Wireless Executive Summary

          RFP 20-516: District Wide Wireless Infrastructure Equipment and Services
                                    Executive Summary


Purpose

The purpose of solicitation RFP 20-516 is to procure professional services from an experienced,
highly qualified and capable provider to supply and install Wireless Access Points for any of the
134 schools and administrative locations within DCSD on its Wide Area Network on an as
needed basis. It is expected that the Awarded Offeror will provide services in accordance with
the specifications, requirements and terms and conditions stated within the solicitation.
Services shall include all equipment, labor, materials, tools, specialized equipment, supplies,
trained personnel, insurance, travel and per diem, direct and indirect administrative costs,
overhead, any other charges, and all services necessary to provide a complete turn-key
solution.

Background and Process

The evaluation team was made up of six staff persons in the Division of Information
Technology, with three representing Enterprise Services (Manager, 1-Wireless Engineer, and 2-
Information Security Officers) and two representing the Project Management Office (Manager
and 1-Project Manager).

The RFP was written and submitted for approval in December 2018 and was published for two
weeks in February 2019. Electronic notifications were sent to 44 vendors from the DCSD
Vendor Bid List and 1742 vendors through the State of GA Procurement Registry. In March
2019, three vendors responded to the RFP, deemed responsive, and were evaluated.

Evaluation Results

Based on a careful evaluation of how well each of the 3 possible choices could meet the 3 major
criteria considered, Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. appears to be the best choice.

The 3 choices considered were:
       Integrated Communication Networks, Inc.
       IntelliSpring Technologies
       Prosys

The criteria used to evaluate the options and their weightings were:
        Cost – 45%
        Ability to Execute – 35%
        Ability to Provide a Complete Solution To DCSD – 20%

Of all of the choices considered, 2 were considered to be leading candidates. These "top
options" were:
                                                1
       Integrated Communication Networks, Inc.
       IntelliSpring Technologies

Cost was the most significant factor leading to the choice of Integrated Communication
Networks, Inc. over IntelliSpring Technologies.

The question of "RFP 20-516" was evaluated by means of a decision table.




             Decision Table for RFP 20-516 District Wide Wireless Infrastructure Equipment and Services


Cost Evaluation

RFP 20-516 Cost was evaluated by means of a decision table.




The criteria used to evaluate the choices, and their weightings, were:
        Access Points – 32%
        On-Guard Licenses (100,000) – 27%
        Aruba Controller – 18%
        On-Boarding Licenses (10,000) – 15%
        Clear Pass Appliance – 7%

Weightings were the result of calculations of anticipated spending over the next 5 years.
Known future projects and historical data were used as the basis for the projections. Cost
entered comes directly from the Cost Tables. Only items expected to represent 2% or greater
of anticipated spending were used in the evaluation.

In the area of Cost, Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. was the leading choice by a
substantial margin.

                                                         2
Comparisons among Choices
Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. versus Intellispring Technologies
    • Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. was considered to be a better choice than
       Intellispring Technologies in all of the 5 criteria considered. Of these, the critical factor
       was Access Points cost.

After a careful evaluation of each option, Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. appears to
be the best choice in the area of Cost.

Relative Strengths
Integrated Communication Networks versus Intellispring Technologies
       Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. provided pricing significantly below that of
       Intellispring Technologies
Prosys
       Prosys proposed Meraki access points by Cisco. While the cost of the access points is
       favorable, they are not capable of being managed by the existing DCSD Aruba wireless
       management system. Prosys failed to provide pricing for Aruba Controllers, Clear Pass
       Appliances, On-Boarding Licensing and On-Guard Licensing. DCSD has an installed base
       of over 10,250 Aruba access points. There are no plans to totally replace these Aruba
       access points over the next 5 years.

       The purchase of access points only represents a third of anticipated wireless spending
       over the next 5 years. The remaining expenditures will be in the areas of managing and
       securing our existing wireless network. By providing only access point pricing and
       ignoring the other critical components for which pricing was requested, Prosys is
       considered non-responsive.

Ability to Execute Evaluation
RFP 20-516 Ability to Execute was evaluated by means of a decision table.




The criteria used to evaluate the choices, and their weightings, were:
        Experience with Organizations Comparable to DCSD – 20%
        Prior Experience with DCSD – 20%
        References – 20%
                                                  3
       Technical Capability – 20%
       Warranty – 20%

Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. was the leading choice by a substantial margin.

Comparisons among Choices
Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. versus Prosys
       Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. was considered to be a better choice than
       Prosys in 3 of the 5 criteria considered. Of these, the critical factor was Experience with
       Organizations Comparable to DCSD.

Prosys versus IntelliSpring Technologies
       Prosys was considered to be a better choice than IntelliSpring Technologies in 1 of the 5
       criteria considered. Of these, the critical factor was References.

       After a careful evaluation of each option, Integrated Communication Networks, Inc.
       appears to be the best choice in the area of Ability to Execute.

Discussion of Options

Integrated Communication Networks, Inc.
• Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. was judged Excellent in the matter of Prior
    Experience with DCSD. ICN has been a valuable partner with DCSD for many years.
• Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. was judged Good in the matter of References.
    Only two references were provided instead of the three requested.
• Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. was judged Excellent in the matter of Technical
    Capability. ICN has provided certifications demonstrating their staff's technical capability.
Prosys
• Prosys was judged Poor in the matter of Experience with Organizations Comparable to
    DCSD. References provided by Prosys do not reflect experience with organizations as large
    as DCSD nor do they include K12 institutions.
IntelliSpring Technologies
• IntelliSpring Technologies was judged Poor in the matter of Experience with Organizations
    Comparable to DCSD. Intellispring Technologies stated they have prior experience with 30
    companies comparable to DCSD but they failed to list one. With no way to verify this
    experience the evaluation committee could not justify more than a minimal score of 3.

•   IntelliSpring Technologies was judged Fair in the matter of References. Only one reference
    was provided by IntelliSpring. Three references were required.

Ability to Provide a Complete Solution to DCSD Evaluation

RFP 20-516 Ability to Provide a Complete Solution to DCSD was evaluated by means of a
decision table.
                                                 4
The criteria used to evaluate the choices, and their weightings, were:
        Project Management – 50%
        Ordering and Installation – 25%
        Concurrent Installations – 25%

Comparisons among Choices
Integrated Communication Networks, Inc., Prosys and IntelliSpring Technologies
       Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. and Prosys were considered to be better
       choices than IntelliSpring Technologies in 1 of the 3 criteria considered, Project
       Management.

After a careful evaluation of each option, Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. and Prosys
appear to be the best choices in the area of Ability to Provide a Complete Solution to DCSD


RFP 20-216 District Wide Wireless Infrastructure Equipment and Services – Final Selection
Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. was the leading choice by a substantial margin.

The Top Choices
The decision-making process has identified 2 of the choices as "top options." They were:
       Integrated Communication Networks, Inc.
       IntelliSpring Technologies

Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. was the leading choice by a substantial margin.
Prosys would have been considered a "top option" except for a fatal flaw in their cost proposal.
Had they not failed in this area, Prosys would have been considered to be among the "top
options":

Comparisons among Choices
Relative strengths of the various choices in each of the factors is illustrated in the following
graph:




                                                  5
                                           Relative Strengths

Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. versus IntelliSpring Technologies
       Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. was considered to be a better choice than
       IntelliSpring Technologies in 3 of the 3 criteria considered. Of these, the critical factor
       was Cost.

                                            Conclusion

After a careful evaluation of each option, Integrated Communication Networks, Inc. appears to
be the best choice for RFP 20-516 District Wide Wireless Infrastructure Equipment and Services.




                                                   6