HomeMy WebLinkAboutRFP - 8086 ACCELA SOFTWARE CONSULTING (2)Addendum 1 – 8086 Accela Software Consulting Page 1 of 2
ADDENDUM NO. 1
SPECIFICATIONS AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
Description of RFP 8086: Accela Software Consulting
OPENING DATE: 3:00 PM (Our Clock) April 3, 2015
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 & Answers
Please contact Pat Johnson, CPPB, Senior Buyer at (970) 221-6816 with any questions
regarding this addendum.
RECEIPT OF THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED BY A WRITTEN STATEMENT
ENCLOSED WITH THE BID/QUOTE 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
970.221.6707
fcgov.com/purchasing
Addendum 1 – 8086 Accela Software Consulting Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 1 – QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
Q1. The RFP requires information that will exceed the 25-page proposal limit. Would the City
consider increasing the current page limit to 50 pages or more? Or can entries refer to
attachments provided in proposal Section E. Additional Information that won’t be counted
as part of the page limit?
A1. The City prefers that Consultants stay within the requested 25-page limit. We
are not looking for a marketing document, but prefer a document that is
concise in answering our questions.
Q2. II.A.2 : How many reports need to be converted? Can you provide a brief description or title
of the reports to be converted in order to gauge complexity? Will the city consider
converting existing reports to the Accela Ad Hoc Report Writer? This will save the city in
conversion costs and increase reusability.
A2. The list of projected Enhancements in II.A.2 is just a list of possible projects
the City may have the awarded contractor assist with. There is no need to
address these potential situations in your response. The awarded contractor
and the City will address the details of these projects when the City is ready
to move forward with them.
Q3. II.A.2 : Should the proposal assume Accela IVR is the platform that will be used? Is there
any possibility for a 3rd party product?
A3. See A2.
Q4. II.A.2 : How many permit applications need to be brought online in ACA? Can the city
provide a list of these applications? Does the city need to collect fees online? If so, will
one of the supported payment vendors be used, or is a custom adapter needed?
A4. See A2.
Q5. II.A.2: How many record types for Zoning, Engineering, Enforcement? Will the city consider
using Accela's best practice templates, or will full analysis and custom configuration be
needed these record types?
A5. See A2.
Q6. II.A.2: For EDR implementation for the Building Department plan reviews. How many
record types does this entail? How many distinct workflow processes? Does the city have
a preference of using the existing (Adobe) EDR vs the soon to be release EplanCheck
feature?
A6. See A2.
Q7. II.A.2: Does the city require assistance in the installation of the various add-on products
(Accela IVR, Accela EDR/EplanCheck, Accela Document Service), or can the proposal
assume that the products are installed?
A7. See A2.