Plinkit PCs/Tech Group 3/6/09 Final SOW Discussion Meeting Minutes
Troy Brown (IL), Steve Gregory (CO), Darci Hanning (OR), Jeff Humphrey (INCOLSA), Kathleen Krause-Thompson (TX), Christine Kreger (CO), Sonya Norris (MI), Bev Obert (IL), minutes by Justine Shaffner (Collaborative Coordinator)
Gregory outlined that we’re meeting to make a decision about our chosen vendor and asked if everyone received the revised spreadsheet (they had). He said we have Enfold in first place with a score of 84.8, Six Feet up in 2nd place with 75.6 and Jazkarta in third place with 66.2 - everyone rated Enfold first except TX where there’s a tie between Enfold and Six Feet Up. Gregory asked if there’s any discussion about the scores. There wasn’t.
Gregory asked if we should take a vote in this meeting to adopt the outcome of the scores we’ve submitted or should we email the people who aren’t at the meeting? Hanning said I think we’re okay to say this is our selection as we’ve reached a consensus from the people who have been involved in the process.
Brown asked if anyone had concerns about the ranking and making Enfold our recommendation. No one did. Gregory asked if TX had any comments about their first place tie. Krause-Thompson said no, GenericSetup not being ready made their choice Enfold.
Gregory said well that’s clear, so Enfold is the winner, thanks so much to everyone for all their work in this process, it’s encouraging that we’re basically unanimous with this. He mentioned it’s great that Enfold’s references were all so positive. Hanning said they’ve been doing this for a while. Krause-Thompson mentioned that the other vendors were problematic because of scope creep and trying to advance Plone more than address our project needs.
It was decided that we’ll need to email the Steering Committee re our first and second choices and tell them Enfold came out first. Hanning echoed Gregory’s thanks to everyone.
Gregory asked will we write contract for the vendor or will they give us one? Hanning said she’d like to see them write the contract. Gregory agreed and said we’ll all read it over and make sure it’s okay. Brown said the references made it clear we need to spell out everything in it. Hanning agreed and wanted to make sure there are no dropped pieces.
Gregory asked who’ll review the contract, everyone or should we appoint a separate committee? Hanning said either way she’d like to be included. Norris said they have a lawyer on staff that Mase may want to have review the contract. Everyone thought this was great. Brown thought the contract should go to the whole group. Gregory and others said this sounds fine but are there any proprietary issues with that? We thought not as it’s not a public list.
Gregory said when we’re working with the vendor what will be the process for communicating? Hanning proposed to be the intermediary or she could work with someone else or someone else could do it. She thinks it’s important for someone with a technical background to do this. We thought Hanning should do this and she’ll be sure to ask the whole group on questions that might affect us all. Gregory will back her up. He proposed a process where Enfold deals with Shaffner for administrative things and Hanning works with them on everything else. Everyone agreed.
Hanning said when Shaffner communicates with Steering she should include the price range and timeline and indicate that neither is hard and fast as we haven’t signed the final contract (but the price is very close) and she should also give them the links to the proposals (Shaffner will also send them the revised compiled evaluations). In the email to Steering, she should make it clear that Jim Duncan will need to sign the contract and she should cc Bailey-Hainer and Harrison to find out if a BCR person should sign the contract. Brown said stress that it’s a consensus. In the email to the Steering Committee indicate that the vendor will provide the contract and that we’ll all review the contract to make sure nothing’s missing and perhaps MI’s lawyer can also review it (ask Mase). Gregory said and say it’s a unanimous decision. Everyone including Krause-Thompson was fine with that. Brown asked if we should give a deadline re when Enfold will have the contract back to us by. Hanning said let’s ask them to give us an ETA on their contract by Monday, if they don’t think they can give us the contract by 3/13. Shaffner can let the other vendors know they weren’t chosen; she’ll work with Hanning, Gregory and Brown on the email to send to them re if you want more feedback you can ask for it, and that one of the key parts of our decision was their GenericSetup approach to import/export and that one or two references of their gave us pause.
Gregory mentioned Six Feet Up started hosting the Plone.org site, Hanning wasn’t sure it had happened yet.
Obert joined the conference and said we’d all done a fantastic job in this process. She said it looked like Enfold was the clear winner due to their import/export approach.
Brown asked about the skinning process - when will the process start for theming? Hanning said whenever anyone wants to take it on. She’d like someone else to take the Technical lead for the themes. Brown is willing to do this, but he’ll need a lot of help as he’s not creative. Hanning said the idea is we’ll select existing skins from Plone.org so we’re not doing this from scratch, and the chosen ones don’t have to be liked by all, but should include at something for everyone. Brown asked if we need to write another SOW, Hanning thought we want to outline our expectations. Brown felt more comfortable making sure our intentions are very clear. He’ll take a first pass at this and Hanning can fill in gaps.
Obert said thanks to all for all your work and Gregory said awesome job everyone! Gregory adjourned the meeting after reminding everyone of next week’s meeting.
Next Meeting - Friday 3/13/09 from noon-1:30pm ET, 11am- 12:30pm CT, 10am-11:30am MT & 9am-10:30am PT
To Do’s
Shaffner - Email the Steering Committee re we have a unanimous decision that puts Enfold in first place with a score of 84.8, Six Feet up in 2nd place with 75.6 so if they approve, we’ll go with Enfold. Tell them their price range is 730 – 905 hours ($94,900 – $117,650) not including the waived first year post project support fee of $7500 for 20-40 hours Tell them the project timeline starts 3/16/09 and ends 5/15/09 and that neither the price or the timeline are hard and fast as we haven’t signed the final contract (but the price is very close). Also send them the link to the proposals http://www.plinkit.org/resources/plinkit-2-0-rfq-responses and Revised Compiled Evals.xls Tell them Jim Duncan will need to sign the contract and cc Bailey-Hainer and Harrison to find out if a BCR person should also sign the contract. Tell them the vendor will provide the contract and the entire Plinkit PC/Technical Group will review the contract to make sure nothing’s missing. Ask Cheryl Mase if MI’s lawyer can also review the contract.
Shaffner – Email Enfold re you’re the winner and that we’d like you to do the contract and to tell us by EOB 3/9/09 if don’t think they can give us the contract by 3/13. Also tell them re communicating with them, Shaffner will be the contact for administrative things and Hanning will work with them on everything else with Gregory as her backup and that Hanning will ask the whole group about questions that might affect them all.
Shaffner – Draft and send an email (and get it approved by Gregory, Hanning and Brown) to Six Feet Up and Jazkarta letting them know they weren’t chosen and that one of the key parts of our decision was their GenericSetup approach to import/export and that one or two of their references gave us pause and that if they want more feedback, please ask for it.
