00011928 Mini-RFP.docx

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

A&E “Related Services” MINI-RFP/ OregonBuys Bid Solicitation Number : S-73000-00011928 for Work Order Contract (“WOC”) Assignment Under TLUP-21 Price Agreement (“PA”) series B38909, B38913, B38914, B38916-B38918, B38922-B38924 for the following discipline:

Transportation System Planning (“TSP”)

[NOTE: Only Consultants that have been awarded a PA in the above PA series may respond to this Mini-RFP.] This is a local two-tier project delivered on behalf of the City of Ashland. The City of Ashland is responsible for the two-tier final selection of the Consultant, pursuant to ORS 279C.125 and OAR 731-148-0260.

Project Name: City of Ashland Updated TSP

Project Location: Ashland, Oregon

ODOT Key Number: N/A

DBE Participation Goal: 3% (see Section 1.5.1 for more information)

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION DEADLINE: See “Bid Opening Date” and time for this Mini-RFP in OregonBuys.

Buyer/Single Point of Contact: Val Harms at valerie.harms@odot.oregon.gov

Accessibility: The Oregon Department of Transportation is committed to complying with all statutory requirements to ensure that it is providing information that is more accessible to people with disabilities, as required by Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794d), and 36 C.F.R. 1194 Appendix A. This includes information regarding the solicitation process. Please contact the Single Point of Contact (“SPC”) identified in OregonBuys (see “Buyer”) to request reasonable accommodation for access, due to a disability, to information related to this solicitation, or the solicitation process, or both. Accommodation requests must be received by the SPC 3 business days prior to the Proposal Submission Deadline (see “Bid Opening Date” and time in OregonBuys).

Non-Discrimination Notice: ODOT in accordance with the Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 78 Stat. 252. 42 U.S.C. 2000d to 2000d-4 and Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Department of Transportation, Subtitle A, Office of the Secretary, Part 21, Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted programs of the Department of Transportation issued pursuant to such Act, hereby notifies all Bidders that it will affirmatively ensure that all business enterprises will be afforded full opportunity to submit bids in response to this solicitation and will not be discriminated against on the grounds of race, color, or national origin in consideration for an award.

SECTION 0.0 OREGONBUYS, ATTACHMENTS, SOLICITATION SCHEDULE

This Mini-RFP is advertised in OregonBuys (https://oregonbuys.gov/bso/) as a Bid Solicitation, which is open only to registered vendors that have an existing PA with ODOT for the needed Services.

0.1 INFORMATION AND ATTACHMENTS INCORPORATED FROM OREGONBUYS

In addition to the provisions set forth and linked within the Mini-RFP, the Mini-RFP incorporates by this reference the information published on the OregonBuys Bid Solicitation page for this Mini-RFP, including but not limited to:

· The Bid Opening Date and time specified under the Active Bid Solicitation section;

· The Buyer name and contact information specified in the Header Information section;

· Any documents, forms, or other files linked in the Bid Solicitation Attachments section.

0.2 CROSSWALK OF TERMS USED IN OREGONBUYS

Definition of terms used in OregonBuys.

Bid Opening Date means “Closing” as defined in Oregon Administrative Rules (“OAR”) 137-046-0110(6). In OregonBuys it is the deadline for submitting Quotes (Bids, Proposals or other required responses) required for a Bid Solicitation.

Change Order means A formal change to an existing MBPO (i.e., any form of contract; agreement; price agreement or on-call contract, etc.; purchase order; or WOC).

Master Blanket Purchase Order (“MBPO”) means Any form of contract, agreement (i.e. price agreement, on-call contract, etc.), purchase order or WOC.

Quote means Any form of offer submission by vendors (i.e., Bids, Technical Proposals, Price Proposals, or any other type of offer required by a Bid Solicitation or a Mini-RFP).

Vendor means Any form of business entity registered in OregonBuys. Only registered vendors are eligible to submit a Quote and enter into Purchase Orders, MBPOs, or Release Requisitions pursuant to a Bid Solicitation or Mini-RFP advertised in OregonBuys.

0.3 GUIDANCE FOR OREGONBUYS

For quick reference information regarding common questions from vendors when using OregonBuys, see User Guides under “OregonBuys eProcurement System” on the Contracting with ODOT webpage: https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Business/Procurement/Pages/HowTo.aspx.

Oregon Department of Transportation (“Agency” or “ODOT") is requesting supplemental information regarding specific A&E and Related Services experience relevant to the above referenced City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Update (the “Project”). The needed Services are further described in Section 3.0 (the “Services”).

The State of Oregon (“State”) updated Transportation Planning Rules (“TPR”) in 2022 to better align local transportation planning with the State’s climate and equity goals. The updated TPRs apply to transportation system plans (“TSP”s) prepared by cities and counties within Oregon’s 8 metropolitan planning areas (Albany, Bend, Corvallis, Eugene/Springfield, Grants Pass, Medford/Ashland, Portland Metro, Salem/Keizer). The 2022 updates to the TPR emphasize transportation planning and solutions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote safety and completeness of the multimodal transportation system and seek to create a more equitable transportation system.

The TPR updates expand on existing requirements around community engagement and analysis of safety and multimodal conditions; they also include new requirements to prepare a multimodal, multi-agency financially constrained project list and to evaluate equity, transportation options, and alternatives to expanded automotive infrastructure.

The expected outcome of the Project is an update to the City of Ashland’s (“the City”) TSP (“Updated TSP”), previously adopted in 2013. The Project will create consistency with recent updates to the TPR. The City’s Updated TSP must identify an integrated network of multi-modal transportation facilities and services consistent with the TPR and adequate to support development of the City’s existing and planned land uses over a twenty-year planning horizon. The City’s portion of the Urban Growth Boundary (“UGB”) is the (“Project Area”).

Project Area The Project Area consists of the area inside the City’s portion of the UGB, as shown in Figure 1 below:

Figure 1 City of Ashland

Background The City of Ashland, with a population of nearly 21,000 has a surface transportation system comprised of 102 miles, or 194 lane miles, of public streets and alleys. The street system is maintained by the City of Ashland Public Works Department and is administered by the City’s Public Works Director.

The City’s focus is to ensure that people have opportunities to conveniently and safely use their transportation mode of choice and allow the City to move towards a less auto-dependent community.

It is of vital importance to the City that it retains its small-town character through periods of growth. To achieve this, the City must proactively plan for a transportation system that is integrated into the community and enhances livability, character and natural environment.

The concept of “modal equity,” or the equal opportunity to use all modes of travel, is an integral part of realizing this vision. Whether Ashland residents and visitors travel by foot, bicycle, public transit or automobile, the City must have a well-designed, integrated network that is convenient to use and enables people to move easily through the City by all modes of travel.

Desired Project Objectives and Outcomes:

The Project will develop a Updated TSP and draft implementing regulations that include:

· Goals, policies, performance measures, and implementing regulations that support the City’s Comprehensive Plan and create a safe and reliable multi-modal transportation system that supports a thriving economy;

· Standards and solutions to develop a safe, efficient, multi-modal transportation network based on the needs of existing and planned land uses;

· A transportation system funding and financing strategy to support the development of the identified transportation system; and

· Analysis and documentation to demonstrate compliance with all applicable requirements to support adoption of the TSP, including local criteria, Oregon’s Transportation Planning Rule, and relevant Statewide planning goals and administrative rules.

The Project will support key outcomes, including:

· Identify, map, and assess existing transportation, transit, mobility, and parking facilities;

· Identify appropriate Transportation Options (“TO”), Transportation System Management (“TSM”) and Transportation Demand Management (“TDM”) techniques;

· Identify how the investments and policies in the TSP support a path to reach the regional greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions reduction target, including adopting required performance measures and targets;

· Preserve the function and capacity of transportation facilities to support the economy and movement of goods;

· Fill gaps and improve safety on pedestrian and bicycle routes to schools and key destinations;

· Review and updates to typical street cross sections to support adjacent land uses and safety for all modes;

· Be consistent with applicable laws and adopted plans, including the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, the Transportation Planning Rules, Oregon Transportation Plan, Oregon modal and topic plans including the Oregon Highway Plan, and City plans, policies, and ordinances.

Proposers responding to the Mini-RFP do so solely at their expense. Agency is not responsible for any Proposer expenses associated with the Mini-RFP.

The selected Proposer and Agency will negotiate the delivery schedule, costs and final Statement of Work (“SOW”), within the scope of what is advertised here, for inclusion in the final WOC.

The WOC is anticipated to start April 2025, and is expected to be completed by October 2027. Pending successful negotiations, the selected Proposer shall perform its obligations according to the WOC and applicable terms and conditions of the parent PA and exhibits thereto.

Funding Source(s):

· Federal Highway Administration (“FHWA”) WOC Payment. Payment will be made for completion of, or acceptable monthly progress on, tasks and deliverables in conformance with PA requirements and all applicable standards. The method of compensation will be determined by Agency and may be based on any of the following methods (may include more than 1 method – “Mixed”):

· Cost Plus Fixed-fee, up to a maximum Not To Exceed (“NTE”) amount;

· Fixed Price for all Services; Fixed Price per Deliverable; Fixed Price per Milestone;

· Time and Materials, up to a maximum NTE amount;

· Price per Unit.

For further information see PA, Exhibit B - Compensation.

Offer Period: A Proposer's Proposal is a firm offer, irrevocable, valid and binding on the Proposer for not less than 180 days following the closing date for this Mini-RFP. Agency may request, either orally or in writing, that Proposer extend the offer period in writing.

Contingent upon Agency need and available funding, Agency may (for up to 9 months following the close of this Mini-RFP), in Agency’s sole discretion, make additional award(s). Agency may select the next ranked responsible Proposer who has submitted a responsive proposal (provided Proposer agrees to an extended offer period, which would cover the balance of the 9 months, if at that time the offer period stated in the paragraph above has expired or soon will expire), issue an intent to award. If agreement with that Proposer is not reached, Agency may offer award to the next ranked Proposer and so on until agreement is reached or until Agency terminates the process. Agency reserves the right to require confirmation of the qualifications of any Proposer.

The “Buyer” identified in OregonBuys for this Mini-RFP is Agency’s Single Point of Contact for this solicitation. All inquiries regarding this procurement, whether relating to the Mini-RFP process, administration, deadline or award, potential Conflict of Interest (“COI”) issues, or to the intent or technical aspects of the Services must be submitted in writing via e-mail to the Buyer.

Failing to follow the foregoing requirements regarding the Buyer/Single Point of Contact for inquiries may result in Proposal rejection by Agency.

All questions must be received on or before the Proposer Question Deadline set forth in Mini-RFP Section 0.4.

Question and Answer documents, if any, will be posted on OregonBuys (in the Bid Solicitation Attachments section for this Mini-RFP) to respond to inquiries that Agency determines, in its sole discretion, do not effect changes to this Mini-RFP. Question and Answer documents provide clarifications and interpretations but do not change Mini-RFP requirements.

1.2.2 ADDENDA

Answers to questions Agency receives and that Agency, in its sole discretion, determines are substantive and provide new information, will be issued as official Addenda to this Mini-RFP. When appropriate, as determined by Agency in its sole discretion, revisions, substitutions, or clarifications of the Mini-RFP will be issued as Addenda to this Mini-RFP. Changes or modifications to this Mini-RFP will be binding on Agency only if in the form of written Addenda issued by the Agency. Any Addenda to this Mini-RFP will be published on OregonBuys in the Bid Solicitation Attachments section for this Mini-RFP.

1.3 PUBLIC RECORDS

After the evaluation/selection and negotiation process is complete, Proposals will be open to public inspection in accordance with Oregon Revised Statutes (“ORS”) 279C.107. If a Proposal contains any information that may be considered exempt from disclosure under the various grounds specified in Oregon Public Records Law, ORS 192.311 through 192.478, the Proposer must clearly designate the portions of its Proposal that Proposer claims are exempt from disclosure, along with a justification and citation to the authority relied upon. Application of the Oregon Public Records Law shall determine whether any information is actually exempt from disclosure. Identifying the Proposal in whole as exempt from disclosure is not acceptable. If Proposer fails to identify the portions of the Proposal that Proposer claims are exempt from disclosure and the authority used to substantiate that claim, Proposer is deemed to waive any future claim for non-disclosure of that information.

· Items in Section 1.4 marked as “PASS/FAIL” that are incomplete (except for minor informalities), not submitted by Proposal due date and time, or are otherwise not in substantial conformance with the requirement, will be rejected as non-responsive. Proposals must comply with ALL requirements marked as “PASS/FAIL” to be considered for further evaluation.

1.4.2 REQUIRED ITEMS AND SCORING DEDUCTIONS

· Proposals will receive a 2% scoring deduction, based upon the total available points, for each item in Section 1.4 marked as “REQUIRED” that is incomplete (except for minor informalities) or not submitted with the Proposal in substantial conformance of the requirement. Incomplete or missing items must be completed and submitted within 2 business days of e-mail request by Agency (this does not apply to “PASS/FAIL” items which must be submitted by Proposal due date and time). Missing or incomplete items must be delivered via e-mail to the SPC to provide an appropriate time stamp. Failure to complete and deliver missing or incomplete “REQUIRED” items within 2 business days of request by Agency shall result in Proposal rejection. Time limitations will be based upon the time of the e-mail sent by Agency and the time of the e-mail sent in response to Agency notification. ·

· Proposals not in conformance with the 12-point minimum font requirements for substantive text (including text in tables) and 11-point minimum font size for resumes or Key Staff Resume form (if required) will receive a 3% scoring deduction and will not be sent back to Proposer for correction.

· Scoring deductions are on an average score per Proposal basis and not a deduction per evaluator. For example, if a Proposer received an average score of 92 points from the evaluation committee, a 2% scoring deduction would result in a Proposal score of 90. (Percentage will be rounded to either the lower number if under .5% or to the higher number if .5% or over.)

1.4.3 PROPOSAL

The Proposal must describe how Proposer meets the requirements that are specified in this Mini-RFP as related to the scoring criteria below. Be clear and concise.

The Proposal must include a completed Proposal Cover Sheet using the form Attachment A - Proposal Cover Sheet (located on the Bid Solicitation File Attachments section in OregonBuys), with the “APPROVED” checkbox marked to certify approval.

1.4.6 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION DEADLINE (PASS/FAIL)

Agency will not accept Proposals submitted after the Proposal submission deadline, which is specified as the Bid Opening Date and time for this Mini-RFP in OregonBuys.

1.4.7 SUBMITTAL FILE SIZE AND REQUIRED FORMS (REQUIRED)

The total combined size of all files for Proposal, Cover Sheet and any forms must not exceed 5 megabytes.

· (REQUIRED) Key Staff Resumes form (using Agency form and minimum 11-point font). Key Staff Resumes form is, available at: https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Business/Procurement/DocsPSK/keystaff.docx.

· (REQUIRED) Reference forms as required in Section 2.13.

1.4.8 SUBMITTAL VIA OREGONBUYS

All required submittals must be submitted via OregonBuys (submittals by any other means will be rejected).

