RFP 260000002460 Bidder Q and A.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 22 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- RFP 761 260000002460 2
- Issued by
- Grand Traverse County, Lansing City, Michigan
About this file
Summary of RFP 260000002460 Bidder Q&A
This is a bidder question and answer document from the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) for RFP 260000002460, a Pollution Prevention and Food Waste Reduction Technical Assistance Program (TAP) contract. The contract requires the selected contractor to provide technical assessments to 8-12 food and beverage manufacturing facilities located in Michigan, with up to two site visits per facility. Key deliverables include facility assessment reports due within three weeks of the final onsite visit, development of a pollution prevention and food waste reduction toolbox with outreach materials, three educational webinars and workshops, two listening sessions to gather stakeholder feedback, a roundtable event, and a comprehensive final report. The contractor must employ a minimum of two key personnel with at least 10 years of facility audit experience and technical expertise across multiple areas, though experience may be distributed across team members rather than held by a single individual. The proposal deadline was extended to Monday, September 21, 2026, at 3:00 PM Eastern, and the contract term is one year with a potential optional extension of up to one additional year, contingent upon EPA extending the grant period.
Pricing for the contract is structured as maximum not-to-exceed rates for individual line items and hourly rates by role rather than individual staff members. The contractor must develop its own budget based on the detailed scope of work in Schedule A and pricing guidance in Schedule B; EGLE declined to disclose a predetermined budget to maintain procurement integrity. Out-of-state contractors are permitted as prime contractors, though in-state key personnel are preferred and contractors without Michigan-based staff must provide a Michigan address for mileage calculation with no additional reimbursement. Technical proposals receiving 80 or more points will advance to cost evaluation. The contract is funded through an EPA Pollution Prevention grant, and contractors must price all required tasks within the one-year performance period, with any follow-ups occurring after contract expiration to be handled by EGLE. The contractor is responsible for recruiting and securing facility participation, with EGLE providing support through its GovDelivery system and assistance with state-side due diligence as capacity allows.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFP 260000002460 Vendor Questions Worksheet.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFP 260000002460 Confidential Treatment Form.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFP 260000002460 Schedule B - Pricing.docx | DOCX document | |
| Revised RFP 260000002460 Proposal Instructions_09_03.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFP 260000002460 Schedule A - Statement of Work.docx | DOCX document | |
| Revised RFP 260000002460 Schedule A - Statement of Work_09_03.docx | DOCX document | |
| EPA P2 Grant Scope of Work Summary 090126.pdf | ||
| RFP 260000002460 Proposal Instructions.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFP 260000002460 Schedule F - Federal Provisions Addendum.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFP 260000002460 Standard Contract Terms.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFP 260000002460 Schedule D - Service Level Agreement.docx | DOCX document | |
| Revised RFP 260000002460 Schedule B - Pricing_09_03.docx | DOCX document |
Show all 12
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
Sheet1
| Question # | Bidder Question | EGLE Response |
| 1 | Would the State consider extending the proposal deadline from September 16 to September 30, 2026, so bidders have enough time to incorporate the State's responses to questions? | The due date for bids to be submitted will be extended to Monday, September 21, 2026 no later than 3:00pm Eastern. EGLE is unable to extend the deadline any further due to time constraints and the EPA grant expiration date. |
| 2 | Can an out-of-state company serve as the prime contractor, and can Key Personnel be located outside Michigan? How much weight will the State give to Michigan-based staff and other local economic benefits? | While EGLE does not evaluate based on the location of the firm or their Key Personnel, the scope of work does require that all industry that receive technical assessment through this Contract are based in Michigan. Therefore in-state key personnel are preferred. If not, the firm must provide a Michigan based address to calculate mileage for travel from a local address. No additional cost will be paid by EGLE due to the Contractor not having any in-state Key Personnel. The bidder must ensure that they and their staff can conduct all the in-person meetings and onsite visits that are required by the Contract, without adversely affecting the overall budget. As mentioned in the Proposal Instructions document, bids that receive 80 or more score based on the technical evaluation, will then be evaluated based on the cost proposal. |
| 3 | Can the State clarify how the Unauthorized Removal Credits would be applied? Is the $25,000 credit assessed for each unauthorized removal even if the approved replacement completes the 30-day shadowing period? If the full shadowing period is not completed, is the additional credit $100 per missed day or $100 total? | Please see the updated text in the revised Schedule A - Scope of Work document. A $25,000 credit is assessed for each "unauthorized" removal if the replacement individual completes shadowing of the Key Personnel is leaving for a 30 day period. An additional $100 credit to EGLE is assessed for every calendar day that the replacement Key Personnel does not shadow the removed Key Personnel, with the maximum per individual being $3,000. Therefore a maximum of $28,000 may be assessed in total unauthorized removal credits per unauthorized removal & failure to provide the 30-calendar days of shadowing. |
| 4 | Can EGLE provide a copy of its approved USEPA P2 grant application, including the work plan, budget, timeline, and required performance measures, so bidders can make sure their proposed approach aligns with the grant requirements? | Please see attached the "EPA P2 Grant Scope of Work Summary 090126" document. |
| 5 | Do both of the two required personnel need at least 10 years of facility audit experience and experience in every listed technical area, or can that experience be covered across the team? | No one single Key Personnel is expected to have all the required experiences, but the required experience in various technical areas is expected to be covered by the various Key Personnel across the team. |
| 6 | Do all Key Personnel need to attend every onsite assessment? | A minimum of one Key Personnel with relevant experience with the processes at the facility being visited, should be at the onsite visit. It is expected that the same Key Personnel will conduct the second onsite visit if it is deemed necessary. Additional Key Personnel and other staff are not restricted from attending the onsite assessment visits, provided it does not adversely effect the total budget and that the assessed facility approves their visits. |
| 7 | Is the Contractor expected to attend required meetings listed in Section 10 in person or will these meetings be virtual? | All meetings referred to in Section 10 are expected to be conducted by the Contractor using a virtual meeting platform. |
| 8 | Does being "specifically assigned" to the State account mean Key Personnel must be dedicated full-time to this contract, or can they work on other projects as long as they meet the proposed time commitment and 24-hour response requirement? | While Key Personnel assigned to the Contract are not expected to spend all their billable hours solely working on the Contract tasks, they would be expected to work at or close to the number of work hours or % work time, that they would be committing to this Contract. Bidders should estimate those hours based on the Contract tasks and include this information in their bid response. |
| 9 | What is the anticipated budget or maximum contract value for the one-year project? | To maintain procurement integrity and to protect EGLE’s best interest we are unable to disclose the budget. EGLE believes that the solicitation documents provides sufficient details on the requirements and outcomes for the bidder to estimate the budget that they would require to complete the services in a successful manner. |
| 10 | Follow up and reporting-it is requested to follow up at 12 months after the report is provided, however, as far as we can understand it would not be possible to follow up after 12 months and still be within the 1 year grant period (unless given a 2nd year extension) - there would not be enough time. Could there be any guidance given on this? | Schedule A 3.5 Task 5 Technical Assistance follow-up and reporting, has been updated to note that the required follow-up's would be conducted approximately after 8 weeks, 16 weeks and 32 weeks (or 24 weeks for the assessments conducted later in the Contract) from the date of the last onsite visit for that specific facility. The total number of facilities to be assisted has been updated to 8-12 facilities, with up to 2 visits per facility. EGLE will conduct the 52 week follow-up and amend the final report with the findings of that follow-up. Contractors are required to price for three follow-ups per technical assessment/facility assisted. |
| 11 | The first sentence on P. 2 states that the selected vendor must complete all tasks within one year; however, it can often take significant time to recruit and schedule facility participation in P2 assessments. Further, some of the tasks require follow up one year following completion of the task. For example, Task 3.5 requires follow up 12 months after the cohort meeting and assistance. Will EGLE consider extending the standard contract term (and associated pricing schedule, Table 1) to 2 years to accommodate completion of all tasks? | See answer to question 10. The bidder is expected to plan and budget for conducting all required tasks within the 1 year Contract period. While the Contract term will allow for an additional up to 1 year extension, if it is deemed necessary, any extension is contingent upon US EPA extending the EGLE/EPA grant expiration date. |
| 12 | How should the required 12-month follow-up be completed within a one-year contract? Will EGLE handle any follow-ups that fall after the contract ends? | See answer to question 10. |
| 13 | Is there a required/expected/anticipated interest in whomever is awarded this to collaborate with other team(s) in Michigan also funded through EPA P2 funds to work together? We are aware of what we understand to be other ongoing efforts that are currently operating in Michigan with the same/similar goals under the same/similar EPA funds. If there is any guidance on this, this would be appreciated. | See attached "EPA P2 Grant Scope of Work Summary 090126" document that lists the potential partnership opportunities. The selected Contractor is expected to be aware of other work in this area and build organic collaborative relationship to improve their quality of work and the outcome of this project. Please note there are no specific billable tasks that require them to do so. |
| 14 | Is there a certain size of manufacturer that this grant is targeting (or not targeting)? | While the EPA grant does not have a specific requirement regarding the size of the business to be supported through this work, EGLE typically targets its technical assistance support towards small and medium size business with less than 500 total employees. |
| 15 | For the 2nd listening session where feedback should be provided on the toolbox, would this be an existing toolbox, or would this be for stakeholders to provide feedback on the toolkit developed as part of this effort (i.e. this 2nd listening session would occur toward the end of the project). | The 2nd listening session is expected to collect feedback on the tool box that was developed as part of this Contract. The 2nd listening session is expected to be scheduled early in the second half of the Contract period, to allow the Contractor to improve the toolbox developed. |
| 16 | Is there any guidance on when EGLE would like the webinars and listening sessions/workshops to occur throughout the project timeline? | The Contractor must propose in their draft work plan the timeline on when they think these sessions and webinars should be conducted based on the scope of work. The final timeline would be decided collaboratively by EGLE and the selected Contractor. |
| 17 | The completion of a report within 2 weeks timeframe from the site visit is a fairly tight schedule - could any further guidance be provided on the level of detail/components expected in the reports? | Schedule A section 9. Reporting, has been updated to require that the technical assessment reports be submitted within 3 weeks of completing the final onsite visit for a given facility. |
| 18 | Will EGLE staff provide a list of desired invitees or F&B facility contacts for the listening sessions and roundtable, or is Contractor tasked with assembling a list of invitees? | While EGLE has some contacts in this sector and can share those with the selected Contractor, it is not considered an exhaustive list. The selected Contractor is expected to use the contact list as a starting point and build to develop the full list of invitees. |
| 19 | For the in-person roundtable, will EGLE provide the location to host the event? Will EGLE also provide AV equipment? | EGLE can provide a location and AV equipment if the best location is near an EGLE facility that has a room/event space large enough to host the event. |
| 20 | Does EGLE have a target number of outreach materials in mind to complete the toolbox? | The bidder is expected to propose a reasonable number of outreach materials that may fulfill the scope of this Contract. Contractors can list the number of outreach material they considered in their pricing. The final number of outreach material will be decided collaboratively between the selected Contractor and EGLE. |
| 21 | Please clarify if the fourth webinar mentioned in Section 3.7 of the statement of work is reflected in the pricing table as the project closeout meeting in row 11. | Please see revised Schedule A and Schedule B. Only 3 webinars in total is expected. |
| 22 | Is there an upper and/or lower bounds of funding for this RFP or any guidance on this that could be shared? | See answer to question 9. |
| 23 | Is there an established budget for this work? If so, can you please provide? | See answer to question 9. |
| 24 | For SCH B. Table 3, can the Contractor provide category rates in our response rather than rates for individual staff members? | Contractors can provide rates with or without individual staff member name, as far the hourly rate for each role (e.g. project management, subject matter expert, onsite assessor etc.) is listed. |
| 25 | If the contract term is extended to two years, may bidders adjust the proposed rates in Table 3 to be adjusted annually or do proposed rates remain valid for the entire contract period? | The Contractor must price based on the list of tasks & scope of work, to be conducted within 1 year. Therefore the total pricing is not expected to change. The additional and optional one year extension just allows EGLE to extend the Contract in case EGLE decides additional time maybe warranted. Any or all extension of the Contract is contingent upon EPA extending EGLE/EPA grant period. |
| 26 | Would EGLE welcome proposals that pair a marketing and communications firm with a qualified technical prime contractor or technical subcontractor? | The bid proposal must clearly identify the primary contractor, the sub-contractor or any partnerships/relationship along with clearly identifying their roles and responsibilities on this Contract. Irrespective of which entity conducts the actual tasks, the primary contractor would be responsible for the successful completion of the Contract tasks in its entirety and would be held accountable. Contractor would be responsible to ensure all Contract terms are being communicated and followed by all other parties that they will be working with on this Contract. |
| 27 | Schedule A requires follow-ups at 2 weeks, 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months; while Schedule B assumes three follow-up phone calls per business. Please confirm the number and timing of follow-ups bidders should include in their price and whether any 12-month follow-up occurring after contract expiration will be performed by EGLE. | See answer to question 10. |
| 28 | Schedule A requires a minimum of four educational webinars/workshops, while Schedule B prices three events. Please confirm the number of events bidders should include in the technical approach and pricing. | See answer to question 21. |
| 29 | Schedule A calls for monthly office hours during the final three months of the cohort cycle, while Schedule B references up to four hours of office-hour support. Please confirm the required number and duration of office-hour sessions. | Please see revised Schedule A and Schedule B. The office hours subtask has been removed from the scope of work & pricing documents. |
| 30 | Schedule A identifies a cohort of 10–15 facilities, while Schedule B establishes pricing based on 15 facilities. Should bidders assume and price 15 facilities for evaluation purposes? | Please see revised Schedule A and Schedule B. The total number of facilities to conduct onsite technical assessments have been updated to 8-12 facilities, with 2 site visits each. The bidder is to price for individual facilities per site visit along with the total budget for 12 sites for maximum of 2 site visits. Payments will be made based on actual facilities assisted and actual number of site visits conducted per facility. |
| 31 | Please confirm whether each of the required Key Personnel must individually possess the listed experience and 10-year audit qualifications, or whether the qualifications may be demonstrated collectively across multiple personnel. | See answer to question 5. |
| 32 | Does EGLE have a target timeline for recruitment, cohort launch, facility assessments, and report completion within the one-year contract term, or should bidders propose the full sequencing? | The bidder's are expected to propose a tentative timeline and sequencing as part of their draft work plan, to be submitted as part of the bid response. |
| 33 | Please clarify required consent, privacy-notice, recording, and data-sharing procedures for participant information, recordings, surveys, and polls. | EGLE can assist in hosting the webinars and can take care of these concerns. Any required information or EGLE policies on these items will be shared with the selected Contractor as needed. |
| 34 | For requirements expressed as “within two weeks” or at the “9-month mark,” should bidders interpret those periods as calendar days/months unless stated otherwise? | For timeline related to onsite technical assistance the timeline is based on the date of the last onsite visit for a specific facility that is being assisted. For the webinars/listening sessions etc. it is an approximate timeline from the start date of the Contract. |
| 35 | Please identify any required webpage templates, CMS constraints, branding standards, analytics requirements, or file-format requirements associated with webpage and outreach-material development. | The Contractor is expected to provide only the content of the webpage and toolbox. The EGLE web team will assist in creating the actual webpages and hosting it. All outreach material should be developed to meet EGLE's requirements which will be shared with the selected Contractor. All material will be branded with EGLE logo, and the Contractor can include their own branding to note their role in that work. All material will be reviewed by EGLE team before they can be published or distributed. |
| 36 | Should bidders identify and price only equipment not already owned, or all equipment proposed for use under the project? | The bidder is allowed to charge a nominal and reasonable rental on equipment that they already possess. |
| 37 | Please clarify the required branding and identity protocol when Contractor personnel recruit facilities and conduct program activities on behalf of EGLE. | The selected Contractor must represent the P2 and Food Waste Reduction Program and not their own interest or firm. The Contractor should also not misrepresent themselves as EGLE. |
| 38 | How should State Data return/deletion requirements be reconciled with the four-year audit-record retention requirement? May a restricted archival copy be retained for compliance purposes? | The selected Contractor would be expected to keep all records required to be retained for compliance purpose for the duration required per audit requirements. The Contractor must delete any personal identifying information, or sensitive information, as soon as their need is met, or at the end of the Contract. When the bidder deletes any records per the record retention/elimination requirement, they must submit in writing admitting that the deletion has been completed. |
| 39 | Please confirm whether the State intends a single one-year renewal option. | This contract is funded through a federal award; any time extensions for this Contract would be contingent upon receiving an extension from EPA for the EGLE/EPA grant. |
| 40 | Please confirm whether the requirement to respond within 24 hours means 24 clock hours or one business day. | A responses is expected by the end of the next business day from the selected Contractor. Please note that sometimes a response may not need to address the entire question, and can simply be an acknowledgement of receipt and a plan/timing for detailed response. |
| 41 | Regarding energy, gas, and water usage assessments, Schedule A appears to require an evaluation of existing systems at each facility. Please clarify whether bidders should recommend energy and water audits, such as ASHRAE Level 1–3 audits and/or in-depth water-use surveys and engineering analyses, based on one in-person site visit, or whether bidders are expected to perform those audits during a single site visit. | The Contractor must use the ASHRAE level 2 model and expand it to collect data and address all resources and waste for the facility, equipment and process improvements etc. The Contractor is expected to identify all possible pollution prevention opportunities that are available at a facility, estimate the approximate cost to implement, pay back period, and the expected environmental benefits. |
| 42 | Please clarify the respective responsibilities of EGLE and the Contractor for identifying prospects, conducting outreach, confirming eligibility, obtaining facility participation agreements, and replacing facilities that withdraw. | While EGLE can assist where it has the ability to do so, the Contractor is expected to be the primary responsible party for conducting the tasks listed in the scope of work. If the Contractor believes that EGLE would be able to assist best with certain tasks, then they should clearly state that in there proposal, and only price for the items that they would be responsible for. For example, EGLE can assist in using GovDelivery as one of the avenues for marketing and outreach, but it should be considered the only avenue. Similarly EGLE can assist in conducting State side due diligence on the participating facilities, but the bidder should propose additional eligibility criteria as they see fit. The bidder should utilize the Schedule A Bidder Response fields to clarify their responsibilities and what they are pricing for. |
| 43 | Will EGLE provide required templates or minimum content standards for facility assessment reports, progress reports, case studies, webinar materials, the two-page PDF, and the final report? Please also identify the review period and acceptance criteria for each deliverable. | While EGLE can provide inputs on the required components of the technical assessment reports and share some relevant example templates, the Contractor is expected to develop or update their own templates and submit for EGLE approval. EGLE approval timeline could be between 3 to 10 business days depending on the size and complexity of the document being approved. |
| 44 | Schedule A states the Contractor must develop and conduct “a minimum of four educational webinars and/or workshops,” while Schedule B, Table 1, Task No. 7 prices for a total of three (one before assessments, two after). Please confirm whether bidders should plan and price for three or four webinars/workshops. | See answer to question 21. |
| 45 | Schedule A permits a cohort of 10–15 facilities, while Schedule B, Table 1, Task No. 4A prices technical assessments and assistance based on 15 facilities. Is compensation for Task 4A based on the fixed unit of 15 facilities regardless of the number actually recruited, or will payment be adjusted to the actual number of participating facilities if fewer than 15 are recruited? | See answer to question 30. |
| 46 | Schedule A requires technical assistance follow-up at four intervals per business (2 weeks, 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months), while Schedule B, Table 1, Task No. 5 instructs bidders to assume three phone-call follow-ups per business within a 100-hour budget. Please confirm the number of follow-up contacts per business that bidders should plan and price for. | See answer to question 10. The bidder is expected to explain how they will conduct the follow up and price it accordingly. A total of three follow ups at the frequency described in Schedule A, are expected per technical assessment conducted/facility assisted. |
| 47 | Schedule A refers to a monthly office hour during the cohort's last three months (implying roughly three sessions), while Schedule B, Table 1, Task No. 4B lists the unit as “Up to 4 hours” total, with each meeting up to two hours. Please confirm the required number of office-hour sessions and the total hours bidders should plan and price for. | See answer to question 29. |
| 48 | Because the Contract term is one year, a 12-month follow-up conducted 12 months after a given facility's assessment could fall after Contract expiration unless that facility's assessment occurs near the beginning of the term. Schedule A's Reporting section notes that the State will amend the follow-up summary report “after the Contract end date with its own findings for the additional follow-ups it plans to conduct.” Please confirm whether the Contractor is responsible for completing every business's 12-month follow-up within the Contract term, or whether EGLE will take over any 12-month follow-ups that fall after Contract expiration. | See answer to question 10. |
| 49 | Schedule B states that listed prices are “maximum not to exceed rates” on a per-line-item and per-hourly-rate basis, but no total contract budget, funding cap, or not-to-exceed total contract value is stated elsewhere in the RFP documents. Can EGLE confirm whether a total budget or funding ceiling exists for this Contract, or should bidders develop their total price independently based on their proposed approach? | The bidder is expected to develop the individual line item pricing and the total pricing based on Schedule A and Schedule B of the RFP and their individual approach. The budget that is developed and proposed by the bidder is considered as the maximum not to exceed rate, for both the line items and for the total and will be firm during the Contract period, unless there is a scope change later in the Contract. |
| 50 | Will EGLE provide a template for the individual technical assessment report due per facility, or is the Contractor expected to design its own report format? | See answer to question 43. |
| 51 | Will the new P2 & Food Waste Reduction webpage be a standalone page, or a child page under EGLE's existing food waste reduction and recovery (commercial) site? | The new P2 & Food Waste Reduction webpage will be a child page under EGLE's existing Pollution Prevention webpage and will also be linked to EGLE's existing Food Waste & Recovery webpage. EGLE will be hosting and connecting these pages as we see fit. |
| 52 | Who will be assigned as the EGLE Program Manager for this Contract, or will that be determined after award? | The State Program Manager for this Contract is Indu Jayamani, as noted in the 'Standard Contract Terms' document, of the RFP. |
| 53 | Does EGLE have existing relationships with food and beverage companies that they plan to leverage for the technical assessments or is that expected of the awardee? | EGLE expects that the selected bidder would have sufficient connections and partnerships with the industries in Michigan. The Schedule A section 3.4 Task 4 has been updated as follows: "The Contractor in collaboration with EGLE Program Manager (and their designees) shall market and recruit between 8 and 10 food and beverage facilities located in Michigan to provide technical assistance as a cohort. EGLE GovDelivery can be one of the avenues through which the solicitation can be marketed through. Marketing must be conducted in a manner that allows equal opportunity to all small and medium food and beverage manufacturing and processing businesses in Michigan." |
| 54 | Would the State consider extending the proposal submission deadline beyond September 16, 2026? | See answer to question 1. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .