Enterprise System for:
1 / 22

Pre-Proposal Conference September 10, 2009 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Enterprise System for: Pesticide Permitting and Use Reporting to be deployed in all California Counties CACASA Request for Proposals #10. Pre-Proposal Conference September 10, 2009. Agenda. RFP Scope of Services Highlights Answers to submitted questions Open questions from attendees

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Pre-Proposal Conference September 10, 2009' - iman

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Pre proposal conference september 10 2009

Enterprise System for:Pesticide Permitting and Use Reportingto be deployed in all California CountiesCACASA Request for Proposals #10

Pre-Proposal Conference

September 10, 2009


  • RFP Scope of Services Highlights

  • Answers to submitted questions

  • Open questions from attendees

  • Software demonstrations @ 10:30

  • Finish Q & A

  • Adjourn

3 1 system design services
3.1 System Design Services

  • Demonstrated consulting skills to work with counties on needs & expectations

  • Commitment to thoroughly document the whole solution

  • Details about proposed system architecture: engineering, components, deployed infrastructure

  • Advantages and rationale for proposed architecture

3 2 system acceptance test plan
3.2 System Acceptance Test Plan

  • Commitment to thoroughly test prior to deployment

  • Experience developing incremental software/system test plans

  • Field testing duration, objectives, and benchmark monitoring

3 3 software coding testing
3.3 Software Coding & Testing

  • Commitment to an organized process that integrates design, coding, testing, and source code documentation

  • Strong feedback loops to keep design documentation synchronized with as-built system.

3 4 system documentation user help sub system
3.4 System Documentation & User Help Sub-system

  • Maximize county self-sufficiency to learn, use, and maintain the system

  • Engage the community of users to achieve in-depth understanding and a strong sense of system ownership

Summary of objectives 3 1 3 4
Summary of Objectives: 3.1 - 3.4

  • System development follows an orderly, efficient, and manageable process

  • Control and autonomy conveyed to system users and owners

3 5 implementation transition plan
3.5 Implementation / Transition Plan

  • Explain the process for converting unknowns to knowns

  • Planning details and advance work required for a swift and smooth transition

  • Assumptions about CACASA and county participation in both planning and execution

3 6 system installations
3.6 System Installations

  • Anticipated duration to accomplish all county transitions

  • Required contractor resources

  • Assumptions about required CACASA and county resources

  • Seasonal timing to minimize Ag. Department disruptions

3 7 maintenance and technical support one time setup activities
3.7 Maintenance and Technical Support One Time Setup Activities

  • Describe system monitoring / maintenance procedures and technical support systems that will be planned and/or established in advance of the system going “live”

3 8 ongoing maintenance and technical support activities
3.8 Ongoing Maintenance and ActivitiesTechnical Support Activities

  • Anticipated contractor resources required

  • Technical User Group involvement

3 9 project management
3.9 Project Management Activities

  • Detailed Work Plan & Schedule

  • Coordination and communication methods, both internal and external

  • Change and risk management strategies

  • Assumptions about CACASA and county involvement and response times for evaluating deliverables or decision-making

Questions submitted in advance budget funding
Questions Submitted in Advance: ActivitiesBudget & Funding

  • Is there a budget for the project?

  • How much funding is secured and guaranteed given the current financial and budgeting issues?

  • The “Phase I Needs Assessment Report” says that there is an unspent amount of $1.23M.  How much of this amount will be available to the current project?

Questions submitted in advance incumbent vendors
Questions Submitted in Advance: ActivitiesIncumbent Vendors

  • Do you want a new solution or will you give preference to the AgGIS/RMMS systems if they include the necessary enhancements?

  • What is CACASA’s plan to leverage the past investment of $1.7M?

Questions submitted in advance data issues
Questions Submitted in Advance: ActivitiesData Issues

  • Will CACASA provide all of the pesticide data and polygonal configuration of GIS interest areas?

  • Is spatial data currently available with all the counties?

  • Is there a requirement for data archival?

Questions submitted in advance project management
Questions Submitted in Advance: ActivitiesProject Management

  • Does CACASA have any professional IT personnel who will participate in conjunction with the contractor?

  • Who will approve the detailed system design, an outside IT vendor or the CACASA staff?

  • How many design/vision meetings should we include in our estimate?

Questions submitted in advance standards and certifications
Questions Submitted in Advance: ActivitiesStandards and Certifications

  • Are there any State IT standards to be followed if CDPR is funding part of the development and implementation of the new system?

  • Does the contract require California MSA / CMAS certifications?

Questions submitted in advance architecture issues
Questions Submitted in Advance: ActivitiesArchitecture Issues

  • Are there any existing co-location services being used by the CACASA where we can house the new system being developed?

  • Are you open to using licensed products, such as ESRI tools for GIS?  Are there any other licensing considerations for the new system?

  • For a centralized approach, would there be a database administrator assigned to resolve internal database replication / synchronization conflict scenarios?

Questions submitted in advance existing infrastructure
Questions Submitted in Advance: ActivitiesExisting Infrastructure

  • Do all counties using this system have access to high speed internet services?

  • Can you share some data of installation per county so that we can give a more realistic estimate of installation and transition?

  • Currently does the main district office (or county HQ) synchronize its data with the other field district offices of the county?

  • Do the counties have remote access for system developers currently?

Questions submitted in advance miscellaneous issues 1
Questions Submitted in Advance: ActivitiesMiscellaneous Issues (1)

  • Is there a mobile component for this service whereby a field technician can input their pesticide usage and take advantage of GIS discovery on the mobile device?

  • On page 2 of the “Phase II Final Recommended Solution Report” a Statewide Pesticide Use Reporting System (SPURS) is mentioned.  Is this the system that we are developing?

Questions submitted in advance miscellaneous issues 2
Questions Submitted in Advance: ActivitiesMiscellaneous Issues (2)

  • Can some part of the project engineering activities be carried out off-site?

  • We expect to team with an overseas developer.  Will such a teaming relationship preclude us from winning the project?

  • How will the traveling costs be billed to CACASA?

Interactive q a
Interactive Q & A Activities