When submitting a Proposal (“Quote”) in response to this Mini-RFP:

· Do not enter pricing or any other information in the Item Information section.

· Select the “Confidential” checkbox on the Create Quote page when uploading Proposal and any other files (“Quote”).

1.4.9 FORMAT FOR PROPOSAL AND PAGE LENGTH LIMITATION

The Proposal must be organized in accordance with the list of Scoring Criteria categories in Section 2.2. The Proposal must not exceed 5 pages, excluding Proposal Cover Sheet, any tabs or indexes, table of contents, BOC or other price information (if applicable), “Key Staff Resumes” (if required, including any limitations, in Section 2.2), Work Samples, and Reference Forms (if required). If a Proposer submits a Proposal exceeding this limit, Agency will consider the pages up to the allowable page limit and discard all subsequent pages. Any links to external information included in the Proposal and any Proposal attachments will not be considered. The Proposer may choose how to allocate the number of pages between any sections, within the overall page limit.

One Page is defined as: one side of a single 8-1/2" x 11" page, with 12-point minimum font size for the substantive text (including text in tables) and 11-point minimum font size for resumes or Key Staff Resume form. Any page over this size will be counted as 2 pages. Any page, or partial page, tabs, indexes or table of contents with substantive text, tables, graphics, charts, resumes, etc., will be counted as 1 page.

· The Proposal Cover Sheet, Proposal, Key Staff Resumes and Reference Forms must be submitted as a single combined pdf file.

· COI information (see Attachment A - Proposal Cover Sheet) must be submitted as a separate pdf file.

(REQUIRED) Proposals must use 12-point minimum font size for the substantive text in Proposals (including text in tables). “Key Staff Resumes” (if required) or other resume formats (if required) must use an 11-point minimum font. Proposers may use their discretion for the font size of other materials that do not include substantive text (e.g. headings, graphics, picture or graphics captions, and org charts). If hard copies are required, Proposers are to submit Proposals on recycled white paper (stapled only), without binders or cover-stock. If a Proposer submits a Proposal with cover-stock or binding, Agency will remove and recycle them.

1.4.10 TERMS AND CONDITIONS (PASS/FAIL)

Unless otherwise provided in this Mini-RFP, by submitting a Statement of Proposal (SOP), each Proposer agrees to be bound by and comply with the terms and conditions of the Proposer’s existing PA, as amended. Any SOP that is conditioned on Agency’s acceptance of terms and conditions other than those set forth in the existing PA and the requirements specified in this Mini-RFP (as they may be revised by an addendum to this Mini-RFP) will be rejected as non-responsive.

1.4.11 FAILURE OF ELECTRONIC PROCUREMENT SYSTEM OR EMAIL SYSTEM

Per OAR 731-146-0150(4), in the event of a failure of an Electronic Procurement System or email system that interferes with the ability to submit electronic Proposals or to otherwise participate in the procurement, Agency may cancel the procurement or may extend the date and time of receipt of electronic Proposals by providing notice of the extension immediately after the Electronic Procurement System becomes available.

The WOC will include Federal funding:

· A DBE participation goal, as set forth on page 1, has been assigned for the prospective WOC. This goal will apply to the overall WOC including amendments. If a given phase of the WOC (such as construction Contract Administration/Construction Engineering Inspection (“CA-CEI”)), if applicable) will include little or no opportunity for DBEs, then DBE utilization in other phases of the WOC will need to be sufficient to meet the overall WOC goal. Exceptions for a given WOC or amendment will need to be assessed by Agency on a case-by-case basis.

See PA Exhibit E or, for No-Goal WOCs, Exhibit E.1 for:

· information on reporting requirements and how credit toward meeting an assigned DBE participation is determined (for goal and no-goal WOCs), and

· further explanation and description of the DBE program.

This is a local agency two-tiered project pursuant to ORS 279C.125 and OAR 731-148-0260. ODOT is delivering the Project on behalf of the City of Ashland. Pursuant to OAR 731-148-0260(3)(b), under this mini-RFP, the Local Public Agency (“LPA”) will evaluate proposals submitted from the Transportation Land Use Planning Price Agreement holders (“Tier two”), with the Price Agreement holders previously qualified by ODOT through an RFP issued under OAR 731-148-0220 (“Tier one”).

2.1.1 EVALUATION

Agency will evaluate Proposals in accordance with the Pass/Fail criteria identified in Section 1.4. Proposals meeting those criteria will be forwarded to an LPA evaluation committee of at least 3 members. In accordance with the qualifications-based selection requirements of ORS 279C.110, the LPA committee will independently review, score and rank Proposals according to the Scoring Criteria set forth in Section 2.2. Following completion of the scoring and ranking of Proposals by the LPA committee, the LPA will be responsible for final selection.

The outcome of the Evaluation process may, at Agency’s sole discretion, result in:

(a) notice to Proposer(s) of selection or rejection for WOC negotiation and possible award;

(b) further steps to gather additional information for evaluation, (e.g. checking references, notice of placement on an interview list, requesting clarification); or

(c) cancellation of the Mini-RFP and either re-issuance of the Mini-RFP in the same or revised form or no further action by Agency with respect to the Mini-RFP.

Agency reserves the right to reject any or all Proposals and reserves the right to cancel this Mini-RFP at any time if doing either would be in the public interest as determined by Agency. Agency is not liable for any costs a Proposer incurs while preparing or presenting the Proposal or during further evaluation stages. All unreturned Proposals will become property of Agency and part of the public file without obligation to Agency.

False or Misleading Statements. Any statements, written or verbal, provided by the Proposer deemed by the Agency to be false or misleading will result in all or portions of the Proposal, including demonstrations, to be rejected and removed from consideration in the evaluation for Project award.

2.1.2 INTERVIEWS/FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS

The LPA may conduct interviews/follow-up questions. If interviews/follow-up questions are conducted, the following will apply:

· The number of Proposers selected for interviews/follow-up questions is at the sole discretion of LPA.

· A minimum of 3 evaluators shall score the interviews/follow-up questions;

· Interview/follow-up question scores (up to a maximum of 100 points) will be combined with the other criteria scores to arrive at a total score. The total score will be ranked to determine the apparent successful Proposer.

· Interviews normally require physical attendance at Agency’s offices; however, LPA may elect to conduct interviews via teleconference or video conference. Further details will be included with notification of time and date of interviews, if conducted.

· Evaluation and scoring will be based on one or more of the following criteria:

· Understanding of Requested Services

· Technical Approach

· Project Management/Cost Effectiveness

· Proposer’s General Qualifications

· Proposer’s Capabilities

· Proposer’s Relevant Experience

· Project Team and Qualifications

2.1.3 REFERENCES

Proposers must provide 3 references (using Attachment B – References located on the Bid Solicitation Attachments section in OregonBuys) for projects where Proposer provided services relevant to the scope of services described in this Mini-RFP. If Agency contacts Proposer’s references, a maximum of 3 attempts will be made to contact each reference within a 5 business day period. References may be checked regarding Proposer’s past performance and to determine if they are supportive of the Consultant's ability to successfully complete the Services described in this Mini-RFP. Failure to provide complete and accurate information in a Proposal or reference may be cause for Proposal rejection.

References may be scored if determined necessary by Agency (including without limitation, to break ties, for example). If references are scored, the following will apply:

· Agency will provide the same questions to each reference;

· Reference scores (up to a maximum of 20 points) will be combined with the other criteria scores (and interview scores, if applicable) for a total score.

· The number of Proposers selected for reference scoring is at the sole discretion of Agency.

2.1.4 AGENCY QUESTIONS

Agency may require any clarification it needs to understand the Proposer’s Proposal. Any necessary clarifications or modifications which are in the best interest of Agency may be made before the Proposer is awarded a WOC, and some or all of the clarifications or modifications may become part of the final WOC.

2.1.5 METHOD OF AWARD

The total scores and selection for tentative WOC assignment will be determined as follows:

· Total Proposal Score = Total of all evaluator scores for a given Proposal, divided by the number of evaluators, minus any SCORING DEDUCTIONS received per Section 1.4.

· Total Interview Score (if conducted) = Total of all evaluator scores for a given interviewee, divided by the number of evaluators.

· Total Reference Score (if references or performance evaluations are scored) = Total score received for all references evaluations divided by the number of references evaluations scored.

Final Score = Total Proposal Score plus Total Interview Score (if conducted) plus Total Reference Scores (if conducted).

Agency will negotiate the payment amount and methodology with the top ranked Proposer (based on Final Scores). If negotiations are not successful, Agency may terminate negotiations with the top ranked Proposer selected by the City of Ashland and may begin negotiations with the next highest ranked Proposer selected by the City of Ashland and so on, until successful negotiations are completed or Agency determines that cancellation of this Mini-RFP is in the best interest of the State.

2.2 SCORING CRITERIA

Proposal scoring will be based on the criteria stated in the subsections below. Proposers should use the information provided throughout this mini-RPF (including the tasks shown in Section 3.0 -Statement of Work) to develop their response to the evaluation criteria below.

· Describe your vision of a successful City Updated TSP Project, and your approach to achieving this and ODOT’s objectives in a cost-effective and timely manner.

· Describe how your team would structure the City’s Updated TSP Project: What are critical path decisions and milestones? How would you sequence tasks? Which tasks are concurrent or subsequent? How would you coordinate work on various policy topics within the TSP development? Include the estimated timeframe to accomplish major milestones in your structure.

· Describe what you believe are the most critical topics of this Project that the must be addressed for a successful outcome. Which topics will take more workgroup and staff effort and which topics may be easier?

· Describe how your team will proactively identify issues that may cause a change in Project approach or product. How will your team clarify the need and adjust effort to respond to such issues or opportunities?

· Describe how your team will be structured and managed to complete the Services identified in this mini-RFP. Include a list or organization chart showing all Key Staff and subconsultants and their proposed roles/disciplines.

· The City of Ashland will be a key partner in delivering this Project. Provide an example of when your firm successfully managed projects that required collaboration with multiple teams, and where the client delivered key work products. Include methods you used to communicate and manage risk.

· Describe your firm’s approach to adjusting schedules when needed, or adjusting your level of effort in order to meet a schedule while keeping a project within a stated budget.

· Describe 3 projects conducted by the Project Manager, Key Staff, or both that demonstrate your firm’s capacity to successfully complete the Services identified in this mini-RFP, including:

· Your firm’s experience performing a transportation network analysis under evacuation scenarios.

· Your firm’s experience conducting equity analyses and engaging with underserved populations.

· Describe the relevance of each project to the City’s Updated TSP Project and Services. Include descriptions of how project constraints were addressed and resolved.

· Include a brief description of project type, location, context, duration and objectives; a list of key project staff and their roles; tasks performed by your firm to fulfill the project objectives; the project budget and whether the schedule and budget were met.

· Using the “Key Staff Resumes” form (accessible using the link in Section 1.4.7), describe relevant experience for the proposed Project Manager and other Key Staff that you believe are most important to the success of this Project.

· Scoring will be based on relevance of the experience, qualifications, and technical competence of Project Manager and Key Staff proposed for use on this specific Project.

· Key Staff Resumes are not included in the Proposal page limit, however, a maximum of 5 Key Staff Resumes may be submitted. Any resumes submitted beyond this limit will be discarded by Agency and will not be included in the evaluation. The fields on the Key Staff Resumes form may be expanded, but may not exceed 1 page per resume and must use a minimum of 11 point font for substantive text.

· Agency is requiring that the Key Staff Resumes submitted for this mini-RFP will be the same Key Staff members providing Services under the resulting WOC. There will be no staff substitutions without Agency’s written consent.

· Provide 3 work samples, from one or more projects, with a scope and magnitude that is similar to the Project described in this Mini-RFP.

· A work sample is 1 actual page from an existing document, developed by your firm, that best demonstrates your firm’s ability to communicate key information and inform decisions.

· Each work sample must have been developed by at least one of your team's Key Staff, Project Manager, or both, in the same or similar roles.

· You must clearly identify how the work sample responds to the information requested above. You may circle or highlight a particular area of the page or provide supplemental information for context.

· Work samples will be scored on applicability to City’s Updated TSP Project as well as format: including appropriate use of tables and graphics; clear, concise text; and errors, including misspellings, grammatical, and typographic.

· Work samples are not included in the Proposal page limit, however, a maximum of 1 page per work sample (up to 3 pages total) may be submitted for this criterion. Any pages submitted beyond this limit will be discarded by Agency and will not be included in the evaluation.

· Proposers should not provide a written response to this criterion.

The Proposal must be organized in accordance with the list of Scoring Criteria categories in Section 2.2. Proposals will be scored by evaluators on the following factors: Proposal format; ease of finding clear, concise responses that correlate with the order of evaluation criteria in this mini-RFP; and Proposer's ability to follow instructions.

Following development of the SOW, the selected Proposer shall submit a detailed Breakdown of Costs ( BOC or BOC-NBR, as applicable, available at https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Business/Procurement/Pages/PSK.aspx) with cost information as required in the WOC Assignment and Requirements Exhibit of the PA.

2.3.2 COMMITTED DBE BREAKDOWN AND CERTIFICATION FORM-AE

During negotiations of the WOC, Consultant shall submit a Committed DBE Breakdown and Certification Form-AE (one for each DBE subcontractor that will be utilized) if a DBE goal greater than 0% is assigned to the WOC. [Note: The Committed DBE Breakdown and Certification Form-AE will not be required for WOCs with no goal assignment or if a DBE goal is not required (i.e., if WOC includes no federal funding)]. The Committed DBE Breakdown and Certification Form-AE must be submitted and approved prior to WOC execution and shall be used to determine Consultant’s responsiveness to the DBE requirements. See PA Exhibit E, DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PROVISIONS for detailed requirements.

The Committed DBE Breakdown and Certification Form-AE is available at: https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Forms/2ODOT/7345235.pdf.

2.3.3 PROPOSER RESPONSIBILITY, DEBT OWED to STATE

Agency may reject an offer and rescind the Intent to Award notice if Agency determines Proposer is not responsible or if Proposer has liquidated and delinquent debt owed to the State or any department or agency of the State.

Note to Proposers: Agency will negotiate the final SOW with the top-ranked Proposer(s) within the scope of what is advertised in this solicitation, for inclusion in the final Work Order Contract. Therefore, the task summaries and desired outcomes described below are provided to inform proposal development and future negotiation of the final tasks and deliverables.

“Consultant” as used in this Section 3.0 refers to the apparent successful Proposer.

Consultant understands that the City of Ashland has significant tasks related to, and involvement with, the Project. As such Agency will enter into a separate Intergovernmental Agreement (“IGA”) with the City to provide services to the Project as described in this SOW that are not the responsibility of the Consultant. The information in this Statement of Work (“SOW“) regarding the City’s responsibilities are for informational purposes only.

Task 1: Project Management Consultant shall provide ongoing Project management services and Agency coordination activities necessary to implement the agreed Project scope, manage delivery of products in a timely and effective manner, and enable effective coordination and collaboration. Consultant shall develop a work plan, which outlines a schedule, how decisions will be made, and escalation/resolution plans when differences arise.

Consultant shall:

· Set up and maintain Project files;

· Supervise, manage, and coordinate Project work staff (this includes work tasks performed by others) in coordination with Agency;

· Ensure quality control and timely submission of deliverables (this includes work tasks performed by others);

· Support the City in establishing a Project Management Team (“PMT”);

· Regularly communicate with the PMT and with Agency Project Manager (“APM”) as needed or as requested;

· Arrange and conduct regular PMT meetings;

· Prepare a detailed Project work plan and schedule; monitor Project budget;

· Prepare and host an internal Project management website.

Task 2: Community Engagement Consultant shall support a City-led community engagement effort by undertaking the following tasks:

Consultant shall:

· Support the City in establishing a Project Advisory Committee (“PAC”);

· Arrange and conduct meetings as necessary to support City’s community engagement effort;

· Consultant shall provide content for a public-facing Project website throughout the Project;

· Prepare a Community Profile & Major Equity Analysis Memorandum, which must meet the requirements for a Title VI Report and Major Equity Analysis as outlined in OAR 660-012-0135. The final draft of the Community Profile & Major Equity Analysis Memorandum must be completed at the close of the Project and must include a report on Equitable Outcomes and the Title VI Report. This memorandum must also assess and summarize:

· Current population locations and characteristics;

· Stories of who is living, working, and doing business in the community;

· Growth and other changes projected into the future.

· Review and provide comment on a City-developed Community Engagement Plan and provide comments based on best practices and experience with similar communities.

· Coordinate with City to develop a timeline that identifies key milestones for the Community Engagement Plan. Provide community engagement sequencing, detailing key points of community engagement throughout the planning process.

· Provide support for City-led community engagement meetings and activities, including, but not limited to, developing presentation and activity materials, providing translation and interpretation services, and facilitating conversations to meaningfully inform the development of the TSP. Consultant shall summarize input received during public meetings in the applicable Community Profile & Major Equity Analysis Memorandum.

Task 3: Policy and Planning Framework Consultant shall:

· Prepare a Planning and Policy Framework Memorandum which must review relevant City, County, Regional, and State plans, policies, standards, rules, regulations, and other relevant documents and identify conflicts, changed conditions and data gaps, connections to regionally significant transportation networks, revisions to the City of Ashland’s Comprehensive Plan, and implementation regulations needed to comply with State plans, policies, and regulations.

· Prepare a Goals, Objectives, Prioritization Criteria Memorandum, and Performance Standards Memorandum, documenting:

· Goals and Objectives that reflect past local planning, community engagement, and the Community Profile developed in Task 2.

· A Project Prioritization Framework that reflects the City’s Updated TSP goals and objectives and must be consistent with the following OARs: 660-012-0130, 660-012-0155, and 660-012-0170. This framework must also address the “shall” methods from the TSP Guidelines. This framework must support prioritization of projects by mode in addition to meeting the requirements of OAR 660-012-0170.

· Performance Standards used to evaluate transportation investments included in later tasks in this Project and in the years following adoption of the Updated TSP. Consistent with OAR 660-012-0215, at least 1 performance standard must be adopted that supports increasing transportation options and avoiding principal reliance on the automobile. Performance standards for ODOT owned and managed facilities are established in the Oregon Transportation Plan and Oregon Highway Plan.

· Performance Targets previously established per OAR 660-012-0910 for each performance measure in OAR 660-044-0110 and OAR 660-012-0905, as well as any for targets locally determined performance measures identified during the greenhouse gas reduction target-setting processes outlined in OARs 660-044-0110, 660-044-0120, and 660-044-0130.

· Regional Performance Standards or Measures developed by the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization that may be relevant or appropriate for the City.

· Reporting Requirements for performance measures and targets, including a timeline for key reporting dates.

Task 4: Analytical Methods Consultant shall develop an Analysis Methodology and Assumptions Memorandum which must describe the analytical procedures used to evaluate existing conditions, future conditions, potential solutions, Level of Traffic Stress (“LTS”), and development of an alternatives analysis (as provided in OAR 660-012-0830). These procedures must be prepared in coordination with Agency and consistent with the Appendix 2C Sample Methodology Memorandum from ODOT’s Analysis Procedures Manual.

Task 5: Existing Conditions and Needs Analysis Consultant shall conduct an Existing Conditions Inventory and Analysis and report findings in a Needs Analysis Memorandum. The Existing Conditions Inventory and Analysis must be consistent with the Analysis Methodology and Assumptions Memorandum, and containing relevant “shall” requirements from the TSP Guidelines. System inventories (identified below) must be used to establish a baseline for comparison with future needs.

The Existing Conditions Inventory must:

· Describe the pedestrian, bicycle, public transportation, and roadway systems (including freight and traffic counts) as well as transportation options programs, development patterns and natural constraints, and summarize household-based vehicle miles traveled (“VMT”) per capita. Indicate jurisdictional control of facilities.

· Summarize current and historical transportation funding and forecast future revenues through the planning period.

· Identify evacuation route-limited locations within the City that require additional analysis to facilitate improved evacuation capabilities.

· Be consistent with applicable TPRs, including but not limited to:

· OAR 660-012-0150 Transportation System Inventories;

· OAR 660-012-0325 Transportation Review in Climate-Friendly Areas and Centers;

· OAR 660-012-0505 Pedestrian System Inventory;

· OAR 660-012-0605 Bicycle System Inventory;

· OAR 660-012-0705 Public Transportation System Inventory; and

· OAR 660-012-0805 Street and Highway System Inventory.

· As applicable, describe the rail, air, and truck freight transportation systems.

The Existing Conditions Analysis must:

· Evaluate intersection operations, safety, intermodal connections, access management and deficiencies in the pedestrian, bicycle, and public transportation systems. To the greatest extent possible, Consultant shall take a holistic look at safety throughout the development of the Updated TSP and to apply a range of methods to analyze safety concerns; and

· As applicable, assess bridge conditions and performance of rail, air, truck freight, and marine transportation systems.

Task 6: Future Conditions and Solutions Development Consultant shall prepare a Future Conditions Analysis Memorandum, presenting an assessment of land use and transportation future conditions in the Project Area under a “No-Build” scenario, that must incorporate planned transportation improvements with an identified and committed funding source. The memorandum must include:

· Population and employment forecasts;

· Future transportation volumes;

· Future deficiencies and needs; and

· A horizon year VMT per capita calculation.

Consultant shall prepare a Solutions Analysis and Funding Program Memorandum that must identify transportation solutions that address deficiencies and needs as identified in the Future Conditions Analysis Memorandum. The memorandum must include:

· Solutions for pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and automobile modes; including new or revised typical street cross sections to support all land uses and safety of all modes;

· Solutions addressing safety, multimodal connections, street layout and connectivity, parking management, freight movement, and transportation options;

· Solutions for addressing evacuation route-limited locations identified in the Existing Conditions Analysis;

· A comprehensive list of funding options, including City and available external funding sources;

· A conceptual list of amendments to the City’s municipal code and regulations to align with the TPR and reflecting the priorities identified in the final Goals, Objectives, Prioritization Criteria, and Performance Standards Memorandum; and

· An evaluation matrix of alternative solutions using prioritization criteria developed in Task 3.

Task 7: Identification of Preferred and Cost-Constrained Solutions Consultant shall prepare a Preferred Multimodal Transportation Solutions Memorandum identifying preferred and cost-constrained solutions based on the Needs Analysis Memorandum, Future Conditions Analysis Memorandum, Solutions Analysis and Funding Program Memorandum, and input received from the PMT, PAC and the public. The memorandum must contain:

· Narrative, tables, and maps describing preferred solutions and suitable for eventual inclusion in the Updated TSP and its appendices;

· An unconstrained project list that includes projects from City-adopted plans prioritized using criteria consistent with 660-012-0170;

· A future transportation funding plan consistent with ODOT Transportation System Plan Guidelines and ODOT Directive PB-03 Financial Feasibility in System Planning;

· A financially constrained project list consistent with OAR 660-012-0180 and based on planning-level cost estimates not to exceed 125% of projected funding;

· A description of how the constrained project list would make progress to adopted targets and meet standards at the end of the planning horizon; and

· If applicable, an update to the regional travel demand model with the constrained project list to develop horizon year build volumes.

If the project list (constrained or unconstrained) includes a project that would require review as provided in OAR 660-012-0830(1), Consultant must prepare:

· A facility impact assessment as described in OAR 660-012-0830(3);

· A focused public involvement strategy consistent with the requirements of 660-012-0830(4);

· Alternative investment scenario(s) inclusive of alternatives provided in OAR 660-012-0830(5), subsections (e) through (h);

· An alternatives review report and accompanying analysis, as provided in OAR 660-012-0830(6); and

· A draft authorization report as provided in OAR 660-012-0830(8), if specifically authorized by City Council.

A constrained project list including a project requiring this level of review must also demonstrate that completion of the full project list will not increase VMT per capita over the base year.

Task 8: Draft Transportation System Plan, Implementing Ordinances, and Findings Consultant shall prepare a draft, revised draft, and adoption draft Transportation System Plan; and draft, revised draft, and adoption draft Implementing Ordinances Memorandum for review and comment by PMT, PAC, Planning Commission, and City Council.

8.1 Transportation System Plan Update:

Consultant shall prepare draft, revised draft, and adoption draft Updated TSP incorporating memoranda completed in the Project, consistent with the requirements of the Oregon Transportation Plan, OAR 660-012-0100 and must include the ‘shalls’ shown in the TSP Guidelines.

Updated TSP must include:

· A stand-alone executive summary presenting the most important aspects of the TSP;

· Maps and plan elements describing the future multimodal transportation network and related transportation options;

· Updated roadway classifications based on federal standards;

· Transportation system goals, policies and performance standards;

· Performance targets and related reporting protocols aligned with regional performance measures for GHG reduction;

· A prioritized, unconstrained project list;

· Funding projections and a financially constrained project list that includes projects from other roadway authorities;

· Street standards and access spacing standards, including typical street cross sections and green street standards;

· Project prospectus sheets,

· Recommended development code amendments…