Laserfiche WebLink
<br />hardware failure. Second, upgrade the existing system as much as would be technically possible <br />and seek to hold the line on the risk factor. This would be a severely limiting solution as the core <br />technology would still be end of life and the upgrades would be equivalent to putting a bandage <br />on the City's telecommunications system. The cost of this solution was estimated at thirty to <br />forty percent of that of a new system. While it would stabilize the risk factor, this "restored" <br />system would only marginally improve performance and technical capabilities, and at best, <br />"buy" four (4) or five (5) more years before the issues of stability and risk reached an <br />unacceptable level. Third, initiate and complete the request for proposals (RFP) process for an <br />entirely new internet protocol (IP) communications system. This solution would leverage the <br />City's network infrastructure and provide a foundation for enhanced service delivery to the <br />community. The life cycle of a new IP Communications System is estimated to be from ten (10) <br />to twelve (12) years. <br /> <br />Staff concluded that an RFP for a new IP Communications System would provide the best <br />solution for several compelling reasons: <br />. The technology is receiving broad acceptance in both the public and private sector. <br />. The technology is now established with a strong installation base and presence. <br />. The technology is stable with mature products and offerings on the market. <br />. The technology provides long term economic advantages as it leverages an organization's <br />existing network infrastructure by converging data and voice services. <br /> <br />Overall, the RFP approach for an IP Communications System would immediately provide the <br />City with stable and traditional telecommunication services and establish a telecommunications <br />infrastructure on which future applications could be implemented that would enhance service <br />delivery to the community. <br /> <br />The request for proposals (RFP) was released to bidders on February 23, 2007. This was <br />followed by a Mandatory Bidders' Conference with Site Walks on March 14, 2007 with <br />approximately twenty (20) people in attendance, representing ten (10) different vendors. An <br />opportunity was provided to potential bidders to submit any questions up to March 20, 2007 and <br />staff responses to those questions were posted on March 23,2007. <br /> <br />By the bid opening on March 28, 2007 at 2:00 pm, four (4) bids had been received. The bidders <br />included Altura Communications Solutions (Avaya Solution), AMS.NET (Cisco A WID <br />Solution), American Telesource Inc (ShoreTel Solution) and ExtraTeam (Microsoft and Cisco <br />Unified Communications Solution). <br /> <br />The RFP Evaluation Team consisted of representatives from every City department. Prior to <br />evaluating the bids, the team members discussed and determined an objective evaluation method. <br />It was decided that each bid be ranked in six weighted categories, the emphasis being on <br />functionality, installation and sustainability. <br /> <br />The cumulative evaluation results were as follows: <br />. Altura Communications Soutions 411.4 <br />. AMS.NET 459.6 <br />. American Telesource, Inc. 579.4 <br />. ExtraTeam 623.0 <br /> <br />G:\IS\Phone Switch\VoIP Staff <br />