Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRFP - 8179 BROADBAND STRATEGIC PLAN - FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS (2)RFP Addendum 1 – 8179 Broadband Strategic Plan- Feasibility Analysis Page 1 of 3 ADDENDUM NO. 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS Description of BID 8179: Broadband Strategic Plan- Feasibility Analysis OPENING DATE: 3:00 PM (Our Clock) October 26, 2015 To all prospective bidders under the specifications and contract documents described above, the following changes/additions are hereby made and detailed in the following sections of this addendum: Exhibit 1 – Questions & Answers Please contact Jill Wilson, Buyer at (970) 221-6216 with any questions regarding this addendum. RECEIPT OF THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED BY A WRITTEN STATEMENT ENCLOSED WITH THE BID/QUOTE STATING THAT THIS ADDENDUM HAS BEEN RECEIVED. Financial Services Purchasing Division 215 N. Mason St. 2nd Floor PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6775 970.221.6707 fcgov.com/purchasing RFP Addendum 1 – 8179 Broadband Strategic Plan- Feasibility Analysis Page 2 of 3 EXHIBIT 1 QUESTIONS & ANSWERS 1. Q: The City’s RFP No. 8179, “Broadband Strategic Plan - Feasibility Analysis,” states that “[p]roposals shall be limited to twenty five (25) pages” (Section VII, Submittal Requirements). Does that page limit include staff resumes, or can we treat resumes as an appendix to our proposal and exclude them from the page count? A: Staff resumes will be exempt from the twenty five (25) page limit and should be included as an appendix. 2. Q: The RFP states: The Broadband Strategic Plan is structured into phases. The first phase focuses on public engagement and education, community needs assessments, and community visioning regarding broadband services. Professional services have been procured separately through RFP 8108 – Broadband Engagement Services. Does this mean that all public engagement and community needs assessments are already in progress and /or completed? A: In progress. 3. Q: What firm did the City award RFP 8108 to? A: Magellan Advisors LLC. 4. Q: Completing Deliverable #3 – Broadband Service Market Demand Report, would necessarily require the selected firm to engage the public and community as indicated to gather the data for the final report. This deliverable appears to be partially redundant to the requirements of RFP 8108. Will the selected firm have access to the results of RFP 8108 and will the selected firm be permitted to expand on the provided data if necessary? A: Winning RFP proposals are considered public record and can be accessed via this link: http://citydocs.fcgov.com/. 5. Q: Is the consulting company that was awarded RFP 8108 allowed to respond to RFP 8179? A: Yes. 6. Q: Pertaining to response and submission: there are conflicting RFP numbers listed on the first page. The number of the RFP is 8179, but in paragraph 2 of the first page the language states to reference proposal number 8108. Please clarify which number the response should reference. A: Please reference RFP 8179 on your proposal. 7. Q: Page 1 Paragraph 1 “The selected firm will provide assistance to City staff and work collaboratively with other consulting teams currently supporting the project to develop the complete set of final Broadband Strategic Plan project deliverables.” Who are the identified consulting teams that are currently working with the City? A: Magellan Advisors work will be an input for the work requested. 8. Q: As part of the Comcast franchise project, the City was to complete surveys of public and community needs. Has the City already surveyed residential, business, government, and education entities for feedback on their current Internet services and desired services? Is this information available to RFP respondents? A: No, to the best of our knowledge, the Comcast franchise renewal surveys were structured only on the television component and not internet services. RFP Addendum 1 – 8179 Broadband Strategic Plan- Feasibility Analysis Page 3 of 3 9. Q: To clarify the purpose of the project: this proposal response is for the creation of a strategic plan that will focus on project feasibility. This response is for the feasibility assessment and plan only. Those submitting responses to this RFP are not intended to be the primary contractor for the implementation aspects of the plan. Is this correct? A: Yes, this is just for the plan, not implementation. 10. Q: Will the selected firm for 8108 and 8179 be precluded from being awarded any aspects of the anticipated implementation of the broadband initiatives? A: No. 11. Q: What is the not-to-exceed-budget for this project? A: The City does have funding for the Project. However, the City is electing not to post a budget for the project. 12. Q: Does the City intend to allow video and voice services as well as Internet services to residents? A: No determination has been made yet – either for or exclusion of. 13. Q: Since the City already has a franchise agreement in place with Comcast, will the City provide access to Comcast asset maps to the selected firm? A: Will need to verify with the City Attorney’s Office, but there might be some DND. 14. Q: Can you advise of the current status of the City’s contract/agreement with PRPA as this will expire within the next three years and may have impact on any plan that is considered? A: No. 15. Q: For the following reports identified as project deliverables, what format(s) are acceptable for each: City of Fort Collins Asset Report and Map(s) - Word and/or PowerPoint (with GIS maps included as appendices)?  Target Broadband Standards Report – Word and/or PowerPoint?  Broadband Service Market Demand Report – Word and/or PowerPoint?  Feasibility Analysis – Word and/or PowerPoint (with spreadsheet images included as appendices)?  Strategic, Financial, Operational and Technological Risks and Opportunities Report – Word and/or PowerPoint?  Broadband Strategic Plan Synopsis and Recommendation Report – Word and/or PowerPoint? A: The entire deliverable will incorporate various formats (e.g. within the feasibility analysis deliverable, there will be a quantitative model built on Excel programming). 16. Q For the Deliverable #1 requirement, does the City possess incumbent facilities asset maps/information that will be made available, or is the intent to compare the functional/architectural capabilities in evaluating synergies or gaps? A: Although the intent is to compare current state and capabilities for evaluating synergies and gaps, we can potentially explore asset information for input into that deliverable. 17. Q: For the Deliverable #4 requirement, could you please further describe the opportunity cost analysis you are seeking? A: This would be something that the consultant would help us identify.