Vendor Inquiries & State's Responses CoE RFI 012615.pdf

Vendor Inquiries & State’s Responses for RFI# FPCRFI1501CoE – Division of Fire Safety - Center of Excellence

Q & A: FPCRFI1501CoE Page 1

Question #1: What is the goal of the RFI? Is it to simply identify credible locations and help identify important location considerations or will this process alone be used to make a location decision?

Answer #1: The purpose of the RFI is to solicit information from jurisdictions who are interested in hosting the Center of Excellence. It will not be used to make a location decision, but simply to inform the

Division about the various benefits of interested jurisdictions. The Division will follow the standard State process for real estate acquisition once a location is chosen.

Question #2: A 100-page response is a lot for a typical RFI. What level of detail do you want at this point? Are you looking for a concise expression of interest backed-up by an overview of our key locational advantages, or will the information provided in this process alone be used to make a final location decision? In other words, should we prepare this as a complete and “best offer,” or should we assume that there will be additional opportunities to provide more detailed information once more is known about the state’s and CoE’s specific needs?

Answer #2: The 100-page limit was simply a request to limit the amount of material provided by jurisdictions. Jurisdictions must decide the best way to respond to this RFI and should not assume that there will be additional opportunities to provide more detailed information. The responses will be used to educate the Division about the jurisdictions who are interested in hosting and determine what criteria those jurisdictions think are important to ensuring the ongoing success of the CoE.

Question #3: May we include letters from our partners outlining their desire to participate in the project and the resources they are offering to make available as part of the main narrative page limit and not have them included in the page limit for “supporting materials?”

Answer #3: Yes. Again, the 100 page limit request is just a request. Jurisdictions can allocate the pages as they would like, but the intent was to limit the number of brochures or marketing documents including in the response.

Question #4: If we have conducted unique research germane to the CoE’s operations and our location, can this be included in a technical appendix and be part of our overall page count and not limited to the

10 pages of “supporting materials?”

Answer #4: Yes. See answer to Question 3 above. Jurisdictions may allocate the pages as they would like and can identify themselves whether or not something qualifies as “supporting materials.”

Question #5: Who will review the information provided? If it is a committee, who are the members and how are they selected?

Answer #5: The Division of Fire Prevention and Control and other State personnel will review the information provided. These personnel are only those who will be essential to assisting in determining the most appropriate location for the CoE.

Q & A: FPCRFI1501CoE Page 2

Question #6: What is the timeframe/schedule for review of the responses?

Answer #6: The answer to this question depends on the number of responses we receive to this RFI.

The goal is to review the responses within one week of the February 6 deadline so that we can continue to move forward with the process of choosing a location.

Question #7: What is the next step in the process?

Answer #7: The next step in the process is to use the information submitted through this RFI process and gathered through other means to make a determination of the most appropriate jurisdiction to host the CoE. As soon as location choices are narrowed, the Division will follow the standard State process for real estate acquisition once a location is chosen.

Question #8: Who will make the final decision of whether to seek formal proposals?

Answer #8: The Interim Director of the CoE, the Director of the Division of Fire Prevention and Control, the Executive Director of the Department of Public Safety, and relevant staff within those agencies and within the Department of Personnel Administration will make that final decision.

Question #9: Who will make the final decision for selecting a site?

Answer #9: The Division will follow the standard State process for real estate acquisition to determine the actual site. This ensures that the State gets the best deal in the most appropriate location.

Question #10: What is the preferred date of initial operations after the location is chosen?

Answer #10: The CoE would like to begin initial operations as soon as possible after the location is chosen. Much of this will be contingent on the availability of space in the jurisdiction chosen, the ability to swiftly negotiate a contract that suits the CoE’s needs, and the amount of tenant improvement required to the space. The CoE will continue to operate out of the Division of Fire Prevention and

Control’s current office until those abovementioned details are settled. At a minimum, the CoE expects to be in the space and fully operational by July 2015.

Question #11: Will CoE staff members be hired before or after the chosen location is operational?

Answer #11: It depends. Some essential staff members (e.g. Permanent Director) will be hired before the chosen location is fully operational. We will work to hire staff as quickly as possible after the location is chosen, recognizing that they may start their position in a temporary location while the permanent location is being prepared.

Question #12: How much money has been budgeted to pay for CoE operational expenses in FY 2015?

Answer #12: The Division has requested $998,496 in FY 2015-2016, but the CoE will not know what the full amount is until the budget bill is passed and signed by the Governor. This amount includes both personal services and operating expenses.

