RFPQB 2025 ACC_Bike Plus Data Fusion 4.3.25.pdf

A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

for

Innovative Mobility: Bike+ Data Fusion Activity Model

April 7, 2025

DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

1001 17th Street, Suite 700

Denver, Colorado 80202

Table of Contents I. Instructions for submittal of proposal

A. Summary B. Solicitation schedule C. General instructions D. Required elements in response/response format E. Selection process F. Special conditions

II. Project description Attachment A – Principles for determining costs applicable to contracts with the Denver Regional Council of Governments

A. Purpose and scope B. Definitions C. Basic guidelines D. Accounting system E. Billing procedure

Attachment B – Federal and state requirements A. Nondiscrimination Provisions B. Noncompliance C. Single Audit Act Amendment D. Employee Financial Interest/Conflict of Interest (C.R.S. § 24-18-201 and 24-50-507) E. The Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. 1501-1508) and Public Law 95-454 Section 4728 F. 42 USC 6101 et seq. 42 U.S.C. 2000d, 29 U.S.C. 794, and implementing regulation, 45 C.F.R.

Part 80 et. seq G. The Americans with Disabilities Act (Public Law 101-336); 42 U.S.C. 12101, 12102, 12111- 12117, 12131-12134, 12141-12150, 12161-12165, 12181-12189, 12201-12213; 47 U.S.C. 225 and 47 U.S.C. 611 H. The Drug-Free Workplace Act (Public Law 100-690 Title V, subtitle D, 41 U.S.C. 701 et seq.). . 21 I. The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, 42 U.S.C. Sections 6101 et. seq. and its implementing regulation, 45 C.F.R. Part 91; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. 794, as amended, and implementing regulation 45 C.F.R. Part 84 J. §§24-85-101, et seq., C.R.S., or the Accessibility Standards for Individuals with a Disability as established by OIT pursuant to Section §24-85-103 (2.5), C.R.S

Attachment C – Denver Regional Council of Governments disadvantaged business enterprise program information request form Attachment D – E-Verify federal contractor rule employment eligibility verification Attachment E – Sample contract

I. Instructions for submittal of proposal A. Summary

The Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) hereby issues this Request for (RFP) (referred to further herein also as solicitation) in order to solicit proposals from individuals, firms, and teams (referred to further herein also as “respondent”, “contractor” or “consultant” interchangeably) with experience in developing network volume estimation models for bicycling and micromobility activity by fusing multiple data sources.

B. Solicitation schedule Consideration of the responses will be governed by the following schedule, which is subject to revision by DRCOG.

Milestone Details Date

Distribution

Solicitation will be forwarded to respondents and firms who have indicated an interest in participating in this project.

The solicitation is posted on the BidNet Direct System at:

www.bidnetdirect.com

April 7, 2025

Questions and inquiries

Questions and inquiries should be sent to bids@drcog.org by 2:00 pm Mountain time.

April 21, Question responses

DRCOG will respond to questions and inquiries via the BidNet Direct System. Responses are posted as an addendum to the solicitation by this date.

April 23, Submittals due

Responses to this request must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. Mountain time. Proposals must be submitted via the BidNet Direct System at www.bidnetdirect.com.

Registration for the site is free. If you have any questions related to registration or the BidNet Direct site, please call the BidNet customer support line at 1-800-835-4603.

Note that DRCOG staff is unable to assist with the registration process or any technical difficulties that may occur using Bidnet.

May 2, 2025

Interviews Interviews, if required, will be held on or before this date.

Notification of selection for an interview will be given on or before May 13, 2025

May 22, Recommendation and authorization

Following review of responses, DRCOG staff to prepare recommendation to proceed to contract with one (or more) of the respondent(s). DRCOG staff to seek approval from DRCOG’s Finance and Budget Committee if applicable to proceed to contract with selected respondent(s). This date is approximate.

June 18, http://www.bidnetdirect.com/ mailto:bids@drcog.org http://www.bidnetdirect.com/

Contract execution

DRCOG staff to begin contract negotiations with selected respondent(s). DRCOG may contract with one (or more) respondent(s) to complete the entire scope of work. This date is approximate.

June 19, C. General instructions

1. Questions

Questions regarding this solicitation must be submitted by the date listed above.

Questions should be submitted electronically to bids@drcog.org.

2. Signatory requirements Responses must be signed by a duly authorized official of the respondent. Consortiums, joint ventures, or teams submitting responses will not be considered responsive unless it is established that all contractual responsibility to DRCOG with regard to the project shall rest solely with one contractor or legal entity, which shall not be a subsidiary or affiliate with limited resources. Each response should indicate the entity responsible for execution on behalf of the team.

3. Responses to solicitation All responses to this solicitation become the property of DRCOG upon receipt and will not be returned to the respondent. Selection or rejection will not affect this right.

DRCOG shall have the right to use any or all of the ideas or adaptations of the ideas contained in any response received, excluding case study materials or other reference materials prepared for clients of respondent. Any confidential/proprietary information submitted in response to this request shall be readily identified, clearly marked, and separated from the rest of the response. Co-mingling of confidential/proprietary and other information is not acceptable and may disqualify the submittal from the selection process. Submittals will be handled in accordance with applicable federal and state public records laws and procurement regulations. Neither cost information nor the total response will be considered confidential/proprietary.

D. Required elements in response/response format

1. Cover letter

Respondents should submit a cover letter expressing their interest in the project. The letter must contain, at a minimum, the following information:

mailto:bids@drcog.org

a. Statement of interest in completion of the work as described herein.

b. Certification that the information and data submitted is true and complete to the best knowledge of the individual signing the letter.

c. Respondent’s name, address, telephone number, fax number and e-mail address of the individual to contact regarding the submittal.

d. An authorized principal or partner of a firm shall sign the letter.

e. Identification of whether the prime respondent is certified as a Disadvantage

Business Enterprise, or indication as to the Respondent’s goals for DBE participation, if any (see Section E.5).

2. Qualifications and experience of the respondent(s) Respondents shall describe projects and experience of the past three years relevant to the draft scope of services described in Section II, Project Description, below.

Respondents should place particular emphasis on projects for which key staff to be assigned to this project have either been primarily responsible or have performed substantial work. If subcontractors are to be used, the means by which these firms will participate must be specified and their experience and credentials presented in this section.

3. Qualifications and experience of key staff Respondents shall identify the key individuals to be assigned to this project (by name and position) and describe the work tasks assigned to each individual. The respondent must also provide experience summaries of these key individuals, describing for each individual their previous experience on similar projects in similar roles, their educational background, and their length of tenure with the consulting firm. Resumes of these key individuals may also be included and can be added in the optional section. Respondents shall also list any professional affiliations, licensures, and certifications that are pertinent to the work described in Section II, Project Description.

4. References Respondents shall submit names, addresses, email address, and phone numbers of references familiar with the Respondent's ability, experience, and reliability in the performance and management of projects of a similar nature. References listed in any submitted proposals will not be eligible to serve on the selection panel.

5. Cost information Both cost and other factors listed herein will be weighed in selecting a respondent.

Respondents shall provide a listing of the hourly billing rates for each job classification and job title they would expect to deploy on this project, including any supporting personnel. Respondents shall provide a complete budget for the project including hours and cost broken out by project task and a total dollar amount proposed for the project.

Respondents shall also include a complete budget for the project including breakout of costs associated with any materials, services, or travel that may be required in the course of performing the tasks outlined below. Overhead costs such as business insurance premiums, cellular phone, technology needs related to staff, etc., also known as the typical cost of doing business, should be factored into hourly consultant rates and will not be reimbursed on a line-item basis.

Allowable costs under any contract with the selected Respondent will be administered in accordance with Attachment A of this solicitation.

6. Contract review The successful Respondent will be required to sign a Contract for Services substantially similar to the contract form in Attachment E. DRCOG reserves the right to add or delete provisions to the form prior to contract execution.

Respondents shall undertake a detailed review of the Sample Contract and submit with their proposal a list of questions which the Respondent would like DRCOG to review, should they be selected as the top ranked respondent. Respondents are strongly advised to seek legal counsel prior to preparing such a list. DRCOG shall assume that the Sample Contract has been thoroughly reviewed and discussed with legal counsel prior to submission of the list of questions.

Comments to Sample Contract for Services.

Prospective respondents are required to provide any clarifying questions pertaining to the provided sample Contract for Services (Attachment E). The intent of this section is to expedite the negotiation time between respondent selection and final contracting. Any objections to the legal terms and conditions of the sample contract submitted after the submission of the proposal will not be considered by DRCOG and may result in rejection of the proposal. Respondents are strongly advised to seek legal counsel prior to preparing this section. DRCOG shall assume that the sample Contract has been thoroughly reviewed and discussed with legal counsel prior to the submission of this comments list. Comments submitted in this section do not count toward the prescribed page limits (if any). DRCOG reserves the right to add or delete provisions to the form prior to contract execution.

Prospective respondents are advised that as recipients of federal and state funding, DRCOG contracts with vendors and consultants mirror the language set forth in its funding agreements. As a result, DRCOG contracts are largely non-negotiable. Extensive changes, “wordsmithing”, and alterations of primary provisions will not be accepted by DRCOG.

7. Project management Respondents shall identify the management techniques that they are using to assure the completion of projects within schedule and budget.

8. Project schedule Respondents should include a project timeline or schedule showing major tasks, proposed duration of each task and when key deliverables will be complete.

9. Insurance requirements Respondents shall provide acknowledgement of the following insurance requirements and a statement ensuring they are able to meet these minimum requirements. Any Contract resulting from award of this solicitation will require the selected respondent(s) to procure and maintain, and shall cause each subcontractor of respondent to procure and maintain the minimum insurance coverages listed below:

a. Workers’ Compensation in statutory limits.

b. Employer's Liability Insurance: $100,000/ each accident, $500,000/ disease -policy limit, and $100,000/ disease - each employee.

c. Comprehensive General Liability Insurance $1,000,000/Occurrence;

d. $1,000,000/Products and Completed Operations Aggregate; $50,000/any one fire.

e. Automobile Liability or Hired & Non-Owned Vehicle Liability Insurance:

$1,000,000/each accident.

f. Professional Liability Insurance: $1,000,000 per claim.

DRCOG, its officers, and employees are to be named as additional insured under both the Contractor's General Liability and Automobile Liability policies.

Said insurance will be required to be maintained in full force and effect during the term of the contract.

The foregoing insurance types, limits, and coverages may be modified only with the express written consent of DRCOG and shall be subject to additional terms and conditions of any contract awarded pursuant to this solicitation

10. Disadvantaged business enterprise information All Respondents shall complete and return with their response the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Information Request Form (Attachment C).

11. Equal employment opportunity clause Parties hereby incorporate the requirements of 41 C.F.R. § 60-1.4(a), 60-250-5, 60- 300.5(a), 60-741.5(a) and 29 C.F.R. § 471, Appendix A, if applicable. This contractor and subcontractor shall abide by the requirements of 41 CFR 60-300.5(a) and 41 CFR 60- 741.5(a), if applicable. These regulations prohibit discrimination against qualified protected veterans and qualified individuals with disabilities and require affirmative action by covered prime contractors and subcontractors to employ and advance in employment qualified protected veterans and qualified individuals with disabilities.

12. Colorado law for persons with disabilities The State of Colorado, through House Bill 21-1110 and Senate Bill 23-244, has legislated that it is a state civil rights violation for a public entity to exclude people with disabilities from receiving services or benefits because of lack of accessibility. This applies to all information and communication technology that is used and/or funded by public entities, whether the users are members of the public or employees. Respondents are expected to review the law in detail before responding. Respondents intending to provide software, or an application must submit an accessibility conformance report using the most current Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) template.

Respondents intending to provide digital documents as their deliverable will be required to provide appropriate documentation of their accessibility, as defined in the scope of work.

13. Reservations and special conditions The respondent should review the Special Conditions in Section F below, the principles for determining costs in Attachment A, and the Federal and State Requirements in Attachment B. The respondent should note any elements/reservations, special conditions, constraints, and exclusions related to the terms of this solicitation. Failure to comply with the requirements in Attachments A and B may result in termination of the contract with the selected respondent.

14. Project Understanding and Approach Respondents shall describe their understanding of the project and explain their proposed approach to the work. Respondents’ response should include their understanding of the project purpose and goals, a discussion of the potential challenges and opportunities for the project, and acknowledgement of the context in which the project is taking place.

Respondents should also outline their unique approach to meeting project goals and addressing tasks outlined in the scope of work, including innovative strategies, recommendations for how to accomplish each task, and a project timeline.

E. Selection process Evaluations of proposals will be based on the following criteria:

1. Experience and capability Respondents will be evaluated with respect to the experience of the respondent(s) and personnel assigned to the project both in terms of past efforts in this type of work and the quality and level of commitment to this project. Of prime concern will be the capabilities and accomplishments of the individuals to be assigned to this particular project.

2. Management qualifications Qualifications of the respondent in terms of its ability, experience, and reliability in performing and managing work within a schedule and budget will be included in the evaluation process.

3. Cost information Likely project cost, determined from the standard service fee break out provided by the respondent, will be considered in the selection; however, it will not be the only determining factor. Specific attention will be given to the commitment implied for key staff and the overall labor effort proposed, and their relationship to the estimated project cost.

4. References Information provided by respondent’s references addressing the knowledge, skills, abilities and performance of the respondent to complete the work outlined below will be included in the staff evaluation of the response.

5. Contract and insurance Respondents will be assessed on their ability to comply with DRCOG’s sample contract verbiage and insurance requirements.

6. Colorado law for persons with disability compliance It is the policy of DRCOG to evaluate each respondent’s ability to comply with House Bill 21-1110 and Senate Bill 23-244. Non-compliance does not necessarily preclude a vendor from contracting with DRCOG but may be taken into consideration during the selection process depending on the service or product.

7. Project Understanding and Approach Respondents will be evaluated on their understanding and approach to the project. This will include awareness of goals, opportunities, and challenges, as well as innovative strategies for the work. Specific attention will be given to goals and priorities outlined in the RFP and scope of work.

8. Other Other factors that may be determined by DRCOG to be necessary or appropriate in its discretion.

F. Special conditions

1. Rejection rights

All respondents are notified that the execution of a contract pursuant to this solicitation is dependent upon approval by DRCOG. DRCOG reserves the right to reject all responses and re-solicit if deemed by DRCOG to be in its best interests, and to abandon the project and this solicitation at any time for any or no reason. Selection of a respondent or respondents is also conditioned on the negotiation of an acceptable contract.

2. Other conditions; reservation of rights This is a solicitation and not an offer to contract. The provisions in this solicitation and any procurement or purchasing policies or procedures of DRCOG are solely for the fiscal responsibility of DRCOG and confer no rights, duties, or entitlements to any party submitting responses to this solicitation. DRCOG reserves the right to issue clarifications and other directives concerning this solicitation, to make and issue modifications to the solicitation schedule; to require clarification or further information with respect to any response or proposal received; to waiver any informalities or irregularities; and to determine the final scope and terms of any contract, and whether to enter any contract. The provisions herein confer no rights, duties or entitlements to any respondent.

3. Costs of response preparation and other charges Respondents are solely responsible for all costs of preparing their proposals and participation in this solicitation and DRCOG assumes no responsibility for payment of any expenses incurred by a respondent as part of this process. For the selected firm, no reimbursement will be made by DRCOG for any costs incurred prior to full execution of a contract and issuance of written notice by DRCOG to commence project services.

4. Conflict of interest Respondents shall not engage in any business or personal activities or practices or maintain any relationships which conflict in any way with the full performance of respondent’s obligations in this project. Respondents shall acknowledge that with respect to any subsequent contract, even the appearance of a conflict of interest is harmful to DRCOG’s interests. Absent DRCOG’s prior written approval, respondents shall refrain from any practices, activities or relationships that reasonably appear to be in conflict with the full performance of respondents’ obligations to DRCOG. If a conflict or appearance exists, or if respondent is uncertain whether a conflict or the appearance of a conflict of interest exists, respondent shall submit to DRCOG a disclosure statement setting forth the relevant details for DRCOG’s consideration. Failure to promptly submit a disclosure statement or to follow DRCOG’s direction in regard to the apparent conflict constitutes a breach of contract.

5. Federal and state requirements The selected respondent shall be responsible, at all times during the execution of the project, for strictly adhering to and complying with all applicable federal and state laws and regulations, including but not limited to those set forth in Attachment B.

6. Cooperative purchasing Respondents are asked to indicate their willingness to extend the terms of resulting contracts, inclusive of price, to Colorado local government entities, including counties and municipalities. While this clause in no way commits any other local government entity to purchase from DRCOG’s awarded contractor, nor does it guarantee any additional orders will result, it does allow such local governmental entities, at their discretion, to make use of DRCOG’s competitive process (provided said process satisfies their own procurement guidelines) and purchase directly from the awarded contractor. All purchases made by other local government entities will be transactions between that entity and the awarded vendor; DRCOG will not be responsible for any such purchases.

7. Funding Sources DRCOG reserves, in its sole discretion, the right to add additional funding sources for this solicitation should it become available. Respondents must agree to and be capable of tracking different funding sources, allocating expenses, and billing accordingly. This provision in no way commits or obligates DRCOG to provide additional funding for this project.

8. Suspension and debarment By submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation, the respondent represents its organization, and its principals are not suspended or debarred per Federal requirements.

9. Period of performance Performance of the contract resulting from this solicitation will commence on or about July 1, 2025 The initial term of the work to be performed will terminate December 31, 2026 DRCOG will have an option to renew for 1 additional one-year terms, upon renewal terms mutually agreed upon by the parties.

II. Project description

Introduction The Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) seeks proposals from teams qualified and experienced in developing bicycling and active transportation activity models.

This work is part of DRCOG’s Innovative Mobility Set-Aside program, which supports member jurisdictions in emerging mobility planning efforts. The program focuses on preparedness, feasibility and planning of emerging mobility in the Denver region. Collaborative efforts through the program will help address challenges such as curbside management, emerging modes, shared mobility, and mobility as a service. This project will be led by DRCOG but developed in close collaboration with the City and County of Denver and City of Boulder, Colorado.

The purpose of this study is to estimate and assign average daily “Bike+” trips—i.e., trips by any small, low-speed, human or electric-powered transportation devices including bicycles, scooters, electric-assist bicycles and scooters, and other small, lightweight wheeled conveyances—to the street network by fusing traditional and emerging bike+ data sources. Bike+ modes have proliferated in the DRCOG region in the last five years, proving to be popular transportation options for many users. They are a key component in helping the region meet its congestion reduction, mode shift and air quality goals.

However, significant investments need to be made to provide safe, connected and comfortable bike+ networks across the region, particularly in urban areas.

Bike+ trip data are foundational for identifying demand and infrastructure gaps in the region.

Traditionally, this data were only available at select locations on the network through either short term or permanent counters installed by the managing agencies. Budget constraints have limited widespread and continuous data collection. More recently, additional data is available through emerging sources such as Strava Metro, shared micromobility operations (collected by Ride Report) and cellphone/connected vehicle data platforms, which provide larger coverage of select bike+ trips.

Further, vendors have attempted to scale up location-based services data to estimate network-wide or area-wide bike+ use. However, the methods used to scale up the data and the quality and accuracy of resultant estimates remain unverified. This project, proposed by the City and County of Denver Department of Transportation and Infrastructure in partnership with the City of Boulder (“Partner Cities”), aims to estimate and assign average daily bike+ trips to the street and trail network (“bike+ network”) by fusing traditional and emerging bike+ data sources and accounting for surrounding land-use and demography factors.

While the next section of the RFP includes potential tasks and deliverables, DRCOG encourages proposing consultants or consultant teams to include members from a range of disciplines to encourage innovative approaches to the research, which may include (but is not limited to) firms specializing in active transportation planning, firms specializing in data analytics and model development, and/or research institutions. Once the consulting firm or team of firms is selected, the DRCOG project manager (PM), in consultation with key project partners, and consultant will work together to further define the Scope of Work and the associated tasks. This RFP includes both core required tasks and deliverables, as well as optional tasks and deliverables that are desired as budget allows. Additionally, DRCOG and the Partner Cities would be interested in receiving proposals that propose “modular” optional tasks, or tasks that may be recommended by the proposing Consultant Team based on their expertise and experience with similar projects.

The timeline to develop this plan is approximately 18 months from when a contract is executed.

https://www.drcog.org/transportation-planning/emerging-mobility/innovative-mobility-set-aside

Tasks Project management This task includes managing the project and associated deliverables. This may include items such as meetings with project manager and project management committee, monthly progress reports, invoices and billing, meeting summaries and other project management activities identified by the project team.

Task 1: State of the Practice and Use Case Development The Consultant Team will draft a memo detailing the state of the practice for developing Bike+ models and present findings to DRCOG and its partners. The purpose of this memo is to identify and evaluate potential approaches to building the Bike+ Network Volume Estimation Model detailed in Task 3.

Literature/State of the Practice Review The Consultant Team will conduct a research scan of similar efforts undertaken to fuse diverse data and modeling sources to estimate Bike+ activity, and review research literature to understand and summarize the state of the practice around estimating active transportation activities. These findings will be summarized in a memorandum to DRCOG and the Partner Cities to help guide this project’s approach to creating a Bike+ Network Volume Model.

Additionally, the Consultant will identify and suggest potential research questions that may be pursued in Task 5. Potential research questions may include:

• Given a street’s context and ridership demand in the area, what is the range of potential ridership demand on the street?

• Where should bike+ infrastructure be added or enhanced to attract the most bike+ ridership?

• Do certain bike+ facilities attract more ridership than others, if everything else is equal?

• What are the estimated potential air pollution and GHG emissions reductions from installing a bike facility on a street?

• Which streets are best candidates for building bike+ infrastructure from a safety and ridership standpoint?

• Where observed data is collected, how do rider types break down by facility type or context on existing facilities (e.g., observed gender splits, helmet use or vehicle types by context)?

Peer Expert Consultation In addition to the state of the practice and literature review, the consultant team will interview at least three entities that have done similar work and document their approach, data used, challenges and outcomes. The findings meeting will be used to identify and finalize research questions that will be answered through this project and will be documented in the task memorandum.

Use Case Development Finally, after completing the literature/practice review and peer city interviews, the Consultant will work with DRCOG and Partner City staff to identify and summarize use cases for the Bike+ Network Model, to guide model development and detail how the Model may be applied or expanded to DRCOG and the Partner Cities’ work.

Deliverables

• State of best practices memorandum, including documentation of findings, a final list of research questions and use cases for this project.

Roles

• The Consultant Team will lead research, peer city identification and interviews, stakeholder consultation regarding use case identification and memorandum development.

• DRCOG and Partner Cities will provide guidance and oversight.

Task 2: Data gathering After the literature review/state of the practice and development of research questions, the next step will be to identify and gather data sets that will help answer the research questions and build the Bike+ Network Volume Models. In addition to the data provided by DRCOG and its partners, the Consultant Team will recommend whether it is necessary to gather additional counts (up to 25 locations) in areas where sufficient bike+ demand data is not available.

Bike+ activity data Identify and gather data sources that will be used to model ridership. Potential data sources that DRCOG and the Partner Cities could provide include:

• Location-based services data which provides areawide estimates of bike+ trip origins and destinations, but does not assign bike+ trips to the street network

• Shared micromobility trip data, utilizing mobility data specification and general bikeshare feed specification data

• Boulder B-Cycle trip starts and ends

• Strava Metro activities

• Network of municipal and state permanent count sites (primarily inductive loops and infrared beam counters)

• Short duration counts; these will need to be adjusted for seasonality based on factors developed by the Consultant Team from continuous counters.

Contextual data Identify and gather data that will be used to construct and characterize the bike+ network, including infrastructure and land-use data that can be used to estimate or augment trip generation and assignment. Potential datasets that can be furnished by DRCOG and Partner Cities include:

• Street centerlines, including length, functional classification, posted and 85th percentile speed when available, AADT, truck traffic, street gradient, number of vehicle lanes, turn lanes, and curb cuts and connectivity.

• Bicycle facilities, including facility type and design characteristics (e.g., pavement surface material, means of separation, width), and maintenance practices (e.g. snow/ice removal, gravel removal). DRCOG maintains a Regional Bicycle Facility Inventory that crosswalks facility types from all jurisdictions into the following menu:

o Shared-Use Paths (a.k.a., Multi-Use Paths or trails) o Side paths (sidewalks explicitly signed as shared bicycle facilities) o Separated Bike Lanes (a.k.a., Protected Bike Lanes) o Bicycle Lanes (Denver distinguishes between buffered and conventional bike lanes, while Boulder emphasizes preference for buffered bicycle lanes where feasible) o Bicycle Boulevards (a.k.a., Neighborhood Bikeways or Neighborhood Green Streets)

• Traffic signals, wayfinding, and control devices.

• Land use/zoning data.

• Socio-demographic data.

• DRCOG’s Focus travel model.

• 3-years of crash data (including bike crash data)

• Seasonal adjustment factors where available.

Deliverables

• Data inventory ready for modeling

Roles

• Consultant team is responsible for creating a complete and consolidated data request.

• DRCOG partners are responsible for collecting and transmitting available data in the format that the jurisdiction currently has the data.

Task 3: Bike+ network model development During this task, the Consultant will develop a Bike+ network model that estimates existing average daily bike+ trips on the complete bike+ network within each of the two jurisdictions: the City of Boulder and the City and County of Denver. Using data gathered during Task 1, Network Volume Estimation Methodology The Consultant will propose and develop a methodology for fusing verified count data with big data sources to develop the network model. This methodology will define input data sources, a typology and classification of street types and land use contexts, software and computation approach, and expected outputs. The Consultant will share the initial methodology with project stakeholders for input prior to finalizing the model.

Bike+ Network Volume Model Using a Linear Referencing System base layer provided by DRCOG, the Consultant will build a model estimating Average Daily Bicycle Traffic (ADBT) on a weekday (Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday) in September-October timeframe for each bike+ network segment within the two city boundaries. The September-October timeframe corresponds to the timing of travel behavior surveys in Boulder and Denver. The Consultant will map results of the bike+ network ADBT using a GIS platform, outputting the results to an ESRI File Geodatabase. Additionally, the Consultant will provide DRCOG and the Partner Cities with the code base for calculating the model network so that the project team may make future updates.

Corridor Estimation Tool The Consultant will develop a localized Segment-level estimation tool. While the ultimate form of this tool is malleable, DRCOG and team are seeking a calculator tool, such as an interactive spreadsheet with editable variables, which project partners can use to adjust inputs and calculate expected changes to segment- or corridor-level Bike+ volume. For instance, if a corridor is undergoing a planning analysis to install or upgrade a bicycle facility, the estimation tool could be utilized to understand the potential change in bicycle volume before and after implementation.

Deliverables

• Memorandum detailing the methodology for developing the Bike+ Network Volume Model.

• Bike+ Network Volume Model output as a GIS geodatabase with estimated Bike+ volumes and margins of error per street segment, with code base for updating future model runs.

• Segment-level estimation tool.

Roles

• Consultant to lead

• DRCOG and Partner Cities will provide oversight, review deliverables and provide one set of consolidated comments

Task 4: Bike+ Network Model validation During this task, the Consultant will collect screen line counts of Bike+ users across a representative sample of locations across the two jurisdictions to validate the Model output from Task 3, and to answer secondary research questions. This task can be completed either concurrently with or after Task 3.

Count Collection The Consultant will, depending on team members, either directly or through procurement as a direct expense, collect short duration Bike+ screen line counts at up to 50-75 locations across Denver and

Boulder. The Consultant will propose a scheme or methodology for selecting locations to ensure they cover diverse contexts and can be used to accurately validate the Bike+ Network Model.

Upon completing the methodology, the Consultant team will collect bike+ counts across a variety of locations to validate estimates developed in Task 3. The Consultant should plan for collecting screen line counts at approximately 50-75 locations, though the Partner Cities are seeking recommendations both around the number of locations, the dispersion of those locations across the two jurisdictions, and the method of data collection. To best balance statistical rigor with cost considerations, the Partner Cities anticipate recommending a mix of pneumatic tube and video camera counts, which provide the opportunity for more granular analysis of vehicle types and user characteristics.

Deliverables

• Up to 75 screen line counts covering the two jurisdictions. The counts should primarily be a count collection method that can differentiate among user types, including at a minimum bicycles and scooters, while differentiation between e-bikes and acoustic bikes is also desired.

Ideally, a representative sample of the counts will be able to be utilized for answering additional research questions, including gender split, electric versus acoustic bikes, helmet use, and rider location (i.e., sidewalk vs. street).

• Update to the Bike+ Network model and Corridor Estimation Tool based on the validation analysis, and a presentation of the findings and changes to DRCOG and the Partner Cities.

Roles

• Consultant is responsible for developing collection site selection methodology and procuring counts.

• DRCOG partners are responsible for providing input.

Task 5: Bike+ Network Volume Estimation Report The Consultant Team will compile deliverables developed during previous tasks such as the State of the Practice Review, Network Volume Estimation Methodology, Bike+ Network Volume Model, and Network Model Validation results into a comprehensive but concise report documenting the project. The Consultant Team should expect to prepare one draft report and one final report, which will address and resolve a consolidated set of comments from DRCOG and the Partner Cities. The report will be accessible to comply with WCAG 2.1 standards—while DRCOG can perform final accessibility remediation, the Consultant Team will be expected to create an “accessibility ready” document that includes key accessibility features (such as accessible document structure, formatting and alternative text).

Deliverables

• Draft Bike+ Network Volume Estimation Report

• Final Bike+ Network Volume Estimation Report

Roles

• DRCOG will provide a report template in either MS Word or Adobe InDesign (to be determined) that includes accessible document structure and approved color palette options.

• Consultant Team will develop the draft and final reports in an “accessibility ready” format, including alt text for graphics and images, accessible colors and contrast for all document elements, and accessible structure and text.

• DRCOG and Partner Cities will provide one round of consolidated comments on the draft report.

• DRCOG will complete final remediation using Common Look software.

Task 6: Future forecast model development (modular) During this task, the Consultant will utilize the Bike+ Network Model to conduct forecast modeling and prepare a summary report of key findings to the project team. Using the Partner Cities’ long range bicycle network plans and DRCOG’s forecast scenarios for a designated future year (e.g., forecasted 2050 land-use and socio-economic data), the Consultant will apply the model to estimate and summarize future bike+ volumes in the two jurisdictions’ street networks. The Consultant may also propose a type of multimodal forecasting model that has been successful in a peer region or city.

This task is proposed as a “modular” task, or a task that may be included as the fee estimate allows.

Deliverables

• GIS dataset with 2050 forecast model of bike+ network volumes

• Summary report of key findings.

Roles

• The Consultant will conduct forecast modeling and share results with project team and stakeholders.

Attachment A – Principles for determining costs applicable to contracts with the Denver Regional Council of Governments

A. Purpose and scope

1. Objective

This policy procedure sets forth principles for determining the allowable costs of contracts with DRCOG and provides a general summary of applicable policies. Allowable costs are determined and administered in accordance with these principles and applicable federal regulations and requirements, including without limitation 49 C.F.R. Part 18 Subpart C and 49 C.F.R. 18.22.

Applicable Cost Principles. For each kind of organization, there is a set of Federal principles for determining allowable costs. The following table lists the kinds of organizations and the applicable cost principles:

2. Policy Guides The application of these principles is based on the fundamental premises that:

a. Contractors are responsible for the efficient and effective administration of contract programs through the application of sound management practices.

b. Contractors assume the responsibility for seeing that contract funds have been expended and accounted for consistent with underlying agreements and contract objectives and provisions.

c. Each contractor organization, in recognition of its own unique combination of staff facilities and experience, will have the primary responsibility for employing whatever form of organization and management techniques may be necessary to assure proper and efficient administration.

3. Application These principles will be applied to all contracts with DRCOG in determining costs and cost reimbursement type contracts including subcontracts.

B. Definitions Approval or authorization of DRCOG means documentation evidencing consent prior to incurring specific costs.

For the costs of a: Use the principles in:

State, local, or federal-recognized Indian tribal government 2 C.F.R. Part 225 (OMB Circular

A-87) Private nonprofit organization other than: (1) an institution of higher education; (2) a hospital; or (3) organization named in 2 CFR Part 230, Appendix C, as not subject to that part

2 C.F.R. Part 230 (OMB Circular A-122)

Institutions of Higher Education 2 C.F.R. Part 220 (OMB Circular A-21)

For-profit organizations other than: (1) a hospital; (2) a commercial organization; or (3) a non-profit organization listed in 2 CFR Part 230, Appendix C, as not subject to that part

48 C.F.R. Subpart 31.2

Cost allocation plan means the documentation identifying, accumulating, and distributing allowable costs under DRCOG’s contracts, together with the allocation methods used.

Cost, as used herein, means cost as determined on a cash, accrual, or other basis acceptable to the DRCOG as a discharge of the Contractor's accountability for DRCOG’s funds.

Cost objective means a pool, center, or area established for the accumulation of cost. Such areas include organizational units, functions, objects or items of expense, as well as ultimate cost objectives including specific on-site direct and indirect activities.

Contract program means those activities and operations of the Contractor which are necessary to carry out the purposes of the contract.

Services, as used herein, means goods and facilities, as well as services.

Supporting services means auxiliary functions necessary to sustain the direct effort involved in administering a contract or an activity providing service to the program. These services may include procurement, payroll, personnel functions, maintenance and operation of space, data processing, accounting, budgeting, auditing, mail and messenger service, and the like.

C. Basic guidelines

1. Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs

To be allowable under a DRCOG contract, costs must meet the following general criteria:

a. Meet the standards and criteria set forth in the applicable federal regulations and requirements.

b. Be necessary and reasonable for proper and efficient administration of the contract, be allocable thereto under these principles, and except as specifically provided herein, not be a general expense required to carry out the overall responsibilities of the Contractor.

c. Be authorized or not prohibited under state or local laws or regulations.

d. Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles, federal laws, or other governing limitations as to types or amounts of cost items.

e. Be consistent with policies, regulations, and procedures that apply uniformly to all activities of the Contractor.

f. Be accorded consistent treatment through application of generally accepted accounting principles appropriate to the circumstances.

g. Not be allocable to or included as a cost of any other program in either the current or a prior period.

h. Be net of all applicable credits.

i. Be satisfactorily documented.

2. Allocable Costs A cost is allocable to a particular cost objective to the extent of benefits received by such objective.

3. Applicable Credits Applicable credits refer to those receipts or reduction of expenditure-type transactions that offset or reduce expense items allocable to contracts as direct or indirect costs. Examples of such transactions are: purchase discounts; rebates or allowances; recoveries or indemnities on losses; sales or publications, equipment, and scrap; income from personal or incidental services; and adjustments of overpayment or erroneous charges.

D. Accounting system The Contractor shall establish and maintain a proper accounting system in accordance with generally accepted accounting standards (a separate set of accounts, or as a separate and integral part of its current accounting scheme) to assure that project funds are expended, and costs accounted in a manner consistent with the contract and project objectives.

All allowable costs charged to the project, including any approved services contributed by the Contractor or others, shall be supported by properly executed payrolls, time records, invoices, contractors or vouchers evidencing in detail the nature of the charges.

Any check or order drawn up by the Contractor, including any item which is or will be chargeable against the project account, shall only be drawn up in accordance with a properly signed voucher on file in the office of the Contractor, which will detail the purpose for which said check or order is drawn. All checks, payrolls, invoices, contracts, vouchers, orders or other accounting documents shall be clearly identified, readily accessible, and to the extent feasible, kept separate and apart from all other such documents.

E. Billing procedure Billings shall include appropriate documentation, such as detailed listing of charges being submitted for payment including billable hours and hourly rate, payments to sub-contractors, parking and mileage, supplies, etc. Certain funding sources may require more documentation, such as approved timesheet copies of invoices paid, etc. Contractors must maintain detailed records that are subject to review and/or audit by DRCOG or its representatives.

Attachment B – Federal and state requirements A. Nondiscrimination Provisions

In connection with this request, the selected respondent(s) shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of age, race, sex, color, religion, veteran status, marital status, national origin, disability, being a disadvantaged person, genetic information, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or any other status protected by applicable state or local law. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation and selection for training, including any apprenticeship.

Selected respondent shall comply with all applicable provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 162(a) of the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1973 and with the Regulations of the Department of Transportation relative to nondiscrimination in Federally assisted programs of the Department of Transportation (Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21).

The selected respondent(s) will furnish all necessary information and reports and will permit access to its books, records, and accounts by DRCOG for purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of any resultant contract.

B. Noncompliance In the event of the selected respondent(s) noncompliance with the nondiscrimination provision of any resultant contract, DRCOG shall impose such contract sanctions as it may determine to be appropriate, including, but not limited to:

1. Withholding of payments under the contract until the compliance by the selected respondent(s), and/or

2. Cancellation, termination, or suspension of the contract, in whole or in part.

C. Single Audit Act Amendment State and local governments and nonprofit organizations receiving more than $500,000 in Federal funds (all federal sources, not just FHWA funds), shall comply with the audit requirements of OMB Circular A-133.

D. Employee Financial Interest/Conflict of Interest (C.R.S. § 24-18-201 and 24-50-507) These laws require the selected respondent to aver that no State employee has any personal or beneficial interest in the contract and that it has no interest and shall acquire no interest that would conflict with its performance of the services.

E. The Hatch Act (5 U.S.C.