BTC-2024-RFP-003 Addendum No. 1.docx
DOCX document 61 KB Posted
- Attached to
- External Evaluation Services State and local contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- BTC2024FRP003
- Issued by
- Walla Walla County, Whatcom County, Washington
About this file
This document is an addendum to Request for Proposal #BTC-2024-RFP-003 for External Evaluator Services issued by Bellingham Technical College (BTC) in Washington state. The addendum provides responses to questions submitted by interested bidders regarding the proposed budget and evaluation criteria for this project. The RFP seeks external evaluation services for a Department of Education cooperative Title III grant, with a maximum annual cost of $16,000 for a 5-year term, totaling $80,000. BTC established this budget in consultation with an external evaluator, though an evaluator was not involved in writing the RFP. The addendum clarifies that the maximum cost is not adjustable, but applicants can submit estimates lower than or equal to this amount, and BTC is not obligated to award to the lowest price. The evaluation criteria include pricing, though the addendum acknowledges this may be an unfair comparison for solo evaluators. An external evaluator was previously hired for the project but has since departed.
Regarding pricing, the addendum states that the colleges are seeking the best value proposal based on the evaluation criteria, not necessarily the lowest price. The original $16,000 annual budget was established in consultation with an external evaluator, though an evaluator was not involved in writing the RFP. The addendum also notes that an external evaluator was previously hired for the project but has since departed.
View the file
Other files for this state and local contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| BTC-2024-RFP-003 Addendum No. 2.docx | DOCX document | |
| External Evaluator Services BTC-2024-RFP-003.docx | DOCX document | |
| BTC-2024-RFP-003 Addendum No. 3.docx | DOCX document | |
| BTC-2024-RFP-003 Addendum No. 4.docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
3028 Lindbergh Avenue Bellingham WA 98225 360.752.8343
From: Melisa Nelson, Director of Purchasing To: All interested bidders Date: September 24, 2024 Subject: Addendum to Request for Proposal #BTC-2024-RFP-003, External Evaluator Services Addendum #1:
The purpose of this addendum is to provide additional information in answer to a submitted question(s).
Here is a summary of the email that introduced the questions submitted:
The proposed budget appears too low for this level of work based on this firm’s experience.
Question 1:
Is the budget malleable? This is a problem as well because losing 18 points makes a proposal uncompetitive.
Answer – Question 1:
The maximum cost for external evaluation noted in the RFP ($16,000 annually x 5 years, $80,000 total) is already factored into the grant budget and is not adjustable.
Question 2:
Why is pricing used in the evaluation criteria when the price is stated in the RFP? Using price as a numerator/denominator comparison is an unfair comparison to solo evaluators who low ball a price quote but do not have the necessary skills (in many cases) to do the work appropriately. But the points are lost making a competition difficult to win based on price alone, especially for 18 points/percent.
Answer – Question 2:
Your concern is noted. Applicants may submit an estimate lower than or equal to the maximum cost. The Colleges are not obligated to award a contract to the lowest priced Proposal and may accept the Proposal that they determine provides the best value to the Colleges based upon evaluation criteria described.
Question 3:
How did BTC come up with the $20,000/year price? How was this advised?
Answer – Question 3:
This maximum cost ($16,000 annually x 5 years, $80,000 total) was established in the original proposal in consultation with an external evaluator.
Question 4:
It sounds like there was no evaluation during the first year. Is there a reason an evaluator was not hired from the start?
Answer – Question 4:
An external evaluator was hired at project start but has departed the project.
Question 5:
Was an evaluator involved in the writing of the original proposal or/and this RFP?
Answer – Question 5:
An evaluator was involved in writing a sub-section of the original proposal. An evaluator was not involved in writing this RFP.
This addendum shall become part of the original Request for Information and shall be properly signed, executed, and returned, along with the formal proposal response, by 4:00 pm on October 11, 2024.
Regards, Melisa Nelson Director of Purchasing Administrative Services
| Company Name: ________________________________ | Signature: ___________________________________ |
| Address: _________________________________________ | Title: _________________________________________ |
| City/State/Zip: ___________________________________ | Date: ________________________________________ |
image1.jpeg image2.jpg
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .