6-Financial Auditing Services Questions Addendum 3 Final.pdf

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION

DEPARTMENT OF AIRPORTS

COMPLIANCE AUDIT SERVICES

ADDENDUM #3

The following questions were received in writing.

Q1. Per the RFP, proposals are to be submitted through Bonfire. At this time, the "Prepare Your Submission" section of the portal appears to be locked. Do you anticipate opening the submission portal closer to the due date, or is there an alternate site or method that firms should use to submit their proposals?

A1. Respondents may contact U3P Support Team at support@gobonfire.com with questions regarding the website.

Q2. Per the information provided in the RFP under Section K, Submission Procedure and Proposal Content, proposals are limited to twenty (20) pages and must be submitted as a single, word-searchable PDF document with the required tabbed sections, unless otherwise noted. Could you please clarify whether firms may include certification numbers for the certifications requested in the RFP?

Additionally, if space is limited within the 20-page proposal, would firms be permitted to provide supplemental information in an appendix, or would all information need to be included within the page limit?

A2. Proof of certification is not part of the 20 pages. Supplemental information should be submitted within the 20-page limit.

Q3. Per information in the RFP Section 5. A…IRS tax information, it states, “1) Firm’s federal tax ID number or alternate number, or 2) A copy of firm’s most current available IRS W-9 Form. Can you please confirm that firm’s can either provide their EIN number or a copy of their W-9 firm, or if we should provide both.

A3. As per RFP, 1) Firm’s federal tax ID number or alternate number, or 2) A copy of firm’s most current available IRS W-9 Form.

Q4. Reporting framework: Please clarify the expected engagement and reporting framework for this project (e.g., GAGAS performance audit, forensic audit, agreed-upon procedures engagement, compliance examination, internal audit engagement, or another reporting format), and the required final deliverables.

Please also clarify whether the City expects a single comprehensive report or separate deliverables and findings by scope area (e.g., change orders, pay applications, procurement, federal grant compliance, root-cause analysis, and financial analysis).

A4. The City is looking to the proposer to recommend the appropriate engagement and reporting framework based on its experience, professional judgement and understanding of the scope of work. The City anticipates that the audit may involve a combination of reporting frameworks and multiple reports or deliverables.

Q5. Expected audit approach: Does the City expect a comprehensive review of all project transactions and activities, or does it anticipate a risk-based audit approach utilizing professional judgment and statistically valid sampling methodologies?

A5. The City anticipates a risk-based audit approach utilizing professional judgement and statistically valid sampling methodologies.

Q6. Change order population: How many change orders and supplemental agreements are included within the audit population, and what is their aggregate dollar value?

A6. There are approximately 13,000 CMCOs. The value is approximately $1 billion.

Q7. Pay application population: Approximately how many pay applications, payment records, and contractor billings are included in the audit population?

A7. There are approximately 600 payment draws.

Q8. Records availability: Have all project records been centralized and digitized, and will the selected auditor be provided electronic access to relevant project management, financial, procurement, and grant administration systems?

A8. Yes; the project records are currently maintained in the City’s Unifier system. The selected auditor will be provided electronic access.

Q9. Schedule: What is the City's anticipated timeline for fieldwork completion, draft report issuance, management response, and final report delivery?

A9. The City is looking to the proposer to recommend an appropriate timeline based on its proposed approach, experience and understanding of the scope, including key milestones.

Q10. Federal grant scope: Is federal compliance testing expected to be limited to costs funded by FAA grants, or does the City expect compliance procedures to be extended across the entire Airport Redevelopment Program?

A10. Federal compliance testing should be focused on costs funded by FAA grants, unless the Audit uncovers reason to expand the scope.

Q11. Budget expectations: Does the City have an estimated budget range or anticipated level of effort for this engagement that respondents should consider when developing staffing plans and fee proposals?

A11. The City is looking to the proposer to provide its best estimate based on its proposed approach, experience and understanding of the scope.

Q12. Have any prior internal audits, external audits, investigative reviews, inspector general reviews, FAA reviews, legal reviews, or consultant assessments been performed related to the ARP? If so, will those reports be made available to the selected auditor?

A12. There have not been any of the above audits or reviews.

Q13. Are there any pending claims, disputes, litigation matters, procurement protests, contractor claims, or known allegations that the City expects respondents to consider when developing the work plan?

A13. There are currently none of the above.