Prison Phone Justice

State of Nevada
Department of Administration
Purchasing Division
515 E. Musser Street, Suite 300
Carson City, NV 89701

SUBJECT:

Jim Gibbons
Governor
Greg Smith
Administrator

Amendment No. 01 to Request for Proposal No. 1628

DATE OF AMENDMENT: October 5, 2007
DATE OF RFP RELEASE: August 21, 2007
DATE AND TIME OF OPENING: October 15, 2007 @ 2:00 pm
AGENCY CONTACT:

Gail Burchett, Purchasing Officer

The following shall be a part of RFP No. 1628 for Inmate Telephone Services. If a vendor has
already returned a proposal and any of the information provided below changes that proposal,
please submit the changes along with this amendment. You need not re-submit an entire
proposal prior to the opening date and time.
Section I: Attendees at walk through.
Robert Rafalski Unisys
Kevin Collins
Securus
David Lang
Securus
Tracy Stewart
All Com Services
Jim Choi
PCS
Shelia Rafferty Embarq
George Halldin ICS
Tillman Mosley
Shawn Tech
John Crites
Global Tel* Link
Justin Naquin
ICS
John Jacoby
Securus
Steve Cadwell
PCS
Dawn Rosenberg
Nevada Dept. of Corrections
Gail Burchett
State Purchasing
Section II: Questions and Answers.
1.

Is it possible to obtain simple floor plans of the correctional facilities?
For security reasons, floor plans cannot be released.

2.

Do the phone enclosures belong to NDOC or the current vendor?
Please refer to the response to question 16.

3.

Who is responsible for relocating any phone pedestals within a facility?
If a vendor feels relocation is needed, then it is the vendor’s responsibility to relocate the
phone pedestals and or phones within the facility.

Amendment 01

RFP 1628

Page 1 of 22

4.

Is there lightning protection on the NDOC facilities?
All sites have lightening protection up to the demarcation provided by the local carrier.
Only High Desert State Prison (HDSP) has lightening protection after the demarcation.

5.

What is the current inmate population?
The current population is approximately 13,000 inmates. Please see question number 34 for
further population data.

6.

Do you have any vandalism issues?
The vendor shall keep in mind that this RFP supports correctional facilities and a
correctional environment. Each facility is different, and although we try to keep any phone
issues to a minimum, vandalism sometimes happens.

7.

What is the phone access time per facility?
Phones are turned on from 6:30AM to 9:30PM, although access at each facility can vary.
Additional information regarding this is answered under the Unisys question “Facility
Collect Calling Statistics”.

8.

Are the entire main phone rooms (demarcation points) air conditioned?
No – Although a majority of them are, there are some without dedicated air conditioning.
The current vendor has not noted this as a point of concern. If the vendor decides that air
conditioning is needed, the cost of adding such should be taken into consideration in their
proposal.

9.

Please relist the phone counts per facility including a breakdown of portable phones and
stationary phones.
Please see revised Table F below.

10.

Please clarify any fiber connections between SNCC and JCC.
No fiber exists at this time between the two facilities.

11.

How many months of CD backup of phone records do you required?
Per the RFP, call recording shall be available on-line for 180 days and off line (CD back-up)
indefinitely.

12.

Is the vendor responsible for repairing any concrete or asphalt that may be disturbed during
installation of phone lines?
Yes, per the RFP. However, inmate labor may be available to assist vendors.

13.

Will vendors be required to publish and supply rate charts for posting in all facilities?
Yes, vendor will be responsible for creating and supplying calling rate charts for the
facilities.

14.

Is there already a TDD dedicated line in each facility? Will this be required for all facilities?
No – Currently there are TDD phones located at ESP and NNCC only.

15.

Does each facility have a back up generator in the event of power outages?
Yes, all facilities have back-up generators.

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 2 of 22

16.

[3.2.1, p.7] Vendor Responsibilities – Equipment and Software: Will NDOC require new
equipment such as telephone instruments, telephone enclosures etc.?
Vendors are responsible for installing new telephone sets.

17.

[3.2.2, p.7] Vendor Responsibilities – Equipment and Software: Will NDOC require a new
Inmate Telephone System?
Vendor shall be responsible for installing a new telephone system.

18.

[3.3.1, p. 8] Vendor Responsibilities – Initial and Ongoing Installations: Given the distances
involved between NDOC facilities, and the lead times required for ordering network services,
would NDOC consider allowing 180 days for initial implementation?
NDOC took the above items into consideration and is requiring vendors to complete the
installation in 120 days.

19.

[3.4.17, p. 11] Collect calls including debit and pre-paid calls: Does NDOC really want debit and
pre-paid calls identified as a collect call to the called party? Instead, would NDOC prefer for
collect to be identified as collect, and prepaid/debit identified as prepaid/debit? Intentionally
incorrectly identifying the types of calls being placed to the called parties could result in
regulatory or legal action.
All calls processed from the Facilities should clearly be identified as collect, pre-paid or
debit at the time of the call.

20.

[3.7.8, p. 14] Security Features: The ITS equipment is capable of shutting down telephones, as
requested in this section, from within the ITS system and without manual intervention. Will
NDOC consider removing the manual cutoff switch requirement?
Yes – NDOC is agreeable to removing the requirement for manual cutoff switches.

21.

[3.7.11, p. 15] Security Features: Does NDOC have an announcement in mind that they would
like the ITS vendor to use?
Vendor shall provide a standard fraud prevention announcement. Vendor shall also
provide information on whether the system has additional capabilities for fraud prevention
other than the recorded announcement.

22.

[3.9.1, p. 17] Monitoring and Recording Requirements: Will NDOC provide the number of
investigative staff that will be monitoring live conversations as well as the number of access
devices to be used from the Central Office in Carson City, NV? Vendors will need to know this
information in order to provide adequate network facilities.
As stated in both 3.9.1 and 3.9.2 – monitoring is required at all facilities as well as the
Central Office.

23.

[3.8.7, p. 16 & 3.10.2, p. 18] Costs for interfaces with correctional management and
commissary systems: These provisions state that the ITS shall have the capability to interface
with NDOC's correctional management and commissary/banking systems, the latter to be moved
to a new application in April 2008. It is our experience that installed suppliers sometimes
charges very high fees to incoming ITS suppliers wishing to interface with their systems. Does
NDOC have agreements with these suppliers - contractually or otherwise - that govern the fees
they could charge the incoming ITS supplier?
NDOC owns the current commissary system and will own the new commissary system
moving forward. We do not anticipate any associated costs at this time.

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 3 of 22

24.

[3.10.5, p. 19] Terminology clarification: Could NDOC please clarify terminology? The
provision refers to "debit and/or inmate-based prepaid", potentially suggesting that "debit" and
"inmate-based prepaid" are different concepts. From other provisions we infer them to be
interchangeable terms.
These terms refer to the same method of the call being processed. We apologize for any
confusion.

25.

[3.10.6, P. 19] Debit or Inmate Based Pre-Paid Application: Is there a requirement for collect
International calling?
NDOC prefers that international calls be allowed via inmate based pre-paid or pre-paid
collect only.

26.

[3.12.3, p. 19] General Maintenance: Considering the lack of LEC plant facilities at some
locations, will NDOC allow the winning bidder to use a portion of the existing state Ethernet
network to meet the data requirements for this bid?
This will be addressed on an as needed basis.

27.

[3.12.6, p. 20] General Maintenance: Will NDOC provide definitions for severity levels 1, 2, 3
and 4 tickets?
NDOC’s intent was not to imply that there should only be 4 levels. Vendor shall please
detail and define their levels of maintenance priority and what each level includes.

28.

[3.14.1, pp. 21-22] LEC billing fees: Is the current ITS provider charging any fees to end-users,
including billing fees for calls charged to local telephone bills? While we are capable of
charging such fees, it is our strong desire and general policy not to charge them. Will NDOC
consider explicitly forbidding these types of fees to ensure an apples-to-apples comparison
between bidders?
NDOC does not want vendors to charge a billing fee.

29.

[4.1.11 and 4.1.12, p. 23] Primary vendor information: The numbering for Paragraphs 4.1.11
and 4.1.12 is duplicated. How would NDOC wish the bidders to respond? Will the second
4.1.11 and 4.1.12 be renumbered to .13 and .14, and the existing 4.1.13 be renumbered to
4.1.15?
Yes – Duplicate 4.1.11 – 13 should be made to 4.1.13, 4.1.14, 4.1.15

30.

[4.2.5, p. 24] References: Will NDOC please clarify “staff assigned”? Is the request for
information on the staff on existing account references’ or staff that will be assigned for NDOC?
NDOC would like information on the vendor’s staff that will be assigned to the NDOC
account.

31.

[5.12, p. 26] Cost/Commission Proposal Submittal: Will NDOC provide the proposed number of
part-time administrators required when bidding Section II of the RFP? Are these administrators
required at all locations, the major NDOC facilities, or located at a central facility?
Please reference response to question regarding 5.12.

32.

[5.13.1, 5.13.2, p. 26] Cost/Commission: The verbiage in these two paragraphs is duplicated. Is
this an oversight, or did NDOC intend to have different verbiage? If this is an unintended
duplication, the bidder will respond identically to 5.13.1 ad 5.13.2, unless NDOC directs
otherwise.
This is a duplicate. Please ignore 5.13.2.

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 4 of 22

33.

[8.10, p. 34] Terms, Conditions and Exceptions: Will NDOC clarify the need for these
documents, as NDOC is not purchasing any products or services from vendors. ITS vendors will
be providing a complete, turnkey solution that will not require any payments from the State of
Nevada.
Please see answer above.

34.

[Attachment E, p. 57] Population and estimated growth: Could NDOC please provide average
daily population (ADP) for the past 6 months? This would enable bidders to calculate calls and
minutes per inmate as well as estimated ADP growth from now until FY09.
Below is the average daily population per month since the beginning of 2007;
February 2007 – 12594
May 2007 - 12095
August 2007 - 12981
March 2007 - 12946
June 2007 - 12951
April 2007
- 13041
July 2007 - 13011
The drop in population May 2007 was a result of the removal of illegal immigrant
prisoners from the NDOC.

35.

[Attachment E, pp. 58- 61] Average Monthly Collect (Based Upon 6 Months):
a. Would NDOC provide the collect rates (surcharge, first minute, additional minute) for
each type of call (local, Intralata, Interlata, interstate, and International) associated with
the traffic data provided on pages 58 through 61?
The calling rates included in the RFP are the current rates used for inmate telephone calls.
b. Would NDOC provide the gross revenue values generated by the traffic listed on pages
58 through 61?
Vendor may formulate revenue figures based on the provided calling rates and statistics.
c. Would NDOC provide the commission rates associated with the traffic data listed on
pages 58 through 61?
The current commission rate is 52%
d. Would NDOC provide the commission payment values associated with the traffic data
listed on pages 58 through 61?
The vendor may formulate the commission payment based on the commission rate provided
above.
e. Would NDOC provide the minimum annual guarantee (MAG) payment values associated
with the traffic data listed on pages 58 through 61?
NDOC receives no minimum annual guarantee payment.

36.

[Attachment E, pp. 62 – 66] Average Monthly Debit (Based Upon 6 Months):
a. Would NDOC provide the debit rates (surcharge, first minute, additional minute) for each
type of call (local, Intralata, Interlata, interstate, and International) associated with the
traffic data provided on pages 62 through 66?
Attachment J provides rate information.
b. Would NDOC provide the gross revenue values generated by the traffic listed on pages
62 through 66?
Vendor may formulate revenue values based on the calling rate and calling statistics
provided.
c. Would NDOC provide the commission rates associated with the traffic data listed on
pages 62 through 66?
Vendor may formulate revenue values based on the calling rate and calling statistics
provided. Attachment J provides rate information.

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 5 of 22

d. Would NDOC provide the commission payment values associated with the traffic data
listed on pages 62 through 66?
Vendor may formulate revenue values based on the calling rate and calling statistics
provided.
e. Would NDOC provide the minimum annual guarantee (MAG) payment values associated
with the traffic data listed on pages 62 through 66?
NDOC receives no minimum annual guarantee payment.
37.

[Attachment E, pp. 58 – 61] Average Monthly Collect (Based Upon 6 Months): Are the prepaid
collect calls contained within the calling statistics listed on pages 58 through 61? If so, could
they be identified separately from the collect calls (separate listings of minutes and messages for
collect and prepaid calls)? If not, could the prepaid collect statistics be provided?
Prepaid collect statistics are included with the collect statistics provided on pages 58 through 61.
The pre-paid collect statistics cannot be separated.

38.

[Attachment E, pp. 58 – 61] Average Monthly Collect (Based Upon 6 Months): There are no
local, Intralata, or Interlata/intrastate collect calls listed on pages 58 through 61, instead there is
only the category “Intrastate”. Does NDOC have the details (messages and minutes) on which of
the calls are local, Intralata, or Interlata/intrastate? If not, does NDOC have any samples or
estimates of the percentage of these calls that are local, Intralata, or Interlata/intrastate?
Refer to the response to Unisys question regarding facility collect calling statistics.

39.

[Attachment E, p. 65] Average Monthly Debit (Based Upon 6 Months): Why does the Wells
Conservation Camp only have collect calling? Does Wells not have debit, or is this an accidental
omission? Could NDOC provide the debit calling statistics for the Wells Conservation Camp?
NDOC made an error. The table labeled as Stewart Conservation Camp should have been
labeled as Wells Conservation Camp usage. Please adjust this information.

40.

[Attachment E, pp. 65 – 66] Average Monthly Debit (Based Upon 6 Months): Are the calling
statistics (messages and minutes) for the following four camps really identical: Silver Springs
Conservation Camp, Stewart Conservation Camp, Tonopah Conservation Camp, and Northern
Nevada Restitution Camp? If not, could NDOC provide a corrected Attachment E?
The debit statistics listed for Stewart

41.

[Attachment F, p. 67] Inmate Telephone Equipment Required: Will NDOC verify if the number
of TDD Units and Portable Telephones listed in Attachment F are in addition to quantities listed
in # of Inmate Telephones column?
Please see the chart at the end of this document

42.

[Attachment J, Section I, p. 83] RATES AND COMMISSIONS EXCLUDING A PART-TIME
ON-SITE ADMINISTRATOR: Does NDOC have any calling statistics concerning messages and
minutes broken down by time of day and/or day of week? Does it have any samples or estimates
concerning the percentage of calls that occur during weekdays, evenings, nights, weekends, and
holidays?
NDOC does not have this information available.

43.

[Attachment J, Section I, p. 83] Rate tables for financial offer: With the signing of Assembly
Bill (AB) 518 on May 31st, 2007 (which was effective immediately), the current status of inmate
rate caps is that while they are not officially repealed (they are still on the books), effectively they
have been repealed, and they are already unenforceable. Since inmate rates have become
deregulated, Option #1's complex time-of-day and mileage-band rate structure is no longer

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 6 of 22

necessary. The complexity of this rate/discount structure imposes financial risk on bidders that
will be reflected in financial offers to NDOC. As a result we believe it is in neither party's
interest to consider a financial offer based on the calling rates in Option #1.
We request that NDOC eliminate the current Option #1 as a bidding scenario. We request NDOC
revise the rate structure for Option #1 using the traditional Local/IntraLATA/InterLATA/etc
framework presented in Option #2.
NDOC does not believe that it is necessary to eliminate option #1 as a bidding scenario.
The vendor shall provide a proposal on the current rates and have the opportunity to
propose an alternative calling rate structure.
44.

[Attachment J, Section I and Section II, pp. 83 – 85] Paragraph 2. Contractor shall attach
additional charts if Contractor chooses to provide additional commission and calling rate
offers. Failure to complete Attachment G-1 and G-2 may cause your proposal to be rejected.
Please be sure to include debit and/or pre-paid information in the RFP Response.”: There does
not appear to be an Attachment G-1 or G-2; Attachment G is a sample score sheet to be filled
out by the State. Should Paragraph 2 on pages 83 and 85 read “Failure to complete Attachment
J, Section I and Attachment J, Section II may cause your proposal to be rejected.”?
Correct - The requirement should read Attachment J. NDOC apologizes for any
confusion.

45.

