NCPC_Penn Ave RFP 1_QA_23_10_19.pdf

A New Pennsylvania Avenue Plan RFP 1

Ques�ons, NCPC Responses, and FAQ Last Updated: Thursday, October 19, 2023

Note: Questions are grouped by topic and posted verbatim.

10/19/23 UPDATES

1. Will you accept a PDF for the Fee Proposal?

Offerors are welcome to submit the Fee Proposal Worksheet as either a PDF or as an Excel file. We understand that if the Fee Proposal Worksheet is a PDF, there will be two addi�onal pages in the Fee Proposal. Teams will not be penalized for those addi�onal pages.

2. Does Item 6 on the Experience Ques�onnaire pertain to all projects currently under contract, or just projects under contract with the Federal Government or NCPC?

At a minimum, please list all projects currently under contract that your proposed team is currently commited to.

3. Is there a portal to upload proposals?

There is no portal. Proposals shall be submited via email to Bizops@ncpc.gov.

4. Will NCPC consider extensions to the posted deadline?

The submission deadline is Friday, October 20, 2023 at 12:00 PM Eastern Time, as stated in the RFP. Late submissions will not be considered.

9/29/23 POSTING

ADMINISTRATIVE QUESTIONS

1. How would the US government shutdown affect the submission deadline for RFP 1?

Regardless of the federal government’s opera�ng status, the submission deadline is Friday, October 20, 2023 at 12:00 PM Eastern Time, as stated in the RFP.

Proposals shall be submited via email to Bizops@ncpc.gov. Late submissions will not be considered. The email subject line shall include the Project Name and Solicita�on Number. The body of the email shall include the name and contact informa�on for the Offeror’s primary point of contact. The Technical and Fee https://usncpc.sharepoint.com/sites/PPD/Shared%20Documents/PROJECTS/Penn%20Ave%20Plan/Contracting/Evaluation_IP/4_Q&A/Bizops@ncpc.gov https://usncpc.sharepoint.com/sites/PPD/Shared%20Documents/PROJECTS/Penn%20Ave%20Plan/Contracting/Evaluation_IP/4_Q&A/Bizops@ncpc.gov

Proposal Submissions must be separate atachments in the same email. The maximum file size for the email atachments is 10 MB. Please refer to the RFP for submission requirements.

The SAM.gov website will remain opera�onal during a shutdown. The RFP solicita�on, Fee Worksheet, Experience Ques�onnaire, and FAQ will be available for download.

2. What updates were made in the revised RFP (version 9/25)?

The only revision was on page 6, first paragraph. We updated the NAICS code to 541611 Administra�ve Management and General Management Consul�ng Services. We removed the old NAICS code 925120 Administra�on of Urban Planning and Community and Rural Development.

3. Sec�on 92 NAICS codes are for use by public government agencies only. For-profit corpora�ons cannot add NAICS code 925120 to their SAM registra�on. Offeror respec�ully requests that a NAICS code for which for-profit en��es may register, such as 541611 Administra�ve Management and General Management Consul�ng Services, be iden�fied as the primary NAICS code for these services and thus required SAM registra�on NAICS code.

The NAICS code has been updated to 541611 Administra�ve Management and General Management Consul�ng Services in the revised RFP (version 9/25) posted on SAM.gov.

4. Is there a list of par�cipants who atended the pre-bid mee�ng available somewhere?

Mee�ng atendance was recorded for NCPC’s internal use only and will not be shared.

5. Can you clarify if there are any SBE requirements?

Is there a DBE requirement for this RFP? I’ve not seen one but wanted to confirm this.

There are no SBE or DBE requirements.

6. Can NCPC share the “established budget” (pg. 62 of the RFP) for the Phase 1a work or will it depend on the selected proposal and any subsequent changes to the task scope of work?

Is there a budget in mind for this various tasks?

Are you able to share the budget for this effort?

The Offeror’s Fee Proposal will be evaluated against the Independent Government Cost Es�mate (IGCE), which is not public and will not be shared. Bids should be proposed at a fair market rate es�mate.

7. Is the design firm that prepared the 2022 concept studies for the Pennsylvania Avenue ini�a�ve precluded from par�cipa�ng in Phases 1 & 2 of this project?

Yes.

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION QUESTIONS

8. Is the Past Performance Ques�onnaire (page 53, item 6) the same as the Experience Ques�onnaire (page 65, item 3, last bullet)?

To our knowledge, there is no Past Performance Ques�onnaire posted on SAM.gov. Could NCPC please provide the Past Performance Ques�onnaire form?

These two forms are the same; the Experience Ques�onnaire form is available on SAM.gov.

9. Will NCPC accept previously requested Past Performance Ques�onnaires (PPQs)?

The Offerors shall submit the Experience Ques�onnaire (aka Past Performance Ques�onnaire) for this RFP.

Please use the Experience Ques�onnaire posted on SAM.gov.

10. Because we are a large firm that does a significant amount of work for the federal government, we would greatly exceed the page limit for the Experience Ques�onnaire if we listed every past contract for the past five years and every ac�ve contract. Can we limit these lists to most relevant and/or recent for the purposes of this solicita�on?

For the Experience Ques�onnaire, the Offeror should focus on the most relevant projects that exhibit the team’s experience with applicability to the Pennsylvania Avenue effort in terms of the significance and scale;

mul�-jurisdic�onal partnerships, ideally federal-local structure; and process and �meline for implementa�on.

11. A typical PPQ is 3 pages minimum (9 pages total for 3 PPQs). Can the PPQs be excluded from the 40-page count?

The page limit for the submission is 40 pages total (20 pages, two-sided) with legible font and line spacing.

This total does not include the Cover, Execu�ve Summary, Fee Worksheet, and Experience Ques�onnaire.

12. Please confirm that NCPC is looking for 13 resumes total, for example:

• 1 Consultant Team Lead;

• 2 (1 lead + 1 support) Facilita�on and Communica�ons SMEs;

• 2 (1 lead + 1 support) Event and Public Space Cultural Programming and Cura�on SMEs;

• 2 (1 lead + 1 support) Economics SMEs;

• 2 (1 lead + 1 support) Stewardship and Implemen�ng Strategies SMEs;

• 2 (1 lead + 1 support) for Phases 1b and 1c; and

• 2 (1 lead + 1 support) for Future Phase 1d?

Can you please clarify what resumes you would like submited for the SMEs for the future Phases? Also please clarify what are the areas of exper�se men�oned on page 53?

What kind of en�ty are you looking for to prime phase 1?

https://sam.gov/content/home

The Offerors shall submit resumes of key staff (Consultant Prime / Team Lead and relevant Support) for Phase 1a and future Phases 1b and 1c. Resumes should highlight relevant experience; we don’t need a full resume. Resume should be one page or less per person. Mul�ple resumes per page is allowed.

Key areas of exper�se are detailed on pages 52-53, item 3. It is expected that the Prime will be one of the subject mater experts (SMEs).

13. Should primary teaming for this Phase I RFP focus on Phase IA (with iden�fica�on of addi�onal team members that we would like to include for Phases 1B-1D)?

Yes.

SCOPE OF WORK QUESTIONS

14. What output are you looking for on the first bullet of 1A: "Event and public space program of requirements to inform concept development in Phase 2"?

The program of requirements in Task 3 is intended to inform the economic modeling in Task 4. It should be inclusive of, but not limited to, the scope of events and programming; opera�onal, infrastructure, and spa�al requirements; and poten�al ground-floor uses for public space ac�va�ons (Task 3.1 on page 34).

15. Can you clarify the difference between the "public space master plan" that occurs in RFP 1 and RFP 2? Is there a different level of detail, different deliverables, or different scenarios that will be evaluated in each?

RFP 1 establishes the program of requirements for the Public Space Master Plan; RFP 2 develops it into physical design alterna�ves.

16. Page 37 of the RFP says that a stewardship en�ty “may be a partnership or subsidiary of federal, District, ins�tu�onal, civil, and private organiza�ons.” Would NCPC consider using exis�ng en��es that fall in this category, and/or spli�ng responsibili�es across mul�ple en��es, new or exis�ng?

Yes, the Selected Consultant shall develop strategies for establishing a stewardship en�ty in Phase 1a to be further defined in subsequent Phases 1b and 1c (Task 5 on pages 45-46).

17. Will Phase 1a budget es�mates be focused on the opera�ng budget of the new stewardship en�ty, as opposed to capital budgets for the proposed improvements, which appear to not be developed un�l Phase 1c, Task 4 (page 46 of the RFP)?

The Implementa�on Program consultant in Phase 1a will develop the ini�al budget es�mates for the new stewardship en�ty, including projec�ons of poten�al events, opera�ons, costs, and revenues. Capital budget for the proposed improvements (cost es�mates) will be developed in subsequent phases.

RFP 1 AND RFP 2 RELATIONSHIPS AND COORDINATION

18. Can the same firm bid on both RFPs (e.g. serve as a Sub on RFP 1 and a Lead on RFP 2)?

Please confirm that if a team is selected for Phase 1 work, that team will not be conflicted out from pursuing Phase 2 or Phase 3 work.

Does NCPC have an interest in having dis�nct teams pursuing each of these phases, or is it open or interested in having con�nuity in the teams across mul�ple or all of the phases?

Are respondents that are part of the Phase I team precluded from responding to the Phase II RFP? Does NCPC look favorably/unfavorably on respondents being part of both phases?

Is NCPC able to provide addi�onal clarity on the ra�onale for spli�ng the project into two phases with separate solicita�ons?

It is our understanding that the phases will be contracted separately with the first two happening concurrently. Would working on phase 1 preclude a firm from working on phase 2 and/or 3?

Phases 1 and 2 will progress concurrently and will be closely coordinated. Is it NCPC’s inten�on to have two separate consultant teams for RFP 1 versus RFP 2, or will overlap between the RFP 1 and RFP 2 teams be considered? Can you provide any addi�onal informa�on about how NCPC views overlapping versus dis�nct teams, and can you confirm that par�cipa�on in Phase 1 will not preclude any firm from par�cipa�ng in any subsequent phases?

As stated in Sec�on 3 of RFP 1, key areas of exper�se for the Implementa�on Program consultant include:

• Facilitation and Communications to support discussions with Project Partners in the en�rety of Phases 1 and 2, and manage public engagement in Phases 1c and 2b.

• Event and Public Space Cultural Programming and Curation to develop the program of requirements and cura�on approach for public space ac�va�on for a diverse range of special events and daily programming, including, but not limited to cultural, arts, entertainment, and civic.

• Economics to develop the business case for Pennsylvania Avenue as a venue and daily des�na�on.

• Stewardship and Implementing Strategies to develop the poten�al Implementa�on Program.

• SMEs for future Phases:

o Phases 1b and 1c: Planning to lead NEPA / NHPA Sec�on 106, the approval processes, and to prepare the New Pennsylvania Avenue Plan.

o Future Phase 1d: Legal to support establishment of a stewardship en�ty and poten�al legisla�ve changes.

With target release this fall, the Public Space Master Plan and Concept Design RFP (RFP 2) will focus on design of the corridor and public spaces and infrastructure moderniza�on, as well as technical analysis for NEPA / NHPA Sec�on 106. We expect the Lead of RFP 2 to be Landscape Architect / Urban Designer and will require subconsultants necessary to develop physical design plans for the NEPA process.

We want the exper�se and efforts for both the Implementa�on Program and Design consultant teams to be complementary and not duplica�ve. While teams in Phase 1 are not precluded from bidding on Phases 2 and 3, we’re looking for lean and efficient teams of SMEs that will execute the required deliverables for each RFP and teams that can collaborate, coordinate, and work well together to execute the deliverables.

UPCOMING RFP 2: MASTER PLAN AND CONCEPT DESIGN RFP

19. What kind of en�ty are you looking for to prime phase 2?

With target release this fall, the Public Space Master Plan and Concept Design RFP (RFP 2) will focus on design of the corridor and public spaces and infrastructure moderniza�on, as well as technical analysis for NEPA / NHPA Sec�on 106. We expect the Lead of RFP 2 to be Landscape Architect / Urban Designer and will require subconsultants necessary to develop physical design plans for the NEPA process. Refer to the Overview of Project Phases on pages 9-10.

We want the exper�se and efforts for both the Implementa�on Program and Design consultant teams to be complementary and not duplica�ve. We’re looking for lean and efficient teams of SMEs that will execute the required deliverables for each RFP and teams that can collaborate, coordinate, and work well together to execute the deliverables.