Independent Investigative Journalism and Commentary from New Orleans, LA
Thursday, September 03, 2009
Subject to interpretation
After obtaining a copy of the RFP and reading it, I have to say I don't agree with the interpretation of the requirement I offer the following points:
1. The rfp states that the contractor will "provide" a CMS. It did not say the contractor has to "own" a CMS or have a proprietary solution. "Provide" seems to be the operative word here. The contractor should have or possess the capability to "provide" this solution.
I don't interpret it the way you or MAS has. Furthermore, City Hall insiders say MSF does have a CMS solution to implement but it's up to the City and MAS to resolve it's issues regarding access to the website source code so it can be implemented.
This is the actual requirement wording, you be the judge:
9. Web Site Planning, Development and Maintenance
> Review existing CNO intranet and extranet sites.
> Develop recommendations and designs for future intranet and extranet site development.
> Perform web-site development using advanced portal technologies.
> Provide a Content Management Solution and work with CNO to develop a workflow to support independent content updates by departments.
> Upgrade current On-Base Document Management System to current version and design integrations with MOSS 2007.
> Design and implement core intranet site components such as knowledge bases, reporting portals, collaboration sites, workflow, executive dashboards, and corporate communication processes.
> Implement, configure, tune, and maintain enterprise search engines.
Also...we've got conflicting information from "City Hall insiders". I've been told MSF is negotiating with MAS to use their existing CMS...don't know if it's true but that is what I hear. So are you telling me that the MSF actually has a CMS but MAS is not cooperating with MSF to allow access to the database?