163641512200910-003 Peoplesoft Upgrade Services

RFP 10-003
Specification No. 09-918-71

DATE: November 2009
City of Round Rock

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
PEOPLESOFT UPGRADE SERVICES
PART I
GENERAL INFORMATION
1. PURPOSE:
The City of Round Rock requests proposals from qualified firms to assist the City in the upgrade of PeopleSoft Financials 8.4
to release 9.0. As a result of this solicitation, the selected Vendor shall also provide project management under the guidance
of the City. The targeted Go-Live date for Phase I of the upgrade is September 8, 2010.
2. BACKGROUND:
The City initially installed PeopleSoft 6.0 in 1998, upgrading to release 7.5 in 2000. A second upgrade to release 8.4 was
performed in 2003 to provide the current positioning for the City. City staff has acquired multiple levels of experience and
proficiency with the PeopleSoft Financial modules identified in Scope of Work. Attachment B to this specification provides
a detailed summary of present experience levels in resource areas affected by the planned upgrade.
3. DEFINITIONS: The following definitions will be used for identified terms throughout the specification and proposal
document:
3.1. Agreement – a mutually binding legal document obligating the Vendor to furnish the goods, equipment or services,
and obligating the City to pay for it.
3.2. City – identifies the City of Round Rock, Travis and Williamson Counties, Texas.
3.3. Deliverables - the goods, products, materials, and/or services to be provided to the City by Proposer if awarded the
agreement.
3.4. Goods - represent materials, supplies, commodities and equipment.
3.5. Proposal - complete, properly signed response to a Solicitation that if accepted, would bind the Proposer to perform
the resulting agreement.
3.6. Proposer - identifies persons and entities that submit a proposal.
3.7. Purchase Order - an order placed by the Purchasing Office for the purchase of Goods or Services written on the
City’s standard Purchase Order form and which, when accepted by the Proposer, becomes an agreement. The
Purchase Order is the Proposer’s authority to deliver and invoice the City for Goods or Services specified, and the
City’s commitment to accept the Goods or Services for an agreed upon price.
3.8. Services - work performed to meet a demand. The furnishing of labor, time, or effort by the vendor and their ability
to comply with promised delivery dates, specification and technical assistance specified.
3.9. Subcontractor - any person or business enterprise providing goods, labor, and/or services to a Vendor if such goods,
equipment, labor, and/or services are procured or used in fulfillment of the Vendor’s obligations arising from an
agreement with the City.
3.10. Vendor (sometimes referred to as Contractor) - a person or business enterprise providing goods, equipment, labor
and/or services to the City as fulfillment of obligations arising from an agreement or purchase order.
Page 1 of 14
RFP 10-003
DATE: November 2009
4. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
4.1. Effective March 1, 2006, Chapter 176 of the Texas Local Government Code (House Bill 914) requires that any
vendor or person considering doing business with a local government entity disclose the vendor or person's
affiliation or business relationship that might cause a conflict of interest with a local government entity. The
Conflict of Interest Questionnaire form is available from the Texas Ethics Commission at www.ethics.state.tx.us.
Completed Conflict of Interest Questionnaires may be mailed or delivered by hand to the City Secretary. If mailing
a completed form, please mail to:
City of Round Rock
City Secretary
221 East Main Street
Round Rock, Texas 78664-5299
4.2. Any attempt to intentionally or unintentionally conceal or obfuscate a conflict of interest may automatically result in
the disqualification of the vendor's proposal.
5. CITY CONTACT: All responses for Request for Proposals (RFP), as well as any questions, clarifications or requests for
general information are to be directed to:
Randy Barker
Purchasing Supervisor
Round Rock, TX 78664-5299
Telephone (512) 218-3295
Fax (512) 218-7028
rbarker@round-rock.tx.us
5.1. The individual above may be contacted for clarification of the specifications of this Request for Proposals only. No
authority is intended or implied that specifications may be amended or alternates accepted prior to closing date
without written approval of the City. Under no circumstances will private meetings be scheduled between Proposer
and City staff.
6. EX PARTE COMMUNICATION:
6.1. Please note that to insure the proper and fair evaluation of a proposal, the City prohibits ex parte communication
(e.g., unsolicited) initiated by the Proposer to a City Official or Employee evaluating or considering the proposals
prior to the time a formal decision has been made. Questions and other communication from vendors will be
permissible until 5:00 pm on the day specified as the deadline for questions. Any communication between Proposer
and the City after the deadline for questions will be initiated by the appropriate City Official or Employee in order to
obtain information or clarification needed to develop a proper and accurate evaluation of the proposal. Ex parte
communication may be grounds for disqualifying the offending Proposer from consideration or award of the
solicitation then in evaluation, or any future solicitation.
7. PROPOSAL SCHEDULE:
7.1. It is the City’s intention to comply with the following proposal timeline:
7.1.1. Request for Proposals released November 7, 2009
7.1.2. Pre-Proposal Conference Call November 18, 2009
7.1.3. Deadline for questions December 2, 2009
7.1.4. City response to all questions/addendums December 9, 2009
7.1.5. Responses to RFP due by 3:00 p.m. December 15, 2009
NOTE: These dates represent a tentative schedule of events. The City reserves the right to modify these dates at
any time, with appropriate notice to prospective Proposer.
7.2. All questions regarding the RFP shall be submitted in writing (either electronically, fax, or regular mail) by 5:00 pm
on December 2, 2009 to above named City Contact. All interested firms will be provided with a copy of the
questions submitted and the City’s response. Questions shall be submitted to the contact named above.
Page 2 of 14
RFP 10-003
DATE: November 2009
8. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE CALL:

8.1 The City will conduct a Pre-Proposal Conference Call for all interested Proposers to familiarize them with the
requested services and to give all potential Proposers an opportunity to ask questions they may have concerning this
service. Agenda, instructions and contact information will be released by the City to all known interested firms via
email on Friday, November 13, 2009 and posted on the City website www.roundrocktexas.gov/bids by 5:00 p.m.
Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Time: 2:00 – 3:00 p.m., CDT
9. PROPOSAL DUE DATE:

9.1. Sealed proposals are due no later than 3:00 p.m., December 15, 2009 to the office of the Purchasing Department.
Mail or carry sealed proposals to:
City of Round Rock
Attn: Randy Barker
Round Rock, Texas 78664-5299
9.2. Proposals received after this time and date will not be considered.
9.3. Sealed proposals shall be clearly marked “DO NOT OPEN – RFP 10-003 PeopleSoft Upgrade Services”.
9.4. Facsimile or electronically transmitted proposals are not acceptable.
9.5. Each proposal and each proposal variation shall be submitted in one (1) original and three (3) copies.
10. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Interested and qualified firms or teams shall:
10.1. Submit one (1) original and three (3) copies of materials that demonstrate their experience in performing projects of
this scale and complexity.
10.1.1. Additionally, the City requests inclusion of an electronic copy of the proposal in PDF format identical to
original submittal. Electronic copy is preferred in CD/DVD media.
10.2. Documentation shall include:
10.2.1. Identification of the firm/team responding to the RFP to include a brief summary of team member
experiences.
10.2.2. A summary demonstrating the firm’s/team’s qualifications to satisfy all the technical areas identified in the
specification.
10.2.3. A representative list of projects of a scale and complexity similar to the project being considered by the
City. The list should include the project location, client, services provided by your firm for the project,
term of sponsorship and an owner contact name.
10.2.4. Project timeline outlining the steps the firm would take in the implementation of the project.
10.3. Provide references: Provide the name, address, telephone number and point of contact of at least three clients that
have utilized the same or similar product and services within the last 3 years. References may be checked prior to
award. Any negative responses received may result in disqualification from consideration for award. Failure to
include references with submittal may result in disqualification from consideration for award.
10.4. Identify any subcontractors to be used for this project. Experience, qualifications and references of the
subcontractors shall be submitted. The City reserves the right to approve or disapprove all subcontractors prior to
any work being performed.
Page 3 of 14
RFP 10-003
DATE: November 2009
11. PROPOSER PROFILE

11.1. Provide the following information about your firm:
11.1.1. Firm name and business address, including telephone number.
11.1.2. Year established (include former firm names and year established, if applicable).
11.1.3. The number of projects your firm has dealt with involving Oracle Government Financials. Proposer shall
have Oracle Government Financials experience and the team members shall have worked on at minimum
one project in the past directly related to Oracle Government Financials. Proposer shall identify which
team members have worked on which project.
11.1.4. Office locations (relative to this project).
11.1.5. Number of current contracts and contract amounts.
11.1.6. Current limits of professional liability insurance.
12. STAFFING:
12.1. Project Organization
12.1.1. Vendor shall describe project organization for planning, implementation, and post-implementation
operations.
12.1.2. Vendor shall include organizational structure resources available, including number of staff and locations.
12.2. Key Personnel
12.2.1. Project manager’s name, mailing address, email address, telephone number, and resume. The project
manager shall have the responsibility and authority to act on behalf of the firm in matters relating to the
proposed project.
12.2.2. Proposer shall include the names and resumes for all key personnel who will be involved in this project.
Each member of the project team shall be described in terms of position in the firm and on the project
team, relevant projects the person has worked on in the past and their particular responsibilities for this
project, along with their resumes. Identify the project manager responsible for this project.
12.3. Change of Project Personnel
12.3.1. Any change of assignment or responsibility for employees identified as key personnel in this project are
subject to prior notification and approval by the City.
13. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL:

13.1. The technical proposal shall describe the proposed implementation plan including a time schedule and approach for
accomplishing the scope of work identified in this RFP. Along with the Technical Proposal, the Proposer shall also
submit a Project Management Plan.
13.2. Proposal shall include expected commitment of City resources necessary to meet requirements of Scope of Work.
14. COST PROPOSAL:

14.1. The cost proposal shall be identified in summary page(s) or section of the proposal for clear identification.
14.2. The cost proposal shall include an official offer to undertake the proposed work at the quoted price and a detailed
explanation of the quoted price which shall include a cost break down by each module or deliverable.
14.3. The cost shall include an estimate of the number of hours to be spent by the Proposer on the project, an estimate of
miscellaneous expenses such as telephone costs and travel expenses, and a proposed project schedule.
14.4. The official offer shall include a commitment to perform all financial responsibilities relative to the performance of
the proposed contract including submitting all invoices and accounting for all funds.
Page 4 of 14
RFP 10-003
DATE: November 2009
15. ASSURANCES, ERRORS, AND OMISSIONS:

15.1. A brief statement providing assurances that the Proposer shall be cognizant of, comply with and enforce all
applicable Federal, State and Local statutes and ordinances and a description of the proponent’s methodology for
handling errors and omissions in the project management and implementation as part of this project.
16. CONFIDENTIALITY OF PROPOSAL CONTENT:

16.1. All proposals submitted in response to this RFP shall be held confidential until an agreement is awarded. Following
the agreement award, proposals are subject to release as public information unless the proposal or specific parts of
the proposal can be shown to be exempt from the Texas Public Information Act. Proposers are advised to consult
with their legal counsel regarding disclosure issues and take the appropriate precautions to safeguard trade secrets or
any other proprietary information. The City assumes no obligation or responsibility for asserting legal arguments on
behalf of potential Proposers.
16.2. If a Proposer believes that a proposal or parts of a proposal are confidential, then the Proposer shall so specify. The
Proposer shall stamp in bold red letters the term "CONFIDENTIAL" on that part of the proposal, which the
Proposer believes to be confidential. Vague and general claims as to confidentiality shall not be accepted. All
proposals and parts of proposals that are not marked as confidential will be automatically considered public
information after the agreement is awarded.
17. CLARIFICATION OF PROPOSALS:

17.1. The City reserves the right to request clarification or additional information specific to any proposal after all
proposals have been received.
18. EVALUATION CRITERIA: All proposals received shall be evaluated based on the best value for the City by considering
all or part of the criteria listed below, as well as any relevant criteria specifically listed in the solicitation:
18.1. Price;
18.2. Long-term cost to the City to acquire Proposer’s goods and services;
18.3. The extent to which the goods or services meet the City’s needs;
18.4. Completeness, technical competence and clarity of the proposal;
18.5. Project process and outline;
18.6. Compliance with requested form and information;
18.7. Reputation of the Proposer and the Proposer’s services;
18.8. Technical expertise;
18.9. Client list/sponsor reference and experience;
18.10. Proposer’s past relationship with the City. All vendors will be evaluated on their past performance and prior
dealings with the City to include, but not limited to, failure to meet specifications, poor quality, poor workmanship,
late delivery.
19. EVALUATION PROCESS:

