Vendor Eval Form_T-Mobile

AID 1436120 · View on Simbli

Agenda Item

c. Cellular Carrier Renewal (at a cost not to exceed a yearly cost of $600,000)

Summary: Presented by:  Ms. Monika Davis, Chief Information Officer, Division of Information & Instructional Technology
Request: It is requested that the Board of Education approve the purchase of the T-Mobile USA, INC, GTA Contract 9800-GTA794-T, Cellular Carrier Contract at a cost not to exceed a yearly cost of $600,000.
Why: The purpose of the agenda item is to extend our current cellular service with T-Mobile.
Details: DeKalb County Schools provides cell phones to employees whose job role and function meets the requirement of emergency responder/first responder to critical services. Cell phone distribution is determined by an employee's specific need to stay connected to the daily operations of the school district’s business and community.

Currently, there are devices utilizing cellular services which include:
887 - Smartphones
24 - Hotspots

Telecommunications continues to employ strategies to manage and reduce the monthly bill through monitoring all devices for inactivity and removing the devices from the district's bill.   

The district selected to continue services with T-Mobile for the following reasons:


Updated iPhone hardware deployment completed in October 2021; therefore, the cost of securing new equipment would be significant with another carrier, not including the administrative cost of changing vendors.



T-Mobile provided DCSD with portal access that allows us to pull 30-day non-use reports. This allows us to recover devices that are not be utilized and redistribute them without needing to purchase additional equipment.
T-Mobile offers the lowest monthly price plus comprehensive options if upgrades are desired.
T-Mobile offered the lowest cost for device upgrade/acquisition.

Board Policy DJE allows purchases to be made through contracts formally solicited and obtained by the State of Georgia to achieve cost savings and administrative efficiencies. As a result, if approved, the district is opting to utilize state contract (GTA Contract 9800-GTA794-T) to continue purchasing T-Mobile services based on no changeover cost, desired service features, excellent current service, and added support for student internet connectivity devices.
Financial impact: $600,000.00
General Funds100.2800.553000.00011.7600.9990.0308.070.0000
Contact: Ms. Monika Davis, Chief Information Officer, Division of Information & Instructional Technology, 678.676.1274
Effective: Upon Board Approval.
Status: Approved by General Counsel.
                                DEKALB COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
                          VENDOR / CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION



Instructions: This form must be completed for all contract renewals, Be factual and do not include unsubstantiated opinions.



Contractor Name: Contract Title and Number:
    T-Mobile
Contract Term:           Contract Period: From: 2022                   To: 2023
1 Year                   November 1, 2022 – October 31, 2023
Contract Value:                                   Department:
600,000                                           Information Technology

                                         DEFINITIONS OF PERFORMANCE RATINGS

         SATISFACTORY                 UNSATISFACTORY                               N/A                  INSUFFICIENT
                                                                                                        INFORMATION TO
Meets contractual requirements.       Does not meet                                                     RATE
The actions taken by the contractor   contractual requirements,       Not Applicable
appear or were satisfactory.          and recovery is not likely                                        There is not sufficient
                                      in a timely manner. The                                           information to rate
.                                     contractor’s corrective                                           performance.
                                      actions appear or were
                                      ineffective.




                      PERFORMANCE RATING                                        COMMENTS (Attach additional sheets if necessary)


                                                                               Completed iPhone Deployment and SIM upgrade to T-
                                                Satisfactory                  Mobile
                                                 Unsatisfactory
Work performed in compliance with contract
                                                 N/A
terms
                                                 Insufficient info. to rate



                                                                               Yes- provides all materials in a timely fashion and is very
                                                                               responsive to DCSD. Provided Project Manages and
                                                Satisfactory                  assistance with SIM Card Swap
Materials, supplies and equipment provided as    Unsatisfactory
required?                                        N/A
                                                 Insufficient info. to rate




                                                            Page 1 of 3
                                                                               Always available when needed and adapts to changes in
                                                Satisfactory                  Deployment size with no problem.
                                                 Unsatisfactory
Staff availability                               N/A
                                                 Insufficient info. to rate

                                                                               Excellent – Stuck with schedule and was flexible in terms
                                                Satisfactory                  of user accommodations for SIM Swap
                                                 Unsatisfactory
Timeliness of work                               N/A
                                                 Insufficient info. to rate

                                                                               T-Mobile always professional and treats DCSD end users
                                                Satisfactory                  and Staff with respect
                                                 Unsatisfactory
Staff professionalism                            N/A
                                                 Insufficient info. to rate

                                                                               Excellent- responds in a timely manner to both EMAIL
                                                                               and phone calls. Very professional when onsite working
                                                X Satisfactory
                                                                               with end users
                                                 Unsatisfactory
                                                 N/A
Customer service
                                                 Insufficient info. to rate




                                                                               Excellent-
                                                Satisfactory
Quality of work                                  Unsatisfactory
                                                 N/A
                                                 Insufficient info. to rate

                                                                               T-Mobile is extremely responsive. EMAIL, Phone or face
                                                Satisfactory                  to face meetings, T-Mobile always provides required
                                                 Unsatisfactory               information as requested for management decisions
Communication and Accessibility                  N/A
                                                 Insufficient info. to rate

                                                                               Always wants to make sure work is done correctly
                                                Satisfactory
                                                 Unsatisfactory
Prompt and effective correction of situations    N/A
and conditions                                   Insufficient info. to rate

                                                                               Yes
Documentation records, receipts, invoices and   Satisfactory
computer generated reports received in a         Unsatisfactory
timely manner and in compliance with             N/A
contract specifications                          Insufficient info. to rate

                                                                               Would highly recommend this company again
                                                  X Yes     No
Would you recommend using this firm again?
                                                (Explain)




                                                            Page 2 of 3
OVERALL ASSESSMENT                        Unsatisfactory    Satisfactory


Comments:




Name of Evaluator                          Joseph Swing
                                                 (Print)                                             (Signature)


Title:     Manager Enterprise Systems.                                                       Date: 09/19/2022




   FISCAL INFORMATION:

   Original Contract Value $______________600,000___________

   Dollar amount of increase (decrease) $____0_______

   Percent of increase (decrease) ______0______ %

   Reason for (decrease) Bill monitoring and removal of unused devices________________

   _______________________________________________________________________________________


                    Project Scope (FY 2020 – 2021)                                            Timeline




         CIO Review                                                                ___9/20/22_________________
                                                                                     Date


 __Chief Information Officer______________________________                ____________Monika Davis___________________
                      Title                                                      Signature




                                                            Page 3 of 3