question # - seattle.gov home · web viewthe attached zip file contains an esri shapefile (7 files)...

City of Seattle Request for Proposal SFD# 2687Addendum

Updated As of 02/11/11

The following is additional information regarding Request for Proposal #SFD 2687, titled Basic Life Support (BLS) Ambulance Services released on 12/8/10. The due date and time for responses is updated to 3/15/11@ 4:00PM (Pacific). This addendum includes questions from prospective proposers and the City’s answers, and revisions to the RFP. This addendum is hereby made part of the RFP and therefore, the information contained herein shall be taken into consideration when preparing and submitting a proposal.

Item #

Date Received

Date Answered

Vendor’s Question City’s Answer ITB/RFP Revisions

1 01/07/11 The RFP due date is updated to:March 1, 2011 @ 4:00 PM (Pacific)The cut off for questions is updated to:January 14, 2011

1A 12/20/10 12/22/10 Scope of Services section 3.3.3, Patch through standard does not mention 90% as is mentioned in sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2?

Scope of Work section 3.3.3 - Replace the first sentence with the following language:The Contractor shall respond to ninety percent (90%) of all patch-through requests which have not been exempted from such time performance standards within 19:59 minutes.

2 12/20/10 12/22/10 Scope of Work section 12 - Replace the first sentence with the following language:The Contractor may apply for and the City may grant exemptions to liquidated damages resulting from situations beyond the Contractor's control that cause unavoidable delay or no response.

3 12/20/10 01/07/11 On page 16 of the RFP, under the heading "Substantially Equivalent Scores", will the criteria for selecting the provider that "best meets the City needs" be made public? If so, can we obtain a copy of these criteria?

We do not have any other written criteria.

of 27



4 12/20/10 01/07/11 What date does the new contract begin? There is no indication in the RFP as to the start date of the new contract.

The desired start date is June 1, 2011.

5 12/20/10 01/07/11 We would like a year’s worth of data for all EMS incidents responded to within the City of Seattle. The specific data fields requested include, but are not limited to:

The attached addresses the request for SFD transport data. The data is for Jan 1 thru Dec 26, 2010 which provides the most current history.

Information includes: lat/long for the destination (hospital). It will be easier to do modeling with the lat/long data for the destination as well as having the lat/long data for the incident. So, the City is providing the lat/long data for both.

6 12/20/10 01/07/11 We request that all GIS data be provided in an ESRI file format (also known as shape files) with all files necessary for each layer. The specific shape files requested include:

Most current City of Seattle street network

City parcel layer SFD District layer SFD Battalion layer City Council District layer

Please see the directions below to access the requested information.

7 12/20/10 01/07/11 Provide any State Plane conversions if The attached ZIP file contains an ESRI

of 27



necessary to convert latitudes and longitudes of CAD incident data.

shapefile (7 files) representing geocoded 2010 SFD incidents. The data has been projected in North American Datum 1983, Washington North State Plane, units US feet in compliance with City of Seattle, King County and State of Washington GIS data sharing standards.

8 12/20/10 01/07/11 In order to provide a detailed and well constructed response to the RFP, we have submitted a request for additional GIS and CAD data from the City. The information requested will assist us in compiling a proposal that meets the needs of both the City and the citizens. As such, we would like to request a six (6) week extension from the date that the requested GIS / CAD information is made available to all potential bidders.

See #1 above.

9 12/22/10 01/07/11 Will the City require a Letter of Credit as was required in the last contract?

There is no requirement for a Letter of Credit in the RFP.

10 12/22/10 02/01/11 Ref RFP page 5: Communications with the CityUnless authorized by the RFP Coordinator, no other City official or City employee is empowered to speak for the City with respect to this RFP. Any Proposer seeking to obtain information, clarification, or interpretations from any other City

The statement first ensures that the bidder does not rely upon information received in other forums which may contradict the official RFP package. Secondly, the statement reminds interested bidders that contacts with City employees must be reasonable and appropriate in the opinion of the RFP Coordinator.

of 27



official or City employee (other than the RFP Coordinator) is advised that such material is used at the Proposer’s own risk. The City will not be bound by any such information, clarification, or interpretation.

Following the Proposal submittal deadline, Proposers shall continue to direct all communications to the City RFP Coordinator. The RFP Coordinator will send out information to responding companies as decisions are concluded.

Contact by a proposer regarding this RFP with a City employee other than the RFP Coordinator or an individual specifically approved by the RFP Coordinator in writing, may be grounds for rejection of the proposer’s proposal.

The first highlighted section, while stating the City will not be bound by anything said, does not specifically exclude asking questions of other City employees or officials without authorization.

The second highlighted section states a proposer’s proposal “may” be rejected if there is unauthorized contact with a City employee. There is no mention of City officials.

Is it the intent of these 3 paragraphs to prohibit contact (meaning asking questions, lobbying, or other contact such as

of 27



email or other social media, intended to further the proposer’s effort to prevail during the RFP process) with any and all City employees and/or officials not preauthorized, in writing, by the RFP Coordinator by the proposer or their consultants?

11 12/30/10 01/07/11 The RFP requires that the proposals be submitted to the City of Seattle on or before February 7, 2011. This time line is extremely short and will not allow sufficient time for a detailed evaluation of the needs of the system and preparation of a comprehensive proposal. Most jurisdictions allow a minimum of 90-day from the date the questions are due and we would ask that the submission deadline be extended to April 2011.

See #1 above.

12 12/30/10 01/07/11 Section 2.2.1 SFD will provide the rapid initial response to all requests for emergency medical assistance within the City. Except in limited circumstances, the Contractor shall not provide rapid initial response or ALS to medical emergencies within the City. We would be designing a BLS-only

system under the requirements of the RFP. What 'limited circumstances' are anticipated that would require contractor to provide ALS response,

The RFP is for BLS Ambulance Services. “Limited Circumstances” would be only under catastrophic events/circumstances and only if the contractor had capacity to provide ALS service.

of 27



and is the Contractor required to provide ALS capability specifically for these 'limited circumstances?'

13 12/30/10 01/07/11 Section 2.2.4 The Contractor will record and routinely review with SFD all direct requests from medical providers to transport critical but stable patients between medical facilities for the purposes of assessing which were subsequently picked up by SFD. The Contractor shall refer to SFD all requests for inter-hospital transportation involving critically ill but unstable patients that it cannot adequately handle medically. Is the Contractor allowed to

contract with hospitals to provide ALS transport services? It would seem that 'critical but stable patients' would require an ALS crew; doesn't this then require SFD to perform the transport?

Yes, the contractor is allowed to contract with hospitals to provide inter- facility ALS transport services to critical but stable patients. No, there is no requirement for SFD to provide transport for critical but stable ALS patients.

14 12/30/10 01/07/11 2.2.8 In the event that a BLS transport being handled by the Contractor becomes an emergency requiring the services of an ALS technician, the Contractor shall immediately request the services of SFD.1. Depending on remaining transport time to a hospital, it would seem counterproductive for the Contractor's ambulance to wait for the SFD ALS crew to arrive rather than continue transporting to the hospital.

1. The contractor will call SFD and SFD will decide on a case by case basis.

of 27



2. Is that the reason for the exemption from Code Red transport penalty detailed in 2.2.7?3. Does the Contractor have any recourse if it is determined that ALS patients are being deferred to Contractor's crews?It is possible under the proposed system that an ALS patient is 'turfed' incorrectly to a BLS contractor ambulance. Since one of the bases for determining cost/profit for this system is the ability to use non-paramedics as staff, that could result in an inappropriate level of care. If that were to happen, or if a presumed BLS patient was assessed incorrectly by the ALS SFD crew, the contract requires that SFD be notified to respond another SFD ambulance which could incur reporting and/or fines for Contractor.

So, if it is determined that SFD crews had 'turfed' an inappropriate patient, does the Contractor have any recourse or relief from penalty?

2. Yes, Code Red transport is not appropriate for BLS transport.

3. The contractor will call SFD if they have a patient requiring an ALS transport.

There are no liquidated damages for this type of occurrence. Nor does it imply that the contractor needs to provide Paramedics.

15 12/30/10 01/07/11 2.3 Patient Care Performance Standards Monitoring - This section details some specific forms including "AMA Summary Audits." Since the Contractor is by

definition the second unit in, does SFD not handle patient refusals? If not, this would shift a significant liability burden to the Contractor.

