Full List of Submitted Questions with Answers.pdf

Questions Grouped by Topic Area NOTE: These questions are in response to Version 1 of the RFQ and responses may not be applicable to Version 2. Page numbers and sections may not align with the current version.

Questions below may seem redundant, but we are required to respond to all questions as originally submitted.

Scope of Work and Program Area Requirements

Reconstruction/Rehabilitation Services (Task 2) Q1: Pre-Designed Floor Plans & Standard Specifications

● RFQ Reference: Section II(A)(2) (Reconstruction/Rehabilitation Administration Services, p. 3).

● Text Reference: "Provide pre-designed residential floor plan options for disaster survivors..."

● Inquiry: Is a vendor required to include a complete catalog of pre-designed residential architectural plans within this initial RFQ submittal, or will floor plan submittals and approvals occur after award during the Master Task Order execution or Mini-RFP stage?

A1: This is not a requirement but a vendor may elect to do so when demonstrating their ability to perform the task order program area.

Q2: Pages 6-8. Are lead-based paint evaluation and clearance, asbestos surveys, and radon testing and mitigation within the scope of Program Area 2, or will these be performed by a separate environmental provider?

A2: Those details will depend upon the scale and scope of the disaster and the nature of the housing stock. Applicants should have a strong knowledge of environmental compliance and be prepared to perform those services either in-house or through subcontracts or partnerships.

Q3: Pages 6-8, 13. Section II(A) identifies six task order program areas, but the section numbers eight items. Please confirm whether II(A)(3) Miscellaneous and II(A)(4) Additional Requirements are separate program areas or requirements within Program Area 2, and how respondents should account for them within the ten-page experience limit.

A3: Confirmed that Task 3 and Task 4 are not distinct tasks, but part of Task 2.

Q4: Page 7. Section II4. Additional Requirements, mention requirements such as performing all reconstruction and repairs, and providing associated labor, equipment, and materials. Can you confirm that part of the scope is to perform the reconstruction and repairs services?

A4: Yes.

Q5: Page 6/8. The Reconstruction/Rehabilitation section initially describes administration, estimating, inspection, and construction oversight services;

however, the Additional Requirements subsequently require the provider to furnish professional labor, equipment, and materials; obtain permits; perform reconstruction and repairs; and provide warranties. Please confirm whether DOLA intends for the selected provider under this service area to perform any actual residential construction as a general contractor, in addition to construction administration and inspection services.

A5: Task #2 assumes a model where the State program will provide construction services directly, so under this task construction capabilities are required either in-house or through a subcontractor. Task #3 is more of the traditional grant and loan program for reconstruction or rehab in which the homeowner would typically contract directly with the builder.

Q6: Page 6-8. If direct construction is included in Program Area 2, may a respondent qualify for construction administration, damage assessment, estimating, inspection, and construction management services without qualifying to self-perform residential construction, or must a respondent demonstrate capability to perform all elements listed within Program Area 2 to receive qualification in that area?

A6: See A5.

Q7: In reference to RFQ Section A. Task Order Program Areas and Qualifications, item 2. Reconstruction / Rehabilitation of Residential Dwellings (pages 6 and 7)

- if a respondent proposes services only for the Program Management component of Reconstruction/Rehabilitation, is the respondent still eligible to be awarded this task order program area, or must the respondent provide all services associated with Reconstruction/Rehabilitation to be considered for an award?

A7: See A5.

Q8: Page 7-8. Can DOLA please confirm that these requirements do not apply to the current scope of work?

A8: Those requirements apply to Task #2, which is a model where the State would provide construction services to disaster survivors.

Q9: Page 6 – Reconstruction/Rehabilitation of Residential Dwellings; For residential reconstruction and rehabilitation activities, can DOLA clarify the expected role of the contractor with respect to pre-design services? Specifically, will contractors be expected to develop floor plans and design documents, or will existing plans be provided for use in cost estimating, rehabilitation planning, and construction management activities?

A9: Contractors are expected to provide or develop floor plans and design documents.

Q10: Page 7 – Additional Requirements; Can DOLA clarify whether responsibilities such as obtaining permits, securing homeowner association approvals, providing workmanship warranties, third-party structural warranties, and obtaining any required flood insurance policies are expected to be performed by the construction contractor performing the work or by the contractor providing administration, construction management, and oversight services?

A10: Tasks 3 and 4 are not separate tasks, but part of Task 2 (this is due to a formatting error during the document conversion process). Standalone construction management is not a separate task and will not be considered separately from Task 2.

Buyouts (Task 4)

Q11: RFQ p.9; §II.A.7 (Buyout Program)

For the Buyout Program, please confirm the federal appraisal and acquisition standards DOLA expects (e.g. Uniformed Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policy Act in 49 CFR Part 24, and applicable HUD or FEMA requirements).

A11: The program administrator must ensure all acquisitions comply with URA (49 CFR Part 24) and applicable HUD CDBG-DR notices. The program administrator will be expected to procure and manage appraisals and perform appraisal reviews. Appraisers must hold an active license in the State of Colorado.

Valuations typically require establishing the pre-disaster fair market value.

Q12: RFQ p.9; §II.A.7 (Buyout Program)

Will the contract be expected to procure and manage appraisals, perform appraisal review, or both? Please confirm if appraisers must be licensed in Colorado?

A12: The contractor will be responsible for appraisals being completed and reviewed. The RFQ does not dictate whether these are completed directly or through a subcontractor. Yes, appraisers must be licensed in Colorado.

Rental Assistance (Task 5) Q11: Pages 8–9 – Grant & Loan Administration / Rental Assistance; For housing assistance, rental assistance, and loan programs involving applicant payments, will DOLA disburse funds directly through State systems, or will contractors be responsible for payment processing? If contractors will process payments, will funds be advanced, reimbursed, or otherwise provided prior to disbursement?

A11: Contractors will be responsible for payment processing. Typically the State works on a reimbursement basis for the principal payments. For our current program, loan servicers are reimbursed on a per transaction basis and the loan repayments are transferred to the State. Other models may be considered if they are in the best interest of the program.

Transitional Housing (Task 6) Q12: Page 9 – Transitional & Intermediate Housing Services; The scope states that

Transitional and Intermediate Housing Services may include replacement housing, factory-built housing, and semi-permanent construction. Can DOLA clarify whether contractors are expected to directly implement these construction-related activities, or whether the scope is limited to program development, administration, oversight, monitoring, and coordination of such services?

A12: Construction related activities may be provided in-house or through a subcontract.

Federal Requirements Q15: Pages 6-7. For multi-family projects that trigger Davis-Bacon labor standards or

Section 3 requirements, is labor standards compliance monitoring expected to be performed under Program Area 2, or retained by DOLA or the Subrecipient?

A15: Specific compliance requirements will be detailed in the task order and will differ depending on whether the program is a state-run or subrecipient model.

Applicants should have the ability to conduct compliance monitoring in accordance with federal regulations.

Q16: Page 8. Please confirm whether environmental review and clearance activities (e.g., NEPA, environmental review records, and historic preservation review) are expected to be performed by the selected contractor under future task orders, or whether DOLA or another responsible entity will retain ultimate responsibility for environmental clearance determinations."

A16: Environmental review and clearance activities (e.g., NEPA, environmental review records, and historic preservation review) are expected to be performed by the selected contractor under future task orders.

Q17: Page 9 – Eligibility Determination & Duplication of Benefits; Will contractors be responsible for verifying applicant benefits against FEMA, SBA, NFIP, insurance carriers, and other funding sources as part of eligibility determinations and Duplication of Benefits reviews? If so, will DOLA provide access to relevant data sources and data-sharing agreements, or will contractors be expected to obtain access independently?

A17: The program administrator will be responsible for conducting DOB reviews and verifying applicant benefits against sources such as FEMA, SBA, NFIP, and private insurance. DOLA will maintain the necessary federal data-sharing agreements and will grant the program administrator authorized access to these data sources to perform the verifications.

Communications and Outreach

Q18: Pages 9-11. Does DOLA anticipate that communications and outreach services may be procured as a standalone task order, or will these services generally be incorporated into task orders under the six identified program areas?

A18: Communications and outreach services are included under Section II.B General Program Management and Implementation Requirements for all Task Orders.

Q19: Pages 9-11. For purposes of this RFQ, should respondents demonstrate the capacity to lead public outreach and community engagement activities, including public meetings and applicant intake events, or is the contractor’s anticipated role primarily to support activities directed by DOLA or local jurisdictions?

A19: See requirements under Section II.B General Program Management and Implementation Requirements for all Task Orders

Q20: Pages 9–11 – Program Operations; The RFQ requires field offices, bilingual customer service, scalability, case management, and call center support, but does not identify anticipated applicant volumes. Will staffing assumptions, call volumes, office requirements, coverage areas, and service-level expectations be identified within individual task orders?

A20: Yes. For the purposes of evaluation, you may provide assumptions.

Language, Reference, and Formatting Corrections

Language and Reference Q21: RFQ p.4, §I.B; p.13, §II.E.3.a; p.15, §IV.B.4 and §IV.B.6

Several instances appear to reference other solicitations: “Colorado Main Street Program” (Section I.B), “DDD Program” (Section II.E.3.a), “Main Street projects” (Section IV.B.4) and “Section III.B.7” (Section IV.B.6). Please confirm if these references are intended for the Disaster Resilience Rebuilding (DRR) Program and corresponding sections of this RFQ.

A21: Main Street language does not apply to this RFQ and will be removed.

Q22: RFQ p.15, §IV.B.3.c

The link provided in item 3.C appears to be the Main Streets Project Program.

Will the government confirm (a) the link, (b) associated qualifications (Tied to Section II of SOQ) necessary to be completed via the Google Form, (c) whether it should be completed once per respondent or once per submission, and (d), whether respondents will receive a confirmation of submission?

A22: See A21.

Q23: RFQ p.15, §IV.B.4

The evaluation criteria for Management, Staff, Personnel summary indicate that “the qualifications of the individuals included and a determination about their ability to complete Main Street projects successfully”. Please confirm that the qualifications will be assessed against ability to perform services under the 6 areas included under Section II. Requirements and Potential Services and not against “Main Street Projects”

A23: See A21.

Q24: Can the State please confirm the evaluation criteria is accurate? Currently the evaluation criteria includes evaluating “Qualifications” inclusive of the minimum requirements and requires respondents to complete a google form for Main Street projects. Will this specific contract cover Main Street projects? Can the State also provide minimum qualifications as that is not currently specific in the solicitation documents.

A24: See A21.

Q25: The RFQ includes references to "Main Street" and "DDD." Please confirm whether these apply to this solicitation.

A25: See A21.

Q26: Pages 4, 13, 15. The RFQ contains references to the “Colorado Main Street Program,” “DDD Program,” and “Main Street projects.” Please confirm that these are legacy/template references and should be interpreted as referring to the Disaster Resilience Rebuilding (DRR) Program and DRR projects for purposes of this solicitation.

A26: See A21.

Q27: Page 15. Please confirm whether the Pre-qualification Google Form is required for this Solicitation; it refers to the Colorado Main Street Program.

A27: See A21.

Q28: In addition, can the State confirm the description of the evaluation for the Management, Staff, Personnel Summary is accurate? The evaluation criteria also mentions Main Street projects rather than the Disaster Resilience Rebuilding Program.

A28: See A21.

Q29: In RFQ Section IV. Evaluation Process, item B.3.c (page 15) there is a link to a Google form that must be completed as part of the solicitation [link from RFQ].

This form references DOLA’s “Main Street Program.” Is this the correct form to complete, or is there an updated link for a form specifically related to pre-disaster services?

A29: Main Street language and forms were included in error. The revised version of the RFQ will correct these errors.

Q30: For purposes of Qualifications to be evaluated, is the provided Google Link the sole place where that information should be provided or can it also be included in the body of the RFQ response?

A30: See A29.

Q31: Are the “Pre-qualified service areas” listed in the Google Form the sole basis upon which respondents will be evaluated for Qualifications as provided for on page 15 of the RFQ?

A31: See A29.

Q32: The “Pre-qualified service areas” in the Google Form linked to the RFQ pertain to qualifications related to organizing, designing, promoting, performing economic vitality, and other general services in furtherance of “Main Street” projects. How do these service areas tie to the demonstration of qualifications with respect to the Task Order Program Areas and Qualifications on page 6 of the RFQ and any related DRR programming?

A32: See 29.

Q33: For purposes of being evaluated for Qualifications as stipulated on page 15 in the RFQ, will the respondent be scored solely based on the content provided in the Google Form?

A33: See A29.

Q34: Do the resumes of key individuals to be included need to address the Main Street qualifications in the linked Google Form and the relevant experience listed among the Task Order Program Areas?

A34: See A29.

Q35: Page 15: The Prequalified Service Areas Google Form and RFQ mention the Main Street Program. Will that program be connected with the DRR and CDBGDR programs?

A35: See A29.

Q36: Page 15. Is the link provided in the RFQ for Qualifications the correct Google Form? It is requesting qualifications for organization, design and promotion.

A36: See A29.

Q37: Page 15. Will the qualifications be evaluated only on the responses in the google form, or can we insert a brief section on qualifications for consideration in the response document?

A37: See A29.

Q38: SOQ Instructions; The RFQ states that respondents must clearly identify the service areas for which they seek qualification; however, it does not specify where this information should be provided. Can DOLA clarify the preferred method for identifying selected service areas (e.g., cover letter, qualifications narrative, Google Form, or another location)?

A38: See A29.

Q39: In Section IV. Evaluation Process, 3. Qualifications (30 points), page 15, there is a requirement to complete the qualifications using the link included for a Google Form. When the link for the form is selected, the pre-qualified services areas do not match the service areas of the RFQ. Please confirm this is the correct form to complete in order to obtain the 30 points noted in the evaluation criteria or will the Google Form be updated to reflect the scope of work in the

RFQ.

A39: See A29.

Q40: The Pre-Qualified Service Areas survey linked on page 15 refers to 5 different categories of service areas: Organization, Design, Promotion, Economic Vitality, and General. Should Respondents select individual service areas within any specific category, or select any individual service area in which Respondents are qualified across any category?

A40: Requirements and scoring criteria will be further clarified with the amended

RFQ.

Q41: The RFQ references key individuals performing work as awarded by the DDD Program. Can DOLA please clarify what the DDD Program is?

A41: This is a typo and should have read DRR, Disaster Resilience Rebuilding Program.

Formatting Q42: RFQ p.5, §I.B (item numbering); p.17 (List of Exhibits)

The number list in Section 1.B skips from item 2 to item 5, and the List of Exhibits notes Exhibit C is not included. Please confirm that no inquiry or submittal instructions were omitted and that no Exhibit C is required for submission.

A42: These were intentionally omitted.

Q43: RFQ p.6-8, §II.A (Items 3 and 4)

Section II.A introduces 6 program areas but the body numbers 8 items, with “Miscellaneous” (item 3) and “Additional Requirements” (item 4) placed after Reconstruction/Rehabilitation. Please confirm that items 3 and 4 apply only to respondents pursuing

Reconstruction/Rehabilitation of Residential Dwellings. Confirm how respondents should reference service areas: by the 6-area numbering in the intro or by the item numbering in the body.

A43: Items 3 and 4 show up as separate items due to a formatting issue and should be subbullets under #2 Reconstruction/Rehabilitation of Residential Dwellings.

Please use the 6 areas in the introduction.

Q44: The introduction lists six program areas, and the program area section lists eight. Which numbering should respondents use when identifying the areas they are pursuing?

A44: See A43.

Q45: Pages 6-8, 13. Section II(A) identifies six task order program areas, but the section numbers eight items. Please confirm whether II(A)(3) Miscellaneous and II(A)(4) Additional Requirements are separate program areas or requirements within Program Area 2, and how respondents should account for them within the ten-page experience limit.

A45: See A43.

Q46: Pages 8 & 10 – Housing Recovery Program Guidelines; The RFQ references DOLA Housing Recovery Program Guidelines but does not include them as an attachment. Can DOLA provide the current version of the guidelines or indicate where they may be accessed?

A46: Yes. Housing Recovery Program Policies. Note that these guidelines are subject to change.

Q47: On page 6 of the RFQ, six Task Order Program Areas are initially mentioned but in the subsequent subparts, an additional two Program Areas -- “Miscellaneous” and “Additional Requirements” are included, totaling eight. Is it DOLA’s expectation that these latter two are separate program areas that should be pursued separately and for which any response would be counted towards the overall 10-page limit?

A47: This will be better addressed in the revised RFQ.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LHOmHRUBaJ4Saxa11pwUOyJW7fodcV2X/view?usp=sharing

Submission Rules and Solicitation Requirements

Formatting - Page Limits

Q48: RFQ p.13, §II.E.4

Do cover pages, table of contents, tab dividers count toward the Experience page limits?

A48: No.

Q49: Page 1. The resume requirements state there is no page limit; however, they also require resumes to be one page. Please confirm whether there is no page limit or whether each resume must be one page. There is no resume page limit, only the requirement that each one is no more than one (1) page in length.

A49: For ease of evaluation, DOLA requests only 1-page resumes. There is no limit to the number of resumes you can include.

Q50: RFQ Section E. Outline of Statement of Qualifications, item 4.a.i (page 13) states “Descriptions shall be no more than two (2) pages in length per service area (no more than ten (10) pages total).” As there are six (6) task order program areas, should the total page count of this section instead be limited to twelve (12) pages, still limiting each task order program areas’ description to two (2) pages?

A50: This is correct. 12-pages total with each program area being 2-pages. This will also be better addressed in the modified version of the RFQ.

Q51: RFQ section II.E.4.a.i. states that “Descriptions shall be no more than two (2) pages in length per service area (no more than ten (10) pages total).” Section II.A. Task Order Program Areas and Qualifications seems to state there are 6 program areas. Will DOLA please confirm Respondents may include a total of 12 pages of information maximum?

A51: See A50 above.

Q52: Page 13 – Experience Requirements; Section 4(a)(i) states that experience descriptions shall be “no more than two (2) pages in length per service area” and “no more than ten (10) pages total.” Section II(A) identifies eight service areas. If respondents seek qualification in all eight service areas, a two-page response per service area would allow up to 16 pages, which appears to conflict with the overall ten-page limit. Additionally, Service Areas 2 (Reconstruction/Rehabilitation of Residential Dwellings), 3 (Miscellaneous Construction Services), and 4 (Additional Requirements) appear closely related.

Can DOLA clarify: (1) whether these service areas may be combined; (2) whether the two-page limit applies to each service area individually; and (3) how the ten-page overall limit should be applied?

A52: See A50 above.

Q53: Section III, E.4.a.i states that experience descriptions shall be no more than two

(2) pages per service area and no more than ten (10) pages total. Since the RFQ identifies six (6) service areas, which would allow up to twelve (12) pages at two pages per service area, please clarify whether respondents addressing all six service areas may submit up to twelve (12) pages, or whether the Experience section is limited to ten (10) pages total regardless of the number of service areas addressed.

A53: See A50 above.

Q54: Please confirm whether respondents are permitted to include 11" x 17" pages as part of their proposal submission and if these will be counted as one (1) page.

A54: Yes 11” x 17” pages are allowed and will be counted as 1 page.

Q55: Is it the expectation of DOLA that the up to 2 pages of relevant experiences for each pursued Task Order Program Area address every sub-bullet included in the RFQ for that Task Order?

A55: No. Vendors should use their judgement in highlighting their most relevant experience.

Q56: Does any proposed additional or amended language to Exhibit A – Master Task Order Contract, count toward the 10-page limit?

A56: Feedback on the State of Colorado Master Task Order Contract is outside the scope of the proposal. Any issues or recommendations should be addressed post award.

Formatting - Organization

Q57: Please confirm whether respondents have flexibility in how the descriptions of the task order program areas are organized and presented, or whether they must strictly adhere to the organizational structure provided in the RFQ.

A57: Submissions are expected to follow the organizational structure provided in the

RFQ.

Submission Content

Q58: Multiple Submissions & Dual Role Participation

● RFQ Reference: Section I(A) (Overview and Administrative Information, p. 2) and Section III(E)(3) (Management, Staff, Personnel Summary, p. 5).

● Text Reference: "Respondents must indicate if it intends to provide these services in-house with existing staff or through subcontracting or partnership arrangements." [Section I(A)].

● Inquiry: Is a vendor permitted to participate in multiple submissions under this RFQ? Specifically:

1. May a firm submit a standalone SOQ as a Prime Contractor for a single task area (e.g., Task Area 2: Reconstruction/Rehabilitation)?

2. Simultaneously, may that same firm be included as a designated Subcontractor or Teaming Partner on a separate, full-scope SOQ submitted by a Prime Contractor (e.g., a joint submission covering Tasks 1 through 8)?

3. Does DOLA restrict or prohibit a subcontractor from appearing on more than one prime respondent's proposal?

A58: Yes for 1 and 2. No for 3.

Q59: Page 17 – Required Forms & Exhibits; Are Exhibits B, D, E, and any other required forms expected from all named subcontractors, or only from the prime respondent?

A59: Only from the Prime.

Q60: Master Task Order Contract; If a subcontractor is identified in the SOQ and included as part of the awarded team, does that satisfy the contract requirement for prior written approval of subcontracting relationships?

A60: Yes. This will of course be approved again as part of any individual task order approval.

Q61: RFQ p.15, §IV.B.3.a-b

Section Iv.B.3. refers to “minimum requirements” and “additional qualifications”. Please identify what the minimum requirements are (for example, the “shall be capable of performing, at a minimum” lists in Sections II.A and II.B) and what constitutes an additional qualification.

A61: Requirements and scoring criteria will be further clarified with the amended

RFQ.

Q62: RFQ p.13, §II.E.4a-b; p.15; §IV.B.5; p.13-14 §II.E.6

May the Experience section include relevant projects performed by proposed key personnel while employed at other firms, provided that the project is clearly identified as such? May references be provided for projects performed by key personnel at prior firms?

A62: Yes, if clearly identified.

Q63: Page 15 – Qualifications; Can respondents include subcontractor qualifications and experience within the Qualifications Form, or should only the prime contractor’s qualifications be included?

A63: Subcontractor qualifications can also be included.

Q64: Page 13. Can experience also be demonstrated by years of experience of a proposed staff member earned while working for a different vendor than the one who is submitting this SOQ?

A64: Yes.

Q65: Page 13 – Experience & Personnel Evaluation; May respondents rely upon and receive evaluation credit for the qualifications, experience, and key personnel of named subcontractors and teaming partners in the same manner as prime contractor experience?

A65: Yes.

Q66: Is it DOLA’s expectation that any persons to be considered as “key individuals you believe will perform work should it be awarded by the DDD Program” should be included in response to this RFQ or can other key individuals be added over time in response to mini-RFPs by example?

A66: There will be flexibility to add individuals in responses to mini-RFPs.

Q67: Is it a requirement that key individuals be identified for each specific task?

A67: No, but it would be helpful where there are specialties.

Q68: Are there specific roles that DOLA wants to see represented among listed key Individuals?

A68: No. Largely this gives us insights into your organizational structure and approach to administration.

Q69: Are there specific staff titles that should explicitly be listed on the rate card?

A69: No.

Q70: Is it DOLA’s expectation that the 2-pages for detailing relevant experience for each pursued Task Order Program Area also demonstrate the respondent’s capabilities to meet all the subparts of Section B: General Program Management Implementation Requirements?

A70: The revised RFQ allows additional pages for General Program Management Implementation.

Q71: Page 13, Section 9 – References; Will DOLA accept third-party performance evaluations, such as CPARS reports, LOGHOUSE evaluations, or similar owner-completed performance assessments, in lieu of traditional project reference forms or questionnaires?

A71: Yes.

BidNet Submission

Q72: RFQ p.2 vs. p.3 (items 4, 5.a, and Note) Page 2 requires one emailed copy and one BidNet upload, while page 3 states proposals may only be submitted through BidNet.

Please confirm whether both an email copy and a BidNet upload are required. If an email copy is required, please state the maximum attachment size and confirm that the BidNet upload governs if the two differ or if the email is not received.

A72: One emailed copy AND one copy uploaded to Bidnet is required. The file size limit for email attachments is 25MB. Bidnet allows uploads of up to 250MB.

Q73: The RFQ lists submission by email to brenda.lujan@state.co.us and uploaded to BidNet in one place, and BidNet only in another. Please confirm the required submission method.

A73: See A72 above.

Q74: Page 2-3. Please clarify the required submission method. Page 2 states that one emailed copy and one copy uploaded to BidNet must be submitted, while page 3 states that proposals may be submitted only through BidNet and that bids will be received electronically via BidNet. Should respondents submit both an emailed PDF and a BidNet upload, or is the BidNet submission alone the official response?

A74: See A72 above.

Q75: The RFQ’s Vendor Self Service (VSS) and BidNet Registration section (page 2) states “One emailed copy of competitive quotation and one copy uploaded to the Rocky Mountain BidNet system … must be submitted” while the Rocky Mtn BidNet Website & Solicitation Page, Attachments and Terms & Conditions section (page 3) states “Proposals may only be submitted via the electronic submission on BidNet.” Please confirm if Respondents should submit their SOQs solely through BidNet or in addition to email.

A75: See A72 above.

Q76: We noted two separate bid profiles published on BidNet with the solicitation number NLAA2027000003: “PRE-DISASTER REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS - Disaster Resilience Rebuilding Program” and “Pre-Disaster DRR.” Please confirm to which of these bid profiles Respondents should refer and submit their Statement of Qualifications (SOQ).

A76: NLAA2027000003: “PRE-DISASTER REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS - Disaster Resilience Rebuilding Program”

Q77: In BidNet, there is a mandatory requirement to include “Total Bid Price”. Given the RFQ requests hourly rates and this will be a task order contract, please confirm that a “Total Bid Price” is required when submitting via BidNet, should we enter $0 for this requirements, or will the data field in BidNet be updated to reflect the cost format in the RFQ?

A77: The evaluation of the responses will include reasonableness of rates charged for key individuals. This is independent of the lump sum (though these rates lead up to the final amount). Respondents will enter a lump sum into Bidnet.

