SPIN: 143004434 | Regional Educational Media Center 1 |
All positive changes
USAC hybrid calculation example:
District 3 has the following schools with more or less than 150 students. | |||
School 3A | 33 | students @ the minimum = 25,000 | |
School 3B | 1,806 | students @ $167/student = 301,602 | |
School 3C | 591 | students @ $167/student = 98,697 | |
School 3D | 107 | students @ the minimum = 25,000 |
Hot link to this years list doc. Scroll down past the prelude to Category 1 and Category 2 sections: http://e-ratecentral.com/FCC/eslArchive/
Another basic link: http://www.usac.org/sl/applicants/beforeyoubegin/eligible-services-list.aspx
Phone service is being phased out in steps starting 2015. 2018 I believe is the last year phone service will be eligible
Basics: Category One: Data Transmission Services and Internet Access, and Voice Services. Category Two: Internal Connections, Managed Internal Broadband Services, and Basic Maintenance of Internal Connections
Josh, I always request BMIC and MIBS in addition to equipment as some licenses/services may be considered one of these service types by USAC. If bidding for just licensing, I would utilize scoring to achieve the goal of ensuring that it is compatible with the equipment. Adding this language is important: "Proposals are requested for the makes/models specified in the Pricing Attachment (or equivalent). Offers containing alternative makes/models are required to submit product specifications and documentation to establish that the equipment is equivalent to the requested solution. The applicant will be the arbiter of whether the proposed solution is functionally and technically equivalent to the requested solution." While cost must be most heavily weighted…. Technical merit: Ability of the solution to support requirements of this solicitation would be right up there under the points for cost. Prior experience with the manufacturer, as well. You could require bidders not bidding a “compatible” solution bid the hardware, as well. This would show the resulting cost-savings that going with the manufacturer’s license that is compatible with the current solution would offer. I would include it on the 470 in case you do end up desiring to purchase it, then you’re covered. Adding language that says this will ensure that you do not need to purchase the equipment, but you get the pricing for the comparison. This would be critical wording to get pricing for alternate equipment while not having to buy it. (more critical wording below) ========================== Further statements and advice ========================== Josh Hiner <josh@remc1.org> OK so for a cloud connected wireless access point (such as Aruba or Meraki) again where the devices will not function at all without a license in the (aruba or meraki) cloud controller... Would the service type "internal connection" be -> Wireless access points and Necessary software/license or Wireless controller and necessary software/license)? The applicant would enter the licensing into the controller... but the licensing would be for the access points and would "enable them to function" where, without the license, they would not function. My gut feeling says just list both on the 470 (while also checking the "create accompanying BMIC" box) and let USAC sort it out during the 471 review so bases are covered on the 470. Of course also following your previous advice on MIBS... and even applying for wireless access points themselves for comparative pricing for non aruba/meraki responses. Thanks! -Josh <and the response>
Josh,
I also typically have a template for the pricing I use that asks them to qualify the category and E-Rate eligibility so I don’t have to guess or sift through dozens of slick boilerplate pages. I typically make it a requirement, but add language that allows me to waive minor informalities if they give pricing in a different format, I can go back and ask for the workbook with it the way I need it to be laid out. 😉 Hope that also is helpful! Julia |
Statements and questions to address from the PDF above pasted below in the code block...
"Some licenses or service subscriptions may have mixed BMIC & Internal Connections (IC) functionality. Tip: If it contains features of both types you should work with the vendor to determine if a separate identifiable price exists for the different aspects." |
Form 473: The Service Provider Annual Certification form required to be filed annually by participating providers.
Form 474: The Service Provider Invoice Form used to invoice the SLD for the discounted cost of E-rate services delivered and not paid for in full by the applicant.
Form 498: The Service Provider Information Form must be filed to apply for a Service Provider Identification Number.
Many details and more are here. This is a summary. http://usac.org/sl/applicants/step02/default.aspx