SLED Opportunity · IOWA · CITY OF CEDAR RAPIDS

    Addendum 2 (CAD/Mobile, RMS and JMS System

    Issued by City of Cedar Rapids
    cityRFPCity of Cedar RapidsSol. 1729
    Closed
    STATUS
    Closed
    due Apr 10, 2026
    PUBLISHED
    Jan 30, 2026
    Posting date
    JURISDICTION
    City of
    city
    NAICS CODE
    541512
    AI-classified industry

    AI Summary

    The City of Cedar Rapids seeks proposals for a CAD/Mobile, RMS, and JMS system. Proposals must be submitted electronically by April 10, 2026. The project involves public safety software integration including interfaces with GuardOne and CACTAS systems.

    Opportunity details

    Solicitation No.
    1729
    Type / RFx
    RFP
    Status
    Issued
    Level
    city
    Published Date
    January 30, 2026
    Due Date
    April 10, 2026
    NAICS Code
    541512AI guide
    State
    Iowa
    Agency
    City of Cedar Rapids

    Description

    Notice of Request for Proposal Notice is hereby given that sealed proposals will be received electronically before 3:00pm on Friday, April 10, 2026, for CAD/Mobile, RMS and JMS System as requested by the City of Cedar Rapids Information Technology Department. The City will only accept bids submitted through the City’s Online E-Procurement portal system (Euna Procurement, powered by IonWave). Email, fax or hard copy Submittals are not acceptable. Suppliers are solely responsible for correctly submitting their response into the electronic system (IonWave). The City bears no responsibility for delays or errors in submittal of response by the Supplier. Proposals will be opened on Friday, April 10, 2026 at 3:00pm CDT (our clock). Proposals will be evaluated promptly after opening. After an award is made, a proposal summary will be sent to all companies who submitted a proposal. Proposal results will not be given over the telephone or prior to award. Proposals may be withdrawn any time prior to the scheduled closing time for receipt of proposals; no proposal may be modified or withdrawn for a period of sixty (60) calendar days thereafter. --- Q&A --- Q1: Does the City have existing interface specifications, API documentation, or sample data formats available for the third-party systems identified in Attachment 2? If so, will those documents be provided to vendors during the proposal or implementation phase? A1: The City anticipates collaboratively developing these with the selected Proposer and the third-party vendor. Submitted: 3/13/2026 08:32:54 AM (CT) Q2: Does the County intend to continue using the existing GuardOne system, or would the County consider replacing it with a rounds/welfare check module included in the JMS? If GuardOne will remain in use, should vendors include only the GuardOne interface in the base proposal, or should vendors also include an alternative integrated rounds system as an optional module? A2: The City anticipates continuing to use GuardOne for its rounds tracking needs and Proposers should include the GuardOne interface in their base proposals. If Proposers have a separately priced optional module that they believe to be helpful in meeting the RFP's requirements, they are welcome to propose it as optional. All optional modules must be clearly noted on Form O. Submitted: 3/13/2026 08:32:17 AM (CT) Q3: Is direct NCIC/NLETS access required from within the Jail Management System, or will NCIC access be limited to CAD and RMS? A3: The City currently anticipates accessing NLETS/NCIC through the CAD and RMS applications. If proposers are proposing a stand-alone JMS, since such proposal must also include an interface to the selected RMS, the City expects to be able to conduct a federated query from the JMS to include the CAD, RMS and NLETS/NCIC, among other databases. Submitted: 3/13/2026 08:31:35 AM (CT) Q4: If CACTAS will remain the primary commissary system, should the commissary module be proposed as an optional module, with the base proposal only including the CACTAS interface? A4: The CACTAS interface and the Commissary functionality are each requirements of the RFP. If there are additional fees to provide the desired system and/or interface functionality, those costs should be included in the baseline proposed costs. If there is functionality available that supersedes the requirements of the RFP, vendors may propose that functionality as optional. All optional modules must be clearly noted on Form O. Proposers are reminded that any requirement with a response code of "Y" (Compliant) indicates that the Proposer can meet this requirement within the total provided Non-Optional pricing. Refer to RFP Attachment 6 for evaluation criteria. Submitted: 3/13/2026 08:30:02 AM (CT) Q5: Does the County intend to continue using CACTAS for commissary and inmate banking functions? A5: Please refer to Attachment 2, Section 1.2 Interfaces for a detailed description of the interface functionality the City is seeking to CACTAS for Commissary and Banking. In addition to the CACTAS interface, the City is also interested in understanding whether vendors' JMS applications can meet the Accounting and Commissary requirements described in Attachment 11, Requirements #370 - 441. Submitted: 3/13/2026 08:29:05 AM (CT)

    Key dates

    1. January 30, 2026Published
    2. April 10, 2026Responses Due

    AI classification tags

    Frequently asked questions

    SLED stands for State, Local, and Education. These are solicitations issued by state governments, counties, cities, school districts, utilities, and higher education institutions — as opposed to federal agencies.

    SamSearch Platform

    Stop searching. Start winning.

    AI-powered intelligence for the right opportunities, the right leads, and the right time.