Bonding Q78: RFQ 78; MTOC 20-22. Section II(A)(4) requires respondents to "provide all necessary bonding." Please identify the type (bid, performance, payment) and amount of bonding anticipated, whether bonding will be required per task order or per project, and whether it applies to administration and inspection services.

A78: Bonding language, including dollar amounts, can be found in the example

MTOC.

Q79: Page 8. Please provide more information regarding the bond requirements for this opportunity. Provide all necessary bonding and insurance requirements.

A79: See A78 above.

EFT/W9 Forms

Q80: RFQ p.15, §IV.B.7

Section IV.B.7 refers to an EFT authorization form “included in the appendix.”

The form is not in the solicitation package. Please provide the form.

A80: Please see added Exhibit C.

Q81: Page 15. Please confirm which W-9 form is required or acceptable. The solicitation document specifies that proposers must use the May 2022 version;

however, the form provided to proposers, Exhibit D – State Substitute W-9 ADA Accessible – Digital Signature, is dated December 2022. Could you please clarify which version should be submitted?

You must attach a current W-9 (See Exhibit D) on the May 2022 form only. If you prefer Electronic Fund Transfer (EFT), please complete the authorization form included in the appendix (instructions included).

A81: The new December ADA form is the correct form. The EFT form will be attached to the modified RFQ.

Q82: RFQ section II.E.7. Completed Preferred Payment Method and Submission of Related Forms refers to an authorization form in the appendix. Could DOLA please provide this form for Respondents to complete?

A82: The EFT form and W-9 will be provided with the modified RFQ.

Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Businesses Q83: Page 14. Beyond the identified SDVOSB preference, will local Colorado firms, Colorado-based subcontractors, MBE/WBE firms, or other socioeconomic businesses receive consideration during future mini-RFP evaluations?

A83: Yes.

Q84: Page 15. The RFQ mentions a SOQ submitted by a SDVOSB may receive an additional 5 points during evaluation. If a firm subcontracts with SDVOSB for services on this SOQ, will there be any additional points during evaluation?

A84: With the revised scoring criteria, there are no explicit points for SDVOSB, but this will be considered within the personnel and staffing portion of the evaluation.

Q85: Can the Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) requirement be satisfied by a subcontractor of the respondent?

A85: Yes.

Q86: Section I.A asks Respondents to indicate whether they will provide services inhouse or through subcontracting or partnership arrangements. Will DOLA consider the Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) status of subcontractors when assessing the 5 point scoring benefit in Section II.E.5?

A86: See A85.

Contract Language Modifications Q87: Page 33. Will the State consider modifications to the indemnification section of the draft contract?

A87: No. The State Special Provisions are never modified per the Office of the State Controller.

Q88: Will the State consider the addition of a limitation of liability cap in the contract?

A88: No. The State Special Provisions are never modified per the Office of the State Controller.

Q89: Can any requested contract adjustments be provided as a redlined version of the Master Task Order Contract, acknowledging that the State Special Provisions cannot be adjusted, or should requested adjustments be included exclusively in the cover letter?

A89: Any requested adjustments to the State of Colorado Master Task Order Contract will be negotiated after the award process and prior to execution of the contract.

Submission Deadline Q90. Page 5. In order for bidders to effectively incorporate answers to questions, will

DOLA consider extending the submission due date to at least 10 days after releasing answers?

A90: DOLA has taken this into consideration and is extending the deadline for submission. The new deadline is October 16th at 5pm (MT).

Q91: Is DOLA willing and able to provide a two-week extension for responding beyond the current October 6, 2026, deadline?

A91: A 16 day extension has been provided.

Work Performed Outside Colorado

Q92: Exhibit E; Exhibit A MATOC §6.C

For Exhibit E, should services performed remotely by a respondent’s employees located in other U.S. states (for example, technical assistance or quality control) be reported as services performed outside of Colorado?

A92: These services must be reported as happening outside of Colorado. For consideration by the review committee.

Q93: May staff based outside Colorado perform remote work under task orders, such as program design, compliance review, and quality review, if the vendor bills no out-of-state travel?

A93: See A26 above.

Q94: Exhibit E; Does remote work performed by out-of-state subcontractor personnel constitute work performed “outside Colorado” and therefore require disclosure under Exhibit E?

A94: Yes.

Other Submission Questions Q95: RFQ p.12, §II.E.1.f; p.14, §II.E.7; Exhibit A MTOC §10 (p 20 – 21)

At the SOQ submission stage, must the ACORD show the State as an additional insured and all MTOC Section 10 coverages? Or is a current certificate evidencing the required limits sufficient, with endorsements provided at contract execution?

A95: Endorsements can wait until contract execution.

Q96: Exhibit A MTOC, Cover page and §2.BC; RFQ p. 11, §II.C

Please confirm if the 5-year period in Section II.C is the total contract duration including all extensions.

A96: Five years includes all extensions. The contract will be rebid every 5 years in accordance with State procurement rules.

Q97: Please clarify the appropriate return address for the Vendor Disclosure Statement Form, as the “Return To” field is currently blank.

A97: DOLA no longer receives paper copies; please submit this Form with the rest of your submission packet.

Pricing

Rates Q98: RFQ p.13, §II.E.3.a; p.12, §II.C; Exhibit A MTOC §4.B.i.d

Please confirm that respondents may also include rates by labor category for positions not tied to a named key individual, so that the most advantageous rate structure can be submitted and qualified staff added later can be billed?

A98: Confirmed.

Q99: Regarding section II.E.3.a., please confirm that Respondents may provide hourly rates associated with positions rather than proposed key personnel.

A99: See A98.

Q100: Page 13: Should the response include billable hourly rates for each type of professional on the potential task orders, or only for key individuals?

A100: Each type of professional on the potential task orders.

Q101:Section 4 – Management, Staff & Personnel Summary; The RFQ requests proposed hourly rates but does not identify labor categories or position classifications. Does DOLA have preferred labor categories or titles that respondents should use, or may respondents use their standard labor classifications? Additionally, will the rates submitted as part of the SOQ become the contract rate schedule for the five-year MTOC? If so, will rate escalation be permitted and may additional labor categories be added during future task orders, option periods, or mini-RFPs?

A101: Use your standard labor classifications. Reasonable adjustments may be made to rates and additional labor categories may be added in response to more specific mini-RFPs.

Q102: Master Task Order Contract; Under future task orders or mini-RFPs, may respondents add additional labor categories and rates when specialized expertise is required that was not included in the original SOQ submission?

A102: Yes.

Q103: On the Bidnet Solicitation, the bid submittal is requesting “lump sum” pricing.

Section 3. Management, Staff, Personnel Summary requests “hourly rates of key individuals”. Please confirm what is required to submit.

A103: The evaluation of the responses will include reasonableness of rates charged for key individuals. This is independent of the lump sum (though these rates lead up to the final amount).

Q104: Pages 11-12. Please confirm that in addition to the Contract Rates, Task Orders will be able to identify additional unit or material costs such as construction, appraisals, title and closing fees, etc.

A104: Yes.

Q105: Page 13 – Personnel Summary; For named subcontractor personnel, should loaded hourly rates reflect the subcontractor’s direct billed rate or the prime contractor’s billed rate including markup? If markup is permitted, is there a maximum allowable markup?

A105: All costs should be included including markup. This can be blended or itemized. There is no maximum allowable. However, larger markups will naturally be less competitive.

Q106:Page 10 – General Program Management & Implementation Requirements; If a contractor-provided PMIS and/or CRM solution is required under future task orders, should associated software licensing, hosting, configuration, maintenance, and user support costs be included in the SOQ response, incorporated into hourly rates, or proposed separately at the task-order level?

A106:If incorporated into hourly rates, be sure to include all components included in that blended rate. We recommend, but do not dictate that solution costs be counted separately so as not to skew hourly rates.

Q107: Section II.B requires field offices in affected areas, a turnkey Project Management Information System (PMIS), a customer relationship management system, and a bilingual call center. Section I.A excludes travel outside Colorado from reimbursement and from hourly rates. Will DOLA reimburse field office costs, system licenses, call center costs, and travel within Colorado as direct costs under a task order, or must Respondents include these costs in their hourly rates?

A107: Vendors may propose either model. Any blended rates need to clearly state what is included from those rates.

Adjustments for Inflation Q108: Exhibit A MTOC §2.c; Exhibit B TO MTOC (Sample Option Letter, Option 1(D))

Please confirm that DOLA will consider annual rate adjustments over the life of the contract through the “modify Contract rates” option in the Sample Option Letter, and that respondents should propose an escalation rate in the SOQ?

A108: This is correct. Adjustments for inflation etc. will be considered for use in an Option letter, but are not guaranteed.

Q109: Pages 11-12. Please confirm if the rates provided in the RFQ are the “Contract Rates” and if so, are they locked for the five-year term of the contract or is annual rate escalation allowed?

A109: See A108 above.

Q110: Page 12. RFQ Section C. Task Order Development states: “The total price of a Project shall be determined based on the rates described in the Contract, and Contractor shall not include any work in a Task Order for which an applicable rate is not provided in the Contract.” Does this mean that all anticipated labor rates must be included within this RFQ? Will it be possible for a contractor to add rates based on specific scopes of work or construction activities?

A110: See A108 above.

Q111: Are the proposed rates fixed for the 5-year term, or can assumptions be added for an additional percentage increase on an annual basis?

A111: See A108 above.

Q112: Master Task Order Contract; The Master Task Order Contract indicates that task-order pricing must be based on contract rates, but no rate exhibit is included. Will the loaded hourly rates submitted in the Personnel Summary become the contract rate schedule?

A112: In most cases yes. The State will allow for adjustments based on reasonable COLA adjustments or changes in personnel requirements.

Q113: Section II.C states that task order prices are based on the rates in the Contract and that no work may be included for which an applicable rate is not provided.

Section II.E.3.a asks only for the loaded hourly rates of key individuals. May Respondents submit a full schedule of labor category rates, and will that schedule become the rate exhibited by the Master Task Order Contract (MTOC)? Will the MTOC allow annual rate escalation over the five-year term?

A113: Rate adjustments will be allowed for reasonable changes including COLA adjustments. These will typically be handled at the task order level through the mini-RFP process.

Travel Costs Q114:Page 4. The RFQ states that travel outside the State cannot be billed, but that some in-state travel may be required. Can the bidder bill for travel-related expenses, such as per diem, hotels, rental cars, or mileage, if travel is required?

