CITY OF SURREY
PURCHASING SECTION
6645 – 148 Street, Surrey, B.C. V3S 3C7
Tel: 604-590-7274 Fax: 604-599-0956
E-Mail: purchasing@surrey.ca
ADDENDUM #2
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) No.: 1220-30-05-09
TITLE: InfoShare Implementation
ADDENDUM ISSUE DATE: March 10, 2009
REVISED CLOSING DATE: March 27, 2009 – 3:00 p.m. (Amended from March 20, 2009)
Information for Contractors
The following information is provided in answer to questions raised by potential Proponents prior to the deadline for
questions. This addendum #2 contains 3 pages in total.
Question #1: MoReq2 has been used as the basis for your requirements. In order to adequately respond to the
detailed requirements, are you looking for a solution that is specifically MoReq2 compliant? How would solutions
that are geared towards the US DOD5015.02 / MoReq1 standard fair in your evaluation?
Answer: The City is seeking Proponents with a solid knowledge and support in their solutions for
MoReq2. As per schedule C – please ensure that you meet the mandatory requirements at minimum.
Question #2: In drafting the implementation plan, has functionality (as per Essential and Enhanced components
identified on pages 8-22 of the proposal) been evaluated for priority?
Answer: As per the RFP – Records Management, Document Management and Collaboration will be part
of Phase One rollout.
Question #3: Is there a technology preference for the ERMS solution?
Answer: Please refer to schedule A.1 InfoShare Executive Summary (Complete Solution) and Schedule
A.2 Technical Standards.
Question #4: In Schedule C-4, Statement of Departures, 2c specifies that a City of Surrey business license is
required. For non-Surrey based businesses, is a valid business license suitable to meet this requirement?
Answer: If proponent is successful, a valid City of Surrey business licence is required.
Question #5: What’s the timeline for the awarding of contract and contract being signed?
Answer: Timing will depend on the number of proposals received. Shortlisted proponents will be given
a demo script and scheduled for an onsite presentation. After the demos, the evaluation team will meet
to make the final decision. We are hoping to have this completed before the end of June. Again, this is
just an estimated date that may move forward.
Page 1 of 3
Question #6: Could City of Surrey give some specifics on the demo?
Answer: After proponents are informed that they’re on the shortlist, they’ll be given 2 weeks notice
before the demo. The demos will be scripted so that the evaluation team will review features in a
standard sequence.
Note: See Question #10, as the Answer has been amended.
Question #7: When filling out Schedule C, in the large table that refers to Schedule A.4, how should one
respond on a desirable item with multiple parts where some of the parts are included and others need to be built?
Answer: Proponents may add some text to the table to record the extra information. Optionally they
may add an extra column. Ultimately the goal is to make your answer clear and concise.
Question #8: Is City of Surrey open to a fully customised solution?
Answer: Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) solution is preferred. As per the Schedule A.1 Executive
Summary, under “Essential Components - Complete Solution”: Proponents must meet all (100%) of the
mandatory functional and technical requirements (as detailed in Schedule A.4 InfoShare (MoReq2)
Detailed Requirements) preferably as an “off-the-shelf” solution without significant customization.
Question #9: City of Surrey has expressed an interest in Boolean and keyword searching. Is the City also
interested in Conceptual Search, where the system might respond based on an understanding of the information
stored?
Answer: The City would like to start with the basics. The City needs to do basic Boolean and keyword
searches, and would like “federated search” capabilities across multiple repositories. More
sophisticated search would also be of interest, please include details.
Question #10:
a) Propose that we supply the demo scripts more in advance. This would provide all proponents with more time
to prepare for the demos. The understanding is that only shortlisted proponents will be invited to present a
solution demo.
b) Propose that a 5-7 day extension be given, to allow more time to prepare a complete proposal.
Answer: The City will provide a response to both as soon as possible, targeting today March 9 th.
a) Amended Answer: The City will post the demo scripts this week (week ending March 13, 2009.)
b) Amended Answer: The City will allow for an extension of 7 days thus closing will be Friday, March 27, 2009
no later than 3pm PST.
Question #11: Was there a specific reason why MoReq2 was used as the basic for the City’s requirements?
Are there any allowances given for those vendors who are still working to meet MoReq2?
Answer: The City chose MoReq2 because it’s a recognized framework that provided a complete set of
requirements that closely matched those of the City of Surrey.
The City is looking for proponents who are MoReq-knowledgeable.
We do recognize that there is a difference between MoReq and MoReq2. We are looking for proponents
preferably who have been involved in MoReq2 board.
Amended Answer: The City understands that there is currently no certification process for MoReq2. We are
looking for is vendors that recognize MoReq as a specification and participated in the MoReq2 review panel.
The terminology used at meeting was “board”: what we meant was “review panel” (page 226 of A.4 InfoShare
(MoReq2) Detailed Requirements.)
Page 2 of 3
Question #12: Is the City looking for DoD certification?
Answer: The City chose MoReq2 because it’s a recognized framework that provided a complete set of
requirements that closely matched those of the City of Surrey.
Question #13: Is the City considering using SharePoint for Web Content Management?
Answer: City of Surrey did develop a proof-of-concept for SharePoint, it was discovered that it would
require too much in-house development for Web Content Management. In A.4 InfoShare (MoReq2)
Detailed Requirements all the Web Content Management is listed as desirable. Although, SharePoint has
a popular GUI that users like.
Amended Answer: SharePoint remains an option for intranet Web Publishing.
Question #14: What preference to server O/S?
Answer: The City’s preferred platform is Windows.
Question #15: Did we know that the sections are mis-numbered in Schedule B1, the Professional Services
Agreement?
Answer: Thanks for pointing that out.
All Addenda will become a part of the Contract Documents.
Page 3 of 3