Lake County Addendum Forum


Q: Where can I locate a signage schedule for this project? 

R: Signage quantities are indicated In Specification Section 10 14 00; Paragraph 3.03A & B.

Q. Could you help me with clarifying the type of fume hood they are looking for in Dental Lab 158 and 162? I found the spec for them but they don’t list any manufacturers and this seems more like a kitchen exhaust fan that a true fume hood.

R: The hood specified is an exhaust hood and not a fume hood.  Provide an exhaust hood as specified.

Q. Please find the attached letterhead, substitution request form, submittal drawings from the completed Performing Arts Center project & a company brochure. GSI seeks approval as a qualified supplier of signage for the Zion Medical Clinic Renovations project. We would manufacture ADA compliant panels utilizing VistaSystems anodized aluminum extruded curved face frames that would be mounted to a backer material by GSI. This substitution would cause no change in schedule or require redesign to other portions of this project.

R: We will not be accepting any substitution on the signage specs as provided in the Bid documents.




The revised  plans and specifications have now been uploaded in their entirety on the Purchasing Portal.  The new plans and specifications include all previously noted specification section and plan updates per the Addendum #1 blog PLUS the following:

Invitation to Bid Form has been updated noting a new BID OPENING DATE OF TUESDAY, AUGUST 8, 2017 @ 2:00 PM and the last day for formal questions has also been updated to read August 1, 2017 at Noon central time.

Section 00 11 15 – Lake County Health Department Invitation to Bid Terms & Conditions attachment has been updated to include a revised bid opening date as noted on Page 2 of the attachment; Paragraph 2 to be Tuesday, August 8, 2017.  The cut-off date for contractor questions has been revised to the Noon Central Time August 1, 2017.

Section 00 31 24 – Environmental Assessment Information has been revised in its entirety.

Section 01 21 00 – Allowances has been revised in its entirety.

The following specifications sections have been revised to include previously noted Addendum #1 Blog items.  (Refer to bold text in the following specification sections):
• 00 01 10 – Table of Contents: Revised Page numbers from quantity 7 to quantity 8 for Section 08 80 00 – GLAZING.
• 02 41 00 – Demolition:  Added Paragraph 3.03H.
• 00 30 00 – Cast-In-Place Concrete: Added Sub-Paragraph 2.04J3.
• 04 20 00 – Unit Masonry: Revised Sub-Paragraph 2.02A2.
• 08 11 13 – Hollow Metal Doors & Frames:  Added Sub-Paragraph 2.01A5.
• 08 80 00 – Glazing: Revised Paragraphs 2.04A & B.



UPDATED 3:20 PM CST 7/26/17

~~This Addendum forms a part of the Contract Documents and modifies the Bidding Documents dated July 11, 2017, with amendments and additions noted below. Acknowledge receipt of this Addendum in the space provided in the Bid Form. Failure to do so may subject the Bidder to disqualification.


Question 1:  The fuse Marker paint (P6) is called out in room 100 Multi-Purpose; it is on the North wall.  One note reads marker board wall paint install floor to ceiling. On the room schedule the north wall is calling for p1/p6 which is an indication that there is PA (eggshell) sw6149 Relaxed Khaki and PF (fuse) on the north wall. On the interior elevations it does not show where the marker board will go. The north wall is approximately 52lf and the height is 8’. If the marker board is to be on the entire wall minus the door and frame, what about the side walls. Need a clarification about the extent of the marker board in that room.

Response 1: The drawings correctly indicate the intent.  The Fuse Marker paint (P6) shall be installed on North wall from inside edge of drywall "bump outs" (Reference Lines E6/D6) at Door
100.3 from floor to ceiling to Northwest (Reference Lines F6) and Northeast (Reference Lines C6) corners of the room.  The Drywall Bump Out at the exterior door opening gets painted with P1 Eggshell - Color PA.
Question 2: Will we be required to submit Certified Payroll verification for payout requests?

Response 2: Yes.  Refer to Specification Section 00 72 00 - General & Supplementary Conditions attachment; Paragraph 7 - Applications for Payment.

Question 3: Per A310- Is a rail required @ (1) side only @ pedestrian walk near 6/C?  None required @ bldg side? ( Note 5.091 reads “ not anchor into face of existing masonry wall.”

Response 3: An interior side hand rail is required to be installed on the interior side of the ramp and shall be fastened into the existing masonry wall.  General Contractor shall coordinate fastening points into the masonry surfaces. Refer to revised Sheet A310 for more information. The guardrail that has keynote 5.091 on Detail 1/A310 shall NOT be anchored into the masonry wall.  The entire guardrail assembly shall be cored into the concrete walkway as keynoted.

Question 4: Are any rails required elsewhere? ie: @ interior/ exterior stairs @ south end of bldg. near 1/C?

Response 4: No.

Question 5: Per A910- Dtl’s 3 & 5 indicate 2 1/2” sq. tubes @ 42” o.c.  Can you provide quantity? I’m having difficulty locating/ determining.

Response 5: The tubes are only to be installed inside the half wall between the intake windows in Room 120 - Reception at the east side of the room. Only one location for the tubes exist.  Two total tubes are required at each end of the half wall for lateral stability of the casework assembly.

Question 6: Per A800 & corresponding dtl’s on A820- (15) doors are indicated to have steel lintels per dtl’s 6 & 14/ A820, but are the beams per S320 meant to be acting as lintels?

Response 6: No new steel is placed directly above door head.  Steel beams on S320 are acting as the lintels to span over the openings.  These will be erected tight to the underside of the precast as detailed on the structural drawings and as shown in added detail 15/A820.  Detail 6/A820 has been revised to indicate that the masonry and lintel over the head of the new door frame are for existing masonry openings that already have lintels above former door opening scheduled to be reused. The existing steel lintel and masonry are existing to remain in place in the reused
opening. Detail 15/A820 has been added and correctly keyed into the updated Door, Frame, & Hardware Schedule on Sheet A800 for new opening locations.  Added detail 15 indicates that no lintel or masonry is needed immediately above the new door frame at the HEAD locations as scheduled.  The interstitial space above the new door frames to the steel supporting the existing precast roof planking shall be infilled with drywall and insulation as shown in new detail 15/A820.
Question 7: And, lintels @ most of the doors where no beam is shown, ie: 101, 104, 106, 116, 142, 145, 147, 166 & 173(.1), & 166 & 173(.2), are indicated as existing per S320, – no new lintels required?

Response 7: No steel placed directly above door head.  Steel beams on S320 are acting as the lintels to span over the openings.  These will be erected tight to the underside of the precast as detailed on the structural drawings.  Refer to response # 6 above and refer to revised Door, Frame, & Hardware Schedule on Sheet A800.

Question 8: Can you provide width of G1z interior partitions? & just to verify, no bottom plates are required on B1/ B2 beams per S320?

Response 8: The G1z wall assembly is 1-5/8" Mtl. Studs & 5/8" Gypsum Board for a total of 2-1/4" however the studs shall be installed 1/4" off the face of the exterior wall for the 2-1/2" dimension indicated on the G1z wall type. No bottom plates required.

Question 9:  Also per S320- width of brg. plates is given as 7” typical for B1 / B2 beams but width of beams is 7.995” & 10” respectively so those won’t work. Revise?

Response 9: Provide bearing plates as noted on the drawings

Question 10: Also, FYI- Plan on giving add for the (8) extra beams indicated per S320 beam & plan on figuring all beams except ones connecting to columns furnished only schedule, to be set by mason. We’ll then come back & weld to bearing plates

Response 10:  No Comment. Means and methods GC coordination issue.

Question 11:  Please provide section views for the infill walls at the removed PTAC units.

Response 11: Section views are not available.  Infill removed PTAC openings as noted in Keynote 4.212 on Sheet A210.  Existing wall construction at removed PTAC units shall be bid to be 8" load bearing CMU interior with 4 inch modular brick masonry veneer and an airspace with polyisocyanurate board insulation.

Question 12:  Per drawing A810 Finish Remark 5 all Window sills and trim are SSA but there are no references to SSB. Please provide direction as to what gets finish SSB

Response 12: All countertops and window sills shall be the same color; SSA.  SSB is not used on this project.

Question 13:  Will there be any work required for placing additional attic or roof insulation?
Response 13: No.

Question 14:  Per Spec Section 05 50 00 Section 2.05 A2 for Metal Fabrications, Spray fireproofing is mentioned but not referenced in the drawings. Please confirm if spray fireproofing will be required on the new steel members.

Response 14: There is no spray fireproofing on this project. All steel members shall be prepared as noted in Specification Section 05 50 00 - Metal Fabrications; Paragraph 3.04.

A. Under Article 2.04  ADMIXTURES:
1. Add new Subparagraph J3 as follows:
"3.  Other Acceptable Product meeting or exceeding the minimum performance requirements of Specified Products; ISE Logik Industries, Inc.; MVRA 900:

A. Add wall mounted, interior handrail (Keynote 5.093) at the west side of the ramp near Door Opening 116.1; revision cloud 2. (Drawing Attached).
B. Add location of the bronze plaque (Keynote 10.143) at vestibule 117 and building address numerals (Keynote 10.146) at exterior entrance canopy; revision cloud 2. (Drawing Attached).
A. Revise Door and Frame Schedule for Door openings 118.1, 118.2, 163.1 & 169.1 to read 15/A820 in lieu of 6/A820 as orifginally scheduled.  (Drawing Attached)
A. Revise Detail 6/A820:  Indicate existing masonry (Keynote 2.041) and existing steel lintel (Keynote 2.053) above door head.
B. Added Detail 15/A820: Added Head Detail as indicated.



Question 1: I am looking at this project and need clarification On L-100 the details call for plant key CAKF. This is not on the plant list, could you find out what it is?

Response 1: CAKF is Calamagrostis x acutiflora ‘Karl Foerster’.

Question 2: With regards to the glass make up for the Zion Medical Clinic 1) Will they accept an alternate to the Solera L (SG3)?.

Response 2: Glass types SG1 & SG3 have been modified by this addendum.  See revisions to the glass specifications in "CHANGES TO SPECIFICATIONS" below.

Question 3:  As far as SG1, please verify the make-up versus the performance, as any greylite product will not come anywhere near the VLT.
Response 3: Glass types SG1 & SG3 have been modified by this addendum.  See revisions to the glass specifications in "CHANGES TO SPECIFICATIONS" below.

Question 4: For the building demolition, will we be responsible for capping utilities or will the owner set that up?  If we are responsible for capping utilities, to what point should they be removed/capped?

Response 4: The General Contractor is responsible to coordinate utility disconnection and capping with the local utility companies as Base Bid. Please see response to Question 7 below.

Question 5:  Per Spec Section 06 41 00 there is a reference to certification through A.W.I. Please confirm, is certification a requirement for bidding as this will greatly limit the potential competition among our subs.  NOTE: Regardless of certification status, our subs still fabricate per A.W.I. Standards Sec.400b (Custom Grade).

Response 5: Cabinets shall be constructed to AWI Premimum Grade in accordance with Specification section 06 41 00; Paragraph 2.01A.  There is no specified requirement for the fabricators shop to be AWI Certified.

Question 6: Referencing Keynote 7.240 at Photo 4 on drawing A1010, please clarify the extent of patching required at the EIFS fascia.  The photo provided does not capture the entire area of existing EIFS and it’s unclear if the area highlighted in the photo is intended to indicate the extent of patching or just the re-coating.  If the extent of required patching is unknown, please stipulate a quantity to be included for bidding purposes.

Response 6: Patching shall be required at the entrance canopy where former building signage or exterior wall penetrations have been removed. There is approximately 150 square feet of patching required.  The balance of the upper canopy gets fully recoated after the EIFS patching is performed.

Question 7: The drawings show no detail of utilities to be disconnected from the building to be demolished. Please clarify size, location, termination point, and any subsequent site repair.

Response 7: No utilities are to be disconnected at 1911 - 27th Street.  All existing utilities at this location shall be reused.  The existing Zion Clinic located at 1819 - 27th Street is a single story structure with a full basement.  The first floor is approximately 14 feet in height and the basement is approximately 12 feet deep. This building is to be demolished in its entirety.  The building is 2,459 square feet at the first floor and 2,459 square feet at the basement floor.  The total building square footage is 4,918 Square Feet in size.  Existing utilities at 1819 - 27th Street shall be removed from the building to the point of connection at the public utility main and terminated in
accordance with utility company direction.  A new power service at this site shall be provided to the small shed on the west property line utilizing the existing overhead utility pole as shown on Sheet
E100 - Electrical Site Plan.  Also refer to Specification Section 02 41 00 - Demolition for additional requirements.

A. Under Article 3.03  EXISTING UTILITIES:
1. Delete Subparagraph 3.03H and replace with the following:
"H.   Prepare building demolition areas by disconnecting and capping utilities outside the demolition zone at existing utility mains; identify and mark utilities to be subsequently reconnected, in same manner as other utilities."
A. Under Article 2.02 BRICK UNITS:
1. Delete Subparagraph A2 and replace with the following:
"2.  (Type B2 - Buff Blend Color):  Sioux City Brick; Gas Burn Matt # 220; Modular Size 4" x 2 2/3" x 8" Nominal with textured face to match existing."
A. Under Article 2.01 MANUFACTURERS:
1. Add acceptable Manufacturer, Sub-Paragraph A5 to read:
"5.  Mesker Openings Group:"
1.4 SECTION 08 80 00 - GLAZING
A. Under Article 2.04  INSULATING GLASS UNITS:
1. Delete Paragraph 2.04 A & B and replace with the following:
"A. Type SG1 - Sealed Insulating Glass Units:  Tinted vision glass, double glazed.
1. Application:  All exterior glazing unless otherwise indicated.
2. Outboard Lite:  Fully tempered float glass, 1/4 inch thick.
a. Tint:  PPG Solarban 60 on Optigray Low-E #2.
b. Coating: Low-E (passive type), on # 2 surface.
3. Inboard Lite:  Fully tempered float glass, 1/4 inch thick, minimum.
a. Tint: Clear.
b. Cavity:  1/2 inch (90% Argon Fill).
4. Total Thickness:  1 inch.
5. Thermal Transmittance (U-Value), Summer - Center of Glass: 0.22, nominal.
6. Thermal Transmittance (U-Value), Winter - Center of Glass: 0.24, nominal.
7. Total Visible Light Transmittance: 50 percent, nominal.
8. Total Solar Heat Gain Coefficient: 0.29 percent, nominal.
9. Shading Coefficient:  0.34 percent, nominal.
10. .  Glazing Method:  Gasket glazing.
B. Type SG3 - Sealed Insulating Glass Units: Frosted translucent glass, double glazed.
1. Application:  As indicated on Drawings.
2. Outboard Lite:  Fully tempered float glass, 1/4 inch thick.
a. Tint:  PPG Solarban 60 on Optigray Low-E #2.
b. Coating: Low-E (passive type), on # 2 surface.
3. Inboard Lite:  Fully tempered float glass, 1/4 inch thick, minimum.
a. Tint: Acid-Etched White # 3.
b. Cavity:  1/2 inch (90% Argon Fill).
4. Total Thickness:  1 inch.
5. Thermal Transmittance (U-Value), Summer - Center of Glass: 0.22, nominal.
6. Thermal Transmittance (U-Value), Winter - Center of Glass: 0.24, nominal.
7. Total Visible Light Transmittance: 50 percent, nominal.
8. Total Solar Heat Gain Coefficient: 0.29 percent, nominal.
9. Shading Coefficient:  0.34 percent, nominal.
10. .  Glazing Method:  Gasket glazing."

A. Revise Keynote 7.717 to read: "7.717  Existing roof hatch to be removed and replaced in its entirety under Base Bid.  General Contractor shall remove existing wood roof curbing and wood roof hatch and discard.  Existing asphalt shingles around the perimeter of the roof hatch shall be removed and replaced to match exisrting color and to accommodate the new roof hatch size. General Contractor shall reframe wood opening with treated wood as required to accommodate new roof hatch.  New roof hatch shall be Manufacturered by Bilco: Type: S-50TB; Thermally Broken type insulated to R-20.  Size: 30 x 36 inches single leaf. Cover: 11 gauge aluminum. Curb: 12" Height (insulated) R-20. Hinges: Stainless Steel. Locking:  Exterior latching lever with padlock hasp option to be secured from exterior." Drawing Sheet A320 has been revised and attached to this Addendum for bidders information.

Please view Bid Documents for updated drawing A320 


PLEASE NOTE THAT THE SITE TOUR SCHEDULED HAS BEEN CANCELLED FOR Wednesday  July 26 1:00-2:30PM new site only LCHD Clinic 1911 27th St. Zion IL  60099


QUESTION: Looking for clarification on CCTV and Door Access specifications ?

RESPONSE: Base Bid:  Contractor to provide open raceways for these system to accessible ceilings.

An Allowance of $85,000.00 shall be carried in the GC Base Bid per specification section 01 21 00 – Allowances.  The General Contractor shall employ the Owner’s Security Vendor (Precision Controls of Illinois) to furnish and install these systems under the allowance. We feel this is clearly indicated in the bid package.

Additional Site tours will be conducted at :

Friday July 21, 2017 8 -8:30 AM first at the current LCHD Zion Clinic 1819 27th St. Zion, IL 60099  followed by site visit/tour at the new  LCHD Zion Clinic site at 1911 27th St. Zion IL 8:30 – 10:00 AM

Wednesday  July 26 1:00-2:30PM new site only LCHD Clinic 1911 27th St. Zion IL  60099


Bruce Rauner Joe Beyer
Governor Acting Director
July 10, 2017

Dear Public Official,
The Illinois Department of Labor has reviewed the Prevailing Wage schedule that was published on May 26, 2017 (These rates took effect on June 5, 2017). Following the review, we have corrected some of the rates in your county. We have posted the corrected schedule and the revised items have been highlighted in the rate schedule.
Please notify contractors engaged in public works by your agency of these corrections, which take effect immediately.

Illinois Department of Labor

Important Legal Notice:


Last Post: ADDENDUM 1 - 7/11/2017



5/9/18 3:00 PM CST.


UPDATED 5/10/18 1:50PM


1. Whether companies from Outside USA can apply for this?
         (like, from India or Canada)


2. Whether we need to come over there for meetings?


3. Can we perform the tasks (related to RFP) outside USA?
        (like, from India or Canada


4. Can we submit the proposals via email


UPDATED MAY 15, 2018 11:45 AM

5. It states there is a meeting on May 17th, 2017. Is this a typo? Is that meeting actually 2018? And if it was in fact in 2017 and we missed it, are we still eligible to apply?


UPDATED MAY 15, 2018 1:45PM

6. If I am reading the RFP correctly, it sounds like you are looking for more of a media agency than a creative agency. If I understand correctly, you need a cross-channel marketing plan but the creative to be used is from existing assets. Is that right?

RESPONSE: Yes, that is correct.  The creative will be purchased by us through the CDC.

UPDATED MAY 23, 2018 3:32PM

7. May we submit an attachment along with the Price Proposal sheet?


8. With the previous campaign what was the data or responses received?


9.Will there be Spanish translation services required?


10. Will the CDC creative be provided electronically?


11. Is the LCHD open to other media strategies eg. Spotify/BillBoards?


12. Can you clarify the webpage requirement? 

RESPOPNSE: It should be a standalone microsite.

Last Post: ADDENDUM RFP 18087 - 5/10/2018


Question: The RFP indicates there are Examination Forms in Appendix A which may have been inadvertently left out. The only form in Appendix A appears to be an Authorization Form.

Response: The Authorization Form is our Examination form.

Question: Clarification needed on the drug testing line items. 10 Panel Collection fee: I assume that means specimen collection only. Your lab and MRO. DOT 5 Panel: Includes collection and lab fees. Do I have this correct? Also, you do not mention random program management for DOT testing. Is that handled by others?

Response: This should be specimen collection, lab and testing. Other testing is not included in this RFP though in the past we have used whatever vendor is chosen for other things as needed including random testing and Vaccination Management.


Last Post: ADDENDUM 1 - 8/11/2015


Addendum 1 -This correction is in regards to Key Dates in the Selection Process found on Page 10.  The interviews are listed as the Week of April 23-27.  This should be read "Week of May 23-27, 2016".


Currently no questions have been submitted.

Last Post: Addendum #1 - 7/29/2016



Q) Regarding page 13, Task 2 Current State Assessment:
a. Is it possible for LCHD to provide a rough estimate of the extent of “all existing research, studies, surveys, plans, reports, data sets, and other related programmatic materials”?  For example, as it relates to documentation, should we expect the equivalent of several hundred pages, a few thousand, more?  As it relates to existing data sets, approximately how many exist and of what type? 
A) The total page volume of relevant LC studies is a few thousand pages however the data sets are to be determined as the project is outlined. 
b. Will the existing materials and data sets be provided in live electronic formats?
A) Electronic primarily

Q)Regarding the data that will be shared and analyzed during this project, is there any assumption about whether data sets that would be provided by members of the Community Coalition include de-identified or identified data from a HIPAA/PHI perspective? 
A) No assumptions have been made and the Community Coalition is open to all perspectives that will best suit the Coalition


Q) Please clarify if there are 15 or 18 monthly meetings?
A) A minimum of 15 meetings are contemplated over a period of 18 months. It is anticipated that due to scheduling conflicts a meeting may not be held every month.