A114:Rental cars and mileage are the responsibility of the Contractor.

Q115:Page 4. Will travel be reimbursed for out-of-state personnel traveling to Colorado during a task order or event?

A115:No.

Q116:Pricing; Can DOLA clarify how travel costs should be addressed for this Master Task Order Contract? Specifically, should respondents assume that in-state travel costs are included within proposed loaded hourly rates, or may in-state travel be billed separately as a reimbursable direct expense under future task orders?

A116: Rates provided can be blended or separate provided it is clearly stated in the proposal.

General Task Order/Mini-RFP Questions Q117: Partial Scope / Standalone Submissions

● RFQ Reference: Section I(A) (Overview and Administrative Information, p. 2) and Section III(E)(4)(a) (Experience, p. 5).

● Text Reference: "Respondent must demonstrate the ability to perform one or more of the task order program areas listed to be considered eligible for an award..." [Section I(A)] and "Contractors should only respond to those areas of expertise that match their specific strengths and qualifications."

[Section III(E)(4)(a)].

● Inquiry: Can DOLA confirm that a vendor may submit a Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) proposing to perform only a single Task Order Program Area (specifically, Task Area 2: Reconstruction/Rehabilitation of Residential Dwellings) without submitting on administrative/grant management task areas (Tasks 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8)? Will standalone construction management/reconstruction submissions be evaluated and awarded a Master Task Order Contract independently for Task Area 2?

A117:Yes, a vendor may submit a SOQ proposing to perform only a single Task Order Program Area. Note that tasks 3 and 4 are not separate tasks, but part of Task 2 (this is due to a formatting error during the document conversion process).

Standalone construction management is not a separate task and will not be considered separately from Task 2.

Q118: Procurement Structure — Direct Task Order Allocation vs. Mini-RFP Secondary Competition

● RFQ Reference: Section I(D) ("Mini"- Request for Proposals (RFP), p. 2) and Section II(C) (Task Order Development, p. 4).

● Text Reference: "DOLA may either: 1) issue a Work Order directly to a Provider from the pool of qualified vendors solicited under this Solicitation to perform the identified services, as allowed by state law; or 2) present a competitive Request For Work Order Proposals ("RFWOP") to all Providers qualified under this RFQ..." [Section II(C)].

● Inquiry: Could DOLA clarify the criteria or threshold that determines whether a Work/Task Order will be awarded via direct allocation to a qualified pool vendor versus through a secondary "Mini-RFP" / RFWOP competition among pool members? Additionally, if a vendor is qualified in a single task area (e.g., Task Area 2: Reconstruction/Rehabilitation), will Mini-RFPs issued for that specific scope be solicited strictly among vendors qualified within that specific sub-category?

A118:The use of a direct work order or the RFWOP is at the sole discretion of the State. Factors such as urgency, scale of the need and alignment with core competencies of the vendor will drive this decision. Yes, only vendors qualified in a specific task area will be asked to submit a RFWOP.

Q119: RFQ p.6, §II.A.1; p.8-9, §II.A.5-6

Please confirm that a contractor that performs program design, unmet needs assessment, or action plan development under Scope Item 1 (Tech Assistance) is eligible to compete for implementation Tos (such as Grant and Loan Administration or Buyout) for the same program.

A119: Confirmed.

Q120: RFQ p. 9-11; §II.B

Section II.B lists general program management requirements for all task orders.

Must respondents demonstrate capability for every item in Section II.B to qualify for any service area, or only the items relevant to the areas they select?

A120: All tasks except for Task #1 (technical assistance) requires general program management and implementation services. Demonstrating capability for the identified items in Section II.B is only required for those service areas for which you are applying.

Q121: Pages 6-8. Section II(A)(2) requires respondents to be capable of performing "reconstruction/rehabilitation administration and construction services," and Section II(A)(4) lists obligations typically performed by a construction contractor (labor, equipment, materials, permits, bonding, and warranties). To qualify for Program Area 2, must a respondent be capable of both the administration/oversight services in II(A)(2) and the construction delivery obligations in II(A)(4)? Or may a respondent qualify for Reconstruction/Rehabilitation Administration Services only?

A121: Respondents should clearly indicate which tasks below that they are qualified for and provide a detailed narrative of its experience as relates to each of the task order program areas selected by the Respondent. Respondents must indicate if it intends to provide these services in-house with existing staff or through subcontracting or partnership arrangements. Both the administration/oversight services and the construction delivery obligation are requirements for the Reconstruction/Rehabilitation of Residential Dwellings program area. If not providing the construction delivery obligations in-house, a respondent must indicate if they intend to provide through subcontracting or partnership arrangements.

Q122: Pages 6-8. If Program Area 2 requires both administration and construction delivery, will DOLA consider dividing it into two separate qualification categories: (1) Reconstruction/Rehabilitation Administration and (2) Reconstruction/Rehabilitation Construction Services?

A122: See answer to A121.

Q123:Page 11, Section C – Task Order Development; Does DOLA anticipate issuing task orders to multiple contractors in support of a single CDBG-DR, DRR, or other disaster recovery funding allocation, or does DOLA anticipate assigning primary responsibility for each allocation to a single contractor?

A123: Factors such as urgency, scale of the need and alignment with core competencies of the contractors will drive this decision.

Q124:Page 4 / Page 11; The RFQ indicates that task orders will generally be issued following a State or Presidential disaster declaration.