1. 1 Conference Call December 7 th 2006 13 h 30 Agenda 1.Concerns on wording and inclusion of glossary of terms; 2.Issues: 3.Scope of RFP equipment required; 4.Revised RFP process; 5.Process plus and minus; 6.List of the most important due dates; 7.Questions;

2. 2 1. Glossary RFP – Request for Proposal : A Request for Proposal (RFP) is often used for purchases where the selection of a supplier cannot be made solely on the basis of the lowest price. An RFP is used to procure the most cost-effective solution based upon evaluation criteria identified in the RFP. MSO - Master Standing Offer : Generic term to identify an answer to a bid request. An MSO can be for prices, quotes, proposals, etc., including any combination and/or all of the above. It allows the Customer (or the Jurisdiction in this case) to obtain specific prices over a certain period of time for given products or services without committing the Jurisdiction to a minimal volume or spent amount. Standing offers are not contracts. When the Jurisdiction issues a purchase order against a Master Standing Offer, it then becomes a contract. Integrator : Reseller of Videoconference equipments; they are responsible for the installation, training, warranty follow up, service calls, supplying repair parts, maintenance contract. Supplier : In this specific process, they are the manufacturers of the products being purchased. (E.g. Polycom, Sony, Tandberg). Vendor : Supplier (or integrator) who answers positively to an RFP and could eventually be under contract with the RFP sponsors. Sponsor : Organization (such as a Jurisdiction) responsible for the management of all procurement activities related to the purchase of a product and/or services. Scope : Summarized view of what the broad objectives are for the RFP, be it for products, services or both. Contract : A binding agreement between two parties, in this instance between a supplier and a Jurisdiction. Phase : Within the context of this project, a phase is a well defined step towards the conclusion of a national procurement for Telehealth. Phase 1 is planning and Phase 2 is the actual issuance of the RFP by a sponsor.

3. 3 2. Issues Compatibility : define the common standards that the new equipment will have to meet for all jurisdictions. A specific clause within the contract must be included to ensure compatibility; Communications: establish with the executive committee a process to ensure sponsor and jurisdictions representatives will respect due dates in the project; Service contract : clearly determine the common service levels the manufacturers will have to provide through more or less than 3 integrators by jurisdiction, including the pricing from the integrators in their RFP proposal.

4. 4 2. Issues Integrators : each jurisdiction will have to negotiate on their own any other service options not included in the RFP; Legal aspect : the sponsor will submit the general RFP and contract form to each jurisdiction for validation purposes; any corrections, new wording, or any specific options will need to be received by the sponsor at a very specific date to be included in the final RFP; Budgets : get a firm commitment from each jurisdiction on the due dates of their budget process Phase 2 : Go or No go decision on January 22 nd 07. Last order on the MSO to be issued no later than December 31 th 2009.

5. 5 3. Scope of RFP equipment required Categories and equipment description to be used in the RFP will be the ones as presented by Don Picard at the Montreal Workshop (p.3 and p.9); Minimum requirements in the RFP were presented as a first draft by D.Picard at the Montreal Workshop p. 8 – needs to be further refined; A grid, to be issued by Renald Lemieux and Martin Cyr, will be developed to simplify the final numbers for every jurisdiction;

6. 6 4. Request For Proposal Process A public RFP launched to any interested suppliers with technical requirements for videoconference equipment, specific service requirements and a possibility to add some requirements for medical peripherals; The suppliers will have to prepare their proposals using the two envelopes technique, one envelope for all mandatory requirements and the other for prices; Only the suppliers proposing qualified equipments will have their price envelopes opened; The price envelopes for suppliers not proposing qualified equipment will be sent back to them unopened; Suppliers can submit a proposal by categories of equipments.

7. 7 4. Request For Proposal Response It is expected the suppliers proposals will contain: i) a national price for every category of equipment; ii) a regional price for service with more or less than 3 suggested integrators by jurisdiction; At the end of the process we could end up with several qualified vendors for videoconferencing equipment and medical peripherals; Final result = a single MSO; As a result, any jurisdiction will issue an order against this MSO and will enter into a contract with their chosen vendor; The jurisdictions will choose their preferred service provider (integrator) as suggested by supplier in their individual area.

8. 8 4. RFP Explanations The term of this MSO will be for 1 year with one or possibly two 1 year options; Any jurisdiction who agrees with the RFP and contract before the launch, will be eligible to participate in the resulting MSO; A yearly review by the sponsor will be planned to determine the chosen option for the following year (either use the contract option renewal or any other scenario; The technique of going back every year on price only, with new volume with the qualified vendors is probably more efficient on prices and on supplier competition; With that approach, it is also possible to evaluate new technology and add any new product to the MSO.

9. 9 5. Plus + All jurisdictions can join the procurement process; + Produce a regional price list (by jurisdiction) for videoconference equipment, major and common service points and peripherals with one RFP; + Clear time frame of one year, plus one or two years to cover Canada Health Infoway’s lifetime; + Methodology (to go back on price with volume) has a proven efficiency in either keeping or reducing prices; + Methodology is in accordance with SEAO rules – Système Électronique d’Appel d’Offres – currently used by Quebec, New Brunswick, BC and Alberta – verify each jurisdiction position regarding AIT)

10. 10 5. Minus -A 3 years contract without volume, with price review is less effective on prices; -Can be confusing since it contains a lot of information from a number of jurisdictions; -Not sure medical peripherals should be include in RFP equipment due to possible high level of expectations from establishments in jurisdictions;

11. 11 6. Immediate due dates January 10 th : Target date to submit report to executive committee; January 22 nd : Presentation of phase 1 report to all jurisdictions, decision on phase 2 and sponsor nomination; March 31 th : RFP launch;

12. 12 7. Questions for Discussion -Do we agree with having a 3 years contract? -Do we agree for a yearly call for prices only? -Do we agree to commit volume every year? -Are we opened to adding a supplier in any category in the second and third year, even if this supplier was not qualified or present at the beginning of the process and/or even if there’s new technology involved? -Do we agree to go back yearly on price only, with only qualified vendors, by category or total, or to all suppliers? -Who will organise the January 22nd meeting and where?