8-TB2627-FS - District Property Feasibility Study.pdf

Salt Lake City School District Purchasing Department

Request for Proposal

For

District Property Feasibility Study

Solicitation No. TB2627-FS

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

District Property Feasibility Study

Solicitation # TB2627-FS

This Request for Proposals (“RFP”), having been determined to be the appropriate procurement method to provide the best value to the Conducting Procurement Unit, is designed to provide interested Vendors with sufficient basic information to submit proposals. It is not intended to limit a proposal's content or exclude any relevant or essential data.

Vendors are at liberty and are encouraged to expand upon the specifications to evidence service capability. This RFP is issued in accordance with State of Utah Procurement Code, Utah Code Annotated (UCA) Chapter 63G-6a, and applicable Rules found in the Utah Administrative Code (UAC). If any provision of this RFP conflicts with the UCA or UAC, the UCA or UAC will take precedence.

PART 1: OVERVIEW AND INSTRUCTIONS

1.1 PURPOSE OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP)

The purpose of this RFP is to enter into a contract with a qualified vendor to provide a feasibility study of district facilities that are no longer used for instructional purposes. The study will help determine the most appropriate use of the facilities going forward.

A brief timeline of RFP events is provided below. All dates are tentative and subject to change.

• November 5, 2025 – RFP published on Bonfire

• November 20, 2025 – Deadline for vendor Q&A on Bonfire

• December 3, 2025 – RFP closes

• December 3, 2025 – December 12, 2025 – RFP evaluations will take place

• January 6, 2026 – Contract award announced

1.2 BACKGROUND

The SLCSD is an urban district with about 18,500 students in grades Pre-K - 12, with 59% ethnic minority and 48% economically disadvantaged. There are over 80 languages and dialects spoken in the district. The SLCSD is largely comprised of the city limits of Salt Lake City.

There are 22 Elementary Schools, 1 K-8 School, 5 Middle Schools, 5 High Schools, and 2 Charter Schools in the district.

A full list of all schools can be found at the following link: https://www.slcschools.org/schools.

1.3 PROCUREMENT UNIT AND RFP SOLICITATION NUMBER

The SLCSD is both the Issuing Procurement Unit and the Conducting Procurement Unit for this RFP and all subsequent addenda relating to it. The reference number for this RFP is Solicitation # TB2627-FS. This number must be referred to on all proposals, correspondence, and documentation relating to this RFP.

1.4 QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD

All questions MUST be submitted through the Bonfire platform (https://www.utah.bonfirehub.com) during the designated time for questions (“Q&A period”) listed on Bonfire. Questions submitted through any other channel will not be answered. Questions may be answered in the order they are submitted or compiled into one document and answered via an addendum. Answers disseminated by SLCSD through the Bonfire system shall serve as the official and binding position of SLCSD and will constitute an addendum to this RFP.

Questions, exceptions, or notification to SLCSD of any ambiguity, inconsistency, excessively restrictive requirement, or error in this RFP, MUST be submitted as a question through Bonfire during the Q&A period.

https://www.slcschools.org/schools https://www.utah.bonfirehub.com/

Questions may be answered individually or may be compiled into one document. Questions may also be answered via addenda. An answered question or addenda may modify the specification or requirements of this RFP. Answered questions and addenda will be posted on Bonfire Source. Vendors should periodically check Bonfire for answered questions and addenda before the closing date. The vendors are responsible for submitting their proposal as required by this RFP, including any requirements in an answered question and/or addendum.

1.5 ADDENDA

Vendors are encouraged to periodically check Periscope Source for posted questions, answers, and addenda.

Any modification to this procurement will be made by addendum issued by SLCSD Purchasing. Addenda to this RFP may be issued for the purpose of making changes to the scope of work, scheduling, qualification requirements, criteria, weighting, or other requirements of this RFP.

After the due date and time for submitting a proposal to this RFP, at the discretion of the chief procurement officer or head of a procurement unit, addenda to this RFP may be limited to vendors that have submitted proposals, provided the addenda does not make a substantial change to this RFP that likely would have impacted the number of vendors responding to the original publication of this RFP.

Authorized and properly issued addenda shall constitute the official and binding position of SLCSD.

Any response to this RFP which has, as its basis, any communications or information received from sources other than this RFP or related addenda, may be considered non-responsive and rejected at the sole discretion of SLCSD.

1.6 RESTRICTIONS ON COMMUNICATIONS

From the issue date of this RFP until a Vendor is awarded a contract and the award is published, Vendors are prohibited from communications regarding this RFP with the conducting procurement unit staff, evaluation committee members, or other associated individuals EXCEPT the SLCSD procurement officer overseeing this RFP. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in disqualification.

1.7 SUBMITTING YOUR PROPOSAL

By submitting a proposal, the vendor acknowledges and agrees that the requirements, scope of work, and evaluation process outlined herein are fair, equitable, understood, and not unduly restrictive. Any exceptions to the content of this RFP must be addressed within the Q&A period. The vendor further acknowledges that it has read this RFP, along with any attached or referenced documents, including the General Provisions.

All vendor costs incurred in the preparation and submission of a proposal, including those incurred during interviews, oral presentations, and/or product demonstrations are the vendor's responsibility and will not be reimbursed.

Proposals must be received by the posted due date and time posted on Bonfire (“deadline”). Proposals received after the deadline will be late and ineligible for consideration.

The only method for submitting your proposal is electronically through Bonfire.

The RFP will end at the deadline. Do not wait until the last minute. If a vendor is in the middle of uploading a proposal when the deadline arrives, the system will stop the upload process and the proposal will not be accepted by Bonfire.

Therefore, the attempted submission will be considered late and ineligible for consideration.

Electronic submissions require a vendor to upload attachments to the Bonfire system. Bonfire will accept a wide variety of document types as attachments. However, SLCSD is unable to view certain documents.

Therefore, DO NOT submit documents that are embedded (zip files), movies, wmp, encrypted, or mp3 files. All documents should be uploaded in Bonfire as separate files.

1.8 CONTRACT AWARD INTENT

It is anticipated this RFP may result in a single contract award.

1.9 LENGTH OF CONTRACT

The contract resulting from this RFP will be for a period of five (5) years.

SLCSD reserves the right to review the contract resulting from this RFP on a regular basis regarding performance and cost and may negotiate price during the term of the contract.

1.10 PRICE GUARANTEE PERIOD

All pricing must be guaranteed for one (1) year.

Following the guarantee period, any request for price adjustment must be for an equal guarantee period and must be made at least 45 days prior to the effective date. Any request for a price adjustment must include sufficient documentation supporting the request. Any adjustment or amendment to the contract will not be effective unless approved by the SLCSD.

The SLCSD will be given the immediate benefit of any decrease in the market or allowable discount.

1.11 DISCUSSIONS

Discussions may be conducted with the Vendors who submit proposals determined to be reasonably susceptible of being selected for award, followed by an opportunity to make best and final offers pursuant to the Utah Procurement Code, but proposals may be accepted without discussions.

1.12 STANDARD CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS, EXCEPTIONS, AND NEGOTIATIONS

Any contract resulting from this RFP will include, but not be limited to, the Salt Lake City School District Standard Terms and Conditions (Attachment A).

Exceptions and/or additions to the Standard Terms and Conditions are strongly discouraged. However, Vendors requesting exceptions and/or additions to the Standard Terms and Conditions must be submitted with the proposal.

Exceptions and/or additions submitted after the date and time for receipt of proposals will not be considered. Vendors may not submit requests for exceptions and/or additions by reference to a vendor's website or URL. URLs provided with a proposal may result in that proposal being rejected as non-responsive. Vendors may submit questions during the Q&A period regarding the Standard Terms and Conditions.

SLCSD may refuse to negotiate exceptions and/or additions that are determined to be excessive; that are inconsistent with similar contracts of the procurement unit; to warranties, insurance, or indemnification provisions that are necessary to protect the procurement unit after consultation with the Attorney General's Office or other applicable legal counsel; where the solicitation specifically prohibits exceptions and/or additions; or that are not in the best interest of the procurement unit.

In a multiple award, SLCSD reserves the right to negotiate exceptions and/or additions to terms and conditions in a manner resulting in expeditious resolutions. This process may include beginning negotiations with the Vendor having the least number of exceptions and/or additions and concluding with the Vendor submitting the greatest number of exceptions and/or additions. Contracts may be executed and become effective as negotiations are completed.

If negotiations are required, Vendor must provide all documents in Microsoft Word format for redline editing. Vendor must also provide the name, contact information, and access to the person(s) that will be directly involved in legal negotiations.

Any mandatorily required acceptance of a Vendor’s terms and conditions may result in the proposal being determined to be non-responsive.

An award resulting from this RFP is subject to successful contract terms and conditions negotiation (if required). SLCSD, at its sole discretion, will determine when contract terms and conditions negotiations become unproductive and will result in termination of award to that Vendor and SLCSD may move to the next eligible Vendor.

1.13 PROTECTED INFORMATION

The Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA), UCA § 63G-2-305, provides in part that:

the following records are protected if properly classified by a government entity:

(1) trade secrets as defined in Section 13-24-2, the Utah Uniform Trade Secrets Act, if the person submitting the trade secret has provided the governmental entity with the information specified in UCA § 63G-2- 309 (Business Confidentiality Claims);

(2) commercial information or non-individual financial information obtained from a person if:

(a) disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to result in unfair competitive injury to the person submitting the information or would impair the ability of the governmental entity to obtain necessary information in the future;

(b) the person submitting the information has a greater interest in prohibiting access than the public in obtaining access; and

(c) the person submitting the information has provided the governmental entity with the information specified in UCA § 63G-2-309;

(6) records, the disclosure of which would impair governmental procurement proceedings or give an unfair advantage to any person proposing to enter into a contract or agreement with a governmental entity, except, subject to Subsections (1) and (2), that this Subsection (6) does not restrict the right of a person to have access to, after the contract or grant has been awarded and signed by all parties,…

Pricing may not be classified as confidential or protected and will be considered public information after award of the contract.

Process for Requesting Non-Disclosure: Any Vendor requesting that a record be protected shall include with the proposal a Claim of Business Confidentiality. To protect information under a Claim of Business Confidentiality, the Vendor must complete the Claim of Business Confidentiality form, which is provided as a separate attachment with this solicitation, and include the following information:

1. Provide a written Claim of Business Confidentiality at the time the information (proposal) is provided to the state, and

2. Include a concise statement of reasons supporting the claim of business confidentiality (UCA §63G-2- 309(1)).

3. Submit an electronic “redacted” (excluding protected information) copy of the proposal. Copy must clearly be marked “Redacted Version.”

An entire proposal cannot be identified as “PROTECTED”, “CONFIDENTIAL” or “PROPRIETARY”, and if so identified, shall be considered non-responsive unless the Vendor removes the designation.

Redacted Copy: If a Vendor submits a proposal that contains information claimed to be business confidential or protected information, the Vendor must submit two separate proposals: one redacted version for public release, with all protected business confidential information either blacked-out or removed, clearly marked as "Redacted Version"; and one non-redacted version for evaluation purposes, clearly marked as "Protected Business Confidential."

1.14 INTERVIEWS AND PRESENTATIONS

If it is determined to be in the best interest of the SLCSD, interviews and presentations may be held. SLCSD shall establish a date and time for the interviews or presentations and shall notify eligible vendors of the procedures. Vendors invited to interviews or presentations shall be limited to those vendors meeting any minimum requirements and/or minimum technical score threshold specified in the RFP.

Representations made by a vendor during interviews or presentations shall become an addendum to the vendor’s proposal and shall be documented. Representations must be consistent with the vendors original proposal and may only be used for purposes of clarifying or filling in gaps in the vendor’s proposal. Interviews and presentations will be at the vendor’s expense.

PART 2: SCOPE OF WORK AND REQUIREMENTS

2.1 DETAILED SCOPE OF WORK AND ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

The SLCSD seeks professional consulting services to conduct a feasibility study to understand the best use case of former school facilities and/or sites that are no longer used for instructional purposes. The study will inform the SLCSD Board of Education as it determines the most appropriate future use of each property. Future use may include whether to repurpose the site while maintaining ownership of the property, or to declare it surplus in accordance with state law.

This work directly correlates to Section V(B) and V(C) of SLCSD’s G-5: Administrative Procedures G-5, District Reconfigurations & Long-Term School Closures, and will provide the Board of Education with data-driven recommendations for each site. Refer to Attachment D for a copy of the Administrative Procedures.

The following facilities will be included in the initial project:

• Mary Jackson Elementary - 750 W 200 N, Salt Lake City, UT 84116

• M. Lynn Bennion Elementary - 429 S 800 E, Salt Lake City, UT 84102

• Hawthorne Elementary - 1675 S 600 E, Salt Lake City, UT 84105

Following the initial project noted above, and over the five-year term of an awarded contract, it is possible the Board of Education may consider additional SLCSD facilities for closure and possible feasibility study determinations. The awarded contractor may be asked to conduct feasibility studies for any facilities over the contract term.

A. Project Objectives

• Evaluate each identified property’s physical condition, regulatory status, and development potential.

• Prepare a Real Estate Analysis to develop a baseline land value and identify a range of feasible reuse or disposition options (refer to Task #2 below).

• Prepare a Financial and Economic Analysis of each viable option, including community impacts and benefits, risk, and fiscal outcomes (refer to Task #3 below).

• Deliver recommendations and supporting documentation suitable for presentation to SLCSD leadership and the Board of Education.

B. Project Tasks and Deliverables Task 1 – Project Initiation

• Conduct kickoff meeting with SLCSD leadership and other applicable staff.

• Review existing documentation (site surveys, appraisals, environmental reports, zoning, previous studies).

• Confirm study sites, data needs, milestones, and reporting format.

• Prepare an overall project plan.

Task 2 – Real Estate Analysis (REA)

• Assess existing building conditions, zoning, and allowable development under regulations.

• Evaluate market demand for potential land uses and identify comparable property values.

• Establish baseline land value for each site.

• Identify viable land use alternatives that keep each site a community asset, deliver value, and advance the

SLCSD’s academic, staffing, and/or other objectives.

Task 3 – Financial and Economic Analysis (FEA)

• Develop land-use scenarios reflecting feasible redevelopment or reuse options.

• Prepare pro forma financial models estimating costs, revenues, and potential returns.

• Evaluate community benefits and impacts, identify possible partners in reuse scenarios, and recommend preferred scenario(s).

Task 4 – Community and Stakeholder Engagement (if requested)

• Coordinate with applicable SLCSD staff to facilitate community meetings or focus groups.

• Summarize public feedback and incorporate into feasibility recommendations.

Task 5 – Final Report and Presentation

• Consolidate findings into a final Feasibility Study Report containing executive summary, site-specific findings, recommendations, implementation roadmap, and applicable exhibits.

• Present findings to SLCSD leadership and the Board of Education.

2.2 DETAILED TECHNICAL RESPONSE

To determine which proposal provides the best value to SLCSD, the evaluation committee will evaluate each responsive and responsible proposal that has not been disqualified or rejected using the following criteria:

A. COMPANY EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS OF KEY PERSONNEL

i. Provide a narrative outlining the qualifications and history of the company as a whole. Provide an organizational chart and brief biographies of executive management.

ii. Provide narratives outlining the training, education, work history, and other qualifications of the key personnel who will be assigned to the SLCSD account. Please include where these individuals will be physically located during the term of this contract.

iii. Indicate any subcontractors that will be utilized to fulfill any portion of the scope of work. Outline their qualifications and experience.

B. APPROACH TO SCOPE OF WORK AND REQUIREMENTS

Vendor is instructed to provide narratives highlighting their approach to the scope of work outlined in Section 2.1 above. This includes a point-by-point response to RFP Section 2.1. Vendors should give a detailed description of how their proposal accomplishes the need outlined within each section.

C. PROJECT TIMELINE

Provide a spreadsheet outlining the week-to-week plan to ensure a timely completion of this project. Assume a contract start date of January 7, 2026.

Include a written narrative outlining why this is the optimal project timeline and indicate any potential constraints in achieving completion in a timely manner.

D. REFERENCES

Provide the names and contact information for five (5) client references who have utilized your services within the past five (5) years. Preference will be given for references from school districts of similar or larger size.

Other public/private industry references may also be given, but the SLCSD prefers school district references. The SLCSD reserves the right to contact these references for verification. In addition, the SLCSD reserves the right to contact any known current customers of a vendor for further verification.

E. VALUE-ADDED SERVICES

Provide a narrative outlining additional products or services that have not specifically been asked for in the Scope of Work (reference Section 2.1 above). Indicate why these additional products/services may be needed/desired and the benefit they may bring to the SLCSD.

For ease of evaluation, the proposals must provide a point-by-point response, addressing in detail each area of the evaluation criteria, including addressing how the point-by-point response addresses the issues discussed in this RFP. The criteria are not intended to limit a proposal's content or exclude any relevant or essential data. Vendors are at liberty and are encouraged to expand upon the criteria to demonstrate the Vendor’s capability to provide the SLCSD with a solution.

PART 3: INFORMATION REQUIRED IN SUBMISSION OF A PROPOSAL

3.1 PROPOSAL FORMAT

Proposals should be concise, straightforward and prepared simply and economically. Expensive displays, bindings, or promotional materials are neither desired nor required. However, there is no intent in these instructions to limit a proposal’s content or to exclude any relevant or essential data.

All materials submitted become the property of the SLCSD. Materials may be evaluated by anyone designated by the SLCSD as part of the proposal evaluation committee. Materials submitted may be returned only at the SLCSD's option.

Organize the proposal using each of the following specific headings. Failure to format the proposal as follows may result in disqualification.

1. Section Title: Executive Summary. The executive summary is to briefly describe the Vendor's proposal. This summary should highlight the major features of the proposal. The reader should be able to determine the essence of the proposal by reading the executive summary.

2. Section Title: Protected Information. All protected/proprietary information must be identified in this section of the proposal by completing the “Claim of Business Confidentiality Form” referenced in Section 1.13.

If the Vendor’s proposal contains protected/proprietary information (refer back to the Protected Information section of this RFP for additional information), then Vendor must submit a redacted copy of the proposal at the same time Vendor submits its proposal. The redacted copy of the Vendor’s proposal must be submitted in compliance with other sections of this RFP.

If there is no protected information, write “None” in this section.

Failure to comply with this Section and Section 1.13 of this RFP releases the SLCSD from any obligation or liability arising from the inadvertent release of Vendor information.

3. Section Title: Potential Conflicts of Interest. Vendor must identify any conflict, or potential conflict of interest, that might arise during the contract. If no conflicts are identified or expected, write “None” in this section.

4. Section Title: Exceptions and/or Additions to the Standard Terms and Conditions. Proposed exceptions and/or additions to the Standard Terms and Conditions must be submitted in this section. Vendor must provide all proposed exceptions and/or additions, including a Vendor’s terms and conditions in Microsoft Word format for redline editing. Vendor must also provide the name, contact information, and access to the person(s) that will be directly involved in terms and conditions negotiations.

If there are no exceptions or additions to the Standard Terms and Conditions, write “None” in this section.

5. Section Title: Detailed Technical Proposal.

As described in Section 2.2, this section should constitute the major portion of the proposal and must be a concise overview of the Vendor's assessment of the work to be performed, the Vendor’s ability and approach, and the resources necessary to fulfill the requirements. This section should demonstrate the Vendor's understanding of the desired overall performance expectations, deliverables, if any, and outcomes. Clearly indicate any options or alternatives proposed. In any case wherein the Vendor cannot comply with an evaluation criterion outlined in Section 2.2, such inability must be stated in response to the applicable requirement. Vendors should reference the Scope of Work in Section 2.1 in their response.

For ease of evaluation, the Detailed Technical Proposal Section must be a point-by-point response, addressing in detail each area of the evaluation criteria. Proposals will be evaluated against the proposal evaluation criteria described in Section 2.2 and listed in Attachment E: RFP Evaluation Score sheet (“Attachment E”). Attachment E provides the scoring methodology, states the relative weight that will be given to each score for the criteria, and the minimum scoring thresholds associated with the evaluation criteria.

6. Section Title: Price Proposal.

Please enumerate all pricing within Attachment C – Price Proposal Form.

Price will be evaluated independently from the Detailed Technical Proposal and must be submitted separately from the Detailed Technical Proposal. Inclusion of any cost or pricing data within the Detailed Technical Proposal may result in the proposal being judged as non-responsive.

PART 4: PROPOSAL EVALUATION

4.1 PROPOSAL EVALUATION

All proposals in response to this RFP will be evaluated in a manner consistent with the Utah Procurement Code, Administrative Rules, policies and the evaluation criteria in this RFP.

Vendors bear sole responsibility for the items included or not included within the proposal submitted by the Vendor.

Each area of the evaluation criteria must be addressed in detail in the proposal.

4.2 PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS

Stage 1: Initial Review In the initial phase of the evaluation process, the procurement unit will review all proposals timely received. Non-responsive proposals not conforming to RFP requirements or unable to meet the minimum and/or mandatory requirements will be eliminated from further consideration.

Stage 2: Detailed Technical Proposal Evaluation Responsive proposals will then be evaluated by an evaluation committee appointed by the procurement unit against the proposal evaluation criteria noted in Attachment E. Attachment E establishes the minimum score threshold for Stage 2.

Vendors that achieve minimum score thresholds (please refer to Attachment E) will proceed to Stage 3: Vendor Interviews. Vendors with a score of less than the minimum required technical points will be deemed non-responsive and ineligible for further consideration.

Stage 3: Vendor Interviews (if needed) As needed by the evaluation committee, Vendors who meet or exceed minimum score thresholds from Stage 2 will be invited to in-person interviews. As noted in Section 1.14 above, Vendors may discuss their product/service and answer questions from the evaluation committee. Additional information regarding interview questions, evaluation process, etc.

will be sent to those vendors selected to participated. Following the interviews, the evaluation committee may revise their proposal evaluation scores.

Vendors with a score of less than the minimum required technical points will be deemed non-responsive and ineligible for further consideration.

Final Stage: Price Proposal Evaluation Vendors successful in Stage 2 and Stage 3 will advance to the Final Stage: Price Proposal Evaluation, as noted in Attachment E.

4.3 DETERMINATION OF BEST VALUE

The evaluation committee will determine which proposal provides the best value to the procurement unit. Pursuant to UCA §63G-6a-Part 7, the evaluation committee will prepare and submit a written statement that recommends a proposal for contract award, contains the score awarded to that proposal based upon the evaluation criteria contained in the RFP, and explains how the recommended proposal provides best value to the procurement unit.

SLCSD reserves the right to award the contract to a technically qualified vendor(s) with a lower score in the event the high scoring offer is determined to not be the best value offered to SLCSD, based on a cost benefit analysis.

PART 5: PROPOSAL AWARD PROCESS

After the proposal evaluation process is finished, the evaluation committee shall submit the proposals, evaluation scores, and written statement to the procurement official (or designee) for review and final determination of a contract award.

5.1 AWARD OF CONTRACT

In accordance with the Utah Procurement Code, and after the evaluation and final scoring of proposals is completed, the SLCSD shall award the contract as soon as practicable to the responsive and responsible Vendor with the highest total score. However, the RFP may be canceled in accordance with UCA §63G-6a-119.

5.2 PUBLICIZING AWARD

The procurement unit shall, on the next business day after the award of a contract is announced, make available to each Vendor and to the public a written statement that includes:

A. the name of the Vendor to which the contract is awarded, and the total score awarded by the evaluation committee; and

B. the total score awarded by the evaluation committee to each Vendor to which the contract is not awarded, without identifying which Vendor received which score.