RFP 012.25 - Addendum #2 - Final.pdf
PDF 228 KB Posted
- Attached to
- On-Call General Engineering Services
- Solicitation number
- 012.25
- Issued by
- Pitkin County, Colorado
About this file
This is Addendum #2 for Pitkin County's Request for Proposals (RFP #012.25) for On-Call General Engineering Services. The county intends to award contracts to two firms to provide comprehensive engineering services across thirteen service categories. The current solicitation covers engineering needs from the past five years, which included 66 projects with a total engineering value of approximately $1,978,000.00. The county seeks consultants who can provide broad coverage across multiple engineering disciplines, with a strong recommendation that firms partner with subconsultants if they cannot provide services in all required areas.
The addendum clarifies key details about the procurement, including that proposers are not required to submit a certified check or bid bond, and hourly rates should include subconsultant rates whenever possible. The incumbent firm is SGM, Inc., and the county is seeking firms that can demonstrate a standard approach to task management with typical lead times for service. Proposers are advised that while they may specialize in specific areas (such as environmental engineering), the county prefers comprehensive proposals that cover multiple service categories, making it more likely for a firm to be selected among the two contracts to be awarded.
View the file
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
Rev. 2022.6.21 CDD
RFP # 012.25
ADDENDUM # 2
Date: January 14, 2025
TO: All Parties of Interest for the ON-CALL GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES.
This addendum is issued in response to inquiries received and/or to clarify details regarding the On-Call General Engineering Services Request for Proposals.
The following responses and/or clarifications are hereby adopted as Project Documents and, where applicable, supersede or are in addition to any previously issued documentation or communication.
1. Question: Could you confirm if we are able to submit solely on in-house services provided or do we need to provide a full-service team in order to be considered?
● Response: You may submit solely based on in-house services but we are seeking a consultant that will be able to provide the best coverage of all of the specialties identified in the contract. Since we are only awarding a contract to two firms it will be unlikely that a firm covering only one specialty will be selected. The County recommends that a firm that does not provide all services in-house should partner with another firm as a subconsultant to have a better chance of selection.
2. Question: Number of past projects: During the last five (5) year term, approximately how many on-call civil engineering projects were there?
● Response: There have been 66 projects over the last five years.
3. Question: Dollar value of past project: During the last five (5) year term, approximately what was the corresponding total engineering dollar value of those projects?
● Response: Approximately $1,978,000.00.
4. Question: The scope lists thirteen areas that Pitkin County anticipates the need for support. Will you accept proposals from firms that can provide services in some (not all) of these areas, or will you consider only firms that can provide service on all thirteen areas?
● Response: See Response to #1
5. Question: Of the 13 service categories listed, are respondents able to select which categories they are pursuing? In other words, since we specialize in environmental services, could we only pursue Environmental Engineering & Services?
6. Question: Under the Intro Section in the RFP, it states that the County intends to contract services with two firms. Is that two firms for all these services or two firms for each of the 13 services listed?
● Response: Two firms will receive a contract from this RFP to cover all of the identified services.
7. Question: Several of the disciplines listed are outside of services that we ever provide. Do we need to be able to cover all of the disciplines listed, or do we submit on just the disciplines that we work with?
8. Question: Is it the intent of the County that proposers submit on all of the scopes/categories listed in the RFP? We would like to submit on some scopes, but not all.
9. Question: Section C.4 requests hourly rates. Should this include subconsultants?
● Response: Yes, whenever possible.
10. Question: Section 3(a) of the Instructions to Proposers asks for a certified check or bid bond (if required by the Proposal Documents), which is atypical for these services. Please confirm this is not required.
● Response: Confirmed. Proposers are not required to submit a certified check or a bid bond.
11. Question: Generally speaking, how many firms does the County typically select for these types of contracts? (ie, 3 or more, 6 or more, etc.)
● Response: Past On Call services awards have been to only one firm. This RFP will be selecting two firms.
12. Question: Who are the incumbent firm/s who currently provide the services requested under this RFP?
● Response: SGM, Inc.
13. Question: On Page 6, Item B, it mentions a “Timetable for the Service,” on Page 8, Item 1, it states we must include a “Project Schedule.” Since this is an on-call contract without a specific project defined, could you clarify how you would like us to address and demonstrate a project schedule in our proposal? Would you like us to describe a standard approach to task management or to provide one or more example projects?
● Response: Please provide a standard approach with typical lead times for service.
Thank you for reviewing this Request for Proposals and for your willingness to pursue business opportunities with Pitkin County. Should you require any additional clarification regarding the Project or this Addendum, please contact Procurement@PitkinCounty.com .
mailto:Procurement@PitkinCounty.com
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .