Q and A for RFP S1139.pdf
PDF 38 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Study Rural NV Caseload
- Solicitation number
- 11DIDS-S1139
- Issued by
- Churchill County, Nevada
About this file
The document is a Question and Answer (Q&A) file related to a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a study on the rural county caseload for indigent defense services in the state of Nevada. The Department has received questions regarding travel and COVID-19 impacts, the availability of a time tracking software system, and the use of a database or list of attorneys providing indigent defense services for qualitative data collection. The Department indicated that a two-scenario proposal addressing both in-person and remote work is prudent given the uncertainty around travel restrictions. Additionally, the Department stated that the time tracking system may not be fully implemented during the study period, and that they can provide access to the list of attorneys providing indigent defense services in the applicable rural counties. Regarding the sample size, the Department clarified that all 15 rural counties should be included in the study to capture the variations in travel, volume, and attorney locations, rather than selecting a representative sample.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| LetterOfIntentS1139.pdf | ||
| RFP 11DIDS-S1139 Final.docx | DOCX document | |
| Quote Instructions.pdf | ||
| Attachment D Insurance Schedule for RFP 11DIDS-S1139.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment F Cost Schedule.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Bid Q&A
QUESTION_NBR CREATED_BY QUESTION_SUBJECT QUESTION_TEXT ANSWER_TEXT
1 VANESSAFRY Travel and COVID-19
Although we recognize the important of face to face interactions for building relationships throughout the process of the study, we are also aware of the study's timeframe and the impact COVID-19 may have on travel restrictions.
Therefore would be be appropriate to develop a proposal that included two scenarios - one with travel and one where the study could be done remotely, if that was necessary?
Travel and COVID: Given the uncertainty, a two scenario proposal is prudent.
2 VANESSAFRY Time tracking software Will the new time tracking system be in place and attorneys trained on the software prior to the study?
Time Tracking: At this point, it is unknown whether the time tracking system will be in place. It is possible that the system could be in the process of being implemented during the course of the study.
3 VANESSAFRY Qualitative data collection Is there a database or list of attorneys providing indigent defense that can be utilized for qualitative data collection (i.e., attorney demographics, their perceptions of their workloads, etc.)?
Qualitative data collection: Yes, the Department can identify those attorneys providing indigent defense services in the applicable counties.
4 VANESSAFRY Sampling With only 15 rural counties under consideration for this study selecting a representative sample for this study would be challenging. Therefore would it be acceptable to include each of the counties as part of the study?
The Department is unclear as to what the question is asking specifically. If this question asks whether all Nevada counties including Washoe and Clark should be included, the answer is it would be unacceptable to add those counties for the purpose establishing a sample for the study. The RFP is limited in scope to create a workload for the rural counties.
In the alternative, if this question asks whether all indigent defense providers in each of the 15 rural counties should be included, instead of forming a representative sample from only a portion of them, the answer is yes. Including each of the counties as part of the study is necessary to consider the variations in travel, volume, and attorney locations.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .