Gov of Alberta � AMSA EAL App
In BidsDirectly addressableFit 83 · PursueCloses: Refer to APC posting.
AB-2026-05745 · amsa_tender.pdf · 58 requirements
36% package complete29 items left
Directly addressable — we can deliver this in-house
- Maps to Cybersecurity (CORE).
- Priced service line — we can bid this at our target rates.
Tender synopsis — what they want & what you must have
View on portal ↗In plain terms
The Alberta government is seeking a contractor (already pre-qualified under AMSA) to build an AI-assisted English as an Additional Language (EAL) benchmark assessment application for Alberta school authorities, including a pilot with real student voice recordings before go-live.
What they want delivered
•Design, develop, implement, and support an AI-enabled EAL benchmark assessment application that processes student voice recordings
•AI outputs (assessments, classifications, recommendations) must include human validation/approval workflows with plain-language explainability
•Deploy and operate the solution within a Canadian sovereign compute environment using open-source-compliant models
•Run a mandatory pre-production pilot with 5–10 school authorities using real student voice recordings before final acceptance
•Deliver all Key Documentation into the Province's designated GitHub repository per AMSA Schedule 2 and 3D
•Meet firm delivery milestones as specified in Appendix B, Table 9; fixed-price contract with optional extension periods
To be eligible you MUST
•Be in Good Standing under AMSA (Alberta Master Services Agreement) — this is an AMSA-only open competition
•Propose open-source models/components that comply with the Sovereign Compute Environment requirements — failure to do so may result in rejection
•Enforce strict in-Canada data residency for Protected A/B data and in-Alberta residency for Protected C data, with no access subject to foreign laws
•Use only contractor personnel who meet Canadian sovereignty and security clearance requirements for management, support, and security operations
•Demonstrate 7 completed projects covering: AI app development, human-in-the-loop AI outputs, two or more AI capabilities, edtech/assessment platforms, Canadian sovereign cloud deployment, privacy/security practices, and AI governance
•Provide fixed all-inclusive pricing (no separate travel, equipment, connectivity, or workspace costs)
•Designate Key Contractor Personnel who will serve as single point of contact across all SSAs (for contracts after October 1, 2025)
Key submission rules
•Closing date/time: refer to the APC portal posting for the exact deadline — late submissions are not accepted
•Submit via APC e-submission portal only (http://vendor.purchasingconnection.ca/) — email submissions are disqualified
•Include completed Submission Form (Appendix A) and pricing in Appendix B, Section 3 format
•All files must be searchable and printable; MP4/MOV formats excluded; content in external links or embedded documents will not be evaluated
•Responses must be in English only
•Questions must be submitted in writing to the SOW Procurement Official at least 3 business days before closing
Watch-outs
•The APC system timestamp after security checks is the official receipt time — submit early, as a file stuck in validation is not considered received until checks pass
•Any content behind a web link or in an embedded document is ignored entirely — everything evaluable must be in the uploaded files
•Failing to propose open-source models compliant with Sovereign Compute Environment requirements can get your response rejected outright
•Each of the 7 mandatory experience examples must include project title, outcomes, dates, client name, and a verifiable client contact — missing any element risks disqualification
Bid closing
Refer to APC posting. — couldn't resolve this to a precise time; verify against the solicitation cover page.
Bid package completion
New Library/Dossier info available. You've updated a reusable input since this package was analyzed. Click Re-analyze to pull the new information into the open items — your already-accepted answers are kept.
36% complete16 of 45 items resolved · 29 left
How this works: the AI auto-drafts every answer it can from your dossier + library (shown amber, “AI-drafted — verify”). Items that need your real facts are marked “needs your input.” Accepting an item folds it into the Word package and moves the bar.
needs your input
...
AI-drafted — verify
...
Beyond in-Canada data residency, NimbleStride confirms: data encrypted at rest (AES-256) and in transit (TLS 1.2+), role-based least-privilege access controls, and full audit logging as standard practice. Please confirm whether the SOW mandates additional requirements such as Protected B cloud controls (CCCS Medium profile), personnel security screening (reliability or secret clearance), or a specific certified environment (e.g., SCED Level 2/3) so those can be attested or arranged.
needs your input
insert submission date
needs your input
insert Procurement Official name and contact details from APC posting
needs your input
insert APC posting/solicitation number
needs your input
verify no conflict of interest exists for NimbleStride Inc., MGR Infotech, and all proposed subcontractors/associates before signing
needs your input
CRA Business Number
needs your input
Alberta Corporate Registry number
needs your input
WCB Alberta account number or confirm exemption
needs your input
confirm file formats and sizes comply with APC System Submission Rules published on the APC Help Centre before final upload.
needs your input
NimbleStride Inc. must confirm it is in Good Standing under AMSA and eligible to submit. Complete the applicable row in Table 3 of Appendix A. See also Section 3.2.1 below.
needs your input
Is this Response from a consortium? If NimbleStride Inc. and MGR Infotech are submitting as a consortium, complete Table 4 for MGR Infotech as a consortium member. If NimbleStride Inc. is the sole legal entity and MGR Infotech is a trade name/division, confirm this in Appendix A and no Table 4 entry is required. Clarify legal structure before submission.
AI-drafted — verify
Review all proposed associates/subcontractors for conflicts before submission and disclose any identified conflicts to the SOW Procurement Official in writing.
NimbleStride Inc. confirms that all proposed associates and subcontractors will be reviewed for conflicts of interest prior to submission. Any identified conflict will be disclosed promptly and in writing to the SOW Procurement Official before the bid is filed, and ongoing conflict-of-interest monitoring will be maintained throughout the engagement.
needs your input
Is NimbleStride Inc. currently registered and in Good Standing under AMSA (Alberta Master Services Agreement for Application Services)? If not yet registered, this is a **critical eligibility gap** that must be resolved before submission. Provide AMSA registration/vendor number here.
needs your input
Identify an Alberta-specific cloud region or data centre (e.g., Azure Canada East / Calgary, or a GoA-approved on-premises or co-location facility in Alberta) to satisfy the in-Alberta requirement for Protected C data. AWS ca-central-1 is located in Montreal/Montréal and may not satisfy in-Alberta residency for Protected C. Resolve before submission.
needs your input
Do any proposed associates or subcontractors reside outside Canada? If so, this is a **mandatory compliance gap**. Confirm all personnel meet the Province's specific security clearance level requirements (e.g., Reliability, Secret) and provide evidence of clearances or a plan to obtain them. Confirm what specific clearance level the SOW requires.
AI-drafted — verify
Insert specific incident response SLA timelines (e.g., initial notification within X hours, root cause analysis within Y business days) once confirmed with the Province or as specified in the SSA.
NimbleStride Inc. proposes the following indicative incident response SLAs, subject to confirmation against the executed SSA: Critical/P1 incidents — initial notification within 1 hour, interim mitigation within 4 hours, root cause analysis (RCA) within 2 business days; High/P2 — notification within 4 hours, RCA within 5 business days. Final SLA timelines will be aligned to any specific figures mandated in the SSA upon execution.
needs your input
Identify the specific open-source AI/LLM models and components proposed for the EAL Benchmark Assessment Application (e.g., Whisper for speech-to-text, a specific open-source LLM for assessment generation). Confirm each proposed model's licence is compatible with the Province's Sovereign Compute Environment requirements. Confirm no proposed model component requires data to leave Canada or is subject to foreign licensing restrictions that would violate sovereignty requirements. This is a **mandatory requirement** — failure to address it may result in rejection.
needs your input
Once the SSA is executed, insert the specific milestone dates from Table 9 into the project plan and confirm resource allocation against each.
needs your input
Detail the pilot plan — recruitment of school authorities, pilot duration, success criteria, feedback mechanisms, and how pilot findings will be incorporated before final acceptance. Confirm whether the Province will identify and coordinate participating school authorities or whether the Contractor is responsible.
needs your input
List the specific Key Documentation items required under AMSA Schedule 2, Section 3.3 and Schedule 3D, Section 3.3, and map each to a delivery milestone in the project plan.
needs your input
Complete all five required fields per SOW p.30.
needs your input
Complete all five required fields.
needs your input
Identify which two or more AI capabilities from the SOW p.28–29 list are demonstrated, and complete all five required fields.
needs your input
Complete all five required fields. **CRITICAL GAP:** The company dossier does not contain a confirmed EdTech or educational assessment project. If no such project exists, this mandatory requirement cannot be met from dossier facts alone. Assess whether any existing project (e.g., ClearBid, OSFI E-23 platform) can be characterised as a "comparable AI-enabled solution" under the SOW's language, and obtain Province confirmation if needed. Do not claim experience that does not exist.
needs your input
Complete all five required fields. The OSFI E-23 model-risk platform and/or ClearBid are potential candidates — confirm Canadian sovereign deployment details and obtain client reference.
needs your input
Complete all five required fields. The OSFI E-23 model-risk-management platform is a potential candidate — confirm governance capabilities implemented and obtain client reference.
needs your input
Map each proposed resource to the SOW's mandatory experience level table and confirm each resource meets or exceeds the required level.
needs your input
A third reference, ideally for a NimbleStride Inc. or MGR Infotech company project, to complement these key-personnel references. Also provide project-specific references for each mandatory experience example in Section 6.
AI-drafted — verify
Summarise NimbleStride Inc.'s understanding of the AI-Assisted EAL Benchmark Assessment Application — its purpose, the student voice recording workflow, the AI assessment/classification outputs, the human validation/approval layer, and the school authority user base. Reference SOW Sections 2.1, 2.2, 3.1.1, and 3.1.2.
NimbleStride understands the AMSA EAL Benchmark Assessment Application as a web-based tool enabling trained assessors to record student oral language samples, submit them through an AI pipeline that performs speech-to-text transcription and EAL proficiency classification against Alberta's benchmark levels, and present AI-generated draft assessments to human assessors for validation and approval before results are stored and reported to school authority administrators — replacing or augmenting manual scoring to improve consistency, speed, and auditability across Alberta school authorities.
AI-drafted — verify
Describe the proposed high-level architecture — front-end (web application for assessors/administrators), back-end API layer, AI/ML pipeline (speech-to-text, language proficiency assessment model, scoring engine), data storage, and integration points with GoA systems. Identify proposed open-source models and components (mandatory — see Section 3.4.4). Provide an architecture diagram.
Proposed high-level architecture: (1) React/Next.js web front-end for assessors and administrators, accessible to WCAG 2.1 AA; (2) Node.js/Python REST API layer handling authentication, workflow orchestration, and business logic; (3) AI/ML pipeline — OpenAI Whisper (open-source, Apache 2.0) for ASR/transcription, a fine-tuned open-source LLM (e.g., Mistral or LLaMA 3, hosted on-premise or in Canadian cloud) for proficiency scoring and benchmark classification; (4) PostgreSQL on AWS ca-central-1 (or Alberta-region equivalent) for data storage; (5) integration points with GoA identity (ADFS/Azure AD) and reporting systems via secure API. An architecture diagram will be provided in the final submission — please confirm if a draft diagram can be prepared for review before submission.
AI-drafted — verify
Identify specific open-source models proposed (e.g., OpenAI Whisper for ASR, a specific open-source LLM for assessment generation). Confirm each model's licence and sovereign compute compatibility. Describe model hosting approach within Canadian/Alberta infrastructure. Address SOW p.8 requirement explicitly.
Proposed open-source models: OpenAI Whisper (large-v3, Apache 2.0 licence) for automatic speech recognition; Mistral 7B or LLaMA 3 8B (Apache 2.0 / Meta Community Licence — confirm sovereign-compute compatibility) for proficiency assessment generation and benchmark classification. Both models will be self-hosted on Canadian/Alberta cloud infrastructure (AWS ca-central-1 or Azure Canada Central GPU instances), with no data leaving Canadian jurisdiction; model weights and inference endpoints remain entirely within the GoA-approved environment, satisfying SOW p.8's open-source and sovereign-compute requirements.
AI-drafted — verify
Describe the end-to-end pipeline from student voice recording upload through transcription, feature extraction, proficiency scoring, and output generation. Address accuracy, handling of diverse accents/dialects, and quality thresholds.
End-to-end pipeline: (1) assessor uploads or records student audio via the web app; (2) audio is passed to a self-hosted Whisper large-v3 ASR model for transcription, with confidence scores flagging low-quality recordings for re-recording; (3) transcript and acoustic features are passed to the proficiency scoring LLM, which classifies the student against Alberta EAL benchmark levels and generates a structured assessment draft; (4) outputs include benchmark level, supporting evidence excerpts, and a confidence score; (5) samples below a defined accuracy threshold (e.g., <85% ASR confidence) are flagged for mandatory human review. Accent and dialect robustness is addressed through Whisper's multilingual training corpus and, where needed, fine-tuning on representative Alberta EAL student samples.
AI-drafted — verify
Describe how AI-generated assessments, classifications, and recommendations are presented to human assessors for validation and approval. Describe the approval workflow, override mechanisms, and audit trail.
AI-generated assessments are presented to the human assessor in a structured review screen showing the draft benchmark classification, supporting transcript excerpts, and the model's confidence score; the assessor can accept, edit, or override any AI output before approving. All approvals, edits, and overrides are captured in a full audit trail (who, what, when, original AI output vs. final human decision), and no assessment is finalised without explicit human approval — ensuring the human remains the accountable decision-maker throughout.
AI-drafted — verify
Describe how AI outputs will be made explainable in plain language for teachers, administrators, and assessors. Reference Section 3.4.1.
AI outputs are presented in plain-language summaries: each benchmark classification is accompanied by a brief rationale (e.g., 'The student demonstrated Stage 2 oral fluency based on sentence complexity and vocabulary range observed in the recording') drawn directly from transcript evidence, avoiding technical model jargon. Assessors and administrators see only the evidence-based explanation and the specific transcript passages that drove the classification, enabling them to understand, trust, and meaningfully override AI recommendations in line with SOW Section 3.4.1's explainability requirement.