19.1. A committee comprised of City Staff and others as appropriate will review the responses to the RFP and may
develop a short list of firms/teams.
19.2. Interviews and/or demonstrations may be conducted with any responding firms/teams to discuss their qualifications,
resources, and availability to provide the services requested.
19.2.1. Upon completion of the evaluation, the selection committee may recommend a firm/team for the project
identified.
19.2.2. An agreement with the recommended firm/team for the project will then be negotiated. This process will
be completed with the City Council’s authorization to the Mayor for the execution of the agreement or the
execution of the agreement by the City Manager.
Page 5 of 14
RFP 10-003
DATE: November 2009
19.3. The City will not provide compensation or defray any cost incurred by any firm related to the response to this
request. The City reserves the right to negotiate with any and all persons or firms. The City also reserves the right
to reject any or all proposals, or to accept any proposal deemed most advantageous, or to waive any irregularities or
informalities in the proposal received, and to revise the process and/or schedule as circumstances require.
PART II
GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1. AGREEMENT:
1.1. The term of the Agreement resulting from the solicitation shall be until full and satisfactory completion of the work
specified herein is achieved.
1.2. The Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unless and until it expires by operation of the term negotiated
between the City and Vendor during the contractual process or until terminated or extended as provided.
1.3. The City Manager reserves the right to:
1.3.1. Review the following at the end of each twelve-month review period or renewal:
1.3.1.1. Vendor performance;
1.3.1.2. Price;
1.3.1.3. Continuing need;
1.3.1.4. Advancements in technologies and/or service;
1.3.1.5. Funding as appropriated by governing body.
1.3.2. The City may terminate the Agreement with or without cause or may continue through the next twelve-
month review or renewal period.
1.3.3. Proposer shall include expected Agreement term relative to cost elements in proposal.
2. PRICE: The agreement price shall be firm for the duration of the agreement or extension periods except as provided for in
paragraph below. No separate line item charges shall be permitted for either proposal or invoice purposes, which shall
include equipment rental, demurrage, costs associated with obtaining permits or any other extraneous charges.
2.1. Proposal pricing shall reflect individual cost elements specific to each phase of the identified project as outlined.
3. INTERLOCAL COOPERATIVE CONTRACTING: Other governmental entities within the State of Texas may be extended
the opportunity to purchase off of the City’s solicitation, with the consent and agreement of the successful vendor(s) and the City.
Such consent and agreement shall be conclusively inferred from lack of exception to this clause in vendor’s response. However,
all parties indicate their understanding and all parties hereby expressly agree that the City is not an agent of, partner to, or
representative of those outside agencies or entities and that the City is not obligated or liable for any action or debts that may arise
out of such independently-negotiated “piggyback” procurements.
4. INDEMNIFICATION: The successful Proposer shall indemnify, save harmless and exempt the City, its officers, agents,
servants, and employees from and against any and all suits, actions, legal proceedings, claims, demands, damages, costs,
expenses, attorney fees and any and all other costs or fees incident to any work done as a result of this quote and arising out
of a willful or negligent act or omission of the successful Proposer, its officers, agents, servants, and employees; provided,
however, that the successful Proposer shall not be liable for any suits, actions, legal proceedings, claims, demands, damages,
costs, expenses and attorney fees arising out of a willful or negligent act or omission of the City, its officers, agents, servants
and employees, or third parties.
5. INSURANCE: The successful Proposer shall meet or exceed ALL insurance requirements set forth by the City as identified
in Attachment A to the specifications. Any additional insurance requirements of participating or cooperative parties will be
included as subsequent Attachments and shall require mandatory compliance.
Page 6 of 14
RFP 10-003
DATE: November 2009
6. VENUE: The agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas. Venue shall
be in the applicable court, Williamson County, Texas.
7. DISCLOSURE OF LITIGATION:
7.1. Each Proposer shall include in its proposal a complete disclosure of any civil or criminal litigation or investigation
pending which involves the Proposer or in which the Proposer has been judged guilty.
8. RIGHT TO REPRODUCE DOCUMENTATION AND OTHER INFORMATION:

8.1. The City shall have the right to reproduce any and all manuals, documentation, software or other information stored
on electronic media supplied pursuant to the agreement at no additional cost to the City, regardless of whether the
same be copyrighted or otherwise restricted as proprietary information; provided, however, that such reproductions
shall be subject to the same restrictions on use and disclosure as are set forth in the agreement.
8.2. The Awarded Proposer agrees to execute any non-exclusive copyright assignments or reproduction authorizations
that may be necessary for the City to utilize the rights granted in this subparagraph.
9. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR:
9.1. It is understood and agreed that the Contractor shall not be considered an employee of the City.
9.2. The Contractor shall not be within protection or coverage of the City’s Worker Compensation insurance, Health
Insurance, Liability Insurance or any other insurance that the City from time to time may have in force and effect.
PART III
SPECIFICATIONS
1. SCOPE OF WORK:
1.1. The City intends to upgrade the current PeopleSoft Financial System 8.4 to release 9.0. Phase I will include
upgrade of core functionality and implementation of the eProcurement module with an expected Go-Live date of
September 8, 2010.
1.1.1. The City recognizes the anticipated release of PeopleSoft 9.1 during the first quarter of calendar year
2010. The City reserves the right to entertain and pursue options upon release of PeopleSoft 9.1 to shift
implementation of upgrade into Phase I, creating a direct upgrade from 8.4 into release 9.1. Such action
will be determined through consultation and recommendation of selected Vendor in relation to impact on
projected timeline.
1.1.2. For purposes of response to this solicitation, Proposers shall assume Phase I upgrade will be from current
8.4 to release 9.0.
1.2. The City is considering a future upgrade that may include implementation of additional modules per Phase II
Upgrade as identified below.
1.3. The scope of work includes time for Proposer to conduct fit gap analysis and present recommendations to
incorporate additional functionality for both Phase I and Phase II upgrades.
1.4. The proposed scope of the upgrade project includes:
1.4.1. Project planning and management;
1.4.2. Incorporating any required module customizations;
1.4.3. Providing report development and customizations;
1.4.4. Providing Unit Testing before delivery;
1.4.5. Providing knowledge transfer to the City’s functional and technical Subject Matter Experts (SMEs);
1.4.6. Providing post-implementation support;
Page 7 of 14
RFP 10-003
DATE: November 2009
1.4.7. Assisting the City in archiving data prior to upgrade in order to reduce the size of the database and amount
of data to be converted; and
1.4.8. Assisting the City in converting existing data from 8.4 to release 9.0.
1.5. The City recognizes that multiple options exist to meeting the project scope. Possible solutions include but are not
limited to:
1.5.1. City hosts hardware and software;
1.5.2. Vendor hosts hardware and software.
1.6. Proposers are encouraged to provide alternatives and options in their proposals that may create operational
efficiencies, cost savings, or service improvements for the City.
1.6.1. All alternatives and options may be considered;
1.6.2. Alternative pricing shall also be included.
2. PHASE I UPGRADE:
2.1. Phase I is intended as a technical upgrade of core functionality from current 8.4 to release 9.0 and the addition of
the PeopleSoft eProcurement module.
2.1.1. As noted in Scope of Work, 1.1.1; the City may consider a direct upgrade to release 9.1 pending timing of
PeopleSoft release in calendar year 2010.
2.2. Current core modules in 8.4 are:
2.2.1. Accounts Payable (AP)
2.2.2. Asset Management (AM)
2.2.3. General Ledger (GL)
2.2.4. Purchasing (PO)
3. PHASE II UPGRADE:
3.1. Phase II is intended to include an upgrade from release 9.0 to release 9.1 and may include one or more of the
following modules:
3.1.1. Accounts Receivable
3.1.2. Billing
3.1.3. Cash Management
3.1.4. Contracts
3.1.5. Enterprise Portal (PeopleSoft)
3.1.6. Expenses
3.1.7. Hyperion
3.1.8. Oracle User Productivity Kit
3.1.9. Project Costing
3.1.10. Strategic Sourcing
3.1.11. Supplier Contract Management
3.2. Selected Vendor shall suggest a sequence of module implementations based on experience and City core
requirements.
Page 8 of 14
RFP 10-003
DATE: November 2009
4. OPERATING ENVIRONMENT:
4.1. Current Environment
4.1.1. PeopleSoft Financial Supply Chain Management (FSCM) 8.4
4.1.2. Database Server
4.1.2.1. Dell PE2850 with 2 dual core 3.6 GHz processors, 4 GB of Random Access Memory (RAM),
and local storage
4.1.2.2. Operating System: Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition Service Pack (SP)1
4.1.2.3. Database: Oracle 9i (9.2.0.8)
4.1.3. Application Server, Process Scheduler and Web Server
4.1.3.1. Dell PE2650 with 2 dual core 2.6GHz processors, 2 GB of RAM, and local storage
4.1.3.2. Operating System: Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition SP1
4.1.3.3. PeopleTools 8.48.17
4.2. Future Environment
4.2.1. PeopleSoft FSCM 9.0
4.2.2. Platform: VMWare Clustered Host with High Availability (HA) and Dynamic Resource Scheduling
(DRS). Each host has 2 quad core processors and 32 GB of Memory, 6 Network Interface Connectors
(NICs) and a Host Bus Adapter (HBA) connection to a Compellent Storage Array Network (SAN).
4.2.3. Virtual Machines (VMs): a VM shall be created for each required application i.e. Database, Application
Server, Web Server, Process Scheduler and Reverse Proxy Server. The Application Server and Database
Server shall be set up to always run on the same host.
4.2.3.1. VMs can be configured with 2 or 4 processors and 2 to 4 GB RAM (more can be allocated if
needed), 40GB thin provisioned virtual drive for the operating system and Raw Device Mapped
Drives on the SAN for additional Storage. All VMs shall be contained in a VMware File System
(VMFS) datastore on the SAN.
4.2.3.2. Guest Operating System: Microsoft Windows Server 2008 Standard Edition
4.2.3.3. Database: Oracle 10g (10.2.0.3)
4.2.3.4. PeopleTools: 8.5
5. PROJECT MANAGEMENT:
5.1. The selected Vendor shall provide a project manager for the duration of the project. The duties of the project
manager include general administrative duties associated with the Project Management Body of Knowledge
(PMBOK) methodology. The project manager shall work closely with the City Finance and Information Technology
Department to develop a project charter, project plan, statement of work, detailed work breakdown structure, task
durations and dependencies matrix and risk management plan.
5.1.1. Project reports: Prepare and submit weekly progress reports to the City. Progress reports shall briefly
summarize progress of work tasks, key decisions which require input from or discussion with the City
staff, project adherence to schedule, and a list of problems or unresolved issues. Vendor staff shall
maintain an issues list, identifying the issue, date it was known as an issue, person responsible for
solution, date solution required, and date solution implemented.
5.1.2. Meetings and presentations: Participate in meetings with City staff including an initial meeting,
monthly progress meetings (at a minimum), and follow up meetings as required.
5.1.3. Utilization of all features of the system: Vendor shall recommend Best Practices in utilization of system
features as well as ways to streamline any process using the software. Based upon recommendations, the
City will decide whether to proceed with the recommendations. Project Manager shall include
recommended changes into the project scope.
Page 9 of 14
RFP 10-003
DATE: November 2009
6. PLANNING AND FIT/GAP ACTIVITIES:

6.1. Project Planning and Organization
6.1.1. During each phase of the project, selected Vendor shall work with City personnel to establish a framework
to ensure success. The following activities shall be performed:
6.1.1.1. Provide a Project Implementation Plan showing key milestones that support a critical Go-Live
date.
6.1.1.2. Complete and refine the project management materials, including the project implementation
plan, staffing plan, and other transition plans.
6.1.1.3. Clarify basic project structure, to include expected roles and responsibilities for both the Vendor
and the City.
6.1.1.4. Conduct kickoff meeting to brief team members on their expected roles. Vendor shall provide
City staff with a detailed project schedule prior to conclusion of the second week of Planning
Phase that indicates required levels of participation to facilitate involvement of key resources.
6.1.1.5. Meet with the City’s Project Team and/or other management stakeholders to brief them on the
project objectives and strategy.
6.1.1.6. Confirm all technical assumptions and determine the key technical architecture prior to
reviewing functional requirements.
6.2. Functional Review
6.2.1. A functional review shall take place during Phase I, parallel to other activities. The functional review
shall begin immediately after the project implementation plan is in place. Vendor shall provide clear
direction and identification of functional differences between 8.4 and release 9.0.
6.2.2. During the functional review, Vendor shall lead the project team in the following activities:
6.2.2.1. Introduce and assess new version features and functionality;
6.2.2.2. Confirm the City’s custom modifications for evaluation in detail in comparison with the new
functionality;
6.2.2.3. Review and recommend new functionality and customizations that may enhance Best Practices,
to include report development;
6.2.2.4. Identify potential functionality gaps; and
6.2.2.5. Review and recommend Best Practices for connectivity via the PeopleSoft Portal to PeopleSoft
Financials via intranet and internet connectivity.
6.3. Modification Analysis
6.3.1. Vendor shall lead the project team in running scenarios of business transactions on the new system. From
this activity, the Vendor team shall document any new “to be” processes, and make note of any additional
functionality gaps that emerge. The Vendor team shall then conduct another review of the identified gaps,
and the City will determine if existing customizations are still critical to the operation of the system. Any
gaps remaining after re-engineering, workarounds or elimination of unnecessary customized features shall
be addressed by system modification.
6.3.2. Vendor’s functional analyst shall analyze each gap and prepare a design document for the modification in
consultation with the implementation team and the technical analyst. The design document defines the
approach for changing the system to satisfy the underlying requirement, and includes an estimate for hours
required to make this modification. The City will expedite the review of these designs.
6.4. Knowledge Transfer and Change Management
6.4.1. Vendor shall assist the City in adapting to the cultural, procedural, and technology changes introduced by
release 9.0 by beginning knowledge transfer from start date. The Change Management Plan is a Phase I
deliverable that includes the following information:
6.4.1.1. List of individuals affected by change (stakeholders);
Page 10 of 14
RFP 10-003
DATE: November 2009
6.4.1.2. List of changes these individuals will undergo to support new processes, and any gaps they have
in undertaking the PeopleSoft transformation; and
6.4.1.3. A plan to target how to fill gaps, through knowledge transfer, training, communications,
sponsorship, etc.
7. TESTING:
7.1. During this phase, the business process scenarios developed in the functional review are used again for
comprehensive system testing. The Vendor’s functional analyst shall coordinate the testing process with the City, but
the entire project team will be involved in this activity.
7.2. The Vendor, with City assistance, shall develop test scripts based on best practices and functionality requirements of
the City. A set of the test scripts shall become the property of the City. Detailed testing results shall be reported to
the City.
7.3. When system testing is complete and the results verified, Vendor shall initiate the final round of acceptance testing
prior to moving over to production. The endpoint of this final round of testing is acceptance of the system by the
City. When this has been accomplished, Vendor shall begin the final upgrade to the Production Environment. This
move shall be conducted in conjunction with the City user activities to minimize disruption.
8. TRANSITION/DEPLOYMENT ACTIVITIES:
8.1. During this period, prior to deployment, Vendor trainers shall hold sessions with the City end users to acquaint them
with the differences between 8.4 and release 9.0. All initial end user training shall be complete before the system is
moved to production.
8.2. Training Development
8.2.1. While the technical team is completing the upgrade, Vendor shall outline the differences between 8.4 and
release 9.0 and customize associated training material templates.
8.3. Post-Implementation Activities
8.3.1. To assist the City in any issues that may arise after the cutover to the new system, selected Vendor shall
provide on-site support as needed from the same Vendor staff members who worked on the
implementation. This staff will be directed and managed by the City, and can be used for help desk
support, issue investigation and resolution, and planning for additional system functionality or features.
9. TRAINING:
9.1. The selected Vendor shall provide training as follows:
9.1.1. Vendor shall train City employees who use the software in the differences between 8.4 and 9.0:
9.1.1.1. All users in Finance shall require training. As of November 1, 2009, there are 30 users in
Finance.
9.1.1.2. There are 7 users in Information Technology as of November 1, 2009, who shall require training
in all functions of the software.
9.1.1.3. Other City employees shall require training in GL Inquiry, PO Receiving, and PO Requester.
9.1.2. Vendor shall provide all PeopleSoft application training for City personnel.
9.1.3. Database changes: Vendor shall train City staff in the aspects of the Oracle database that have changed
so that City staff can properly maintain the database in applying patches, updates, or anything required of
Oracle.
9.1.4. Back-up and recover features in Oracle: Vendor shall train City staff in back up and recovery features
of the software and the database.
9.1.5. Training documentation: Vendor shall develop and provide training documents based on best practice
processes identified during implementation.
Page 11 of 14
RFP 10-003
DATE: November 2009
10. PROJECT ASSUMPTIONS:

10.1. The following assumptions apply to the scope, execution, and deliverables for this project:
10.1.1. The City will share project management responsibilities with Vendor and jointly manage the tasks
according to the detailed project implementation plans. The City will assign one full time employee to
function as project manager. Vendor and the City will work together to achieve the objectives of this
project, to include but not limited to:
10.1.1.1. Make key decisions regarding the overall direction of the project, including but not limited to
decisions concerning system design; controls and system procedures to be implemented; project
scope and timetable;
10.1.1.2. Provide guidance and ongoing support to the teams;
10.1.1.3. Participate in regular project leadership and team meetings;
10.1.1.4. Assess and manage project risk;
10.1.1.5. Resolve escalated issues;
10.1.1.6. Assess the impact of proposed changes in scope and make final decision on change requests; and
10.1.1.7. Facilitate availability of proper resources to achieve implementation capabilities.
10.1.2. Management involvement: Managers for the departments affected by these upgrades will be actively
involved in the project. They will participate in all significant decisions affecting their respective area,
and, where appropriate, provide resources to complete specific tasks that have been assigned to their
department.
10.1.3. Resource commitment: The City will have fulltime and part-time resources (the City team leads, super
users, network administrators, and business users) available as required. Team leads/super users are
experienced City resources that will drive this implementation process and guide the efforts of subordinate
team members. In order to support the new systems after implementation, the City will allocate team
leads/super users that will participate throughout the initiative. Refer to the City Staffing Matrix
(Attachment B) for a description of the experience levels currently present from the City team leads/super
users.
10.1.4. Hardware/software installation: Vendor (with assistance from the City) shall be responsible for
software installation and configuration. The City (with assistance from the Vendor) will be responsible for
detailed hardware tasks and determining technical and hardware direction and requirements related to
PeopleSoft. This includes set-up of any new hardware, connectivity to the user desktops, cabling and
configuration of user workstations.
10.1.5. Help Desk: The City will provide a central point-of-contact responsible for all Help Desk issues during
the testing and post go-live support phase of the project in order to centrally control issues. Vendor shall
utilize the City’s internal Help Desk.
10.1.6. Data protection:
10.1.6.1. Proposer acknowledges that the City and/or its affiliates:
10.1.6.1.1. Are the controller(s) of any City, affiliate, or third party data or databases accessed
and/or processed by Vendor in the course of performing the Services, including, but
not limited to, data relating to individuals (the “Data”); and
10.1.6.1.2. Will be solely responsible to third parties for such Data, including, but not limited to,
the individuals to whom the Data relate and City and affiliate personnel.
10.1.6.2. The City represents and warrants to Proposer that all Data processing and transfers
between the City, its affiliates and selected Vendor will be conducted in full
compliance with any laws or regulations applicable to the protection of data.
10.1.6.3. It is further acknowledged that the City and its affiliates are solely responsible for
providing Vendor with directions and instructions relating to any laws or regulations
applicable to the protection of data, upon which directions and instructions Vendor
Page 12 of 14
RFP 10-003
DATE: November 2009
shall rely exclusively when accessing and processing Data in performing the
Services.
10.1.6.4. In addition, the City shall be solely responsible for determining the existence of, and
complying with, any laws or regulations applicable to the protection of data as they
may apply to Vendor deliverables.
10.1.7. Process redesign: The project utilizes industry best practices for process redesign. In essence, much of
what is currently best practice will become the base specification for the new financial systems. It is
assumed that any major redesign of finance operations will occur in potential future projects.
10.1.8. Issue resolution: Timely resolution of project issues shall be a critical success factor given the project
timeframe. Selected Vendor and the City will work together to identify, document and resolve any
potential functional, technical or other project related issues. The City will make final decisions regarding
outstanding project issues in no more than five business days.
10.1.9. Material business changes: No City acquisitions, mergers or reorganizations will occur during the
project other than what is discussed with the project planning team The City does not foresee changes in
their core business, significant deviation from current markets serviced, production or distribution patterns
that may impact the validity or appropriateness of the project estimates.
10.1.10. Access to management and staff: The project team will have timely access to all appropriate City
management and staff personnel (both functional and technical) on an as-needed basis.
10.1.11. Suitability and usability of system: The City has sufficiently evaluated the functionality of PeopleSoft
and is satisfied that it meets the City’s key business requirements.
10.1.12. User training: The City will provide baseline computer training (e.g., Windows, Excel, etc.) prior to the
rollout of PeopleSoft upgrade to all employees who will utilize the system and who lack proficiency in
these areas. Vendor is not responsible for delivery of such training.
10.1.13. Vendor support: Vendor shall follow City procedures for dealing with PeopleSoft related issues. Vendor
will be provided access to Oracle support in order to follow-up and manage vendor software issues.
10.1.14. Custom interfaces. The City currently utilizes several import interfaces as noted below:
10.1.14.1. The “External Flat File” function is used to interface with Incode for Utility Billing and
Municipal Court accounts receivables as well as Highline for Payroll functionality. These
interfaces create journals which are posted to the General Ledger.
10.1.14.2. The “Spreadsheet Import” function is used to interface Procurement Card journal to the
General Ledger.
10.1.15. Software Warranty: Vendor shall not warranty software products or their functionality. Software
selection was based on City’s independent evaluation of the software’s ability to meet the City’s business
requirements.
10.1.16. Hardware acquisition and installation: There will be no delays in the availability of hardware and
software necessary to perform installation and upgrade.
10.1.17. Access to facilities: Vendor project personnel will have reasonable access to City facilities during both
normal business hours and outside normal business hours, as the project requires.
10.1.18. Change request process: Any scope changes shall be documented through a change order process and
signed by both Vendor and City. Additional work shall not be performed in advance without authorization
from the City.
10.1.19. PeopleSoft reports and reporting library: Vendor shall update and modify all existing reports and
queries.
10.1.20. Maintenance Packs, Bundles and Patches: The upgrade includes the installation of all maintenance
packs and required bundles and patches to meet both the business needs and PeopleSoft support for the
City.
10.1.21. Production Support: Proposer shall provide production support following the Go-live period over a two-
week period. Should the City require additional support, Vendor shall provide additional services at the
bill rate identified in proposal. The support shall be by telephone or onsite as needed, and can be used for
the following issues:
Page 13 of 14
RFP 10-003
DATE: November 2009
10.1.21.1. Technical Errors;

10.1.21.2. Questions regarding the tools set for building the interfaces and customizations;
10.1.21.3. Hardware and Performance Issues;
10.1.21.4. Connectivity; and/or
10.1.21.5. Patches and fixes.
PART IV
INVOICE AND PAYMENT
1. ACCEPTANCE: City will determine successful completion of deliverables as specified. Vendor will be notified if service
provided is not in full compliance with the project scope for corrective action. If any service is canceled for non-acceptance,
the needed service may be procured elsewhere and Vendor may be charged full increase, if any, in cost.
2. INVOICING:
2.1. Vendor shall submit one original and two copies of each invoice referencing the assigned Purchase Order number to
the following address:
City of Round Rock
Attn: Accounts Payable
Round Rock, TX 78664-5299
3. PROMPT PAYMENT POLICY:

3.1. Payments will be made within thirty days after the City receives the supplies, materials, equipment, or the day on
which the performance of services was completed, or the day on which the City receives a correct invoice for the
service, whichever is later. The Contractor may charge a late fee (fee shall not be greater than that which is
permitted by Texas law) for payments not made in accordance with this prompt payment policy; however, this
policy does not apply to payments made by the City in the event:
3.1.1. There is a bona fide dispute between the City and Contractor concerning the supplies, materials, services
or equipment delivered or the services performed that causes the payment to be late; or
3.1.2. The terms of a federal contract, grant, regulation, or statute prevent the City from making a timely
payment with Federal Funds; or
3.1.3. There is a bona fide dispute between the Contractor and a subcontractor or between a subcontractor and its
suppliers concerning supplies, material, or equipment delivered or the services performed which caused
the payment to be late; or
3.1.4. The invoice is not mailed to the City in strict accordance with instructions, if any, on the purchase order or
agreement or other such contractual agreement.
4. OVERCHARGES:
4.1. Contractor hereby assigns to purchaser any and all claims for overcharges associated with this purchase which arise
under the antitrust laws of the United States, 15 USGA Section 1 et seq., and which arise under the antitrust laws of
the State of Texas, Bus. and Com. Code, Section 15.01, et seq.
Page 14 of 14
ATTACHMENT A
City of Round Rock

Insurance Requirements
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF ROUND ROCK
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
1. INSURANCE: The Vendor shall procure and maintain at its sole cost and expense for the duration
of the contract or purchase order resulting from a response to this bid/Specification insurance
against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in
connection with the performance of the work as a result of this bid by the successful bidder, its
agents, representatives, volunteers, employees or subcontractors.
1.1. Certificates of Insurance and endorsements shall be furnished to the City and approved
by the City before work commences.
1.2. The following standard insurance policies shall be required:
1.2.1. General Liability Policy
1.2.2. Automobile Liability Policy
1.2.3. Worker’s Compensation Policy
1.3. The following general requirements are applicable to all policies:
1.3.1. Only insurance companies licensed and admitted to do business in the State of
Texas shall be accepted.
1.3.2. Deductibles shall be listed on the Certificate of Insurance and are acceptable
only on a per occurrence basis for property damage only.
1.3.3. Claims made policies shall not be accepted, except for Professional Liability
Insurance.
1.3.4. Upon request, certified copies of all insurance policies shall be furnished to the
City
1.3.5. Policies shall include, but not be limited to, the following minimum limits:
1.3.5.1. Minimum Bodily Injury Limits of $300,000.00 per occurrence.
1.3.5.2. Property Damage Insurance with minimum limits of $50,000.00 for
each occurrence.
1.3.5.3. Automobile Liability Insurance for all owned, non-owned, and hired
vehicles with minimum limits for Bodily Injury of $100,000.00 each
person, and $300,000.00 for each occurrence, and Property
Damage Minimum limits of $50,000.00 for each occurrence.
1.3.5.4. Statutory Worker’s Compensation Insurance and minimum
$100,000.00 Employers Liability Insurance.
1.3.6. Coverage shall be maintained for two years minimum after the termination of the
Contract.
1.4. The City shall be entitled, upon request, and without expense to receive copies of
insurance policies and all endorsements thereto and may make reasonable request for
deletion, revision, or modification of particular policy terms, conditions, limitations, or
exclusions (except where policy provisions are established by law or regulation binding
either of the parties hereto or the underwriter of any of such policies). Upon such request
by the City, the Vendor shall exercise reasonable efforts to accomplish such changes in
policy coverage and shall pay the cost thereof. All insurance and bonds shall meet the
requirements of the bid specification and the insurance endorsements stated below.
1.5. Vendor agrees that with respect to the required insurance, all insurance contracts and
certificate(s) of insurance will contain and state, in writing, on the certificate or its
attachment, the following provisions:
Page 1 of 4
1.5.1. Provide for an additional insurance endorsement clause declaring the Vendor’s
insurance as primary.
1.5.2. Name the City and its officers, employees, and elected officials as additional
insured’s, (as the interest of each insured may appear) as to all applicable
coverage.
1.5.3. Provide thirty days notice to the City of cancellation, non-renewal, or material
changes
1.5.4. Remove all language on the certificate of insurance indicating:
1.5.4.1. That the insurance company or agent/broker shall endeavor to notify
the City; and,
1.5.4.2. Failure to do so shall impose no obligation of liability of any kind
upon the company, its agents, or representatives.
1.5.5. Provide for notice to the City at the addresses listed below by registered mail:
1.5.6. Vendor agrees to waive subrogation against the City, its officers, employees,
and elected officials for injuries, including death, property damage, or any other
loss to the extent same may be covered by the proceeds of insurance.
1.5.7. Provide that all provisions of this contract concerning liability, duty, and standard
of care together with the indemnification provision, shall be underwritten by
contractual liability coverage sufficient to include such obligations within
applicable policies.
1.5.8. All copies of the Certificate of Insurance shall reference the project name, bid
number or purchase order number for which the insurance is being supplied.
1.5.9. Vendor shall notify the City in the event of any change in coverage and shall
give such notices not less than thirty days prior notice to the change, which
notice shall be accomplished by a replacement Certificate of Insurance.
1.5.10. All notices shall be mailed to the City at the following addresses:
Assistant City Manager City Attorney
City of Round Rock City of Round Rock
221 East Main 309 East Main
Round Rock, TX 78664-5299 Round Rock, TX 78664
2. WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE
2.1. Texas Labor Code, Section 406.098 requires workers’ compensation insurance coverage
for all persons providing services on building or construction projects for a governmental
entity.
2.1.1. Certificate of coverage (“certificate”) - A copy of a certificate of insurance, a
certificate of authority to self-insure issued by the Texas Workers’ Compensation
Commission, or a coverage agreement (TWCC-81, TWCC-82, TWCC-83, or
TWCC-84), showing statutory workers’ compensation insurance coverage for
the person’s or entity’s employees providing services on a project, for the
duration of the project.
2.1.2. Duration of the project - includes the time from the beginning of the work on the
project until the CONTRACTOR’S /person’s work on the project has been
completed and accepted by the OWNER.
2.2. Persons providing services on the project (“subcontractor”) in Section 406.096 - includes
all persons or entities performing all or part of the services the CONTRACTOR has
undertaken to perform on the project, regardless of whether that person contracted
directly with the CONTRACTOR and regardless of whether that person has employees.
This includes, without limitation, independent contractors, subcontractors, leasing
companies, motor carriers, owner-operators, employees of any such entity, or employees
of any entity, which furnishes persons to provide services on the project. “Services”
include, without limitation, providing, hauling, or delivering equipment or materials, or
providing labor, transportation, or other service related to a project. “Services” does not
Page 2 of 4
include activities unrelated to the project, such as food/beverage vendors, office supply
deliveries, and delivery of portable toilets.
2.3. The CONTRACTOR shall provide coverage, based on proper reporting of classification
codes and payroll amounts and filing of any coverage agreements, that meets the
statutory requirements of Texas Labor Code, Section 401.011(44) for all employees of the
CONTRACTOR providing services on the project, for the duration of the project.
2.4. The CONTRACTOR must provide a certificate of coverage to the OWNER prior to being
awarded the contract.
2.5. If the coverage period shown on the CONTRACTOR’S current certificate of coverage
ends during the duration of the project, the CONTRACTOR must, prior to the end of the
coverage period, file a new certificate of coverage with the OWNER showing that
coverage has been extended.
2.6. The CONTRACTOR shall obtain from each person providing services on a project, and
provide to the OWNER:
2.6.1. a certificate of coverage, prior to that person beginning work on the project, so
the OWNER will have on file certificates of coverage showing coverage for all
persons providing services on the project; and
2.6.2. no later than seven calendar days after receipt by the CONTRACTOR, a new
certificate of coverage showing extension of coverage, if the coverage period
shown on the current certificate of coverage ends during the duration of the
project.
2.7. The CONTRACTOR shall retain all required certificates of coverage for the duration of
the project and for one year thereafter.
2.8. The CONTRACTOR shall notify the OWNER in writing by certified mail or personal
delivery, within 10 calendar days after the CONTRACTOR knew or should have known,
or any change that materially affects the provision of coverage of any person providing
services on the project.
2.9. The CONTRACTOR shall post on each project site a notice, in the text, form and manner
prescribed by the Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission, informing all persons
providing services on the project that they are required to be covered, and stating how a
person may verify coverage and report lack of coverage.
2.10. The CONTRACTOR shall contractually require each person with whom it contracts to
provide services on a project, to:
2.10.1. provide coverage, based on proper reporting of classification codes and payroll
amounts and filing of any coverage agreements, that meets the statutory
requirements of Texas Labor Code, Section 401.011(44) for all its employees
providing services on the project, for the duration of the project;
2.10.2. provide to the CONTRACTOR, prior to that person beginning work on the
project, a certificate of coverage showing that coverage is being provided for all
employees of the person providing services on a project, for the duration of the
project;
2.10.3. provide the CONTRACTOR, prior to the end of the coverage period, a new
certificate of coverage showing extension of coverage, if the coverage period
shown on the current certificate of coverage ends during the duration of the
project;
2.10.3.1. obtain from each other person with whom it contracts, and provide to
the CONTRACTOR:
2.10.3.1.1. a certificate of coverage, prior to the other person
beginning work on the project; and
2.10.3.1.2. a new certificate of coverage showing extension of
coverage, prior to the end of the coverage period, if
the coverage period shown on the current certificate
of coverage ends during the duration of the project
Page 3 of 4
2.10.3.2. retain all required certificates of coverage on file for the duration of
the project and for one year thereafter;
2.10.3.3. notify the OWNER in writing by certified mail or personal delivery,
within 10 calendar days after the person knew or should have
known, of any change that materially affects the provision of
coverage of any person providing services on the project; and
2.10.3.4. contractually require each person with whom it contracts, to perform
as required by paragraphs (A thru G), with the certificates of
coverage to be provided to the person for whom they are providing
services.
2.10.3.5. By signing the solicitation associated with this specification, or
providing, or causing to be provided a certificate of coverage, the
Contractor is representing to the Owner that all employees of the
Contractor who will provide services on the project will be covered
by workers’ compensation coverage for the duration of the project,
that the coverage will be based on proper reporting of classification
codes and payroll amounts, and that all coverage agreements will
be filed with the appropriate insurance carrier or, in the case of a
self-insured, with the Commission’s Division of Self-Insurance
Regulation. Providing false or misleading information may subject
the Contractor to administrative penalties, criminal penalties, civil
penalties, or other civil actions.
2.10.3.6. The Contractor’s failure to comply with any of these provisions is a
breach of contract by the Contractor that entitles the Owner to
declare the contract void if the Contractor does not remedy the
breach within ten calendar days after receipt of notice of breach
from the owner.
Page 4 of 4
Attachment B
City Staffing Matrix

November 2009
Information Technology Department

Title Division Peoplesoft Experience Field Experience
Assistant City Manager Information Technology 11 years 6.0, 7.5, 8.4 19 years
Enterprise Application Manager Enterprise Applications 13 years 5.5, 6.0, 7.5, 8.4 15 years
Database Administrator Enterprise Applications 5 years 8.4 10 years
Infrastructure Manager Infrastructure 10 years
Senior Network Manager Infrastructure 20 years
User Support Manager Help Desk 10 years
User Support Technican Help Desk 10 years
Finance Department
Title Division Peoplesoft Experience Field Experience
Finance Director Finance 6 years 7.5, 8.4 6 years
Financial Programs Manager Accounting 10 years 6.0, 7.5, 8.4 20+ years
Accounting Supervisor Accounting 5 years 8.4 23 years
Accounting Supervisor Accounts Payable 5 years 8.4 23 years
Accounting Tech I Accounts Payable 8 years 7.5, 8.4 10 years
Budget Supervisor Budget 2 years 8.4 18 years
Budget Analyst II Budget 5 years 8.4, 6.1 10 years
Construction Accountant II Construction/Projects 10 years 6.0, 7.5, 8.4 15 years
Construction Accountant I Construction/Projects 9 years 7.5, 8.4 15 years
Purchasing Supervisor Purchasing 6 years 8.4, 7.5 30 years
Purchaser Purchasing 5 months 8.4 35+ years
10-003 PeopleSoft Upgrade Services
Pre-Proposal Conference Call
Summary of Questions & Comments
QUESTION:
Is the City open to customization?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
QUESTION:
Does the City plan to upgrade the platform hardware currently being used?
CITY RESPONSE:
No. The City plans to keep the current hardware.
QUESTION:
Regarding the Past Relationship evaluation criteria in the RFP, please list the companies on the
conference call that have done business with the City in the past?
CITY RESPONSE:
In relation to this project, there are none. The firm that assisted in our prior upgrade in 2003 is
not participating. We do have prior experience with several firms participating on other projects,
but none that are applicable to this upgrade project.
QUESTION:
Please detail the number of users that are going to be trained for each module including the core
users and other City employees referenced in part III of the RFP.
CITY RESPONSE:
This request will be addressed in the December 9th written response from the City.
QUESTION:
Is the City currently operating in production the modules that are listed as part of the Phase II
upgrade?
CITY RESPONSE:
No.
QUESTION:
So the modules listed for Phase II are new deployments of modules that the City is currently not
utilizing today in production?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes, that is correct.
QUESTION:
What interfaces or 3rd party software is used with current system?
Page 1 11/30/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
External Flat File function is used to interface with Incode for Utility Billing and Municipal
Court and Highline for payroll. The Spreadsheet Import function is used to interface
Procurement Card journal to General Ledger.
QUESTION:
Is the City looking for a business process review or an overview of capabilities of each of the
modules or a full blown Fit/Gap? Informal sessions or formal review?
CITY RESPONSE:
Based on scope of work identified we did include time for a Fit/Gap analysis. Based on our
experience with PeopleSoft, we were hoping that the proposer would propose whatever would be
required for us to meet our needs going forward. In assessing what we are looking for and in
preparing your proposal, you are welcome to include any options for pricing components or
alternate options.
QUESTION:
Does anyone with the City have experience with Hyperion?
CITY RESPONSE:
No
QUESTION:
Is the City looking at Hyperion for budget purposes?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
QUESTION:
Integrated with commitment control?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
QUESTION:
Do you have an estimated start date for this project?
CITY RESPONSE:
No estimated start date. The City has a “Go live” date of September 8, 2010. Our desired goal is
to have a contract negotiated and presented to our City Council for formal approval by late
January.
QUESTION:
Will the City be responsible for configuring the hardware in the Oracle database?
Page 2 11/30/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes but we will work with the vendor to identify any special configurations based on standard
PeopleSoft configuration methodology.
QUESTION:
Is this RFP different from the previous 3rd party support RFP?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes. The City did not award that solicitation and have decided to upgrade instead.
QUESTION:
Will the City consider new and/or smaller vendors?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes. The City will consider any vendor that submits a proposal. Each proposal will be evaluated
on its own merit using the evaluation criteria outlined in the RFP.
QUESTION:
What is the expectation from the project standpoint of contracted staff from the vendor?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City has no expectations other than the expectation that the vendor will use whatever
resources they need to get the job done.
QUESTION:
Is the City looking for on-site or off-site Phase I and II upgrade implementation?
CITY RESPONSE:
That is up to the vendor to propose in either phase.
QUESTION:
Are you requesting assistance for Oracle upgrade from 9i to 10g or doing it yourself?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City will do it.
QUESTION:
Is the City considering using any of the new features in 10g such as RAC or ASM?
CITY RESPONSE:
We are considering using these features; however, we most likely will not utilize RAC because
we are running in a virtualized environment. The City does not operate on a 24/7 basis. The
hours of operation are generally Monday – Friday 8:00am – 5:00pm.
Page 3 11/30/2009
QUESTION:
What are your current customizations?
CITY RESPONSE:
There are none.
QUESTION:
Can you identify the number of your reports and/or workflows?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City will identify the exact number of either Crystal reports or SQRs that we have
customized in our response on December 9, 2009.
QUESTION:
What are the intentions around implementing functionality in E-Procurement?
CITY RESPONSE:
To introduce online requisitioning to our organization and the workflow that follows to route
requisitions through the Purchasing Department to completion with issuance of a PO. This will
consist of a user group including employees outside of the Finance Department submitting
requisitions to Finance/Purchasing resulting in the issuance of a Purchase Order.
QUESTION:
Does the City anticipate this to include direct connection to suppliers as well?
CITY RESPONSE:
Not a primary focus at this point. The City expects that in Phase II there are some components
that would go hand in hand with that. The City could possibly expect this functionality in Phase
II.
QUESTION:
Is the suggested sequence of module implementations for Phase II being requested up front
before Phase I implementation?
CITY RESPONSE:
Not necessary up front. The City’s goal is to establish partnership with the selected vendor in
Phase I that would result in working together to identify the Phase II sequence.
QUESTION:
Is the City using any of Oracle’s business intelligence tools or looking into business intelligence
for Phase II?
Page 4 11/30/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes, the City is looking at the functionality of business intelligence tools. Although we are
licensed for it, we are not currently using them.
QUESTION:
Will the City entertain “train the trainer” or will you expect the consultant to do all training?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes. We will incorporate train the trainer in some instances. That will evolve out of partnership
developed with the vendor and what works best. We realize that will be some training that we
need to do from a higher level to users in partnership.
QUESTION:
Will on-site support from the vendor for post implementation be capped to a period of time or is
it open ended? Is there an exit measurement that needs to be met?
CITY RESPONSE:
Post support refers to after system acceptance of upgrade. User training is outlined in RFP
section 10.1.12.
QUESTION:
Have requirements been defined for data archiving effort? If so, can you provide data elements
and timeframe to be archived?
CITY RESPONSE:
No, the requirements have not been defined. Our data base is at 25GB. We have not
implemented any archiving but request the vendor to propose recommendations and procedures
to archive data.
QUESTION:
What level of process and/or user documentation does the City currently have in place that will
serve as a baseline?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City has a limited user base as well as limited documentation. Processes will need to be
identified and documented before we introduce the upgrade to our organization.
QUESTION:
Has the City modified its chart of accounts?
CITY RESPONSE:
No; not that we won’t. The City uses standard chart fields.
Page 5 11/30/2009
QUESTION:
Does the respondent have the choice of responding to the basic requirements of the RFP as well
as adding anything else that they feel that would be of value to the City as it relates to this RFP?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes, the City will consider any alternatives or options that are proposed.
QUESTION:
Is the City asking for both Phase I and II proposed project schedules at this point?
CITY RESPONSE:
Primary focus is Phase I. If you are able to submit anything that addresses Phase II we would
consider it but we realize that Phase II schedules are going to be driven by Phase I, funding, etc.
QUESTION:
Does the City have VPN access into environment?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes.
QUESTION:
Does the City want pricing for Phase II when we aren’t exactly sure of the requirements at this
time?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City requests pricing on the implementation of modules listed in the RFP realizing that the
sequence of implementation may change and that there are variables that could come into play.
We would like pricing for Phase II included.
QUESTION:
Should we assume that Hyperion will be used for Budget or BI warehouse or both?
CITY RESPONSE:
Hyperion will be used for Budget.
QUESTION:
Does the City perform manual testing or are tools used?
CITY RESPONSE:
The city utilizes manual testing.
QUESTION:
What interfaces are currently being used?
Page 6 11/30/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
External Flat File function is used to interface with Incode for Utility Billing and Municipal
Court and Highline for payroll. The Spreadsheet Import function is used to interface
Procurement Card journal to General Ledger.
QUESTION:
What type of programs are they?
CITY RESPONSE:
File imports.
QUESTION:
Are all interfaces the same type or are they different?
CITY RESPONSE:
One is an Excel and the others are ASCII file format.
QUESTION:
Are you going to use a Portal line in Phase II imports?
CITY RESPONSE:
Decision has not been made at this point.
QUESTION:
Does the City plan to implement the PeopleSoft Portal?
CITY RESPONSE:
We currently have the enterprise Portal version 8.8.
QUESTION:
Does the City plan to update the current Portal to 9.0?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
QUESTION:
What kind of Legacy systems does the City currently use?
CITY RESPONSE:
None at this point.
QUESTION:
How many years and volume of data needs to be transferred?
Page 7 11/30/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
The City has been with PeopleSoft for 11 years and has never purged any data. Our database
contains 25GB of data.
QUESTION:
How many DBAs does the City currently have?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City has one DBA with PeopleSoft experience dedicated to this project.
QUESTION:
Should respondents propose how much DBA support and administrative assistance we would
supply for project?
CITY RESPONSE:
We would ask that you propose what you think your firm would do and the commitment you
need from us.
QUESTION:
Please clarify the upgrade of the Enterprise Portal 8.8 to 9 or 9.1. Is this part of the Phase I or
Phase II upgrade?
CITY RESPONSE:
Not included in either. We will do in-house.
QUESTION:
What payment methods are currently used in the City’s Accounts Payable department to submit
payment to a supplier or vendor?
CITY RESPONSE:
Checks and Wire Transfers.
QUESTION:
Does the City use 3rd party check printing software?
CITY RESPONSE:
No.
QUESTION:
Does the City use 3rd party paper stock?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes.
Page 8 11/30/2009
QUESTION:
Are Wire Transfers performed directly from AP or is a 3rd party application used?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City uses a 3rd party application.
QUESTION:
What application of Hyperion is the City looking at implementing?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City would like to implement the Planning and Budget module.
QUESTION:
Support and test - is the city willing to execute testing or onsite or remote assistance?
CITY RESPONSE:
Vendor to propose as much testing as they can take on with our staff doing acceptance testing.
QUESTION:
Does the City currently use software to capture or process testing results?
CITY RESPONSE:
No.
QUESTION:
Is the City open to using software to capture or process testing results?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
QUESTION:
What is the City asking for in Phase II for Oracle UPK?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City is looking for a recommendation from the vendor for implementing the UPK to help
provide additional user documentation and training and ongoing training.
QUESTION:
Will the City use UPK for every module?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes for the 4 modules.
QUESTION:
6.3.1 addresses existing customizations. Please clarify.
Page 9 11/30/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
Reports only.
QUESTION:
Is the existing data outlined in Section 1.4.8 outside of normal upgrade that we would be
performing?
CITY RESPONSE:
Any data conversion required from 8.4 to 9.0.
QUESTION:
Is the City running the scripts or is the vendor?
CITY RESPONSE:
The vendor.
QUESTION:
What would the vendor be assisting with in Section 1.4.8?
CITY RESPONSE:
Any additional data conversions required in upgrade that the City was not previously aware of.
QUESTION:
What participation do you expect to have with PeopleSoft proper during upgrade? Do you
envision that the vendor would have access to your rep? What is the City’s expectation of
PeopleSoft’s participation?
CITY RESPONSE:
The expectation is that any problems would be filed through the City’s account. If we run into
issues on the final upgrade prior to going live they will be submitted as a critical issue. The City
will not have a PeopleSoft rep on-site.
QUESTION:
Will it be the City’s communication with PeopleSoft, especially in Phase II, that will determine
the go or no go regarding the version?
CITY RESPONSE:
No. It will be an internal decision.
QUESTION:
When will the City address the submitted questions?
CITY RESPONSE:
December 9th
Page 10 11/30/2009
PARTICIPATING FIRMS:
4Consulting
Cephei Technology Group
Chivas Engineering & Consulting
Empower Solutions
EMS Consulting
eVerge Group
Exxova
Fujitsu America
HyperGen
Interfusion Solutions
iuXta America
MAXIMUS
Mo'mix Solutions
Neos Consulting
ObjectWin
Plante & Moran
PMCS Services
Sierra Systems
Satyam Government Solutions
Stark Holdings
Summit Technology
Synch-Solutions
System Efficiency
Varsun eTechnologies
Page 11 11/30/2009
12/8/2009
City Response to Submitted Questions
NOTE: The Scope of Work for this project identifies upgrading the City’s existing 8.4
environment to PeopleSoft 9.0 and implementation of the eProcurement module as the
Phase I approach. We are aware that version 9.1 has been released by PeopleSoft and are
considering a direct upgrade, but no decision has been made at this time. Interested firms
are welcome to include upgrading from 8.4 to 9.1 as a Phase I option in their proposal.
1. Section II.I.3 references experience with Oracle Government Financials, which is a

product we are not familiar with, and is not referenced as one of the PeopleSoft modules
included in either Phase I or II. Is the experience with OGF required for this project?
CITY RESPONSE:
The product module we currently have is PeopleSoft Financials. The inclusion of
Oracle in terminology was in reference to the buyout; if you have experience with
PeopleSoft Financials 8.4 you meet the criteria.
2. Current Solution Architecture – diagram: Provide if available. (It can be a very simple
diagram showing inputs, outputs and the relation with other applications. Please mention
names of other applications interacting with PeopleSoft application.)
CITY RESPONSE:
No we do not have an I/O diagram. Our implementation is a vanilla
implementation. There are no customizations other than relaying out the screen or
order of fields. We have not created any custom menus, added any custom tables or
modified any existing tables.
3. Customizations: What are present customizations; a brief description of the same would
help us in effort and cost estimations and allocating resources with appropriate skill set
CITY RESPONSE:
None
4. Customizations: No of Reports and types
CITY RESPONSE:
Please see Question #155.
5. Customizations: Workflows
CITY RESPONSE:
None
6. Customizations: Alerts
Page 1 of 30
12/8/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
None
7. Customizations: Customizations to standard functionality
CITY RESPONSE:
The only changes have been in the screen navigation. We have re-ordered fields so
that the user does not need to scroll across the screen to enter data. We have not
added or changed any fields or added or changed any menus or added or modified
any tables.
8. Customizations: Forms
CITY RESPONSE:
There are no new forms. We have relayed out fields to facilitate data entry in
purchasing and A/P but that is the limit of any changes
9. Customizations: Any custom bolt on (Custom Module)
CITY RESPONSE:
None
10. Customizations: Any other customizations
CITY RESPONSE:
We have a custom view that our document management system (Liberty IMS)
utilizes an ODBC connection to retrieve the voucher id (unique key) in order to
index the remaining fields within our document management system. This allows
staff to search on multiple fields (voucher id, vendor number, vendor name,
accounting date, check number and payment date) within our document
management system.
11. Unicode/Languages: Is the current installation Unicode compliant?
CITY RESPONSE:
No, it is non-Unicode in English only.
12. Unicode/Languages: Are any languages (other than English) being used in the system?
CITY RESPONSE:
No
13. Data conversion: Please provide details – legacy system to PS and in what for data exist
in Legacy system.
Page 2 of 30
12/8/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
All data is currently in PeopleSoft FSCM 8.4
14. Data conversion: How many years’ data needs to be transferred to People Soft and what
is volume of it?
CITY RESPONSE:
We have 10 years of data in our existing database. The database is approximately
25GB. Prior to the upgrade we would like to work with the selected vendor to
identify any opportunities that we may have to archive data using PeopleSoft
Archive functionality into archive tables. The number of years of data that we
convert will need to be determined at the time of upgrade.
15. No. of Instances: Please provide us details as regards to number of, instances –
production, development, reporting etc,
CITY RESPONSE:
There are 3 instances that we maintain. Production, Demo and Test. If we choose
to do any development we would then create a separate database or we would
snapshot the Test environment in VMWare.
16. Standby Database: Where is your standby database located?
CITY RESPONSE:
There is no standby database. Open to vendor recommendation.
17. Standby Database will not be upgraded separately. Please confirm our understanding.
CITY RESPONSE:
18. DBA availability: Can City’s PS DBA(s) be actively involved in the upgrade activity if
required?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes. The time commitment expectation will need to be included in the proposal.
19. Documentation: If implementation, customization documents for current version

available? Once awarded the project will they be made available to us?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
20. Application Security features: What are security features used? If any enhancement is
expected?
Page 3 of 30
12/8/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
We are using PeopleSoft’s security functionality. There has been some discussion
re: incorporating LDAP (Lightweight Directory Access Protocol) but no decision
has been made.
21. Vendor support: Does City have support contract with People soft suppliers?
CITY RESPONSE:
No
22. Software/database Licenses: Does City hold license for new modules and database that
are to be implemented? If not, should vendor provide costing for the same?
CITY RESPONSE:
City does not currently hold license for new modules and database. We would
prefer provision of cost information in proposal.
23. General: Data conversion: can we propose offshore onsite model?
CITY RESPONSE:
City will consider all relevant proposal options in determining the best solution to
meet our needs.
24. General: What is pricing model – fixed bid or T&M
CITY RESPONSE:
The City is seeking fixed pricing for the upgrade services. Please refer to PART I,
page 4 of 14; Item 14. COST PROPOSAL.
25. General: Would you be awarding contract for database upgrade and application upgrade
to same vendor or different vendors?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City reserves the right to select a single vendor or combination of vendors that
best meet our need. We are open to either possibility pending receipt and
evaluation of proposals.
26. General: When second Phase is expected to start and end?
CITY RESPONSE:
Unable to specify at this time. A decision on the City’s desired timeline for Phase II
as identified in the specification will be developed through internal discussion and
recommendation of selected vendor.
27. General: Are we supposed to provide implementation module wise for all modules
indicated in second phase?
Page 4 of 30
12/8/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
The City requests pricing on the implementation of modules listed in the RFP
realizing that the sequence of implementation may change and that there are
variables that could come into play. We would like pricing for Phase II included in
all proposals for this project.
28. General: How stable is the current PeopleSoft Finance system? What is the volume of the
issues faced on a monthly basis?
CITY RESPONSE:
It is stable, there are very few issues that come up in a week. Typically I get <10
calls per week of which <5 become an issue that is entered into our tracking system.
Of all the issues per month there is no more than 1-2 that get escalated to
Oracle/PeopleSoft.
29. Organization Structure: What is Present Organization Structure? Please provide brief
write up
CITY RESPONSE:
The City’s main operations are conducted through the General, Utility, Hotel and
debt service funds. The City utilizes 1 Business Unit, with about 47 active funds
made up of 62 divisions. The General Fund has 18 departments made up of 41
divisions. The Utility fund has 9 departments made up of 10 divisions. The Hotel
fund has 5 divisions. The City has approximately 9 Enterprise funds, 13 Capital
Project funds, 4 Debt Service funds, 13 Special Revenue funds, an internal service
fund and a couple of other miscellaneous funds.
30. Organization Structure: No. of Legal Entities/Operating units/regions/departments etc
CITY RESPONSE:
31. Organization Structure: Locations (operations)/ Details of the Profit centers and Cost
Centers
CITY RESPONSE:
32. e-Procurement: What is current Procurement System?
CITY RESPONSE:
The current Procurement System in the City consists of a user group including
employees outside of the Finance Department submitting paper requisitions to
Finance/Purchasing resulting in the issuance of a paper Purchase Order.
Page 5 of 30
12/8/2009
33. e-Procurement: Inventory Policies- Stock norms, Accuracy plans, ABC classifications
CITY RESPONSE:
We do not maintain data or track these components of procuring goods or services
through PeopleSoft.
34. e-Procurement: Inventory Management Methodology being currently followed
CITY RESPONSE:
We do currently utilize inventory management methods in PeopleSoft 8.4.
35. e-Procurement: Existing Item Master along with the Item codification mechanism
(availability of BIN cards etc).
CITY RESPONSE:
Not applicable to this project for the City of Round Rock.
36. e-Procurement: Are Items being categorized on the basis of certain common
characteristics? If yes, then elaborate
CITY RESPONSE:
The City uses application of the 5 digit Commodity Code provided by the National
Institute of Governmental Purchasing for all goods and services.
37. e-Procurement: Explain the Material Flow vis-à-vis:

Receipt and inspection of goods;
Issue of items/materials;
Issue for internal consumption;
CITY RESPONSE:
User departments are responsible for receipt, inspection, and acceptance of all
materials ordered via Purchase Order. We do not maintain data or track these
materials through PeopleSoft after issuance of Purchase Order.
38. e-Procurement: Explain the method for tracking the items/materials.
CITY RESPONSE:
Please see Question # 37.
39. e-Procurement: Is Bar coding being used to track the items? If yes, then provide details.
CITY RESPONSE:
40. e-Procurement: Hardware and Software being used for Bar Coding;
Page 6 of 30
12/8/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
41. e-Procurement: Explain the method by which items/materials are being tracked e.g. Lot
Control, Expiration date control etc.
CITY RESPONSE:
42. e-Procurement: What is the Material Accounting Structure followed and how the cost is
being tracked
Cost Structure
Valuation Structure
CITY RESPONSE:
43. e-Procurement: What is the Material Planning method being followed (Re-Order
Level/Min-Max Planning/EOQ etc.)
CITY RESPONSE:
44. e-Procurement: How the Inventory in the warehouses/other storage locations being
tracked and maintained?
CITY RESPONSE:
45. e-Procurement: Structure of the Procurement/commercial division with roles and

responsibilities
CITY RESPONSE:
The Purchasing Department consists of 3 separate work groups relative to City
business demands. The Purchasing group is responsible for review of all
department requisitions, assistance with obtaining quotes and/or bids, verification
of budgetary compliance, and issuance of Purchase Order. Additionally, this group
handles all formal solicitations for the department. The Program group administers
services, equipment, and invoicing for specific program activities such as the
Procurement card, Travel, Fleet fuel services, Wireless Communications, uniforms,
and other programs as assigned. The Contract group serves as a liaison between
user departments and our 3rd party legal firm to initiate, track and secure
contractual agreements with vendors.
46. e-Procurement: Channels of Procurement i.e. through the web, conventional channel etc
Describe
Page 7 of 30
12/8/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
Current Procurement channels would be considered conventional. Purchase Orders
are generated by user requisition and supplied to departments in paper format for
issuance. Additionally, City users also have the functionality of procuring items
below a monetary threshold via credit card transaction outside of the PO process.
47. e-Procurement: Component of import purchases and details of procedure for imports
CITY RESPONSE:
Not applicable to the services requested for this project.
48. e-Procurement: Procurement Process Flow from initiating a Requisition to raising of

Purchase Orders and finally to the Receipt of Goods) for different types of Purchase
Orders (standard Purchase Orders, Contract Purchase Orders, Release against agreements
etc.)
CITY RESPONSE:
Departmental user identifies need and prepares purchase requisition (paper);
departmental approver signs/approves the requisition; paper requisition is
submitted to Purchasing for processing; requisition is entered into PeopleSoft for
PO creation; Purchasing staff reviews submitted requisition for policy and legal
compliance; Purchasing staff budget checks procurement, encumbers funds, and
dispatches PO; PO is reviewed by Purchasing staff and final signature authority is
executed; PO (paper) is returned to department for issuance to vendor; original
requisition and documentation is forwarded to Accounts Payable for verification of
receipt and payment of invoice(s). Departments are responsible for receipt of goods,
verification of matching to PO, and contact of Accounts Payable with approval to
pay invoices against the PO. The process is the same for all procurements.
49. e-Procurement: Procurement Approval Mechanism for each type and category of
procurement
CITY RESPONSE:
50. e-Procurement: Request for Quotation, Quotation Analysis and Price negotiation process
CITY RESPONSE:
51. e-Procurement: Availability of approved vendor list and criterion of the same
CITY RESPONSE:
Please see Question #60 below.
Page 8 of 30
12/8/2009
52. e-Procurement: Principal Suppliers and the types of Purchase Agreement with them.
Highlight any specific aspects and peculiarity vis-à-vis the agreements
CITY RESPONSE:
53. e-Procurement: Explain the various steps involved in the receipt of Goods process
CITY RESPONSE:
54. e-Procurement: Highlight the various costs that are included as total cost of purchases
(e.g. inward cost, freight cost, other incidental costs etc.)
CITY RESPONSE:
55. e-Procurement: Various currencies used while raising POs.
CITY RESPONSE:
56. e-Procurement: Treatment of foreign exchange fluctuation on imports in the books of

account
CITY RESPONSE:
57. e-Procurement: Volumes of Transactions (Number of Requisitions, Request for

Quotation, Quotations, Agreements, Purchase Orders, Receipts against Purchase Orders)
CITY RESPONSE:
In 2008-2009 fiscal year: 1,967 POs were generated against same number of
requisitions from 26 user departments.
58. e-Procurement: What is the average lead-time required for completing the Purchasing
process for various types of Items or category of Items
CITY RESPONSE:
59. e-Procurement: List the various credit terms being used and do highlight if any specific
credit term is being exclusively being used for certain supplier or supplier types
CITY RESPONSE:
Page 9 of 30
12/8/2009
60. Vendor Management: What is the size of Vendor Master, how are the vendors
categorized and what is the vendor numbering system being used at present?
CITY RESPONSE:
Vendor Master currently contains 19,175 active and 5,624 inactive vendors. The
vendors are categorized by Active and Inactive. The current numbering system is a
10 digit format.
61. Vendor Management: Elaborate on Vendor Development and Vendor rating.
CITY RESPONSE:
62. General Ledger: Elaborate the broad accounting policies
CITY RESPONSE:
Please see the Budget Message in the City’s 2008-2009 Annual Operating Budget on
the Finance Administration page of the City’s website www.roundrocktexas.gov .
63. General Ledger: Describe the Existing Chart of Accounts structure
CITY RESPONSE:
The City utilizes the accounting string of Account-Fund Code-Deptid for most
budgets. The City also utilizes the Project ID for capital project budgets and
Program code in a limited capacity.
64. General Ledger: Structure of the Accounts/Finance Department along with Roles &
Responsibilities
CITY RESPONSE:
The City has several different roles within the system depending on position. There
are approximately 9 people with varying degrees of security within the Purchasing
module. There are 5-7 people with Accounts Payable roles, about 6-8 with Budget
roles, 4 with Asset Management roles, and about 15 with General Ledger roles.
65. General Ledger: Financial reporting structure of the Organization
CITY RESPONSE:
Fund
Department
Division
Category
Account
66. General Ledger: Accounting year and periods within that accounting year
Page 10 of 30
12/8/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
Fiscal Year Oct 1-Sept 30. Utilize 12 monthly periods and adjustment period 998.
67. General Ledger: Significant expense heads. Highlight the mechanism by which it is
being controlled
CITY RESPONSE:
Operating budgets use ORG & ORG 2 ledgers. ORG2 are line item account
budgets that roll up to a category total. ORG budgets are the rollup category
accounts. Most departments budget check at the ORG level, however, some budget
check at the ORG2 level.
68. General Ledger: Consolidation Process (Explain how the consolidation takes place at the
Unit level, Group level etc.)
CITY RESPONSE:
69. General Ledger: Explain the budgeting and budgetary control process for both Revenue
and Capital expenditure.
CITY RESPONSE:
Utilize Revest ledger to track revenue budgets; utilize Funding Source, Master,
Project, and Segment ledgers to control Capital Project budgets; utilize ORG and
ORG2 ledgers as stated in #67 above.
70. Payables: Invoice processing (Highlight specific Invoice Processing process for certain
types of suppliers and purchase orders)
CITY RESPONSE:
Invoices are received in Accounts Payable. If the approval to pay is not already
received, we request approval from the specific department. Once approved by the
department, a finance approver reviews and we enter a voucher for the invoice.
71. Payables: Payment Processing (Highlight the basis on which the invoices to be paid are
selected. Is any payment being processed in a batch form? If yes, what are the
parameters for selecting the invoices for payment)? What are the different types of
payment instruments being used e.g. Cheque, EFT, Wire Transfer etc.)?
CITY RESPONSE:
Invoices are selected for payment based on the invoice date. Vendors are set up as
30 day pay; therefore, invoices are paid 30 days later. Types of payment are checks
and wires.
Page 11 of 30
12/8/2009
72. Payables: Explain the manner in which Imprest Cash transactions are reflected in the
system
CITY RESPONSE:
These transactions are handled through the GL transactions.
73. Payables: List the authority matrix for voucher approvals and payment
CITY RESPONSE:
Invoices are approved by department, then by the finance approver prior to
vouchering and paying.
74. Payables: Elaborate the manner in which the Employee Expense Reports are being
processed and accounted for (e.g. Travel expense statement etc.). Does the employee
submit the reports manually or is it done automatically using a web-enabled system
CITY RESPONSE:
Employees submit a travel advance request form to receive an advance per diem
check; upon return they submit a final travel reconciliation form with any
additional reimbursements. This is a manual process, not web-enabled.
75. Payables: Explain the way in which the outstanding payable balances are monitored and
analyzed.
CITY RESPONSE:
We utilize a manual monitoring process to track outstanding invoices, although we
do not have very many outstanding payables.
76. Payables: Explain the procedure adopted for accruing operational expenses, where
Invoices are not received, at period end.
CITY RESPONSE:
We identify any recurring expenses not received. We then journal the entry to the
accrual account.
77. Payables: Explain the process for capturing information for IATA forms
CITY RESPONSE:
Our current processes do not require the use of IATA forms.
78. Payables: Explain the process for capturing information for ICH settlements
CITY RESPONSE:
Our current process does not require ICH settlements.
Page 12 of 30
12/8/2009
79. Assets: Description of Fixed Assets and process of capitalization (including budgeting,
requisition, approvals etc)
CITY RESPONSE:
Capitalize items over $5,000 by manual entry. Capital items can be from
operations, capital projects or donations.
80. Assets: Accounting for fixed assets and method of depreciation used
CITY RESPONSE:
Depreciation method is Half-year, straightline.
81. Assets: Current year revaluation of fixed assets if any
CITY RESPONSE:
N/A
82. Assets: Details of imported capital items and accounting for foreign exchange fluctuation
on restatement of liability for capital goods at balance sheet date.
CITY RESPONSE:
No foreign exchange.
83. Reports: List the various statutory reporting requirements
CITY RESPONSE:
CAFR – Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (GASB & GAAP requirements);
OMB-A133 Single Audit Report; Annual Operating & Strategic Budgets.
84. Reports: List all the MIS & Analytical reports being generated at the Group level,
Business unit level and for the various functions as identified above. In addition,
highlight the expectations from the new system in order to meet certain reporting and
analytical requirements not being met by the existing system but are desirable.
CITY RESPONSE:
Weekly and Monthly nVision reports run by department and posted to City’s
intranet through Portal. Monthly Revenue reports run by department and posted to
City’s intranet through Portal. Need to be able to budget and report more
programmatically in the future system rather than just by department.
85. Reports: Currently is there any data warehouse in place to meet reporting requirements?
If yes please give more details.
CITY RESPONSE:
No data warehouse.
Page 13 of 30
12/8/2009
86. Is Access via VPN/Remote desktop for remote access available?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
87. What is the estimated Award and start dates for this project?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City has a “Go live” date of September 8, 2010. Our desired goal is to have a
contract negotiated and presented to our City Council for formal approval by late
January.
88. Are there existing Business Process Test Scripts available?
CITY RESPONSE:
No
89. What functions within Hyperion does the City expect to use?
CITY RESPONSE:
Hyperion will be used for Budget.
90. Section 1.4.7: What is the size of current production database?
CITY RESPONSE:
21GB
91. Section 1.4.8: Is there custom data that needs to be converted?
CITY RESPONSE:
No
92. What is the expected start date for Phase II Upgrade?
CITY RESPONSE:
93. If Phase I core modules are upgraded to 9.0 does the City understand that they will also
need to be upgraded in Phase II in order to implement the 9.1 modules identified in Phase
II?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City is aware of the need to upgrade core modules in 9.0 and again in 9.1.
Decision will be based on proposed solution and recommendation of selected
vendor.
Page 14 of 30
12/8/2009
94. Hardware sizing is typically determined by the number of concurrent users and number
of environments. What is the number of concurrent users and number of concurrent
environments estimated for the upgraded system?
CITY RESPONSE:
Current estimate provides for approximately 200 system users within 26
departmental environments; estimate of concurrent users is not expected to exceed
100 employees.
95. Section 6.3.1: Is there any information related to the existing modification? For
example: total customized objects. Online (pages/app engine/CI etc), Reports (SQR,
crystal).
CITY RESPONSE:
96. Section 10.2.14: Are the interfaces noted in this section the total number of interfaces for
the application?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
97. Does the FSCM application integrate with any other application? (HRM)
CITY RESPONSE:
No
98. Section 4.2.3: Will the database upgrade and PeopleTools be part of the project or will
they be complete prior?
CITY RESPONSE:
They will be completed at the same time as part of the project. FSCM 8.4 does not
run on PT8.5 nor is it approved to run on Oracle 10g.
99. Is there any documentation available for the existing customizations, interfaces and
reports?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
100. Does the City currently use the Oracle User Productivity Kit? If so what version?
CITY RESPONSE:
No
101. Section 3.1.5: Enterprise Portal has already been upgraded to 9.0?
Page 15 of 30
12/8/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
No, it is currently on version 8.8. The City will be responsible for the Portal
upgrade.
102. Are there existing standards used by the client for following : Development
standards/template for preparing documents(e.g, functional doc template, technical doc
template, test plan template etc.)
CITY RESPONSE:
No
103. Is there any issues with the existing system? e.g hardware, software, space issue or
slowdowns etc.
CITY RESPONSE:
No
104. Is there any documentation available from the last upgrade.
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes but it will not be applicable since that upgrade was from 7.5 to 8.4
105. Any issues or "things to learn" from the last upgrade.
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes. Conversion to Ledger KK & Commitment Control.
106. Does the City plan on using the delivered PeopleSoft archiving process?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
107. Upon selection, will there be an opportunity for chosen bidders to negotiate mutually
agreeable terms and conditions with the County? If not, will all bidders be required to
conform to identical terms and conditions?
CITY RESPONSE:
Please refer to PART I; page 5 of 14; Item 19. EVALUATION PROCESS; 19.2.2
and PART II; page 6 of 14; Item 1. AGREEMENT; 1.2 of the specification.
108. Vendor Hosts the hardware/software: Does City expect shared hosting or dedicated
hosting model?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City will consider any alternatives or options that are proposed.
Page 16 of 30
12/8/2009
109. Vendor Hosts the hardware/software: Please indicate if City will extend their WAN
network to establish connectivity to Datacenter
CITY RESPONSE:
This will be a discussion item with selected vendor after award.
110. Vendor Hosts the hardware/software: What standard SLAs are used to monitor and
manage the environment?
CITY RESPONSE:
This will be a discussion item with selected vendor after award.
111. Vendor Hosts the hardware/software: Please provide End users details, like no of users,
location etc.
CITY RESPONSE:
Currently there are no more than 20 concurrent users. As we add more modules
this will grow, but in the future it is not expected to exceed 100 concurrent users all
located in Round Rock, Texas.
112. Vendor Hosts the hardware/software: Please provide the back-up/restore requirements
CITY RESPONSE:
We expect requirements to change pending solutions proposed in connection with
the upgrade. The City will consider any alternatives or options that are proposed.
113. Vendor Hosts the hardware/software: What is the frequency and type (full, incremental)
for backups?
CITY RESPONSE:
114. Vendor Hosts the hardware/software: Describe the secure media storage process
including the use of external service provider storage and frequency of off-site storage?
CITY RESPONSE:
115. Vendor Hosts the hardware/software: Describe the City's Disaster Recovery strategy
requirements?
CITY RESPONSE:
Page 17 of 30
12/8/2009
116. City hosts the hardware/software: Will city procure and install hardware's? Does it also
include installing Operating System.?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes for both questions.
117. Will Commitment Control be utilized, and if so which modules will utilize it?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes – Purchasing, Accounts Payable, General Ledger and E-Procurement.
118. Which modules will utilize data archiving?
CITY RESPONSE:
This will be a discussion item with selected vendor. Prior to the upgrade, we would
like to work with the selected vendor to identify any opportunities that we may have
to archive data using PeopleSoft Archive functionality into archive tables.
119. Will UPK be utilized for 9.0 upgrade work, and if so, will the focus be delta training or
full module training for new hires?
CITY RESPONSE:
Full module training, especially in the area when we add new functionality and
modules
120. What is the existing user community size for each module?
CITY RESPONSE:
AP: 5-6; GL: 15; Procurement: 7-8; AM: 3-4
121. Will any new group of the total 800+ employees be added as users with the upgrade?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
122. How many items are defined in the purchasing catalog and how many will be converted?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City does not currently utilize a purchasing catalog.
123. Will workflow be utilized and if so for which modules?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes; decisions will be based on proposed solution, implementation and Best
Practices identified by selected vendor.
Page 18 of 30
12/8/2009
124. Will a change to the existing chart of accounts structure be implemented or significant
changes to combination edits?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
125. How many trees are utilized and how many will be converted?
CITY RESPONSE:
Currently utilize approximately 10-15 trees to be converted.
126. Will any data cleanup be included as part of the upgrade?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes; decision will be based on proposed solution and recommendation of selected
vendor.
127. Any existing features not currently utilized known to be added in upgrade, such as bank
recon, workflow, summary ledger, etc?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes; please see Question #123.
128. Is the city using workflow currently?
CITY RESPONSE:
No
129. Will they be changing the set up for workflow in Phase I
CITY RESPONSE:
130. Page 11 sec 8.1 – Is the vendor responsible for all training and documentation?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes. We will incorporate train the trainer in some instances. That will evolve out of
partnership developed with the vendor and what works best. We realize there will
be some training that we need to do from a higher level to users in partnership.
131. Page 11 sec 8.1 – Are there existing training docs?
CITY RESPONSE:
Very limited (Assets).
Page 19 of 30
12/8/2009
132. Section 9.1.1.2 – says 7 IT users need training in all functions of software. Can you
clarify this? Is this just PeopleSoft or is Oracle Database, Unix included?
CITY RESPONSE:
PeopleSoft but not Unix. We run Oracle on Windows in a virtualized environment
133. Section 9.1.1.2 – Is this just on technical aspects, or functionality also?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes to both.
134. Is the city personnel responsible for the hardware configurations and loading the oracle
database?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City will be responsible for the hardware configurations and loading the Oracle
database with consideration for vendor recommendations. The time commitment
expectation will need to be included in the proposal.
135. What is the number of users for eProcurement?
CITY RESPONSE:
In current paper process, we have 65 departmental requestors, 113 departmental
signers/approvers, and 4 Purchasing approvers (2 with final signature authority).
136. What is the timeline (expected start date & end date) for Phase II?
CITY RESPONSE:
137. Does City want vendor to only conduct fit gap Analysis & provide the recommendation
for Phase II or complete implementation of Additional modules in Phase II also within
the scope of this RFP?
CITY RESPONSE:
Based on scope of work identified we did include time for a Fit/Gap analysis. Based
on our experience with PeopleSoft, we were hoping that the proposer would propose
whatever would be required for us to meet our needs going forward. In assessing
what we are looking for and in preparing your proposal, you are welcome to include
any options for pricing components or alternate options.
138. Is City looking for Fixed bid or Time & material for Phase I & Phase II?
CITY RESPONSE:
Page 20 of 30
12/8/2009
139. Please provide number of interfaces, customizations & reports requirement for additional
modules for phase II.
CITY RESPONSE:
Unknown at this time. Future decisions will be based on proposed solution,
identified best practices, and recommendation of selected vendor.
140. In section 1.4.7 it has been mentioned that City wants to archive data prior to upgrade to
reduce the size of the database. Please respond to following questions regarding this
requirement
140.1. Does city has any performance issues which call for reduction of database size?
CITY RESPONSE:
140.2. Please provide list of transactions & volume of transactions which needs to be
archived.
CITY RESPONSE:
140.3. Is archival of data from PeopleSoft standard tables or from Custom tables?
CITY RESPONSE:
140.4. What City wants to do with Archived data? Does City want to load the data in
some other Instance?
CITY RESPONSE:
140.5. Does City want to use the Archived data in future for any reporting?
CITY RESPONSE:
140.6. Does City have any Archived Instance where City wants to load the archived
Data?
CITY RESPONSE:
140.7. Does City want to archive data after upgrade (Data in PeopleSoft 9.0 format) or
prior upgrade (Data in PeopleSoft 8.4 format)?
Page 21 of 30
12/8/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
140.8. Please provide more details about the scope of Archival of data?
CITY RESPONSE:
141. Does City want vendor to provide the response for Vendor hosted options with Costing?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
142. We understand that City will have license of Software even for vendor hosted option.
Please confirm our understanding.
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
143. Please provide following custom components number with complexity

143.1. Customizations of Standard PeopleSoft functionalities
143.2. App Engine Interfaces
143.3. SQR Interfaces
143.4. nVision reports
143.5. Crystal reports
143.6. Workflows
CITY RESPONSE:
There is no customization for .1, .2 and .6 above and limited modifications to .3-.5
Please see response to Question #155 below for numbers for .4, .5, and .6 above.
144. What is the user base for Phase II?
CITY RESPONSE:
Current estimate would provide for approximately 200 users; however, the City
anticipates the user base could fluctuate substantially dependent on proposed
solution, identified best practices, and recommendation of selected vendor.
145. City wants to upgrade the database also to Oracle 10g during Phase I. Please Confirm
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
146. We understand that City wants to upgrade the People Tools to 8.5 during phase I? Please
Confirm
Page 22 of 30
12/8/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
147. Per Section 8.3 of RFP City wants post implementation support. Please respond to
following regarding this requirement
147.1. What is the duration of Post production support?
CITY RESPONSE:
Post support refers to after system acceptance of upgrade. User training is outlined
in RFP section 10.1.12.
147.2. How many resources City is looking for or Vendor needs to propose number of
resources for application support?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City has no expectations other than the expectation that the vendor will use
whatever resources they need to get the job done.
148. Please respond to following for Section 9.0 “Training”- RFP is open for this and also
have said to propose otherwise we will provide both options
148.1. Does City want Vendor to provide training to Key users and Key users will
provide train all other users?
CITY RESPONSE:
149. Per Section 10.1.7 “Process redesign” we understand that any Process redesign will be
part of future phases not part of Phase I & Phase II.
CITY RESPONSE:
The City’s goal is to establish partnership with the selected vendor in Phase I that
would result in working together to identify the Phase II sequence. A key result of
the established partnership would include identification of best practices,
comparison with current processes, and recommendation of improvements or
redesign where applicable.
150. It has been mentioned in Section 10.1.19 that all reports to be updated & modified.
Please clarify as why modifications to all reports are required. Does City means
modification to reports to ensure that they work in upgraded environment?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes, updated and modified to work in upgraded environment.
151. Is September 8th 2010 go live for Phase I is fixed date or vendor can propose go live for
phase I earlier than September 8th 2010?
Page 23 of 30
12/8/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
September 8, 2010 is the City’s desired Go Live date. Interested firms are welcome
to propose an earlier date for Phase I if they so choose.
152. We are going to provide the estimate for implementing all PeopleSoft modules given in
RFP for Phase II. Please let us know if it is OK; otherwise, provide list of modules which
we should consider for implementation estimate for Phase II.
CITY RESPONSE:
153. Are you using delivered Chart Fields or have you modified them?
CITY RESPONSE:
Delivered Chartfields
154. What Chart Fields are you using?
CITY RESPONSE:
Account; Fund Code; Department (Deptid); Program Code; Project.
155. Would you please fill out the below Customization Matrix? Estimates only
CUSTOMIZATION TYPE CUSTOM MODIFIED CLONED
MESSAGES
RECORDS
FIELDS
PAGES (PANELS)
PEOPLECODE
SQL OBJECTS
SQR/SQC PurchaseOrder.sqr Yes
APP ENGINE
QUERIES PRIVATE 125-130 Yes
(MOST ARE COPIES
OF PUBLIC QUERIES)
PUBLIC 350-400
CRYSTALS 75; AP Check Yes
NVISION 285 Yes
156. Of the Above SQR’s and Application Engines, how many are interfaces to external
systems and can you please give a description of the interface?
Page 24 of 30
12/8/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
None
157. Consultant work remotely on the project?
CITY RESPONSE:
Yes
158. Consultant required to have a security clearance?
CITY RESPONSE:
No
159. Is the PeopleSoft Application Highly customized?
CITY RESPONSE:
No. Limited customizations
160. Will the project winner upgrade the database from oracle 9i to 10 G?
CITY RESPONSE:
161. Will the project winner designs the PeopleSoft Architecture?
CITY RESPONSE:
vendor.
162. Is this a fix bid project?
CITY RESPONSE:
163. Who is doing the installation for FSCM demo?
CITY RESPONSE:
vendor.
164. Please list the number of custom reports and queries?
CITY RESPONSE:
Page 25 of 30
12/8/2009
165. What is the breakdown of public vs. private queries?
CITY RESPONSE:
166. Will City be responsible for retrofit of queries or will that be partner responsibility?
CITY RESPONSE:
Per response to Question #150, vendor will be responsible for making sure queries
are updated and working in upgraded environment.
167. You mention a number of inbound interfaces in the RFP, but are there any outbound
interfaces?
CITY RESPONSE:
No
168. Are you looking for a fixed fee price or T&M estimate?
CITY RESPONSE:
169. What was the duration and resources used on previous upgrade projects?
CITY RESPONSE:
Duration and resources have varied. Please see Attachment B of the RFP for
current staffing resources for the City.
170. Metrics
170.1. Total Spend
CITY RESPONSE:
Fiscal Year 2010 budgeted expenditures $135,433,711
170.2. # of requisitions per month
CITY RESPONSE:
See Question #170.3; all requisitions are converted to Purchase Orders.
170.3. # of POs per month
CITY RESPONSE:
Fiscal Year 2009 = 1,967 POs issued
170.4. # of vouchers / payments per month
Page 26 of 30
12/8/2009
CITY RESPONSE:
Fiscal Year 2009 = 12,039 vouchers & 8,210 payments
170.5. # of Assets
CITY RESPONSE:
13,007 Total 8,736 Active 4,271 Disposed
170.6. # of Journal entries per month
CITY RESPONSE:
Fiscal Year 2009 = 6,420
170.7. # of vendors
CITY RESPONSE:
Active = 19,175; Inactive = 5,624
171. Please advise on whether attending the Pre-Proposal conference call on 11/18 is a pre-
requisite to responding to RFP 10-003 for PeopleSoft Upgrade Services.
CITY RESPONSE:
The Pre-Proposal Conference Call was not a mandatory event. We have provided a
summary on the City website (www.roundrocktexas.gov/bids) of the Q&A content
for the benefit of the firms that were unable to attend yet still wish to propose on the
project.
172. Section 11.1.3 (Page 4) refers to experience with "Oracle Government Financials". Is this
term being used to refer to PeopleSoft Enterprise Financials in the Public Sector? If not,
can you please clarify the meaning of the term?
CITY RESPONSE:
173. In the Conference Call Summary, the City requests that pricing is included for Phase II
modules. Without the specific requirements, timeframes, or identification of exact
modules to be implemented, it is very hard to provide price estimates for these modules.
Any estimates would have limited accuracy and could vary widely based on findings
during Phase I. Is it acceptable to not include pricing for these Phase II modules, and only
include pricing for assessing these modules during Phase I?
CITY RESPONSE:
Please see Question #27. City will consider all relevant proposal options in
determining the best solution to meet our needs.
Page 27 of 30
12/8/2009
174. How much customization has been made to the current Production version? (% of the
customizations with in the PeopleSoft FSCM8.4) Compare between FSCM8.4
production and FSCM8.4, If the % is high , can we be provided the number of
customizations by object type?
CITY RESPONSE:
See Questions #143 & #155.
175. Will the project contractor designs the PeopleSoft Architecture
CITY RESPONSE:
176. Number of named users in the database broken out by heavy users, occasional users and
infrequent users?
CITY RESPONSE:
177. Will the contractor system administrator of the upgrade project have full rights
administration over the development and new production environments?
CITY RESPONSE:
Decision will be based on the proposed solution and recommendation of the selected
vendor.
178. Will a Performance Bond be required?
CITY RESPONSE:
No
179. Does the contractor require US Citizenship?
CITY RESPONSE:
No
180. Does the contractor require security clearance?
CITY RESPONSE:
181. Can the contractor work remotely on the project? (VPN or other RSA access)
CITY RESPONSE:
Page 28 of 30
12/8/2009
182. Will they have dedicated resources allocated to the effort and if so who, skill set and
tenure w/ organization?
CITY RESPONSE:
Please see Attachment B to the specifications, City Staffing Matrix.
183. How many City of Round Rock resources will be allocated for User Acceptance Testing?
CITY RESPONSE:
Based on vendor proposals; please see Attachment B, City Staffing Matrix/
184. When is the anticipated award date?
CITY RESPONSE:
185. When is the anticipated Project start date?
CITY RESPONSE:
186. Does the Go-Live date of September 8, 2010 have a fiscal significance?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City will begin the 2010-2011 fiscal year on October 1, 2010; our desire is to
have implementation and testing completed and a fully functional system in place
for the 2010-2011 fiscal year.
187. If September 8, 2010 is delayed, what is the next opportunity for the Go-Live date?
October 8, 2010?
CITY RESPONSE:
Adherence to the Go Live target date is critical for the success of the upgrade; no
alternate date has been considered.
188. What is the be clear criteria to go-live example 1% error failure during testing
CITY RESPONSE:
Depending on what specific core functionality is affected.
189. Will there be new requirements introduced with the upgrade? Or, will new requirements
be on hold until the upgrade has been stabilized?
CITY RESPONSE:
The City expects new requirements with the upgrade. There is no desire to place
those requirements on hold until post-upgrade.
Page 29 of 30
12/8/2009
190. Does City of Round Rock have a formalized requirements process? If so, can the City of
Round Rock share them?
CITY RESPONSE:
No
191. Is there Information Assurance group working on project to determine if security are do
be install by contractor
CITY RESPONSE:
No
192. Is this contract a fix bid project?
CITY RESPONSE:
193. Will the payments be tied to a milestone, such as a Monthly Status Report? The
assumption is that the status report is on schedule according to the project plan.
CITY RESPONSE:
Payment terms will be negotiated with the selected vendor at the time of contract.
194. Will there be clear objective criteria established to define the completion of Phase I?
CITY RESPONSE:
Decision will be based on proposed solution.
195. If the project delays, for reasons outside the control of contractor, how does the City of
Round Rock anticipate covering for the cost overruns of the contractor?
CITY RESPONSE:
Based on contract terms.
Page 30 of 30

163641512200910-003 Peoplesoft Upgrade Services

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

163641512200910-003 Peoplesoft Upgrade Services

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RFP 10-003

Specification No. 09-918-71

City of Round Rock

8. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE CALL:

9. PROPOSAL DUE DATE:

11. PROPOSER PROFILE

13. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL:

14. COST PROPOSAL:

15. ASSURANCES, ERRORS, AND OMISSIONS:

16. CONFIDENTIALITY OF PROPOSAL CONTENT:

17. CLARIFICATION OF PROPOSALS:

19. EVALUATION PROCESS:

8. RIGHT TO REPRODUCE DOCUMENTATION AND OTHER INFORMATION:

6. PLANNING AND FIT/GAP ACTIVITIES:

10. PROJECT ASSUMPTIONS:

10.1.21.1. Technical Errors;

3. PROMPT PAYMENT POLICY:

City of Round Rock

City Staffing Matrix

Information Technology Department

10-003 PeopleSoft Upgrade Services

City Response to Submitted Questions

1. Section II.I.3 references experience with Oracle Government Financials, which is a

4. Customizations: No of Reports and types

7. Customizations: Customizations to standard functionality

9. Customizations: Any custom bolt on (Custom Module)

10. Customizations: Any other customizations

11. Unicode/Languages: Is the current installation Unicode compliant?

16. Standby Database: Where is your standby database located?

19. Documentation: If implementation, customization documents for current version

23. General: Data conversion: can we propose offshore onsite model?

24. General: What is pricing model – fixed bid or T&M

26. General: When second Phase is expected to start and end?

30. Organization Structure: No. of Legal Entities/Operating units/regions/departments etc

32. e-Procurement: What is current Procurement System?

34. e-Procurement: Inventory Management Methodology being currently followed

37. e-Procurement: Explain the Material Flow vis-à-vis:

38. e-Procurement: Explain the method for tracking the items/materials.

45. e-Procurement: Structure of the Procurement/commercial division with roles and

48. e-Procurement: Procurement Process Flow from initiating a Requisition to raising of

55. e-Procurement: Various currencies used while raising POs.

56. e-Procurement: Treatment of foreign exchange fluctuation on imports in the books of

57. e-Procurement: Volumes of Transactions (Number of Requisitions, Request for

61. Vendor Management: Elaborate on Vendor Development and Vendor rating.

62. General Ledger: Elaborate the broad accounting policies

63. General Ledger: Describe the Existing Chart of Accounts structure

65. General Ledger: Financial reporting structure of the Organization

81. Assets: Current year revaluation of fixed assets if any

83. Reports: List the various statutory reporting requirements

86. Is Access via VPN/Remote desktop for remote access available?

88. Are there existing Business Process Test Scripts available?

90. Section 1.4.7: What is the size of current production database?

91. Section 1.4.8: Is there custom data that needs to be converted?

92. What is the expected start date for Phase II Upgrade?

104. Is there any documentation available from the last upgrade.

105. Any issues or "things to learn" from the last upgrade.

118. Which modules will utilize data archiving?

123. Will workflow be utilized and if so for which modules?

126. Will any data cleanup be included as part of the upgrade?

128. Is the city using workflow currently?

129. Will they be changing the set up for workflow in Phase I

131. Page 11 sec 8.1 – Are there existing training docs?

133. Section 9.1.1.2 – Is this just on technical aspects, or functionality also?