2 RFP Intro ............................................................................................................................. 8
1.2 About The City ..................................................................................................................... 8
1.2.1 City LPCE Departments ............................................................................................................. 9
1.2.2 Information Technology Organization ..................................................................................... 10
1.2.3 Other City Initiatives ............................................................................................................... 10
1.3 Project Objectives .............................................................................................................. 11
1.4 RFP Schedule of Events ..................................................................................................... 16
1.5 RFP Minimum Requirements .............................................................................................. 16
1.6 RFP Questions ................................................................................................................... 17
1.7 Addenda ............................................................................................................................ 17
1.8 Proposal General Instructions ............................................................................................ 17
1.9 Proposal Format ................................................................................................................ 18
1.10 Proposal Submission Requirements ................................................................................. 18
2 PROJECT SCOPE ................................................................................................................... 19
2.1 Drivers For Replacement ................................................................................................... 21
2.2 Current State ..................................................................................................................... 22
2.2.1 Existing Technical And Accela Environment ............................................................................ 22
2.2.2 LPCE Current Statistics ............................................................................................................ 24
2.2.3 LPCE Current Hi-Level Workflow ............................................................................................. 25
2.3 Target State ....................................................................................................................... 30
2.3.1 Functional Components ........................................................................................................... 30
2.3.2 LPCE Fee Schedules ................................................................................................................ 31
2.3.3 Interfaces And Integration Points ........................................................................................... 32
2.3.4 Data Access Solution – Reporting And Queries ....................................................................... 32
2.3.5 Comprehensive Solution .......................................................................................................... 32
2.3.6 Ongoing Software Product Support ......................................................................................... 41
2.4 Optional Modules and Services .......................................................................................... 41
2.5 Technology Managed Services .......................................................................................... 42
3 PROPOSAL EVENTS & EVALUATION ................................................................................. 43
3.1 Pre-Proposal Conference Conducted ................................................................................. 43
3.2 Vendors’ Written RFP Clarification Requests Due .............................................................. 43
3.3 Proposal AddendA ............................................................................................................. 43
3.4 Proposals Due .................................................................................................................... 43
3.5 LPCE Software Demonstrations ......................................................................................... 43
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 3 of 55
3.6 Oral Presentation ............................................................................................................... 44
3.7 Reference Checks .............................................................................................................. 44
3.8 Down Select Vendor Of Choice .......................................................................................... 44
3.9 Initial Solution Scoping Sessions ....................................................................................... 45
3.10 Vendor Best and Final Offer ............................................................................................ 45
3.11 The City Confirms Total Solution & Vendor of Choice ..................................................... 45
3.12 Contract & SOW Negotiations Complete with Vendor ..................................................... 45
3.13 Contracts Awarded .......................................................................................................... 46
3.14 Implementation Project Begins ........................................................................................ 46
3.15 Proposal Evaluation ......................................................................................................... 46
3.16 Evaluation Criteria ........................................................................................................... 46
4 POLICIES GOVERNING THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS ................................................ 49
4.1 Basis for Proposal .............................................................................................................. 49
4.2 Terms and Conditions ........................................................................................................ 49
4.3 Signing of Proposals .......................................................................................................... 49
4.4 Cost of Proposal ................................................................................................................ 49
4.5 Conflict of Interest, Non-Collusion and Anti-Lobbying ....................................................... 50
4.6 Confidentiality, Materials Submitted and Ownership of Proposals ..................................... 50
4.7 Disqualification or Rejection of Proposals .......................................................................... 50
4.8 Right to Waive proposal Irregularities ............................................................................... 51
4.9 RFP Irregularities ............................................................................................................... 51
4.10 Prior Agreements ............................................................................................................. 51
4.11 Withdrawal of Proposals .................................................................................................. 51
4.12 Amending of Proposals .................................................................................................... 51
4.13 Reservation of Rights ...................................................................................................... 52
4.14 Proposal Offer Firm .......................................................................................................... 52
4.15 Exceptions to RFP Specifications ..................................................................................... 52
4.16 Consideration of Proposals .............................................................................................. 52
4.17 Award of Contract ............................................................................................................ 53
4.18 Notice to Unsuccessful Vendors ....................................................................................... 53
4.19 Negotiation of Contracts .................................................................................................. 53
4.20 Execution of Contracts ..................................................................................................... 54
4.21 TMG Consulting ............................................................................................................... 54
5 ATTACHMENT LISTING ....................................................................................................... 55
Attachment A – Response Form .............................................................................................. 55
Attachment B – Integration And Interfaces ............................................................................. 55
Attachment C – Pricing Form ................................................................................................... 55
Attachment D – Staffing Form ................................................................................................. 55
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 4 of 55
Attachment E – Functional Matrix ............................................................................................ 55
Attachment F – Exceptions Conflicts and Clarifications ........................................................... 55
Attachment G – Manual Processes .......................................................................................... 55
Attachment H – SaaS Cyber Vendor Questionnaire ................................................................. 55
Attachment I – Vendor Acknowledgement Form ..................................................................... 55
Attachment J – Insurance Form .............................................................................................. 55
Attachment K – Sample LPCE Types ....................................................................................... 55
Attachment L – Sample Critical Reports .................................................................................. 55
Attachment M – Data Conversion ............................................................................................ 55
Attachment N – Sample Planning Application TYpes ............................................................... 55
Attachment O – Special Provisions .......................................................................................... 55
Attachment P – Records Retention Schedule .......................................................................... 55
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 5 of 55
1 RFP INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND
1.1 LETTER FROM PROCUREMENT DIRECTOR
The City of Fort Collins (“City”) is requesting proposals from qualified firms for the purchase of a
Licensing, Permitting and Code Enforcement (LPCE) Solution and Solution Implementation
Services.
As part of City’s commitment to sustainability, proposals must be submitted online through the
Rocky Mountain E-Purchasing System (RMEPS) at http://www.bidnetdirect.com/colorado/city-
of-fort-collins. Note: please ensure adequate time to submit proposals through RMEPS.
Proposals not submitted by the designated Opening Date and Time will not be accepted by
RMEPS.
A pre-proposal meeting will be held virtually on January 17, 2024 at 10:00 AM MDT. The
pre-proposal meeting will be hosted on-line via Microsoft Teams. Select or copy/paste the link
below into your browser for access to the meeting. Please be prepared to announce your name
and mute your microphone:
Microsoft Teams
Click here to join the meeting
Web Address: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-teams/join-a-meeting?rtc=1
Meeting ID: 297 302 248 485
Passcode: zXZNqZ
All questions should be submitted, in writing via email, to Gerry Paul, Purchasing
Director at gpaul@fcgov.com, with a copy to Jim Anderson (jim.anderson@tmgconsulting.com)
no later than 3:00 PM MDT on January 22, 2024. Please format your e-mail to include RFP
9908 Licensing, Permitting and Code Enforcement Systems and Implementation Services in the
subject line. Questions received after this deadline may not be answered. Responses to all
questions submitted before the deadline will be addressed in an addendum and posted on the
Rocky Mountain E-Purchasing System webpage.
Rocky Mountain E-Purchasing System hosted by BidNet
A copy of the RFP may be obtained at http://www.bidnetdirect.com/colorado/city-of-fort-collins.
This RFP has been posted utilizing the following Commodity Code(s):
§ 20800 Computer Software for Microcomputers, Systems, Including Cloud-Based
(Preprogrammed)
§ 20880 Software, Microcomputer (Not Otherwise Classified)
§ 20900 Computer Software for Mini and Mainframe Computers (Preprogrammed)
§ 20987 Software, Mini/Mainframe Computer (Not Otherwise Classified)
§ 92045 Software Maintenance/Support
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 6 of 55
Prohibition of Unlawful Discrimination: The City of Fort Collins, in accordance with the
provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 252, 42 US.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-
4) and the Regulations, hereby notifies all bidders that it will affirmatively ensure that any
contract entered into pursuant to this advertisement, disadvantaged business enterprises will be
afforded full and fair opportunity to submit bids in response to this invitation and will not be
discriminated against on the grounds of race, color, or national origin in consideration for an
award.
The City strictly prohibits unlawful discrimination based on an individual’s gender (regardless of
gender identity or gender expression), race, color, religion, creed, national origin, ancestry, age
40 years or older, marital status, disability, sexual orientation, genetic information, or other
characteristics protected by law. For this policy “sexual orientation” means a person’s actual or
perceived orientation toward heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bisexuality. The City also
strictly prohibits unlawful harassment in the workplace, including sexual harassment. Further,
The City strictly prohibits unlawful retaliation against a person who engages in protected activity.
Protected activity includes an employee complaining that he or she has been discriminated
against in violation of the above policy or participating in an employment discrimination
proceeding.
The City requires its Contractors to comply with The City’s policy for equal employment
opportunity and to prohibit unlawful discrimination, harassment, and retaliation. This
requirement applies to all third-party Contractors and their subcontractors at every tier.
Public Viewing Copy: The City is a governmental entity subject to the Colorado Open Records
Act, C.R.S. §§ 24-72-200.1 et seq. (“CORA”). Any proposals submitted hereunder are subject
to public disclosure by the City pursuant to CORA and City ordinances. Vendors may submit
one (1) additional complete proposal clearly marked “FOR PUBLIC VIEWING.” In this version
of their proposal, Vendors may redact text and/or data that it deems confidential or proprietary
pursuant to CORA. All pricing will be considered public records subject to disclosure under
CORA and as such pricing cannot be redacted from the “FOR PUBLIC VIEWING” version of the
proposal. Failure to provide a public viewing copy will be considered a waiver of any claim of
confidentiality under CORA without regard to how the applicant’s proposal or certain pages of
the proposal are marked confidential, proprietary, or similar. Such a statement does not
necessarily exempt such documentation from public disclosure if required by CORA, by order of
a court of appropriate jurisdiction, or other applicable law. Generally, under CORA, trade
secrets, confidential commercial information and financial data information may not be required
to be disclosed by The City. Proposals may not be marked “Confidential” or ‘Proprietary’ in their
entirety. By responding to this RFP, Vendors hereby waives all claims for damages against the
City for the City’s good faith compliance with CORA. All provisions and pricing of any
contract resulting from this request for proposal will be public information.
Vendor Registration: The City requires new Vendors receiving awards from the City to submit
IRS form W-9 and requires all Vendors to accept Direct Deposit (Electronic) payment. If
needed, the W-9 form, and the Vendor Direct Deposit Authorization Form can be found on the
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 7 of 55
City’s Purchasing website at www.fcgov.com/purchasing under Vendor Reference Documents.
Please do not submit these documents with your proposal, however, if you take exception
to participating in Direct Deposit (Electronic) payments please clearly note such in your proposal
as an exception. The City may waive the requirement to participate in Direct Deposit
(Electronic) payments at its sole discretion.
Sales Prohibited/Conflict of Interest: No officer, employee, or member of City Council, shall
have a financial interest in the sale to the City of any real or personal property, equipment,
material, supplies or services where such officer or employee exercises directly or indirectly any
decision-making authority concerning such sale or any supervisory authority over the services to
be rendered. This rule also applies to subcontracts with the City. Soliciting or accepting any
gift, gratuity favor, entertainment, kickback, or any item of monetary value from any person who
has or is seeking to do business with the City of Fort Collins is prohibited.
Collusive or Sham Proposals: Any proposal deemed to be collusive, or a sham proposal will
be rejected and reported to authorities as such. Your authorized signature of this proposal
assures that such proposal is genuine and is not a collusive or sham proposal.
The City reserves the right to reject all proposals and to waive any irregularities or informalities.
Utilization of Award by Other Agencies: The City reserves the right to allow other state and
local governmental agencies, political subdivisions, and/or school districts to utilize the resulting
award under all terms and conditions specified and upon agreement by all parties. Usage by
any other entity shall not have a negative impact on the City in the current term or in any future
terms.
TMG Consulting: The City has retained the services of TMG Consulting, an RIA Company for
assistance with this procurement. Confidential information shall be shared with TMG
Consulting.
Sincerely,
Gerry Paul
Purchasing Director
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 8 of 55
1.2 RFP INTRO
This document constitutes a Request for Proposal hereinafter “RFP” for the purchase and
implementation of a Solution for Licensing, Permitting and Code Enforcement (LPCE). This
solution will consist of an LPCE System including Cashiering, a Customer Self-Service Portal, a
Mobile Workforce Management System (MWM), and the provision of Ongoing Operational
Support/Managed Services (Both Business-focused and Technical-focused) for these systems.
The City is requiring a cloud-hosted solution that is easy to configure in-house for new permit
and license types. The goal is to implement an integrated software suite that will lead the City
to an efficient and user-friendly system. The primary goal is to streamline processes, enhance
operational excellence, and allow staff to focus their time on the most valuable activities.
This will be a competitive solicitation process. Qualified individuals, firms, contractors,
consultants, or entities hereinafter “Vendors,” who meet the requirements set forth in this RFP
and can provide the services requested, are encouraged to participate.
The City is seeking proposals only from experienced Vendors in response to this RFP. The City
is looking for a Vendor that has a well-defined methodology with a documented success record
and professional, experienced resources, and who is prepared to take on contractual
responsibility for the implementation. The City also expects a full partnership with a single
Vendor (including involvement of a System Integrator) where all key decisions require the City’s
involvement and voice at the leadership level. The System Integrator and Software Vendor will
be accountable contractually to the City. The City expects full transparency in all
communications between all parties.
The term Vendor will encompass an individual Software Vendor or System Integrator
submitting a solution with or without partners. In any event there should be a lead Vendor in
the Partnered Solution who is assuming Primary Software Vendor responsibility.
While the Vendor may submit a proposal that utilizes products and/or services from several sub-
contractors, the City is requiring that the Vendor assume primary responsibility as the single
point of contact regarding the completion of the solution implementation effort under the
direction of the City. Vendors must note that the City will inquire about the working history
between partnered Vendors and will encourage partnerships where the parties have
referenceable history together.
1.2 ABOUT THE CITY
Fort Collins is a vibrant community of approximately 168,000 including over 37,000 college
students located 65 miles north of Denver in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains. The City
provides municipal utility services, including electric and stormwater services, for approximately
87,000 customers; water, and wastewater services for approximately 35,000 customers;
broadband services to a growing number of customers throughout the community; and is
considering adding municipal trash services to some of the community in the future.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 9 of 55
For more information about the City of Fort Collins, please visit www.fcgov.com.
1.2.1 CITY LPCE DEPARTMENTS
The users of the current LPCE systems span many areas of the City as well as some entities
outside of the City. The current users of the systems are indicated in blue in the org chart
below.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 10 of 55
1.2.2 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ORGANIZATION
City IT provides support for IT infrastructure and applications. The graphic below displays the IT
organizational structure and number of positions.
1.2.3 OTHER CITY INITIATIVES
The City has other key concurrent initiatives underway over the next one-to-two years,
including, but are not limited to, the following table. These initiatives may have a material
impact to the LPCE project.
# Description
1 Digital Transformation of Fort Collins primary website: www.fcgov.com
2 Implementation of Recreation software
3 Implementation of a new CIS from VertexOne
4 Upgrade and enhancements to ESRI GIS
5 City-wide Organizational Change Management initiative
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 11 of 55
1.3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
LPCE Goals & Objectives
General LPCE Objectives
• Information and Record Keeping: Easily see the history of permits/violations
attached to a specific property or license, link licenses/permits to specific
projects/properties, run and extract reports.
• Workflow: Build workflows for different permit/license types with specific approvals
in defined order, allow for automation of task signoffs based on application, allow
for multiple “statuses” for each task, easily create new workflows. Customizable
notifications for tasks (that is, some workflows will notify when tasks enter a
queue, some will not). Ability to assign a task or project to a specific individual
within a specific department within the City. That is, one-stop shop (application,
review, payment, inspection all in one).
• Approvals Process: Set target times for review/approval, allow “gatekeeping”
function, allow commenting on plans/applications, allow for partial/conditional
approval.
• Document Management and Review: Generate official documents, manage
multiple versions of plans/applications/other submittal documents, allow for
commenting on plans/applications, interface with Citizen Portal and public records
platform to ensure proper documents are publicly available.
• Correspondence Tracking: Automate email communications at key points during
the permit process, see when emails are sent, see when resubmittals are
received.
• Payment Processing: Accept e-check and credit card payments, accept partial
payments, process refunds and voids, reporting.
• Fee Schedules: Maintain list of fees, ability to easily update fees, allow for fee
waiver thresholds, ability to add custom amounts to individual fees.
• Reporting - Self-Service Reporting: Ability to generate reports based on various
metadata relevant to defined processes. Ability to access data directly for easy
custom reporting.
• Mobile application(s): For field workers.
• GIS/Mapping integration: Integration for primary Application as well as mobile
App. Integration of departments outside of CDNS (Community Development &
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 12 of 55
Neighborhood Services) into the system, and, preferably integration of entities
outside of the City as well.
Planning & Development Objectives
• Process Optimization: Improve linkage between Permitting and Land
Development processes. (referencing system between development review
applications and building permits, development construction permits, etc.,
including noting the development review project # on the permit application). Have
the Development Review process within a single system. Including allowing
multiple review rounds/iterations. Implement automated reminders and
notifications for stakeholders.
• Enhanced Online Capabilities: Allow online submissions and document uploads.
Provide comprehensive online status tracking and information access for
applicants. Ability to turn off and on automated communication to applicants at
specific workflow stages. Continued integration with website, GIS, FCMaps,
Citizen Access Portal.
• Customer-Centric Approach: Design systems and processes with the customer in
mind. Ability to send multiple reminders and notifications. Focusing on customer
feedback and engagement, should have the ability to generate and store
Customer Surveys within the system.
• Integration and Efficiency: Fold external project components into the development
review process. [example, Historic Surveys, boards and commissions as
appropriate]. Ensure alignment between development projects and future
construction documents along with external reviews [Historic Preservation, etc.]
during Building Permit stage. Provide easy access to approved plans for Building
permit technicians and applicants.
• Reporting and Data Accessibility: Generate detailed monthly and quarterly reports
to monitor project duration, specifically for how long a project is “in the City’s
hands.” Simplify data extraction for users via excel spreadsheets and empower
users to create reports and queries without IT intervention.
• Process Improvements: Have the option for interrelated records between
Development Review and Building Permits. Opportunities for “Building Code
Review Only “on any permit, linking to the active Development Project. Simplify
and automate the use of system-populated comment letter templates. Additional
formatting and editing should not be necessary.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 13 of 55
Licensing Specific Objectives
• Online application (completion that goes directly into system) with attachments
(supporting documents), workflow (including auto-generated reminders and letters
with ability to update letters easily) and ability to update status - viewable to
customers.
• Online portal for customers to check status of their licenses and ability pull
certificates and wallet cards
• Violation tracking that can also tie into inspector violations if Vendor involved.
• Robust system automation including system generation of things like
license/registration numbers
• Key areas within permitting to avoid issuance based on expired/needed
information within licensing - better linkage between permitting and licensing.
• Ability to easily add license classifications, when needed
Permitting Specific Objectives
• Information & Record Keeping: New construction, financial reports, permit status
reports, expiration reports, generating permits, COs/TCOs, etc.
Additional Expectations
• Linkage between the Permitting and Land Development processes (tighter
referencing system between development review applications and building
permits, such as noting the development review project # on the permit
application)
• Building Permit Application thru Approval (including auto-issuance of certain permit
types, ability to re-open tasks, request clarification/resubmittal, etc.)
• Ability for customers to upload documents online
• TCEF (Transportation Capital Expansion Fees) and other fee types
o Ability to consider the different / unique methodology TCEF (and other fees)
use.
o Ability to see historic instances of TCEF (and other fees) being paid with
previous changes on the property.
• Collaboration between departments, customer self-service (opportunities for better
coordination so customers have a single point-of-contact rather than treating each
sign-off as separate, disconnected process)
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 14 of 55
• Integrated Survey payment processing
• Increased internal and external access to inspection scheduling / information
• Mobile app for building inspectors
• Integrated electronic plan review
Inspections Objectives
• Information & Record Keeping: daily inspection count, inspections assigned to
each inspector,
• Timeline tracking. (tracking 30-day notices for violation letters as well as for TCOs)
• Scheduling Inspections
• Assignment/Perform Inspections (including commenting/ passing / failing
inspections)
• Inspection scheduling (IVR, etc.)
• IVR module/integration capability and/or other functionality (SMS) to provide
alternative methods for inspection scheduling
• Ability for applicant to request follow up inspection
• Ability for outside entities (e.g., Poudre Fire, Engineering, etc.) to sign-off on
inspections
Compliance / Code Enforcement Objectives
• Information & Record Keeping: daily inspection count, inspections assigned to
each inspector
• Track violations
• Send violation letters
• Make notes all in one system (e.g., such as complaint details, inspector observed
violation details and subsequent notes related to violation correction and payment
collection)
• Mobile App for Code Compliance field staff (exists today)
• Mobile App for Environmental Compliance (no mobile app today)
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 15 of 55
Customer Self-Service Objectives
• Comprehensive Online Portal: Develop an online portal for application submission,
permit status tracking, and payment processing. Enable customers to upload
various documents online (e.g., insurance, permit-related documents, final
inspection reports).
o Online Payment Services: Enable online payment options for various licenses and
permits.
o License Status Monitoring: Allow customers to check the status of their licenses
(e.g., Marijuana & Liquor licenses, Contractor Licenses) through the online portal.
• Efficient Application Handling: Provide customers with the capability to complete
and submit multiple applications simultaneously.
• Automated Permit Issuance: Implement an "auto-issue" feature for specific permit
types to expedite the process.
• Integrated Service Collaboration: Foster interdepartmental collaboration to offer
comprehensive customer self-service. Create a seamless experience, eliminating
the need for customers to visit different locations or entities (e.g., Floodplain,
Stormwater, other Utilities).
• Efficient Inspection Scheduling: Enable online scheduling of inspections, via an
Interactive Voice Response (IVR) systems or similar platforms and / or public-
facing portal. Allow customers to schedule multiple inspections simultaneously for
increased convenience.
Field MWM Objectives
• A Web Responsive Design or app suitable for iOS and Android devices
• Map integration
• Store and Forward Buffering
• Robust/complete set of back-office tools for employee engagement and
management
• Allowance for work order processing
• Allowance for a single or crew entity processing
• Supervisory experience and control
• All work order history and reporting
• Apps for mobile devices that are written/integrated with the core application to
support functions such as code and building inspection
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 16 of 55
1.4 RFP SCHEDULE OF EVENTS
Subject to change
Activity Date & Time
RFP Issued 1/10/2024
Pre-Proposal Conference Conducted 1/17/2024, 10AM MDT
Vendors’ written questions and RFP clarification requests due 1/22/2024, 3PM MDT
Proposal addendum issued re: written responses to RFP
clarification requests 1/26/2024
Proposal Due Date & Time 2/9/2024, 3PM MDT
Phase 1 Evaluation to Short-List February - March 2024
Software / Solution Demonstrations February - March 2024
Vendor Oral Presentations & Reference Checks February - March 2024
City Down-selection to Vendor of Choice March 2024
City Initial Solution Scoping Sessions March 2024
Vendor Best & Final Offer Received April 2024
City Confirmation of Total Solution & Vendor of Choice April - 2024
Contract and SOW Negotiations Complete with Vendor of Choice May 2024
Contract Package Signatures - Project Initiated May 2024
Projected Start of Engagement July – August 2024
1.5 RFP MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
The City expects the proposed Solution(s) will meet the following minimum requirements and
that each of these requirements will be included in and clearly addressed as part of the
Proposal. In reviewing these minimum requirements, Vendors should consider each item’s
relevance to the specific solution or service being proposed and, if not relevant, explain the
reasons.
Proposals may be rejected at the sole discretion of the City if they do not meet these minimum
requirements:
# Description
1 Must be installed with Proposed Solution at five municipalities of similar or larger
size within the past five years that are cloud-based (Planning, Permitting, Code,
Inspections, Licensing, CSS, and Field/MWM)
2 Must be a Cloud (SaaS) - based solution
3 Microsoft SQL Server is the preferred RDBMS
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 17 of 55
4 COTS (Commercial Off-the-Shelf) Solution with minimum enhancements /
modifications/customization required
5 Responsive Design and ability to become compliant with CO ADA HB-21-1110
(July 2024)
6 Must meet all City of Fort Collins Cyber Security requirements as defined in the
SaaS Cyber Vendor Questionnaire (RFP Attachment H)
7 Proposed Solution must be online/electronic with a minimal use of paper
8 Vendor Corporate financial strength, and a proven, reference-able track record
1.6 RFP QUESTIONS
All questions should be submitted before the deadline stated on the RFP cover sheet in writing
via email to gspaul@fcgov.com with a copy to jim.anderson@tmgconsulting.com, citing the RFP
section and paragraph number. Prospective Vendors should note that all questions, including
those relating to the terms and conditions stated in Attachment O, Special Provisions should be
resolved prior to the submission of a Proposal.
Failure on the part of Vendor to make a careful examination of the RFP documents or to
thoroughly investigate the conditions of the RFP shall not be grounds for a declaration that the
Vendor did not understand the RFP package.
1.7 ADDENDA
The City shall not be responsible for any oral instructions given by any employees, officials,
advisors, or agents of the City regarding the proposal instructions, specifications, or proposal
documents as described in this RFP. All questions submitted by the stated deadline will be
answered via one or more Addenda posted on RMEPS.
1.8 PROPOSAL GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
Vendors are expected to examine the entire RFP including all Attachments, specifications,
special provisions, and instructions. All exceptions shall be identified and explained in writing by
Vendor on Attachment F – Exceptions Conflicts and Clarifications. Conflicts shall be
marked directly on the pages where they occur, and by referring to a particular page and
paragraph number in the Vendor Proposal. In case of conflicts between these RFP documents
and those of the Vendor not marked as directed, the RFP documents shall govern. All conflicts
shall be clearly explained by the Vendor. Pages contained within this RFP package shall not be
electronically altered.
The Vendor will define the capabilities of its organization to design, implement, maintain, and
support the solution components as outlined within this RFP. Each Proposal submitted must
clearly identify each recommended solution.
The Vendor must segment their proposal responses as referenced below:
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 18 of 55
1. The RFP response should be prepared in a simple and straightforward manner, using
the table format contained within Attachment A – Response Form. Add additional
rows to the tables as required.
2. Please do not refer to an answer to another/different question, and do not refer to other
documents (except to elaborate Vendor response).
3. Include any additional information that is required to support Vendor response, or which
may be helpful to the City in its evaluation, either following the tables, in separate
sections of Vendor response, or in an appendix at the end of Vendor Proposal.
1.9 PROPOSAL FORMAT
Vendors must use and complete Attachment A – Response Form to this RFP, as their
Proposal, both in form, sequence, and materially.
Proposals should be straightforward and concise and provide “layman” explanations of all terms
that are used in Attachment A – Response Form. Vendor responses must focus on
conforming to the RFP instructions, responding to the RFP questions, and on providing concise
descriptions and answers.
Proposals shall be assembled according to the following guidelines:
1. Electronic submission is required through Rocky Mountain E-Purchasing System
(RMEPS)
2. Page size must be 8 ½ x 11 inches for all PDFs and Attachments (Note: tables and
graphics can vary from this requirement.)
3. Proposals must include a Table of Contents listing all sections, figures, and tables.
4. Sections must have a separation page.
5. All sections and pages must be appropriately identified and numbered.
6. For security reasons, embedded hyperlinks will not be accessed or utilized and should
not be placed in any Proposal. Simply copy the desired information to a PDF and attach
it to the Proposal.
1.10 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
One (1) electronic copy of the entire Proposal must be submitted within RMEPS by 3:00 p.m.
Mountain Standard Time on the date specified for this event for the Proposal to be considered.
All non-spreadsheet response files must be submitted in the Adobe Portable Document format
(*.PDF) or the Microsoft Word format (*.DOCX). Spreadsheet response files must be provided
in the *.XLS or the *.XLSX Microsoft Excel formats. Supporting documentation shall also be
provided in an electronic format.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 19 of 55
2 PROJECT SCOPE
Several key systems and service-related components have been identified to achieve the City’s
LPCE business objectives which are summarized below. The current LPCE environment is
then explained, followed by the desired future system environment (more detailed future system
requirements can be found in Attachment A – RFP Response Form).
The City is requesting a solution which consists of the following components:
1. Replacement of the LPCE Information Systems
The new solution will include all software and services, integration, and configuration required to
implement and support the following business processes:
• Planning & Development
• Licensing
• Permitting
• Inspections
• Code enforcement
For all the key business areas, effective financial management must be included. This includes,
but is not limited to, the management of fees, invoicing, and escrow accounts. Full LPCE
requirements are reflected in Attachment E – Functional Matrix.
2. Replacement of a Customer Self Service Portal (CSS)
The solution will include a Customer Self-Service Portal (CSS) and related communication
channels to support customer interaction. The CSS requirements are reflected in Attachment E
– Functional Matrix.
3. Replacement of Mobile Workforce Management (MWM)
The solution will include a City-specific Mobile Workforce Management (MWM) system and
functionality as described in this RFP. Field/MWM requirements are reflected in Attachment E –
Functional Matrix.
4. Reporting and Data Access Solution
The City is seeking access via a standard, intuitive set of tools for reporting and analytics for
easy user-run reports and queries. The data access solution and toolset(s) will include all
hardware, software, and services required to implement and support application query and
reporting within the solution.
5. Full Integration
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 20 of 55
The new solution will contain full integration between the various modules in each of the sub-
solutions. The new systems will also facilitate efficient and effective integration to other LPCE
components. There must be a clear approach to master data management, supporting both
internal integrations as well as external system integrations through industry-standard methods.
Integration requirements are reflected in Attachment B – Integrations & Interfaces.
6. Data Conversion
The City understands the critical link between a successful project and a successful data
conversion. The City requires the Vendor to convert all data required for the implemented
solution to function as designed and meet all defined requirements. Vendors must note that the
City requires that all converted data is accessible online and usable in the new application.
Historical data to be converted as specified in Attachment M – Data Conversion. The City
expects data associated with all historic and in-flight work (permit applications, etc.) to be
converted to the new system.
The City expects the Vendor to review all conversion decisions to ensure adequate data is
being converted to meet operational business needs.
7. Software Installation and Environment Management
The City expects the Vendor to provide and install the base software, prepare it for access, and
lead in configuration activities. In addition, the City expects the Vendor to provide technical
architecture services to design and build the eventual production and support environments, in
addition to various project environments. The City expects the Vendor to take a lead role in the
provisioning and management of these various project environments.
8. Improved Business Processes through Solution Configuration
The City expects the Vendor to provide leadership during product configuration to implement
common / best practices to deliver the application’s functionality against the City’s requirements.
The City will rely principally upon product configuration rather than product
modifications/customizations and will consider modifying its business processes to fit the
technology workflow(s).
The City is committed to embracing universal business processes that are enabled by the
baseline software solution and expects the Vendor to provide consultation to the City through
the process of standardization. However, the Vendor may modify the product as required to
accommodate policy and key business rules-driven processes.
The City would like a separate line item (Attachment C – Pricing form) for reviewing its current
business processes and helping to document new ones.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 21 of 55
2.1 DRIVERS FOR REPLACEMENT
The drivers for replacing the City’s current LPCE solution are (in order of importance):
# Description
1 Current on-prem solution is stopping maintenance of their platform June-2025, with
support ending Dec-2025
2 Customer Experience - Back End
• Increased transparency and visibility across and within business capabilities is
needed – as there is minimal transparency today with the legacy solution(s). The
City expects visibility across City functions and within capability areas (for
example, status and requirements across different departments today, are difficult
to see)
• Single source of Truth – Today there is no single source of truth – with data residing
in multiple systems and formats across City departments
3 Robust Tools are needed to manage/configure workflows. Current systems are difficult
to update/add on to (e.g., new permit type or a change to the workflow)
4 Automation of Manual processes is needed– many processes today are Manual and
not being facilitated by the current tools used by the City.
5 Customer Experience - Front End
• Consistency and elimination of variability across City customer service delivery
models – customer service requirements currently vary across the organization
from high-touch to desiring self-service. Alignment across departments and
services would be extremely beneficial.
• Intuitive, consistent website navigation – Today website navigation and content are
confusing, creating a disjointed digital experience for consumers of City services.
• Digital engagement capabilities are needed – to address the lack of digital
enablement and/or gaps in technology for those who cannot make it into the City’s
offices in person.
6 Lack of centralized citizen information – Lack of citizen information hinders visibility and
communication channels for supporting departments. Unification of information across
compliance functions.
7 1-off, external workarounds are in use today. Microsoft Access databases and Excel
workbooks are used extensively.
8 Gaps in processes - some processes are not able to be supported within current tools
and software
9 Lack of field tools/technology
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 22 of 55
10 Reporting and Analytics – Reporting and Analytics are cumbersome and difficult.
Disjointed Metrics - Lack of operational “metrics that matter”
11 Data access and retrieval - Limited capability to store, retrieve data.
12 Lack of integrations with key applications
2.2 CURRENT STATE
The following section presents background information regarding the City’s current LPCE profile
and environments.
Currently, the City’s primary LPCE system is the Accela 21.2.6 on-premise Civic software
application. The Accela application is the system of record for a substantial amount of LPCE
functions. It is supplemented by various one-off processes many of which are largely performed
in Microsoft Access and Microsoft Excel.
The City’s current on-premise solution consists of permitting, licensing, and code enforcement
workflows, providing online application submissions, permit tracking, process review,
compliance monitoring, and enforcement actions. Today, City staff utilize a web platform to
update workflows, assess fees, and run reports. A customer portal is also available for paying
fees, uploading building permit plans, and supporting documents, scheduling building
inspections and viewing workflow statuses. Document storage and retrieval is integrated. A 3rd
party IVR vendor is leveraged to enable scheduling building inspections via automated phone or
text prompts. The primary vendor’s Mobile application is utilized by Building Inspectors and
Enforcement Code Officers for their field processes.
2.2.1 EXISTING TECHNICAL AND ACCELA ENVIRONMENT
This section includes general information about the technical environment being used by the
City.
• Accela 21.2.6 Civic Platform
• The City currently supports Oracle database platforms, and is moving towards MS SQL
Server as its preferred database technology
• Integrations today are largely file-based and point-to-point with the Accela solution.
• The City has no hard requirements regarding an ESB/SOA for integration and is open to
new thoughts and ideas during this procurement process. Web Services using the
SOAP 1.x standard is preferred.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 23 of 55
• If proposed, the City will utilize the Vendor proposed solution integration strategy and
establish the appropriate integrations with assistance and leadership from the Vendor.
Below, the City has provided a high-level architecture diagram of the current Accella Production
environment.
Laserfiche
Laserfiche is the City’s Enterprise Content Management System. It is a document
management/business process automation system that is used in conjunction with Accela. It is
used for documents (including images, text, annotations, and attached electronic files) that are
stored in a central location and separated into various repositories to protect access to sensitive
data. Metadata can be assigned to provide additional information about each entry and allow for
dynamic searching.
Further detail and interface definitions can be found in RFP Attachment B – Integrations and
Interfaces.
The following diagrams represent the high-level view of current LPCE system components.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 24 of 55
CURRENT STATE – LPCE & SURROUNDING COMPONENTS
2.2.2 LPCE CURRENT STATISTICS
LPCE users currently employ multiple technology systems to complete their processes. The
following are the current user counts. Vendors shall note: A 10% annual growth rate is
anticipated.
Area # of Users
Planning & Development 100
Contracting Licensing 10
Retail Licensing 11
Number of users that access the system for Permitting 175
Number of users that access the system for Inspections 25
Compliance (Code Enforcement) 20
Mobile Application 25
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 25 of 55
The following table displays the current system counts:
Area Count
Building Permits (see Attachment K –
Sample Types) 8,000 / year
Contracting Licensing (31 types of
licenses)
2020 - 1300 (478 for new licenses)
2021 - 1332 (417 for new licenses)
2022 - 1241 (450 for new licenses)
2023 - 1420 (326 for new licenses)
Land Development Applications (see
Attachment N - Planning Application
Types and Attachment K - Sample
Types)
Estimated growth rate approximately
4% growth rate
2020 - 350,
2021 - 388,
2022 - 363,
2023 - 343 YTD as of Nov-2023
Retail Licensing
Estimated annual growth rate for
Liquor is 6%
Liquor:
• Yearly 400-500
• New licenses 15-30,
• Transfer of ownership temporary permits 15-30,
• Transfer of ownership permanent license 15-30.
For Marijuana:
• 47; for 2023:
Code Enforcement 10,000 cases per year
2.2.3 LPCE CURRENT HI-LEVEL WORKFLOW
The following table presents the core LPCE components to be considered by Vendors in their
RFP Responses.
Core LPCE Current City Workflow
Planning &
Development
The current Planning & Development system in place utilizes a multi-step
process to manage project applications. It begins with the receipt of
applications via email, where customers frequently use file sharing
systems like OneDrive or Dropbox to submit their project materials.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 26 of 55
The City’s Development Review Coordinator (DRC) assigned to the
project then saves these files on to the shared drive.
To ensure completeness, an Excel spreadsheet is employed to facilitate
communication with reviewing departments, allowing them to confirm
whether the project is complete, and provide any notes. These notes are
especially useful on incomplete projects.
Email notifications, including a link to the folder location of the relevant
file(s), are sent to the reviewing departments to inform them that the
materials are saved, and they are given a specific timeframe to complete
the associated Excel spreadsheet.
If the materials are deemed complete, the DRC proceeds to build the
project in Accela and activate the Accela workflow (note that workflow is
not available for all departments, additionally workflow varies per project
type).
Project files are THEN saved in Bluebeam (the City’s Construction
software solution) and a Bluebeam “session” is created, where a
collaborative review process can take place among the reviewing
departments.
The DRC will email the applicant a Letter of Acceptance – notifying the
applicant team that the project was accepted as complete and has been
routed to the reviewing departments.
Weekly Project Summary emails are sent to the reviewing departments,
containing details about routed projects, comment due dates, and
scheduled project review meetings, and a link to the Bluebeam session.
The reviewing departments assess project files in Bluebeam, provide
markups when necessary. They will then need to enter comments and
complete Accela workflow processes.
At the end of the review period the DRC team creates agendas based on
all projects which have comments due that week. The City sends an
internal-only coordination meeting agenda, and an agenda for the project
review meetings with the applicants. These are manually created.
Draft comment letters are generated from Accela, typically requiring some
formatting adjustments. The DRC also shares a markup summary from
Bluebeam in preparation for project review meetings. Following the
project review meeting with the applicant team, finalized comment letters
are created and sent to the applicant team along with a Bluebeam link to
access any available markups.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 27 of 55
The DRC will go into Accela and close out any remaining workflow [if a
department did not close out their own workflow that is manually
documented in an excel worksheet that the Development Review Manger
sends out each month].
The Accela process for Conceptual Reviews and Minor Amendments is
similar, but the details of the comment entry and workflow vary per project
type, which can be confusing. The manual processes are slightly different
also, but generally utilize emails, the files in a shared drive, PDFs, and/or
Bluebeam.
The current system manages the flow of project applications, integrates
collaboration through Bluebeam, and ensures a structured process for
reviewing departments and applicants to communicate and track
progress. However, the system's reliance on multiple software tools and
manual tracking processes presents opportunities for further streamlining
and automation to enhance overall efficiency and accuracy.
Permitting The current licensing and permitting environment rely on a patchwork of
Accela-based systems, spreadsheets, paper applications, and online
forms. This means that customers must navigate multiple different
systems and requirements depending on the specific license/permit they
are seeking.
Building Services currently processes 47 different building permit types,
with 26 permit types requiring some sort of electronic review and markup.
Permit applications are submitted through email, reviewed for
completeness, and then a record is created in Accela. Each permit type
is associated with a specific workflow of tasks/reviewing departments that
must be approved or deactivated prior to permit issuance (ex: Floodplain,
Engineering, Poudre Fire Authority, etc.). Many permits begin with a
review by the Zoning department to verify that the project meets the Land
Use Code requirements. This “gatekeeper” function must be signed off
before any other departments may review the permit. Resubmittals may
be requested through Accela or through email to update plans to meet
code requirements. Once all departments have reviewed, all contractors
have been verified, and all fees have been paid, the permit is issued
through email and work can begin. Building permits are closed out
through inspection and submittal of final documents.
The Engineering department administratively processes 14 permit types,
of which only two permits are managed through Accela. Engineering
administrative staff process payments, track, and document each permit
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 28 of 55
type through a series of spreadsheets and internal workflows. All files are
stored on the City’s network drive.
Other departments, including Natural Areas and Forestry, also process
permits manually using spreadsheets, Access databases, and other
internal workflows.
Code
Enforcement
Code Compliance responds to complaint-based violations as well as has
field staff proactively patrol for violations using a mobile app. Customer
Service staff utilize the desktop version to respond to calls and generate
notices. The current system allows for a semi-automated workflow from
entering the case, disposition of the case after inspection, reinspection,
abatements, invoicing, and citations and adjudication as necessary. The
system allows for connection to GIS, so that field staff can drop pins to
initiate violation information. There are also several layers or filters that
can allow for snow, weeds, approved nature areas, etc.
The Zoning and Environmental Services Department (ESD) both have
similar compliance requirements and processes. These are all external
processes and records currently.
Inspections Integrate with MWM
See Attachment E – Functional Matrix
Licensing Contractor Licensing:
Applications come in via in-person, through email, and via USPS. These
paper applications then go through the review process by an individual. If
there are missing pieces, it is placed in a physical file cabinet until pieces
are received. Once the City has a complete application packet, it then
goes to an individual for creation of license and cert. numbers (Generated
via Excel spreadsheets - each license has its own spreadsheet) and then
input into Accela. Once completed, a certificate with wallet card is created
by an individual and then mailed, via USPS, to the contractor(s). Once
that task is completed, the paper packet is then scanned into the
SharePoint location and then uploaded into Laserfiche. Engineering takes
in right of way license applications in physical form for bonds, and through
email for insurance, application, and other materials. Once reviewed and
approved, license records are input into Accela, and physical items
(insurance and bonds) are stored in a file cabinet on site.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 29 of 55
Retail Licensing:
This is a completely manual process. There is serious concern over
loss/misplacement of information. With a completely manual process it is
heavily dependent on the licensing specialist to remember to do certain
steps in the workflow/process. Customer service is done completely via
email and telephone calls.
Types and descriptions of retail licenses:
Liquor: New Application, Transfer of Ownership, Renewals, Modification
of Premises, Temporary Modification of Premises, Corporate Name
Change, Change in Corporation or LLC, Change of Location, Surrender of
License, Take-out and delivery, Delivery Permit, Art Gallery Permit, Bed
and Breakfast Permit, Tastings Permit, Special Events Permit, etc.
Marijuana: New application for retail and medical, store, cultivation,
manufacturer, testing, research and development, operator
Customer Self
Service
See Attachment E – Functional Matrix
Field / MWM See Attachment E – Functional Matrix
Cashiering See Attachment E – Functional Matrix
Miscellaneous See Attachment E – Functional Matrix
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 30 of 55
2.3 TARGET STATE
Below a desired Target State High-level Architecture Diagram has been provided for
consideration – including for LPCE and its Adjacent Components/Edge Systems.
2.3.1 FUNCTIONAL COMPONENTS
The City is committed to embracing business processes that are natively enabled by the
baseline software solution and expects the Vendor to guide the City in standardization and
simplification of these processes.
As stated above, the following is the list of functional areas for the LPCE solution:
• Planning & Development
• Licensing
• Permitting
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 31 of 55
• Inspections
• Code Enforcement
• Customer Self Service Portal
• Mobile Workforce Management
• Reporting and Data Access
The expanded list of Functional Requirements can be found in Attachment E – Functional
Matrix which contains the detailed functionality the City requires within each functional area in a
future LPCE environment, as well as general and technical system requirements.
2.3.2 LPCE FEE SCHEDULES
The proposed solution should support a series of fees and charges, and the ability to make
ads/changes/deletes to the same. The fees are updated as required to support the many
activities of the City. Below are a sample of fees:
Module # Fees Abbreviated List of Top / Most Common Fees
Planning &
Development 30+
Minor Amendment - $1,500
Project Development Plan - $27,675
Final Development Plan - $21,575
Preliminary Design Review - $1,000
Basic Development Review - $16,900
Contractor
Licensing 6+
New license - $300
Reinstatement - $300
Renewal - $225
Registrations MP and EX - $200
Application fee, non-refundable - $75
Violation fee - $200
Permitting 25+
Fast Track Permit: $65+sales tax
Basement Finish: $155 + sales tax
Exterior Permits (deck, patio cover, pergola, shade
sail, carport, residential pool) - $110 ($38.50 at
submittal, $71.50 at issuance) + sales tax
Residential Solar Permits - $85 (29.75 at submittal,
55.25 at issuance) + sales tax
Alterations: Six tiers - based on valuation
New Construction: Cost based on square footage
within 14 occupancy types
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 32 of 55
2.3.3 INTERFACES AND INTEGRATION POINTS
The proposed solution should permit the City to configure extensions, modifications, and
interfaces. The proposed solution will contain the functionality for the integration points shown in
Attachment B – Integrations & Interfaces. The Vendor must address each of these
extensions and modification requirements within Attachment C – Pricing Form.
2.3.4 DATA ACCESS SOLUTION – REPORTING AND QUERIES
The City requires a solution that provides standard and customized reports, as well as
predefined and ad-hoc queries that may be scheduled. The solution must ensure that full
database access to and distribution of data is in accordance with the City’s information security
and compliance policies. The solution must support a “self-service” model for end-users with
both basic and advanced skill levels, including an intuitive report designer and ad/hoc query
builder for the basic business user and a more sophisticated interface for the advanced user.
For reporting, the City will utilize the standard reports that are offered with the base product with
reporting needs met at go-live for key reports that are critical for business operations. Once the
system(s) are in production, users have learned how to use them, and business processes have
been aligned, the need for further reports will be identified and developed by Vendor.
There is an “optional service” where the City is requesting the Vendor to provide a reporting
team for developing reports that extends beyond key baseline reports necessary for go-live.
Vendors should propose the appropriate level of reporting effort for this engagement as part of
the requested fixed price. Reporting needs and architecture will be further identified and
documented during the Analysis phase, and the complexity of the identified key reports will be
determined and documented. Attachment L – Sample Accela Critical Reports contains the
current Accela reports that are deemed of high importance.
2.3.5 COMPREHENSIVE SOLUTION
If any components of the proposed Solution require the City purchase of any hardware, the City
understands that many Vendors are not hardware resellers and expects the Vendor to
coordinate and work with a hardware vendor of the City’s choice. To obtain a total picture of the
proposed solution, the City is requesting the Vendor, based on experience with the proposed
solution and on the City attributes in this RFP package, provide the appropriate hardware
configuration and pricing (if any hardware is required on the City’s side to access and operate
the solution.
Attachment A – RFP Response Form contains additional and more detailed scope
requirements and considerations for the Solution.
Cloud Platform
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 33 of 55
The City is requiring a Cloud platform, either a Managed Platform as a Service (MPaaS), or a
Software as a Service (SaaS) solution deployed in a private Cloud infrastructure model.
The City looks to the Vendor to propose specific options that will provide the highest level of
performance for the City and, at the same time, will inter-operate with existing City systems. At a
minimum, the City expects:
• Complete access to Cloud-Based reporting and data analysis.
• A Disaster Recovery solution.
• Service Levels and Monitoring Program.
• Hardware patches and hardware upgrades applied.
• Application releases and upgrades on a regular basis with no more than once every 6
months to apply a required upgrade.
• Deployment in a single tenant Cloud model operated solely for the City and managed by
the Vendor. Managed services (business and technical) are desired as baseline
service(s) to be provided by the Vendor with associated pricing.
• Vendor to consider options such as: storage replication, high-availability and replication
technologies, standby databases / log shipping, mirroring.
• Cyber Security is critical for the City. It is required that the Vendor’s policies,
procedures, personnel, products, and services are used to design, build, configure,
deliver, manage data, integrate, test, deploy, and support the solution comply with
Attachment H – SaaS Cyber Vendor Questionnaire.
• Compliance with Colorado Accessibility Laws
Database Environment
The City is open to the proposed solution utilizing relational or object-oriented database
technology. The City’s preference is Microsoft SQL.
Vendor must identify all, and specific database versions, features, levels, and modules required
to implement and operate the solution.
Client Compute Environment & Connectivity
The City prefers a responsive, Browser-based UI (User Interface) to access the Vendor’s cloud-
based solution. Define all capabilities in Attachment A – RFP Response Form.
Vendor will identify the approach for connecting and authenticating the proposed cloud-based
solution/platform with the client computing device(s) allowing user access to the new system(s).
A description of the cloud-based infrastructure, communication protocols, network elements,
security protocols, data transfer standards, and client component requirements necessary to
provide this connectivity is required from the Vendor.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 34 of 55
Additionally, Vendor should specify any/all software required to be installed on the client
computing devices (if applicable) regardless of size / functionality and/or any modifications to
standard operating system configurations (including any browser extensions or plug-ins required
to access the application).
Vendor must specify any hardware, software, or service requirements to connect to City’s
existing network for this solution acquisition project.
Product Offering
Vendor must identify all product modules / plug-ins / extensions / enhancements / reports /
interfaces required to meet the requirements outlined in this RFP package and in Attachment E
– Functional Matrix, required to support the proposed solution.
Implementation Services
The following outline of services is provided for the Vendor to consider in the formulation and
proposal of services to deliver a successful implementation. The Vendor is expected to assume
overall accountability for the successful completion of these services and may partner with other
firms (and individuals) as required who have experience and expertise with specific services to
successfully deliver the Solution. All project activities must be represented in the final,
negotiated Project Plan.
The Vendor must present its methodology and address the following services including:
• Project Management Services. Activities will include but are not limited to work program
management, schedule management, project governance, scope management, change
management, issue and problem management, cost and budget management, personnel
management, facility management, development tools and development environment
management, approval management, contract management, reporting and project status
management, communication and document management, risk management, quality
assurance, and quality control management.
• Organizational Change Management (OCM) Services. The Vendor will participate in
reviews of City business processes and workflows impacted by the implementation of the
new environment to identify which processes may need to be changed to ensure a
successful implementation and participate, and, at times lead, the change management
associated with aligning those processes with the solution. This input will ensure the user
client base is engaged and the organization is ready to accommodate changes associated
with the new environment. These services will also accommodate all aspects of training
development and delivery. This includes but is not limited to the following:
1. Workflows/Processes. Vendor will lead workshops and deliver business process
documentation and workflows associated with software. City LPCE team members
knowledgeable in existing business processes and the legacy software solution will
participate in these workshops to identify any impacted business
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 35 of 55
processes. Together, with the Vendor, these individuals will document either the
current business when it is compatible with the solution or develop and document the
new business process consistent with the environment. For primary business
processes, a workflow will be developed documenting how the City will utilize the
solution to accomplish work.
2. Business Procedures. For the primary business processes, the project team and
Vendor will develop and document step-by-step business procedures, along with the
forms, screens, reports, etc. necessary to conduct the business process.
3. Staffing Levels. Based upon the new processes and procedures, any potential
impact on staffing roles and responsibilities will be identified by the Vendor.
4. Organizational Structure and Governance. Based upon the new processes and
procedures along with the identified impacts on staffing levels, the City may see a
need to realign or adjust organizational boundaries. This activity works to identify
organizational impacts and implement changes in support of the solution and define
the ongoing support model needed for the new solution.
5. Offerings. This activity ensures that the City’s current and short-term future
programs, products, and services are accurately configured and supported by the
solution. If there is an impact to an existing or future offering, activities will occur to
make the necessary changes and engage in the formal change process to ensure
changes are made, approved, and incorporated into the solution.
6. Strategies. This activity will work to identify strategic impacts and implement
changes to customer service or marketing strategies in support of the Project.
7. Communication. Changes to the business environment as discussed in the
previous paragraphs will be communicated, through a communication plan, to
internal and external users of the solution. This activity will be responsible for
communicating changes through the City’s Communications and Public Involvement
organization.
• Technical Architecture Services. These services are meant to address the development
environment, the ongoing operating environment and implementation of the database,
design and configuration of the application environments, implementation and certification of
the baseline software and ongoing upgrades to the baseline software that occur during the
implementation project. Technical Architecture Services shall consist of the following
components:
1. Planning the architecture required for development and operation of the
solution. This includes overall cloud-based architecture considerations, development
environment, integration and middleware environment, operations environment,
analytics and reporting environment, support environment, technical environment,
data environment, and security environment. It also includes communication
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 36 of 55
protocols, network elements, security protocols, data transfer standards, and client
component requirements for accessing and interacting with the Solution.
2. Implementation, configuration, and oversight of acceptance of any software platform,
software, environments, and tools necessary to support the development effort. An
associated schedule of upgrades to the environments to support various stages of
the development effort leading up to production operation.
3. Establishing the training environments and any hardware or cloud computing
infrastructure requirements needed to support the training effort.
4. Implementation, configuration, and oversight of acceptance of all components of the
software within the cloud solution.
5. Implementation, configuration, and oversight of acceptance of the database software
utilized by the software. This includes subsequent upgrades to support newer
versions of the database software.
6. Implementation of necessary tools to support the oversight of acceptance and
migration of new versions or releases to support the various development,
maintenance, and production environments. A migration strategy for new application
versions/releases will be put in place to support any “code drops” for identified
Reports, Interfaces, Conversations, Extensions, Forms and Workflows (RICEFWs)
and fixes. Database administration activities will be conducted on a regular basis to
conduct tuning in support of batch and on-line service levels.
7. Initial implementation, configuration, and oversight of acceptance of the base
Product.
8. Technical acceptance of “code drops” in support of RICEFW’s and migration of these
“code drops” across the various development, maintenance, and production
environments per the migration strategy.
• Application/Solution Design Services. This will focus on the design and configuration of
the solution to meet stated LPCE business requirements, processes, and fees requirements,
etc.
1. Processes. Vendor will lead and deliver business process documentation and
processes associated with software during a series of scheduled workshops. City
LPCE team members knowledgeable in business processes and legacy solution
SME’s will participate in these workshops. While Vendor-led, these individuals will
assist to identify and document new “To Be” business processes.
2. Requirements. Vendor will provide the City with a largely pre-configured product
offering. Vendor will take the lead in further configuring the product working with the
City team members trained in the software. Knowledge transfer will occur during the
project, with reinforcement toward the end/go-live date for the City to understand
how to modify and support this configuration process. The primary method of
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 37 of 55
meeting the City’s' business requirements and processing will be through
configuration rather than customization, as stated earlier. The Vendor will lead the
design effort based on the City’s and industry best practices, utilizing out of the box
configurations wherever possible. This activity will include the creation of functional
design specifications, configuration workbooks, and other documentation to ensure
the City’s LPCE solution is well documented.
3. Rules and Fees. This activity ensures that City’s rules of service and associated
fees are properly accounted for and accommodated within the solution. If there is an
impact on a rule or fee during implementation, activities will occur to make the
necessary changes and engage in the formal change process to ensure changes are
made and approved.
