MODIFICATION
D -- FSA Workspace Collaboration/Project Management Tool
- Notice Date
- 9/11/2003
- Notice Type
- Modification
- Contracting Office
- Department of Education, Federal Student Aid, Acquisitions and Contracts Performance, Union Center Plaza, RM 101H4 830 First Street, NE, Washington, DC, 20202-5405
- ZIP Code
- 20202-5405
- Solicitation Number
- EDOFSA-03-900172
- Response Due
- 9/12/2003
- Archive Date
- 9/27/2003
- Point of Contact
- Deborah Wrabley, Contracting Officer, Phone 202-377-3471, Fax 202-275-3477,
- E-Mail Address
-
Deborah.Wrabley@ed.gov
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Total Small Business
- Description
- The purpose of this modification is to provide answers to the following questions we have received: Question 1: Can you elaborate on "Issue Management Functionality" & "Document Functionality"? These terms mean different things to different people. I want to make sure we understand what specific functionality DOE needs. Answer 1: Issue Management Functionality - the COTS product should have the capability to track & categorize project issues and resolutions. It should also allow you to prioritize the issues for the project. Document Management Functionality - the product should be able to act as a repository for documents listed under separate folders (by project) using the web interface. Version control of documents should be easy to track. Question 2: Capture - Can ED provide more detail to the requirement for document checkin? For example, is there any existing legacy data planned for checkin (e.g. hardcopy paper, non MS office "e" files) and/or is the checkin particularly focused on new MS Office/Project data types. Corresponding with the capture requirement, can ED provide a rough estimate of the data volume anticipated across the 150 end-user licenses planned for deployment. Answer 2: There is no need to do any document capturing. All documents are in electronic format as stated in the solicitation. We do not anticipate more than approximately 500 documents. Question 3: Has there been any preliminary analysis work performed by the ED regarding the index fields necessary to support control of the data planned for storage in the project archive? Answer 3: Yes, all documents should be stored by project name. Question 4: Is the ED anticipating the vendor would bid the implementation services surrounding the capture requirement into its bid? Answer 4: We are not sure how to anwer this question. Can you clarify further what you are asking? Question 5: Security - Does the ED anticipate that any advanced security features will be provided with the system? Answer 5: No, ID and password protection. Question 6: Are they any particular security or sensitive data requirements the ED would expect the system to include for the project archive? For example: Is it necessary to virtually separate the project archive data into their respective project categories and limit access to those personnel assigned or authorized to access the project data or will all 150 end users have access to the same data. Answer 6: Users should only have access(authorization) to the documents within the project they are working on. Question 7: Are there any specific data types or sets of information (e.g. cost) which may have unique security profiles. Answer 7: No. Question 8: If the former approach is selected, has the ED already identified the primary project areas it would like to secure separate from other project areas. Answer 8: No. Question 9: Collaboration - Are there processing requirements associated with the collaboration component of the solicitation? For example, when a project is changed for some reason (schedule change, resource availability modifications, etc.) is there an approval process prior to incorporating this change? Answer 9: No. Question 10: If there is an associated review process associated with related project documents used (visio, MS office and Adobe are mentioned in the Solicitation), are these documents redlined, commented, etc. during the process? Answer 10: Yes. Question 11: How is change communicated within the project workspace? Is there a formal change request process? Answer 11: No. Question 12: Access - Is tracking of access to the files and actions resulting from access (e.g., read, edit, delete) required? Answer 12: No. Question 13: Will a firewall separate the users from the hosted system? Answer 13: No. Question 14: If so, what are the security requirements for the firewall? Answer 14: N/A. Question 15: What exactly do you mean by "cross project management functionality" Answer 15: The ability to manage more than one project simultaneously, and the ability to exchange files or information between two or more projects. For example, Project A might be underway, but then a relationship with Project E might be discovered: information exchanges or joint scheduling between A and E might be added to both projects in flight. Question 16: Can you explain the scope of the file compatibility. Answer 16: The ability to open and read files from other cited applications. The ability to create new content and export it directly to other applications in a file format readable by that other application.
- Record
- SN00431962-W 20030913/030911213125 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |