RFP 25-0004 Addendum 3 School Photograph Services.pdf

Business Services Procurement and Contracting

1260 NW Waterhouse Avenue Beaverton, OR 97006

April 15, 2026 RFP 25-0004 School Photography Services

ADDENDUM NO. 3

THE FOLLOWING CHANGES/ADDITIONS TO THE ABOVE CITED SOLICITATION ARE

ANNOUNCED:

This Addendum modifies and clarifies the Request for Proposal (RFP) documents only to the extent outlined below. All unaltered sections and aspects of the RFP shall remain in full force and effect. This Addendum is hereby made an integral component of the RFP document. Proposers are expected to adhere to the specifications of the addendum as if the requirements were originally detailed in the RFP.

This addendum must be acknowledged in the designated space on the Proposer Certification form as outlined in the solicitation document (SECTION V - ATTACHMENT A, PROPOSER CERTIFICATION).

Failure to acknowledge receipt of this addendum may result in the rejection of your offer.

The RFP closing date is hereby extended to:

April 21, 2026, 2:00 PM PST

CLARIFICATIONS/CHANGES

1. PRICE SCHEDULE REPLACEMENT:

Attachment G1, Price Schedule is hereby replaced in its entirety with Attachment G2 Price Schedule (attached hereto). Sections 2. through 4. below describes how G2 and referenced Proposal content will be evaluated and replaces/supersedes any information found in Section IV of the RFP related to Price Schedule evaluation and scoring.

2. STANDARD PORTRAIT PACKAGES:

Standard Portrait Package Sheets are defined as follows:

a. One (1) 8X10

b. Two (2) 5X7 prints

c. Four (4) 3 X5 prints

d. Eight (8) standard wallet prints

e. One (1) 8x10 Composite (primary level only)

3. NON-STANDARD SHEET GROUPINGS:

If a Proposer offers a non-standard print sheet grouping the Proposer must:

• Provide a visual layout (mock-up) of each package showing how prints are arranged, and

• Clearly demonstrate how the proposed package meets the required number of sheets using the equivalencies defined above.

The evaluation committee reserves the right to consider the composition of non-standard sheet groupings in its scoring of Proposals. For example, if the evaluation committee member determines, in its sole judgment, finds that a package containing non-standard sheet grouping provides less desirability, wasted space, and/or lesser value, points may be deducted. This example is illustrative only and does not limit evaluators’ judgement in scoring non-standard sheet groupings.

4. Pricing and Evaluation – Price Schedule (Total: 35 Points):

All pricing submitted must reflect the actual prices charged to the students and families. No deviations from proposed pricing will be permitted without prior written approval from the District Representative named in the Contract.

The Price Schedule will be evaluated as follows:

• Section 1- Portrait Package Pricing (21 Points).

This section will be evaluated on a comparative basis. The lowest-priced responsive proposal will receive the maximum points available for this section. All other Proposals will be a weighted scored based on their pricing relative to the lowest price proposal (Lowest price scores the highest).

• Section 2 – A’-La-Carte Pricing (10 Points).

The lowest-priced responsive Proposal will receive the maximum points available.

All other Proposals will be scored proportionally.

• Section 3 – Optional Services (4 Points).

This section evaluates the value and relevance of optional services offered.

Proposers are not required to offer all listed services and will not be penalized for not offering specific optional services. However, higher scores may be awarded for offerings that provide meaningful added value to the District.

Scoring will be based on the following criteria:

• (0-2 points) Value to Students/Families: Usefulness and affordability of optional offerings.

• (0-2 points) Alignment with District needs and student population

• Section 4 – Required Services (Pass/Fail).

Proposals must include all required services listed on Attachment G2, Section 4 (Required Services).

If a Proposal includes a product or service that may deviate from the specified Required Services, the Proposer must provide supporting examples and detailed description for the District’s required service for the District’s consideration of equivalency. The District will determine equivalency in its sole discretion.

Failure to meet the Required Services, as determined by the District, will result in a fail rating for this section and rejection of the Proposal.

-End-