Pre-Proposal Conference September 10, 2009

1. Enterprise System for:Pesticide Permitting and Use Reportingto be deployed in all California CountiesCACASA Request for Proposals #10 Pre-Proposal Conference September 10, 2009

2. Agenda • RFP Scope of Services Highlights • Answers to submitted questions • Open questions from attendees • Software demonstrations @ 10:30 • Finish Q & A • Adjourn

3. 3.1 System Design Services • Demonstrated consulting skills to work with counties on needs & expectations • Commitment to thoroughly document the whole solution • Details about proposed system architecture: engineering, components, deployed infrastructure • Advantages and rationale for proposed architecture

4. 3.2 System Acceptance Test Plan • Commitment to thoroughly test prior to deployment • Experience developing incremental software/system test plans • Field testing duration, objectives, and benchmark monitoring

5. 3.3 Software Coding & Testing • Commitment to an organized process that integrates design, coding, testing, and source code documentation • Strong feedback loops to keep design documentation synchronized with as-built system.

6. 3.4 System Documentation & User Help Sub-system • Maximize county self-sufficiency to learn, use, and maintain the system • Engage the community of users to achieve in-depth understanding and a strong sense of system ownership

7. Summary of Objectives: 3.1 - 3.4 • System development follows an orderly, efficient, and manageable process • Control and autonomy conveyed to system users and owners

8. 3.5 Implementation / Transition Plan • Explain the process for converting unknowns to knowns • Planning details and advance work required for a swift and smooth transition • Assumptions about CACASA and county participation in both planning and execution

9. 3.6 System Installations • Anticipated duration to accomplish all county transitions • Required contractor resources • Assumptions about required CACASA and county resources • Seasonal timing to minimize Ag. Department disruptions

10. 3.7 Maintenance and Technical Support One Time Setup Activities • Describe system monitoring / maintenance procedures and technical support systems that will be planned and/or established in advance of the system going “live”

11. 3.8 Ongoing Maintenance and Technical Support Activities • Anticipated contractor resources required • Technical User Group involvement

12. 3.9 Project Management • Detailed Work Plan & Schedule • Coordination and communication methods, both internal and external • Change and risk management strategies • Assumptions about CACASA and county involvement and response times for evaluating deliverables or decision-making

13. Questions Submitted in Advance:Budget & Funding • Is there a budget for the project? • How much funding is secured and guaranteed given the current financial and budgeting issues? • The “Phase I Needs Assessment Report” says that there is an unspent amount of $1.23M.  How much of this amount will be available to the current project?

14. Questions Submitted in Advance:Incumbent Vendors • Do you want a new solution or will you give preference to the AgGIS/RMMS systems if they include the necessary enhancements? • What is CACASA’s plan to leverage the past investment of $1.7M?

15. Questions Submitted in Advance:Data Issues • Will CACASA provide all of the pesticide data and polygonal configuration of GIS interest areas? • Is spatial data currently available with all the counties? • Is there a requirement for data archival?

16. Questions Submitted in Advance:Project Management • Does CACASA have any professional IT personnel who will participate in conjunction with the contractor? • Who will approve the detailed system design, an outside IT vendor or the CACASA staff? • How many design/vision meetings should we include in our estimate?

17. Questions Submitted in Advance:Standards and Certifications • Are there any State IT standards to be followed if CDPR is funding part of the development and implementation of the new system? • Does the contract require California MSA / CMAS certifications?

18. Questions Submitted in Advance:Architecture Issues • Are there any existing co-location services being used by the CACASA where we can house the new system being developed? • Are you open to using licensed products, such as ESRI tools for GIS?  Are there any other licensing considerations for the new system? • For a centralized approach, would there be a database administrator assigned to resolve internal database replication / synchronization conflict scenarios?

19. Questions Submitted in Advance:Existing Infrastructure • Do all counties using this system have access to high speed internet services? • Can you share some data of installation per county so that we can give a more realistic estimate of installation and transition? • Currently does the main district office (or county HQ) synchronize its data with the other field district offices of the county? • Do the counties have remote access for system developers currently?

20. Questions Submitted in Advance:Miscellaneous Issues (1) • Is there a mobile component for this service whereby a field technician can input their pesticide usage and take advantage of GIS discovery on the mobile device? • On page 2 of the “Phase II Final Recommended Solution Report” a Statewide Pesticide Use Reporting System (SPURS) is mentioned.  Is this the system that we are developing?

21. Questions Submitted in Advance:Miscellaneous Issues (2) • Can some part of the project engineering activities be carried out off-site? • We expect to team with an overseas developer.  Will such a teaming relationship preclude us from winning the project? • How will the traveling costs be billed to CACASA?

22. Interactive Q & A