16073_MKT TECH_RFP_Inquiry Response_3-1-23.pdf
PDF 164 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- S-10700-00005745
- Issued by
- Marion County, Oregon
About this file
This is an RFP Inquiry Response document issued by the Oregon Lottery on March 1, 2023, in response to questions and requests for clarification regarding RFP #16073 for Marketing Technology Services. The document addresses ten substantive questions submitted by potential proposers regarding eligibility, submission procedures, and specific attachment requirements. Key clarifications include confirmation that companies from outside the United States, including those located in India or Canada, are eligible to submit proposals; however, proposals must be submitted through OregonBuys by the specified closing date rather than via email. The Lottery references Addendum Two for detailed guidance on multiple procedural matters, including whether work can be performed outside the United States, instructions for completing Attachment F8 (attestations and certifications), formatting requirements for submitted documents, submission methods for various attachments, and guidance on utilizing confidential client references and previous Lottery work as project examples.
The response document does not contain explicit pricing terms, set-aside information, funding amounts, or contract award dates. The inquiry response focuses primarily on clarifying procedural and administrative requirements to ensure proposers understand submission expectations and organizational policies. Several questions defer to Addendum Two, suggesting that the Oregon Lottery issued supplemental guidance to address complex compliance and operational concerns raised by potential bidders. The document establishes that the Oregon Lottery maintains flexibility regarding vendor location and subcontracting arrangements while maintaining strict requirements for proposal submission methodology and documentation format through its OregonBuys procurement portal.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| S-10700-00005745_Notice of Intent to Procure.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
RFP [16073] – [Marketing Technology Services – Inquiry Response]
RFP #16073
MARKETING TECHNOLOGY SERVICES
Response to Questions and Requests for Clarification
Date of Issue: March 1, 2023
Question / Request for Clarification:
Lottery’s Response:
1. “Whether companies from outside USA can apply for this (…India or Canada)?”
The RFP does not restrict companies from outside the US from proposing or working with the Oregon Lottery. Companies outside the USA may submit a proposal to this RFP.
2. “Whether we need to come over there for meetings”
See Addendum Two.
3. “Can we perform the tasks (related to RFP) outside USA (…from India or Canada)?”
4. “Can we submit the proposals via email?”
No. Proposals must be submitted through OregonBuys on or before Closing.
See RFP Section 4.6.4, Electronic Delivery.
5. “RFP Section 4.6.1:
a. Are there instructions for Attachment
F8?
b. There is content in Attachment F8 that does not apply to us or would apply directly to WP Engine or other vendors we use. The RFP does say to fill it out if attestations or certifications are not
a. RFP, Section 4.6.1, Table, Attachment F8, includes instructions.
b. See Addendum Two.
RFP [16073] – [Marketing Technology Services – Inquiry Response] available, but does that mean only the questions that apply or the entire form?”
6.
“RFP Section 4.6.3:
Should attachments be filled out and submitted in the exact provided Word docs (exported as PDFs), including all pages, even title/table of contents?”
7.
“RFP Section 4.6.3:
Is any design/branding formatting allowed (e.g., pulling questions from the attachment and re-formatting in a branded PDF), or are Proposers encouraged to maintain the exact documents as they currently exist?”
8. “In RFP Section 4.6.3., the wording appears to indicate that only the cost information is to be submitted separately – Should the remaining attachments be submitted as a combined PDF? Or are all attachments submitted individually in OregonBuys?”
9. “Attachment RT2, Section 2.13:
When providing a copy of service level agreements for clients whose work is comparable to RFP Section 3.1, for confidentiality can information be redacted if required/requested by said client?”
10. “Attachment RT2, Section 3.0:
a. If work has been completed for the
Lottery, is there any issue with utilizing a Lottery reference for this RFP?
b. Can the same reference be used for multiple projects if the latest examples are for the same client, or should different projects be selected in order to allow for different references?”
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .