Opportunity Detail

Questions and Answers

Children's Justice Act Task Force Research and Support
Document #:  JFSR1819068142


Question:   1. Is the 1800 estimated hours on an annual basis or the estimated total hours for the three years combined? 2. On the Cost Proposal (Attachment D), what should be entered in the sections A-E? Is it the hourly rates for each person listed in the work plan? Or is A-E in reference to some other specific deliverables? Given that the specific tasks required are not detailed in the RFP and this project will be based on hourly rate reimbursement, how would you instruct bidders to estimate total cost for each fiscal year?

Answer:   1.1800 hours is the maximum number of hours allotted under this one-year contract period. The actual number of billable hours may be less, dependent upon the level of work and tasks assigned through the Task Force, but may not exceed 1800 hours. 2.Attachment D is the vehicle through which the vendor identifies its total cost projection for completion of the project deliverables as set forth in this Request for Proposal. Sections A-E are available for the vendor to provide any cost breakdown by budget item. The vendor may supplement this form with a Cost Narrative that explains how costs were calculated and justifies the need for the cost.

Date: 4/25/2018

Inquiry: 53100


Question:   We are confused by two aspects of the instructions for the Format of the proposal. The organization of the tabs and sub-tabs seems inconsistent- Beginning of page 12 of 24, Sub-Tabs 2a-c fall under Tab 2, but sub-tabs 4a-b fall under Tab 3, and sub-tabs 5a-f fall under Tab 4. Additionally, the explanation and division of deliverables as described on page 13 of 24 are unclear. That page asks for Deliverables to be divided into sub-tabs a-f as per section 4.4. We think you mean section 4.3, which is divided into 6 categories, while section 4.4 is not divided at all. Additionally, sections 4.3a-f describe Specifications of Deliverables with single-sentence basic headings, while section 4.1 (pages 7&8 of 24) describes the Scope of Work using the term Deliverables, and then presents four categories of deliverables that include involved and specific examples which do a good job of clarifying expectations for the recipient of the contract. Our questions then, involve knowing how much latitude you will allow us as we draft the format of our submissions. 1) Do you want us to retain the tab/sub-tab numbered-structure that you have identified, or may we use headings either with sub-tabs numbered to correspond with the tabs, or just use headings? 2) May we divide Tab 4 according to the four Scope of Work deliverables identified in section 4.1, and apply the Specifications of Deliverables into the Scope categories, or do you want us to stick with the six Specifications of Deliverables and apply the Scope of Work into those six categories? Thank you.

Answer:   We apologize for the confusion, during our edits this section was not updated and should read: , section 4.2 is actually the Admin Structures. And for TAB 4 it references the Deliverable at Section 4.4; however, section 4.3 is actually the Deliverables. Vendors will not be penalized as this was JFS' oversight.

Date: 4/25/2018

Inquiry: 53109


Question:   1) We would appreciate a clarification of the term "contracts" occurring in Section VIII, 8.1. Our agency holds relationships with State agencies that are "contracts," but also "subgrant agreements," and "grant award agreements." What kinds of formal two-party arrangements do you want included in our list of contracts? 2) Regarding the format of the proposal, specifically dividing the sections into tabs and subtabs: Do you want us to deliver a proposal that is physically arranged using tab-dividers, such as those manila card-stock pages with the colored tabs on a side or are you asking that we utilize the term "Tab" when organizing our sections, such as in a header?

Answer:   1.) Any mutually binding written legal document signed by both parties obligating the parties to responsibilities, terms and conditions. Types of agreements include: a contract, grant, subgrant, memorandum of understanding, data sharing agreement, inter-agency agreement, inter-branch agreement, or software license agreement. 2.) The proposal should be physically arranged with tabs and subtabs by section as stated in the RFGA. Manila card-stock pages with the colored tabs on the side may be used or any other form or color of tabs.

Date: 4/24/2018

Inquiry: 53095


Question:   Does ODJFS own the domain ohiochildlaw.org or is owned by the current vendor? Is creating a new website design part of this RFP?

Answer:   This website is the property of the current vendor. Yes, establishing and maintaining a website is a function under this agreement.

Date: 4/24/2018

Inquiry: 53092


Question:   Below, please find question from Public Consulting Group, Inc. regarding this RFP. 1. Has the state made a determination if the selected vendor for this project will be considered a “contractor” or “subrecipient” per 2 CFR 200.330? 2. Where is the project website currently hosted? 3. Other than the quarterly in-person reports to the Advisory Committee, can you estimate the number of in-person Columbus-based meetings of the Task Force that would be required? 4. Is there an incumbent vendor currently contracted for this scope of work?

Answer:   1.Has the state made a determination if the selected vendor for this project will be considered a "contractor" or "subrecipient" per 2 CFR 200.330? The selected vendor will be a CONTRACTOR. 2.Where is the project website currently hosted? OHIOCHILDLAW.COM 3.Other than the quarterly in-person reports to the Advisory Committee, can you estimate the number of in-person Columbus-based meetings of the Task Force that would be required? A minimum of 4-6 in person meetings of the Task Force is anticipated. Additional in-person meetings may be required to accomplish identified goals and will be negotiated with the selected vendor as appropriate. 4.Is there an incumbent vendor currently contracted for this scope of work? Yes, FYLAW is the Family and Youth Law Center at Capital University Law School.

Date: 4/18/2018

Inquiry: 53056


Question:   Below, please find question from Public Consulting Group, Inc. regarding this RFP. 1. Has the state made a determination if the selected vendor for this project will be considered a “contractor” or “subrecipient” per 2 CFR 200.330? 2. Where is the project website currently hosted? 3. Other than the quarterly in-person reports to the Advisory Committee, can you estimate the number of in-person Columbus-based meetings of the Task Force that would be required? 4. Is there an incumbent vendor currently contracted for this scope of work?

Answer:   1.Has the state made a determination if the selected vendor for this project will be considered a "contractor" or "subrecipient" per 2 CFR 200.330? The selected vendor will be a CONTRACTOR. 2.Where is the project website currently hosted? OHIOCHILDLAW.COM 3.Other than the quarterly in-person reports to the Advisory Committee, can you estimate the number of in-person Columbus-based meetings of the Task Force that would be required? A minimum of 4-6 in person meetings of the Task Force is anticipated. Additional in-person meetings may be required to accomplish identified goals and will be negotiated with the selected vendor as appropriate. 4.Is there an incumbent vendor currently contracted for this scope of work? Yes, FYLAW is the Family and Youth Law Center at Capital University Law School.

Date: 4/18/2018

Inquiry: 53055


back

Inquiry period ended:  4/26/2018 8:00:00 AM