RFP 24-02 Emerald Heights Expansion

Question #1 (2/21/24):

Are submitted proposals to include base pricing?

Answer:

Pricing is not an evaluation factor for this RFP. Pricing would come at later phases of the project. Here

Question #2 (3/8/24):

A window vendor inquired about the window specs on attachment #4 Emerald Heights Existing layout & plans.

Answer:

Attachment #4 is for the existing building (a previous project, circa 2014). KIHA does not yet have plans for this expansion project, RFP 24-02. A note has been added to the plan set. Here

Question #3 (3/7/24):

Has KIHA secured funds for the project and/or has a funding source(s) for the project?

Answer:

Yes.

It is anticipated that this project will utilize a mix of IHBG and other funding.

Question #4 (3/7/24):

Does KIHA have a budget for the project? If so, what is the budget amount?

Answer:

Yes.

Not to exceed $13million

Question #5 (3/7/24):

Regarding RFP Item E. Service Fee Should the Project not Proceed, please define KIHA understanding of a Schematic Design and Class B Budget? 15% Design Development & Conceptual Estimate? 35% Level Design with 35% Estimate? Other?

Answer:

Schematic design is defined as: 15% design. Zoning and building code issues that may affect the development, as well as site analysis would be completed at this point.

The shape and size of the building would be established, along with the size, location, and relationships between all the spaces.

Class B budget: Cost estimate based off Schematic design.

Question #6 (3/7/24):

Regarding RFP Item E. Service Fee Should the Project not Proceed, is it correct to understand that if awarded the project and after completion of the (see question #3 above) 35% level design (schematic?) and 35% estimate, if the estimate exceeds KIHA budget or funding source(s) or for other reasons that cause the project to not move forward beyond that point, that the Prime Contractor & Design Team are to estimate its cost expenditure at that point and include that number under RFP Item E for reimbursement by KIHA in the event that project is cancelled?

Answer:

Service Fee should be a flat price.

Question #7 (3/7/24):

Under the Evaluation heading in the RFP it speaks to a Signed Conflict of Interest Form that is in Appendix A. There does not appear to be an Appendix A within the RFP other than Item #4 Organizational Conflicts of Interest Certification contained within the Reps & Certs. No direct signature provided in Item #4 other than signature of the entire Rep & Certs package. Will executing the Reps & Certs package by signature fulfill the Signed Conflict of Interest Form requirements under Evaluation?

Answer:

Signed “Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Bidders” satisfies this requirement.

Item 4 of the Reps and Certs statement.

Question #8 (3/7/24):

Was there a Geotechnical investigation and corresponding report provided to KIHA or the “Project” related to the existing Emerald Heights Senior Housing facility construction? If so, would KIHA share the report with the bidders?

Answer:

Yes. Added attachment #5: 2011 NEAR ISLAND SENIOR HOUSING Geotechnical Investigation Report

Question #9 (3/7/24):

The RFP document titled “Contractor/Bidder’s Indian Preference Statement”, part II. Preference in Subcontract Awards, Item (B) (.pdf page 20 of the RFP), states the bidder shall give a dollar preference to qualified Indian-owned subcontractors in an amount provided in the preference table found at Section 11 of the Instructions to Bidders. We are unable to locate Section 11 of the Instructions to Bidders. Can this be provided?

Answer:

From page 2 of the RFP:

Preference will be given to American Indian/Alaska Native owned firms and individuals are encouraged to participate. Preference in the award of this contract will be given to Indian owned economic enterprises and individuals. The project is subject to Section 7(b) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C 450 e(b)). To qualify as an Indian owned enterprise, the proposal must include documented evidence that the enterprise is at least 51% Indian-owned and evidence of operation and control showing a substantial Involvement in the day-to-day management and business activities of the enterprise. Consultants must certify whether they are an Indian organization or Indian owned economic enterprise, or how opportunities for employment will be given to Indians for this project.

From page 6, Evaluation point F. “American Indian / Alaskan Native Preference. 15 Points”

Question #10 (3/11/24):

Why do we use pre-selection?

Answer:

KIHA would like the successful proposer to be involved with all aspects of design and construction, from pre-development to post-construction.

Question #11 (3/11/24):

Regarding scoring of Native preference, is it published somewhere we can access? We want to understand the point system.

Answer:

See question 7 answer

Question #12 (3/15/24):

How is the scoring for Native Preference weighted and could a breakdown of scoring for this category be provided?

Answer:

See question 7 answer

Question #13 (3/15/24):

May we suggest a mandatory site visit?

Answer:

No site visit is required for this phase of the project.

Interested parties are encouraged to visit, and KIHA can show the site at any time.

Question #14 (3/19/24):

Will electronic proposals be received by KIHA at procurement@kiha.org?

Answer:

Yes.