ESBD_367554_1721750703793_SOL_ADD_1_405-24R0004808A.pdf

Procurement and Contract Services

Revised-March 10, 2015 PCS form 004

ADDENDUM OF SOLICITATION

1. SOLICITATION NO.

405-24R0004808A

2. ADDENDUM NO.

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

7/23/2024

4. ISSUED BY

Department of Public Safety Procurement and Contract Services 5805 North Lamar Blvd. Bldg. A 1st floor Austin, Texas 78752

5. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR

6. The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 7. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this addendum prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 5 and 8, and returning 3 copies of the addendum; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this addendum on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or e-mail which includes a reference to the solicitation and addendum numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER.

If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by e-mail or letter, provided each e-mail or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this addendum, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

7. DESCRIPTION OF ADDENDUM:

The purpose of this addendum is to correct the numbering in Section C Scope of Work and answer vendor questions per Section D.11 ANTICIPATED SCHEDULE OF EVENTS.

SOLICITATION SECTION C NUMBERING SEQUENCING CORRECTIONS

C.6 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES correction C.8 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES

C.7 HISTORICALLY UNDERUTILIZED BUSINESSES (HUB) PARTICIPATION correction C.9 HISTORICALLY

UNDERUTILIZED BUSINESSES (HUB) PARTICIPATION

C.8 INSURANCE REQUIRED UNDER THE CONTRACT correction C.10 INSURANCE REQUIRED UNDER THE

CONTRACT

C.9 CRIMINAL HISTORY BACKGROUND CHECK correction C.11 CRIMINAL HISTORY BACKGROUND CHECK

C.10 GENERAL CONFIDENTIALITY REQUIREMENTS correction C.12 GENERAL CONFIDENTIALITY

REQUIREMENTS

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the solicitation, as heretofore changed, remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

8a. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or Print)

8b. OFFEROR

(Signature of Person Authorized to Sign) Date Signed

VENDOR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

1. Section B.4 Mandatory Pricing Schedule. Is DPS interested in additional items not currently detailed in the price list? While it’s understood pricing will be evaluated based on the schedule provided, DPS may benefit from additional items such as rush testing services, biogeographical ancestry analysis, and investigative outreach services. As such, can the Respondent provide supplementary items for inclusion in the contract if awarded? Yes, as long as they are separate and in addition to the mandatory pricing schedule. The mandatory pricing schedule must be answered as written.

2. Section C.2 Scope Section C.2. f.4 states that “contractor must not place samples from any other contract or agency on a plate containing samples from DPS.” Can DPS confirm that the requirement for dedicated plate runs applies to both STR analysis and SNP analysis? Vendor can provide the separate cost for dedicated plate runs and grouped together plate runs.

3. General Question about Price of Third-Party Databases: If the companies that own FamilyTree DNA and GEDmatch increase the upload price during the term of vendor’s contract with DPS, will DPS adjust the contract to allow vendor to be reimbursed by DPS for the increased amount? DPS must be notified in advance and approve list price increases before being billed or invoiced.

4. Section B.4 Mandatory Pricing Schedule, Question 1: Is DPS interested in additional items not currently detailed in the price list? While it’s understood pricing will be evaluated based on the schedule provided, DPS may benefit from additional items such as rush testing services, biogeographical ancestry analysis, and investigative outreach services. As such, can the Respondent provide supplementary items for inclusion in the contract if awarded? See answer to Question 1.

5. Question 2: For the Testimony line item, can DPS confirm that the unit is per day? Is the pricing inclusive of travel costs?

Expert court testimony is per day. Travel costs are not included.

6. Section C.2 Scope Question 3a: Section C.2.A.3 states that “the vendor must offer the option to stop testing after the qualification step for samples containing insufficient human DNA for further processing.” For the Genetic Genealogy portion of this award, the successful building of an uploadable DNA profile can be predicted by vendors. Therefore, does DPS require that a vendor stop casework at the FGG quality verification step (similar to stop at quantification for STR profile testing)? All work must stop once the sample is determined unsuitable for STR or FGG, until further DPS approval is provided. If DPS provides approval to continue, then DPS will cover the additional testing costs.

7. Question 3b: If “yes” to question 3a, does DPS require that the vendor not charge for any work performed beyond the quality verification step? This would be pre-SNP test assessment.

8. Question 4: Section C.2.f.4 states that “contractor must not place samples from any other contract or agency on a plate containing samples from DPS.” Can DPS confirm that the requirement for dedicated plate runs applies to both STR analysis and SNP analysis? See question 2.

9. Question 5: The best way to ensure samples from other contracts and agencies are not run with DPS samples is to require that the contractor must not place samples from any other contract or agency on the same microarray chip or DNA sequencing run as samples from DPS. Can DPS confirm that this is what is being requested? Yes

10. Section C.2.3 SNP Analysis, Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) and Mixtures, Question 6: Can DPS confirm that all individual genealogists working on DPS cases should have a track record of solving criminal cases for law enforcement as demonstrated by providing a list of at least ten publicly-verifiable case solves using in-house laboratory technology? Proven track records of working criminal cases with law enforcement will be given priority consideration.

11. Section C.3.2 Contractor Qualification, Question 7: Section C.2.3.B. Can DPS please confirm that reference testing, which assists in inferring kinship–and includes laboratory processing, analysis, and reporting–must be performed utilizing in-house laboratory services and analysis must utilize in-house tools to perform the analysis (no outsourcing lab/analysis and no upload to a database to protect privacy of reference testers)? This section applies to determining the closeness of the relationships, i.e., 3rd to 4th cousins, etc.

12. Section C.3.1 Contractor Requirements, Question 8: Section C.3.1.B.1.a. states that the vendor's laboratory will meet chain of custody requirements. Does DPS require evidence of successful admission to court where chain of custody was established for each type of testing service for both STR and FGG services, or any service for which the Respondent bids? No

13. Section C.3.2 Contractor Qualification, Question 9: Because this proposal does not require Texas licensing and accreditation for FGG testing at the time of bid response, should the number of in-house publicly-verifiable case solves, which is evidence of FGG success, be taken into consideration rather than the years of accredited experience or the number/years of experience of Texas licensed analysts, which likely indicates unrelated experience with non-FGG forensic testing? For new technologies like FGG, practical experience is likely a better indicator of capability and future success. Yes

14. Section C.4 Deliverables, Question 10: Section C.4.A.1.h. requires a court ready written report as a deliverable. Because FGG is new technology and precedent is contemporarily being set in court, accreditation alone may not guarantee successful admission of a report into court. Can DPS confirm that the Respondent has experience defending such a report in a successfully-resolved jury trial for each type of testing service for which the Respondent bids? Testifying and defending FGG in cross examination is very different from defending standard STR testing. The vendors accreditation will cover this.

15. Please clarify if PowerPlex Y23 is the TxDPS preferred kit, similar to the annotation in C.2.A.5. Yes

16. Will the answers to questions provided for solicitation 405-24R0004808; Addendum no. 1 remain true and accurate for solicitation 405-24R0004808A? Yes

17. Revisions to TxDPS document "ESBD_367554-1720622681306_SOL_PST_405-24R0004808A_952-48.pdf" resulted in inconsistent paragraph numbering/markings in Section C. To ensure consistent referencing of this document by Respondents, will TxDPS provide an updated document that updates Section C numbering? Yes, addressed in section number 7 of this addendum.