Vendor Questions and KSP Responses for DNA Analysis.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 14 KB Posted
- Attached to
- DNA Analysis Services
- Solicitation number
- RFP 520 2600000168 2
- Issued by
- Elliott County, Kentucky
About this file
This document is a Vendor Questions and KSP Responses file for DNA Analysis RFP-520-2600000168 issued by the Kentucky State Police (KSP). The RFP solicits proposals for forensic genetic genealogy (FGG) and DNA analysis services, including SNP testing, whole-genome sequencing, database searching, genealogical research, and family-tree construction. The scope of work requires initial analysis completion within ninety (90) days of sample submission, with the Commonwealth recognizing that additional time may be necessary for subsequent analysis phases. The services requested encompass DNA extraction, quality control and suitability assessments, SNP development with genomic refinement, database searches through FTDNA and GEDmatch, genealogical research, reference testing, elimination sample testing, and mixture mitigation analysis. KSP reserves the right to consult with vendors on a case-by-case basis regarding which cases would benefit from FGG analysis, and the determination of appropriate analytical methods will be based on each vendor's validation and protocols.
Regarding pricing and evaluation criteria, vendors may propose comprehensive bundled services or itemized pricing structures for individual components, with the flexibility to include optional line items with detailed descriptions in the cost proposal. The Commonwealth does not specify a preferred pricing format but requires vendors to first present regular pricing before any expedited or rush-processing surcharges. Proposal attachments are limited to 65,000 KB per individual attachment, and a table of contents is permitted in the technical proposal. Evaluation of technical proposals will emphasize proposers' previous experience, expertise, and qualifications, including analyst proficiency testing documentation, hands-on SNP laboratory experience, data-driven quality control processes, publicly verifiable case resolutions, validated testing methods published in peer-reviewed journals, and authorship of scientific manuscripts demonstrating competency in forensic SNP testing. The Commonwealth mandates that all forensic genetic genealogy analysis follows the United States Department of Justice Interim Policy and must be performed in-house, in an accredited facility, or by the Commonwealth's designee without uploading profiles to external databases.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Final_RFP_520_2600000168_2_SO_FORM.PDF | ||
| Final_RFP_520_2600000168_1_SO_FORM.PDF | ||
| DNA Analysis Attachment A revised.docx | DOCX document |
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
| DNA Analysis | |
| RFP-520-2600000168 | |
| KSP response to vendor questions | |
| Question | Answer |
| Regarding the requirement for analysts and vendors to maintain proficiency, can the Commonwealth clarify whether proposers must demonstrate proficiency testing across all technologies commonly used for forensic genetic genealogy, such as whole-genome sequencing and microarray genotyping, to meet this requirement? | If the laboratory performs DNA extraction of samples, the laboratory must provide documentation of proficiency testing for analysts performing testing on samples submitted by the KSP upon request. This would be for any DNA testing or subsequent analysis. |
| Under the evaluation factors related to skills and proficiency, technical experience, and technical qualifications, can the Commonwealth confirm whether the following FGG vendor capabilities would be evaluated more favorably and strengthen a proposer’s technical standing under the Commonwealth’s evaluation criteria: |
a. Analysts with extensive hands-on SNP laboratory experience (e.g., development of 100+ SNP profiles).
b. A data-driven QC process for assessing evidence suitability for SNP profiling.
c. A substantial record of publicly verifiable case resolutions (e.g., 50+ SNP/FGG-supported outcomes).
d. Use of SNP testing methods that have been validated in an accredited forensic laboratory and publicly published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.
| e. Authorship or co-authorship of at least five peer-reviewed scientific manuscripts demonstrating competency in forensic SNP testing. | Addressed under Technical Proposal Evaluation - Previous Experience, Expertise and Qualifications. | |
| In the Scope of Work Section (pg 6) the Commonwealth requires completion of initial analysis within ninety (90) days of submission. | ||
| a. | Does this time frame apply strictly to the traditional DNA testing of samples, or does it also apply to FGG analysis if SNP testing is necessary? | |
| b. | Does the 90-day time frame apply to FGG vendors if samples go directly to FGG because STR and mtDNA were completed prior to commencement of the project? | |
| c. | How does the Commonwealth define “initial analysis”? | |
| d. | Some laboratories are capable of completing SNP testing and preliminary ancestry assessments on shorter timelines. Would the Commonwealth be interested in bidders providing optional pricing for expedited or rush-case turnaround times in addition to the standard 90-day requirement? | The 90-day initial analysis should be completed within 90 days. The Commonwealth does recognizes that additional time may be needed for subsequent analysis. |
The Commonwealth is not privy to all vendor laboratory pricing structure for various analyses. Additional line items with detailed descriptions can be included within the applicable role of Attachment A. To admonish contract pricing for selected vendors; however please include first the regular price for any analysis offered by the vendor for consideration.
| Can the Commonwealth confirm that reference SNP testing for forensic genetic genealogy must be performed in-house in an accredited facility, without uploading profiles to external databases or using online tools, to protect the privacy of reference testers? Using public databases and online resources for reference testing can create unnecessary risks to the privacy and security of individuals who are not the subject of the investigation. | In-house, the Commonwealth's designee, or the Commonwealth's Forensic Genetic Genealogy analysis must follow the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) Interim Policy for Forensic Genetic Genealogical DNA Analysis and Searching. | |
| Can the Commonwealth confirm that the vendor should utilize BCG Certified Genetic Genealogists with at least five years of experience to conduct forensic genetic genealogy research in casework who are Contractor employees, and not volunteers or students? | Not a criteria of RFP. | |
| Can the Commonwealth confirm that the Contractor should be able to demonstrate courtroom experience in which both SNP testing and forensic genetic genealogy were admitted as evidence and successfully defended under cross-examination in front of a jury during a criminal trial? | Not a criteria of RFP. | |
| The Commonwealth states in the Scope of Work (pg 7) that “samples that meet thresholds for FGGS may be required to be searched utilizing databases including but not limited to Family Tree and GEDMatch with subsequent Data Mining and Data Modeling.” Please clarify how the Commonwealth defines “thresholds for FGGS.” | ||
| a. | Does this refer to total SNP count, overlap with GEDmatch/FTDNA chip formats, coverage of specific SNP sets, or something else? | |
| b. | Can the Commonwealth confirm that SNP profiles consisting of >100,000 markers are preferable over microarray techniques for purposes of comprehensive database searching, data mining and data modeling? | |
| c. | Under what circumstances would the Commonwealth approve use of a targeted SNP panel that generally provides lower coverage? | Based upon validation and protocols of vendor laboratory. |
| The Commonwealth states in Scope of Work (pg 7) that “cases will also need to be evaluated to determine if FGGP would be beneficial.” Does the Commonwealth have guidance on what constitutes a case for which FGGP would be beneficial? | The Commonwealth will consult with the vendor laboratory on a case by case basis. As the case progresses and results are obtained. Based upon validation and protocols of vendor laboratory. | |
| To ensure accurate pricing and consistency across bidders, can the Commonwealth confirm whether a comprehensive, bundled FGG service may be proposed? A bundled service would include: | ||
| ● | DNA extraction | |
| ● | Suitability/QC analysis | |
| ● | SNP development (inclusive of genomic refinement) | |
| ● | FTDNA database search | |
| ● | GEDmatch PRO search | |
| ● | Genealogical research and family-tree construction | |
| ● | Reference testing (as applicable) | |
| ● | Testing of known reference samples | |
| ● | Elimination samples | |
| ● | Mixture mitigation | |
| If bundling is not preferred, please advise on how the Commonwealth would like these components priced since the Cost Proposal does not include this specific of a breakdown. | See Attachment A. | |
| Should the proposed price for SNP testing include DNA extraction or would the Commonwealth like to see DNA extraction costs broken out separately? | See Attachment A | |
| Will the Commonwealth allow a separate price structure for cases in which samples are evaluated for QC/suitability and determined to be unsuitable for SNP sequencing, resulting in the process being halted prior to DNA sequencing? | See Attachment A | |
| The pricing format for FGG includes several required activities, and we would appreciate clarification on how the Commonwealth would like these items represented in the pricing schedule. | ||
| a. | Upload to ancestry/ genealogical databases. | |
| . | Should pricing for FTDNA be provided separately? | |
| . | Should pricing for GEDMatch be provided separately? |
b. If the FGGP report is already included in a vendor’s services, must it still be priced separately?
c. Determination of the need to perform third party reference testing:
i. Does the Commonwealth desire a price for the collection, testing, and comparison of reference/third-party reference tests?
ii. Would the Commonwealth prefer a 1:1 comparison issued as a report to protect the privacy of the tester?
iii. Can the Commonwealth confirm that all reference testing must be performed in an ISO17025 accredited laboratory?
d. Can the Commonwealth confirm that the pricing for genealogy services should be uncapped in the number of hours offered? See Attachment A The Commonwealth will determine on case by case basis if hours should be capped.
| Since the Commonwealth may submit samples for FGG testing requiring mixtures: | ||
| . | Does the Commonwealth prefer to see documented success on performing mixtures? | |
| . | If yes, is there an additional pricing that can be applied to run reference samples and perform appropriate mixture mitigation? | Addressed under Technical Proposal Evaluation - Previous Experience, Expertise and Qualifications. |
| The Commonwealth requires evaluation of samples for FGGS. Can the Commonwealth confirm that these costs should be integrated into the line items form SNP/ Whole Genome testing? | See Attachment A | |
| Can the Commonwealth confirm whether bidders may propose rush-processing fees as a surcharge, applied as appropriate to specific services? | See Attachment A | |
| In Section 8, page 13, the Commonwealth states that proposal attachments may not exceed 65,000 KB. Does this limit apply to each of the three (3) individual attachments, or is this a collective limit? | Limit is for each individual attachment. | |
| Is a Table of Contents permitted in the Technical Proposal? If yes, where should this be placed | Reference Section 8.20 Format of Technical Proposal |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .