SLIDE 11 Q1: Do all Councils currently have access to the internet (have the ability to access the system/s once implemented)? A1: All participating Councils have access to the Internet, most have a Local-e website (or a site of their own). All participating Councils will have the ability to access the systems developed as part of the project. General Q:2 Would Lgov NSW have an interest in dealing with a consortium with an overall lead contractor rather than separate bids from individual organisations? A2: We believe that this is a preferred option provided that it will produce a quality outcome. General Q3: In the pricing schedules, what is the expected relationship between the pricing of the "deliverable" and the next table "hourly rates". A3: The "deliverable" price is the predominant factor. Hourly rates will be used to judge the weightings of each team member's contribution, as well as to determine costs for additional work. General Q4: Do all Councils currently have access to the internet (have the ability to access the system/s once implemented)? A4: All participating Councils have access to the Internet, most have a Local-e website (or a site of their own). All participating Councils will have the ability to access the systems developed as part of the project. General SLIDE 12 Q5: Is it envisaged that the other Councils who have not yet signed up for the project will come on board prior to the commencement of this project? A5: We are targeting all 130 country councils. We believe they all will come on board over time. General Q6: Who has responsibility and ownership for the content? Is it the Local-e agency or is it the individual councils? A6: This question we have categorised in 2 ways: 1 with regard to applications developed for the project by solution providers, all IP rests with Lgov NSW. 2 Secondly, content that is supplied by Council and community groups/users is owned and/or maintained by each individual Council. General Q7: Is there a preference for: a) technology (eg IBM over Microsoft) and/or b) build vs buy? c) Tier-1 or Tier-2 solutions? d) aggregated/integrated whole-of-business hosted solutions or .one offs.? A7: Lgov NSW does not have any preferences for solutions, technologies or hosting. We are interested in the quality and appropriateness of proposed solutions based on the selection criteria set out in the Tender documents. General Q8: Is there currently any infrastructure in place that the Local-e project would like to take advantage of "whether hardware or software" and utilise, where practical, within the project? A8: The existing & proven Local-e website infrastructure will provide the base framework to which the "Next Steps" components will be added. General Q9: Is there a requirement for a centralised support line and telemarketing services for the life of the contract, and if so is there a separate budget for this support or is it required as part of the tender submission A9: All services & applications provided as part of this project are required to be supported by the solution provider/s for the term of the project (until the 31 December 2004). This support should be included as part of tender submissions. We do not envisage any requirements for telemarketing services. General Q10: In Section B under the heading "type of services required", item 6 identifies "ongoing maintenance and development support services". This is not mentioned in the pricing schedules. How significant is this aspect of the tender to Lgov NSW? A10: Requirements for ongoing support and maintenance will be negotiated after the completion of the project. General SLIDE 13 Q11: How much integration is expected between the commercial business and Government in terms of Services being offered via the Local-e initiative? A11: We leave it to the future. General Q12: Does the project require a fixed price? If so, will this be based on the Councils that are currently signed up for the project? A12: Contractual arrangements with solution providers will be generally on a fixed-price basis, however at this stage we are seeking indicative pricing for each component. These prices do not need to be based on the number nor types of Councils who are participating. General Q13: Are there separate budgets for each class of functionality or is it all lumped together in one sum? If there are individual budgets what is the size of each budget? A13: No separate budgets. General Q14: Will the tender responses be required to address all areas of the tender or can responses be specialised to particular areas of the requirement? Does Lgov NSW prefer one tenderer across all of these projects or do they prefer to have different agreements with different vendors, each of which with skills in one of these areas? A14: Tenders may address one or more project components, but not parts of components. Lgov NSW does not have a preference for tenderer configuration and will be making evaluations based on the criteria provided. Tenderers must submit a separate tender for each component. General General Q15: How is the interaction between the different required services (e-procurement, mapping, hosting etc) going to be coordinated, so that issues of interoperability and standards are effectively addressed ? A15: Project management of all components will come from the Local-e Project team, and the operational procedures for managing the integration between components will be determined in consultation with solution providers. These issues will also be addressed in contractual documentation with solution providers. General Q16: Given that the tender requirements are fairly high-level and flexible, how does Lgov NSW intend to map requirements into specific deliverables? What are the specific indicators of success? A16: Specific requirements and deliverables (including milestones and performance indicators) will be specified and confirmed prior to the signing of contracts with solution providers. Eg. Ability to meet deadlines is an essential criteria SLIDE 14 Q17: What value does the Evaluation Committee place on a number of existing services that Local Councils could use ? A17: One of the key principles of the Local-e program is the avoidance of duplication. If existing services are identified that meet project requirements, then they will be considered within the context of the proposed solution as a whole. General Q18: What criteria will the Evaluation Committee use to .demonstrate value for money.? A18: Evaluation will be carried out using best value for money criteria (which may include, but not be limited to: 1 meeting functional requirements, 2 technical capacity, 3 financial viability, 4 quality and performance of products, 5 delivery timescale, 6 recent experience, 7 as well as cost). General Q19: If you are unable to obtain professional indemnity insurance, what alternative options would Lgov NSW consider ? A19: Professional Indemnity insurance at the minimum specified level is a contractual requirement by Lgov from any tenderer. General Q20: Is Lgov NSW prepared to review the Intellectual Property Clause of the Conditions of Contract? A20: Perhaps. General Q21: Would Lgov NSW consider this as a project whereby the outcomes could be licensed to other State Local Government Associations? A21: YES General
SLIDE 15 Q23: Can you clarify your reference for raster vs vector technology in terms of clarity, functionality and performance? A23: Both have their uses and advantages. We encourage service providers to come up with efficient solutions to our requirements. We believe there may be cases for providing raster based images in terms of performance though equally there may be cases in some instances for providing vector based data for increased functionality e-Mapping Q24: Can you confirm if you envisage different solutions/suppliers for different size Councils, or perhaps for regions. A24: There may be need for different solutions for a few councils. Therefore, we endeavour to look for a common solution for all councils. Size of Councils or Regions are not specific factors. e-Mapping Q25: Section C - Response to Tender, Item 15.4.2 mentions spatial data and electronic services being combined with the Electronic Procurement. We presume this is at the portal level and not at the application level? A25: The payment module will be the common link between all components, including e-Procurement. e-Mapping/ e-Procurement
Q26: What level of transaction based services are envisaged? Are these services benchmarked with 'Best Practices' such as EU E-Government Benchmarking? If so how? A26: It is envisaged that the ability to make payments for relevant Council services will be required as part of the e-Services module. The e-Procurement component is fully based around transactional services. Tenderers are expected to consider and recommend relevant benchmarks and best-practice solutions when responding. e-Procurement Q27: Does the online management of purchasing cards fall under the e-Procurement section of the tender? A27: Online management of purchasing cards does not fall into the scope of this project. e-Procurement Q28: What emphasis will you be placing on: a) existing Procurement applications within the Councils (if any) and b) supported classification schemas? A28: We are seeking to integrate with Councils. enterprise systems, and it will be at the Councils' discretion as to the level of integration. e-Procurement Q29: In Sept 2000 a syndicate of 9 Councils issued an EOI for an integrated application system based on a name and address format for multiple contacts including: 1 suppliers 2 employees 3 ratepayers 4 property owners 5 developers 6 councillors Can this standard name and address structure be used for the e-Procurement module? A29: We are seeking structures that are relevant and appropriate to product-based purchasing and based on our interpretation of the question, we do not see that this data structure is relevant. e-Procurement
Q30: With the development of XML and XML Registry Standards, are x.500 and x.400 still appropriate? A30: We are seeking advice on the most appropriate standards for all components, and would expect tender responses to document the standards to be implemented in the proposed solution. Standards Q31: Is the Evaluation Committee encouraging/enforcing the use of XML standards for the customer transaction management module as well as the e-Procurement module? A31: The use of appropriate standards to ensure integration between many project components is seen as critical to the success of the project. Standards Q32: The policy framework in the Executive Summary of the Standards Brief is unclear, please clarify the chart. A32: We are looking for the development of the principles as discussed earlier in the presentation into policies for the project, using appropriate standards. Standards
