CT Contract RFP Amendments 2010-2011

State DOC Contracts • Connecticut

Download original document:
Brief thumbnail

Document text

This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.

STATE OF CONNECTICUT
DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
(http://www.ct.gov/doit)

AMENDMENT # 1
RFP # 10ITZ0119

Inmate Telephone Service

AMENDMENT # 1
provides the following:

1. Extension of Due Date: February 8, 2011

Note: A signature line has been included below. A copy of this page signed in ink is required with the
Proposal to show that vendors have received this Amendment.

____________________________________________
VENDOR’S SIGNATURE ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT
(This page should be signed and returned WITH PROPOSAL. If vendor fails to submit signed
Amendment, vendor will still be responsible for adhering to its content)

APPROVED:___________________________________
JACQUELINE SHIRLEY
DIRECTOR, IT CONTRACTS AND PURCHASING
CONTRACTS AND PURCHASING DIVISION
Date of Amendment: December 20, 2010

STATE OF CONNECTICUT
DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
(http://www.ct.gov/doit)

AMENDMENT # 2
RFP # 10ITZ0119

Inmate Telephone Service
AMENDMENT # 2
provides the following:

1. Add the Questions and Answers
2. Add Revised Attachment 16
3. Add Provider Commission Rate (12 Months)

Note: A signature line has been included below. A copy of this page signed in ink is required with the
Proposal to show that vendors have received this Amendment.

APPROVED:___________________________________
JACQUELINE SHIRLEY
DIRECTOR, IT CONTRACTS AND PURCHASING
CONTRACTS AND PURCHASING DIVISION
Date of Amendment: January 13, 2011

RFP #10ITZ0119
AMENDMENT #2
VENDOR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
1Q:

On page 34 “Commission Rate” is based on “commissionable revenue” which, by
definition, does not include bad debt, “…amounts billed but not paid”. Bad debt can vary
greatly between inmate telephone service providers. A 45% Commission Rate from one
company (with a large bad debt deducted from Total Gross Revenue) may give the
department much less revenue than a 45% Commission Rate from another company. In
order for the DOIT to fairly evaluate Commission Rate on a level playing field, can this
be changed to remove “..amounts billed but not paid” from the definition of
“commissionable revenue”?

1A:

RFP Attachment 3, paragraph 1.1 COMMISSION RATE of the RFP is redacted and
replaced with the following:
The vendor shall pay a monthly commission to DOIT of at least, but not limited to,
45% of the Commissionable Revenue. “Commissionable Revenue” is defined as the
gross billed amounts generated by every completed telephone call that is accepted
by a called party using the inmate telephone service. This excludes Federal, State
and local government taxes and fees mandated to be billed to the called party by a
regulatory government entity. If some future regulatory development establishes a
new charge, the vendor and the State will mutually determine the exemption of such
charge from Commissionable Revenue at that time. The commission must be
received by DOIT within 30 days of the end of each month’s billing cycle.
All revenue payments to the State for services/equipment shall be made payable to
“Treasurer, State of Connecticut” and submitted to the Department of Information
Technology, Fiscal Office or designee.
The vendor shall affirm it will comply with the above requirements (do not state the
commission rate here).

2Q:

End user fees, e.g. prepaid account setup fee, account recharge fee, account refund fee,
billing cost recovery or bill statement fee, and other similar fees, can vary greatly and
significantly affect the cost to inmate friends and families and commission revenues
received by the DOIT. Will the DOIT require that all such fees charged to end users be
defined and quantified by each responder?

2A:

With regards to fees charged, the vendor shall not charge any fees except for those fees
mandated to be billed to the called party by a regulatory government entity. DOC will
1

allow outside agencies such as Western Union and MoneyGram to be used only for
International billing. DOC understands that the fees from these outside agencies cannot
be waived. DOC will not require vendors to disclose the fees charged by these agencies
or their share.

3Q:

Attachment 5 Section 21. Putting source code into escrow is problematic to most or all
providers. It also does not necessarily resolve the dilemma of a company’s failure to
provide service due to bankruptcy or other financial issues. Even with the source code,
the DOIT would most likely still have a many months ordeal in reading, deciphering, and
rewriting any required code changes, if it could be accomplished at all. In lieu of
escrowing source code can the DOIT require a bond large enough to completely change
the system, hardware and software, in the case of a provider default?

3A:

These issues will be addressed with the successful vendor during the negotiation
process.

4Q:

Page 22
Section 3.1.1
Procurement Schedule
Would DOC please extend the due date to February 18, 2011 given the complexity of
this RFP and to allow the Vendor’s sufficient time to provide a more comprehensive
response?

4A:

DOIT has issued RFP Amendment #1 - Extension of Due Date: February 8, 2011
(posted on the State Portal).

5Q:

Page 29
Section 8.3 & 8.4
Architecture Overview & Product Architecture
Would DOC clarify if section 8.3 is a high-level system overview and that 8.4 is a
detailed description of all systems and software?

5A:

Section 8.3 requires the vendor to provide a detailed design of the architecture for each
of the proposed application(s)/product(s) that make up the overall solution.

6Q:

Page 29
Section 8.3 & 8.4
Architecture Overview & Product Architecture
Would DOC provide clarification of the terms “proposed application” and “proposed
product”?

6A:

Section 8.4 requires the vendor to provide a detailed design of the integration of all
application(s)/product(s) noted in 8.3.

7Q:

Page 77
Section 1.3
Overview
Page 93
Section 6.12
Visitor Telephone Service
Page 94
Section 7.4
Visiting Area Telephone Sets
Are there a total of 650 visitation phones (325 visitation areas) or 650 visitation areas
(1,300 phones)?

7A:

There are a total of 762 phones needed for visitation purposes; this includes phones on
both sides of the glass. (See revised Attachment 16)

8Q:

Page 77
Section 1.3
Overview
Page 93
Section 6.12
Visitor Telephone Service
Page 94
Section 7.4
Visiting Area Telephone Sets
Will DOC provide the quantity and location of the visitation phones located at each
facility?

8A:

See revised Attachment 16.

9Q:

Page 77
Section 1.3
Overview
Page 93
Section 6.12
Visitor Telephone Service
Page 94
Section 7.4
Visiting Area Telephone Sets
Will DOC provide the physical location of where the current premised based calling
platform is located at each facility?

9A:

Yes. This information will be provided to the awarded vendor.

10Q:

Page 77
Section 1.3
Overview
Page 93
Section 6.12
Visitor Telephone Service
Page 94
Section 7.4
Visiting Area Telephone Sets
Will DOC provide architectural site drawings for each location to aid in understanding of
the scope of work required to provide recording capabilities for visitation telephones?

10A:

Yes. This information will be provided to the awarded vendor.

11Q:

Page 77
Section 1.3
Overview
Page 93
Section 6.12
Visitor Telephone Service
Page 94
Section 7.4
Visiting Area Telephone Sets
Would DOC allow for on site visits as part of the RFP process?

11A:

No.
3

12Q:

Page 30
Section 8.5 System Development Methodology (SDM)
Practices
Page 149
Attachment 13/14
System Development Methodology (SDM)
The documentation provided in Attachment 13 and 14 indicates that the application of
SDM is for new systems (from Executive Order No. 19; “The Department of Information
Technology (DOIT) issue and publish a System Development Methodology (SDM) and
an SDM Policy for the development of information systems;” (emphasis added).
Considering that the Inmate Telephone Service software that will be used for this RFP
will be utilized by the winning vendor to provide services for inmates directly, the
services will be provided at no cost to the state, and are, in most cases, fully developed
and do not fall under the “…acquisition, design, development, implementation, and
maintenance of information systems…” section of Executive Order No. 19.
Would DOC consider eliminating Section 8.5 - Systems Development Methodology
(SDM) Practices?

12A:

For acquisition of services or subscriptions where no development is required, Executive
Order No. 19 would not apply.

13Q:

Page 30
Section 8.9
Accessibility (MJH)
This section states “All applications and pages developed for the State must be
compatible…with the State Accessibility guidelines...” The guideline states: “The use of
the guidelines below will ensure that web sites created by the State of Connecticut…”
The applications the vendors will be using for the Inmate Telephone Services are not
web sites; would these standards be applicable to this RFP?

13A:

No.

14Q:

Page 34
Section 1.1 Commission Rate
This section defines “Commissionable Revenue” as revenue from Operator Service
Calls. DOC is allowing for reductions for unpaid bills, which enables a huge range by
which vendors may deduct from the commissionable revenue, potentially reducing the
commission to DOC. Also, the reference to Operator Service Calls could exclude some
forms of payments.
Typically, most states and counties require that commissions be paid on "gross
revenues", which is defined as "total billable minutes without any allowances or
deductions for fraud, line charges, and equipment charges, other collectible or
4

uncollectible charges, etc. “No deductions from Commissionable Revenue will be made."
Taxes are not included in Commissionable Revenue.
Would DOC consider redefining their definition of the Commissionable Revenue to
eliminate any ambiguities? If not, could DOC define and explicitly state what constitutes
the following: - “Amounts billed and not paid”?
14A:

15Q:

Page 34
Section 1.1 Commission Rate
Does the current vendor add a monthly charge for each customer telephone line being
billed / charged each month? If so, what is the amount of the recurring charge?

15A:

No.

16Q:

Page 34
Section 1.1 Commission Rate
Would DOC please specify what recourse it will apply when the selected vendor
modifies their definition in the future by adding unforeseen charges in today’s billing
practices?

16A:

The vendor is not allowed to modify its billing practices including adding unforeseen
charges without prior State approval via a product schedule update. If the vendor were
to change its billing practices by adding unforeseen charges, the vendor would be in
5

breach of contract if said contract did not include the charge. The vendor would be in
breach of the terms of the contract and the State would avail itself of all remedies
available to it including but not limited to converting to an alternate provider or going to
the open market to replace the vendor and charging the vendor in breach of contract for
all costs for such remedy.

17Q:

Page 34
Section 1.1 Commission Rate
In order to ensure apples-to-apples comparisons, would DOC require Contractors to
disclose all billing policies and fees charged, including those by third parties including
Western Union, TouchPay, MoneyGram, etc. and require the details of their revenue
sharing which is in essence and source of income?

17A:

18Q:

Page 35
Section 1.2
Rate Structure
What are the current calling rates for collect and prepaid today?
6

18A:

Rates are posted on the DOIT website:
http://www.ct.gov/doit/lib/doit/purchase/telecom/ps_gtl_inmate_calling_web.pdf
http://www.ct.gov/doit/lib/doit/purchase/telecom/ps_gtl_advpay_web.pdf
http://www.ct.gov/doit/lib/doit/purchase/telecom/ps_gtl_inmate_calling_international_web.pdf

19Q:

Page 35
Section 1.2
Rate Structure
Billing fees and policies both significantly impact the calling rates and commissions that
providers are able to offer. Would DOC please require certain policies for prepaid collect
funding that also impact cost to end-users to be fully disclosed by the Vendors as well as
detail the DOC’s/State’s recourse in the event these are not adhered to or changed?
Examples are in the table below:
We also respectfully request DOC to require disclosures/adherence of any billing agent
associated with the vendor; i.e. disclosures/adherence would be required regardless of
whether prepaid collect funding was administered directly by the vendor or through a
third party:

Minimum funding amount -by phone or
mail

At most $25

Minimum funding amount - by internet,
or third party cash method such as
Western Union (if allowed)

No minimum

Maximum funding amount – by phone

At least $100

Maximum funding amount - by internet,
or third party cash method such as
Western Union (if allowed)

At least $100

Prepaid collect account expiration

At least 6 months from last use

Account refund policy

(1) Process immediately upon request:
•
•

Post within 24 hours to last
credit card used
If no credit card used, mail check
within 5 days of request

(2) No cost to end-users regardless of
refund method

19A:

With regards to fees charged, the vendor shall not charge any fees except for those fees
mandated to be billed to the called party by a regulatory government entity. DOC will
allow outside agencies such as Western Union and MoneyGram to be used only for
International billing. DOC understands that the fees from these outside agencies cannot
be waived. DOC will not require vendors to disclose the fees charged by these agencies
or their share.
With regards to policies, please refer to Attachment 6, Paragraphs 6.7 DISCOUNTED
PRE-PAID SERVICE – MANDATORY and 6.7.1 DISCOUNTED SERVICE FEATURES.
In addition, the vendor is not allowed to modify its billing fees or policies, including
adding unforeseen charges, without prior State approval via a product schedule update.
If the vendor were to change its billing practices by adding unforeseen fees/charges, the
vendor would be in breach of contract if said contract did not include the charge. The
vendor would be in breach of the terms of the contract and the State would avail itself of
all remedies available to it including but not limited to converting to an alternate provider
or going to the open market to replace the vendor and charging the vendor in breach of
contract for all costs for such remedy.

20Q:

Page 35
Section 1.2
Rate Structure
Would DOC please use the fee/policy table below as a mandatory requirement for all
Contractors’ financial offer? Would DOC please require all vendors to fully disclose all
revenue generating agreements (whether through their subcontractors/partners or
directly) with any other entities, in conjunction with inmate telephone services, or the
funding, collecting or establishing payments for the State inmate telephone service?
We also respectfully request DOC to require disclosures/adherence of any billing agent
associated with the vendor; i.e. disclosures/adherence would be required regardless of
whether prepaid collect funding was administered directly by the vendor or through a
third party:

Fee type

Frequency
(e.g. per
transaction
, monthly,
per bill)

Amount

“Cost Recovery” fees, e.g.
Equipment Cost Recovery,
Federal Regulatory
Recovery
8

Applicable
Billing type
(collect, direct
bill, prepaid
collect, debit)

Applicable
tariff type (e.g.
local,
intraLATA,
interstate)

Account Maintenance Fee
Funding through third
parties, e.g. Western Union
Collect billing fee, e.g. Bill
Statement Fee
Direct billing fee
Account refund fee

20A:

In answer to both questions, no. With regards to fees charged, the vendor shall not
charge any fees except for those fees mandated to be billed to the called party by a
regulatory government entity. DOC will allow outside agencies such as Western Union
and MoneyGram to be used only for International billing. DOC understands that the fees
from these outside agencies cannot be waived. DOC will not require vendors to disclose
the fees charged by these agencies or their share.

21Q:

Page 35
Section 1.2
Rate Structure
Would DOC please allow for a Best and Final Offer with fees and calling rates specified
and “fixed” by DOC, so it can make a more "apples-to-apples" comparison of financial
offers?

21A:

No.

22Q:

Pages 57
Section 22.3
Liquidated Damages
What is DOC’s intent for Contractors' response to 22.3?

22A:

These issues will be addressed with the successful vendor during the negotiation
process.

23Q:

Pages 57
Section 22.3
Liquidated Damages
Are specific liquidated damages penalties to be determined during contract
negotiations?

23A:

These issues will be addressed with the successful vendor during the negotiation
process.

24Q:

Page 82
Section 3.5.2
Manual On/Off Switches
Would DOC provide the location and the approximate distance from the phone room
where they would like the cutoff switches installed for each location?

24A:

Yes. This information will be provided to the awarded vendor.

25Q:

Page 82
Section 3.5.2
Manual On/Off Switches
Are there any facilities that currently have cutoff switches installed?

25A:

All facilities have cutoff switches installed.

26Q:

Page 82
Section 3.5.2
Manual On/Off Switches
Does every telephone have a cut-off switch today? If not, how many do?

26A:

Yes, they all do. Some are individual telephone cutoff switches and some are for a bank
of telephones.

27Q:

Page 84
Section 3.11
Inmate Allowed Call List
Would DOC please describe in detail the current process for the inmate add/drop
process?

27A:

Currently, inmates submit a hand written add/drop form monthly, if needed, to DOC
personnel which is then forwarded to three selected facilities. The current vendor picks
up these forms for processing.

28Q:

Page 84
Section 3.11
Inmate Allowed Call List
What is the allowed time period for this process as determined by DOC Security?

28A:

The current vendor processing time period is 30 days from pick up but this is subject to
change as determined by DOC Security.

29Q:

Page 87
Attachment 6
Section 4.10
Inmate Tracking
What file type and information is contained in the current FTP feed for inmate tracking?

29A:

Two daily files are created and sent through FTP.
Daily file 1 includes the Inmate Number, Facility Code, Inmate Name, Housing Unit
and Facility Name.
10

Daily file 2 includes Inmate Number, Sending Facility, and Receiving Facility.
There is also a twice monthly file produced that looks for inmates who are no longer
incarcerated within the DOC system but had been the month before. DOC takes the
current date and subtracts 1 from the month and then compares the calculated date with
discharged inmates last movement date. The files produced include the inmate number
and the last movement date.

30Q:

Page 87
Attachment 6
Section 4.10
Inmate Tracking
Is this information encrypted today? If yes, what is the current encryption technology?

30A:

The information is not encrypted today. Going forward DOC would be looking for the
vendor to be able to accept encrypted data. The vendor should provide DOC with the
various encryption technologies it can work with.

31Q:

Page 88
Section 5
Call Monitoring and Recording Equipment, and
Page 93
Section 7
Inmate Telephone Equipment
Would DOC confirm that all vendors, (including the incumbent, should they be selected
as the winner of this RFP), must replace the existing phones with new phones, both
inmate and visitation?

31A:

Yes, all vendors, (including the incumbent, should they be selected as the winner of this
RFP), must replace the existing inmate telephones with new inmate telephones. Visitor
handsets will be replaced with new inmate telephones should DOC decide to include
visitor telephones as part of the new inmate telephone service.

32Q:

Page 88
Section 5.1
Workstations (ink cartridges)
Would DOC allow for a reasonable negotiation for this requirement during contract
negotiation?

32A:

No. This is a requirement.

33Q:

Page 88
Section 5.1
Workstations (ink cartridges)
Would DOC provide a usage forecast for the replacement of ink cartridges?
Due to
the opportunity for abuse, consumables associated with ITS ancillary equipment (e.g.
printer cartridges, paper, CD-ROMs) are typically provided by the customer rather than
the vendor, and the vendor does not have previous experience with which to estimate
ongoing cost.

33A:

No. DOC does not have this information.

34Q:

Page 88
Section 5.1
Workstations (ink cartridges)
Will DOC commit that the printing will only include reports and data from the ITS?

34A:

Yes

35Q:

Page 89
Section 5.6
Equipment Refresh
For the two year refresh cycle, would DOC confirm that the old workstations replaced by
the new workstations will be returned to the vendor?

35A:

Yes.

36Q:

Page 89
Section 5.6
Equipment Refresh
Would a lease arrangement be acceptable to DOC, where a third-party leasing company
would replace the existing workstations every two years?

36A:

No.

37Q:

Page 91
Section 6.7
Discounted Pre-Paid Service
The second bullet in this section says that the State will not manage any inmate
commissary/trust funds for discounted services.
Does DOC currently have inmate prepaid (debit) calling, where the inmate is able to pay
for their own calls as opposed to an external customer? If yes, would DOC please
describe how the current inmate prepaid (debit) process works with the current vendor?
If no, will DOC consider an option for offender prepaid (debit) calling?

37A:

No, DOC does have inmate prepaid (debit) calling, where the inmate is able to pay for
their own calls as opposed to an external customer. No, at this time DOC will not
consider an option for offender prepaid (debit) calling.

38Q:

Page 92
Section 6.9
Calls at No Monetary Cost
Would DOC provide the number of calls that are placed to the State Public Defender’s
Office, internal security calls from confidential sources and calls place from test
accounts?

38A:

Since calls to the State’s Public Defender’s Office are placed from multiple telephone
switches, including the current inmate telephone calling service, DOC does not have the
12

number of these calls. Monthly, there are approximately 150 internal security calls from
confidential sources. There are currently no calls placed from test accounts,

39Q:

Page 92
Section 6.9
Calls at No Monetary Cost
Are these calls included in the calling information?

39A:

Some of the calls to the State’s Public Defenders may be included but the quantity is
unknown. The calls to the confidential sources are not included. There are currently no
calls placed from test accounts.

40Q:

Page 93
Section 6.11.1
Intake Facility Video Capabilities
Page 94
Section 7.3
Intake Facilities Admitting and Processing
Telephone Sets
Would DOC confirm that this will occur only at the five Correctional Centers (Intake
Facilities) listed on Attachment 16? If not, would DOC provide where this will occur?

40A:

No. This is subject to change.

41Q:

Page 93
Section 6.11.1
Intake Facility Video Capabilities
Page 94
Section 7.3
Intake Facilities Admitting and Processing
Telephone Sets
Would a stand alone video system meet this requirement as long as the video
and audio recordings were synced to a single clock source?

41A:

No.

42Q:

Page 93
Section 6.11.1
Intake Facility Video Capabilities
Page 94
Section 7.3
Intake Facilities Admitting and Processing
Telephone Sets
Is the proposed video system to record all calls made from the Intake Facilities? If not,
would DOC provide additional clarifying information?

42A:

No, only in the admitting and processing areas.

43Q:

Page 93
Section 6.11.1
Page 94
Section 7.3
Telephone Sets

Intake Facility Video Capabilities
Intake Facilities Admitting and Processing

Would DOC provide the expected number of phones in each of the admitting and
processing areas?
43A:

Two telephones in each of the admitting and processing areas.

44Q:

Page 93
Section 6.11.1
Intake Facility Video Capabilities
Page 94
Section 7.3
Intake Facilities Admitting and Processing
Telephone Sets
Is the intent of this requirement to video the overall intake process or to video each
individual phone conversation made from the intake areas?

44A:

To video each individual phone conversation made from the intake areas only.

45Q:

Page 93
Section 6.11.1
Intake Facility Video Capabilities
Page 94
Section 7.3
Intake Facilities Admitting and Processing
Telephone Sets
Will DOC provide architectural site drawings for each location to aid in understanding of
the scope of work required to provide video recording capabilities in the intake areas?

45A:

Yes. This information will be provided to the awarded vendor.

46Q:

Page 94
Section 6.12
Visitor Area Telephone Service
Would DOC provide the footage between the areas where the visitation phones are
located and the closest phone closet?

46A:

See revised Attachment 16.

47Q:

Page 94
Section 6.12
Visitor Area Telephone Service
Is there existing cable or conduit that is currently run back to the demarcation and
telephone equipment?

47A:

No there is not any existing cable or conduit that is currently run back to the demarcation
and telephone equipment, however, it will not be the awarded vendor’s responsibility to
install such cable or conduit. It is the awarded vendor’s responsibility only to install
cable and/or conduit from the closest telephone closet to the visitor telephone sets.

48Q:

Page 99
Section 9.2
Implementation Plan
This section states “order of site installation to be determined by DOC”, and also
14

requires a proposed project plan. The range of phones per facility runs from 28 to 183,
which impacts installation time, additionally, the vendor will not have a working
knowledge of the wiring requirements, including the possible need to trench, until after
the site inspections after contract award. With that in mind, timeframes can only be
estimated. For the RFP:
Does DOC already have a site installation plan listing the order of installations? If not,
would DOC like the vendor to schedule each facility in alphabetical order, with the plan
to be revised after award, using a final installation order supplied by DOC?
48A:

See revised Attachment 16. Implementation plan order is identified for RFP evaluation
purposes only. DOC must approve the final installation order and this may not be
geographic.

49Q:

Page 99
Section 9.2
Implementation Plan
This section states “order of site installation to be determined by DOC”, and also
requires a proposed project plan. The range of phones per facility runs from 28 to 183,
which impacts installation time, additionally, the vendor will not have a working
knowledge of the wiring requirements, including the possible need to trench, until after
the site inspections after contract award. With that in mind, timeframes can only be
estimated. For the RFP:
How much time should the vendor allow for DOC site acceptance testing?

49A:

30-days is the State’s normal acceptance test period however, the State reserves the
right to modify this period as necessary.

50Q:

Page 99
Section 9.2
Implementation Plan
Is the intent of the RFP proposed implementation plan to demonstrate to DOC the ability
of the vendor to provide a comprehensive plan, with the understanding that post-award
decisions will probably alter the times in the proposed plan?

50A:

Yes.

51Q:

Page 108
Section 13
Phase-out Plan
This section discusses the role of the vendor at the end of the contract. At the end of the
next contract, is it acceptable to:
Have a “leave behind” solution whereby a fully function system is left for the State’s use.

51A:

Yes.

52Q:

Page 108
Section 13
Phase-out Plan
This section discusses the role of the vendor at the end of the contract. At the end of the
next contract, is it acceptable to:
Provide a new service provider with historical CDRs and call recording in a common
format?

52A:

Yes as long as it is in compliance with RFP Attachment 6, paragraph 4.7
AUTHENTICITY OF RECORDINGS.

53Q:

Page 111
Section 14.6.3
Vendor Service and Support Manager
Does the incumbent (GTL) have a full-time Service and Support Manger dedicated
exclusively to DOC?

53A:

No.

55Q:

Page 111
Section 14.6.3
Vendor Service and Support Manager
Would DOC consider waiving the requirement to provide this individual’s resume in the
RFP, with the stipulation that this would be supplied to DOC after the award of the
contract for DOC’s approval?

55A:

Since the Service and Support Manager is not required to be exclusively dedicated to
DOC, the State will not waive this requirement.

56Q:

Page 111
Section 14.6.4
Vendor Technical Staffing
This section states that vendor technicians will report directly to the DOC Director of
Security or Designee.
Section 14.6.3 states - the Vendor Service and Support Manager will be responsible for
on-going service and support.
Would DOC please clarify the role of the Vendor Service and Support Manager if the
vendor technicians are reporting directly to DOC?

56A:

The Vendor Service and Support Manager will manage the vendor’s technicians and
ensure the Inmate Telephone Service is maintained and operational. It was DOC’s
intent to provide direction to the vendor’s technicians regarding day-to-day
operations/assignments.

57Q:

Page 113
Attachment 7
Contract Compliance
Page 124
Attachment 9
Vendor Certifications
Would the State please provide these two attachments in a word document?

57A:

No.

58Q:

Page 157
Attachment 16
DOC Facility Profile
Are the phones listed in the Quantity Column mounted directly on the wall?
DOC provide a breakdown by type of pedestals and enclosures?

If no could

58A:

Yes with the exception of the two telephones at John Dempsey which are on rolling
pedestals.

59Q:

On page 12 of the issued RFP, Section 2.2.1, Number 12 allows the State to “Contract
with one or more vendors who submit proposals”. State and governmental agencies
contract with one Inmate Telephone provider to service the agency. The vendor
respectfully request that this statement be removed.

On page 12 of the issued RFP, Section 2.2.1, Number 14 allows the State to “Contract
for all or any portion of the scope of work or tasks within this RFP”. State and
governmental agencies contract with one Inmate Telephone provider to service the
agency. For this reason the vendor respectfully request that this statement be removed.
59A:

No.

60Q:

On page 34 of the issued RFP, Section 1.1 it states “Commissions must be based upon
revenue as follows: “Commissionable Revenue” is the revenue from Operator Service
Calls generated by the inmate telephones, excluding: (i) amounts billed, but not paid; (ii)
taxes; (iii) credits; and (iv) amounts otherwise paid to third parties in support of
regulatory programs.” The above statement defining revenue is not normal or customary
within the inmate telephone industry. Amounts billed but not paid are considered bad
debt and normally not excluded from commissionable revenue. The vendor respectfully
requests that the State redefines commissionable revenue as “Gross Revenue shall
mean all revenue generated by every completed call that is accepted by a consumer, but
excludes all taxes, Federal and State or local telecommunication fees that additionally
apply to a consumer’s monthly telephone bill.” This is the current payment method that
is utilized in paying the State of Connecticut.

60A:

61Q:

Beginning on page 36 of the issued RFP there is a matrix that vendor must fill out
containing the cost per minute for calling. Normal calls also contain a surcharge that is
associated with the call as well. Is it the intent of the State to solicit a rate chart that is
comprised of a per minute fee only, or will the State be amending the form to include a
per call surcharge?

61A:

No, the State does not want a per call surcharge and will not be amending the form.

62Q:

On page 79 of the issued RFP, Section 2.6 states “The solution must assure no loss of
functions for up to 90 minutes loss of commercial power in the DOCs’ facilities.” On
page 89 of the issued RFP, Section 5.5 it states “The vendor shall provide four (4) hours
UPS backup to for all vendor provided equipment.” Please confirm that 90 minutes of
backup power, in the event of commercial power loss, is sufficient.

62A:

90 minutes is sufficient.

63Q:

On page 88 of the issued RFP, Section 5.0 states “The vendor must supply DOC with
additional hardware and related software upon request.” Please define any additional
hardware and software that may be needed above and beyond the defined workstations,
18

laptops and printers so that the vendor can provide the DOC with the best commission
offering.
63A:

It is dependent upon the awarded vendor’s service. Additional hardware could include
additional workstations/printers and additional software may include analytical software
that is not included with the core service.

64Q:

On page 88 of the issued RFP, Section 5.1 states “The vendor must also supply the
following for each workstation:
•
•
•
•

CD/DVD creator software
Wireless Headset with noise cancellation (one per telephone monitor)
Color All-In-One Laser Printer/Scanner/Fax, associated cable(s) and replacement ink
cartridges
Surge Protector (UPS 900 VA 120V or comparable alternative)”

Please clarify, if the State is looking for 29 or 30 printers? Further please clarify if the
State wishes Color All-In-One Laser Printers or Inkjet Printers.
64A:

The quantity of workstations may vary over the life of the contract. DOC requires one
“Color All-In-One Laser Printer/Scanner/Fax, associated cable(s) and replacement ink
cartridges” for each workstation.

65Q:

On page 90 of the issued RFP, Section 6.6 states “All inmate calls will be “Collect Call
Only” as defined in DOC Administrative Directive 10.7 Inmate Communications
(http://www.ct.gov/doc/LIB/doc/PDF/AD/ad1007.pdf).” Currently the State allows for
three types of calling under the current contract: 1) Standard LEC Collect Calling –
Traditional collect calling. Call charges appear on the end users LEC telephone bill. 2)
Direct Remit Billing – direct billed collect calling option. This calling option allows the
end user to be billed by the current provider. This is NOT a prepaid calling plan.
Statements are sent by your provider and payments are received after the fact. 3) Direct
Remit Prepaid Calling – This calling option allows for end user to pre-pay for calls prior
to receiving them. Please confirm if the State wishes to keep these calling
methodologies in place. . Additionally, would the state consider supplementing these
choices with inmate paid or debit calling?

65A:

Yes, it is confirmed. The State would like to keep these billing options available to the
public.
No, at this time, the State will not allow supplementing these choices with inmate paid or
debit calling.

66Q:

On page 91 of the issued RFP, within Section 6.7 it states “There will be no
administrative fee for establishing or replenishing accounts.” During the pre-bid meeting
on December 8th, an attending vendor requested that all fees, in addition to normal call
cost fees, be defined within the RFP submittal. The above referenced statement from
the RFP, as the vendor reads it, does not allow for fees. Under the current contract NO
fees are permitted or charged by the current provider. Please clarify your intention with
respect to fees.

66A:

The State confirms that there will be no administrative fee for establishing or
replenishing accounts.
The vendor shall not charge any fees except for those fees mandated to be billed to the
called party by a regulatory government entity. DOC will allow outside agencies such as
Western Union and MoneyGram to be used only for International billing. DOC
understands that the fees from these outside agencies cannot be waived. DOC will not
require vendors to disclose the fees charged by these agencies or their share.

67Q:

On page 93 of the issued RFP, Section 6.12 states “DOC is interested in having the
ability to listen and record visitor telephone conversations with the same call control and
limitation features as the inmate telephones.” This requirement will result in every facility
needing to be surveyed for wiring requirements. Please provide a contact person and
phone number so that the vendor can coordinate these site visits.

67A:

Only the awarded vendor shall perform site surveys at the DOC facilities/sites which will
be coordinated at that time with the DOC Project Manager. For the visitor telephone
sets, wiring distance requirements is provided in this document.

68Q:

On page 93 of the issued RFP, Section 6.12 states “DOC is interested in having the
ability to listen and record visitor telephone conversations with the same call control and
limitation features as the inmate telephones.” To properly size the solution please
provide the following information by facility:
Number of visitation booths.

68A:

The count is unknown as not all facilities have booths.

69Q:

On page 93 of the issued RFP, Section 6.12 states “DOC is interested in having the
ability to listen and record visitor telephone conversations with the same call control and
limitation features as the inmate telephones.” To properly size the solution please
provide the following information by facility:
20

Location of Visitation Areas. If multiple locations exist within a facility please indicate
all locations.
69A:

See revised Attachment 16. Specific visitation locations within a facility will be provided
to the awarded vendor.

70Q:

On page 93 of the issued RFP, Section 6.12 states “DOC is interested in having the
ability to listen and record visitor telephone conversations with the same call control and
limitation features as the inmate telephones.” To properly size the solution please
provide the following information by facility:
Number of phone on each side of the glass.

70A:

There are a total of 762 phones needed for visitation purposes; this includes phones on
both sides of the glass. (See revised Attachment 16)

71Q:

On page 93 of the issued RFP, Section 6.12 states “DOC is interested in having the
ability to listen and record visitor telephone conversations with the same call control and
limitation features as the inmate telephones.” To properly size the solution please
provide the following information by facility:
Visitation hours by day, by week

71A:

Visitation schedules vary by facility and are listed on the DOC website by facility
(http://www.ct.gov/doc/cwp/view.asp?a=1502&Q=265422&docNav=|)

72Q:

On page 93 of the issued RFP, Section 6.12 states “DOC is interested in having the
ability to listen and record visitor telephone conversations with the same call control and
limitation features as the inmate telephones.” Does the facility wish to have the inmates
utilize PIN numbers for access to the visitation system?

72A:

Yes.

73Q:

On page 113 of the issued RFP it states “During the evaluation process, special
consideration will be given to those Bidders who provide documentation to evidence
their utilization of a certified small minority or women’s business and/or demonstrate the
Bidder’s commitment to, whenever possible, utilize a certified small minority or women’s
business.” Please define what this special consideration will be, how will it be evaluated

and any evaluation points associated with the use of small minority or women’s
businesses.
73A:

There will be no special consideration in the RFP evaluation for a small minority or
women’s business.

74Q:

In responding to State DOC inmate telephone RFPs it is normal and customary to
submit multiple financial offers so that the State can select the best financial offer and
rate plan that meets their business objectives. Is this permissible to the State?

74A:

No.

75Q:

It has been the vendor’s experience that answers to submitted questions may generate
additional questions that need to be asked for clarification. With this in mind will the
State have a secondary question period after December 13th?

75A:

No.

76Q:

The State defines that the financial response to the issued RFP is weighted at a total
maximum pointing value of 1000 points. How many points are allocated to rates and
how many to commissions?

76A:

This level of detail will not be disclosed at this time.

77Q:

Is the State more concerned with lower calling rates to the end user or more revenue for
the State?

77A:

This level of detail will not be disclosed at this time.

78Q:

On page 92 of the issued RFP, Section 6.11 states “This service allows inmates to place
collect calls via live operator.” Currently the system that is in place does not allow the
inmates the opportunity to access a live operator. The vendor respectfully requests that
this statement be amended to say automated operator.

78A:

RFP Attachment 6, Section 6.11 INTAKE FACILITY TELEPHONE SERVICE –
MANDATORY the second sentence in the first paragraph is redacted and replaced with
the following:
This service allows inmates to place collect calls via automated operator.
22

79Q:

On page 109 of the issued RFP, Section 14.4 mandates three references must be
supplied with the RFP response. Please confirm that these references must be
references of the prime vendor responding to this RFP and not references from their
sub-contractors.

79A:

The references must be references of the vendor responding to this RFP as identified in
Attachment 6, paragraph 14.1.

80Q:

Is a vendor allowed to be a sub-contractor and/or prime on multiple bid responses?

80A:

No. Vendors may be sub-contractors on multiple RFP responses but not as a prime on
multiple RFP responses.

81Q:

In order to provide the best possible offer, it is very helpful to have the rates currently
being charged to called parties under the current contract. Please provide the following
information as they apply in the following chart:
Call Category

Per Call Surcharge

Per Minute Charge

Other Charges

LOCAL – Collect
INTRALATA – Collect
INTERLATA – Collect
INTERSTATE – Collect
LOCAL – PrePaid Collect
INTRALATA – PrePaid Collect
INTERLATA – PrePaid Collect
INTERSTATE – PrePaid Collect

In addition, if any other calling options are available to which special calling rates apply,
please provide those calling rates.
81A:

82Q:

Please confirm that CT DOIT inmate telephone revenue commission is paid on gross
completed call revenue, and that no deductions are made for unbillable calls or bad debt
for Collect calls, or for any cost associated with providing Collect, Prepaid Collect, or
Debit calls. If deductions do apply, please state the deductions being applied before
calculating commissionable revenue.

82A:

83Q:

Please confirm the commission rate the State is receiving from its current inmate
telephone provider.

83A:

45%

84Q:

Please provide the total technology grant dollars or bonuses received by the State from
the current provider at the beginning of, or at any time during, the current contract
period.

84A:

85Q:

Please provide a copy of the current inmate phone service agreement(s).
24

85A:

The link to current master agreement is:
http://www.ct.gov/doit/lib/doit/purchase/telecom/mab03013.pdf.

86Q:

Please provide an average of monthly commissions received over the past year from the
current vendor and copies of commission statements (if available).

86A:

Copies of the Commission Statements, which contain the commission paid, are provided
at the end of Amendment 2.

87Q:

Section 1.4 allows vendors some latitude in how they present information; please
confirm the following:
Will the State allow each vendor to submit multiple rate and commission options for
consideration?

87A:

No.

88Q:

All inmate telephone vendors offer some version of called party prepaid calling. With this
type prepaid account, there are often fees associated with funding of accounts, account
setup, refund processing, dormant accounts, etc. Some fees are charged by the vendor
and others are charged through a third-party agent or subcontractor. Regardless, the
amounts can be significant. Does the State require disclosure of all fees in order to
ensure that the State is able to evaluate the total cost to the consumer?

88A:

The vendor shall not charge any fees except for those fees mandated to be billed to the
called party by a regulatory government entity. DOC will allow outside agencies such as
Western Union and MoneyGram to be used only for International billing. DOC
understands that the fees from these outside agencies cannot be waived. DOC will not
require vendors to disclose the fees charged by these agencies or their share.

89Q:

On page 34 “Commission Rate” is based on “commissionable revenue” which, by
definition, does not include bad debt, “…amounts billed but not paid.” Bad debt can vary
greatly between inmate telephone service providers. A 45% Commission Rate from one
company (with bad debt deducted from Total Gross Revenue) may give the department
much less revenue than a 45% Commission Rate from another company. In order for
the DOIT to fairly evaluate Commission Rate on a level playing field, can this be
changed to remove “..amounts billed but not paid” from the definition of “commissionable
revenue”?
25

89A:

90Q:

Section 21, page 55, which requires putting source code into escrow, is problematic to
most or all providers. It also does not necessarily resolve the dilemma of a company’s
failure to provide service due to bankruptcy or other financial issues. Even with the
source code, the DOIT would most likely still have a many months ordeal in reading,
deciphering, and rewriting any required code changes, if it could be accomplished at all.
In lieu of escrowing source code, can the DOIT require a bond large enough to
completely change the system, hardware and software, in the case of a provider default?

90A:

These issues will be addressed with the successful vendor during the negotiation
process.

91Q:

Requirement 2.2.30 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE requires compliance for NYSE listed
companies. Please confirm that a non-NYSE listed company is not bound by these
requirements.

91A:

This is not applicable to non-NYSE companies.

92Q:

Systems Development Technology - Attachment 13 - Executive Order No. 19 –
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGY addresses IT Systems Developed for the
State of Connecticut. There is no required IT development for this project. All of the
26

software and systems proposed for the inmate telephone application has been
developed, deployed, and operational for more than 3 years. Please confirm the system
software proposed as a part of the proposal does not have to comply with this
requirement.
92A:

For acquisition of services or subscriptions where no development is required, Executive
Order No. 19 would not apply.

93Q:

Paragraph 16, page 53 requires encryption of data “…classified as confidential or
restricted.” Are call recording and call record details classified as confidential or
restricted, and will they require encryption in accordance with CTEA requirements?

93A:

These issues will be addressed with the successful vendor during the negotiation
process.

94Q:

Paragraph 33, page 63, is the “Continuity of Systems” requirement in place for the
current provider?

94A:

Yes, State Statute 4d-44 is included in the current master agreement.

95Q:

In order to ensure that vendors have ample time to incorporate the State’s answers to
bidder questions and to prepare a thorough bid response for the State of Connecticut,
will the State consider extending the RFP response deadline two weeks to January 25,
2010?

95A:

The State has issued Amendment #1 to this RFP extending the due date to 2/8/2011.

96Q:

Will the state permit inmates to place prepaid collect calls to cellular phones?

96A:

Yes.

97Q:

Are calls permitted to cellular phones today?

97A:

No.

98Q:

Some requirements are highlighted in yellow and the text indicates they are mandatory
requirements. Yet other requirements not marked as such use terms such as “shall”
27

“will” & “must.” Are all requirements mandatory; or just those marked as mandatory and
highlighted in yellow? Please clarify.
98A:

A vendor must meet all requirements marked MANDATORY or they will not be
considered. All other requirements will be evaluated and will affect the vendor’s ranking.

99Q:

Section 1.2 – Identifies contract duration as a five year term with two extension options
of one year each. Attachment 5, paragraph 1 indicates that three extension options are
possible following a base contract term of five years. Please confirm which language is
correct.

99A:

Attachment 5 is a sample RFP CPD - Master Agreement. The term of the contract will
be a five year term with two extension options of one year each.

100Q: Section 2.2.1 (12) - specifies that the State may select one or more vendors to provide
the desired service. Most vendors predicate their financial offers based on the total call
traffic, and a presumption that they will be the only (exclusive) provider of inmate
telephone services. If this is not the case, it will substantially affect the business model.
Selection of multiple vendors could also negatively impact the State’s ability to perform
investigative analysis because each vendor would be using a separate call processing
platform. Please clarify.
100A: The state may contract with one or more vendors who submit proposals if it deems this is in the
best interest of the State.

101Q: Section 2.2.16 – Is it necessary to include copies of proposed subcontractor
agreements with the proposal?
101A: No. This is a requirement of the successful vendor.

102Q: Section 2.2.21 - Indicates that ownership of software/code developed or customized for
the contract becomes property of the state. If this interpretation is correct, vendors
would not be able to offer the same/similar features to other states/county customers.
102A: Any software code, development, or customization, specific to the State and paid for by
the State is property of the State. This issue will be addressed in contract negotiations.

103Q: Section 2.2.29 - States: “Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in any warranty
or warranties, the remedies available to the State under this Date/Time Compliance
28

Warranty shall include the obligation to repair or replace any Product and/or item whose
non-compliance with this Warranty or defect is discovered by Contractor or the State, all
at the expense of Contractor….This Warranty remains in effect through the 365 days
following the termination of this Contract. This provision shall not be construed to extend
the Warranty Term of this Contract, except as services for defects to the System and all
Products shall be required under any Maintenance Term.”
Knowing that the selected vendor will remove their equipment following the end of the
contract (and award to another vendor); under what conditions would the vendor’s
equipment be subject to this requirement following the termination of the contract?
103A: See Attachment 6, paragraph 13. PHASE-OUT PLAN which states “The vendor will
transfer ownership of the then current telephones, hardware, software and all associated
cabling to the DOC at the end of the contract.”

104Q: Sections 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3; 2.1.1; 2.1.2; and 2.1.3 indicate the following: “The rate
proposed and charged by the vendor shall be a single flat per minute rate exclusive of all
applicable fees, surcharges, and taxes for all collect calls made.”
Please confirm that the rates proposed must not include any fees or surcharges charged
by the vendor (or its payment agent) for any reason short of government mandate.
104A: RFP Attachment 3, Paragraph 1.2.1 DOMESTIC CALLS PLACED TO CONNECTICUT
TELEPHONE NUMBERS is redacted and replaced with the following:
The rate proposed and charged by the vendor shall be a single flat per minute rate
for all collect calls made to Connecticut telephone numbers. This rate must be
inclusive of all applicable fees and surcharges. This rate shall exclude Federal,
State and local government taxes and fees mandated to be billed to the called party
by a regulatory government entity. If some future regulatory development
establishes a new charge, the vendor must submit such charge with supporting
documentation to the State for its approval. The rate for the discounted pre-paid
calls must be, at a minimum, 25% less than the standard collect call rate.
The vendor shall affirm it will comply.
RFP Attachment 3, Paragraph 1.2.2 DOMESTIC CALLS PLACED TO NON-CONNECTICUT
TELEPHONE NUMBERS is redacted and replaced with the following:
The rate proposed and charged by the vendor shall be a single flat per minute rate
for all collect calls made to non-Connecticut telephone numbers within the
continental United States, Alaska and Hawaii. This rate must be inclusive of all
applicable fees and surcharges. This rate shall exclude Federal, State and local
29

government taxes and fees mandated to be billed to the called party by a regulatory
government entity. If some future regulatory development establishes a new charge,
the vendor must submit such charge with supporting documentation to the State for
its approval. The rate for the discounted pre-paid calls must be, at a minimum, 25%
less than the standard collect call rate.
The vendor shall affirm it will comply.
RFP Attachment 3, Paragraph 1.2.3 CALLS PLACED TO INTERNATIONAL TELEPHONE
NUMBERS is redacted and replaced with the following:
The vendor shall propose a rate structure for international calls detailing rates by
country inclusive of all applicable fees and surcharges. This rate shall exclude,
where applicable, all Federal, State and local government taxes and fees mandated
to be billed to the called party by a regulatory government entity. If some future
regulatory development establishes a new charge, the vendor must submit such
charge with supporting documentation to the State for its approval. The rates for the
discounted pre-paid calls must be, at a minimum, 25% less than the standard collect
call rates.
The vendor shall affirm it will comply.
RFP Attachment 3, Paragraph 2.1.1 DOMESTIC CALLS PLACED TO CONNECTICUT
TELEPHONE NUMBERS (ALTERNATE RATE) is redacted and replaced with the following:
The rate proposed and charged by the vendor shall be a single flat per minute rate
for all collect calls made to Connecticut telephone numbers. This rate must be
inclusive of all applicable fees and surcharges. This rate shall exclude Federal,
State and local government taxes and fees mandated to be billed to the called party
by a regulatory government entity. If some future regulatory development
establishes a new charge, the vendor must submit such charge with supporting
documentation to the State for its approval. The rate for the discounted pre-paid
calls must be, at a minimum, 25% less than the standard collect call rate.
The vendor shall affirm it will comply.
RFP Attachment 3, Paragraph 2.1.2 DOMESTIC CALLS PLACED TO NON-CONNECTICUT
TELEPHONE NUMBERS (ALTERNATE RATE) is redacted and replaced with the following:
The rate proposed and charged by the vendor shall be a single flat per minute rate
for all collect calls made to non-Connecticut telephone numbers within the
continental United States, Alaska and Hawaii. This rate must be inclusive of all
applicable fees and surcharges. This rate shall exclude Federal, State and local
30

105Q: Sections 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3; 2.1.1; 2.1.2; and 2.1.3 indicate the following: “The rate
proposed and charged by the vendor shall be a single flat per minute rate exclusive of all
applicable fees, surcharges, and taxes for all collect calls made.”
Many vendors accept payments made via Western Union and/or MoneyGram. Each of these
services assess a fee to process a payment. Will the State allow vendors to accept payments
made using these methods? If yes, will the State require vendors to disclose the amount of such
fees and any profit or share of Western Union or MoneyGram fees received by the vendor?

105A: DOC will allow outside agencies such as Western Union and MoneyGram to be used
only for International billing. DOC understands that the fees from these outside
agencies cannot be waived. DOC will not require vendors to disclose the fees charged
by these agencies or their share.

106Q: Section 7.1 and 7.2 – Please confirm that vendor is to provide one original plus six
copies and one CD of the technical proposal and one original plus six copies and one
CD of the financial proposal. Is it acceptable to deliver the proposal in a single package
which includes two separate containers (one containing the financial proposal and one
containing the technical proposal)?
106A: For both the Technical and Financial proposals, the vendor must provide one original
hardcopy (original with signature) plus six (6) additional hardcopies. The original and
each hardcopy must also include an electronic copy.
Yes, it is acceptable to deliver the proposal in a single package which includes two
separate containers (one containing the financial proposal and one containing the
technical proposal)

107Q: Attachment 3, Section 1.1: “The vendor shall pay a monthly commission to DOIT of at
least, but not limited to 45% of the Commissionable Revenue. Commissions must be
based upon revenue as follows:
‘Commissionable Revenue’ is the revenue from Operator Service Calls generated by the
inmate telephones, excluding: (i) amounts billed, but not paid; (ii) taxes; (iii) credits; and
(iv) amounts otherwise paid to third parties in support of regulatory programs.”
So that all vendors are clear on what the commission percentage (i.e, “commissionable
revenue”) is based on, is it correct to re-state that commissionable revenue is based on
gross collect and prepaid collect call revenue less items (i),(ii), (iii), and (iv)?
108A: RFP Attachment 3, paragraph 1.1 COMMISSION RATE of the RFP is redacted and
replaced with the following:
The vendor shall pay a monthly commission to DOIT of at least, but not limited to,
45% of the Commissionable Revenue. “Commissionable Revenue” is defined as the
gross billed amounts generated by every completed telephone call that is accepted
by a called party using the inmate telephone service. This excludes Federal, State
and local government taxes and fees mandated to be billed to the called party by a
regulatory government entity. If some future regulatory development establishes a
new charge, the vendor and the State will mutually determine the exemption of such
charge from Commissionable Revenue at that time. The commission must be
received by DOIT within 30 days of the end of each month’s billing cycle.
All revenue payments to the State for services/equipment shall be made payable to
“Treasurer, State of Connecticut” and submitted to the Department of Information
Technology, Fiscal Office or designee.
32

The vendor shall affirm it will comply with the above requirements (do not state the
commission rate here).

108Q: Attachment 3, Section 1.1: “The vendor shall pay a monthly commission to DOIT of at
least, but not limited to 45% of the Commissionable Revenue. Commissions must be
based upon revenue as follows:
It is uncommon to exclude bad debt/uncollected funds from commission calculations;
does the current vendor pay commissions on this basis?
108A: No.

109Q: Attachment 3, Section 1.1: “The vendor shall pay a monthly commission to DOIT of at
least, but not limited to 45% of the Commissionable Revenue. Commissions must be
based upon revenue as follows:
Recent media publicity concerning fees applied to prepaid calling has called attention
that certain fees charged to CT residents may not be legal in the state. Please confirm
which fees (if any) are being charged by the current vendor and/or their payment agents.
109A: We cannot confirm the fees that are being charged by the current vendor.

110Q: Attachment 3, Section 1.1: “The vendor shall pay a monthly commission to DOIT of at
least, but not limited to 45% of the Commissionable Revenue. Commissions must be
based upon revenue as follows:
Please confirm that the State will not permit vendors to charge any fees beyond taxes
and mandated regulatory fees.
110A: This is confirmed. The vendors’ proposed rates must be inclusive of all applicable fees
and surcharges. These rates shall exclude Federal, State and local government taxes
and fees mandated to be billed to the called party by a regulatory government entity. If
some future regulatory development establishes a new charge, the vendor must submit
such charge with supporting documentation to the State for its approval.
In addition, the vendor shall not charge any fees except for those fees mandated to be
billed to the called party by a regulatory government entity. DOC will allow outside
agencies such as Western Union and MoneyGram to be used only for International
billing. DOC understands that the fees from these outside agencies cannot be waived.
DOC will not require vendors to disclose the fees charged by these agencies or their
share.

111Q: Attachment 3, Section 1.2.3 implies that vendor is to provide international collect by
stating that international prepaid collect rates must be at least 25% below international
collect rates. However, Attachment 3 Financial Spreadsheet does not ask for a collect
international rate(s). Please confirm that international calling is to be limited to prepaid
collect only. Please provide the international rates charged by the current vendor today.
111A: It is confirmed that international calling is to be limited to prepaid collect only. The
international rates charged by the current vendor may be found on the DOIT website:
http://www.ct.gov/doit/lib/doit/purchase/telecom/ps_gtl_inmate_calling_international_web.pdf.

112Q: Attachment 5, Agreement – Much of the agreement anticipates payment for a product
made to the vendor; however, the RFP is intended to obtain a “no cost” solution for the
state, and to produce a commission revenue share for the State. Will the Agreement be
modified to better reflect the project money flow?
112A: These issues will be addressed with the successful vendor during the negotiation
process.

113Q: Attachment 6, Section 1.3 States that there are 650 visitor handsets. Will the State
provide vendors with a breakdown of visitor handsets by site? Also, it is assumed that
for every visitor handset, there is an inmate visitation handset, please confirm.
113A: There are a total of 762 phones needed for visitation purposes; this includes phones on
both sides of the glass. (See revised Attachment 16)

114Q: Attachment 6, Section 4.10 - Attachment 6 indicates the DOC is currently using an
inmate tracking system to update the phone system of inmate daily movements – please
identify the manufacturer of the tracking system and whether it contains data such as
inmate ID and inmate PIN in addition to inmate location. Does the DOC wish to change
the data flow between this system and the inmate phone vendor or continue with the ftp
file sharing concept in use today?
114A: Currently the DOC has a mainframe based system that tracks the inmates. The system
is the Offender based Information System and is hosted on the mainframe at DOIT.
There is no PIN number associated with the file. At a minimum the vendor must be able
to continue with the existing FTP process. DOC would like to improve this process and
would be interested in the vendor’s proposed changes. If the proposed changes can
work in the State’s environment then the State would be interested.

115Q: Attachment 6, Section 5 – specifies that equipment must be new but this requirement
is under the heading of monitoring and recording equipment. Please confirm that the
requirement for all equipment to be new also applies to all on-site equipment including
inmate phones, workstations, laptops, etc.
115A: Yes, this is confirmed.

116Q: Attachment 6, Section 5.3 – Please be more specific about the desired “additional
software” to analyze CDRs. Are features contained within the inmate phone system
acceptable; or does the DOC have a particular functionality in mind?
116A: Features contained within the inmate telephone system may be acceptable. DOC
requires analytical software that may or may not be included in the core Inmate
Telephone Service.

117Q: Attachment 6, Section 5.4 – On-site backup of recording data - By including yet
another data backup site at DOC Central will add another layer of equipment and also
another cost component to the system which will affect commission rate. Will the state
permit vendors to use their own backup site and capability to satisfy this requirement?
117A: No.

118Q: Attachment 6, Section 5.5 – This section requires 4 hour UPS backup time which
conflicts with Section 2.6 which requires 90 minutes of UPS coverage in the event o f a
commercial power outages.
118A: 90 minutes is sufficient.

119Q: Attachment 6, Section 5.6 Please confirm the requirement to refresh all onsite
equipment every two years of the contract. Most vendors will provide high quality,
industry-standard equipment that will serve well over the contract term, and in event of a
failure, the vendor would be bound by the contract to replace such equipment
automatically upon failure. The requirement as written will add additional cost to the
program and will impact commissions.
119A: This requirement remains as is.

120Q: Attachment 6, Section 6.4 states that “collect only” calls will be allowed which will
include prepaid collect using the price discount schedule stated in the RFP.
120A: (Attachment 6, Section 6.4 is INMATE NAME IDENTIFIER. Attachment 6, Section 6.6 is
COLLECT CALLS – MANDATORY)
DOC only allows collect calling. The vendor may have other billing options (pre-paid,
direct remittance), all of which must have the recipient of the call paying for the call
(collect calling only).

121Q: Attachment 6, Section 6.6 – This section specifies that vendors may not impose any
limitations to inmate calling except for those listed in the DOC handbook. Most vendors
impose a monthly credit limit to LEC-billed traditional collect calls in order to minimize
bad debt exposure. Will the DOC permit this practice?
121A: No.

122Q: Attachment 6, Section 6.7 – This section specifies that vendors shall not keep funds
when an account is closed. Please confirm that vendors are not permitted to absorb
prepaid collect account balances due to account inactivity. It is also specified that no fee
is to be charged to replenish an account. While vendors may agree to waive such fees,
outside agencies such as Western Union and MoneyGram collect a fee that cannot be
waived. Will the DOC permit the use of these payment alternatives? If so, please note
that each vendor’s agreement with Western Union and MoneyGram vary and some
vendors profit by receiving a share of the fee collected by these agencies. Will the DOC
require vendors to disclose the fees charged by these agencies along with their share, if
any?
122A: Confirmed, vendors are not permitted to absorb prepaid collect account balances due to
account inactivity. Confirmed, no fee is to be charged to replenish an account. DOC will
allow outside agencies such as Western Union and MoneyGram to be used only for
International billing. DOC understands that the fees from these outside agencies cannot
be waived. DOC will not require vendors to disclose the fees charged by these agencies
or their share.

123Q: Attachment 6, Section 6.11.1 - DOC is interested in having the ability in the admitting
and processing areas, to video record conversations as part of the inmate telephone
service. The video recordings must contain date and time stamps which correspond to
the audio recording of these calls.
Please Clarify: Is the requirement for the vendor to provide the ancillary videotaping
equipment and media at each intake area to visually record each inmate’s call?
36

123A: Yes it is a requirement.

124Q: Attachment 6, Section 6.11.1 - DOC is interested in having the ability in the admitting
and processing areas, to video record conversations as part of the inmate telephone
service. The video recordings must contain date and time stamps which correspond to
the audio recording of these calls. Please Clarify: Is this a mandatory requirement as
implied by Section 7.3?
124A: No it is not mandatory but is an important feature that will be scored.

125Q: Attachment 6, Section 6.11.1 - DOC is interested in having the ability in the admitting
and processing areas, to video record conversations as part of the inmate telephone
service. The video recordings must contain date and time stamps which correspond to
the audio recording of these calls.
Please Clarify: If not, what evaluation value does this feature represent?
125A: Evaluation value will not be disclosed.

126Q: Attachment 6 , Section 6.12 & 7.4 - DOC is interested in having the ability to listen and
record visitor telephone conversations with the same call control and limitation features
as the inmate telephones. The vendor shall describe how the proposed service
accomplishes this.
For vendors to calculate the number of recorders and amount of storage media to record
visitation conversations, it is important for the vendor to know how many visitation
stations, number of visitors, and duration of each visit for all of the facilities which allow
visitation.
126A: There are a total of 762 phones needed for visitation purposes; this includes phones on
both sides of the glass. (See revised Attachment 16) There were a total of 392,164
visits made January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010. Visitation sessions for all
facilities, can vary between 30 and 60 minutes.

127Q: Attachment 6, Section 7.3 – Requires an electronic identifier, video recording or
snapshot of caller imbedded in the CDR. Will the DOC consider a proven voice
verification solution as an alternative?
127A: No unless a legal precedence has already been established through litigation. For
consideration, the vendor must fully disclose the details of such litigation.
37

128Q: Attachment 6, Section 8 – Indicates that wiring, when replaced should be CAT6.
Please confirm that wiring will only need to be replaced in instances where existing
wiring is insufficient or damaged.
128A: This is confirmed. Where needed, the vendor must install all new inside station wiring
(at least Category 6) and conduit in compliance with the most current TIA/EIA
Telecommunications Building Wiring Standards for the installation of all equipment. It is
the awarded vendor’s responsibility only to install cable and/or conduit from the closest
telephone closet to the inmate or visitor telephone sets.

129Q: Attachment 6, Section 9.5 – Please confirm that current vendor has agreed to provide
90 days of recordings in a non-proprietary format for the DOC’s future use.
129A: The current vendor has not agreed to provide 90 days of recordings in a non-proprietary
format for the DOC’s future use.

130Q: Attachment 6, Section 9.6 - “The vendor shall be responsible for the removal, inventory
creation/validation, storage and coordination of the return of all existing GTL equipment
no later than forty-five (45) days after the successful completion of a facilities
acceptance test.”
It is customary for the incumbent vendor to remove their own equipment in coordination
with the new vendor system acceptance. Having the new vendor remove the incumbent
vendor’s equipment would make the new vendor responsible for the condition of the
equipment. Will the DOC agree to have the new vendor coordinate with the outgoing
vendor for removal of their own equipment as part of the transition plan?
130A: Yes as long as the new vendor assumes all responsibility and manages this effort.

131Q: Attachment 6, Section 11.5.1 – System Reliability - The vendor must provide details on
all incidents of system failures in the last three (3) years, including priority levels (see
above table) which resulted in an interruption of service. Identify the cause of the failure
including whether it was a system malfunction (hardware or software) or human error.
Please clarify that the requirement for the vendor to list all incidents for the last 3 years
for its systems at all previous/existing customers. It would seem that this would only be
relevant if vendors were using the same platforms for these three years as the platform
being proposed. Some vendors may be proposing newer, more advanced system
technology that was not in place 3 years ago.
38

131A: DOC is only interested in reviewing incidents on the proposed system from the last 3
years or for as long as the system being proposed has been in place.

132Q: Appendix 6, Section 13 - The vendor will transfer ownership of the then current
telephones, hardware, software and all associated cabling to DOC at the end of the
contract. The vendor will provide DOC a software license, at no cost to the State, to
operate the then current system. The vendor shall provide DOC a full explanation on
how it will handle a transition situation at the end of the contract period. Any DOC owned
equipment located outside the DOC sites, such as recording equipment and software
with applicable licenses, shall be provided to the new vendor or DOC at no cost to DOC
or the new vendor. The vendor shall provide any and all data including call recordings,
inmate authorized call lists, and call detail records to DOC.
Please clarify: The second sentence infers that upon contact termination, that the
existing vendor will no longer have any responsibility for operating or maintaining the
system once the transition process has started and that the DOC will assume all
operating and maintenance operations. If this is the case, who will be responsible for
billing, collections, and customer support during the transition phase.
Also, it is understood that all data and audio recordings are property of the DOC.
However, some new centralized platform technologies will have the recording equipment
located at the vendor’s site and integrated into the vendor’s prime server system. It will
not be possible to detach these servers and give them to the DOC. Typically however,
upon contract termination and during the transition phase between the existing and new
vendor, the existing vendor will work with the new vendor to make available and help
download all DOC data into the new system so that the historical data will be
immediately available through the new vendor’s system. This has worked well in the
industry for many years and all vendors are familiar with this part of the transition
process.
132A: The vendor will continue to be responsible for billing, collections, and customer support
during the transition phase.

133Q: Attachment 6, Section 14.1 – Would the DOC consider requiring vendors to provide
Better Business Bureau ratings and complaint history as a means to evaluate business
ethics and customer service performance?
133A: No.

134Q: Attachment 6, Section 14.6.4 - DOC requires a minimum of two full-time dedicated
vendor technicians. These individuals will report directly to and receive all assignments
from the DOC Director of Security or designee.
If the two technicians are reporting directly to the Director of Security, how does the
DOC envision the technicians responding to directives from the vendor’s technical
support center to avoid conflicts in the event of system problems or outages where the
vendor’s technical support center needs to direct the operations of the technicians for
onsite corrective actions?
134A: It was DOC’s intent to provide direction to the vendor’s technicians regarding day-to-day
operations/assignments. The Vendor Service and Support Manager will manage the
vendor’s technicians and ensure the Inmate Telephone Service is maintained and
operational.

135Q: Attachment 7 – Please confirm whether or not vendors are obligated to subcontract
25% of the project to small, woman-owned, or minority businesses or if vendors who do
are simply granted an advantage in the evaluation. If the latter is true, please confirm
how this aspect of the proposal impacts scoring and evaluation.
135A: There will be no special consideration in the RFP evaluation for a small minority or
women’s business.

136Q: General - Given the comprehensive requirements of this RFP, will the State consider a
two week extension to the RFP due date? Assuming that an extension of time is
granted, will the State allow for a follow-up round of questions and answers?
136A: The State has issued Amendment #1 to this RFP extending the due date to 2/8/2011.
There will be no further questions allowed.

137Q: Will the state please provide blueprints, fire plans, or similar indication of the scope of
the location of telephone rooms, phone locations, and potential visitation phone
locations?
137A: Yes. This information will be provided to the awarded vendor.

138Q: What is the standard recording format and process in which the current vendor will
transmit the existing recordings to the awarded vendor?
40

138A: GTL proprietary format. The process is yet to be determined. It is extremely important
that the authenticity of the call is maintained (see paragraph 4.7 in Attachment 6 of the
RFP).

139Q: What is the capacity required to store the existing recordings from the current vendor in
the format in which they will be obtained?
139A: Total storage required for call details, pins, allowed lists, etc: Approximately 14 GB data
storage for 1 year.
Total storage required for call recordings: Approximately 8 TB for 1 year of call storage.

140Q: To eliminate a potential competitive financial advantage by the existing vendor, please
validate that there will be no cost to the awarded vendor to obtain the existing recordings
from the current vendor.
140A: Correct. The recordings are the property of the State.

141Q: In relation to Section 3.5: MANUAL ON/OFF SWITCHES, with the vendor’s IP based
inmate telephones, the vendor includes the ability to instantly disable one, some or all of
the inmate telephones within the entire facility via the vendor’s Secure Studio system.
The vendor has found that this method is preferable to a physical switching system for a
number of reasons including:
•

The safety and security of the facility staff is enhanced as there is no requirement for
them to physically move to a single, secured location to disable the inmate
telephones in the case of an emergency shutdown.

•

The inmate telephones can be disabled from multiple locations in the facility.

•

The inmate telephones can be disabled from remote locations.

•

Access to the shut down functionality is restricted to authorized users.

•

The time, date and user responsible for disabling the inmate telephones are
recorded in the system ensuring user accountability.

•

The potential for the accidental disabling of the system is dramatically reduced.

•

There is no potential for the mechanical failure of a physical switching system.

•

There is no dependency on the integrity and condition of the physical cabling to each
phone.

•

The need for periodic testing and maintenance of a physical system is eliminated.

Given the superiority of a software based inmate telephone system shut down, will the
DOC accept a software based solution to satisfy this requirement?
141A: No. Manual on/off switches as defined in the RFP are still required.

142Q: Section 6.11: INTAKE FACILITY TELEPHONE SERVICE, states that collect calls are
placed via live operators from the admitting and processing areas. Can the DOC tell the
vendors the reason for live operators being used instead of automated operators for
collect calls from these areas?
142A: In Attachment 6, Section 6.11 INTAKE FACILITY TELEPHONE SERVICE –
MANDATORY the second sentence in the first paragraph is redacted and replaced with
the following:
This service allows inmates to place collect calls via automated operator.

143Q: To meet the requirements of Section 7.6: TELEPHONE SETS FOR TESTING, the
vendor’s Secure Studio system provides a software based (soft) phone that is able to
simulate calls from the telephone account of any inmate, originating at any phone from
any facility. A telephone account at each facility can also be established specifically for
testing purposes. Access to the test phone functionality is restricted to authorized users
of the system.
Given this capability does the DOC consider it necessary to install a physical inmate
telephone at its Security Division?
143A: No. A software based (soft) phone is acceptable as long as it replicates 100% of the
functionality of the service.

144Q: Cat 6 will need to be added to the visitation phones to give them the required features,
and how much of the other wiring (not for the visitation phones) that is Cat 3 or 5 are you
expecting to have replaced?
144A: Where needed, the vendor must install all new inside station wiring (at least Category 6)
and conduit in compliance with the most current TIA/EIA Telecommunications Building
Wiring Standards for the installation of all equipment. It is the awarded vendor’s
responsibility only to install cable and/or conduit from the closest telephone closet to the
visitor telephone sets.

145Q: 1.3 Overview - The RFP overview identifies approximately 650 visitor handsets but does
not provide inventory, equipment details and location by site. This will be necessary to
determine replacement equipment and labor costs.
Can the State provide inventory and location details by site for the visitation phones?
(Inventory must specify number of visitor stations and number and type of handsets for
each station – i.e. will inmates be required to use a PIN which requires a key pad at the
visitation stations)
145A: See revised Attachment 16. Specific visitation locations within a facility will be provided
to the awarded vendor. The inmates will be required to use a PIN.

146Q: 1.3 Overview & 6.12 Visitor Telephone Service, 7.4 Visiting Area Telephone Sets
Can the State provide floor plan details which provides vendors enough information to
determine wiring configurations in order to tie visitation phones into recording
equipment?
146A: Floor plans will be provided to the awarded vendor.

147Q: 2.10 Readiness of Offered Services – MANDATORY
The RFP states “All equipment, systems and services proposed to the State through the
vendor's deliverables must be available upon proposal issuance and called upon at
contract award or the date the service is requested by the state.”
Can the State please clarify the intent of this requirement? Inmate telephone systems
are capital extensive and require substantial telecommunications circuits both of which
(generally) are not ordered until contract award. Does this requirement suggest the
items must be “commercially available” or is there some other objective intended?
147A: The proposed service must be commercially available. It is understood that hardware
and telecommunications circuits will need to be obtained from another provider.

148Q: 3.5.1 Emergency System Shut Down – MANDATORY
The RFP States: “DOC requires the installation of a manual on/off switch for each facility
that will disable inmate telephones in the entire facility. These switches must be located
in a secured location that has been approved by the DOC Director of Security or
designee.
Can the State elaborate of the specific details of what they want with this requirement?
148A: DOC requires manuals switches that can be utilized to disable ALL phones in the event
of a facility/statewide emergency.
43

149Q: 3.5.1 Emergency System Shut Down – MANDATORY
The RFP States: “DOC requires the installation of a manual on/off switch for each facility
that will disable inmate telephones in the entire facility. These switches must be located
in a secured location that has been approved by the DOC Director of Security or
designee.
Is the wiring to all inmate phones within each facility currently terminated in a single
location that would facilitate a single manual cut-off switch for all phones at that location?
149A: No.

150Q: 3.5.1 Emergency System Shut Down – MANDATORY
The RFP States: “DOC requires the installation of a manual on/off switch for each facility
that will disable inmate telephones in the entire facility. These switches must be located
in a secured location that has been approved by the DOC Director of Security or
designee.
Can the State provide wiring diagrams that illustrate how each prison phones are
configured in order to support this requirement?
150A: This information is unavailable.

151Q: 3.5.1 Emergency System Shut Down – MANDATORY
The RFP States: “DOC requires the installation of a manual on/off switch for each facility
that will disable inmate telephones in the entire facility. These switches must be located
in a secured location that has been approved by the DOC Director of Security or
designee.
Are such switches currently installed at all locations?
151A: Yes.

152Q: 3.5.2 Manual On/Off Switches Per Phone
The RFP states: “DOC requires the installation of a manual on/off switch for each
individual phone installed in a facility. These switches must be in a location(s) that has
been approved by the DOC Director of Security or designee.”
Is the wiring to all inmate phones within each facility currently terminated in locations that
would facilitate a single manual cut-off switch for each phone at that location?
152A: All inmate telephones go to the MDF room through various IDF rooms. DOC would not
allow the switches to be installed in these locations as they are not assessable to staff
44

needing these switches. The switches must be installed and readily accessible to DOC
staff in close proximity to the affected telephones.

153Q: 3.5.2 Manual On/Off Switches Per Phone
The RFP states: “DOC requires the installation of a manual on/off switch for each
individual phone installed in a facility. These switches must be in a location(s) that has
been approved by the DOC Director of Security or designee.”
Can the State provide wiring diagrams that illustrate how each prison phones are
configured in order to support this requirement?
153A: This information is unavailable.

154Q: 3.5.2 Manual On/Off Switches Per Phone
The RFP states: “DOC requires the installation of a manual on/off switch for each
individual phone installed in a facility. These switches must be in a location(s) that has
been approved by the DOC Director of Security or designee.”
Are such switches currently installed at all locations?
154A: Yes.

155Q: 2.6 Commercial Power Outages 5.5 Power Backups
The RFP states: 2.6 “The solution must assure no loss of functions for up to 90 minutes
loss of commercial power in the DOCs’ facilities.” 5.5 “The vendor shall provide four (4)
hours UPS backup to for all vendor provided equipment. These requirements appear to
contradict each other.
Can the state clarify which requirement is the actual UPS backup requirement?
155A: 90 minutes is sufficient.

156Q: 11.3 Repair Priority Levels and Performance Requirements
Per the RFP: “In the table below, DOC has defined repair priority levels along with its
associated performance requirements. Knowing that this list is not all inclusive, DOC, at
its discretion, may deem any repair as a priority 1, 2 or 3”.
If the state has the ability to declare any small issue such as 1 out of service phone a
priority 1, vendors will have no way to predict and anticipate repair and maintenance
costs.
45

Would the State consider modifying the statement that “DOC, at its discretion may deem
any repair as a priority 1,2, or 3” to “DOC may deem repairs that are rated as category 2
or 3 as more critical and request contractor to place additional attention and resources
on such requests”.
156A: No but it is not the intent to deem everything as Priority 1.

157Q: 3.11 Inmate Allowed Call List
Per the RFP: “The current vendor processes approximately 1700 revisions monthly”
Can the State clarify the current processing methods for the 1700 revisions?
157A: On a monthly basis, inmates are allowed to add or drop telephone numbers from their
approved call lists. Today, this is done via ADD/DROP forms that are submitted by
inmates to the facility and forwarded onto the current vender for processing. The current
vendor manually enters all add/drop changes into the system, thus updating the inmate’s
allowed call list. Upon completion, the current vendor also provides DOC with a report
listing the rejected telephone numbers along with the reason why the add was not
completed.

158Q: 3.11 Inmate Allowed Call List
Per the RFP: “The current vendor processes approximately 1700 revisions monthly”
Do inmates submit the 1700 changes all on the same day or is this a rolling dynamic
process over the full 30 period each month?
158A: The State in divided up into three sections. Over a three week span, these forms are
collected and forwarded to the current vender.

159Q: 3.11 Inmate Allowed Call List
Per the RFP: “The current vendor processes approximately 1700 revisions monthly”
Who is responsible for monitoring and enforcing adherence to the 30 day rule for ACL
modifications by inmates?
159A: DOC is responsible.

160Q: 3.11 Inmate Allowed Call List
Per the RFP: “The current vendor processes approximately 1700 revisions monthly”
If the selected vendor were to offer on-site PIN Administrative and ACL support, would
the State provide office/work space for the administrator?
46

160A: No, at this time CT DOC can’t accommodate this.

161Q: 5.1 Workstations
The RFP includes a list of equipment the vendor must provide along with the work
stations and that lists included a surge protector but no UPS.
Does the state require UPS power backup for the work stations and if so for what period
of time?
161A: Yes, 90 minutes is sufficient.

162Q: 5.0 Call Monitoring Equipment
The State indicates there are 30 existing work stations
Can the State provide an inventory of the quantity of work stations by site?
162A: Workstation current locations are as follows:
7 at Central Office
2 at Cheshire, Corrigan, Hartford, Northern, York
1 at Bergin, Bridgeport, Brooklyn, CRCI, Enfield Garner, Gates, MacDougall, Walker,
Manson, New Haven, Osborn, Willard, Cybulski, Radgowski, Webster
Workstation locations and quantities are subject to change.

163Q: 5.4 Back up Call Recordings (Central Office)
The RFP states: “vendor shall provide backup storage at DOC Central Offices that would
back up all data and recording on a daily basis”
Would the State be willing to allow a centralized call processor to be placed in the DOC
Central Office?
163A: A Centralized Call Processor may be acceptable if the DOC WAN (Wide Area Network)
has sufficient bandwidth and provided that a backup Centralized Call Processor is
provided for installation at the DOC DR site. There may be additional costs associated
with providing necessary power and cooling. This concept could be beneficial and would
need to be explored further.

164Q: 5.4 Back up Call Recordings (Central Office)
The RFP states: “vendor shall provide backup storage at DOC Central Offices that would
back up all data and recording on a daily basis”
Is there sufficient floor space for computer racks in the equipment room?
47

164A: The DOC Data Center has sufficient physical space. Any equipment would need to be
installed in either an existing DOC cabinet (if available) or a new cabinet of the same
type that the DOC is using in the DOC Data Center. Equipment power and cooling
requirements also need to be considered. There may be additional costs associated
with providing necessary power and cooling. Any storage systems need to adhere to the
current State of Connecticut Enterprise Architecture (CTEA) standards. The disk
storage systems currently allowed under CTEA are sold by EMC.

165Q: 6.6 Collect Calls – Mandatory
Per the RFP – “All inmates calls will be “Collect Call Only”. This requirement appears to
contradict the idea of pre-paid inmate calling accounts.
Would the State consider revising this statement to include language such as “All inmate
calls will be Collect Call Only – to include traditional collect calls and prepaid collect
calls”?
165A: No, a collect is defined as a telephone call in which the called party pays for the call. By
definition, this includes traditional, prepaid, and direct remit.

166Q: 6.7 Discounted Pre-Paid Service
Per the requirements for this service:
•

The vendor must allow customers the option to revert to the non-discount rates after
utilizing the discounted rate service

Vendors will have a difficult time knowing when a customer is just low or out of funds
and plans to replenish and account, vs. when the customer wants to revert to higher
rates and traditional collect calls.
Will the State consider removing this requirement?
166A: No.

167Q: 6.7 Discounted Pre-Paid Service
Per the requirements for this service:
•

The vendor must allow customers the option to revert to the non-discount rates after
utilizing the discounted rate service

If the State will not remove this requirement, will the State provide additional details and
guidelines as to when and how a vendor will know that a pre-paid account holder intends
to replenish a prepaid account vs. when that customer intends to revert to higher collect
rates?

167A: If there is money in the pre-paid account, then the call must be completed at the
discounted rate. Upon depletion of pre-paid fund, calls should be completed at the
traditional call rate.

168Q: 6.7 Discounted Pre-Paid Service
Per the requirements for this service:
•

There will be no administrative fee for establishing or replenishing accounts

Observation; the State of Connecticut currently charges tax payers a 2.49%
convenience fee for paying taxes using a credit card and a $9 transaction fees for
consumers reserving buses.
Will the State consider allowing vendors to charge convenience fees for the use of
and/or recharging of funds to pre-paid accounts when customers use credit cards?
168A: No. The vendor shall not charge any fees except for those fees mandated to be billed to
the called party by a regulatory government entity. DOC will allow outside agencies
such as Western Union and MoneyGram to be used only for International billing. DOC
understands that the fees from these outside agencies cannot be waived. DOC will not
require vendors to disclose the fees charged by these agencies or their share.

169Q: 8 Wiring 8.4 Station Wiring
Per the RFP: “The vendor must install all new inside wiring (at least Category 6) and
conduit, where needed, in compliance…Per the RFP: “ For initial conversion, new station
wiring…”
Will the State please clarify this requirement? Does this suggest it is mandatory for
vendors to replace all existing wiring and wire all telephones with new inside wiring or
does is suggest that when and if additional wiring is required it must be at least Cat 6?
169A: Where needed, the vendor must install all new inside station wiring (at least Category 6)
and conduit in compliance with the most current TIA/EIA Telecommunications Building
Wiring Standards for the installation of all equipment. It is the awarded vendor’s
49

responsibility only to install cable and/or conduit from the closest telephone closet to the
visitor telephone sets.

170Q: 9 Implementation 9.2
Per the RFP: “DOC requires that vendor convert one DOC site at a time…“Once the
DOC… installation should begin at another facility…”
Observation: this process will extend the implementation/conversion time frame beyond
industry typical conversion standards, increase cost and reduce revenues for the new
vendor?
Would the State consider revising this requirement such that multiple sites could be
under construction simultaneously but on one site will actually be converted at a time?
170A: For the first three sites being converted from the old system to the new, construction
cannot happen simultaneously. Construction at an individual site will need to be fully
completed, and then successfully activated, before moving onto the next site. It will be
at DOC’s discretion, as to whether or not the conversion of a site has been successfully
activated or not, and the vendor must obtain DOC’s approval, prior to moving onto the
next site. After this conversion has occurred successfully at three consecutive sites,
DOC will then evaluate the ease of conversion which occurred at these sites, and at that
time, make a decision as to whether or not simultaneous construction will be allowed at
future sites still needing to be converted. In addition, the old inmate phone service
and/or telephones cannot be removed or deactivated at any DOC site, until conversion
to the new service has been 100% successfully completed at that site.

171Q: 9.2 Proposed Implementation Plan
Per the RFP: “The vendor shall submit a proposed project plan in MS Project… This
Plan must include at least the following elements:
•
•
•

Implementation Plan
Risk management and mitigation plan
Acceptance test plan…

Can the State please clarify if you are expecting to receive these documents as part of
the RFP submission process or is this a post contract award deliverable?
171A: We expect a proposed plan as part of the RFP submission. It is understood that this is a
draft and subject to change.

172Q: 2.2.16 Use of Subcontractors
Requirement to deliver a copies of subcontracts to the CIO
Can the vendor assume that, in accordance the State’s FOIA exemptions, that the
vendor can redact cost information from such subcontract copies furnished to the CIO.
The vendor’s internal cost structure is highly proprietary and could cause great
competitive harm if known by competitors.
172A: This is only for the successful vendor and the FOIA applies to the sub-contracting
agreement as well. If this is confidential, please mark it as such in a separate envelope.

173Q: 2.2.16 3 Use of Subcontractors
Source Code
Can the vendors assume that the only source code being referred to is for software
developed under this contract, separately and directly ordered, paid for, and, noting that
many third party software manufacturers of pre-existing software (e.g., Microsoft, Oracle,
etc.) will not provide source code under any circumstances, even into escrow.
173A: Yes.

174Q: Attach 1, item 3
Liquidated Damages
Liquidated Damages, as opposed to Actual Damages, are, by definition, arbitrary
amounts, usually specifically set forth in contracts, which are a routine part of ensuring
adherence to Service Level Agreements (SLA’s) (e.g., an nominal fee imposed if a
monthly report is delivered later than it is due). An example is RFP Attachment 5,
Section 22.3 “Liquidated Damages”. The vendors are not aware of any major
Information Technology or Telecommunications provider that has not been subjected to
such fees, on occasion (usually applied as a credit on a regular monthly invoice). Can
this apparently disqualifying requirement be deleted, or converted to a more meaningful
requirement, such as Actual Damages?
174A: No. You must answer accordingly. An affirmative answer may not disqualify a vendor.

175Q: Attach 5, Section 3
Purchase Order
Can the vendor assume the contractor would get a single Purchase Order with
unspecified dollars (since the State is not paying the Contractor), incorporating the RFP
and the vendor’s Proposal by reference, unless there is a need for a special P.O.
because there are special State needs not covered by the RFP or proposal, and which
51

the State would be paying for? Note that similar considerations apply throughout
Section 3.
175A: The State will not be incorporating by referencing the RFP nor the vendor’s responses to
the RFP in the negotiated agreement nor in any resulting purchase order.

176Q: Attach 5, Section 40
Indemnification
Since the vendor considers its inability to bid on indemnity clauses, such as this cited
clause, as proprietary, the vendor would appreciate it if the text below were not included
in the Q&A discussion, and, instead, the vendor’s question simply being reduced to,
“Would the State, consider reasonable alternate suggestions for alternate indemnity and
liability clauses, Attachment 5 discussions notwithstanding.”
Proprietary:
The Indemnification requirement as written includes many items that are normally part of
a standard indemnity clause. Standard indemnity clauses only cover bodily injury,
death, and property damage (which, by statute, have no dollar limit). The vendor
routinely covers such risks. Separate liability clauses normally address all other risks,
and normally specify a limitation of liability, which are also no problem for the vendor.
Indemnity, however, is like auto insurance, which means the contractor has to pay,
regardless of fault, and, as written in this RFP, regardless of the fault of the State! The
Contractor, then, to make itself as whole as possible by pursuing those whose fault it
really is, but with no sharing of liability with the State. Putting all risks in an indemnity
clause, therefore, makes the contractor responsible for all of the risks, and all of the legal
expenses associated all of the above, and for defending the State, regardless of the
contractor’s actual fault. This means, as stated, putting the entire corporation at ruinous
risk, which is something a large publically held corporation simply cannot responsibly do.
It is also is something that is simply not practical to insure against (The vendor is
advised by its insurance companies, that, in general, the necessary policy to cover such
risks for a large corporation, for just this contract, in addition to its substantial regular
coverage, would cost the vendor an additional $1,000,000, annually). This seems to be a
serious, unfair, unreasonable, and overreaching by the State, and the vendor simply
cannot bid on this opportunity, if this potentially ruinous risk is not substantially reduced.
On the other hand, the vendor would like to know if State allow the offeror to offer
industry and government standard indemnity and liability clauses for consideration, in
advance of the proposal due date. Reference: The ABA Model Procurement Code for
State and Local Governments.
A176: These issues will be addressed with the successful vendor during the negotiation
process.
52

177Q: Are all of the communication lines on the facilities' grounds owned or leased, the wires
underneath?
177A: The cabling is owned by the State. The voice circuits (network facilities) connected to
the Inmate Telephone Service are provided by the current vendor at no cost.

178Q: Within the bid it is stated that there will be a specific number of points and specific
categories for evaluations, and that prior to the evaluation, the State will determine what
the point categories will be. Can the vendors receive a copy of that? Can the vendors
be informed of what the specific evaluation criteria will be for each category prior to the
bid submission?
178A: The answer to both questions is no.

179Q: It is stated that the State will evaluate the proposed commission and proposed rates
among other factors within the RFP. The State also requests a secondary proposal for a
zero commission with a rate. How will that be evaluated on the grand scope of things or
will it be evaluated?
179A: The details of the evaluation will not be disclosed at this time.

180Q: Is it acceptable to respond with what the vendor sees as an agreement that coincides
with what the standard agreement is, but customize to what the vendors think would be
appropriate in a master agreement?
180A: No, issues contained in Attachment 5 will be addressed with the successful vendor
during the negotiation process.

State of Connecticut, Department of Information Technology
Request for Proposals
Inmate Telephone Service

ATTACHMENT 16 – DOC FACILITY PROFILE (REVISED)
The following table is a complete list of DOC’s current locations including DOC Central Office,
Correctional Institutions, and Correctional Centers (Intake Facilities). Be advised that the
number of Inmates does fluctuate, facilities may open and close and the quantity of inmate
phones may also change over the life of the resulting contract.
DOC Facility / Main Telephone Number

DOC Central Office
24 Wolcott Hill Rd,
Wethersfield, CT 06109
(860) 692-7480
Bergin Correctional Institution
251 Middle Turnpike
Storrs, CT 06268
(860) 487-2712
Bridgeport Correctional Center
1106 North Avenue
Bridgeport, CT 06604
(203) 579-6131
Brooklyn Correctional Institution
59 Hartford Road
Brooklyn, CT 06234
(860) 779-4500
Cheshire Correctional Institution
900 Highland Avenue
Cheshire, CT 06410
(203) 651-6100
Corrigan Correctional Center
986 Norwich-New London Tpke
Uncasville, CT 06382
(860) 848-5700
Cybulski Correctional Institution
264 Bilton Road
Somers, CT 06071
(860) 763-6500
Enfield Correctional Institution
289 Shaker Road
Enfield, CT 06082
(860) 763-7300
Garner Correctional Institution
50 Nunnawauk Road
Newtown, CT 06470
(203) 270-2800
Gates Correctional Institution
131 North Bridebrook Road
Niantic, CT 06357
(860) 691-4700
Hartford Correctional Center
177 Weston Street
Hartford, CT 06120
(860) 240-1800
John Dempsey Hospital (UCONN)
263 Farmington Avenue
Farmington, CT 06030
(860) 679-2000
MacDougall Correctional Institution
1153 East Street, South
Suffield, CT 06080
(860) 627-2100

Security
Level

Intake
Facility

Implementation Plan
Order

Number of
Inmates
(As of
7/1/10)

Qty of
Inmate
Phones

Estimated
Wiring for
Inmate
Phones
(# of Feet)

n/a

1,009

12,550

Yes

963

32,723

124

10,907

456

12,480

2,160

1,491

183

69,363

23,121

3&4

Yes

1,525

107

14,880

8,000

included
with Willard

2,340

725

2,910

622

7,320

2,440

883

6,978

Yes

1,134

114

14,100

108

11,900

n/a

medical
only

250

2,124

113

12,724

6,892

Qty of
Visitor
Phones
**

Estimated
Wiring for
Visitor
Phones
(# of Feet)

State of Connecticut, Department of Information Technology
Request for Proposals
Inmate Telephone Service

DOC Facility / Main Telephone Number

Manson Youth Institution
42 Jarvis Street
Cheshire, CT 06410
(203) 806-2500
New Haven Correctional Center
245 Whalley Avenue
New Haven, CT 06511
(203) 974-4111
Northern Correctional Institution
287 Bilton Road
Somers, CT 06071
(860) 763-8600
Osborn Correctional Institution
335 Bilton Road
Somers, CT 06071
(860) 814-4600
Radgowski Correctional Center
982 Norwich-New London Tpke
Uncasville, CT 06382
(860) 848-5700
Robinson Correctional Institution
285 Shaker Road
Enfield, CT 06082
(860) 253-8000
Walker RSMU
1151 East Street, South
Suffield, CT 06080
(860) 292-3400
Webster Correctional Institution
(closed in 1/2010)
111 Jarvis Street
Cheshire, CT 06410
(203) 271-5900
Willard Correctional Institution
391 Shaker Road
Enfield, CT 06082
(860) 763-6100
York-East Correctional Institution *
199 West Main Street
Niantic, CT 06357
(860) 739-5413
York-West Correctional Institution *
201 West Main Street
Niantic, CT 06357
(860) 691-6700

Security
Level

Intake
Facility

Implementation Plan
Order

Number of
Inmates
(As of
7/1/10)

Qty of
Inmate
Phones

Estimated
Wiring for
Inmate
Phones
(# of Feet)

Yes

630

11,697

3,898

Yes

803

34,050

11,350

356

9,000

4,800

1,954

29,810

3,600

3&4

Yes

included
with
Corrigan

18,268

4,893

1,478

5,160

2,080

included
with
MacDougall

4,838

1,612

4,750

Qty of
Visitor
Phones
**

Estimated
Wiring for
Visitor
Phones
(# of Feet)

facility
closed:
annex
included
with
Cheshire

1,160

3,955

included
with
YorkWest

included
with YorkWest

included
with
YorkWest

included
with YorkWest

2-5

Yes

included
with YorkWest

2-5

Yes

1,118

146

13,420

640

18,431

1,479

323,566

762

98,293

TOTALS:

* Actually 2 DOC Facilities (York-East and York-West) reported as one
** Visitor Phone totals include the phones on both sides of the glass.
The number given is the total number of phones needed for visitation purposes.

Run Date: 02/04/2010

Connecticut DOC
Global Tel*Link
2609 Cameron St.
Mobile,AL 36607

January 2010

Monthly Commission Payment Summary

12/26/09 to 1/25/10

Connecticut DOC (ZZCTDOC)
Site

Revenue

Commission Payment

CT_DOCBergin Correctional Institution

$60,654.57

$27,294.56

CT_DOCBridgeport Correctional Center

$41,953.33

$18,879.00

CT_DOCBrooklyn Correctional Institution

$17,780.08

$8,001.04

CT_DOCCheshire Correctional Institution

$41,928.18

$18,867.68

CT_DOCCorrigan Correctional Institution

$27,436.81

$12,346.56

CT_DOCCybulski Correctional Institution

$31,441.49

$14,148.67

CT_DOCEnfield Correctional Institution

$39,248.70

$17,661.92

CT_DOCGarner Correctional Institution

$19,050.24

$8,572.61

CT_DOCGates Correctional Institution

$47,719.99

$21,474.00

CT_DOCHartford Correctional Center

$30,106.58

$13,547.96

$222.75

$100.24

CT_DOCMacDougall Correctional

$49,845.64

$22,430.54

CT_DOCManson Youth Institution

$17,921.81

$8,064.81

CT_DOCNew Haven Correctional Center

$25,715.31

$11,571.89

CT_DOCNorthern Correctional Institution

$3,209.64

$1,444.34

CT_DOCOsborn Correctional Institution

$57,342.22

$25,804.00

CT_DOCRadgowski Correctional

$35,703.35

$16,066.51

CT_DOCRobinson Correctional Institution

$79,209.57

$35,644.31

CT_DOCWalker Reception/Management Unit

$26,092.87

$11,741.79

$5,824.08

$2,620.84

CT_DOCWillard Correctional Institution

$19,991.83

$8,996.32

CT_DOCYork Correctional Institution

$46,425.27

$20,891.37

$724,824.31

$326,170.94

CT_DOCJohn Dempsey Hospital

CT_DOCWebster Correctional Institution

Contract Totals:

If you have any questions, please contact Lisa Ferguson at (251) 3388859 ext. 5224 or lferguson@gtl.net.

Run Date: 03/04/2010

Connecticut DOC
Global Tel*Link
2609 Cameron St.
Mobile,AL 36607

February 2010

Monthly Commission Payment Summary

1/26/10 to 2/25/10

Connecticut DOC (ZZCTDOC)
Site

Revenue

Commission Payment

CT_DOCBergin Correctional Institution

$76,210.19

$34,294.59

CT_DOCBridgeport Correctional Center

$46,576.18

$20,959.28

CT_DOCBrooklyn Correctional Institution

$18,880.18

$8,496.08

CT_DOCCheshire Correctional Institution

$43,740.01

$19,683.00

CT_DOCCorrigan Correctional Institution

$26,947.98

$12,126.59

CT_DOCCybulski Correctional Institution

$34,193.95

$15,387.28

CT_DOCEnfield Correctional Institution

$39,645.15

$17,840.32

CT_DOCGarner Correctional Institution

$20,032.61

$9,014.67

CT_DOCGates Correctional Institution

$49,196.85

$22,138.58

CT_DOCHartford Correctional Center

$32,739.82

$14,732.92

$113.14

$50.91

CT_DOCMacDougall Correctional

$56,447.11

$25,401.20

CT_DOCManson Youth Institution

$19,724.85

$8,876.18

CT_DOCNew Haven Correctional Center

$27,937.58

$12,571.91

CT_DOCNorthern Correctional Institution

$3,629.51

$1,633.28

CT_DOCOsborn Correctional Institution

$59,530.04

$26,788.52

CT_DOCRadgowski Correctional

$32,839.05

$14,777.57

CT_DOCRobinson Correctional Institution

$82,271.49

$37,022.17

CT_DOCWalker Reception/Management Unit

$34,021.98

$15,309.89

$6,064.47

$2,729.01

CT_DOCWillard Correctional Institution

$17,787.61

$8,004.42

CT_DOCYork Correctional Institution

$49,098.95

$22,094.53

$777,628.70

$349,932.92

CT_DOCJohn Dempsey Hospital

CT_DOCWebster Correctional Institution

Contract Totals:

If you have any questions, please contact Lisa Ferguson at (251) 3388859 ext. 5224 or lferguson@gtl.net.

Run Date: 04/04/2010

Connecticut DOC
Global Tel*Link
2609 Cameron St.
Mobile,AL 36607

March 2010

Monthly Commission Payment Summary

2/26/10 to 3/25/10

Connecticut DOC (ZZCTDOC)
Site

Revenue

Commission Payment

CT_DOCBergin Correctional Institution

$73,232.42

$32,954.59

CT_DOCBridgeport Correctional Center

$39,883.89

$17,947.75

CT_DOCBrooklyn Correctional Institution

$17,104.24

$7,696.91

CT_DOCCheshire Correctional Institution

$40,949.59

$18,427.32

CT_DOCCorrigan Correctional Institution

$25,260.79

$11,367.36

CT_DOCCybulski Correctional Institution

$35,046.17

$15,770.78

CT_DOCEnfield Correctional Institution

$37,063.36

$16,678.51

CT_DOCGarner Correctional Institution

$16,126.49

$7,256.92

CT_DOCGates Correctional Institution

$45,986.72

$20,694.02

CT_DOCHartford Correctional Center

$27,523.34

$12,385.50

$140.74

$63.33

CT_DOCMacDougall Correctional

$49,445.91

$22,250.66

CT_DOCManson Youth Institution

$16,986.86

$7,644.09

CT_DOCNew Haven Correctional Center

$27,107.59

$12,198.42

CT_DOCNorthern Correctional Institution

$3,873.72

$1,743.17

CT_DOCOsborn Correctional Institution

$54,177.06

$24,379.68

CT_DOCRadgowski Correctional

$32,224.38

$14,500.97

CT_DOCRobinson Correctional Institution

$75,955.84

$34,180.13

CT_DOCWalker Reception/Management Unit

$31,780.51

$14,301.23

$6,044.88

$2,720.20

CT_DOCWillard Correctional Institution

$17,128.16

$7,707.67

CT_DOCYork Correctional Institution

$43,894.99

$19,752.75

$716,937.65

$322,621.94

CT_DOCJohn Dempsey Hospital

CT_DOCWebster Correctional Institution

Contract Totals:

If you have any questions, please contact Lisa Ferguson at (251) 3388859 ext. 5224 or lferguson@gtl.net.

Run Date: 05/04/2010

Connecticut DOC
Global Tel*Link
2609 Cameron St.
Mobile,AL 36607

April 2010

Monthly Commission Payment Summary

3/26/10 to 4/25/10

Connecticut DOC (ZZCTDOC)
Site

Revenue

Commission Payment

CT_DOCBergin Correctional Institution

$80,006.74

$36,003.03

CT_DOCBridgeport Correctional Center

$43,455.66

$19,555.05

CT_DOCBrooklyn Correctional Institution

$20,611.62

$9,275.23

CT_DOCCheshire Correctional Institution

$48,342.80

$21,754.26

CT_DOCCorrigan Correctional Institution

$22,976.41

$10,339.38

CT_DOCCybulski Correctional Institution

$43,245.59

$19,460.52

CT_DOCEnfield Correctional Institution

$38,112.05

$17,150.42

CT_DOCGarner Correctional Institution

$18,016.92

$8,107.61

CT_DOCGates Correctional Institution

$54,004.51

$24,302.03

CT_DOCHartford Correctional Center

$32,749.78

$14,737.40

$462.05

$207.92

CT_DOCMacDougall Correctional

$54,931.30

$24,719.09

CT_DOCManson Youth Institution

$20,598.06

$9,269.13

CT_DOCNew Haven Correctional Center

$28,002.00

$12,600.90

CT_DOCNorthern Correctional Institution

$3,737.41

$1,681.83

CT_DOCOsborn Correctional Institution

$58,634.08

$26,385.34

CT_DOCRadgowski Correctional

$35,375.09

$15,918.79

CT_DOCRobinson Correctional Institution

$77,042.64

$34,669.19

CT_DOCWalker Reception/Management Unit

$34,031.49

$15,314.17

$6,543.47

$2,944.56

CT_DOCWillard Correctional Institution

$21,964.23

$9,883.90

CT_DOCYork Correctional Institution

$44,069.94

$19,831.47

$786,913.84

$354,111.23

CT_DOCJohn Dempsey Hospital

CT_DOCWebster Correctional Institution

Contract Totals:

If you have any questions, please contact Lisa Ferguson at (251) 3388859 ext. 5224 or lferguson@gtl.net.

Run Date: 06/04/2010

Connecticut DOC
Global Tel*Link
2609 Cameron St.
Mobile,AL 36607

May 2010

Monthly Commission Payment Summary

4/26/10 to 5/25/10

Connecticut DOC (ZZCTDOC)
Site

Revenue

Commission Payment

CT_DOCBergin Correctional Institution

$76,778.27

$34,550.22

CT_DOCBridgeport Correctional Center

$41,515.74

$18,682.08

CT_DOCBrooklyn Correctional Institution

$19,069.05

$8,581.07

CT_DOCCheshire Correctional Institution

$44,369.14

$19,966.11

CT_DOCCorrigan Correctional Institution

$21,005.90

$9,452.66

CT_DOCCybulski Correctional Institution

$42,093.24

$18,941.96

CT_DOCEnfield Correctional Institution

$34,166.58

$15,374.96

CT_DOCGarner Correctional Institution

$20,368.95

$9,166.03

CT_DOCGates Correctional Institution

$48,203.48

$21,691.57

CT_DOCHartford Correctional Center

$36,317.34

$16,342.80

$78.68

$35.41

CT_DOCMacDougall Correctional

$56,331.99

$25,349.40

CT_DOCManson Youth Institution

$17,392.48

$7,826.62

CT_DOCNew Haven Correctional Center

$25,897.67

$11,653.95

CT_DOCNorthern Correctional Institution

$3,414.23

$1,536.40

CT_DOCOsborn Correctional Institution

$55,839.76

$25,127.89

CT_DOCRadgowski Correctional

$35,102.92

$15,796.31

CT_DOCRobinson Correctional Institution

$71,566.86

$32,205.09

CT_DOCWalker Reception/Management Unit

$33,486.99

$15,069.15

$5,542.70

$2,494.22

CT_DOCWillard Correctional Institution

$20,812.64

$9,365.69

CT_DOCYork Correctional Institution

$47,574.81

$21,408.66

$756,929.42

$340,618.24

CT_DOCJohn Dempsey Hospital

CT_DOCWebster Correctional Institution

Contract Totals:

If you have any questions, please contact Lisa Ferguson at (251) 3388859 ext. 5224 or lferguson@gtl.net.

Run Date: 07/04/2010

Connecticut DOC
Global Tel*Link
2609 Cameron St.
Mobile,AL 36607

June 2010

Monthly Commission Payment Summary

5/26/10 to 6/25/10

Connecticut DOC (ZZCTDOC)
Site

Revenue

Commission Payment

CT_DOCBergin Correctional Institution

$78,201.62

$35,190.73

CT_DOCBridgeport Correctional Center

$36,896.65

$16,603.49

CT_DOCBrooklyn Correctional Institution

$19,318.52

$8,693.33

CT_DOCCheshire Correctional Institution

$46,048.80

$20,721.96

CT_DOCCorrigan Correctional Institution

$25,513.45

$11,481.05

CT_DOCCybulski Correctional Institution

$38,334.86

$17,250.69

CT_DOCEnfield Correctional Institution

$35,029.55

$15,763.30

CT_DOCGarner Correctional Institution

$19,356.32

$8,710.34

CT_DOCGates Correctional Institution

$46,255.32

$20,814.89

CT_DOCHartford Correctional Center

$31,794.18

$14,307.38

$96.54

$43.44

CT_DOCMacDougall Correctional

$54,001.86

$24,300.84

CT_DOCManson Youth Institution

$17,990.92

$8,095.91

CT_DOCNew Haven Correctional Center

$25,538.65

$11,492.39

CT_DOCNorthern Correctional Institution

$3,543.99

$1,594.80

CT_DOCOsborn Correctional Institution

$55,109.12

$24,799.10

CT_DOCRadgowski Correctional

$35,325.62

$15,896.53

CT_DOCRobinson Correctional Institution

$76,569.13

$34,456.11

CT_DOCWalker Reception/Management Unit

$35,048.00

$15,771.60

$6,075.69

$2,734.06

CT_DOCWillard Correctional Institution

$20,207.67

$9,093.45

CT_DOCYork Correctional Institution

$45,097.64

$20,293.94

$751,354.10

$338,109.35

CT_DOCJohn Dempsey Hospital

CT_DOCWebster Correctional Institution

Contract Totals:

If you have any questions, please contact Lisa Ferguson at (251) 3388859 ext. 5224 or lferguson@gtl.net.

Run Date: 08/04/2010

Connecticut DOC
Global Tel*Link
2609 Cameron St.
Mobile,AL 36607

July 2010

Monthly Commission Payment Summary

6/26/10 to 7/25/10

Connecticut DOC (ZZCTDOC)
Site

Revenue

Commission Payment

CT_DOCBergin Correctional Institution

$70,751.37

$31,838.12

CT_DOCBridgeport Correctional Center

$36,915.19

$16,611.84

CT_DOCBrooklyn Correctional Institution

$19,231.68

$8,654.26

CT_DOCCheshire Correctional Institution

$40,904.27

$18,406.92

CT_DOCCorrigan Correctional Institution

$23,120.63

$10,404.28

CT_DOCCybulski Correctional Institution

$33,845.81

$15,230.61

CT_DOCEnfield Correctional Institution

$29,785.37

$13,403.42

CT_DOCGarner Correctional Institution

$17,282.59

$7,777.17

CT_DOCGates Correctional Institution

$46,129.91

$20,758.46

CT_DOCHartford Correctional Center

$30,232.03

$13,604.41

$209.92

$94.46

CT_DOCMacDougall Correctional

$50,841.91

$22,878.86

CT_DOCManson Youth Institution

$17,840.34

$8,028.15

CT_DOCNew Haven Correctional Center

$21,766.02

$9,794.71

CT_DOCNorthern Correctional Institution

$3,845.79

$1,730.61

CT_DOCOsborn Correctional Institution

$52,240.94

$23,508.42

CT_DOCRadgowski Correctional

$31,999.44

$14,399.75

CT_DOCRobinson Correctional Institution

$66,092.53

$29,741.64

CT_DOCWalker Reception/Management Unit

$30,737.10

$13,831.70

$5,080.14

$2,286.06

CT_DOCWillard Correctional Institution

$18,599.91

$8,369.96

CT_DOCYork Correctional Institution

$41,823.27

$18,820.47

$689,276.16

$310,174.27

CT_DOCJohn Dempsey Hospital

CT_DOCWebster Correctional Institution

Contract Totals:

If you have any questions, please contact Lisa Ferguson at (251) 3388859 ext. 5224 or lferguson@gtl.net.

Run Date: 09/04/2010

Connecticut DOC
Global Tel*Link
2609 Cameron St.
Mobile,AL 36607

August 2010

Monthly Commission Payment Summary

7/26/10 to 8/25/10

Connecticut DOC (ZZCTDOC)
Site

Revenue

Commission Payment

CT_DOCBergin Correctional Institution

$66,150.37

$29,767.67

CT_DOCBridgeport Correctional Center

$38,490.15

$17,320.57

CT_DOCBrooklyn Correctional Institution

$18,653.43

$8,394.04

CT_DOCCheshire Correctional Institution

$40,953.93

$18,429.27

CT_DOCCorrigan Correctional Institution

$23,619.70

$10,628.87

CT_DOCCybulski Correctional Institution

$29,290.21

$13,180.59

CT_DOCEnfield Correctional Institution

$32,659.48

$14,696.77

CT_DOCGarner Correctional Institution

$18,433.52

$8,295.08

CT_DOCGates Correctional Institution

$43,466.73

$19,560.03

CT_DOCHartford Correctional Center

$31,565.76

$14,204.59

$537.02

$241.66

CT_DOCMacDougall Correctional

$47,282.74

$21,277.23

CT_DOCManson Youth Institution

$14,987.99

$6,744.60

CT_DOCNew Haven Correctional Center

$23,964.77

$10,784.15

CT_DOCNorthern Correctional Institution

$4,317.17

$1,942.73

CT_DOCOsborn Correctional Institution

$48,741.10

$21,933.50

CT_DOCRadgowski Correctional

$34,632.33

$15,584.55

CT_DOCRobinson Correctional Institution

$65,168.47

$29,325.81

CT_DOCWalker Reception/Management Unit

$31,512.93

$14,180.82

$5,144.14

$2,314.86

CT_DOCWillard Correctional Institution

$16,131.07

$7,258.98

CT_DOCYork Correctional Institution

$43,805.30

$19,712.39

$679,508.31

$305,778.74

CT_DOCJohn Dempsey Hospital

CT_DOCWebster Correctional Institution

Contract Totals:

If you have any questions, please contact Lisa Ferguson at (251) 3388859 ext. 5224 or lferguson@gtl.net.

Run Date: 10/04/2010

Connecticut DOC
Global Tel*Link
2609 Cameron St.
Mobile,AL 36607

September 2010

Monthly Commission Payment Summary

8/26/10 to 9/25/10

Connecticut DOC (ZZCTDOC)
Site

Revenue

Commission Payment

CT_DOCBergin Correctional Institution

$61,073.16

$27,482.92

CT_DOCBridgeport Correctional Center

$37,211.79

$16,745.31

CT_DOCBrooklyn Correctional Institution

$18,846.93

$8,481.12

CT_DOCCheshire Correctional Institution

$37,321.61

$16,794.72

CT_DOCCorrigan Correctional Institution

$25,258.84

$11,366.48

CT_DOCCybulski Correctional Institution

$32,666.27

$14,699.82

CT_DOCEnfield Correctional Institution

$32,287.07

$14,529.18

CT_DOCGarner Correctional Institution

$20,005.17

$9,002.33

CT_DOCGates Correctional Institution

$39,309.79

$17,689.41

CT_DOCHartford Correctional Center

$30,413.54

$13,686.09

$59.63

$26.83

CT_DOCMacDougall Correctional

$40,011.99

$18,005.40

CT_DOCManson Youth Institution

$14,592.59

$6,566.67

CT_DOCNew Haven Correctional Center

$26,088.14

$11,739.66

CT_DOCNorthern Correctional Institution

$2,833.75

$1,275.19

CT_DOCOsborn Correctional Institution

$53,139.48

$23,912.77

CT_DOCRadgowski Correctional

$33,910.25

$15,259.61

CT_DOCRobinson Correctional Institution

$66,461.03

$29,907.46

CT_DOCWalker Reception/Management Unit

$27,545.72

$12,395.57

$5,050.81

$2,272.86

CT_DOCWillard Correctional Institution

$17,537.20

$7,891.74

CT_DOCYork Correctional Institution

$42,488.83

$19,119.97

$664,113.59

$298,851.12

CT_DOCJohn Dempsey Hospital

CT_DOCWebster Correctional Institution

Contract Totals:

If you have any questions, please contact Lisa Ferguson at (251) 3388859 ext. 5224 or lferguson@gtl.net.

Run Date: 11/04/2010

Connecticut DOC
Global Tel*Link
2609 Cameron St.
Mobile,AL 36607

October 2010

Monthly Commission Payment Summary

9/26/10 to 10/25/10

Connecticut DOC (ZZCTDOC)
Site

Revenue

Commission Payment

CT_DOCBergin Correctional Institution

$64,965.38

$29,234.42

CT_DOCBridgeport Correctional Center

$34,628.81

$15,582.96

CT_DOCBrooklyn Correctional Institution

$19,411.83

$8,735.32

CT_DOCCheshire Correctional Institution

$40,559.97

$18,251.99

CT_DOCCorrigan Correctional Institution

$22,518.05

$10,133.12

CT_DOCCybulski Correctional Institution

$31,166.52

$14,024.93

CT_DOCEnfield Correctional Institution

$32,852.96

$14,783.83

CT_DOCGarner Correctional Institution

$17,740.98

$7,983.44

CT_DOCGates Correctional Institution

$39,343.50

$17,704.58

CT_DOCHartford Correctional Center

$29,910.70

$13,459.82

$143.16

$64.42

CT_DOCMacDougall Correctional

$46,791.58

$21,056.21

CT_DOCManson Youth Institution

$15,996.92

$7,198.61

CT_DOCNew Haven Correctional Center

$24,926.24

$11,216.81

CT_DOCNorthern Correctional Institution

$3,760.57

$1,692.26

CT_DOCOsborn Correctional Institution

$52,311.22

$23,540.05

CT_DOCRadgowski Correctional

$32,310.35

$14,539.66

CT_DOCRobinson Correctional Institution

$67,629.38

$30,433.22

CT_DOCWalker Reception/Management Unit

$30,252.66

$13,613.70

$5,669.76

$2,551.39

CT_DOCWillard Correctional Institution

$19,046.45

$8,570.90

CT_DOCYork Correctional Institution

$38,221.86

$17,199.84

$670,158.85

$301,571.48

CT_DOCJohn Dempsey Hospital

CT_DOCWebster Correctional Institution

Contract Totals:

If you have any questions, please contact Lisa Ferguson at (251) 3388859 ext. 5224 or lferguson@gtl.net.

Run Date: 12/04/2010

Connecticut DOC
Global Tel*Link
2609 Cameron St.
Mobile,AL 36607

November 2010

Monthly Commission Payment Summary

10/26/10 to 11/25/10

Connecticut DOC (ZZCTDOC)
Site

Revenue

Commission Payment

CT_DOCBergin Correctional Institution

$66,610.33

$29,974.65

CT_DOCBridgeport Correctional Center

$33,565.77

$15,104.60

CT_DOCBrooklyn Correctional Institution

$19,991.69

$8,996.26

CT_DOCCheshire Correctional Institution

$44,355.60

$19,960.02

CT_DOCCorrigan Correctional Institution

$22,975.14

$10,338.81

CT_DOCCybulski Correctional Institution

$35,929.36

$16,168.21

CT_DOCEnfield Correctional Institution

$37,899.77

$17,054.90

CT_DOCGarner Correctional Institution

$18,432.16

$8,294.47

CT_DOCGates Correctional Institution

$42,161.38

$18,972.62

CT_DOCHartford Correctional Center

$31,464.39

$14,158.98

$177.12

$79.70

CT_DOCMacDougall Correctional

$49,025.17

$22,061.33

CT_DOCManson Youth Institution

$19,494.96

$8,772.73

CT_DOCNew Haven Correctional Center

$23,616.68

$10,627.51

CT_DOCNorthern Correctional Institution

$4,311.77

$1,940.30

CT_DOCOsborn Correctional Institution

$56,314.55

$25,341.55

CT_DOCRadgowski Correctional

$39,342.45

$17,704.10

CT_DOCRobinson Correctional Institution

$75,641.07

$34,038.48

CT_DOCWalker Reception/Management Unit

$30,219.07

$13,598.58

$6,871.34

$3,092.10

CT_DOCWillard Correctional Institution

$17,425.11

$7,841.30

CT_DOCYork Correctional Institution

$40,996.54

$18,448.44

$716,821.42

$322,569.64

CT_DOCJohn Dempsey Hospital

CT_DOCWebster Correctional Institution

Contract Totals:

If you have any questions, please contact Lisa Ferguson at (251) 3388859 ext. 5224 or lferguson@gtl.net.

Run Date: 01/04/2011

Connecticut DOC
Global Tel*Link
2609 Cameron St.
Mobile,AL 36607

December 2010

Monthly Commission Payment Summary

11/26/10 to 12/25/10

Connecticut DOC (ZZCTDOC)
Site

Revenue

Commission Payment

CT_DOCBergin Correctional Institution

$62,310.86

$28,039.89

CT_DOCBridgeport Correctional Center

$34,480.95

$15,516.43

CT_DOCBrooklyn Correctional Institution

$19,519.73

$8,783.88

CT_DOCCheshire Correctional Institution

$39,044.13

$17,569.86

CT_DOCCorrigan Correctional Institution

$23,221.77

$10,449.80

CT_DOCCybulski Correctional Institution

$34,966.37

$15,734.87

CT_DOCEnfield Correctional Institution

$41,623.29

$18,730.48

CT_DOCGarner Correctional Institution

$21,456.87

$9,655.59

CT_DOCGates Correctional Institution

$44,094.53

$19,842.54

CT_DOCHartford Correctional Center

$32,701.04

$14,715.47

$181.56

$81.70

CT_DOCMacDougall Correctional

$47,595.54

$21,417.99

CT_DOCManson Youth Institution

$16,714.16

$7,521.37

CT_DOCNew Haven Correctional Center

$24,670.51

$11,101.73

CT_DOCNorthern Correctional Institution

$3,388.81

$1,524.96

CT_DOCOsborn Correctional Institution

$53,157.12

$23,920.70

CT_DOCRadgowski Correctional

$38,136.17

$17,161.28

CT_DOCRobinson Correctional Institution

$74,985.54

$33,743.49

CT_DOCWalker Reception/Management Unit

$27,764.35

$12,493.96

$6,288.20

$2,829.69

CT_DOCWillard Correctional Institution

$18,158.25

$8,171.21

CT_DOCYork Correctional Institution

$44,749.27

$20,137.17

$709,209.02

$319,144.06

CT_DOCJohn Dempsey Hospital

CT_DOCWebster Correctional Institution

Contract Totals:

If you have any questions, please contact Lisa Ferguson at (251) 3388859 ext. 5224 or lferguson@gtl.net.

STATE OF CONNECTICUT
DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
(http://www.ct.gov/doit)

AMENDMENT # 3
RFP # 10ITZ0119

Inmate Telephone Service
AMENDMENT # 3
provides the following:

1. Revised/Updated version of Attachment 3
(This version of Attachment 3 must be used in your RFP response)

Note: A signature line has been included below. A copy of this page signed in ink is required with the
Proposal to show that vendors have received this Amendment.

APPROVED:___________________________________
JACQUELINE SHIRLEY
DIRECTOR, IT CONTRACTS AND PURCHASING
CONTRACTS AND PURCHASING DIVISION
Date of Amendment: January 18, 2011

STATE OF CONNECTICUT
DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
(http://www.ct.gov/doit)

AMENDMENT # 4
RFP # 10ITZ0119

Inmate Telephone Service

AMENDMENT # 4
provides the following:

1. Extension of Due Date: February 10, 2011

Note: A signature line has been included below. A copy of this page signed in ink is required with the
Proposal to show that vendors have received this Amendment.

APPROVED:___________________________________
JACQUELINE SHIRLEY
DIRECTOR, IT CONTRACTS AND PURCHASING
CONTRACTS AND PURCHASING DIVISION
Date of Amendment: February 3, 2011

CT Contract RFP Amendments 2010-2011

Prison Phone Justice Articles and Documents

PLN Coverage of Prison Phone Justice

FCC Slashes Prison and Jail Phone Rates, Caps Video Call Cost, Eliminates “Site Commission” Kickbacks

Nevada Supreme Court Holds That Violating Jail Phone Policy Does Not Waive Attorney-Client Privilege

Washington, Virginia Advance Bills to Make Prison Calls Free

Los Angeles County Makes Jail Phone Calls Free

More articles