AI-drafted — verify
Specify the exact cloud region(s) and services to be used for Protected A/B (in-Canada) and Protected C (in-Alberta) data. Address the in-Alberta residency gap identified in Section 3.3.1. Describe encryption, access controls, and audit logging implementation.
For Protected A/B data, all storage and processing will use AWS Canada Central (ca-central-1) or Azure Canada Central, with AES-256 encryption at rest and TLS 1.2+ in transit, role-based least-privilege access, and full audit logging. For Protected C data requiring in-Alberta residency, NimbleStride proposes use of Azure Canada Central (Calgary/Edmonton nodes) or a GoA-approved Alberta-based data centre — please confirm whether GoA's existing Alberta-region Azure or AWS infrastructure is available for vendor use, as this is required to close the in-Alberta residency gap identified in SOW Section 3.3.1.
AI-drafted — verify
Describe the secure software development lifecycle (SDLC) practices — threat modelling, code review, SAST/DAST, dependency scanning, penetration testing. Reference encryption standards (AES-256 at rest, TLS 1.2+ in transit) and access control model (RBAC/least privilege).
NimbleStride follows a secure SDLC integrating security at every phase: threat modelling (STRIDE) during design; mandatory peer code review and static analysis (SAST via SonarQube/Semgrep) on every pull request; dynamic analysis (DAST via OWASP ZAP) against staging environments each sprint; automated dependency/SCA scanning (Dependabot/Snyk) with critical CVEs blocked from merge. All data is encrypted at rest (AES-256) and in transit (TLS 1.2+); access is governed by role-based least-privilege (RBAC) with full audit logging. Pre-production penetration testing by a qualified third party is conducted prior to each major release, with findings remediated and evidenced before go-live.
AI-drafted — verify
Describe the model versioning strategy, approval workflows for model updates, explainability mechanisms, audit logging of model decisions, and controlled model update process. Reference Section 3.4.2 and 3.4.3.
All AI/ML models are version-controlled in Git with semantic versioning; no model update is promoted to production without a documented approval workflow (developer → technical lead → client sign-off) referencing a model change record. Explainability is surfaced via human-readable rationale fields and, where applicable, SHAP/LIME attribution scores logged alongside each decision. Every model inference is written to an immutable audit log (timestamp, input hash, model version, output, confidence score) retained per Province retention policy. Controlled rollout uses blue/green or canary deployment so the prior approved version remains available for instant rollback — directly supporting the governance requirements of Sections 3.4.2 and 3.4.3.
AI-drafted — verify
Add detail specific to this engagement — test types, tools, coverage targets, UAT approach with school authorities, and the pre-production pilot testing plan (Section 3.5.2).
Testing for this engagement spans: unit tests (≥80% code coverage target, Jest/Pytest), integration tests covering all API contracts, WCAG 2.1 AA accessibility checks (axe-core automated + manual screen-reader), SAST/DAST each sprint, and end-to-end regression (Playwright/Cypress). UAT is conducted in two rounds with designated school-authority representatives using scripted scenarios drawn from real EAL assessment workflows, with defects triaged and resolved before sign-off. The mandatory pre-production pilot (Section 3.5.2) is a named phase (see project plan, g39) in which a representative cohort of school authorities runs the live application against production data in a sandboxed environment for a minimum of four weeks, with issues logged, resolved, and re-tested before province-wide rollout.
AI-drafted — verify
Provide a project plan with phases, sprint/iteration cadence, milestone dates mapped to Appendix B Table 9, team structure, and communication/reporting plan. Include the mandatory pre-production pilot as a named phase.
The proposed plan follows five phases aligned to Appendix B Table 9 — (1) Discovery & Architecture (Weeks 1–4): requirements validation, data-model design, security/threat-model sign-off; (2) Iterative Build (Weeks 5–20): two-week sprints, working demo each sprint, Definition of Done gate, flow metrics reported bi-weekly to Province; (3) UAT & Accessibility Validation (Weeks 21–24): two UAT rounds with school authorities, WCAG 2.1 AA sign-off; (4) Pre-Production Pilot (Weeks 25–28): named pilot phase per Section 3.5.2, representative school-authority cohort, issue resolution; (5) Production Release & Stabilisation (Week 29+): go-live, hypercare support, knowledge transfer. Team: Mohammed Yousuf Shariff (Principal / Delivery Lead / SPC 6 / CSM), plus associate consultants for front-end, back-end, QA, and UX (named in g43). Communication: bi-weekly sprint reviews with Province stakeholders, monthly steering report, shared Jira/Confluence workspace for full transparency.
AI-drafted — verify
List all Key Documentation items to be delivered (per AMSA Schedule 2, Section 3.3 and Schedule 3D, Section 3.3). Describe the GitHub repository structure, branching strategy, documentation standards, and version control approach.
Key documentation deliverables per AMSA Schedule 2 Section 3.3 and Schedule 3D Section 3.3 include: System Architecture Document, Data Flow and Entity-Relationship Diagrams, API Specification (OpenAPI 3.x), Security & Privacy Impact Assessment, Test Plans and Test Results (unit, integration, UAT, pen-test), Accessibility Conformance Report (WCAG 2.1 AA), Deployment and Configuration Runbook, User Guides (administrator and school-authority roles), and Source Code with inline documentation. All source code is maintained in a Province-accessible GitHub repository using a trunk-based branching strategy (feature branches → pull request → main, with protected main requiring passing CI and peer review). Documentation is authored in Markdown/Confluence, versioned alongside code, and tagged at each release milestone. A final Documentation Package is delivered at project close and at end of Term.
AI-drafted — verify
Describe the approach to knowledge transfer, documentation handover, and transition to Province operations or a successor contractor at end of Term.
Knowledge transfer is treated as a continuous activity, not a end-of-project event: the Province has access to the GitHub repository, Jira/Confluence workspace, and CI/CD pipeline throughout the engagement. In the final phase, NimbleStride delivers structured handover sessions (recorded) covering architecture, deployment procedures, operational runbooks, and model governance workflows. A Transition Plan document is produced at least 60 days before end of Term, identifying all artefacts, credentials, and third-party service accounts to be transferred; a 30-day hypercare period follows go-live (and again at end of Term) during which NimbleStride responds to Province or successor-contractor queries to ensure continuity of operations.
needs your input
Full résumé/CV for Mohammed Yousuf Shariff in the format required by the SOW. Confirm which mandatory experience level (SOW p.40 table) this role maps to and that the experience level is met or exceeded.
needs your input
For each associate consultant or subcontractor proposed for this engagement, provide:
- Full name
- Proposed role (mapped to SOW p.40 resource role table)
- Relevant qualifications and experience
- Confirmation that mandatory experience level is met or exceeded
- Availability (% of time, start date)
- Full résumé/CV
Note: The dossier states the delivery model is principal-led with vetted part-time associate consultants engaged per engagement. Named associates must be identified before submission.
needs your input
Go / no-go summary
58
mandatory requirements
Heavy — a large mandatory load; start early and assign owners immediately.
25 candidate row(s) dropped as unverifiable by the citation guard.
High-risk items
- p.6 — This SOW is an open competition for Contractors who are in Good Standing under AMSA to provide Application Services as described in the A…
- p.19 — Pricing provided by the Contractor in their Response must take into consideration all workspaces and Applications (e.g. office spaces, su…
- p.19 — Responses must provide pricing as specified in Appendix B, Section 3 to this SOW.
- p.26 — The Contractor must provide the information requested in Table 3 below, indicating the Contractor or the Contractor consortium is eligibl…
- p.37 — Provide a Fixed Price for the completion and delivery of the AI-Assisted EAL Benchmark Assessment Application outlined in Sections 2.1 an…
- p.38 — Failure by a Contractor to comply with this requirement may result in the Province concluding negotiations and entering into negotiations…
- p.39 — The Contractor must provide a Fixed Price for the completion and delivery of the AI-Assisted EAL Benchmark Assessment Application as foll…
- p.40 — Fixed Rates per hour for all proposed resource roles below must be supplied for the Term of the SSA, including the optional extension per…
- p.40 — The Contractor must provide Fixed Rates for on-demand additional AMS, ADS and professional and technical services as follows:
Submission envelope
- Closing date/time
- Refer to APC posting.
- Timezone
- —
- Submission channel
- Alberta Purchasing Connection (APC) portal — e-submission only; http://vendor.purchasingconnection.ca/
- Page limits
- —
- Addenda
- All updates and attachments are accessed via the APC portal at http://vendor.purchasingconnection.ca/; no separate acknowledgement procedure is stated in the supplied text.
Format rules
- Response must be submitted by e-submission to APC only (see SOW Sections 4.3 and 4.4)
- Responses must use Appendix B, Section 3 (or a similar representation of the same information) to submit pricing
- Fixed Prices and Fixed Rates must be inclusive of all expenses including travel, workspaces, facilities, office supplies, equipment, applications, connectivity, telephone and internet services
- Submission Form (Appendix A) must be completed, including contractor information, eligibility, consortia information (if applicable), acknowledgement of non-binding procurement process, and ability to provide application services
- Mandatory Requirements and Desirable Criteria must be addressed per Appendix B
- All Key Documentation must be delivered into the Province's designated GitHub repository (or other repository identified in writing by the Province)
Addenda — acknowledge all before submitting
All updates and attachments are accessed via the APC portal at http://vendor.purchasingconnection.ca/; no separate acknowledgement procedure is stated in the supplied text.
A missed addendum is a common automatic disqualification.
Requirements
| # | Page | Category | Requirement | Can we meet? | Owner | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | p.1 | submissionhigh | Response By E-submission to APC only. Refer to SOW Sections 4.3 and 4.4.(Schedule of Events / Contact for Questions and Responses) | |||
| 2 | p.5 | personnelhigh | The environment must enforce strict in-Canada data residency for Protected A and Protected B data and in-Alberta data residency for Protected C data, prohibiting any access or disclosure subject to foreign laws or extraterritorial claims, and maintaining fully isolated management, support and security operations performed only by Contractor personnel who meet the Province's Canadian sovereignty and security clearance requirements.(Definitions – Sovereign Compute Environment) | |||
| 3 | p.6 | certificationhigh | This SOW is an open competition for Contractors who are in Good Standing under AMSA to provide Application Services as described in the AMSA PQR.(1.3 Eligibility Requirements) | |||
| 4 | p.6 | othermedium | The Due Date(s) specified in Appendix B, Table 9 shall constitute a firm delivery milestone(s).(1.4 Length of Term) | |||
| 5 | p.7 | otherhigh | the Contractor shall conduct a mandatory pre-production pilot with 5–10 participating school authorities using representative student voice recordings before final acceptance.(2.1 Overview) | |||
| 6 | p.8 | otherhigh | Failure to propose open-source models or components that comply with the Sovereign Compute Environment requirements may result in rejection of a Response.(2.1 Overview) | |||
| 7 | p.11 | formathigh | Responses must use Appendix B, Section 3 to this SOW or a similar representation of the same information to submit pricing for the completion of the AI-Assisted EAL Benchmark Assessment Application.(Section 2.3 (Pricing Mechanism)) | |||
| 8 | p.15 | otherhigh | The Contractor shall provide Key Documentation during the Term, as specified in AMSA Schedule 2 (Required Outcomes), Section 3.3 (Key Documentation) and Schedule 3D (Deliverables), Section 3.3 (Application Documentation).(3.2 Documentation, b)) | |||
| 9 | p.15 | otherhigh | If a security violation or issue occurs, the Contractor must immediately initiate an incident report, notifying the Corporate Information Security Office, and provide a root cause analysis.(3.3 Amendments to AMSA, Schedule 3C, Section 3.4) | |||
| 10 | p.17 | otherhigh | The Contractor shall monitor and report compliance with this requirement upon request by the Province.(3.3 Amendments to AMSA, Schedule 5, Section 5.5) | |||
| 11 | p.17 | personnelhigh | For SSAs executed after October 1, 2025, the Contractor shall ensure that the same individual(s) designated as Key Contractor Personnel will act as the single point of contact and management lead across all SSAs executed under this Contract, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Province.(3.3 Amendments to AMSA, Schedule 5, Section 5.6) | |||
| 12 | p.17 | otherhigh | The Contractor shall ensure that all artificial intelligence-enabled processes are explainable in plain language.(3.3 Amendments to AMSA, Schedule 7, Section 3.1.1) | |||
| 13 | p.17 | otherhigh | The Contractor shall maintain up-to-date documentation of all artificial intelligence and automation assets, including model versioning, training data references, workflow logic, and configuration details.(3.3 Amendments to AMSA, Schedule 7, Section 4.1) | |||
| 14 | p.17 | otherhigh | Such documentation shall be readily available to the Province upon request.(3.3 Amendments to AMSA, Schedule 7, Section 4.1) | |||
| 15 | p.19 | othermedium | The Contractor shall store only in Canada all records classified as Protected A and Protected B and only in Alberta records classified as Protected C, including Personal Information, which are disclosed to the Contractor under this Contract, including records that are collected, used or stored on behalf of the Province.(3.4 Location of Services) | |||
| 16 | p.19 | financialmedium | Pricing provided by the Contractor in their Response must take into consideration all workspaces and Applications (e.g. office spaces, supplies, equipment, connectivity to the GoA network, telephone and internet services) that are required for the Contractor to complete the AI-Assisted EAL Benchmark Assessment Application.(3.4 Location of Services) | |||
| 17 | p.19 | formathigh | Responses must include a completed Submission Form, which is included with this SOW as Appendix A.(4.1 Mandatory Requirements (a)) | |||
| 18 | p.19 | otherhigh | Responses must meet or exceed all of the mandatory requirements specified in Appendix B, Section 1 to this SOW.(4.1 Mandatory Requirements (b)) | |||
| 19 | p.19 | financialhigh | Responses must provide pricing as specified in Appendix B, Section 3 to this SOW.(4.1 Mandatory Requirements (c)) | |||
| 20 | p.19 | formatmedium | Submit electronic Responses based on the file type, size, quality and limits set out in the System Submission Rules within APC E-submissions — How to Submit & Rules on the APC Help Centre with the ability to search and print the documents in their entirety (excluding MP4 and MOV formats).(4.3 Format (b)) | |||
| 21 | p.20 | formathigh | Ambiguous, unclear and unreadable Responses will be rejected.(4.3 Format (c)) | |||
| 22 | p.20 | submissionhigh | Responses must be submitted via the APC E-submissions platform. Responses submitted by email to the SOW Procurement Official will not be considered.(4.4 Delivery (a)) | |||
| 23 | p.20 | submissionhigh | The APC system timestamp at successful submission is the official receipt time; late submissions are not accepted.(4.4 Delivery (b)) | |||
| 24 | p.20 | submissionhigh | Uploaded files are subject to system validations and security checks; a submission is not considered received until those checks are complete and the system timestamp is issued.(4.4 Delivery (b)) | |||
| 25 | p.20 | formathigh | If a Response cannot be opened after reasonable efforts are made by the Province, the Response will be rejected.(4.4 Delivery) | |||
| 26 | p.20 | submissionhigh | The Province will disqualify a Response if, in the opinion of the Province, the Response submits any false, deceptive or fraudulent information.(4.4 Delivery) | |||
| 27 | p.20 | formathigh | Content provided in a Response using an external portal, web link or embedded document will not be evaluated.(4.4 Delivery) | |||
| 28 | p.20 | experiencemedium | The Response may be rejected if, in the opinion of the Province, the Contractor or any proposed resource receives unsatisfactory references.(5.1 Evaluation of Responses) | |||
| 29 | p.22 | submissionhigh | This SOW will close on the SOW Closing Date and Time.(6.2.2) | |||
| 30 | p.22 | submissionhigh | A Contractor may retract and resubmit their Response through APC prior to the SOW Closing Date and Time. Only the most recent, time-compliant submission will be considered.(6.3.1) | |||
| 31 | p.23 | submissionmedium | Contractors must communicate questions or concerns in writing to the SOW Procurement Official at least 3 Business Days prior to the SOW Closing Date and Time.(6.4.1) | |||
| 32 | p.24 | othermedium | The Contractor must provide those written consents within 2 Business Days of a request by the Province to do so.(6.5.2) | |||
| 33 | p.24 | formathigh | All Responses are to be in English only.(6.6.1) | |||
| 34 | p.24 | otherhigh | Within their Response, Contractors must fully disclose to the SOW Procurement Official the circumstances of any actual, possible or perceived conflict of interest in relation to the Contractor or any proposed sub-contractor if the Contractor were to execute an SSA with the Province pursuant to this SOW.(6.6.2) | |||
| 35 | p.25 | otherhigh | Contractors must not engage directly or indirectly in any form of political or other lobbying whatsoever to influence the selection of any Contractor.(6.6.3) | |||
| 36 | p.26 | formathigh | A Contractor or Contractor consortium must provide the name and contact information for one person, in Table 2 below, as the contact for any clarifications or communications that might arise regarding their Response.(Appendix A – Submission Form, Section 1 Contractor Information) | |||
| 37 | p.26 | submissionhigh | If the Response is from a consortium, as specified in AMSA Schedule 14 (The SOW Process), Section 2.5 (Consortia), the contact identified in Table 2 below must be a representative from the prime Contractor.(Appendix A – Submission Form, Section 1 Contractor Information) | |||
| 38 | p.26 | submissionmedium | If a Contractor consortium is successful in the SOW process, the prime Contractor of the Contractor consortium will sign the SSA with the Province and all other consortium members will be listed as permitted sub-contractors in accordance with AMSA Section 13.3 (Subcontractors).(Appendix A – Submission Form, Section 2 Eligibility to Respond) | |||
| 39 | p.26 | certificationhigh | The Contractor must provide the information requested in Table 3 below, indicating the Contractor or the Contractor consortium is eligible to submit a Response (complete only one row in Table 3):(Appendix A – Submission Form, Section 2 Eligibility to Respond) | |||
| 40 | p.26 | formathigh | If this Response is from a consortium, the prime Contractor must provide the information requested in Table 4 for each consortium member.(Appendix A – Submission Form, Section 2.1 Consortia Information) | |||
| 41 | p.28 | otherhigh | The Contractor must respond to the following mandatory requirements:(Appendix B – Mandatory Requirements and Desirable Criteria, Section 1 Mandatory Requirements) | |||
| 42 | p.28 | experiencehigh | The Proponent must provide one (1) completed project demonstrating experience designing, developing, implementing, and supporting an AI-enabled application.(Appendix B – Mandatory Requirements and Desirable Criteria, Requirement 1) | |||
| 43 | p.28 | experiencehigh | The Proponent must provide one (1) completed project demonstrating experience developing an AI-enabled solution that generates assessments, classifications, recommendations, or decision-support outputs requiring human validation or approval.(Appendix B – Mandatory Requirements and Desirable Criteria, Requirement 2) | |||
| 44 | p.28 | experiencehigh | The Proponent must provide one (1) completed project demonstrating experience implementing two or more of the following artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities:(Appendix B – Mandatory Requirements and Desirable Criteria, Requirement 3) | |||
| 45 | p.29 | experiencehigh | The Proponent must provide one (1) completed project demonstrating experience developing an educational technology platform, assessment solution, benchmarking application, learning platform, or comparable AI-enabled solution.(Appendix B – Mandatory Requirements and Desirable Criteria, Requirement 4) | |||
| 46 | p.29 | experiencehigh | The Proponent must provide one (1) completed project demonstrating experience deploying and operating secure AI-enabled workloads within Canadian sovereign computing environments that satisfied client privacy, security, and data residency requirements.(Appendix B – Mandatory Requirements and Desirable Criteria, Requirement 5) | |||
| 47 | p.30 | experiencehigh | The Proponent must provide one (1) completed project demonstrating experience delivering a solution that incorporated privacy, security, audit logging, encryption, access controls, and secure software development practices appropriate for sensitive information.(Appendix B – Mandatory Requirements and Desirable Criteria, Requirement 6) | |||
| 48 | p.30 | experiencehigh | The Proponent must provide one (1) completed project demonstrating experience implementing AI governance capabilities, including model versioning, approval workflows, explainability, auditability, and controlled model updates.(Appendix B – Mandatory Requirements and Desirable Criteria, Requirement 7) | |||
| 49 | p.30 | formathigh | Each example claimed must include the following: a. title and description of the relevant project; b. requirements and outcomes achieved; c. start and end dates of the project; d. name of the organization for which the work was performed; and e. name and contact information for a person within the organization who can confirm the project claimed.(Table 5: Mandatory Requirements – Requirement 7. AI Governance) | |||
| 50 | p.31 | formathigh | Each example claimed must include the following: a) Title and description of the relevant project; b) Requirements and outcomes achieved (including specific model tuning or accuracy achievements); c) Start and end dates of the project; d) Name of the organization for which the work was performed; and e) Name and contact information for a person within the organization who can confirm the project claimed.(Table 5: Mandatory Requirements – Requirement 8. Child-Speech and Non-Native Acoustic Phonetic Experience) | |||
| 51 | p.37 | financialhigh | Provide a Fixed Price for the completion and delivery of the AI-Assisted EAL Benchmark Assessment Application outlined in Sections 2.1 and 2.2 and delivering the outcomes/requirements set out in Sections 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 of this Statement of Work (SOW).(Section 3 Pricing – Mandatory Requirement 1, Table 8) | |||
| 52 | p.38 | otherlow | Benchmark Assessment Application as set out in this SOW and AMSA. The Contractor’s Fixed Price must not include any termination fees; | |||
| 53 | p.38 | financialmedium | Failure by a Contractor to comply with this requirement may result in the Province concluding negotiations and entering into negotiations with the Contractor that submitted the next highest-scoring compliant Response in accordance with SOW Section 5.3.(Section 3 Pricing – paragraph following Table 8) | |||
| 54 | p.39 | financialhigh | The Contractor must provide a Fixed Price for the completion and delivery of the AI-Assisted EAL Benchmark Assessment Application as follows:(Section 3.1 Fixed Price) | |||
| 55 | p.40 | financialhigh | Fixed Rates per hour for all proposed resource roles below must be supplied for the Term of the SSA, including the optional extension period(s), and must be compliant with Schedule 4 (Financial Terms and Conditions) of AMSA.(3.2 Fixed Rates) | |||
| 56 | p.40 | experiencehigh | Each Contractor resource must meet or exceed the mandatory experience level defined in the table below for the resource role they are fulfilling.(3.2 Fixed Rates) | |||
| 57 | p.40 | otherlow | Fixed Rates for on-demand additional AMS, ADS and professional and technical services shall not apply to the Fixed Price in Table 9 above. | |||
| 58 | p.40 | financialhigh | The Contractor must provide Fixed Rates for on-demand additional AMS, ADS and professional and technical services as follows:(3.2.1 Fixed Rates for Additional Services) |