Yes, patient refusals are handled by SFD unless the patient refuses transport after being handed off to the contractor for transport.

of 27



16 12/30/10 01/07/11 Page 1 of the sample contract states that "SFD may refer patient transfers to other ambulance companies for a variety of reasons including but not limited to: where the patient has requested transfer by another ambulance company. How often does this happen?

This happens rarely to never.

17 12/30/10 01/07/11

02/01/11

Appendix "C" shows the total emergency response totals for the period of 2005-2009 as well as a percentage of change for the same time period. Will the City provide a list of actual

transports provided by the BLS contractor during this same time period?

Will the City provide a current staffing schedule (including shift configuration) and system status plan currently employed by the incumbent contractor.

Here are the AMR Transports by year.

YR AMR2005 27,9722006 28,8212007 29,2612008 29,7082009 29,275

This is the only information we have regarding the deployment plan.

18 12/30/10 01/07/11 The RFP clearly identifies the reasons that Liquidated Damages may be assessed. Will the City provide an accounting

of the Liquidated Damages paid by the incumbent provider for the last

Yes, please see the embedded report below.

of 27



three years?

19 12/30/10 01/07/11 Section 11.2.1.4 Contractor Payments to the City states that "The payment amount shall be adjusted annually for inflation." What indicators will be used to

determine the percentage of increase?

What are the historical amounts paid by the incumbent provider over the past five (5) years?

It is based on the CPI for Seattle – Tacoma - Bremerton WA

See our response #18 above.

20 01/07/11 02/01/11 RFP p. 4 Solicitation Objectives, last bullet pointWhat specific types of cost sharing of EMS resources is the City referring to?

The contractor’s regular monthly payment covers the contractor’s share of the cost sharing. Specific types of cost sharing are equipment for dispatch, communication hardware and software, and supervision.

21 01/07/11 02/01/11 RFP p. 15 Evaluation ProcessWho will make up the evaluation team? Or, from which city departments will team members be chosen?

The evaluation team will be made up of Fire Department staff.

22 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services p. 2, Patient Care Performance 2.1 Standards The text lists multiple documents for care guidelines but revisions are limited to one document (“…as well as revisions to it [emphasis added] in the future.”) Please specify which document will be subject to this requirement.

Scope of Services section 2.1 is replaced with the following language:2.1 Standards: The Contractor shall continuously meet or exceed the patient care performance standards set forth in State law, Seattle and King County Patient Care Protocols for Basic Life Support, and SFD Operating Guideline 5001: Aid and Medic Response (Appendices A & D) as well

of 27



as any revisions. Additionally the Contractor shall have its own medical direction and performance review programs.

23 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services p. 2, Patient Care Performance, 2.2 Transport Protocols, 2.2.1Please provide an example list of the types of limited circumstances in which the contractor would perform initial response and/or ALS services. Also, what rules would apply to these kinds of situations?

See responses #12 & #13. The contract rules and standards would not change.

24 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services p. 2, Patient Care Performance, 2.2 Transport Protocols, 2.2.3 (should be2.2.2)

Please elaborate on the phrase “when appropriate” in the first sentence. Also, if patients are not in life-threatening or potentially life-threatening situations, is the mode of transportation and hospital destination decision left up to the contractor?

Yes, you are correct there are two sections marked 2.2.3 see our revision.

The ranking SFD official will determine “when appropriate” including but not limited to patient condition, mode of transportation, hospital to be used and availability of SFD resources.

Revise Scope of Services section the first 2.2.3 to section 2.2.2 which reads as follows:

2.2.2 When the Contractor arrives at an incident scene in response to a SFD request, the Contractor’s personnel shall report to the ranking SFD official or his or her designee in charge of the emergency who shall, when appropriate, designate the mode of transportation and the hospital to be utilized. Patients in a life-threatening or potentially life-threatening condition shall be transported to area hospitals as directed by SFD.

25 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services pp. 2-3, Patient Care Performance, 2.2 Transport Protocols 2.2.31. What is included in the term “medical emergency?”2. Is it the clinical definition, or is the

1. “Medical emergency” is any first response for medical assistance. Also see response #13.

of 27



city referring to any request for any type of medical assistance and/or transportation?Medical emergency would be any request for service with an underlying medical condition that results in the activation of 911 or a medical intervention. Requests for assistance back into bed, or assistance getting residents up or down stairs with no underlying medical need would be an assist call and not a medical emergency.

2. No, it is not the clinical definition of medical emergency.

26 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services p. 3, Patient Care Performance, 2.2 Transport Protocols 2.2.4Please clarify what criteria would determine the contractor’s inability to “adequately handle medically” patients.

“Adequately handle medically” is based on the best judgment of the responders transporting the patient.

The question cites the section that deals with requests from citizens (not facilities). Our expectation is that if someone calls the contractor with a medical request (ALS or BLS as opposed to ‘assist’) it would be transferred to our FAC without delay. (Our FAC may triage the call to be an SFD response or may choose to transfer it back as a patch-through.)

27 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services p. 3, Patient Care Performance, 2.2 Transport Protocols 2.2.6

Does this pertain only to instances when there is no initial SFD response, or does it apply to all responses?

It applies to all SFD responses.

of 27



28 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services p. 3, Patient Care Performance, 2.2 Transport Protocols 2.2.71. Once SFD is notified, are there guidelines the contractor would follow in this situation (e.g. continue to the hospital if within xxx blocks; stop and wait for SFD response; divert to a closer facility; etc)? 2. Also, If an upgrade from code yellow to code red is indicated and allowed due to deteriorating condition of the patient, please clarify why there would be liquidated damages in this type of situation.

1 & 2. See answer #14.

29 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services p. 3, Patient Care Performance, 2.2 Transport Protocols 2.2.81. Once SFD is notified, are there guidelines the contractor would follow in this situation (e.g. continue to the hospital if within xxx blocks; stop and wait for SFD response; divert to a closer facility; etc)?

2. What specific emergencies require “the services of an ALS technician”?

1. See answer #13

2. See appendix A, Seattle King County Protocols section BLS and ALS indicators.

30 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services p. 3, Patient Care Below is a non populated copy of the

of 27



Performance, 2.3 Patient Care Performance Standards MonitoringWhat information is required for the monthly report summarizing patient care performance?

current data points supplied monthly. This is a baseline report, but may not reflect all information needed.

31 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, pp. 4-5 Response Time Performance, 3.2 & 3.3

Please provide examples of exemptions to the response time requirements that the City would likely acknowledge.

See Scope of Services page 18 of 20 Section 12.

32 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, pp. 4-5 Response Time Performance, 3.2.3 & 3.3.3Are patch-through calls Code Red or Code Yellow?

All patch-through calls are either code red or code yellow as determined by the contractor. By definition SFD has not triaged the call and the contractor’s dispatch is the deciding factor.

33 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, pp. 4-5 Response Time Performance, 3Is there a response level that is established when manmade threats and/or events are affecting or may affect response times?

Level 1 is indicated for when no extreme weather, man-made threats or natural disasters are active. Level 2 is indicated during times when severe weather or natural conditions impeded response times. Level 3 is indicated if the provider

See Scope of Services 3.3 Level 2 page 5: “If there is a circumstance which effects service delivery (response times) in the entire city – like weather or earthquake – then the Fire Chief may commence Level 2 Operations. This other circumstance may include man-made threats or events. The operative part is that the circumstances in the entire city are such that response times might be affected, not whether the circumstances are man-made or not. If no change of operational level is made,

of 27



reassigned dedicated resources outside the contract and thus negatively affects response times.

There is no indication of a Level which deals with man-made threats or events that might impact response times. For example, a bomb threat that requires the provider to dedicate 3-4 ambulances to a staging area inside the City would impede the ability of the contractor to meet response times of other incidents.

then the Contractor may reasonably apply for exemptions to the response time performance standards as outlined (for Level 1 Operations).

34 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, pp. 4-5 Response Time Performance, 31. How will the contractor be notified of changes in the operational performance level requirements? (e.g. change from Level 1 to Level 2, etc). 2. Are the response time definitions that are being presented for the contractor the same as those used by SFD? (i.e. Does “response time” include or exclude the time it takes for a crew to get ready to respond – to get on the apparatus?)

1. Notification will be made by SFD in the most immediate way.

2. Yes, response time includes turn out time.

35 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 5, Response Time Performance, 3.4This section seems to allow an exception to the first paragraph of Section 4. Is this action subject to 8.1 (SFD Approval), or is it solely up to the contractor’s discretion?

Yes, this action is subject to 8.1 SFD approval.

36 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 6, Response The response time for both inquiries Replace Scope of Services paragraph

of 27



Time Performance, 3.8 Inquires and ComplaintsPlease provide parameters for the term “prompt” used in the first sentence with respect to inquiries. A 15-day time frame is established elsewhere in the document for handling complaints, but a specific timeline for inquires is not addressed.

and complaints is 15 days. 3.8 with the following language:

The Contractor shall provide prompt written responses and follow-up to inquiries and complaints within 15 business days. Such responses shall be subject to the limitations imposed by patient confidentiality restrictions. Contractor shall, on a monthly basis, submit to SFD a list of all complaints received and their respective dispositions. Copies of such complaints will be made available to the City upon request. Any complaint received by the City shall be forwarded to the Contractor for action and the Contractor shall forward the disposition of the complaint to the City within fifteen business days of receipt.

37 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 7, Factors of Production, 4“All equipment, supplies, facilities, locally assigned personnel, and other production factors utilized by the Contractor in performing the services under the Agreement resulting from this solicitation, whether furnished by the City or not, shall be devoted to the services under the Agreement. Does this mean that all Contractor resources used to service this agreement must be devoted exclusively to the City contract and not used in any other capacity?

No, the contract resources do not have to be “exclusively” devoted to the City contract. Use of contractor resources should not detract from the contractors obligations to the City.

38 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 7 Factors of No, it is not restricted to

of 27



Production, 4.3 Dispatch and Communications, 4.3.1

Does the phrase “…SFD–to–Contractor communication system” mean that radio traffic is restricted to communication initiated by the SFD?

communication initiated by SFD.

39 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 7 Factors of Production, 4.3 Dispatch and Communications, 4.3.2

Please confirm that this section refers to the contractor’s system, not the City of Seattle system.

Yes we confirm.

40 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 8 Factors of Production, 4.3 Dispatch & Communications, 4.3.3.6

Is this a statement of the purpose/goal of the technology, or is it meant to be a performance-level requirement?

It is meant to be performance level requirement. See Scope of Services paragraph 4.3.3 page 7.

41 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 8 Dispatch & Communications, 5.2 Cooperation in Upgrading the City’s System

Is the City currently considering and/or developing upgrade strategies and/or options? If so, please provide details.

The City will make two version upgrades to its Fire CAD system in 2011 (from the current 4.4.6 to 4.5 then 4.5.x or 4.6). Also, the City will be upgrading the CAD database from SQL 2005 to 2008 when SFD upgrades to 4.5.x or 4.6. These upgrades may require modifications, expected to be minor, to a CAD-to-CAD interface. (Typically there will be one version upgrade per year of the CAD application software.)

of 27



42 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 9 Ambulance Vehicles, 6.3 Minimum Inventory of VehiclesAt the end of the first sentence, what is meant by the phrase “…peak hour coverage requirements in the region”? (e.g., all contractor resources, all EMS agency resources, contract specific resources, etc).

Peak hour coverage is that time each day in which the highest volumes of calls are received.Peak hour coverage pertains to the contractor’s resource and personnel scheduling per their own submitted coverage and system management plan.

Replace Scope of Services paragraph 6.3 with the following language:

6.3 Minimum Inventory of Vehicles: The Contractor shall furnish a sufficient number of ambulances equipped for emergency and non-emergency BLS ambulance services to maintain a surplus of ambulances in excess of peak hour coverage requirements in the City. The Contractor shall maintain a minimum vehicle inventory and on-board equipment equal to 125% of peak ambulance coverage.

43 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 10 Ambulance Vehicles, 6.10 Vehicle Collision Reporting

Please provide a definition for the word “collisions” (i.e., any vehicle/vehicle contact, vehicle/vehicle contact with more than $500 damage, vehicle/solid object contact, etc).

All collisions.

Defined as a crash when two or more things hit each other.

44 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 10-11, Contractor’s Personnel, 7.2 Driver Training & Area Knowledge

1. With specific regard to area knowledge, does the City have a required method for evaluating this body of information?2. If not, how will the city confirm that this requirement is satisfied?

1. No

2. Through contract performance.

of 27



45 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 12, Additional Contractor Responsibilities, 8.1 Outside WorkCan this other work be done with resources intended for use in the SFD contract?

Yes, see answer #37

46 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 12, Additional Contractor Responsibilities, 8.2 Major Emergency and Disaster Response

Is the recall plan subject to approval by the City, and/or is it required to be submitted to the City?

The recall plan is not subject to approval, but must be submitted to SFD.

47 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 13, Additional Contractor Responsibilities, 8.5 Mutual AidWould mutual aid be allowed in calculating the 125% rule in Section 6.4?

No

48 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 13, Section 10 Inspections, third paragraph

Please more clearly define “reasonable notification.”

“Reasonable notification” depends on the reason for the notification.

49 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 14, Finance, 11.2.1.Monthly Payment, 11.2.1.4

What index will be used to calculate the annual adjustment? The Consumer Price Index? All Medical CPI?

See response #19

of 27



50 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 15, Finance, 11.3 Compensation and Rates, 11.3.1 CompensationIs this intended to prevent or restrict the contractor from using operating capital from elsewhere in the company to supplement local budget times of low revenue flow?

No.

51 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 15, Finance, 11.3 Compensation and Rates, 11.3.2 Rates

1. What if a patient specifically requests an itemized bill? 2. And in paragraph two, can rates for non-contract BLS transport be higher than the contract price?

1. You should provide an itemized bill as requested.

2. The rates only apply only to this contract.

52 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 15, Finance, subsection 11.3.2 RatesParagraph 2 states: “Except as required by law, the Contractor shall charge all customers resulting from the scope of this Agreement the rates not to exceed those proposed on Fee Proposal Form. Except as required by law or as approved by the City, the Contractor shall charge all customers for BLS transports resulting outside the scope of this Agreement and occurring within the City limits rates no less than the rates proposed on Fee Proposal Form.” Does this apply to existing governmental contracts? If so, is there a timeframe that will be allowed for the Contractor to bring rate structures into compliance if necessary?

The restriction does not apply to any other contracts.

Scope of Services section 11.3.2 second paragraph is replaced with the following language:

Except as required by law, the Contractor shall charge customers resulting from the scope of this Agreement the rates not to exceed those proposed on Fee Proposal Form. Except as required by law or as approved by the City, the Contractor shall charge all customers for BLS transports resulting outside the scope of this Agreement and occurring within the City limits rates no less than the rates proposed on Fee Proposal form.This restriction does not apply to any other contracts.

of 27



53 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 17, Liquidated Damages, 11.4.11 Liquidated Damages for Mechanical Failure

There is a very wide range of failures that could occur. Does this apply to any type of mechanical failure of equipment and/or apparatus during transport, or only those that directly affect transport time and/or patient care? (e.g., the passenger side windshield wiper brakes, the apparatus will not start, the light dimmer switch in the patient compartment will not operate, the stretcher falls with the patient on it etc).

This is referring to any breakdown that affects the contractor’s ability to complete transport in a safe, reasonable and timely manner.

54 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, p. 18, Liquidated Damages Exemptions 12.6 Cancelled RequestWhat requirement has the contractor failed to meet in this situation that would result in liquidated damages? If there is none, then why would an exemption be necessary?

Anytime the contractor fails to meet the performance standards the contractor is subject to liquidated damages.The request for exemption would be based on being cancelled before arrival on scene for reasons other than exceeding the maximum response time.

55 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, Appendix C, Historical Call Data

Has the City studied the cause of the reduction in ALS and BLS alarms from 2008 to 2009? If, so, what were the results?

Yes, the City has studied the reduction in alarms but the results were inconclusive.

of 27



56 01/07/11 02/01/11 Scope of Services, Appendix E, CAD InterfaceA. Please provide a current drawing of the CAD system, hardware and interfaces in place relevant to the CAD Interface Requirements.

B. 3. “Any City labor costs for installation, testing, or configuration of any software, hardware or network components needed for the interface.”What is the Hourly rate or dollar amount used to estimate amount due to City for testing and troubleshooting interface?

C. Will the City, prior to the proposal deadline, make available any information that will allow a proposer to make a reasonable estimate of the cost and time involved in providing the required security measures?

A.

B. Department of Information Technology (DoIT) hourly rate for networking and data center services is $120. Hourly rate for Seattle Fire Department (SFD) application, database, network and data center services is $90. The number of hours required by either DoIT or SFD will depend on the contractor’s CAD system and what will be required to make the interface meet the specifications in Appendix E

C. At a minimum the proposer will need to provide anti-virus software on the interface server and are required to purchase and pay for installation of a firewall with intrusion prevention, VPN/IPSec and other features (e. g., CISCO ASA 500 series of firewalls).

57 01/07/11 02/01/11 Proposal Questionnaire, p. 4, 6.A. Regulatory Agency Investigations

“Detail any and all regulatory agency (local, state, federal) investigations, findings, actions, complaints and their respective resolutions within the last five years. Include your firm's expertise

Yes, we are asking for the entire corporation or parent company.

of 27



in billing Medicare Part B and other third party payers for ambulance services. Summarize resolutions of any Medicare and/or Medicaid inquiries, audits, sanctions, or other notice of violations.” Is the City asking for this information related to the entire corporation or parent company, or specifically related to the "bidding" entity?

58 01/07/11 02/01/11 Proposal Questionnaire, p. 7, 9.F.2

AVL-Tech information is not included in Appendix E. Will the City provide additional requirements, or is the Tri-Tech and VisiCad data all that will be provided?

AVL-Tech technology is no longer used and all requirements for the interface are described in Appendix E. TriTech and VisCad data are all that will be provided.

Proposer Questionnaire Section 9 F, page 7 of 10 is replaced with the following language:

F. SFD’s CAD Connection Requirements: Provide information that:

1. Your firm has and will maintain a CAD System that tracks location and status of all of your firm's available ambulance units.

2. Your firm will install, test, debug and maintain a connection between your firm's CAD system and SFD's CAD server as required in Appendix E.

59 01/07/11 02/01/11 Proposal Questionnaire, Section 10 A. Response Time Performance ReportIs the City only requesting an example of what this report will look like? Only the incumbent provider can provide a sample of their response time performance Citywide and within each five battalions.

We only want a sample report. Replace Proposal Questionnaire, Section 10 A. with the following language: Response Time Performance Report: Provide a sample of the monthly report detailing your firm's response time performance.

60 01/07/11 02/01/11 Contract Sample We are referencing SMC 20.60.106.

of 27



The sample contract states “WHEREAS, Contractor was selected as a result of a Request for Proposal process initiated _______20____ as required by Seattle Municipal Code”. Please more specifically identify which section of the SMC is being referenced here.

61 01/07/11 02/01/11 Contract Sample, Section 1.0 Definitions“Request Received”—This definition was also included in the existing contract with the current provider, but was amended to read: “ Request Received’ means the point in time when the incident information enters the waiting incidents queue of the contractor’s dispatch system.” Why was the definition change made, and will the amended definition be an acceptable method of operation?

The amended definition in the existing contract 0000001029 is acceptable to the City however the new definition is more consistent and predicable since CAD systems automatically capture the date/time when an incident enters the queue and is a good measure of when the ambulance company receives the incident from the City. This will be even more consistent and accurate when the CAD-to-CAD interface is implemented.

62 01/07/11 02/01/11 Several sections in the RFP (i.e. Proposal Questionnaire, Sections 1.C, 6.A and 6.B) require information about firm’s contract, litigation and regulatory matters.

We understand that those sections are only seeking disclosure of matters related to bidder’s local operations within the State of Washington and not matters related to bidder’s operations in other states where bidder conducts business (i.e. Florida, New York, etc.).

No, the requested information is not limited to the contractor’s operations in Washington. It includes contractor operations in all states where you operate.

of 27



Please confirm that our understanding is correct.

63 01/07/11 02/01/11 Many of the questions in the Proposal Questionnaire refer to “firm.” We understand the term “firm” to mean only the bidding entity. Please confirm that our understanding is correct.

See response #57

64 01/11/11 02/01/11 On the addendum to the RFP published on 1/7/11, item #17 references annual call volume for AMR for several years. The volume ranges from 23,000 to almost 25,000 calls annually. However, in the Appendix C of the RFP, there is reference to call volume being 44,373 annually. Can you provide information as to which volume is the correct volume for AMR? In addition, can you advise what constitutes the variance between the figures?

The response to Item #17 is the total BLS transports for SFD. Appendix C is providing total call volume received by SFD. Please note that not all calls become transports.

65 01/11/11 02/01/11 In the most recent Addendum updated on 1/7/11 under item #5, there was an embedded spreadsheet that included SFD ambulance response data from 1/1/10 to 12/17/10. This data set only included 7,892 records. I’m guessing this doesn’t include all the SFD ambulance response over this course of time. If I’m correct it would be helpful to include the rest of the responses.

More importantly, I noticed on the tab labeled “INCTYPE” that there is a call

The data file responding to this question is posted on the Blog as:

Addendum Question 65 data file:This entry appears directly below the Addendum Q&A line on the City Purchasing Blog.

The dataset only included SFD transports – i. e., ALS transports, not BLS transports which are almost exclusively handled by AMR. The AMB type code is used on rare

of 27



type labeled “AMB” dedicated to those calls transferred to the current provider AMR. None of these call types were included in the previous data set. This would be the most important information for us to have to fairly bid on this project. If we could obtain a new data set in the same format but inclusive of all the Call Types “AMB,” this would be most helpful.

occasions where SFD units are dispatched but before arrival those units were taken off the incident and the incident transferred to AMR. In 2010 there were only 10 AMB events and in 2009 only 8. AMB are characterized as BLS runs and would not be in a dataset of ALS runs wherein SFD performed the transport.

A dataset of AMR transports from 2005 through the latest available date and date in 2010 will be posted on the Contracting Services web site for download. It includes Inc_type, Address, Lat/Lng, and Year.

66 01/14/11 02/01/11 To conserve paper, can we submit attachments such as policies and procedures on a CD?

No, see RFP Proposal Response Date and Location page 6 paragraph b.

67 01/14/11 02/01/11 Section 16 of the Proposer's Questionnaire, "Equipment and Supplies - Ambulances," contains several duplicate requests for information: Items C & H are identical. Items E & I are identical. Items C, F and J all request the procedures for how equipment is properly maintained. Items C, H and I all request a description for how equipment is selected for use. Items D and G both request a description of the supply inventory control processes. To conserve paper, can the City consolidate the requirements in this section?

Yes Section 16 of the Proposer's Questionnaire, "Equipment and Supplies - Ambulances," is replaced with the language below:

A. Provide a detailed list of durable medical and communications equipment that will be carried on ambulances, including brand name, age (biomedical equipment only), and specifications of such equipment.

B. Identify the medical supplies that will be carried on each ambulance.

C. Describe how equipment is

of 27



selected for use and the procedures that ensure such equipment is properly maintained.

D. Describe your supply/equipment inventory tracking and resupply process.

E. Describe how upgrades to equipment will be handled, and funded, during the duration of the contract.

68 01/26/11 02/01/11 As we mentioned in previous emails and questions, we would request six (6) weeks from the day we have access the data to formulate our deployment strategy. As we move closer to February 1st, this would mean we would need to request the March 1st due date be pushed back a little if possible.

Yes The RFP due date is updated to:March 15, 2011 @ 4:00 PM (Pacific)

69 02/07/11 02/07/11 The "Addendum Question 65 data file: 02/01/11 Data" that is posted on the purchasing blog contains only records dating from 01/01/05 through 04/23/07 @ 15:39:50. Since the file was published in Excel 2003 format, the program has limitations on the number of records it can contain. Can you please post the data in an Excel 2007 format or possibly a txt format so that all records from 2005-2010 are provided?

The data file responding to this question is posted on the Blog as:

AMR Transport2005_2010_172.

The data file is directly below the file posted for question 65.

Note: this data file only goes thru Dec 6th, 2010 because we are still processing medical records from Dec 2010.

70 02/08/11 02/11/11 Will the City accept documentation The City requires the financial

of 27



(financial reports, contracts, etc) from the appropriate bidding entity in lieu of corporate-wide response?

information requested in (Section 7 Financial Stability and Administration of the Proposal Questionnaire/Package) of the RFP from all bidders. However, the City does not require financial information on a nationwide/corporate wide level. The City only requires financial information from the bidding entity that will be responsible for the performance of any contract that might be awarded.

71

of 27

question # - seattle.gov home · web viewthe attached zip file contains an esri shapefile (7 files)...

Documents