Q & A: FPCRFI1501CoE Page 3

Question #13: What is the expected budget allocation for CoE operations in FY 2016?

Answer #13: The Division anticipates requesting the same amount as FY 2015-2016 in FY 2016-2017 with the addition of any potential personal services inflationary costs which are unknown at this time.

Question #14: Is the state looking for private funds to off-set costs associated with state-owned and operated CoE, or is the state seeking to establish the CoE as an independent public-private entity?

Answer #14: Currently, the CoE is fully funded by the State, and will remain State-owned and operated.

The CoE is authorized to accept gifts, grants, and donations, but is not relying on those to fund the CoE’s daily operations.

Question #15: What process will the state use to solicit private involvement and private funding?

Answer #15: This has not yet been determined. Ideally, the processes used to solicit private involvement will evolve as the CoE becomes established and well-known within relevant private industry communities. At all times, the CoE will be subject to the laws that bind all Executive Agencies in the

State of Colorado. A member of the CoE staff will be actively researching and soliciting grants as part of his or her job description.

Question #16: Who/which types of individuals/organizations will serve on the Advisory Board? Will this include individuals/organizations located outside of the state? How often will the Advisory Board convene?

Answer #16: The steering committee brainstormed a comprehensive list of organizations that may be asked to serve on the Advisory Board. This list included representatives appointed by organizations representing counties, municipalities, special districts, fire chiefs, and county sheriffs in Colorado, federal partners in wildland firefighting, representatives from the higher education community, and others subject matter experts on aerial firefighting. The Advisory Board will likely not include out-of-state members in the CoE’s early years. The frequency with which the Advisory Board will convene is undetermined but will likely be semiannually for the first few years.

Question #17: Please help us understand your perspective on the purpose or benefit of a “nearby

University or other Institution of Higher Education with relevant programs” to the Center of Excellence for Advanced Technology Aerial Firefighting?

Answer #17: As was mentioned in the RFI, the location criteria was the product of a brainstorming session conducted during a subcommittee meeting with relevant stakeholders. The argument supporting proximity to a University or Higher Education Institute was that the CoE will be working closely with researchers in higher education, and close proximity would allow for more frequent communication and the improved relationships that come with sharing a community. While none of the criteria listed is essential for a successful CoE, some stakeholders feel as though the CoE will be more

Q & A: FPCRFI1501CoE Page 4 successful if it is located in close proximity to the researchers that will be assisting CoE’s innovative projects.

Question #18: What does “access to private or ability to incorporate private industry in community” mean?

Answer #18: As was mentioned in the RFI, the location criteria was the product of a brainstorming session conducted during a subcommittee meeting with relevant stakeholders. Stakeholders wanted to ensure that there was either existing private industry buy-in in the community that hosts the CoE, or that there was the opportunity within the community to incorporate private industry if the CoE were to expand in such a way as to attract private industry to the jurisdiction in which it is located.

Question #19: What type of aircraft are expected to be landing at a nearby airport? Please specify the type of aircraft you would envision using the airfield. For example, if 747’s and MD-11’s are the desired airframe on a regular basis, that could present some challenges in terms of ground handling. On the other hand, if the intended aircraft mix are all small reconnaissance and tankers that would be helpful in describing the suitability and availability of the facilities to your agency’s needs.

Answer #19: The CoE does not anticipate frequent use of nearby airports for landing firefighting aircraft. The intent is to ensure that the CoE has a relationship with an airport, so that if there is a need to bring in aerial firefighting resources for testing, data collection, or innovative development, the CoE does not have to reestablish a connection with the airport each time. Any firefighting aircraft may be brought in, including aircraft that has not historically been used in firefighting. Early on, the capability to handle Type 1-3 Helicopters, Single Engine Air Tankers (Type 3 and 4), and our Multi-Mission Aircraft

(Pilatus PC-12) will likely be sufficient.

Question #20: Please clarify your requirements for “access to watershed and other critical infrastructure”.

Answer #20: As was mentioned in the RFI, the location criteria was the product of a brainstorming session conducted during a subcommittee meeting with relevant stakeholders. The proponents of this criteria noted that, if innovative testing was to be done to determine the best way to use aerial resources around watershed and critical infrastructure, there should be some watershed and critical infrastructure close by. Again, this is not a requirement, but simply an idea from a stakeholder of a location criteria that may be beneficial to ensure the CoE has access to all types of terrain for testing purposes.