Texas
Department
of Transportation
ROW Division
118 East Riverside Drive
Austin, Texas 78704
Revised (September 24, 2007)
SUPPLEMENT TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
#55-8RFP6001
Statewide Right of Way Acquisition Professional Services
Publish Date of RFP: September 10, 2007
Publish Date of Supplement: September 21, 2007
Proposal Due: October 1, 2007 12:00 Noon (CST)
The following document contains questions and responses posed to the ROW Division
regarding the September 10, 2007 publication of the Request for Proposal (RFP) 558RFP6001 for Statewide Right of Way Acquisition Professional Services. Each question was
submitted in writing and the responses are presented in a logical sequence as they pertain to
each of the 24 Sections of the RFP.
This document is a Supplement to the original RFP published September 10, 2007 and the
responses are considered part of the original RFP. The questions are reprinted as close to
their original format as possible while maintaining the anonymity of the writer.
SECTION 1 Table of Contents
Question 1-1: None
Response to 1-1: Not applicable
SECTION 2 General Information
Question 2-1: How many addenda if any have been issued?
Response to 2-1: This supplement is the only document that has been issued after the
publication of the RFP on September 10, 2007. The 1-page Excel template to be used for
completing the fee schedule was corrected for typographical errors on September 11, 2007
and immediately posted to both public websites. If you downloaded the RFP and the
accompanying Excel spreadsheet on the first day of publication (September 10, 2007),
please go to either of the following public web sites to ensure you have the correct copy of
the spreadsheet. The revised Excel spreadsheet is clearly marked in the bottom left-hand
corner with the statement; “Spreadsheet template revised 9/11/07 to correct payment basis”.
The ensure you are using the correct spreadsheet as “revised” download the spreadsheet
from:
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/services/right_of_way/req_proposals.htm
http://esbd.cpa.state.tx.us
OR
Question 2-2: Is it acceptable to submit a proposal as a prime contractor and also
subcontract to other firms who are proposing?
Response to 2-2: Yes, but you may only submit one proposal as a Prime Provider.
Question 2-3: I was wondering if I could get a listing of the attendees of the pre-proposal
conference that was held on September 11, 2007.
Response to 2-3: A copy of the attendee list is attached to this Supplement.
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 2 of 17
Question 2-4: Will you make available the list of companies/individuals that attended the
pre bid conference?
Response to 2-4: A copy of the attendee list is attached to this Supplement.
SECTION 3 Statement of Work
Question 3-1: (Paragraph 1.2.4) There are fees associated with the acquisition of parcels;
i.e., charges from the Secretary of State’s office to confirm the standing of
commercial/corporate owners that are not typical closing costs such as recording fees. Do
we assume that those costs are direct pass through costs to the State and are not to be
included in the Title Services fee proposed by the provider and that the provider is not to
absorb them in the proposed fee?
Response to 3-1: Such fees are typical in providing Title and Closing Services to for
ROWAPS work and as they come from a State Office with established costs, they to be
considered a part of the full Title and Closing Services to be provided under the contract and
as such, are not a direct pass through cost.
Question 3-2: (Paragraph 1.7.7) Certain districts have requested the negotiator log to be
extracted from Trackers, rather than provided as a separate ROW-N-94. May we assume
extracting the negotiator logs from Trackers are appropriate or shall we assume maintenance
of a duplicate negotiator log is required, and include the cost of duplication in the negotiator
fee proposal?
Response to 3-2: We require a ROW-N-94 form. Any cost of duplication is part of the
Negotiation Services.
Question 3-3: (Paragraph 2.2.2.3 and 2.5.4) There is no provision for the collection of the
final 30% fee for either Title and Closing or Negotiation if a parcel is acquired through
eminent domain since there is no recording and the parcel transfers as an operation of law.
Do we assume that portion of the fee is uncollectible from any parcel that does not close by
deed?
Response to Question 3-3: Yes
Question 3-4: (Paragraph 2.5.4) Circumstances present themselves during the process of
an acquisition that require the provider to make multiple offers on individual parcels where
the property has sold, where there has been a death of the owner. May we assume that in
those circumstances, additional negotiation fees are chargeable to the State for multiple
offers of the same parcel?
Response to 3-4: No, unless the parcel is split and requires new survey and new
appraisal(s).
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 3 of 17
Question 3-5: (Paragraph 1.9.12) If there is an increase in value due to an updated
Appraisal the Provider will make a revised offer and a final offer letter and submit a copy of
the final offer letter. The TxDOT ROW Manual in Vol. 2, Chapter 5, Section 14 says that only
a revised final offer letter is to be sent if the value changes due to an updated Appraisal.
Please clarify.
Response to 3-5: A “revised final offer” which includes the “revised final offer letter” are
required.
Question 3-6: Should the proposed fee schedule for the review appraiser include only the
fees for review appraisals or should the fee schedule include expert witness fees in addition
to the appraisal review fees as implied on page 8 and 9 in sections (3) 1.4.4 and (3) 1.6.4 of
the RFP?
Response to 3-6: The fee for review of an updated appraisal includes the appraiser
defending his conclusion through the Special Commissioners Hearing. This being said, in
the 6-year history of the ROWAPS Program administered by TxDOT we are not aware of any
review appraiser being called for testimony at a Special Commissioners Hearing. Is it
possible? Yes. Is it probable? No.
Question 3-7: In the event that the review appraiser is asked by TxDOT or the Attorney
General’s office to testify at a commissioners hearing, would the review appraiser then acts
as the initial appraiser and prepare his/her own appraisal report and charge the appropriate
appraisal update fee.
Response to 3-7: See Response 3-6.
SECTION 4 Proposal Information
Question 4-1: Section 4, 5.1.2.2 states that “All pages in the RFP should be numbered and
contain an organized, paginated table of contents corresponding to the section and pages of
this proposal.” Should attachments such as copies of certifications, licenses, verification
letters, etc, have page numbers?
Response to 4-1: No.
Question 4-2: Section 4, 5.1.5, states that “Receipt of any and all addenda or supplements
to this RFP should be acknowledged by returning a signed copy of each addendum to the
response.” Should we acknowledge the Corrected Fee Schedule Spreadsheet?
Response to 4-2: No, as it was not considered as addenda. The return of this Supplement
can be submitted under an individual Tab in the proposal if desired or it can be printed,
signed and sent to the Peggy Lindemann, c/o ROW Division, 118 East Riverside Drive,
Austin, Texas 78704.
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 4 of 17
SECTION 5 General Terms and Conditions
Question 5-1: (5.1.1) States that the original proposal requires original signatures. Does
this refer to every document in the response? We utilize e-mail and PDF to obtain signatures
on verification letters for personnel in various Districts.
Response to 5-1: Section 5, Paragraph 5.1 of the proposal does not refer to your question.
You must have cited the wrong Section and paragraph. Not knowing what specific Section
and paragraph of the RFP you are questioning. If a Section and paragraph in the RFP states
that an original signature is needed, then it is required. Typically, if copies of documents are
acceptable, it will be so stated in the RFP. In the case of copies, PDF is acceptable. When
an original signature is required but only a copy of a document with the signature(s) is
available, you should attaché a memorandum to the document stating this fact.
In the case of the Execution of the Proposal (Section 23) and the required forms (Section 24)
only original signatures are acceptable.
Question 5-2: (Paragraph 3.2) With regards to work authorizations, a three day turnaround
is required for acceptance. Can any person authorized to execute contracts on behalf of the
provider sign work authorizations or supplements if acceptable corporate documentation is
provided to TxDOT?
Response to 5-2: If your corporate by-laws or there is an executed corporate resolution, it is
acceptable.
Question 5-3: (Paragraph 3.2) With regard to work authorizations, refusal to accept a work
authorization may be grounds for termination of a contact. Can you give an example of when
this might be necessary?
Response to 5-3: This has not occurred in the short history of the ROWAPS program and
as the statement says; “…may be grounds for termination of contract” any example would be
entirely speculative.
SECTION 6 Professional Qualifications and Experience of Company
Question 6-1: Our firm has Signed Performance Evaluations on all TxDOT projects. Since
neither personnel nor the number of parcels / displacees / ED submissions are specifically
identified on these, is it acceptable to insert a handwritten notation on each evaluation for
each of the following:
a. Company experience – number of parcels covered by the evaluation
b. PM experience – name of PM and number of parcels covered by the evaluation
c. Negotiation Agent – name of agent and number of parcels agent completed under
this evaluation
d. Relocation Agent – name of agent and number of displacements agent completed
under this evaluation
e. Condemnation Support Specialist – name of agent and number of ED submissions
completed under this evaluation
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 5 of 17
Response to 6-1: Yes, but the information may not be handwritten notes on the evaluation
document. Any additional clarifying information to an evaluation as suggested must be
prepared in letter or memorandum format, signed by an authorized representative of the
company and attached to the front of the evaluation document submitted in the proposal. All
this being said, we refer you to Section 6.4.2 which states; “A copy of a signed Performance
Evaluation of the work may be substituted for an Experience Verification Letter from a CA,
but the evaluator must be able to conclude that the body of the ROWAPS services was
acceptable.”
Question 6-2: If a consultant has done a project for TxDOT through an LPA, can TxDOT do
an evaluation on that consultant if TxDOT has completed an audit of the project.
Response to 6-2: As a general rule, the entity that originally contracted with the consultant
must provide the evaluation. However note Section 6, Paragraph 4.1 of the RFP which
states; “…If Experience Letters are not available, you must provide contact information so
that the Department can verify the experience.”
Question 6-3: Regarding Experience of Company – if project is ongoing, do you use current
3rd quarter this year?
Response to 6-3: All work completed in the 5-year period from September 2002 through
September 2007 is applicable.
Question 6-4: Regarding Experience of Company – if C/A is small city projects, can the
project be lumped together over the five years in one total? Or do we need parcel count for
each project under each city project.
Response to 6-4: Report work experience by project. In the scenario you presented, you
would need to report each project on its own line.
Question 6-5: There were 4 companies operating as an LLC on a project. As we were a
team, can we use the work experience for each of the separate companies?
Response to 6-6: If any one of the companies involved in the LLC claims experience credit
for any part of the job, they would have to provide support documentation that their company
provided the substantial portion of the service for which they are using for experience credit.
Question 6-7: “Professional Qualifications and Experience for the Company” – can we show
ROWAPS style services for R/W projects completed by our subs or does this need to be
relevant to the prime company only?
Response to 6-7: The Prime Provider.
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 6 of 17
SECTION 7 Professional Qualifications for the Individual Service Disciplines
Question 7-1: Does a Texas Real Estate Brokers License suffice as a professional
designation for any of the 11 positions on the ROWAPS Team?
Response to 7-1: No (revised 9-24-07) A Real Estate Brokers License from Texas or any
other State does not qualify as a professional designation. However, a Texas Real Estate
Brokers License is required for each person listed in the RFP as a Negotiation Agent.
Question 7-2: With regard to Experience Verification Letters, what constitutes parcel
completion with respect to project management services, negotiation services and relocation
services?
Response to 7-2: For project management, negotiation and relocation services, a
“completed parcel” is a parcel that has been brought into possession of the condemning
authority.
Question 7-3: With regard to Experience Verification Letters, can you please clarify what is
intended by “team member” and how this may or may not affect the number of parcels
completed?
Response to 7-3: A “team member” is an individual listed in our proposal as providing one
or more of the ROWAPS services. As a classification, someone on your “team” does not
affect the number of parcels completed.
We’re looking for work experience as an individual. In some cases the work was contracted
to a team or group and it is difficult to verify if the individual claiming the work experience is
really the primary worker. The evaluators are evaluating the individuals and they must be
able to come to a logical conclusion that the person claiming the work experience is in fact
the individual that performed the primary functions in the field or as a direct first-line
supervisor.
Question 7-4: Will prior Experience Letters of Verification dated in 2006 be acceptable if the
services were performed within the five (5) year period from 9/2002 -9/2007?
Response to 7-4: Yes.
Question 7-5: I want to clarify that a Texas real estate license is still considered a
designation except for Negotiation where there I could use a license from another state.
Response to 7-5: The department realizes that for the purposes of completing the proposal
document by it’s deadline of October 1, 2007 that a ROWAPS Company might have a staff
member (employee/sub contractor) that will be listed as a Negotiation Agent in the proposal
and has an active Real Estate License in another State or is in the process of completing the
requirements in Texas. This scenario is acceptable for the purposes of completing the
proposal and satisfying the requirements for Negotiation Agents only if written support is
provided under Section 14 and 15 clearly stating the individual’s plan of action in actively
pursuing a Texas Real Estate Salesman or Brokers License. In the event of a contract
award being made, the Provider will not be able to provide Negotiation Services until the
Texas Real Estate License requirement (Salesman or Brokers License) is achieved and a
copy of the license has been supplied and reviewed by the department. Without the ability to
provide Negotiation Services, Work Authorizations will not be executed.
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 7 of 17
A Real Estate Brokers License from Texas or any other State does not qualify as a
professional designation. However, a Texas Real Estate Brokers License is required for
each person listed in the RFP as a Negotiation Agent. A Real Estate Brokers License from
another state will satisfy the requirements for Negotiation Agents only if written support is
provided under Section 14 and 15 clearly stating the individual’s plan of action in actively
pursuing a Texas Real Estate Brokers License. In the event of a contract award being made,
the Provider will not be able to provide Negotiation Services until the Texas Real Brokers
License requirement is achieved and a copy of the license has been supplied and reviewed
by TxDOT. Without the ability to provide Negotiation Services, no Work Authorizations will
be executed.
Question 7-6: How can we be scored on title if we don’t have title specialist positions for the
RFP?
Response to 7-6: For the purposes of this RFP, the name of a specific individual is not
required for Title and Closing Services. Review of historical documentation of the program,
scope of work and fees indicated that title services were traditionally performed by Title
Companies and that providing specific names of individuals in this manner was not practical
and in many cases, not possible as Title Companies would not sign Sub Provider
agreements.
Question 7-7: Section 7, 1.7 states that a professional designation for the referenced
agent/specialist is considered to a be a designation by a national organization requiring
training and testing for the specific discipline in the R/W industry in which you are claiming
professional experience. An SR/WA designation is considered a higher level designation
than a NAC or RAC. As such, if the agent/specialist does not have a NAC or RAC, does the
SR/WA designation qualify?
Response to 7-7: The SR/WA designation is a generalist designation and does not equate
to the specialization of a NAC or RAC. However, for the purposes of this RFP, the SR/WA
designation meets the definition of a professional designation.
Question 7-8: Will a MSA (Master Senior Appraiser) designation count as a professional
designation?
Response to 7-8: It counts if you are claiming is as a professional designation as an
Appraiser or a Review Appraiser, but as stated in Section 7, Paragraphs 1.6 and 1.7 that the
designation must be in a specific discipline of the R/W industry in which you are claiming
professional experience. In other words, if it is for an appraiser it counts, but it doesn’t count
for a Negotiation Agent.
Question 7-9: Paragraph 2.0 at the bottom of Page 34 in Section 7 references Section 6
and I believe it should be Section 7.
Response to 7-9: You are correct. It should read “Section 7”.
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 8 of 17
Question 7-10: What do “type of Project Management tasks; type of Negotiation Service
tasks; type of Relocation Service tasks; type of Condemnation Support Service tasks” mean?
These are requested as part of the Experience Verification letters in sections 8, 14, 15, 16,
17 and 18, all paragraphs 7.3 Can you please help clarify what TxDOT is looking for in this
part of the Experience Verification letters?
Response to 7-10: Section 3 of the RFP (pages 5 through 13) describes the general scope
of work associated with these services. Your work experience credit does not have to
include the exact requirements found in this RFP, but the general nature of the tasks
performed lead a logical person verifying the information that you provided the services and
that they fit the general/similar tasks requirements as described in the RFP.
Question 7-11: In reviewing the RFP I noticed that it calls for 2 Negotiation Agents, 2 Relo
Assistance Specialists and 1 Condemnation Support Specialist. Please note that our agents
are trained professionals to handle each file from beginning to end inclusive of negotiation,
relocation and condemnation. Therefore, is it acceptable if we repeat the same names for
the sections that ask for the names of the above mentioned agents?
Response to 7-11: No. The measure is one of capacity. There are many aspects of the
ROWAPS program that overlap and depending upon the specific work authorization, it is
possible for an individual to perform any different tasks. But the question for the evaluation
for a competitive sealed proposal is capacity.
Question 7-12: We typically staff up as needed for upcoming projects. Our current project
is dwindling down and most agents have move on to other projects. Is it acceptable to list
experienced staff members as applicable, or are we only allowed to utilize the persons
whose names are included in the RFP? We also have in the past contracted with other R/W
firms to complete the assignments. May we list those firms instead of individual names?
Response to 7-12: No, it is not acceptable to list firms as subproviders. It is a matter of
capacity and we are evaluating individual team members. After an award is made and work
authorizations are authorized, it is possible and probable that individuals will change. These
changes are handled by the execution of Contract Amendments and Work Authorization
Supplements.
Question 7-13: Do the Experience Verification Letters (and Performance Evaluations) need
to be dated since this RFP has been advertised? Or is it OK to have Experience Verification
Letters (and Performance Evaluations) dated in the pats (in 2006 for example) for projects
already completed?
Response to 7-13: Yes.
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 9 of 17
SECTION 8 Professional Qualifications of the Project Manager
Question 8-1: Experience of PM. Since verification letters from a CA cover only a 5 year
period (Sept ’02 thru Sept ’07), what type of support is required to show more than 10 years
experience.
Response to 8-1: Use the Experience Log for the Project Manager found in Section 10.10.0
of the RFP. The log requires contact information for your experience. The evaluators will
need to conclude that your experience being claimed is acceptable. As stated in the RFP,
your 5 primary years from September 2002 through September 2007 require either a letter or
evaluation document from which the evaluators can conclude that your Project Manager
Services were acceptable. Support documentation for additional years beyond the 5 primary
years can consist of any written document from which the evaluators can conclude that you
were actively working in the R/W Industry during the time frame in which you are claiming
additional time experience.
Question 8-2: What type of verification are you looking for when showing the number of
years working in the R/W industry for the Project Manager?
Response to 8-2: See response to Question 8-1.
Question 8-3: Section 8, 3.0 requires “more than 10 years work experience in the R/W
industry”. Please clarify the type of documentation required to support the 10 years
experience? Resume? Self-reporting log?
Response to 8-3: See response to Question 8-1.
Question 8-4: How do we indicate the 10 years of experience if the project manager can
meet the experience on one project within the last year?
Response to 8-4: See response to Question 8-1.
Question 8-5: Under Section 8, Paragraph 4.0 Professional Designation: Does a state
certified general real property appraiser qualify as a designation for a Project Manager?
Response to 8-5: No. A state certification is a license to practice appraisal.
Question 8-6: The number of years of experience as a Project Manager exceeds the
required amount.
Response to 8-6: See response to Question 8.1.
SECTION 9-13 Professional Qualifications of Real Estate Appraisers and Reviewers
Question 9-1: Some appraiser we have talked to are under the impression that they need
separate experience verification letters for the RFP. As I read the RFP the appraisers and
review appraisers do not need separate experience verification letters from a condemning
entity. All they need is to complete the verification log in the RFP along with copies of
licenses, designations, etc. Please verify this is the case and no separate experience
verification letter is required for appraisers and review appraisers.
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 10 of 17
Response to 9-1: You are correct, Appraisers and Review Appraisers do not need to supply
experience verification letters from condemning authorities. Real Estate Appraiser are
licensed under Texas statues and verification of individual experience in a self-reporting log
format is sufficient. Falsification of professional experience is a violation of the Uniform
Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and grounds for disqualification of the proposal
in its entirety. All of the Appraisers and Review Appraiser must meet the minimum base
requirement of being a State Certified General Appraiser and a Pre-Certified Appraiser with
TxDOT. A copy of their state certification and the TxDOT pre-certification letter are sufficient.
Question 9-2: For the appraiser precertification, is all that is required is that they are on the
TxDOT list of appraisers, or do they need a letter from TxDOT?
Response to 9-2: A copy of the portion of the list with their name on it secured from a
district office or the ROW Division is sufficient. The most common support is a copy of the
original Pre Certification Letter.
Question 9-3: What about appraisers that provide significant assistance and did not sign
reports?
Response to 9-3: Appraisers that have provided significant assistance should have signed
some sort of certification. If a certification is not available then we have no supportable
documentation that they performed significant assistance. Support documents that are
considered acceptable for credible work experience under the guidelines of the Texas
Appraiser Licensing and Certification Board are acceptable for this RFP. In other words, if
the work experience can stand the test of a file review and the evaluator could conclude
through written documentation that the appraiser provided significant assistance, then the
work experience would be acceptable.
SECTION 14 and 15 Professional Qualifications of the Negotiation Agents
Question 14-1: (Paragraph 5.0) In obtaining a parcel count fro experience, does providing
“negotiation services” constitute making an offer and providing other negotiation services as
listed on Page 9 under 1.7 Negotiation Services, or is it necessary to actually successfully
negotiate and close a parcel for that parcel to count as one that has been negotiated? Can
parcels be counted that have been negotiated that result in a deed being signed or a Final
Offer Letter being sent?
Response to 14-1: To successfully complete Negotiation Services for a parcel, the parcel
must be taken into possession by the condemning authority through negotiations. A signed
deed transferring the ownership to the condemning authority would signify a complete
negotiation of a parcel. If the negotiations stopped after the Final Offer letter was sent, the
parcel is not considered to have been taken into possession of the condemning authority
through negotiations.
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 11 of 17
Question 14-2: Section 14-18 – can you explain the difference between the “individual” and
“team” as it relates to the verification letters?
Response to 14-2: We’re looking for work experience as an individual. In some cases the
work was contracted to a team or group and it is difficult to verify if the individual claiming the
work experience is really the primary worker. The evaluators are evaluating the individuals in
Sections 14 through 18 and they must be able to come to a logical conclusion that the
person claiming the work experience is in fact the individual that performed the primary
functions in the field or as a direct first-line supervisor.
Question 14-3: Does a Law Degree substitute for the real estate license requirement?
Response to 14-3: A Law Degree from an accredited college or university is equivalent to
a Texas Real Estate Salesman or Brokers License. This is allowed because a lawyer is
allowed to practice real estate in the State of Texas without having a Texas Real Estate
Salesman or Brokers License.
Question 14-4: Why do you have to a real estate license to perform negotiation services in
a ROWAPS contract?
Response to 14-4: By statue, a Texas Real Estate Salesman or Brokers License is required
to perform the scope of work required for Negotiation Agents in a ROWAPS contract. This
requirement has never changed since the beginning of the program and unless the real
estate laws of Texas change, the requirement will remain.
Question 14-5: Do I have to have a Brokers License or will a Salesman License satisfy the
requirements for a Negotiations Agent?
Response to 14-5: An active Texas Real Estate Salesman or Brokers License is acceptable
to meet the requirements for a ROWAPS Negotiations Agent.
Question 14-6: Is a state real estate license considered a Professional Designation?
Response to 14-6: A Real Estate Salesman or Brokers License is a state license to practice
real estate and is not a professional designation. Therefore, it does not meet the
Professional Designation requirements of any of the 11 ROWAPS categories of work.
SECTION 16 and 17 Professional Qualifications of Relocation Assistance Specialists
Question 16-1: On page 47, 6.0, in the next to the last sentence it states to “Place
Experience Verification Letters for this Relocation Specialist behind this Section (15). I
believe this is a typo and should read Section (16). Is this correct.
Response to 16-1: Yes, it is a typographical error. It should read “Section 16”.
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 12 of 17
Question 16-2: Under Section 17, Paragraph 4.0 Professional Designation: Does a state
certified general real property appraiser qualify as a designation for Relocation Specialist?
Response to 16-2: No. A state certification is a license to practice appraisal.
Question 16-3: The amount of relocation assistance for a condemning authority exceeds
the amount required.
Response to 16-3: Use the Experience Log in each Section for individual services. The log
requires contact information for your experience. The evaluators will need to conclude that
your experience being claimed is acceptable. As stated in the RFP, your 5 primary years
from September 2002 through September 2007 require either a letter or evaluation document
from which the evaluators can conclude that your work experience were acceptable. Support
documentation for additional years beyond the 5 primary years can consist of any written
document from which the evaluators can conclude that you were actively working in the R/W
Industry during the time frame in which you are claiming additional time experience.
SECTION 18 Professional Qualifications of the Condemnation Support Specialist
Question 18-1: Is a law degree considered to be a Professional Designation? None.
Response to 18-1: No. Not applicable.
SECTION 19 Capacity of the Company
Question 19-1: (Paragraph 4.0) With regard to Contracts with Sub-Providers, will you
confirm that a Memorandum of Agreement between the prime provider and a sub-provider
meets the requirements if the sub-provider agrees to (1) abide by applicable provisions in the
ROWAPS contract, (2) provide services at the fees approved in the ROWAPS contract, and
(3) executes a Lobbying Certification form?
Response to 19-1: For the purposes of this RFP, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the Prime Provider and a Sub-Provider is acceptable if the MOA is signed by both
duly authorized representatives of both the Prime Provider and the Sub Provider and;
1) contains language that ensures the Sub Provider will abide by applicable provision in
the ROWAPS contract;
2) provide services at the fees approved in the ROWAPS contract;
3) has an attached and executed Lobbying Certification form; and
4) has an attached and executed Lower Tier Participant Debarment Certification
Question 19-2: Capacity of Company – is a contract for multiple subs under one contract
sufficient if they work for the same company; i.e., 3 appraisers working for Integra Realty
Resources are acting as subs on the RFP. Are we required to have one contract with Integra
or 3 contracts with each appraiser?
Response 19-2: Contract with each individual appraiser.
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 13 of 17
Question 19-3: It was my understanding that in lieu of a subcontractor agreement that a
letter of intent for the specified services would be sufficient for this RFP. Is that correct or do
we need a full contract?
Response to 19-3: See response to 19-1.
SECTION 20 Meeting Schedule Demands
Question 20-1: Under Section 20, paragraph 3.3, it states the WBS should be presented in
the form of an outline. Can the WBS be shown on the left side of the Gantt chart or does it
have to be separate items?
Response to 20-1: Two separate items, but the WBS can also be duplicated on the Gantt
chart.
Question 20-2: Can the Gantt chart be made an Excel spreadsheet or must it be prescribed
software.
Response to 20-2: Paragraph 4.2 says the Gantt Chart “should” be prepared from a
commercial project scheduling software with tracking and presentation capability equal or
superior to Micro Soft Project software. For the purposes of completing the requirements of
Section 20, Paragraph 4.2 the “should” is to be deleted and replaced with “must”.
Question 20-3: Section 20 3.4.8 states the Special Commissioner’s Hearing can be set
within 30 days of the receipt of the ROW-E-49 Eminent domain Package. Please clarify if
this is when the package is submitted to the District and the District is in receipt of the E-49
package.
Response to 20-3: Assume the ROW-E-49 package is received at the district, moved
through to Minute Order and is forwarded to the AG office within 60 days of the Provider’s
delivery of the package. Assume that once the AG receives the package the Special
Commissioners Hearing can be set within 30 days.
SECTION 21 Past Performance Evaluations of Work for TxDOT
Question 21-1: In submitting information on Set. 21 regarding past performance
evaluations, is a TxDOT evaluation acceptable if at least 4 of the disciplines were not met as
stated in Sect. 6? For example, we had a WA with a district in which we did Project
Administration, Negotiations, Title Services and Closing Services. The district does their own
ED and appraisals. As a result, this project did not meet the criteria for Sec. 6. Can we
include the evaluation for this project as additional work (not counted as our initial more than
100 parcels) to be able to include the evaluation in Sec. 21?
Response to 21-1: Yes as long as you can document that the appraisal services and ED
services were not available to you.
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 14 of 17
SECTION 22 Fee Schedule
Question 22-1: With prior ROWAPS Contracts, a management fee for all appraisals was
included. Has this category been deleted or is it to be considered elsewhere in the proposal.
Response to 22-1: Management fees for appraisals and review appraisals is not part of the
fee schedule of this RFP. Management fees are paid on a monthly basis as a fixed fee for a
unit of service on the entire management of the project.
Question 22-2: Past Performance Evaluations – May we submit the first page of the
evaluation or will you need all 16 pages for each evaluation?
Response to 22-2: Submit a copy of the entire evaluation including any comments
response by your company that was submitted to the district within 30-days of your company
receiving the evaluation.
Question 22-3: Can you bid on specific tasks such as relocation, acquisition? Or will you
need to bid on each task?
Response to 22-3: Your proposed fee schedule is not a bid. It is a proposed fee schedule
that will be negotiated before a contract is executed. You must complete the proposed fee
schedule in its entirety.
SECTION 23 Execution of the Proposal
Question 23-1: None
Response to 23-1: Not applicable.
SECTION 24 Forms
Question 24-1: Which of the forms under Section 24 do we have to complete and submit
with the proposal?
Response to 24-1: With your submission of the RFP you must complete each of the forms
from behind Section 24 of the RFP.
Question 24-2: From the meeting you discussed that only the Lobbying Certification needed
to be signed by Subs. It also looks like the Lower Tier Participant Debarment Certification
needs Sub signature. Is this correct? Also, can we use copies (i.e., PDF emails) or do these
also need to be original signatures.
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 15 of 17
Response to 24-2:
1) The Lobbying Certification form must be completed by the Prime Provider and each
Sub Provider.
2) The Debarment Certification requires only the signature of the Prime Provider who is
submitting the proposal.
3) The Lower Tier Participant Debarment Certification requires the signature of the
Prime Provider and the Sub Provider.
If a Section and paragraph in the RFP states that an original signature is needed, then it is
required. Typically, if copies of documents are acceptable, it will be so stated in the RFP. In
the case of copies, PDF is acceptable. When an original signature is required but only a
copy of a document with the signature(s) is available, you should attaché a memorandum to
the document stating this fact.
In the case of the Execution of the Proposal (Section 23) and the required forms (Section 24)
only original signatures are acceptable.
Question 24-3: If only the prime consultant has the DBE certification, will this satisfy the
DBE requirement? Also, is the DBE requirement part of the evaluation criteria?
Response to 24-3: If the Prime Provider has an active DBE certification in the State of
Texas, the DBE requirement is satisfied for all work performed by the Prime Provider. Work
done by a Sub Provider that does not have DBE certification will not be counted toward the
contract goal.
There are no points scored for DBE certification in the RFP, but failure to complete all of the
forms under Section 24 of the RFP which includes the Federal Sub-Provider and Supplier
Information (DBE From H-5) could be grounds for evaluators to consider the proposal
document as being non-responsive. If the Prime Provider has a DBE Certification and does
not report the potential use of any Sub Providers elsewhere in the RFP, then a note to that
effect stating the circumstances would need to be placed on or attached to the Form H-5.
Note, the H-5 form speaks to the issue of Sub Providers and/or Suppliers.
Question 24-4: Does the prime provider or the sub-provider complete the Lower Tier
Participant Debarment Certification form on page 67 of the RFP?
Response to 24-4: See Response 24-2.
Question 24-5: What forms are required from subcontractors?
Response to 24-5: Please see Response 24-2.
Question 24-6: What is the correct procedure for handling the Debarment Certification form
on Page 66 if you cannot sign it because of exceptions?
1. Strike-through two of the five items listed that restrict you from signing it, and sign the
form with attached explanations following the form?
2. Do not sign the form and make note at the bottom of the form to see the attached
explanations?
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 16 of 17
Response to 24-6: Refer to Paragraph 2 at the bottom of the Debarment Certification form
which states; “Where the Provider is unable to certify to any of the statements in this
certification, such Provider shall attach an explanation to this certification.” In other words,
sign the form and attach your explanations. You will note in Paragraph 3 on the form that;
“Exceptions will not necessarily result in denial of award. Providing false information may
result in criminal prosecution or administrative sanctions.”
Question 24-7: Will a (1) Letter of Intent, (2) Memorandum of Agreement, or (3)
Commitment Letter from a subprovider suffices to meet the subcontract agreement
requirement?
Response to 24-7: For the purposes of this RFP, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the Prime Provider and a Sub-Provider is acceptable if the MOA is signed by both
duly authorized representatives of both the Prime Provider and the Sub Provider and;
1) contains language that ensures the Sub Provider will abide by applicable provision in
the ROWAPS contract;
2) provide services at the fees approved in the ROWAPS contract;
3) has an attached and executed Lobbying Certification form; and
4) has an attached and executed Lower Tier Participant Debarment Certification
A letter of intent or Commitment Letter is not acceptable.
Question 24-8: Is the sub-provider required to have Commercial General Liability Insurance
and Texas Business Automobile Policy Insurance? Or is that taken care of by the Prime
Provider.
Response to 24-8: For the purposes of completing the RFP, only the Prime Provider is
required to complete the form and submit it with the proposal. If awarded a contract, all Sub
Providers will be required to supply the same information.
Question 24-9: Do I need to complete the forms (section 24) for all subproviders or for the
prime firm only?
Response to 24-9: See response to 24-2.
SUPPLEMENT TO 55-8RFP6001
Page 17 of 17