ADDENDA 4 - RFP 25-16 - Submitted Questions w Responses (002).pdf
PDF 157 KB Posted
- Attached to
- RFP NO. 25-16 | FEDERAL ADVOCACY
- Solicitation number
- NO. 25-16
- Issued by
- Los Angeles County, California
About this file
This document is Addendum 4 to Request for Proposal No. 25-16 issued by the Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD) Contracts Office for Federal Advocacy Services. The addendum addresses five clarifications submitted by potential proposers regarding proposal requirements and evaluation criteria. The proposal submission deadline is Tuesday, November 18, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time, with a questions submission deadline of Friday, November 7, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time. A pre-proposal conference was held on Tuesday, November 4, 2025. The RFP seeks a firm to provide federal advocacy services on behalf of LACCD, focusing on national policies including the Reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, financial aid, immigration, workforce training and Career and Technical Education (CTE), national government grant application recommendations, and other federal funding issues. While COVID-19 monitoring remains a secondary consideration, the District prioritizes the aforementioned substantive policy areas.
Key clarifications from the addendum specify that proposers must detail team member experience with clients served within the last five years, distinguishing between firm-level and individual staff experience. A separate list of clients or organizations that may pose conflicts of interest must be submitted outside of reference letters. The client list should include California-based clients across higher education, large organizations, Community Colleges, and Community College Districts. The Work Plan and Project Approach section should address why the District should select the firm, differentiation from competitors, fit for the District, knowledge of California and Los Angeles political landscapes, relationships with Congressional members and staff, key policy and appropriations committees, Federal Agencies and Departments, and the White House/Executive Branch and Los Angeles Congressional delegation. All communications regarding the RFP must be directed to Ms. Dorothea McFarline, Procurement Manager, at mcfarld@laccd.edu; unauthorized communications with District officials or RFP evaluation consultants may result in disqualification.
View the file
Other files
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
LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGE
DISTRICT Contracts Office
770 Wilshire Boulevard, 6th Floor Los Angeles, California 90017
RFP Number: REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) NO. 25-16
FEDERAL ADVOCACY SERVICES
Addendum Number: 4 RESPONSE(S) TO QUESTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS
Date: WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2025
NOTICE TO PROPOSERS: THIS ADDENDUM SHALL BECOME PART OF THE RFQ, AND PROPOSERS SHALL ACKNOWLEDGE, IN WRITING, RECEIPT AND INCORPORATION OF ALL ADDENDA AND CLARIFICATIONS IN THEIR RESPONSE. FAILURE OF THE PROPOSER TO RECEIVE ADDENDA SHALL NOT RELIEVE THE PROPOSER FROM ANY OBLIGATION UNDER ITS BID AS SUBMITTED. THE PROPOSER SHALL IDENTIFY
AND LIST IN ITS PROPOSAL ALL ADDENDA RECEIVED AND INCLUDED IN ITS PROPOSAL.
FAILURE TO DO SO MAY BE ASSERTED BY THE DISTRICT AS A BASIS FOR DETERMINING THE PROPOSAL
NON-RESPONSIVE.
CLARIFICATION(S) REQUESTED BY POTENTIAL PROPOSERS:
NUMBER QUESTION DISTRICT RESPONSE
Section 5.3.4 Proposal and Related Experience
1) On page 22, in the proposers must demonstrate their ability to #2, the RFP states, “Work on behalf of the LACCD on national policies and programs such as the Reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, financial aid, immigration, workforce training and CTE, national government grant application recommendations, and other federal funding/issues to offset local, state, national and global pandemic crises impacting higher educational institutions generally, and community and technical colleges in particular.”
Could LACCD please confirm if addressing COVID-19 is still a priority?
While addressing issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic are no longer a high priority, there have continued to be some long-term, ongoing health and public safety impacts that LACCD would like their Federal Advocates to monitor and be prepared to brief the District on, should the need arise. In general, however, LACCD would prefer any proposers to focus their submissions on the other more immediate issues listed including, “Reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, financial aid, immigration, workforce training and CTE, national government grant application recommendations, and other federal funding/issues”.
On page 23, proposed staffing and project organization, the second bullet point states, “Detail the Firm’s experience including each team member’s experience in providing the services listed in the RFP including Project Name, and Client Organization within the last five (5) years.”
Could LACCD please clarify if these are the Firm’s clients or each of the proposed team member’s clients?
Please provide a list of the Firm’s applicable clients with special focus on which clients are specifically handled by the proposed team members who will be assigned to work with LACCD.
On page 24, references, the third bullet point states, “include a current client list and organizations or entities that your firm
The list of clients and/or organizations that may pose a conflict of interest should be provided separate to the currently provides services to that may pose a conflict or require that you represent positions that are contrary to positions approved by
LACCD.”
Could LACCD please clarify if this should be included with the Letters of Reference or identified in this section and not as part of reference letters?
Reference Letters. The Reference Letters themselves do not need to include the list of clients/organizations that may pose a conflict of interest.
On page 24, proposed staffing and project organization, the last bullet states, “Provide a list of your most recent higher education, large organization, or Community Colleges and/or Community College District clients in the State of California.”
Could LACCD please clarify if this means our client list in California or does the State of California reference only apply to Community Colleges/Community College Districts in California?
The request references a list of the proposer’s clients located in the state of California including higher education, large organization(s), or Community Colleges and / or Community College Districts.
On page 25, Work Plan and Project Approach, the RFP states, “Refrain from submitting general marketing materials which do not explicitly respond to the questions below. Materials submitted shall specifically address the following topics.
• Why should the District select your firm?
• How do you differentiate your services from your competition?
Yes, these are the correct questions for this section.
Proposers should seek to answer the attached questions as a part of outlining the Work Plan and Project Approach that they would apply to their federal advocacy on behalf of
LACCD.
• How do you see yourself being a good fit for the District?
• How would your firm demonstrate its knowledge of the California and Los Angeles political landscape; provide background on relationships with key Congressional members, Congressional staff and key policy and appropriations Committees, Federal Agencies, and Federal Departments; and prove successful relationships with the White House/Executive Branch, and the Los Angeles Congressional delegation?”
Could LACCD please confirm if these are the correct questions for this section?
Please be reminded: UNAUTHORIZED COMMUNICATIONS Proposers shall not, prior to Award, contact or communicate, either verbally or in writing, with any of the following persons (other than the person named above) for the purpose of discussing the requirements of the RFP Documents or the RFP process: (1) any trustee, officer, employee, or representative of the District; or (2) any consultant, or employee of a consultant, providing the District with assistance, advice, or professional services relating to the matters covered by the RFP Documents or who is involved in any aspect of the RFP evaluation or scoring processes.
Unauthorized communication by a Proposer in violation of the foregoing may result in disqualification.
CONTACT FOR ALL COMMUNICATIONS IS:
Ms. Dorothea Mc Farline Procurement Manager Business Services mcfarld@laccd.edu mailto:mcfarld@laccd.edu
| LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGE |
| FEDERAL ADVOCACY SERVICES |
| IN THEIR RESPONSE. FAILURE OF THE PROPOSER TO RECEIVE ADDENDA SHALL NOT RELIEVE THE PROPOSER FROM ANY OBLIGATION UNDER ITS BID AS SUBMITTED. THE PROPOSER SHALL IDENTIFY AND LIST IN ITS PROPOSAL ALL ADDENDA RECEIVED AND INCLUDED IN ITS PROPOSAL. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .