REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
For
IT Support and Upgrades
to Space Florida’s
Network and Communications Infrastructure
RFI-SF-01-0-2015/TB
Publication Date: November 12, 2014 Due Date: December 2, 2014
Space Florida (“SF”) is dedicated to fostering the growth and development of a sustainable and world-leading aerospace industry in the State of Florida. SF promotes aerospace business development by facilitating business financing, spaceport operations, research and development, workforce development, and innovative education programs. SF is an independent special district and a subdivision of the State of Florida and is governed by Part II of Chapter 331 of the Florida Statutes.
THIS IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ONLY. SF is issuing this Request for
Information (“RFI”) solely for informational and planning purposes – it does not constitute a solicitation or a promise to issue a solicitation in the future. This RFI does not commit SF to contract for goods or services. Furthermore, SF is not, at this time, seeking proposals and SF will not accept unsolicited proposals in response to this RFI. Failure to respond to this RFI does not preclude participation in a future solicitation, if issued. It is SF’s intent that based on the information received in response to this RFI, that it will issue a request for proposal to engage a vendor to provide the scope of work.
RFI PURPOSE
SF is issuing this RFI in an effort to obtain a better understanding of what IT and communication services are readily available in the commercial marketplace and determine how these services might be applied to SF’s current and future IT requirements.
SF currently has the following IT and Communications Infrastructure: Workstations
40 Users
50 Computers (30 desktops, 20 laptops)
All Dell Computers (most less than 3 years old)(30 with active warranties, 20 without) Mix of MS Office 2007, 2010, and 2013
All computers have Adobe Acrobat Professional 7 or higher Servers
3 Dell Servers (all under warranty)
PowerEdge 2950 Primary Domain Controller (July 2008) PowerEdge R410 File Server (June 2010)
PowerEdge R520 Business Disaster Recovery (April 2014) Network
The main office/headquarters are located at the Space Life Sciences Laboratory, 505 Odyssey Way, Suite 300, Exploration Park, FL 32953 and is the physical location of all SF servers. A secondary office is near the south gate entrance to Cape Canaveral AF Station, 100 Spaceport Way, Cape Canaveral, FL 32920. This office uses a Sonicwall device for a VPN connection to the main office.
A remote office is located at Camp Blanding, Florida National Guard, 5629 State Road 16 W Bldg. 6038, Starke, FL 32091. This office also uses a Sonicwall device for VPN connection to the main office.
Remote office in Tallahassee, FL. This office has 2 users that do not regularly use SF network resources, but use client-based VPN when needed.
Other Remote Users - many of the laptop users use client-based VPN services when working from home or while traveling.
Hosted Services
Use AppRiver for hosting Exchange email services Use Global Relay for hosted email archiving services Use Salesforce for hosted Project Tracking and Reporting Use Clarizen for hosted Project Tracking and Reporting Telephone System
AllWorx 6X Server at Main Office AllWorx 24X Server at Secondary Office
30 AllWorx Model 9212 VoIP telephones at Main Office
25 AllWorx Model 9212 VoIP telephones at the Secondary Office
4 AllWorx Model 9212 VoIP telephones at Camp Blanding Remote Office
1 AllWorx Model 9224 VoIP telephone with addition side button module for Operator 2 PolyCom IP7000 VoIP Conference Phones (Main Office)
1 analog PolyCom Conference Phone (Main Office)
Objectives of this RFI:
Identification and proposed approach of any technology improvements and services that can provide better security, efficiency, and effectiveness of SF’s current network infrastructure is requested. Furthermore, it is desired that various models for daily desktop support and management be evaluated.
Following are some of the principle improvements, upgrades, and modifications that SF is interested in evaluating. This list is intended only as a broad overview of various technologies, solutions and problems that have been discussed and debated internally. The list is not
comprehensive, nor is it a requirements list.
Security- As SF continues to add projects and is managing a growing number of proprietary documents from various companies, there is interest in verifying that SF has the proper level of security in place to prevent corporate espionage or unintentional file sharing.
Virtual Desktop- SF is interested in reduced hardware costs, reduced desktop support costs and all of the efficiencies of implementing a VDI network.
File Duplication- Currently there are many files that are duplicated within departments and across different departments.
Multiple Logon Credentials- Currently there are different logon credentials for Windows, email, Salesforce, Clarizen, and Peachtree Accounting. This situation makes changing passwords on a regular basis very difficult.
Document Management System- SF currently uses digital signatures for approving various documents, but the movement of documents through the process is done by manual copying and pasting of files. Perhaps a SharePoint solution would help with this.
Remote Access- SF would like for remote access to network resources to be easier and more reliable. VPN is slow and there is risk for file corruption.
Bring-Your-Own-Device- SF is interested in technology that would allow users to get full network resources on whatever device they have; iPad, personal laptop, tablets, phones, etc. Laptop sync issues- When laptops are not connected to the SF domain, they are slow to logon, resources are not available (until VPN connection) and synchronization of documents requires a lot of attention from the user.
Email and Archiving- Interested in hosted email and archiving solutions that are available through enterprise MS Office 365 licensing and how to transition from current hosted services. Telephone Service- Working well at the Main and Secondary Office. Quality of service at the Blanding Office is poor and is most likely because of low data bandwidth with DSL connection. All the equipment is owned, though administration can be difficult at times and when data or power is lost at either server location, the entire system typically fails. SF is interested in what alternative solutions may be available, feasible, and more reliable.
The information provided in response to this RFI may be used by SF in developing a solicitation and the related scope of services, performance work statement and statement of objectives or performance specifications.
INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS
Vendor Responses: Industry feedback is vitally important and SF will be receptive to any and all ideas received from the industry. The responses to this RFI will help to determine available options for SF regarding IT and communication options.
Vendor Information: Respondents to this RFI are asked to be as thorough and specific as is practical. The RFI response should include the following:
a. Company name, address, website URL and point of contact (name, telephone number, fax number and email address).
b. Type of business, location of headquarters and whether offices are located in the State of Florida, and if so, where.
c. Address the items outlined in the Objectives of this RFI Section. Freely discuss responses to the statements and the validity, or lack thereof, of the assumptions and provide details of how the vendor’s proposed solutions, innovative strategies or services would meet the requirements or how alternative solutions would be superior. d. Any standard published rates and costs that can be attributed to specific services such as per user/per month licensing cost, desktop support cost, VDI implementation cost, SharePoint development cost that will help SF determine what solutions are financially viable. Vendor can include ROI analysis wherever relevant.
e. Any examples of the vendor implementing proposed solutions with organizations similar to SF.
RFI Project Coordinator: All vendor communications concerning this solicitation should be e-mailed to the RFI Project Manager, Ted Beerman at [email protected] with a courtesy copy provided to the RFI Coordinator, Debbie Hebert at [email protected].
Responses: Interested parties are requested to submit a response to this RFI in .pdf format submitted electronically to the RFI Project Manager, Ted Beerman at
Hebert at [email protected]. Responses are due no later than 12:00 Noon (EST), Tuesday, December 2, 2014.
Discussions with Vendors: SF may, in its sole discretion, choose to meet with some or all vendors that respond to this RFI to conduct discussions to obtain further clarification of the respondent’s submission. Vendors that submit documentation in response to this RFI may be invited to present in person or discuss their ideas via teleconference with SF. A meeting, presentation or teleconference will not preclude a vendor from responding to the request for proposal if the vendor otherwise qualifies under the terms of the request for proposal.
Property of SF: All information submitted by vendor will become part of the project file and, unless otherwise exempt or confidential in accordance with Florida law, will become a public record. All responses and accompanying documentation will become the property of SF and will not be returned.
Trade Secrets and Information Confidential and Exempt from the Public Records Act: Trade secrets and information confidential and exempt from Subsection 119.07(1) of the Florida Statutes and Subsection 24(a) of Article I of the Florida Constitution, is not solicited nor desired, as information to be submitted with a response. The Florida Statutes and the State Constitution govern whether information in a response is confidential or exempt from the Public Records Act. If information is submitted in a response which the vendor deems to be a trade secret or
confidential and exempt from the Public Records Act, the information shall be submitted with the response in a separate, clearly marked envelope referencing the specific statutory citation for such exemption. SF is not obligated to agree with the vendor’s claim of an exemption and, by submitting a reply or other submission, the vendor agrees to be responsible for defending its claim that each and every portion of the separately marked information is exempt from inspection and copying under the Public Records Act. The vendor agrees that it shall protect, defend, and indemnify, including attorney’s fees and costs, SF for any and all claims and litigation (including litigation initiated by SF) arising from or relating to vendor’s claim that the separately marked portions of its reply are not subject to disclosure. If the vendor fails to separately mark portions of its response, or mark its response “confidential” (or other similar language) in its entirety, SF is authorized to produce the entire document, data or record submitted by the vendor in responding to a Public Records Request.
Vendor’s Cost to Develop the Response: Costs for developing a response to this RFI are entirely the obligations of the vendor and shall not be chargeable in any manner to SF.
