addendum-2-rfp-493-26.pdf

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

DIVISION OF PROCUREMENT AND SUPPORT SERVICES

BUREAU OF PURCHASE AND PROPERTY

STATE HOUSE ANNEX

25 CAPITOL STREET

CONCORD, NEW HAMPSHIRE 03301-6398

Date of Change: June 1, 2026

ADDENDUM # 2 TO RFP INVITATION 493-26

DATE AND TIME OF BID CLOSING: 6/10/2026 11:00 AM

FOR: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT TRAINING SERVICES

Question 1: The Offer Bid column on Attachment 1 is labeled "Price Per Class," but Section 22.1.3 references "cost per student per class" in the scoring example. Please clarify whether pricing should be submitted per class delivery (one cohort) or per student.

State Response: Pricing should be per class. See also state response to Q18 of Addendum #1.

Question 2: The anticipated class size ranges vary across courses (for example, 5-10, 10-15, 10-20). If pricing is per class delivery, should vendors assume the minimum or maximum class size when developing pricing?

State Response: Pricing should be per class and will be a fixed price regardless of the number of students up to the maximum stated on the bid sheet.

Question 3: Pricing is required across five contract years (September 2026 through September 2031). Are vendors permitted to escalate pricing year over year, or must pricing remain flat across the contract term?

State Response: Vendors are asked to provide pricing (bid) for each year for all potential contract years.

Question 4: For Attachment 1 training classes, who retains ownership of vendor-developed course materials, syllabi, and proprietary content? Section 6.3.1 specifies State ownership for materials developed under Attachment 3 Instructional Design work. Please confirm whether the same ownership rule applies to materials a vendor uses to deliver Attachment 1 classes.

State Response: See state response to Q17 of Addendum #1.

Question 5: Section 6.2 describes a bid request process for individual work assignments among qualified vendors. How are vendors selected to receive bid requests: all qualified vendors for that service category, a rotation, or another method?

State Response: See state response to Q3 of Addendum #1.

Question 6: Approximately how many work assignments per year does BET anticipate issuing across each Attachment 3 service category? Historical volume data, if available, would help vendors price appropriately.

State Response: See state response to Q5 of Addendum #1.

Question 7: For vendors bidding on both Attachment 1 and Attachment 3, are price scores calculated separately for each attachment, or averaged together into a single price proposal score?

State Response: Vendors will be evaluated separately for classes, training programs, and organizational development support.

Question 8: Would the State please consider a two-week extension for the proposal due date?

State Response: The proposal due date is set to ensure that new contractors are in place for the next academic year; an extension is not possible.

Question 9: Can you please describe over the past five years how many and the total value of the following contracts issued by the State of New Hampshire with selected vendors:

- Professional Development Programs (e.g., series of training programs to develop expertise in a subject matter.)?

- Organizational Development Professional Services contracts?

State Response: This information is not available as it is based on agency and municipality usage. Past usage is not indicative of future needs.

Question 10: What are the highest-priority training and OD needs for the first contract year State Response: The State does not have specific high-priority needs identified at this time.

Question 11: What outcomes should successful vendors help achieve?

State Response: Trainings and professional services provided under this RFP are intended to support BET in fulfilling its mission: Fostering Excellence in Public Service Through Training and Professional Development.

Question 12: Are there existing competency models, curricula, engagement survey results, or prior evaluations vendors should align to?

State Response: The state reserves the right to work with vendors to customize or adjust trainings as needed to align with state objectives.

Question 13: What specific organizational or workforce challenges are driving the need for these professional development services?

State Response: The BET recognizes a general, on-going need across state and municipal governments for support in these areas.

Question 14: Which capability areas are highest priority for upcoming engagements?

State Response: The State does not have specific high-priority needs identified at this time.

Question 15: Who are the primary audience by role, level, and agency type?

State Response: State and municipal government employees at various levels are the primary audience for BET training and services.

Question 16: What is the typical class size or maximum participant count?

State Response: See Attachment 1, Bid sheets for expected class size by class or program.

Question 17: What leadership levels are included (executives, managers, supervisors, frontline staff, cross-functional teams)?

State Response: All levels of state and municipal government employees and leadership are served by BET.

Question 18: What platforms will be used for virtual delivery, LMS hosting, registration, and evaluation?

State Response: The State will continue to use Microsoft Teams and Moodle for instruction. Class/program registration will be handled through BET’s online registration program. BET will facilitate class/program evaluations.

Question 19: What is the anticipated cadence of engagements (single workshop

vs. multi-session programs)?

State Response: See expected frequency of trainings on bid sheets. See also state response to Q5 of Addendum #1.

Question 20: How will coaching confidentiality and reporting be handled?

State Response: Please refer to section 41.4 of RFP document.

Question 21: Are separate examples and qualifications required for each proposed service category (e.g., coaching, Lean consulting, facilitation, instructional design)?

State Response: Vendors should submit sufficient materials and information to demonstrate capabilities and qualifications for all training and services for which they wish to be considered.

Question 22: What specific deliverables are expected for coaching, facilitation, instructional design, and OD engagements State Response: See state response to Q5 of Addendum #1.

Question 23: Are vendors expected to create original curriculum/content or adapt existing State materials?

State Response: Both options are possible.

Question 24: Should vendors include stakeholder interviews, discovery sessions, or needs assessments in scope?

State Response: See state response to Q8 of Addendum #1.

Question 25: Will the State evaluate individual facilitators separately from the overall firm?

State Response: Proposal evaluation includes the evaluation of proposed staff. The state reserves the right to verify the qualifications of any instructor or staff member providing services to the state, including subcontractors.

Question 26: Are bidder qualifications scored comparatively or against minimum standards?

State Response: Bidder qualifications are evaluated by the review team based on information provided. See section 22.1.1 of RFP document.

Question 27: How much weight, is given, if any to being a New Hampshire-based vendor or having in-state staff?

State Response: When identical and qualified low bids, proposals, or quotations are received at the same price, selection or recommendation of a prospective vendor shall, be made pursuant to RSA 21-I: 11-b, II as follows:

(1) If only one of the vendors offering that price has a principal place of business in New Hampshire, that vendor shall be selected or recommended for selection;

(2) When qualified lowest bids, proposals, or quotations are received at the same price from more than one vendor that has a principal place of business in New Hampshire, selection or recommendation for selection shall be made by drawing lots from among those vendors with a principal place of business in New Hampshire;

Question 28: Does in-state presence affect scoring, award priority, or work assignment selection?

State Response: There is no evaluation preference for any vendors, however final selection if there is a tie may benefit State of NH based business, see question 26.

Question 29: Are public-sector or state-government references preferred or required?

State Response: There is no preference for references.

Question 30: Should subcontractors be counted separately from employees in staffing disclosures?

State Response: Section 17.1.6 refers only to employees employed directly by your company, not subcontractors.

Question 31: What volume of classes, coaching, or OD work is expected annually?

State Response: This information is not available as it is based on agency and municipality usage. Past usage is not indicative of future needs.

Question 32: How will individual work assignments be competed among awarded vendors?

State Response: See state response to Q3 of Addendum #1.

Question 33: What is driving this initiative at this time?

Is this primarily intended to expand the State’s current training capacity, address identified capability gaps, support a broader organizational transformation effort, or replace existing vendor relationships State Response: Current contracts will expire September 30, 2026.

Question 34: Is this a new initiative or an existing program/vendor structure that is being renewed or expanded?

If existing, are there incumbent vendors currently providing these services?

State Response: Current contracts will expire September 30, 2026.

Question 35: Is there a projected or anticipated volume of engagements/classes/programs expected annually across the awarded vendors State Response: This information is not available as it is based on agency and municipality usage. Past usage is not indicative of future needs.

Question 36: Are there particular areas of training or organizational development support that are considered higher priority or currently in greater demand?

State Response: The State does not have specific high-priority needs identified at this time.

Question 37: Does the State have a preference for in-person or virtual delivery models for training, coaching, and facilitation services?

State Response: The state utilizes all modalities. See also state response to Q4 of Addendum #1.

Question 38: For in-person engagements, should vendors assume travel throughout the entire state of New Hampshire? Are there geographic regions or hubs where services are most commonly delivered?

State Response: The majority of in-person training and professional services are provided in Concord NH, but occasional on-site delivery statewide is possible.

Question 39: We noted that pricing is expected to be fully loaded, including travel-related costs. Given the variability in travel requirements, is the State open to separate travel reimbursement structures for engagements that require extensive travel, overnight stays, or multi-day facilitation?

State Response: Not at this time.

Question 40: Is there an anticipated budget range or average engagement size for professional development services and consulting assignments?

State Response: See state response to Q5 of Addendum #1.

Question 41: Several courses have a BET suggested format of - 10 hours of work over one week and 2 days, with 2 - 90min live TEAMS sessions. Please could you clarify if the 10 hours of work over one week and 2 days is live Instructor led training?

State Response: See state response to Q12 and Q15 of Addendum #1.

Question 42: Several courses have a BET suggested format of - 1-week online course - with 2 - 90 min live TEAMS sessions. Please could you clarify if the 1 week online is live Instructor led training?

State Response: See state response to Q12 and Q15 of Addendum #1.

Question 43: In cancelled solicitation 3054-26 the quantity of students to be trained per course title was indicated in the pricing sheet. Could quantities be added to the pricing sheet in this solicitation?

State Response: See Attachment 1, Bid sheets for expected class size by class or program.

Question 44: Please confirm you require two training class price sheets to be submitted, one for in-person training and the second for virtual live online training? Do you require the additional sheet to be added to the attachment 1 Excel Workbook?

State Response: Correct.

Question 45: Programs - Which products are in scope of the Microsoft Suite Certification program?

State Response: The Offer Sheet identifies specific programs. However, see also state response to Q8 of Addendum #1.

Question 46: Will the State consider a Credit Program that can be used for bulk purchases to be used for public courses, private events, programs or other named learning projects?

State Response: Not at this time, further discussion can be entertained during contract negotiations.

Question 47: Regarding the Line Item “SQL Training Certification” on Tab Attachment 2 Programs: Can you clarify which SQL Certification is desired or which group of SQL Classes?

State Response: We are seeking a program that includes Beginner, Intermediate, and Advanced Levels.

PURCHASING AGENT: Carrie Martin Email: NH.Purchasing@das.nh.gov

PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS AND MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH THE BID. ALL OTHER

SPECIFICATIONS REMAIN UNCHANGED AND VALID.

RESPONDENT BUSINESS NAME: ______________________________________________________________

ADDRESS: __________________________________________________________________________________

PRINT NAME: __________________________________SIGNATURE: ________________________________

TEL. NO.____________________________ EMAIL ADDRESS: _______________________________________

Please visit: https://das.nh.gov/purchasing/vendorresources.aspx (click on “Bid and Proposals”) for complete bid and addendums.

mailto:NH.Purchasing@das.nh.gov https://das.nh.gov/purchasing/vendorresources.aspx