Area 1 · Tab 1-2
Modules
Respond 1 native, 2 third-party, or 3 not provided for each of EAM, Work Orders, and Inspection and Inventory, with comments.
Pre-bid brief · Live RFI · Under NDA 
A prime's pre-bid brief for Parker RFI 26-011.
Town of Parker, Colorado, a Request for Information on Community Development Technology. No award comes from this RFI. It shapes the future RFP, and a complete response workbook now is how a prime earns the invitation. Techtiz builds the workbook engine behind the prime.
Live · closes Jun 19, 10 AM MT
Awarding body Town of Parker
Jurisdiction Douglas County, Colorado
Status Responding under NDA
Solicitation
RFI 26-011Information only, no award
Scope
Community Dev techSix areas, six-tab workbook
First reader
BerryDunnConsulting advisor, gating review
Techtiz role
Back-officeNDA-first, never agency-facing
Schedule of events
One Mountain-time deadline, portal only.
Questions go through the Euna portal Q&A by June 12, with no phone or email. Responses are due June 19 at 10:00 a.m. Mountain time, portal only, with no late submissions accepted.
Published
RFI issued, portal version Jun 1
Questions due, 10 AM MT
Euna portal Q&A only. No phone, no email
No pre-bid meeting
None scheduled for this RFI
Responses due, 10 AM MT
Portal only. No late submissions
Live
The solicitation reads “MST,” but June 19 falls in Mountain Daylight Time. Confirm the exact cutoff through the portal Q&A.
The procurement stage
This RFI awards nothing. It shapes what comes next.
No contract, no reimbursement, no prequalification. Responding is neither required for nor a guarantee of future participation. The value is positioning for the RFP the RFI will shape.
Stage 1, nowRFI 26-011, information only. Vendors complete the six-tab workbook. No award, no roster, no shortlist commitment.
Stage 2BerryDunn synthesis. The consulting advisor reviews and synthesizes responses before they reach Town leadership.
Stage 3The future RFP, the real competition, scoped partly by what the RFI responses reveal.
Stage 4Contract, awarded from the RFP, not from this RFI.
The differentiator · Two-stage read
BerryDunn reads first, and the workbook comment fields are the scored narrative.
A consulting advisor, not Town staff, is the first reader and synthesizes responses before they reach Town leadership. A row marked with a bare F/G/P/R/T indicator and no comment is indistinguishable from a competitor's. The comment fields are where a vendor proves it read and understood how the response will be judged. Two domain signals reinforce it: addressing the Colorado Privacy Act proactively in the Tab 5 cybersecurity response, and aligning any StateRAMP, FedRAMP Moderate, or SOC 2 Type II certification to Colorado OIT standards. Neither is a stated RFI requirement; both read as sophistication markers.
Techtiz drafts the comment narratives across all six tabs, mapped to the prime's product, for the prime's subject-matter experts to validate.
Task allocation
What a remote team drafts, and what stays with the prime.
The boundary that makes a compliant Subcontracting model work on an information-response workbook.
Contractual and confidentiality-driven, not a statutory bar. This is software and IT consulting work, not sealed or licensed professional work. The RFI imposes no data-residency clause and requires no NDA of its own. The limits are prudential: a standard NDA between the US prime and the support team covers restricted use of Town data, non-disclosure of proprietary response content, and return or destruction on completion. The prime owns final accuracy, all product claims, the portal account, and the submission.
Remote technology & back-office Subcontracting
Workbook drafting, no portal account
Read and decode the full workbook and the 190+ Tab 2 requirements
Draft all narrative comment fields, the primary deliverable
Draft the Tab 2 F/G/P/R/T indicators with the prime's SME input
Draft Tab 3 phasing and timeline for the prime's PM to validate
Build the Tab 4 cost-model structure and support the pricing analysis
Draft Tab 5 responses for the prime's accuracy review
Draft Tab 6 recommendations on the 14 systems for the prime's SMEs
Draft portal Q&A questions and package the workbook for upload
Techtiz operates only in this column, behind the prime, under NDA, and never touches the agency, BerryDunn, or the portal account.
