LOC Questions and Clarifications Memorandum

To: Solicited Vendors for Letter of Configuration (LOC) Number 3744537445, dated February 28, 2008February 28, 2008, for the Mississippi Department of EducationMississippi Department of Education MDE(MDE)

From: David L. Litchliter

Date: March 11, 2008

Subject: Responses to Questions Submitted and Clarifications to Specifications

Contact Name: Melinda SimmonsMelinda Simmons

Contact Phone Number: 9535601-359-9535

Contact E-mail Address:

2

The following questions were submitted to ITS and are being presented as they were submitted, except to remove any reference to a specific vendor. This information should assist you in formulating your response.

Question 1: SolidWorks lists several video cards that they recommend, and they are the higher end video cards...What we have on our quote is the basic ATI Radeon HD 2400...ATI calls this their low end video card, even though it does produce good clear graphics for videos and DirectX movies and capable of broadcasting HD signals, it is not one of their 3D CAD cards...I am being told by SolidWorks that it might work just fine, it is just not one they have listed as a "true" recommended card?” Is the state really looking for this better video card?

Response: The video card included in the student PCs and teacher laptops must be compatible with SolidWorks software. If the Vendor chooses to use a video card that is not listed as SolidWorks recommended, then the Vendor is responsible for replacing that video card if it is not SolidWorks compatible.

Question 2: Some manufacturers have already submitted their “best prices” for the EPL, and some manufacturers have a policy that requires partners to sell the applicable products end users at that special EPL price (no more & no less). Therefore, will ITS make the following changes to LOC 3502 Specifications: (1) Change the last sentence in 5.4 to read “Vendors must be willing to provide a discount off of the current Micro or LAN EPL price if additional price concessions for this LOC or adequate margins are available from the manufacturers or the manufacturers’ distributors.” Change the first sentence in 5.5 to read, MDE and ITS will verify the quotes sent to the schools insure that pricing is at or below that of the current EPL.

Response: LOC 37445 specifications stand as stated. Micro RFP 3502 and LAN RFP 3495 both require that all pricing submitted be not-to-exceed pricing. Vendors are highly encouraged to offer quantity discounts. The curriculum redesign project involving the ICT and STEM labs is a very large project with a projected budget of over $120 million over the five year implementation. It is therefore imperative that ITS and MDE ensure that the school districts are receiving the best discounts. Should there be an occurrence where a manufacturer sponsoring a reseller group on an EPL will not allow the reseller to provide further discounts, please provide ITS with the information, and the ITS EPL Team will work with that manufacturer and reseller on an individual basis.

Question 3: Vendors will have to “pad” the price of their LOC services, as there is no provision in LOC 3502 for travel time. Will ITS change LOC item 8.1 and LOC Attachment A to allow Vendors to provide quotations for Travel Time at a rate below the Vendors’ travel time rates quoted in the EPL?

Response: Participating ICT/STEM EPL Vendors may use the service rates published in the Micro, LAN, and/or ICT/STEM EPL. Vendors are not required to provide an additional discount from their EPL service rates. Note the requirement in the LOC, item 5.4, that reads “Vendors must be willing to provide a discount off of the current Micro or LAN EPL price” refers to additional discounts for the products on the Micro and LAN EPL; it does not refer to services. When proposing the service rates requested in the LOC Attachment A, Vendors will not need to “pad” these services to account for travel time. Instead, when the Vendor provides an ICT/STEM quotation to a school district, they should include any travel time as a separate line item using the Micro or LAN travel rates.

Question 4: Specifications require a Performance Bond if items are not purchased off the ITS EPL and/or the DFA Furniture Contracts. If only a portion of all items quoted are not purchased from these 2 procurement instruments, would it be correct to assume that the Performance Bond would only need to cover the line item costs for the items not purchased from these two procurement instruments (and not the entire quote)?

Response: The intent of the performance bond requirement is to cover equipment that is not on an ITS EPL and requires competitive bids because the cost is above $25,000. All items in the ICT/STEM specifications documents should be covered by an ITS EPL (i.e., Micro, LAN, Cabling, ICT/STEM EPL, various software EPLs, etc.). ITS does not anticipate a situation in which a vendor would need to provide a performance bond if using ITS EPLs, unless it is at the school district’s request.

Question 5: When Vendors quote items not listed on their ITS EPL and DFA furniture contracts for ICT/STEM labs, may vendors quote the cost for the annual Performance Bond as a separate extra cost line item?

Response: Yes, if a performance bond is required, the performance bond must be procured at the Vendor’s expense and may be invoiced to the school district if itemized in the Vendor’s quote.

LOC responses are due Tuesday, March 18, 2008Tuesday, March 18, 2008, at 3:00 p.m. (Central Time).

If you have any questions concerning the information above or if we can be of further assistance, please contact Melinda Simmons at 601-359-9535 or via email at .

cc: File 37445

Page 3 of 3