• Application/Solution Development Services. Focus on developing the baseline solution
to meet the City’s specific needs. It focuses on the following areas:
1. Rules and Fees. This activity ensures that City’s rules of service and associated
fees are properly accounted for and accommodated within the solution. If there is an
2. Enhancements/Extensions. While product enhancements or extensions are not
the preferred method for realizing functionality, there may be instances where it is
required to enhance the solution. This activity deals with the identification, design,
programming, unit testing, and delivery of product extensions to the City’s
environment. These extensions will be delivered into a system testing and user
acceptance environment.
3. Interfaces and Integrations. The City has several interfaces and integration points
which will require the development of either a one-way or two-way interface for the
target solution and the identified applications. This activity deals with the
identification, design, programming, unit testing, and delivery of the integration to the
City’s LPCE environment. These interfaces will be delivered into a system testing
and user acceptance environment.
4. Reports. See Attachment L – Sample Accela Reports. This activity deals with
the design, programming, unit testing, and delivery of the query/report to the City’s
environment. These queries/reports will be delivered into a system testing and user
acceptance testing environment.
5. Statements. The City has identified several different invoices, statements, notices,
letters, and other correspondence which the solution is required to produce. The
solution should accommodate any effort to graphically redesign various
correspondence and to produce in both hardcopy and electronic copy.
6. Legacy LPCE System. Communication of required changes which are being made
to the legacy LPCE system during implementation. These changes need to be
reviewed to determine their disposition and if they should be incorporated into the
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 38 of 55
new LPCE solution. This function also includes the design and development work
required to implement these changes in the future-state solution.
7. Audit, Controls, Security. Focus on the design, development, and testing of the
security roles. It is expected that the Vendor will understand, adhere to, and
implement the solution following City IT security standards and as defined in the
governance policy, in a manner which protects the confidentiality, integrity, and
availability of all data and systems.
• Comprehensive Testing Services. Comprehensive testing services focus on planning and
executing the various tests to be conducted, which may include but are not limited to the
following activities:
1. Test Planning. This activity deals with the development of the various test plans
which govern both functional, system and extended testing. Typically, for each test,
there will be a plan for an overall approach, test conditions, test data, and anticipated
test results. This plan will govern all aspects of the testing process across all phases
of functional and extended testing. Typically, phases include Unit, System, System
integration, and User Acceptance testing.
2. Test Execution. Once the enhancements, modifications, extensions, interfaces,
forms, reports, etc. have been unit tested, delivered, and accepted by the City, they
will be placed into a vendor-provided integration test environment. The integration
test process ensures the solution works as delivered with enhancement(s) as
applicable. In addition, the integration test will confirm the system has been
accurately configured and the data has been accurately converted. This involves
conducting robust regression testing, performance tests, volume tests, security tests,
and disaster recovery tests.
3. User Acceptance Test. A user acceptance test is conducted once the system has
been successfully tested through the various comprehensive integration tests. At
this point in the project, the system, data, configuration, and service levels have all
been tested. The City will now execute another series of user tests to accept the
Project as it has been developed and delivered by the Vendor to the City. Formal
sign-off on the Project is required prior to initiating the production conversion
process.
4. Test Automation. The Vendor will supply, utilize, and maintain tools and scripts to
automate many/most of the Test Execution tasks noted above, including regression,
performance/volume, security, and availability/disaster recovery testing. The Vendor
will provide pre-built scripts automating the testing of these elements, will develop
additional scripts during the project to address the specific needs of this
implementation, and will turn over to the City the original and custom scripts
developed for this project, to allow for the City to perform similar testing after the end
of the project.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 39 of 55
5. Issues Management. Vendor will provide a mechanism for tracking issues and issue
management related to all testing through all phases of the implementation.
• Training Services. These are to be provided by the Vendor to develop training material for
new functionality and to deliver training to the City. This includes but is not limited to the
following: Vendor provided, virtual instructor-led, and online training.
1. Training Development. Baseline training documentation and course materials will
be provided (hardcopy and electronic) with the proposed solutions. The Vendor,
working with the City, will utilize these materials as the starting point and will modify
the materials to reflect the City-specific configurations, workflows, and processes.
“Dry runs” of training materials and courses will be conducted to ensure the materials
are accurate.
2. Training Delivery. Vendor will provide initial training and education program to
identify and deliver to all users of the system including primary, secondary, and
casual users. This may be accomplished using a combination of delivery methods,
including classroom training courses, Computer Based Training, personal practice
time, Internet/Virtual based training, etc. In addition to the initial training, this activity
addresses training needs during and immediately following cutover for the Project.
3. IT Training. Appropriate City IT resources, as defined in the governance policy, will
be trained on the new solution. This may be accomplished using a combination of
delivery methods, including classroom training courses or Internet/Virtual based
training as well as knowledge transfers during the configuration and go-live activities.
Additional certifications or training recommendations for the ongoing development of
the technical teams will also be provided. Training includes advanced report writing,
and technical training - including ERD development, database management, batch,
backup/recovery, and other technical specifications to support all proposed
applications.
• Conversion Services. This will focus on cleansing and converting data from the City’s
legacy LPCE systems to the future solution and includes the following activities:
1. Cleansing. This activity deals with the identification of data in the legacy LPCE
systems which need to be scrubbed or cleaned to ensure information loaded into the
solution is accurate and will support processing within the new
environment. Typically, a series of reports within the conversion process will identify
problem areas which require either a manual or automated cleanup process. An
automated process will be developed where large amounts of data need to be
cleaned. Otherwise, a manual effort using either the legacy billing system to pre-
clean data, or the solution to clean data after it is converted will be utilized.
2. Conversion. Data will be mapped between the legacy LPCE systems (and other
systems as required) and the solution. Conversion programs will be developed to
conduct an automated conversion of data from the legacy LPCE systems to the
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 40 of 55
solution. A series of extracts and loads will be conducted over the course of the
development process to ensure the conversion process is working as designed and
can be conducted over a specified timeframe, such as a 3-day weekend. In addition,
a balancing/comparison program will be developed and executed with each
conversion to ensure all counts, etc. are accounted for in the conversion process.
Data from legacy systems as well as historical information from legacy systems in
various formats including databases, flat files, etc. will be converted to provide
ongoing query capabilities allowing the elimination of the legacy
applications. Currently, the City is planning to classify data, images, maps, and other
LPCE-relevant data according to the retention requirements as documented in
Attachment P – Records Retention Schedule. All data and history not converted
must be loaded to a database with the ability for the City’s LPCE front and back-
office staff members to view and query the static data contained in this database.
3. Mock Conversions. The Project will perform a series of mock conversions to test
the conversion programs and processes. These mock conversions will emulate a full
conversion over the specified conversion timeframe. These mocks are conducted
with the dress rehearsals to confirm the go-live schedule of events and timings. A
minimum of three dress rehearsals to exercise the go-live plan/schedule are
conducted. These rehearsals typically are conducted over a weekend to emulate the
production cutover weekend. Updates to the plan, schedule, dependencies, and
resources are made to reflect lessons learned during the dress rehearsals.
• Production Cutover (Go-Live) Services. Focus on cutover from the legacy systems to the
Solution and subsequent work to stabilize the Solution in the production environment. This
includes the following activities:
1. Go-Live Transition Planning. This activity focuses on planning the go-live
transition period, identifying transition activities, resources, responsibilities, etc.
2. Knowledge Transfer. During the project, the Vendor will engage in a series of
activities to transfer knowledge from the development team to the production team
who will be operating and supporting the Project. Vendor shall conduct a series of
personnel testing and business process readiness to ensure the staff is following
application mandates and costs should be outlined in Attachment C – Pricing
Form.
3. Operational Readiness. This activity involves an assessment of the production
environment to determine if the required cloud platform(s): infrastructure, network,
desktop, database, environments, application, staff, etc., are ready to accept the
solution from development and commission it into a production operating
environment.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 41 of 55
4. Production Support Readiness. Ensure the staff responsible for managing the
application have been trained, knowledge transfer has occurred, and ready to accept
application support responsibility from the development team.
5. Production Cutover. This activity focuses on executing the go-live plan/schedule
which moves the City from the legacy LPCE systems to operation of the solution.
• Production Stabilization Services. A stabilization and shakedown period of four months is
anticipated after go-live. During this stabilization period for the Project, the Vendor is
focused on fixing production problems and working to ensure City performance
requirements are being met. The Vendor will produce reports/dashboards that provide daily
health checks to monitor the system until it is stabilized.
• Final Acceptance Services. A thirty-day final acceptance period, which occurs during the
four-month post-go-live period, will be completed, and documented to ensure that the
system meets all contractually agreed-upon strict criteria for stabilization and transition
services as delineated in the Statement of Work and elsewhere. The City reserves the right
to extend the acceptance period until all terms and conditions are met. The system is tested
against performance and acceptance criteria for the defined period, and upon acceptance,
retainage money is released. Vendors should propose a warranty that starts when the
product is placed into productive use.
2.3.6 ONGOING SOFTWARE PRODUCT SUPPORT
At a minimum, the proposed solution components must include information and costs
associated with all aspects of on-going software vendor product support and maintenance
activities. The City requires Vendors to provide on-going support, including product fixes,
updates and upgrades, product enhancements, and regular product versions and releases, as
included with the defined ongoing maintenance program.
2.4 OPTIONAL MODULES AND SERVICES
The City invites Vendors to include optional services in the Proposal for the following areas.
Pricing for these services is to be provided in Attachment C - Pricing Form.
• Developer Agreements – Word documents
• Inspections for Environmental Programs – For programs with one-time and ongoing
inspections, such as Sediment and Erosion Control, Post Construction Stormwater
Quality Facilities/LID – currently using PermiTrack and Excel
• Special Permits – currently using Eproval solution
• Automated Interface with CIS – VertexOne for fees
• Traffic Control Permit – Currently using CityWorks
• Water Rights transaction processing & tracking
• Water Adequacy (utility) Will Serve determination/waiver for individual development projects
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 42 of 55
• No address (one-off) permit & corresponding fee processing (when no address and not
associated with a building)
2.5 TECHNOLOGY MANAGED SERVICES
The City is looking for Vendors to propose and quote end-to-end technology managed services
for their proposed Solution(s) which include the following:
• Operational support
• Workflow set-up and management support
• Future enhancement support
• 24X7 production support – including monitoring and event management
• Incident management
• Lifecycle management and maintenance
• Process automation
• Batch processing
• Problem management
• Request fulfillment
• Performance Reporting, Service Level Agreement Reporting, and Metrics Reporting
• User Profile management
• Technical Refresh Training Release management and Change management
• Business Configuration management support
• Business Relationship management
• Escalation procedures
• Cyber compliance
• Independent Cyber Audit, Reporting, and Finding Resolution
• Adequate Qualified Resourcing and Staffing Models
If there are areas and levels of support that are not part of your managed services portfolio,
explain how you would plan to meet and fill the gaps.
Identify other service offerings and levels that are available and provided within your scope of
work as well as remote location(s) from which the services would be performed.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 43 of 55
3 PROPOSAL EVENTS & EVALUATION
The City has established the sequence of events and schedule dates (see Section 1.4 RFP
Schedule of Events) for this RFP process. All activities are further defined below. All dates
are subject to change without prior notice. The City is not responsible for costs or losses
incurred by any Vendor due to date changes or failure for work to be awarded in whole or in
part.
3.1 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE CONDUCTED
The City will conduct a pre-proposal Microsoft Teams video teleconference at the date and time
specified on the cover sheet of this RFP. Instructions are contained on the RFP cover sheet.
The purpose of this conference is to provide RFP related information and solicit questions from
the Vendor in a single forum. The pre-proposal conference is non-mandatory, but Vendor
participation is highly encouraged and recommended.
3.2 VENDORS’ WRITTEN RFP CLARIFICATION REQUESTS DUE
All questions and clarifications regarding the RFP and the process are due in writing via email
by the date and time specified on the RFP cover sheet. The City’s team will review and
research each written request in addition to questions raised during the Pre-Proposal
Conference that were not answered. All questions submitted and the City’s responses will be
addressed in an Addenda to the RFP and posted on RMEPS.
3.3 PROPOSAL ADDENDA
Any changes or corrections to or clarification of this RFP, in addition to the answers to the
written clarification requests will be addressed in one or more Addenda to the RFP and posted
on RMEPS. No changes, corrections or explanations that are presented verbally will be
binding.
3.4 PROPOSALS DUE
All Proposals are due in the format specified previously in Section 1 of this RFP by 3:00 p.m.
Mountain Standard Time on the date specified for this event in Section 1.4 – Schedule of
Events.
3.5 LPCE SOFTWARE DEMONSTRATIONS
Based on an evaluation of the written proposals, the City will develop a “short-list” of Vendors to
participate in oral presentations and demonstrations. Vendors selected for this phase of the
evaluation process shall be at the City’s sole discretion and is final.
If applicable, Vendors invited by the City to participate in the oral presentations and
demonstrations are responsible for arranging with the applicable software product vendor(s) for
the product demonstrations and presentations at a future date and time.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 44 of 55
3.6 ORAL PRESENTATION
The City prefers in-person but will also consider Webex, Zoom, or Microsoft Teams or a similar
video teleconferencing services for presentations/demonstrations. Additional information will be
distributed on this topic prior to the specified date.
Each Vendor will adhere to the structured agenda and the structured outline of questions. The
primary objective of this workshop/presentation is for the evaluation team to see the functionality
of the proposed solution and consider how the Vendor intends to implement the solution and
what is required to operate the solution. These questions will focus on topics such as the
proposed timeframe, governance structure, staffing, pricing, milestones, methodology, software
tools, experience, etc. Significant effort will be spent reviewing the services, tools, and approach
that the Vendor follows to understand what aspects of the project the City will be expected to
lead or provide resources for. There will also be an evaluation of elements that will be critical to
the implementation and ongoing operation of the product/solution as well as the City’s ability to
effectively work with the Vendor.
3.7 REFERENCE CHECKS
Vendors will be required to submit references with their Proposals. The reference check
questions will be sent ahead of time by the City to the reference contact/individual so they can
prepare ahead of time for the call.
These questions will focus on areas such as satisfaction with the product and the Vendor,
performance of the Vendor on the upgrade or modernization project, what Vendor staff worked
on their project, ease of product maintenance, release schedule and ease of application
management and usage, probability that they select this vendor product again, etc. The City will
conduct the video teleconference reference checks.
3.8 DOWN SELECT VENDOR OF CHOICE
Vendor will have submitted updated solutions and pricing to the City post Oral Presentations.
The City will update any Vendor solution pricing and Vendor evaluation scores. The City will
consider the updated evaluation scoring and the placement of the Vendor.
It is imperative that a clear picture of a single “Vendor of Choice” is identified to proceed into the
next phase of the competitive purchasing process. The City’s “Vendor of Choice” (if any) will be
determined, and the Vendor(s) will be notified. The RFP process will remain open to the
proposing Vendors until the City completes contract negotiations with the “Vendor of Choice.”
The City reserves the right to negotiate with more than one “Vendor of Choice” in parallel, as
well as to defer an award until final internal reviews have been concluded. At any time during
these scoping, confirmation, and contracting activities, the City reserves the right to discontinue
working with the “Vendor of Choice” and at its sole discretion may initiate discussions with the
second place Vendor.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 45 of 55
3.9 INITIAL SOLUTION SCOPING SESSIONS
Upon selection of a Vendor of Choice, a series of scoping sessions will be conducted with the
Vendor. These activities will consist of an initial series of workshops to confirm solution scope
for all proposed solution components and to confirm LPCE capabilities and associated work that
may be required. The final session during these workshops is a review of the follow-up items.
There may be items that require additional work and even subsequent work sessions. These
items will be resolved and documented because of these follow-up activities and workshops.
Following these scoping and due-diligence workshops, the Vendor will receive the
documentation and information to inform a Best and Final Offer process.
3.10 VENDOR BEST AND FINAL OFFER
Based on this documentation, and the Vendor’s more detailed knowledge of the City’s LPCE
requirements, the Vendor will submit a “Scope based BAFO” (Best and Final Offer) detailing all
aspects of the final solution and the Vendor’s best and final pricing.
The City will review the BAFO submitted by the Vendor and identify any remaining gaps in the
solution. The City will also review the City’s staffing plan and may/will move any responsibilities
back to the Vendor if the City cannot support staffing levels associated with the Vendor-
proposed timeline or resourcing plan. Any impacts of changes in the Comprehensive LPCE
Solution will also be addressed. This Best and Final Offer must reflect the offeror’s total
proposed cost of the project to the City.
3.11 THE CITY CONFIRMS TOTAL SOLUTION & VENDOR OF CHOICE
The City advisors and staff will meet with the executive team to review the total cost of the
project and proceed into Contract Negotiations with the current “Vendor of Choice” if the
solution and the price are acceptable, or the City may proceed into scope confirmation work with
the second-place Vendor.
The City may consider moving to a second-place Vendor if, 1) the pricing has increased over
the original amount going into the scoping workshops, or 2) the price is now significantly more
than the 2nd place vendor, or 3) the price now exceeds the City’s project budget, or 4) The City
has identified unresolved gaps in the system solution, or 5) the parties are unsuccessful
negotiating a mutually acceptable contract.
3.12 CONTRACT & SOW NEGOTIATIONS COMPLETE WITH VENDOR
The City anticipates entering a contract directly with the Vendor for proposed solution software
and services. The Vendor shall be responsible for the licensing of any other 3rd party software
and associated tools required for use during the project. Use of tools proprietary to the Vendor
shall not be made a mandatory requirement in the Proposal. The Vendor will be solely
responsible for entering into any agreements with its proposed third-party subcontractors and
for the procurement of any software or hardware / computing infrastructure it requires to provide
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 46 of 55
the services and meet the requirements of the contract with the City, and the City shall not have
any obligations directly to such subcontractors or third parties.
3.13 CONTRACTS AWARDED
Based upon final approvals and appropriation of funding for the project, the City will award the
software and implementation contracts.
3.14 IMPLEMENTATION PROJECT BEGINS
The Vendor will initiate project organization and startup activities immediately and will be
prepared to begin the implementation project, including on-boarding of the Solution provided
project manager and all other on-site personnel required for initial project activities, no later than
sixty (60) days from the execution date of the final definitive agreement unless otherwise
requested by the City.
3.15 PROPOSAL EVALUATION
A contract may be awarded to the Vendor whose proposed solution is determined to be the
most advantageous to the City. The City reserves the right to disqualify any or all Proposals
during any point of the evaluation process before a final definitive contract is executed. The
following evaluation criteria will be applied during the process by the City.
3.16 EVALUATION CRITERIA
The City will use a broad range of factors in evaluating the Proposals submitted by Vendors
including the following categories:
• Qualifications & Experience – 10%
o Company Profile
o Qualifications & Experience
o Financial Stability
• Solution Software – 30%
o Drivers for Replacement
o Core Functionality
o Usability
o Reporting & Documentation
o Technology
o Interfaces and Integrations
o Cyber Security
• Implementation Planning and Services – 20%
o Project Timeline
o Project Approach & Methodology
o Project Management
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 47 of 55
o Organizational Change Management
o Testing and Training
o Conversion Services
o Installation and Environment Management
o On-going Support
• Pricing & Pricing Analysis – 10%
• Procurement Considerations – 5%
o Exceptions, Conflicts & Clarifications
o Agreement with Insurance
o Proposal Responsiveness
• Functional Matrix Value Score – 25%
At this point in time, Vendors are considered “short-listed.” Points achieved above are reset
to zero and do not “carry forward.”
• Demonstrations & Oral Presentations (100%)
o Software Product Evaluation – 40%
o Implementation & Technical Oral Presentations – 35%
o 10-year TCO – 15%
o Reference Checks – 10%
The criteria are applied during the following evaluation phases and process steps as noted:
• Receive proposals and apply minimum requirements to eliminate any Proposals that do
not meet minimum stated criteria as published in the RFP package.
• Read and analyze proposals and scoring using the criteria listed above.
• Conducting two and one-half-day demonstrations, technical orals, service orals and
reference checks with of top ranked offerors based on the evaluations of the written
proposals.
• Evaluation matrix is updated iteratively, and a single Vendor of Choice is selected.
• Detailed Scoping work is conducted with the Vendor of Choice.
• The Vendor of Choice develops a BAFO which is input to develop the City’s LPCE
solution and to confirm the Vendor Solution.
• If the Vendor is confirmed, work proceeds into Contract Negotiations; otherwise work
proceeds with the second-place Vendor and returns to Scoping work.
• Upon completion of the contract award, resources are mobilized in 60 days, and the
project is initiated unless otherwise requested by the City.
• The City will utilize its business judgment in identifying the “Vendor of Choice.” Awarded
points will be used to assist the City in rendering a decision through analysis; however,
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 48 of 55
the City reserves the right to conduct other evaluations and measurements of proposed
solution responses as may be required to render an informed and optimum decision.
The City’s internal rankings and relative comparisons of the various Vendors and
proposed solutions will not be made available to the Vendors.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 49 of 55
4 POLICIES GOVERNING THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS
The City will consider utilizing the Vendor’s Agreement templates as the framework for the final
contract. Vendors must submit as part of their RFP response any Agreement templates it
proposes to be utilized. As a minimum, the City will require the final contract to include certain
contract clauses in accordance with Attachment O – Special Provisions.
The policies under which this RFP and subsequent Proposal shall be made are outlined below
and are intended to specify this RFP’s framework to be used by the Vendor in preparing and
submitting the Proposal.
4.1 BASIS FOR PROPOSAL
Information about the City from other sources can be used for background information;
however, only information supplied by the City in writing through this RFP should be used in the
preparation of Proposals.
If modifications, clarification, or additions to the RFP become necessary, Vendor will be notified
in writing via an Addenda posted on RMEPS. Vendor must acknowledge all modifications,
clarification, or additions by including such documents in the Proposal.
4.2 TERMS AND CONDITIONS
As noted above, the Vendor must submit any Agreement templates it proposes to be
considered by the City. In addition, Vendor must submit a redlined version of the required
contract provisions stated in Attachment O, if applicable. The reasonableness of any proposed
Agreement templates and the degree of proposed changes to the Special Provisions will be a
material factor in the selection of the finalists and contract award. Any proposed contracts
applicable to the licensing software or sale of hardware that the Vendor may provide as part of
the overall solution must also be submitted with the Proposal.
Cases where offerors withhold exceptions during the Proposal phase but present them during
the negotiation phase may be interpreted by the City as a case of “bad faith” and may result in
the termination of negotiations.
4.3 SIGNING OF PROPOSALS
The submission of a Proposal within RMEPS shall indicate the intention of the Vendor to adhere
to the provisions described in this RFP.
4.4 COST OF PROPOSAL
Each Vendor will be responsible for all costs incurred in preparing or responding to this RFP
and subsequent activities and contract negotiations. Vendors shall not submit any requests for
reimbursements or invoices for fees with respect thereto.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 50 of 55
4.5 CONFLICT OF INTEREST, NON-COLLUSION AND ANTI-LOBBYING
The Vendor warrants and represents that its officers, employees, or agents have not and will not
attempt to lobby or influence a vote or recommendation related to its Proposal, directly or
indirectly, through any contact with City Council, Senior Management, or any City staff. Should
the Vendor become aware of any collusion or conflict of interest, they will immediately notify the
Director of Purchasing at gspaul@fcgov.com.
4.6 CONFIDENTIALITY, MATERIALS SUBMITTED AND OWNERSHIP OF
PROPOSALS
The City is a governmental entity subject to the Colorado Open Records Act, C.R.S. §§ 24-72-
200.1 et seq. (“CORA”). Any proposals submitted hereunder are subject to public disclosure by
the City pursuant to CORA and City ordinances. Vendors may submit one (1) additional
complete proposal clearly marked “FOR PUBLIC VIEWING.” In this version of their proposal,
Vendors may redact text and/or data that it deems confidential or proprietary pursuant to CORA.
All pricing will be considered public records subject to disclosure under CORA and as such
pricing cannot be redacted from the “FOR PUBLIC VIEWING” version of the proposal. Failure
to provide a public viewing copy will be considered a waiver of any claim of confidentiality under
CORA without regard to how the applicant’s proposal or certain pages of the proposal are
marked confidential, proprietary, or similar. Such a statement does not necessarily exempt
such documentation from public disclosure if required by CORA, by order of a court of
appropriate jurisdiction, or other applicable law. Generally, under CORA, trade secrets,
confidential commercial information and financial data information may not be required to be
disclosed by The City. Proposals may not be marked “Confidential” or ‘Proprietary’ in their
entirety. By responding to this RFP, Vendors hereby waives all claims for damages against the
City for the City’s good faith compliance with CORA. All provisions and pricing of any
contract resulting from this request for proposal will be public information.
All documentation, manuals and ideas submitted by Vendors shall become the property of the
City once they are submitted to the City. Any material submitted by Vendors that is to be
considered confidential pursuant to CORA must be clearly marked as such and must include all
applicable restrictions. No submission or supporting documentation will be returned to Vendor
except as part of a final definitive contract with a successful Vendor.
4.7 DISQUALIFICATION OR REJECTION OF PROPOSALS
THE CITY reserves the right to cancel or modify the RFP, the RFP SCHEDULE, AND the RFP
process at any time as it deems necessary or to comply with regulatory orders, rules,
regulations or guidelines without liability or obligation to any SOLUTION PROVIDER. If
modifications, clarifications, or additions to the RFP become necessary, Vendors will be notified
via a written Addenda posted on RMEPS.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 51 of 55
The City reserves the right to select those offerors it deems qualified and to terminate
negotiations at any time, up to and including during the final contracting phase, without incurring
liability.
The City reserves the right to accept or reject all responses to this RFP and at its complete
discretion and without explanation to the offeror(s).
Aspects of Solution Providers’ Proposal may be subject to further inquiry to specifically define
the operation of the Project, to ensure adequate financial and credit support for Solution
Provider, to ensure that the Project is consistent with the City’s requirements or for any other
reason. Further inquiry shall not imply that a Proposal will be selected.
4.8 RIGHT TO WAIVE PROPOSAL IRREGULARITIES
Proposals shall be considered as being "irregular" if they contain any omissions, alterations of
form, additions, or conditions not called for, or irregularities of any kind.
The City reserves the right to waive minor irregularities and mandatory requirements and the
failure to do so does not otherwise materially affect the RFP process. This right is at the sole
discretion of the City.
4.9 RFP IRREGULARITIES
Vendors shall not take advantage of any apparent errors or omissions in any document within
the RFP package. If any errors or omissions are discovered by a Vendor, that Vendor shall
notify the Director of Purchasing at gspaul@fcgov.com immediately.
4.10 PRIOR AGREEMENTS
Any prior agreements between the City and each Vendor related to the subject matter of this
RFP will be superseded by an agreement that results from this bidding event. Vendor should
ensure that all Proposals are inclusive of or expressly waive any related termination costs that
are allowable under the terms of the current agreement.
4.11 WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSALS
Proposals may be withdrawn from RMEPS any time prior to the exact hour and date specified
for submission of Proposals.
4.12 AMENDING OF PROPOSALS
Amended Proposals must be submitted in RMEPS before the deadline for submission of
Proposals. Such amended Proposals must be complete replacements of a previously submitted
Proposal and must be clearly identified as such. The City will not merge, collate, or assemble
Proposal materials.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 52 of 55
4.13 RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
NEITHER THIS RFP, NOR ANY FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE OR DISCUSSION, SHALL
CONSTITUTE AN OFFER BY THE CITY, AND SUBMITTAL OF A PROPOSAL SHALL NOT
BE DEEMED AN ACCEPTANCE.
The City reserves the right to select those offeror(s) it deems qualified and to terminate
negotiations at any time, up to and including during the final contracting phase, without incurring
liability.
The City reserves the right to accept or reject all responses to this RFP and at its complete
discretion and without explanation to the offeror(s). The City reserves the right to withdraw or
modify this RFP at any time.
4.14 PROPOSAL OFFER FIRM
Each Solution Provider guarantees that its responses to this RFP, including proposed terms and
pricing, are firm and binding for One Hundred and Eighty (180) days after the due date for
submission of Proposals or receipt of the last best and final offer submitted. All Proposals must
include a statement to that effect.
4.15 EXCEPTIONS TO RFP SPECIFICATIONS
Although the specifications stated in the RFP represent the City’s anticipated needs, there may
be instances where it is in the City’s interest to permit exceptions to specifications and accept
alternatives.
It is imperative that the Vendor make very clear where exceptions are taken to the specifications
and other provisions of the RFP including the City’s required contract clauses stated in
Attachment O, Special Provisions. Where exceptions are identified, Vendor’s must state
alternatives. Therefore, exceptions, conditions, or qualifications to the provisions of the City’s
specifications must be clearly identified as such together with reasons for taking exception and
inserted into the Proposal. If the Vendor does not make clear that an exception is being taken,
the Proposal will be deemed to meet the specification as written. Cases where offerors withhold
exceptions during the Proposal phase but present them during the negotiation phase may be
interpreted by the City as a case of “bad faith” and may result in the termination of negotiations.
4.16 CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS
Until such time as a contract has been awarded, the City reserves the right to reject any or all
Proposals received in response to this RFP without giving any notice or reasons. The City also
reserves the right to accept any Proposal, notwithstanding informalities or irregularities
contained in such Proposal.
The City reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to seek further information from, or clarification
of, any Proposal submitted by any Vendor, and to negotiate with any Vendor, or with more than
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 53 of 55
one Solution provider concurrently, the terms and conditions of Proposals. The City is not
required to offer any modified terms and conditions to any other Vendor and the City incurs no
liability to any Vendor in exercising its discretion under this paragraph.
4.17 AWARD OF CONTRACT
The City reserves the right to withhold final action on the Proposal for a reasonable time.
The award of a contract, if any, shall be based on an evaluation of Proposals by the City,
through consideration of any criteria deemed important by the City in its sole discretion. The
Proposal containing the lowest price, or any Proposal will not necessarily be accepted. The City
reserves the right, without restriction, of sole discretion in determining the best value and
whether any Proposal received provides the necessary level of value to the City to result in the
awarding of a contract.
The Vendor of Choice will be required to notify the City of the identity of the legal counsel who
will represent Vendor in the negotiation of the contract and associated exhibits by not later than
10 days from notification by the City that the Vendor is a finalist. Such finalist(s) shall ensure
that its legal counsel is available as needed throughout the duration of the negotiations.
In the event of a selection, the City will initiate a Notice of Award to the selected Vendor
regarding the award. The Vendor will acknowledge its receipt and acceptance of such Notice of
Award in writing within five (5) business days.
The City’s’ decision with respect to the selection of the successful Proposal(s), if any, will be
final. Once the decision has been made and the successful Vendor, if any, has been notified,
The City will not accept modified Proposals from the unsuccessful Vendors or requests to
reconsider the choice that has been made.
The City reserves the right to award a contract in respect of all or only a portion of the Proposal
or to award multiple contracts to different Vendors or to Vendors not included in this RFP
process. The use of subcontractors to perform any component of the RFP must be approved by
the City in writing and in advance of providing such services.
4.18 NOTICE TO UNSUCCESSFUL VENDORS
Upon request and after contract award, the City will provide general, high-level information
regarding the procurement process to unsuccessful Vendors.
4.19 NEGOTIATION OF CONTRACTS
Vendors will be asked to define their pricing and capabilities within their Proposal. It is assumed
that the City and the selected Vendors will negotiate specific program features, terms, and
conditions during the contract negotiation phase.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 54 of 55
4.20 EXECUTION OF CONTRACTS
The City anticipates that, if an award is made, it will negotiate and execute a master services
agreement (including a statement of work) on the policies governing the performance of the
services applicable under this RFP and included as Attachment O – Special Provisions. In
addition, the City anticipates signing one or more of the following: license agreement,
maintenance and support agreement, and, other agreements, as applicable. Vendors are
expected to identify any exceptions to the contract terms and conditions in the Proposal.
Failure to state any exceptions shall constitute full acceptance of the City’s terms and
conditions by the Vendor(s).
4.21 TMG CONSULTING
The City has contracted with TMG Consulting, a RIA company to assist in the RFP process and
the selection of Software Vendors. This assistance will include requirements gathering and
definition, RFP development, Proposal evaluation and contract negotiation support.
The City and TMG Consulting may discuss the Proposal with the Vendor for the purpose of
clarification and to assure full understanding of the Proposal.
RFP for LPCE and Implementation Services
Page 55 of 55
5 ATTACHMENT LISTING
ATTACHMENT A – RESPONSE FORM
ATTACHMENT B – INTEGRATION AND INTERFACES
ATTACHMENT C – PRICING FORM
ATTACHMENT D – STAFFING FORM
ATTACHMENT E – FUNCTIONAL MATRIX
ATTACHMENT F – EXCEPTIONS CONFLICTS AND CLARIFICATIONS
ATTACHMENT G – MANUAL PROCESSES
ATTACHMENT H – SAAS CYBER VENDOR QUESTIONNAIRE
ATTACHMENT I – VENDOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM
ATTACHMENT J – INSURANCE FORM
ATTACHMENT K – SAMPLE LPCE TYPES
ATTACHMENT L – SAMPLE CRITICAL REPORTS
ATTACHMENT M – DATA CONVERSION
ATTACHMENT N – SAMPLE PLANNING APPLICATION TYPES
ATTACHMENT O – SPECIAL PROVISIONS
ATTACHMENT P – RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE
***** End of RFP *****