US prime only
Accountability, claims, the submission
Final accuracy review and sign-off on every product capability claim
Ownership of proprietary product pricing and the binding decision
The Euna portal account and the submission act
All contact with Charles Ellis and the BerryDunn review team
Validation of every reference client and authority to bind the vendor
Gates, stated plainly. A signed NDA must be in place before any Town operational data or proprietary response content moves to Techtiz. Town statistics and workbook drafts are used only for response preparation and returned or destroyed on completion. Proprietary product pricing is handled US-side only. No Town systems data exists at the RFI stage; a future contract may add Colorado data-governance and Colorado Privacy Act requirements.
Where responses fail
Binding price quotes instead of estimates Tab 4
The rule
This is an RFI. Tab 4 figures are indicative low and high estimates, not bids. The RFI prohibits binding quotes.
If you miss it
A binding quote can disqualify a vendor from this and future procurement. Label every Tab 4 figure an indicative estimate for planning only.
Scope & the workbook
Three functional areas, one six-tab workbook.
The response is the CO-Town of Parker RFI Workbook, six tabs, with Tab 2 alone carrying more than 190 functional requirements across roughly 200 rows.
Area 2 · Tab 1-2
Functionality, GT.1 to GT.36
F/G/P/R/T indicators with narrative for every P, R, and T. The GT.10 to GT.17 security block is the most evaluable section.
Area 3 · Tab 1-2
Implementation
Professional-services model, Town team roles, work-effort split, and phase durations with low and high estimates.
Area 4 · Tab 1-2
Cost worksheet
Indicative low and high estimates across all categories including recurring SaaS, clearly labeled as estimates.
Area 5 · Tab 1-2
Informational questions
EAM experience, data migration, cybersecurity, licensing, and Colorado local-government references.
Area 6
Future systems environment
A disposition recommendation for each of the six named legacy systems, with rationale.
Value model
The Town's eventual project, in three scenarios.
The Town stated no budget. The SaaS ranges below are independent pre-bid estimates derived from scope, not Town figures, and the Tab 4 workbook figures must stay non-binding. The single variable that moves where the Town lands is the scope of TRAKiT historical data migration.
Low
$180k+ $95k/yr
Migrate active records only, retain TRAKiT as a read-only archive.
MidBase case
$320k+ $145k/yr
Partial historical migration with a phased cutover. Model under NDA
High
$520k+ $210k/yr
Full historical migration of all TRAKiT records into the new platform.
All figures are pre-bid planning estimates, not Town or vendor numbers. One-time plus recurring annual SaaS. The TRAKiT migration decision, migrate all versus retain as archive, is what swings the scenario.
Techtiz back-office pricing is scoped per engagement after NDA and is not part of the public RFI intelligence.
Current estate & integration
Six named systems, plus GIS, spreadsheets, and paper.
Tab 6 asks for a replace, retain, or integrate recommendation on every current system. TRAKiT is the migration source and the largest variable; Esri ArcGIS is the integration anchor.
Beehive
Public Works work orders and asset tracking, the core system an EAM platform would absorb.
FASTER
Fleet management.
Laserfiche
Document management to integrate or retain.
RoadAI
Pavement-condition assessment.
SmartForce
Police equipment tracking.
Sprocket & more
Facilities maintenance, plus GIS tools, Caselle, spreadsheets, and paper processes.
Agency context
Who is buying, and who reads it first.
The Town of Parker is a home-rule municipality in Douglas County, Colorado, founded 1864. Procurement runs through the Finance Department under Charles Ellis, Chief Procurement Officer, the named contact and signer. The Town retained BerryDunn as its consulting advisor, and BerryDunn reviews and synthesizes vendor responses before they reach Town leadership, which makes it the first and gating reader.
72,147
Residents, per the RFI
$328.5M
2025 total budget
Est. 1864
Douglas County, CO
Welcome sign, Town of Parker, Colorado.
The competing field
23 primes mapped, in-state firms in the mix.
From the prime-contractor database. The database carries no revenue figures, every revenue and headcount cell is a research placeholder, so no combined total can be computed. Named firms below are listed by market recognition only, not by any revenue estimate. Public-source mapping for Subcontracting targeting.
23
Firms mapped to the RFI
10 / 5
Highly / partially relevant
3
Colorado in-state primes
n/a
Revenue, not in database
The most recognizable names by market presence are Tyler Technologies, Gartner, Caspio, and SDI Presence, recognition only, the database carries no revenue. Named under NDA
The 5 Colorado in-state primes, the full named map, and the relevance tiers across all 23 firms are in the full document pack. Ask us for it under NDA.
Before June 12
Four questions worth filing.
Questions the prime should file through the Euna portal Q&A. Techtiz never contacts the Town or BerryDunn.
Question 01
Are T responses with a named integration partner acceptable?
Confirming that a Third-party indicator with a named partner is acceptable shapes how honestly the Tab 2 capabilities can be presented.
Question 02
Does a data dictionary or export exist from Beehive or FASTER?
The migration methodology in Tab 5 depends on what conversion source data is available from the two core systems.
Under NDAQuestion 03
Must Tab 6 address all six systems or only EAM-relevant ones?
Scoping the disposition analysis correctly avoids both an incomplete answer and wasted effort.
Question 04
Is general SaaS pricing acceptable in Tab 4?
Confirming the expected granularity keeps the indicative cost estimate responsive without crossing into a binding quote.
Under NDA How Techtiz fits
The workbook engine, behind your firm.
Techtiz reads the full workbook and drafts the narrative for your subject-matter experts to validate. The prime owns every product claim, the proprietary pricing, the portal account, and all contact with the Town and BerryDunn.
NDA before any data
A mutual NDA covering restricted use of Town data and non-disclosure of proprietary content, before a single draft moves.
Draft all six tabs
The module mapping, the GT.1 to GT.36 functionality and narrative, the implementation phasing, the indicative cost model, and the six-system disposition.
Validate & package
Your SMEs validate every claim; Techtiz formats the workbook to XLSX and prepares it for portal upload.
Your firm owns the response
Product claims, proprietary pricing, the Euna account, the submission, and all agency and BerryDunn contact stay with the prime.
NDA Prime name, engagement value, and proprietary content stay under NDA. Techtiz never contacts the Town or BerryDunn.
Responding to RFI 26-011? The window is open.
Request the full RFI-decode pack.
The decoded six-tab workbook guide, the 190+ requirement read, the Tab 4 cost-model structure, the Tab 6 system assessment, and the 23-firm field map. A US partner manager replies within one business day, under a mutual NDA, never agency-facing.
Frequently asked questions
Pre-bid brief & confidentiality
Quick answers about how to use this engagement example and what detail is available under NDA.
Why is the prime contractor name withheld?
Most SLED subcontract work sits under mutual NDA and prime branding requirements. Public summaries describe engagement type, technical surface, and outcomes. Partner names and proposal content are shared only with explicit written permission or under an executed teaming agreement.
Can Techtiz support our bid on a similar pursuit?
Yes. If your pursuit matches this engagement type, email sled@techtiz.co or use the teaming intake form. Within 1 business day a U.S.-based partner manager replies with a mutual NDA template and a calendar slot—never agency-facing.
What do we receive under NDA?
Full RFP-decode packs, compliance matrices, technical volumes, submission runbooks, and named-resume options scoped to your vehicle and timeline. Prime name, pricing, and agency data stay inside the prime boundary.
Does Techtiz contact the procuring agency?
No. Techtiz is subcontract-only and never faces the agency. Your program manager holds the client relationship, sign-off, and all agency communication.