RFP_Addendum_1_RFI_Responses.docx.pdf
PDF 116 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 37578
- Issued by
- Hartford County, Connecticut
About this file
This is Addendum No. 1 to a Request for Proposals issued by the Town of Windsor, Connecticut for comprehensive educational facilities studies, dated July 23, 2026. The addendum addresses eighteen questions received from prospective respondents regarding the RFP scope and requirements. The scope of work includes physical condition assessments of seven educational facilities: Clover (53,980 SF), JFK (65,600 SF), Oliver Ellsworth (72,082 SF), Poquonock (62,657 SF), Sage Park (176,355 SF), Windsor High School (272,100 SF), and LP Wilson Alternative/Special Programs (106,211 SF). The assessment encompasses athletic fields, athletics buildings, facilities and maintenance support buildings, and playground areas. The Town anticipates awarding the contract in September 2026, with an expected project duration of approximately twelve months, though respondents may propose alternative schedules. The RFP submission deadline is August 6, 2026 at 2:00 p.m. EDT. The Town does not have capacity to provide facility tours prior to the submission deadline but may arrange site visits during the proposal review period. No bidders conference is referenced in the addendum.
The Town has not established budgetary expectations for the study and will not provide a standardized fee proposal form or template; respondents may use their own format provided all five required elements outlined in Section 3.5 of the RFP are included. The fee proposal may be incorporated within a single cohesive submission rather than submitted as a separate document. Existing building documentation, including both paper and digital plans, roof condition assessments, HVAC studies (2024-2025), energy studies (2022), AHERA reports, utility records for the past two years, and records of additions and repairs over the last twenty years will be made available to shortlisted or selected respondents. The specific digital file formats available will vary depending on records maintained for each facility. No contract value, payment terms, or incumbent contractor information is disclosed in the addendum.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 37578_Jun_22_26_solicitation_doc.pdf | ||
| RFP - educational facilities studies.pdf.crdownload | CRDOWNLOAD file | |
| 37578_Aug_3_26_solicitation_doc.pdf | ||
| RFP - educational facilities studies.pdf |
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
TOWN OF WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT
Request for Proposals – Educational Facilities Studies
ADDENDUM NO. 1 – RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION (RFI)
Date Issued: July 23, 2026
This Addendum is issued to provide all prospective respondents with the questions received to date regarding the above-referenced Request for Proposals (RFP) for Educational Facilities Studies, together with the Town's official responses.
This Addendum shall be incorporated into and become part of the RFP. Respondents are responsible for acknowledging receipt of this Addendum in their submission in accordance with the RFP instructions.
Question 1 (Received 07/07/26)
Q: Does the scope of work in Section 2.3 Facilities Condition Assessment for “Physical Condition Assessment” include the assessment of athletic fields, athletics buildings (press box, fieldhouse, dugouts, etc.), facilities / maintenance support buildings, and/or playground areas?
A: Yes.
Question 2 (Received 07/15/26)
Q: Could you please provide the anticipated project schedule, including the expected notice of award, project start, and desired completion date?
A: We anticipate awarding in September 2026. We expect the study to need a 12-month duration; however, submissions may include a proposed project schedule for the selection committee’s consideration.
Question 3 (Received 07/15/26)
Q: The RFP requests an itemized fee proposal and separate pricing for bundled and individual scopes. Is there a prescribed fee form or pricing template that proposers should use?
A: Proposers may use their own format for Section 3.5, Fee Proposal. Be sure to include all five bullet points listed.
Question 4 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: Can arrangements be made to tour the schools before the RFP due date?
A: Unfortunately, we do not have the capacity to provide tours at this time.
Question 5 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: Did the Windsor School Department establish any budgetary expectations for the proposed Educational Facilities Study?
A: No.
Question 6 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: In what form are the existing school plans? Are they original/vintage paper plans, old copies, or more recent digital plans?
Knowledge of existing documentation will impact the development of a fee for this study.
A: We have both paper and digital plans which can be made available to the shortlisted or winning respondent.
Question 7 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: When was the last school facility study completed? This document will be useful in establishing a prior benchmark.
A: We have several building assessments, including roof conditions, HVAC (2024–2025), energy studies (2022), and more.
Question 8 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: Does the School Physical Plant Department have a record of the additions and repairs completed at each school over the last 20 years?
A: Yes.
Question 9 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: Does the school District have a copy of the most recent AHERA report for each school?
A: Yes.
Question 10 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: Does the School Physical Plant Department have records of utility bills for each school for the last 2 years?
A: Yes.
Question 11 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: What are the gross SF areas of each school? This information would be invaluable in identifying each proposer's scope of services, especially for our engineering consultants.
A: Clover: 53,980 SF; JFK: 65,600 SF; Oliver Ellsworth: 72,082 SF; Poquonock: 62,657 SF; Sage Park: 176,355 SF; WHS:
272,100 SF; LP Wilson: 106,211 SF.
Question 12 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: Who does the Windsor School District use as its foodservice vendor?
A: Thurston, Simos, Sysco.
Question 13 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: Building #7, listed in the RFP, is called “LP Wilson Alternative/Special Programs.” The Town website identifies it as a community center rather than an educational building. Is there a specific intended plan for use of this building, or is this to be determined as part of this study?
A: To be determined, as part of the study.
Question 14 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: It would be helpful if the School District could provide a list of facility studies or assessments completed in the past 10 years for MEP/FPs, utilities, building envelope, structural condition, and site or civil engineering to the proposers. Having access to these reports would help further identify the proposed scope of work under this RFP.
A: Several studies have been performed over the past 10 years. They can be made available to the shortlisted or winning respondent.
Question 15 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: Will the District issue a fee proposal form or fee sheet that respondents should use to help standardize fee comparisons among submissions?
A: No. Respondents may use their own format for the fee proposal. Please ensure that the proposal includes all five required elements identified in Section 3.5, Fee Proposal, of the RFP.
Question 16 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: Can the anticipated target delivery dates for each section of the studies be provided?
A: The District anticipates awarding the contract in September 2026 and expects the overall study to have an approximate 12-month duration. Respondents are encouraged to include a proposed project schedule with milestones and deliverables for the District’s consideration as part of their submission.
Question 17 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: Will existing building documentation be made available to the selected consultant? If so, in what format (e.g., CAD, Revit, PDF, etc.)?
A: Yes. The District has both paper and digital building plans as well as several previous facility studies and assessments.
These materials will be made available to the shortlisted firms or the selected consultant, as appropriate. The specific digital file formats available will depend on the records maintained for each facility.
Question 18 (Received 07/16/26)
Q: Can you confirm whether a separate fee proposal document is required, or if the fee proposal may be included within a single cohesive submission?
A: A separate fee proposal document is not required. The fee proposal may be included within a single cohesive submission, provided it clearly addresses all requirements outlined in Section 3.5 of the RFP.
End of Addendum No. 1. All other terms and conditions of the RFP remain unchanged.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .