Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAddendum 1 - RFP - 10207 Transit Passenger Counting System RFP 10207 Transit Passenger Counting System Addendum #1 Questions and Answers Page 1 of 8 ADDENDUM NO. 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS Description of RFP 10207: Transit Passenger Counting System OPENING DATE: 3:00 PM (Our Clock) October 3, 2025 To all prospective bidders under the specifications and contract documents described above, the following changes/additions are hereby made and detailed in the following sections of this addendum: Exhibit 1 – Questions and Answers Exhibit 2 - Extending proposal due date to 3:00 PM October 3, 2025. Please contact Ed Bonnette, C.P.M., CPPB, Senior Buyer, at (970) 416-2247 or ebonnette@fcgov.com with any questions regarding this addendum. RECEIPT OF THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED BY A WRITTEN STATEMENT ENCLOSED WITH THE PROPOSAL STATING THAT THIS ADDENDUM HAS BEEN RECEIVED. Financial Services Purchasing Division 215 N. Mason St. 2nd Floor PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6775 fcgov.com/purchasing RFP 10207 Transit Passenger Counting System Addendum #1 Questions and Answers Page 2 of 8 1) Can The City please provide a fleet list with their make, model and door count? Answer: Gillig’s are 2 doors, NABI 60 ft have 3 doors, all others have two doors. Cutaways have 1 door, Ford F550 (3). 2) What is the make and model of your current APC hardware? (sunsetting Summer 2026) Answer: Clever APCs made out of a controller, transmitter and receiver as well as an IRIS matrix. 3) Can you give a use case for "customize business rules for data processing and preview what impact changes might have to ridership" regarding a passenger counting system? Answer: Different organizations have different tolerances for what they will consider as a viable data capture as opposed to one that may need to be totally discarded. For example, if boardings and alightings differ by more than 15%, we may consider that within tolerance. However, we may later decide that a more strict cutoff needs to be enforced, with 10% differences as the new bar. 4) Regarding ‘visitor profiles’, does The City need visitor/guest access to the portal or just to the data? Answer: The portal. 5) Does 'visitor profile' support intend to allow guests to access and manipulate data or just the ability to view data/reports? Answer: Visitors should have read only access to reports. 6) Can you please extend the page count from 50 to 75 pages? Answer: No, we feel that 50 pages is more than adequate. 7) Can you please exclude resumes from the page count? Answer: No, we recommend you limit resumes to no more than 1 page. RFP 10207 Transit Passenger Counting System Addendum #1 Questions and Answers Page 3 of 8 8) We respectfully request that the proposal submission deadline be extended by 2 weeks in order to properly review all requirements and formulate a suitable solution to Fort Collins. Answer: No, since this RFP was preceded by RFI 10156 Transit Passenger Counting System less than 5 months ago, and this Addendum is providing yet more qualifying information; we believe extending the due date to October 3 is adequate. 9) Please provide the Make/Model of the existing APC System. Answer: Clever APCs made out of a controller, transmitter and receiver as well as an IRIS matrix. 10) Since the City currently has 60 buses that will need to be outfitted: a) Please provide the list of bus types and number of doors per bus. What is the clear width between the handles of each doorway? Answer: We are not looking to replace our existing hardware, only software. If hardware as a service (HaaS) is an option we can discuss specifics. b) Is 24 Vdc available on all buses? Answer: We are not looking to replace our existing hardware, only software. If hardware as a service (HaaS) is an option we can discuss specifics. c) How is the existing APC data offloaded to the wayside? Router? If yes, please provide make/model and specify if NMEA streaming is provided by the router. Is the transfer done via WiFi or cellular? Answer: APC Data is offloaded via router, Cradlepoint IBR1700. Transfer can be completed via wifi or cellular. NMEA streaming is not provided by the router. d) For the APC installation on site, how many buses can be made available per day? Are there specific hours during which the installation must occur? RFP 10207 Transit Passenger Counting System Addendum #1 Questions and Answers Page 4 of 8 Answer: At this time, we are only looking to replace our software which is sunsetting in Summer of 2026. If hardware as a service (HaaS) is an option, we can discuss install specifics at a later date. 11) It was mentioned that the existing APC system would be sunsetting by the summer of 2026. Does this mean that the new ridership counting software will be in place before the APC system replacement? Is the new ridership counting software expected to process data from the existing APC hardware? Answer: The software will be sunset by Summer 2026. Ideally, we would like to keep the same hardware, which is not being sunset. 12) Please confirm the deliverables / milestones for the APC hardware. Answer: We are not looking to replace our hardware at this time. 13) Please confirm the scope of the required data migration and archiving. Answer: The vendor will handle all data migration. 14) How many staff will attend the hardware training? Answer: Not looking to replace our hardware at this time. 15) How many staff will attend the software training? Answer: Up to 10 people. 16) Can the software training be done online? Answer: Online is preferred. 17) What is the expected deadline for this project? Answer: End of Q1, 2026. RFP 10207 Transit Passenger Counting System Addendum #1 Questions and Answers Page 5 of 8 18) Please provide make/model of the existing CAD system, as well as any available standard interfaces both on board the vehicles as well as on the back-end software. Answer: We use Clever Devices. 19) “Must support currently installed APC hardware. “ Please clarify this requirement as we are to provide a new APC system. Answer: Our current budget does not allow for a total replacement of our hardware. Hardware as a service (HaaS) is an option we would consider. 20) “Ability to bring data in to city owned servers in order to integrate into our reporting stacks, specifically Microsoft environment and tools.” Please clarify this requirement. What reporting stacks and Microsoft environment and tools are referred to? Answer: The City currently leverages Microsoft SQL Server for databases, Azure for cloud tools and PowerBI for report visualization. We would like to require that the data be importable either to a SQL Server database or into an Azure blob if the vendor is using cloud tools and that would be more readily available. 21) “Capability to maintain visitor profiles and registration information.” Please clarify this requirement. Answer: If we create a visitor account, we want to have a record of that account persist past its use as opposed to deletion. 22) In Appendix A - Requirements: SaaS Cyber Questionnaire, row 48. Please clarify the last paragraph pertaining to Samsara. Answer: That’s a typo; it wasn’t supposed to be included in there. Please disregard that! 23) Does Transfort’s CAD/AVL system currently display live passenger counts? Answer: Yes. 24) Is Transfort’s CAD/AVL system on-premise or cloud hosted? Answer: On-premise. 25) Can Transfort clarify what a “visitor profile” is and what kind of registration information is desired? Answer: A read only profile somehow distinguishable from Fort Collins employee users with more limited capabilities. Information might minimally include name, username, date RFP 10207 Transit Passenger Counting System Addendum #1 Questions and Answers Page 6 of 8 range active. 26) Does Transfort plan to certify its new APC processor for NTD reporting? If so, when does it plan to complete the certification process? Answer: Yes. We will be going through a recertification cycle in reporting for 2025 during 2026. Since selected vendor will not be relevant for that cycle, we would specify the subsequent three year cycle. 27) Could Transfort specify specifically which fields in the S10 report this requirement is in reference to “Clear analog to NTD required ridership reports for S10”? Answer: Details can be found on the NTD website. Within the service form (S10) there is a section specific to reporting of passenger trips and passenger miles traveled, “Services Consumed”. These must be reportable annually and monthly by mode at a minimum. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/2023-08/2023%20S-10.pdf 28) Under the section “Decommissioning” there is a requirement around data migration. Does Transfort have a specific ask around what data is transferred from the previous system and how far back that data is pulled? And if Yes; does Transfort have access to their historical Bus State files and historical vehicle assignment information within Clever to provide to a new vendor to allow for data migration? Answer: Ideally, vendor would support historical data migration back to 2019 in order to support pre-COVID comparison reporting, which is in high demand. However, in the case that more limited data can be migrated, either only as aggregate or more limited lookback, we would consider that acceptable but a disadvantage. We do have access to the needed Clever data to support this. 29) For the requirement “Ability to query both unadjusted, adjusted and statistically factored data to understand differences in reporting modes”; what is the difference between unadjusted and adjusted data? How does adjusted data differ from statistically factored data? Answer: Unadjusted would be data from the sensors without adjustment via business rules (eg trip may report 100 boardings and 90 alightings), adjusted would be data that has gone through normal adjustments like trip balancing (eg trip is adjusted to report 100 boardings and 100 alightings) and statistically factored data would include adjusted data plus imputed data from trips that have been discarded due to data quality issues. 30) In Section II. Scope of Proposal, Part B instructs proposers to complete Appendix A, which includes both functional requirements and a SaaS Cyber questionnaire. Section II. Scope of Proposal, Part C instructs proposers to reply to Appendix B Cyber Vendor Questionnaire, which has identical questions to the Cyber Vendor questions in Appendix A. Where would Transfort like proposers to provide this information? RFP 10207 Transit Passenger Counting System Addendum #1 Questions and Answers Page 7 of 8 Answer: Appendix A Functional Requirements and Appendix C Total Cost of Ownership spreadsheet are electronic documents posted on BidNet for the vendor’s convenience because they are easier for you to fill out in electronic form. That is why they are alluded to in the RFP, but are not shown in there in text form. We want you to fill these in electronically, and include those with your submitted Proposal. Appendix B IS included in the RFP; as this is a standard document in the City’s software RFPs, and no one has had a problem filling it out as a text document and including it as part of their proposal. Therefore, we did not see the necessity to provide that one as an electronic document in BidNet. 31) In Appendix A - Requirements: the SaaS Cyber Questionnaire, Performance, and Training and Support questions allow for answers of “out of the box” “with configuration” “planned release” “with customer programming” and “cannot meet”. These response options do not align with the types of multi-part questions that are asked. Can respondents skip the drop down menu in column “E” and respond in a more detailed manner in column “G”? Answer: See #30, above. Answers of “out of the box” “with configuration” “planned release” “with customer programming” and “cannot meet” refer to the Appendix A Functional Requirements electronic spreadsheet. That has nothing to do with Appendix B Cyber Vendor Questionnaire; that is the separate text document found in the RFP. 32) Can Transfort provide the sample agreement and its exhibits in microsoft word format to facilitate redlines? PDF markups often do not get captured accurately between different PDF readers. Answer: No. The City does several RFPs every year; and to date, no vendor has ever had an issue providing requested exceptions or red-lines to our standard Agreement language. 33) In Appendix A Functional Requirements under SaaS Cyber Questionnaire the City has asked the following: CAIQ Questionnaire: Lack of security control transparency is a leading inhibitor to the adoption of cloud services. As part of the City of Fort Collin's Information Security program we are requesting that all our Cloud Service Providers complete and submit the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) CONSENSUS ASSESSMENTS INITIATIVE QUESTIONNAIRE (CAIQ). This will enable Utilities to have greater confidence that the information is being appropriately protected, and that processes are in place for appropriate action to be taken where any areas of concern emerge. The City will request that the Vendor of Choice complete the CAIQ to assess the maturity of policies, systems and controls that are in place related to services you provide. The questionnaire is available here or www.cloudsecurityalliance.org. The question set was developed by CSA in partnership with industry groups to provide an agreed question set that can be used across the supply chain and is focused on providing industry-accepted ways to document what security controls exist in IaaS, PaaS, and SaaS offerings, providing greater security control transparency. Describe Vendor familiarity with the CAIQ questionnaire. RFP 10207 Transit Passenger Counting System Addendum #1 Questions and Answers Page 8 of 8 Does providing SOC2 compliance and supporting documentation satisfy this requirement rather than filling out the CAIQ questionnaire? If not, can you please provide a direct link to the questionnaire or send it as an attachment? Answer: Yes. Should you be the awarded vendor; the City’s Technology Review Board will review your proposed solution. If they have any follow-up questions for you; they will ask for further information at that time.