Amendment 2 RFP No. 37802-RJ.pdf

Addendum September 09, 2026 Page 1 of 3

Real Estate Advisory Services for the University of Maryland College Park

RFP No. 37802- RJ

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION

1. AMENDMENT NUMBER A002

2. DATE ISSUED September 18, 2026 3. NUMBER OF PAGES

4. ISSUED BY

UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND

DEPARTMENT OF PROCUREMENT & STRATEGIC SOURCING

2113-R CHESAPEAK BUILDING

4300 TERRAPIN TRAIL

COLLEGE PARK, MARYLAND 20742-1111

POINT OF CONTACT: Rahima Jamal

TELEPHONE NUMBER: 301-405-6543

ELECTRONIC MAIL ADDRESS: RJAMAL@UMD.EDU

5. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 4)

6. NAME, ADDRESS AND FEI NUMBER OF CONTRACTOR

TO ALL PROPOSPECTIVE BIDDERS

7A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

RFP No. 37802- RJ Real Estate Advisory Services for the University of Maryland College Park

7B. DATED

September 01, 2026

8. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION

The solicitation identified in 7A above is amended as set forth in Item 9.

The due date and time specified for receipt of offers/bids is extended, is not extended.

Contractor must acknowledge receipt of this amendment.

RECEIPT OF THIS AMENDMENT MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED ON ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF AMENDMENT FORM

FAILURE OF CONTRACTOR’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR RECEIPT OF OFFERS/BIDS PRIOR TO THE DUE DATE AND TIME SPECIFIED MAY RENDER CONTRACTOR’S OFFER UNACCEPTABLE/NON-RESPONSIVE AND SUBJECT TO

REJECTION.

9. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT (Use additional pages if required)

9.1 Services to extend the proposals due date from September 22, 2026 at 3:00 PM to September 29, 2026 at 3:00 PM.

9.2 Serves to publish the Questions and Answers.

Continued on page 2

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 7A, including previous amendments, if any, shall remain in full force and effect.

10A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or Print)

11A. NAME OF PROCUREMENT OFFICER (Type or Print)

Rahima Jamal

September 09, 2026

10B. CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE

(Signature of Person Authorized to Sign)

10C. DATE SIGNED

Amendment Number A002

Q & A From Offerors

Question 1 – Higher Education Experience: Sections 2.3 and 3.1 of the Technical Requirements Matrix reference experience with higher education real estate advisement and negotiating on behalf of a higher education client similar to the University.

Please confirm whether prior real estate advisory work performed directly for a higher-education institution is a minimum/pass-fail qualification, or whether comparable institutional/public-sector real estate advisory experience together with relevant higher-education experience of the proposed key personnel may satisfy these requirements.

Answer: Comparable institutional/public sector real estate advisory experience together with relevant higher-education experience of the proposed key personnel would satisfy this requirement.

Question 2 – Section 4.2.1 Contractor References:

Offerors must have in-depth expertise and experience in the analysis of executive compensation, particularly in the field of public higher education. Offerors must provide a minimum of three (3) and no more than six (6) references and ancillary information on the reference form provided below. This must include a summary of prior executive compensation study projects the company has completed over the past three (3) years that are comparable in size and scope to the project detailed herein. The University will consider all listed Projects to be valid references.

Answer: Delete section 4.2.1 and replace with, Offerors must have demonstrated expertise and experience providing real estate advisory and consulting services, particularly in the field of higher education or for other large public-sector institutions. Offerors must provide a minimum of three (3) and no more than six (6) references and ancillary information on the reference form provided below. References must include a summary of prior real estate projects the company has completed within the past three (3) years that are comparable in size, complexity, and scope to the services described in this RFP. The University will consider all listed projects to be valid references

Question 3: Section 3.3 of the Technical Experience Matrix requires Offerors to “demonstrate at least 10 years of experience working on real estate transactions in Maryland and Prince George’s County”. Provided that an Offeror has at least ten years of experience with transactions in Maryland, is it acceptable for Prince George’s County transaction experience to be more recent?

Answer: If the Offerer has less than 10 years of experience working in a real estate advisory services role in Prince George’s County, 10 or more years of experience in the greater DC-Maryland-Virginia National Capital Region, as defined by the National Capital

Planning Commission, will be acceptable.

Question 4: There appears to be overlap between proposal requirements listed in Sections 2.15, 4.1, 4.2, and 4.4. Please confirm where UMD would prefer to find the following information:

a. Executive Management Summary

B. Key Personnel

Answer: Provide the Executive Management Summary in Section 1. Provide the Key Personnel in Section 2.2.

Question 5: Section 4.2.1 requests references demonstrating “expertise and experience in the analysis of executive compensation, particularly in the field of public higher education.” Please confirm what type of experience Offeror references should reflect, as well as the preferred number of references.

See the answer to Q2

Question 6: The coverage requirements in the Insurance Addendum appear to be misaligned with the type and scale of advisory services required under this contract. Food Products Liability Insurance does not appear to apply to real estate advisory. Additionally, the $2M coverage for both personal injury and each occurrence under Commercial General Liability

Insurance is a higher standard than seen in similar state and municipal advisory contracts. We respectfully request UMD to eliminate the food products liability coverage and reduce the Commercial General Liability requirements for both personal injury and each occurrence to $1M?

Amendment Number A002

Answer: The food products liability insurance is not required for this project.

Question 7: Similarly, the Network Security & Privacy Liability coverage appears to be misaligned with the requested advisory services. We respectfully request this insurance requirement to be removed.

Answer: The Network Security & Privacy Liability insurance is not required for this project.

Question 8: Section 5.1 of the Technical Requirements Matrix requires respondents to, “quantify the economic benefit as a percentage of the Offeror’s total Proposed Price.” Given the on-call nature of this contract and that the Price Proposal Form

(Attachment 1) requires only hourly rates, rather than a total price, how would the university like respondents to represent their economic benefits to the state?

Answer: Offerors should identify the estimated percentage of their proposed hourly rates that will provide an economic benefit to the

State of Maryland. This may include compensation paid to Maryland-based personnel, purchases from Maryland businesses, and applicable overhead for offices located in Maryland. Since this is an on-call contract, the percentage should be based on the Offeror’s proposed hourly-rate structure rather than a total contract price.

Question 9: The Price Proposal Form includes space for up to 10 individuals. Can respondents add rows for additional personnel to meet UMD’s requirements?

Answer: Yes, if necessary.

Question 10:The Technical Requirements Matrix requires respondents in some cases to Explain how our solution meets this requirement, but requires us to Demonstrate it in others. Can you please differentiate an explanation versus a demonstration?

Answer: Explain and Demonstrate are used to describe the same thing.

Question 11: Section 4.1 – can you clarify what customer service means here? Is it intended to be different than the contractor main point of contact?

Its intended to be the customer service representative and contact information for the Contractor.

Question 12: Section 4 .2.2 - Please confirm that the University may request financial statements but is not expecting groups to include these within their submission at this time.

Answer: Confirmed

Question 13: Will there be an opportunity for firms to request changes to the terms laid out in the RFP—should any exceptions be included in our proposal?

No