Interactive Classroom Technology RFP
The Organization for Educational Technology and Curriculum on behalf of its public member K-20 institutions is issuing RFP OETC-ict-2011 as a Joint Cooperative Procurement. The purpose is to identify and award a contract to provide volume price agreement and fulfillment services for interactive classroom technology and related services.
Proposals should be mailed or delivered in person to Kim Buchanan, Administrative Specialist at 14145 SW Galbreath Drive, Sherwood, OR 97140, and must arrive no later than 2:00pm PST on November 16, 2011, when proposals will be opened. RFP documents are online at http://www.oetc.org/2011/10/ict-rfp/
RFP Materials
Download RFP (PDF)
Download Exhibits (XLS)
Respondents
- eInstruction
- iRespond
- Logical Choice Technologies
- NBC Learn
- Lightspeed
- CompView
- CIM
- Troxell
- SMART
- PolyVision
- ACT
Intent to Award
After careful consideration and scoring of the ITC RFP, OETC intends to award this RFP to the following respondents.
- ACT (Promethean products)
- SMART Tech (SMART products)
- Polyvision (Polyvision products)
- CIM (eInstruction)
- CompView (RevoLabs and NEC products)
- Lightspeed (Lightspeed products)
- NBC Learn (NBC content)
- Troxell (eBeam Products)
Download OETC’s Notice of Intent to Award the Interactive Classroom Technology RFP.
We would like to participate in the Interactive Classroom Technology RFP. However, we would like to clarify the following.
We would like to offer equivalent products for several products listed. Would OETC be willing to accept a bid for only those products? Or is a bidder required to quote on all of the products listed in Exhibit A?
Your reply is greatly appreciated.
You may bid just equivalent products. You do not need to bid all the products, or all equivalent products. The pre-defined products in the bid set the qualifying standard, but the RFP is open to all products that fit the qualifying standard, and subset of products that fit that standard.
We look forward to your response.
Thank you,
OETC
On the excel spreadsheet, tab: Exhibit B–Bidder Information, is the “pricing” contact suppose to have it’s own row? It currently is in a column but I think it’s meant to be in a row. Thank you!
The idea was that you put an “X” in the Pricing contact column next to the person (Contract, Sales, Orders, Remit To) who will be the pricing contact. Usually this isn’t a separate person. However, if it is, please add it as a separate contact.
The bottom line: We want to know who is in charge of keeping the price list up-to-date.
We would like to clarify the following.
Our company has not done business with OETC as stated in the scope of OETC RFP. How will we be evaluated under Membership Experience (5 points)?
Your reply is greatly appreciated.
First, we give 3 points to all proposers. Up to two points are added if we’ve had favorable experiences, and points are deducted if we’ve had unfavorable experiences (not keeping pricing up-to-date, not shipping products in a timely manner, etc). So your company would only be at risk of losing two points.
Two points isn’t enough to sway an RFP. It is only enough make a difference where all other things are equal. If all things are equal, we think it is beneficial to go with a proposer who has a proven, positive track record with our consortium.
If you feel that you will be in a situation where two points will make a difference we encourage you to make your bid stronger in other areas (e.g. price). Our RFP process does reward incumbents in good standing, all thing being equal, but there are many areas for newcomers to improve and not have their bids be equal with incumbents.
We think this reflects not only the letter of the public bid laws, but also the spirit, and encourages competition from vendors which benefits the consortium.
The RFP notes that the Public Bid Opening is on November 17, 2011. We did not find a time listed in the RFP for this opening. Could you please provide the time for the Public Bid Opening is on November 17, 2011?
Thank you.
It is 2 p.m.
We will publish the bidders on this page shortly after the opening if you’d like to save the travel.
How would we complete Exhibit A, if we are offering equivalent/alternative products?
Exhibit A Form Example:
Item Name Cost Price Category Manufacture Vendor No. Manufacturer No.
SMART Board 640 H:BRD SMART SB640
Where would we put our product information to show as an equivalent/alternative product?
You should just fill out the first Exhibit A – Pricing tab which is blank. Leave the Promethean tabs and SMART tabs blank if you aren’t bidding those products in particular.
Where would we reference that our product is an equivalent/alternate to a product/s that is listed on the SMART or Promethean tabs?
Just place your items in the blank Exhibit A spreadsheet. If we are unsure if the product fits the RFP standard we will contact you for clarification.
Is there suppose to be a formula in all of the Cost & Price cells on the blank Exhibit A – Pricing tab? It seems the only the first Cost & Price cells have a formula.
The formula works for me in all of the cells. However, it is not material. You need to bid the correct cost to OETC. The price is simply the cost plus the administrative fee. The scoring is based on cost, not price.
If we want the end user cost (Price) to be a rounded number (i.e. $123 vs $123.14), can we put the rounded number in the “Price” column and then deduct 3% off in the “Cost” column?
Sure. We care about the cost column as that is what we pay the vendors. We can always round up to make the numbers more readable. We cannot round down.
If a manufacturer holds the contract with OETC and has authorized resellers, can they delete and add resellers? If resellers changes are allowed, can they be made monthly, quarterly or one time per contract period?
A manufacturer can revoke and reassign their contractual rights to resellers as they see fit. There is no contractual restriction on the number of changes and when they can happen. The terms of the contract (pricing, products, etc) are what the RFP covers.
However, there are operational considerations that may make changing resellers too often unfeasible. Those considerations are unique to each contract and awardee, so I can’t give a blanket statement as to what would apply here. I will say that we can usually work something out that is feasible for all parties involved. To date it hasn’t been an issue.
Could you provide an update to the status of award for this RFP? In the initial documents, it stated that the award was to be made on 12/8; however, I was unable to locate any information on the website.
Thank you.
We should have the intent to award posted on Wednesday. We’ll extend the protest period to account for the holidays.
We had a lot more responses across more lines than we expected so it has taken us a little longer than anticipated.