[5.13.1, 5.13.2, p. 26] Cost/Commission: What does NDOC mean by the use of “dominant
carrier”? With the signing (effective immediately) of Assembly Bill (AB) 518 on May 31st,
2007, the current status of inmate rate caps is that while they are not officially repealed (they are
still on the books), effectively they have been repealed, and they are already unenforceable.
Since inmate rates have become deregulated, conforming to dominant carrier rates is no longer a
relevant criterion.
If the NDOC defines “dominant carrier” as the ILEC (Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier), then
based upon our initial regulatory research Embark would be considered the local and Intralata
dominant carrier, and AT&T the Interlata and interstate dominant carrier.
Embarq Intralata rates are shown below. Please note, all of these values are less than the values
provided in Option #1 on page 83 of the RFP, indicating that Option #1 requires bidders to bid
Intralata rates higher than the dominant carrier rates, in violation of Items 5.13.1 and 5.13.2.
Rate Mileage
0-10
11-30
31-55
56-124 0.24
125-292
293-430
431+

Initial Minute
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.16
0.28
0.29
0.30

Each Additional Minute.
0.04
0.07
0.11
0.18
0.20
0.21

AT&T Interlata rates are shown below.
$3.95 surcharge, 89 cents/minute (initial and additional). These match the interstate rates
provided in Option 1.
Would it be possible for NDOC to delete Items 5.13.1 and 5.13.2, and instead provide what your
current rates are under your current contract (surcharge, initial minute, and additional minute) and

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 7 of 22

then request that bidders offer simple, understandable rate structures at competitive commission
levels?
NDOC will not address cost or rate proposals, especially during a question period. Please
save any for your proposal.
46.

The number and methodology to detect cell phones within an institution can range from wands to
free standing detection devices. The costs and associated benefits to the DOC can range widely.
Without specific requirements, it is difficult to understand the DOC needs. Therefore, request
that the requirement to indicate the impact on commissions be removed, and the requirement to
provide information on capabilities remain.
NDOC is requesting information on the various methods and technology available for cell
phone detection, and realizes that there is a cost to this technology(s). If the vendor is
unable to provide a cost impact to the commission, then please provide as much general cost
information as possible.

47.

The requirement states that the vendors are to install the number of phones as indicated in
Attachment F to the RFP. However, Attachment F to the RFP allows vendor to submit a
recommended number of phones. Therefore, are vendors to deduce that the number?
NDOC is giving the vendors the ability to offer an alternative proposal regarding the
number of inmate telephones per facility.

48.

Request the DOC make a determination if the vendor is or is not responsible for providing the
necessary heating or cooling system for the control room, so that the associated cost can be
determined.
If the vendor feels that the current conditions are inadequate, the vendor is responsible for
implementing any heating or cooling system changes and the associated costs. Please see
RFP Amendment 1 question 8 for additional information.

49.

Request clarification that both debit and called party prepaid calls placed by an inmate should be
announced as a “collect” calls as stated in the requirement, even though for these two types of
calls payment is already made.
Please refer to the response to question number 19.

50.

Please clarify this requirement. Does the DOC require the ability to shut down ITS phones via
cut-off switches, or the ITS itself (as stated)?
Please refer to the response to question number 20.

51.

Can the DOC please further define the term “false disconnects”?
NDOC defines “false disconnects” as calls that are incorrectly disconnected by the inmate
telephone system.

52.

Please provide information as to the projected number of CD/ROMs utilized by each institution
for this effort.
At this time, an estimate cannot be provided as we are currently not utilizing CD/ROMs to
save call information.

53.

Please provide additional information as to the type of equipment the DOC is seeking to meet
these needs.
No further clarification is required.

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 8 of 22

54.

Please confirm that the provider of this feed will provide the necessary technical support and
feeds at no cost to the ITS vendor.
Please refer to question number 23.

55.

Please provide additional information as to the lost commission calculation to be completed. Will
the calls used to make this calculation be determined on a per minute basis or on an hourly basis?
Will this calculation still apply if the phones are not available for use by the inmates (not with the
phone availability times)?
The lost commission calculation will be used for any period of time which exceeds the
response time associated with the priority level.

56.

Please provide information as it relates to Praeses roll in selecting a vendor under this RFP.
The vendor will be selected solely by a committee of NDOC and other State of Nevada
personnel.

57.

Please provide information as it relates to Praeses rolls and responsibilities after contract award.
NDOC is contracting with Praeses to assist with the management of inmate telephones.

58.

Call limits are currently used within one DOC institution. Can the DOC please confirm this
requirement and the methodology that is to be implemented to support this requirement?
Please refer to the response to the Unisys question Facility Collect Calling statistics.

59.

Under the existing contract, the incumbent is required to maintain and manage the attorney
database that is used by the system for do not record and velocity settings. Does the DOC still
require this administration by the vendor, and if so can the DOC please state the performance
expectations related to this effort?
NDOC requires the awarded vendor to maintain and manage the attorney database, this
includes the validation of an attorney phone number.

60.

The pre-paid application shall allow for prepayment to a specific inmate’s account or a member
of inmate’s PAN and shall be specific to an inmate’s PAN. Q: Are you asking that destination
pre-pay be tied directly to the PIN/allow list? For example, if a number is on 2 inmate allow lists,
prepaid funds to the number can be designated for calls from only 1 of the inmates. Please clarify
your intentions
NDOC policy states that a phone number cannot appear on multiple PAN numbers,
therefore pre-payment can be made to only one inmates PAN number. Exceptions will be
made on an as needed basis for family members only.

61.

The vendors assume that only the ITS system and associated system hardware are to be new and
the inmate telephones can be reused or may be purchased from the incumbent vendor (as agreed
to between the vendor and the incumbent) to assist with all vendors meeting the RFP
implementation timeframes.
The vendor’s RFP response should be based on the installation of new inmate telephone
sets. Exceptions to this will be addressed on a case by case basis.

62.

Ability to track other carrier’s phones and validate bill to numbers.

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 9 of 22

Q: Please clarify this requirement. Is this requirement requesting information relating to the
ability of the system to identify which LEC/CLEC a dialed number belongs to and if that number
is able to be billed through the LEC/CLEC?
63.

Billing reports that can be provided or sorted by any or all of the following criteria: daily
statistics, monthly statistics. Q: Please clarify the data and fields to be included in the daily and
monthly statistics reports. Some examples might include total number of calls, total call attempts,
etc.
Vendor shall list the fields available in its daily and monthly statistics reports.

64.

Discusses the State’s move to a new commissary and banking environment.
Q: If the state has determined the new vendor(s) for commissary and banking environment,
please provide the name of the vendor.
The new commissary environment will be owned and managed by NDOC. This software
has been created by Syscon Justice Systems.

65.

Will the vendor have a signed contract immediately upon Board of Examiners approval and prior
to the State’s order to proceed? If no, please consider starting the 120 day clock upon vendor’s
receipt of a signed contract. This is due to the fact that most vendors will not have the ability to
expend funds for equipment purchase until a signed contract has been received. Please consider
adding Acts of God and inability to access a facility due to any facility lock-downs, as a valid
reason for delay in the required installation time frame and exemption of liquidated damages.
The vendor cannot expend funds until the date the contract is signed by the Board of
Examiners. Frequently, the hardcopy contract takes approximately a week to return to the
initiating Department. The 120 day clock will not start until the State gives the order to
proceed. Issues regarding delays to installations will be addressed at the time of the issue.
Acts of God or facility lock-downs will be taken into consideration if implementation delays
move to liquidations.

66.

Please further expand on the question. It is unclear as to what the State is asking.
This question refers to the vendor’s capability /method of validating whether a called
number is billable.

67.

Please expand the requirement to include Federal Government references.
If you have the Federal Government as a client in a similar project, please feel free to utilize
them as a reference

68.

In order to place all vendors on a level playing field, please clarify up-front if the State requires
any pre-payment of commissions. Pre-payment of commission will have a significant impact on
a vendor’s cash flow and may impact the rates charged and commissions paid. What weighting
will the state place on pre-payments in their evaluation of the price proposal responses?
Please refer to section 5.11 of the RFP. Pre-payment is not mandatory. The vendor has the
opportunity to submit a cost proposal with and/or without a pre-payment.

69.

This requirement requests that the Vendor propose a commission offer with and without PIN
administration. Is it the State’s intent to perform the PIN administration under the option without
vendor provided PIN administration? If yes, how many PIN administrators does the state intend
to employee and where will they be located?
5.1.2 states the vendor to provide a cost proposal with the vendor providing the PIN
Administrator and one without a PIN administrator, in which case, the State will support

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 10 of 22

the PIN administration function internally. We cannot direct the vendor on the quantity of
PIN administrators required as it would be dependent on the vendor’s individual system
performance and its efficiency relating to the PIN administration area.
70.

Given that a traditional Local Exchange Carrier (LEC) “dominant” provider of Inmate Telephone
Service no longer exists to file tariffs to be used as a rate cap, please consider establishing a State
mandated not-to-exceed rate cap. If it is the State intent to utilize the existing rates, as listed
within the Cost Proposal as the not-to-exceed rates, please consider removal of the mileage
bands, time of day and holiday discounts and establish a fixed per call surcharge and rate per
minute per calling type (Local, Intralata, Interlata, Interstate) that can be charged during all time
periods. This will greatly simplify billing and estimation of charges for the families and will be
in line with industry standards.
The State has taken into account an alternative calling rate option. This RFP gives the
vendor an opportunity to submit a commission rate using the existing calling rates as well as
to suggest a new calling rate structure and associated commission that would be of a benefit
to the State.

71.

Please note that items 5.13.1 and 5.13.2 are identical. Please Clarify.
Yes – Items 5.13.1 and 5.13.2 are duplicates and apologizes for any confusion.

72.

Paragraph 5.13.6 states the vendor shall implement any rate adjustments requested by the State
within five (5) days of said request, subject to regulatory approval. Is this a unilateral provision?
Please clarify.
Should rate changes be required, the State will notify the vendor in writing for
implementation within 5 days.

73.

Please consider extending the required payment and reporting time from 25 to 45 days following
the end of the prior month. This will ensure that all billing processed are completed and accurate
commissioning and reporting can occur.
This is not flexible. Reporting and payment will remain at 25 days.

74.

Will the State provided the points that will be assigned to each of the listed evaluation criteria?
This question is related to RFP number 7.1 not 7.10.
The State is not required to provide the evaluation criteria points.

75.

This provision requires that the vendor submit with its proposal any and all proposed terms and
conditions, including, without limitation, written warranties, maintenance/service agreements,
license agreements, and lease purchase agreements. If these documents are not included the
vendor’s proposal will be considered non-responsive. At the time of proposal submission, the
vendor may not have all proposed warranties, maintenance/service agreements, license
agreements, and lease purchase agreements terms and conditions for all third party suppliers that
may provide support, products and/or incidental services under this project. With this
understanding, will the State delete the stipulation that the omission of these documents renders a
proposal non-responsive?
If the vendor cannot include all required data, then they must state a reason why the data is
missing and if/when it will become available.

76.

What is the anticipated award date for the Contract? In the Attachment E, Facility Specification,
average daily population information indicates what the FY09 budget data is to be used for the

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 11 of 22

contractor’s response. The average daily population information then specifies expansion of “X”
number of beds. Many of the expansion estimates occur in FYO8. Should the FY09 Budget
actually be FY08? This table is unclear as to what the budget baseline is and what is included in
the budget. Please clarify.
The contract award date is anticipated to be the date of the Board of Examiners meeting in
February 2008 (est. to be 2/11/08). By the time this contract is completed, including
implementation of service at all facilities, we will probably be into FY2009 (July 1, 2008).
These population numbers are a projection of the anticipated population for FY09.
77.

What is the existing allowed call length? Does the State intend to keep this call length in place
under the new contract?
The call length varies by facility and by the inmate security level. The maximum permitted
length of each call is 30 minutes. This will not change with the new contract.

78.

Call and minute statistics provided show that there were no Local Collect calls or minutes. Is this
correct or were the Local Collect calls and minutes inadvertently left out? If yes, please provide
the data. If the Local Collect Calls were included within the Intrastate statistics provided please
provide a breakout.
This data is not available as, based on current reporting local collect calls are not separated
out.

79.

Inmate Telephone Equipment Required. Please provide address with phone number for the
Central-Inspectors location. Please note if this facility is co-located with a facility that will have
an ITS installed. This will enable the vendor to determine if separate data connections are
required to support the required Telephone Workstations.
Additionally, RFP item 3.9.1 states that the State’s staff at the Central Office in Carson City, NV
will need capability to monitor live conversations and access call recordings. Is this the “CentralInspectors” location? If no, please provide the Central Office address with phone number and the
number of workstations required.
The Inspector General’s office is located at 5500 Snyder Ave. Carson City, NV 89702
This is where the Inspector General and his local staff of Inspectors reside. This building is
located in the Central Office complex for Department of Corrections. This building is not
within an institution that houses inmates. As vendors walked through the site visits, they
also understand that there are “Inspectors” located at each facility that have the capability
and responsibility to monitor live or taped phone calls. Inspectors that reside in the
Central Office in Carson City also need the capability to monitor live or taped phone calls.

80.

It is understood that the per minute rates listed under the Intrastate mileage band of 0 to 10 miles
applies to local traffic. Do the Automated Operator Station-to-Station and Person-to-Person
Surcharges also apply to local calls or do these surcharges only apply to Intrastate long distance
calling?
The automated operator surcharge applies to the intrastate calls mileage bands as listed.
Interstate surcharge is specified separately on Attachment J.

81.

During the site survey, the incumbent ITS operator indicated that they will be removing both the
current telephones as well as the permanent mounting pedestals or phone booths. Will they be
allowed to remove the pedestals and phone booths? Do they currently own the pedestals and
phone booths or is that state-owned infrastructure?
GTL is responsible for removing its inmate telephones; however, NDOC believes that any
pedestals or phone booths affixed to the facilities shall remain.

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 12 of 22

82.

Use of existing or in-place conduit, raceways, cable ways, cable, inside wiring, telephone
set mountings, switches, terminal boxes, and terminals within the Facility are at the risk
of the vendor. No exposed wiring will be permitted. Ownership of any wiring or conduit
placed under this Agreement by the successful vendor becomes the State’s property upon
termination and/or expiration of the Agreement. During the site evaluations several units
had non working phones due to cable issues. Please clarify in the total count for each site
included the non working phones. If non working is vendor expected to run new cable
and make these phones work. Please clarify if underground conduit is in good condition
(i.e. Jean Conservation Camp, Northern Nevada Correctional).
The number of phones required by the State required are shown in Attachment F.
Please refer to Section 3.3.5 for cabling requirements. The condition of the conduit between
NNCC and SCC is unknown. There is no conduit/wire between JCC and SNCC. It was
eliminated/destroyed when SNCC was closed several years ago. It was not reinstalled when
the facility was re-opened.

83.

84.

The vendor shall restore to original condition any damage to the State’s property caused by
maintenance or installation personnel associated with the vendor, including repairs to walls,
ceilings, etc.:
Section 3.3.10 is correct.
The ITS must be able to be shutdown quickly and selectively. The State must be able to
shutdown the ITS by cut-off switches at several locations including, but not limited to:
• At demarcation location - total Facility telephones;
• By central control center - select telephones; and,
• By select housing units - control center.
During the site evaluations many of the NV DOC sites do not have cut off switches. Please clarify
the use of cut off switches and use of computer software controls.
Please refer to question #20 & 21.

85.

All call recordings shall be stored on-line for a minimum period of one hundred eighty (180) days
and shall be stored off-line indefinitely. Please explain your storage methodology as it relates to
monitored calls, clearly defining on-line versus off-line storage. Please clarify if NV DOC has
more specifics on off-line storage requirement.
No other specifications are available.

86.

On expansion of existing facilities or construction of new proposed locations, will the vendor be
required to pay for the new conduit?
Yes, per section 3.3.5 of the RFP.

87.

Question 3.7.3 please rephrase the question, I do not understand?
The Caller ID feature, as provided by the telephone company, shall identify calls from any
State facility as “unknown”.

88.

What is your current commission structure, how much are you being paid?
Please refer to question #37.

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 13 of 22

89.

If a web based solution is proposed is there a requirement for onsite equipment other than calling
instruments and or network access devices?
Yes, workstations are required for each facility and for the central inspectors per
Attachment F of the RFP.

90.

Is there a requirement for any coin phones? If so how many and at what locations?
No, there is no requirement for coin phones.

91.

Are there any surcharges associate with the prevailing carrier’s rate that have not been disclosed?
Can you provide us with a detail of revenue generated not an average but 3 actual months by
location?
No, there are no other surcharges other than those shown in Attachment J.
Please see response to Questions 37 and 38.

92.

Paragraph 3.3.1 states “All vendors submitting a response to this RFP must be
appropriately licensed by the Nevada State Contractors’ Board in accordance with NRS
624.” The referenced statute deals with construction/building contractors, not all entities
who contract with the State? We do not envision that the selected vendor will be doing
remodeling of any facility that is so extensive that it requires a permit. Does this
requirement apply to the present RFP for inmate telephone services?
Any questions regarding this requirement may be directed to the Nevada Contractors
Board.

93.

Paragraph 3.7.11 states “What is this feature other than a recorded announcement?” Is this
statement part of the requirement that vendors should respond to?
Please refer to question #20.

94.

Paragraph 4.1.1.1 and 4.1.1.2 regarding business certifications. These paragraphs seem to imply
that the necessary certifications are required upon contract award, but not with the proposal. Yet
Paragraph 6.17 states that proposals that do not contain the requisite licensure may be deemed
non-responsive. Does the State require business certifications with the proposal or upon contract
award?
Business certifications are required during the proposal phase, however if the vendor has
any questions or concerns regarding this requirement, please contact Gail Burchett at State
Purchasing.

95.

Paragraph 4.3.1.2, Subcontractor Information. Are vendors required to submit Financial
Information and documentation (Section 4.1.13) for subcontractors with the proposal?
Yes

96.

Are vendors required to submit certifications (Section 4.1.1) for subcontractors with the proposal?
Yes

97.

Are vendors required to submit proof of insurance coverage (Section 4.3.1.6) for?
subcontractors with the proposal?
No, it is the vendor’s responsibility to ensure that all their subcontractors have the
appropriate insurance as ultimately the vendor is responsible for insurance.

98.

Paragraph 4.1.9 asks for a single point of contact, and this is also requested for all

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 14 of 22

subcontractors. Since the prime vendor will act as a single point of contact for the State,
and not the subcontractors, is a single point of contact also required of subcontractors?
A single point of contact is required for the prime vendor. No single point of contact is
required for the subcontractor. It is anticipated that the prime vendor shall manage the
chain of command for all communications.
99.

Paragraph 5.7 states that “A pre-paid call is deemed to be complete and commission due when a
connection is made between the inmate and the called party, whether such
connection be established by positive acceptance or by live or automated (i.e. answering
machine) pick up.” With an inmate telephone system, positive acceptance is always
required to connect the parties, and occurs only after live pickup. With automated pickup, no
positive acceptance is received and the inmate is never allowed to hear or leave a message on the
machine. Does the State deem the prepaid call complete and commission due upon positive
acceptance, or upon pickup by the called party (or called party’s answering machine), prior to
positive acceptance and without the parties being connected to each other?
A pre-paid call is deemed to be complete when a connection is made between the inmate
and the called party, whether such connection be established by positive acceptance or by
live or automated (i.e. answering machine) pick up.

100.

Paragraph 5.9 states that “A debit call is deemed to be complete and commission due
when a connection is made between the inmate and the called party even if such
connection is established by automated machine pick up. With an inmate telephone
system, positive acceptance is always required to connect the parties, and occurs only
after live pickup. With automated pickup, no positive acceptance is received and the
inmate is never allowed to hear or leave a message on the machine. Does the State
deem the debit call complete and commission due upon positive acceptance, or upon
pickup by the called party (or called party’s answering machine), prior to positive
acceptance and without the parties being connected to each other?
A debit call is deemed to be complete when a connection is made between the inmate and the
called party even if such connection is established by automated machine pick up.

101.

Paragraph 5.11 states that the State may require pre-payment of the monthly commission.
Paragraph 5.14.1 states that the commission payment is due on the 25th day of the month
following the month of traffic. Would the State consider negotiating when the commission
payment is made?
The commission payment should be made on or before the 25th day of the month following
the month of traffic.

102.

Paragraph 8.3 states that the performance bond “will be retained during the full period of the
Contract.” Bonding companies will only issue bonds for a one-year period, which may be
renewed on an annual basis. Please clarify that the State understands that the performance bond
will be issued for a one-year term, and will be renewed annually for the full period of the
agreement.
The State understands the requirement.

103.

Paragraph 8.10 states that proposals must include proposed terms and conditions, written
warranties, maintenance/service agreements, license agreements, lease purchase agreements, and
the vendor’s standard contract language. Is the State referring only to agreements that pertain to
the services provided by the prime vendor to the State?
This paragraph refers to the prime vendor only as ultimately the contract would be with the
prime vendor, and not any subcontractors.

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 15 of 22

104.

Paragraph 8.20 states that “An official of each proposed subcontractor must sign, and include as
part of the proposal submitted in response to this RFP, a statement to the effect that the
subcontractor has read and will agree to abide by the awarded vendor’s
obligations.” Is this statement Attachment B or is it in addition to Attachment B?
Each separate subcontracting company used by vendor must sign and submit a copy of
Attachment A for Subcontractors.

105.

Paragraph 8.32 requires that any person receiving a Federal contract must file a
certification with the using agency that that person has not made and will not make any
prohibited payment. PCS believes that, as this is a State contract and not a Federal
contract, a Federal statute such as this would not apply. Would the State please confirm?
this?
This paragraph shall apply to any vendor who receives a Federal grant, loan, or cooperative
agreement.

106.

Section 9, Submission Checklist, identified documents that must be submitted with the Proposal.
Under the State Documents tab, items e. and f., it lists “Primary Vendor
Information” and “Subcontractor Information.” What is the State looking for here? There is no
form with these titles included in the RFP.
Please refer to Section 4 in the RFP titled Company Background and References.

107.

Attachment E, Facility Collect Calling Statistics. Would the State please provide call data broken
down by Local, Intralata, Interlata/Intrastate, Interstate and International for collect calling as has
been provided for debit calling?
Please refer to questions # 37-40.

108.

Attachment J, Cost/Commission Proposal. We have the following questions regarding this
attachment:
See Questions 109-113.

109.

What are Attachments G-1 and G-2, referred to in item 2 on page 83 and page 85? Attachment G
in this RFP is the Sample Score Sheet, which doesn’t seem to be what is referred to here.
Please refer to question #44.

110.

What are the current Local and Intralata rates for Collect and Debit, or are these the same as the
Intrastate calling rates?
Please refer to Attachment J under Section I for the current local, Intralata, intrastate, and
interstate rates.

111.

Where should vendors place their proposed International rates for Option #1?
Our apologies, page 84 should say Option #1

112.

Where should vendors place their additional fees, if any, for Option #1?
Additional fees should be listed under comments.

113.

What are the desired parameters for Option #2? The concern here is that instructions
to vendors for Option #2 may accidentally have been left out, since instructions are
provided for Option #1 and additional Options, but not for Option #2.
The Chart listed under Option #2 is provided as an optional chart for vendors to provide
additional commission and/or calling rate offers.

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 16 of 22

114.

Would the State confirm that the State owns the enclosures and pedestals upon which some of the
inmate telephones are mounted?
Please see question # 16.

115.

Section 5.4 refers to a “free call list” supplied by the State. Can the State provide statistics on the
number of free calls made from the facilities? Are these calls to the Public Defender’s Office or
does the State allow free calls to other entities? Are there limits to these calls, such as number of
calls per inmate per day/week/month, length of call, local vs. long distance, and so on?
There are no “free” calls currently being allowed by the State.

116.

Into what fund does the commission revenue received from the inmate telephone calls go?
All commission revenue received goes to the Inmate Welfare Fund.
REVISED:
FACILITY DEBIT CALLING STATISTICS
Average Monthly Debit (Based Upon 6 Months)
Ely State Prison (ESP)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
2
95
365
61
1

Number of Minutes
25
1,242
4,528
746
12

High Desert State Prison (HDSP)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
19
2,758
120
115
2

Number of Minutes
340
43,621
2,056
1,214
19

Lovelock Correctional Center (LCC)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
78
301
982
97
0

Number of Minutes
1,797
4,722
16,680
1,209
0

Nevada State Prison (NSP)

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 17 of 22

Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
507
100
262
90
0

Number of Minutes
10,167
1,807
4,796
1,373
0

Northern Nevada Correctional Center (NNCC)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
1,081
257
478
129
0

Number of Minutes
17,461
3,816
6,892
1,482
0

Southern Desert Correctional Center (SDCC)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
60
3,031
236
135
1

Number of Minutes
1,499
50,748
4,056
1,547
14

Southern Nevada Correctional Center (SNCC)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
1,218
23
133
25
0

Number of Minutes
20,885
241
1,956
245
0

Florence McClure Women’s Correctional Center (FMWCC)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
1,221
57
297
84
0

Number of Minutes
20,375
732
3,707
824
0

Warm Springs Correctional Center (WSCC)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate

Amendment 1

Number of Calls
257
116
622

RFP 1628

Number of Minutes
4,695
1,583
10,265

Page 18 of 22

Interstate
International

46
0

433
0

Carlin Conservation Camp (CCC)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
3
50
140
10
0

Number of Minutes
50
872
2,076
91
0

Ely Conservation Camp (ECC)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
0
37
111
8
0

Number of Minutes
0
474
1,547
91
0

Humboldt Conservation Camp (HCC)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
3
44
165
8
0

Number of Minutes
33
575
2,636
105
0

Indian Springs Conservation Camp (ISCC)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
0
424
99
18
0

Number of Minutes
0
6,156
1,467
205
0

Jean Conservation Camp (JCC)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate

Amendment 1

Number of Calls
918
40
168

RFP 1628

Number of Minutes
14,583
565
3,468

Page 19 of 22

Interstate
International

58
0

611
0

Pioche Conservation Camp (PCC)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
0
17
181
12
0

Number of Minutes
0
240
2,652
107
0

Silver Springs Conservation Camp (SSCC)*
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
48
248
29
19
0

Number of Minutes
662
3,369
461
256
0

Wells Conservation Camp (WCC)*
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
0
53
216
9
0

Number of Minutes
0
773
3486
71
0

Tonopah Conservation Camp (TCC)*
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
0
26
222
11
0

Number of Minutes
0
382
2,969
169
0

Northern Nevada Restitution Center (NNRC)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate

Amendment 1

Number of Calls
95
33
62
23

RFP 1628

Number of Minutes
1,164
526
1,133
359

Page 20 of 22

International

0

0

Casa Grande Transitional House (CGTH)
Call Type
Local
Intralata
Interlata/Intrastate
Interstate
International

Number of Calls
246
48
70
20
0

Number of Minutes
4,058
910
1348
291
0

*Please note, the calling statistics for these facilities have been revised and updated.
REVISED:
ATTACHMENT F

Inmate Telephone Equipment Required

Required Inmate Telephone Equipment**
Facility
Name

# of Inmate
Telephones

# of
TDD
Units

# of Portable
Telephones

ESP
HDSP
LCC
NSP
NNCC
SDCC
SNCC
SNWCC
WSCC
CCC
ECC
HCC
ISBC
ISCC
JCC
PCC
SSCC
SCC
TCC
WCC
NNRC
CGTH
Central-

37
145

1
1

14
14

97
60
50
60
26
57
19
6
5
0
?
6
24
8
7
10
6
6
7
24
0

1
1
2
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
0

14
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Optional – Vendor
Recommendations
# of Inmate
Telephones

# of Portable
Telephones

Page 21 of 22

Inspectors
**Please note that the number of specified TDD units and portable phones are in addition to the number of
specified inmate telephones.
**The RFP requires the provision one (1) workstation for each facility and three (3) workstations for the Central
Inspect

ALL ELSE SHALL REMAIN THE SAME
Vendor shall sign and return this amendment with proposal submitted.
NAME OF VENDOR ___________________________________________________________
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE ____________________________________________________
TITLE __________________________________ DATE _____________________________
This document must be submitted in the “State
Documents” section/tab of vendors’ technical proposal

Amendment 1

RFP 1628

Page 22 of 22