Q) Could the County please give more details or definition of facilitation and data methodology?
A) The Mental Health Coalition will consider a variety of facilitation techniques and data sharing avenues suggested by Proposer.

Q) The Insurance section (Section 19) of the RFP General Terms and Conditions lists a number of insurance policies.  Which policies are applicable for this engagement?
A) If the Proposer takes exception to any of the Terms and Conditions responses should clearly define such exceptions.

Q) The third paragraph of Section 29, of the RFP General Terms and Conditions references performance and payment bonds.  Are such bonds required under this RFP and if so, please provide the specific requirements?
A) No bonds are required or this RFP

Q) The Information Security section (Section 35) of the RFP General Terms and Conditions refers to Lake County’s information security policy and privacy standards. Are Lake County’s information security policy and privacy standards available for review?
A) Public WiFi is available. However, if selected, and the Proposer needs to connect to the Lake County System they will need to follow the Third Party Network Access Requirements and sign an Acceptable Use Policy. See Attached.

Q) Will Lake County be providing laptops for consultants to use on engagements, or will consultants be expected to provide their own computers?  If the latter, are there any special requirements for data security/data privacy?
A) No laptops will be provided


Last Post: Addendum # 1 - 12/15/2016



Q) Please elaborate on the communication materials that will be mailed to employees' homes: how many times per year will this be required? Is the vendor expected to mail the materials to the County for the County to mail, or is the vendor expected to mail the materials directly to employees' homes?
A) While we cannot specify the exact content, we expect the vendor to mail materials directly to employee’s home regarding services offered by the EAP vendor in order to maintain awareness and utilization.


Q)Should the redacted copy be submitted in hard copy or electronically? A)Hard copy is preferred for the redacted copy

Q)How many copies and in what format should the separate pricing/cost proposal be submitted? A) Submit pricing in electronic file and hard copy

Q)Who is the current EAP provider and is the County pleased with their services? A) Please review the Addendum as this question has been previously answered.

Q)What is the current pricing for the program? A)Please review the Addendum as this question has been previously answered.

Q)Please provide the most recent yearly utilization report. A)Please review the Addendum as this question has been previously answered.

Q)Is the County currently receiving a 5 or 10 visit counseling model? A)Current model is a 10 visit counseling model

Q)Who currently answers the helpline? Is it a master's-level clinician or a customer service representative? A) A clinician answers all calls

Q)How important is it to the County that services are provided by CEAPs? Why is the County specifically requesting this? Does your current provider have CEAPs performing all of these services? A)Please review Addendum as this question has been previously answered.

Q)How many hours of onsite training and how many hours of onsite management consultations have been provided each of the last 3 years? A)Please review the Addendum as this question has been previously answered.

Q)Regarding the requirement that trainings be taped by the vendor and provided in scom format: can you please explain this requirement? We have not heard of this format before. Additionally, we have a vast library of digitally uploaded training videos available on our website. Would that work for this requirement? A)Perhaps, however the County is requesting the specific training provided be taped so that employees unable to attend can still view the training material

Q)Please explain further if Gatekeeper services are required. Is the County currently receiving gatekeeper services from the incumbent provider? What is the cost being paid for these services? A) Please review the Addendum as this question has been previously answered.

Q)Is the County's health insurance self-insured? A)Yes

Q)How are the individual evaluation factors weighted? A) Each evaluation is scored using a scale of 100 points and each evaluation criteria is given a point value of 20.


Q) Are the 15 hours for Critical Incident Response and the 15 hours of onsite Management consultation also two separate items being requested or are they referencing the same pool of hours?
A) They are separate pool of hours.


Q) Are onsite Critical Incident Response services included in the 40 hours of training requested or are they separate?  If separate, is there a limit on the amount of these services in the current EAP contract? 
A) They are separate.  We currently have 15 hours of Critical Incident Response.

Q) Can you please provide more information about the EAPs role as a gatekeeper.  Is the EAP written into the mental health benefit whereby anyone wanting mental health benefits must first access the EAP?  Are those who access mental health benefits through the EAP reimbursed at a higher percentage for benefit-covered mental health services than those who access mental health benefits without first accessing the EAP?  Or finally, is the gatekeeper role more a traditional EAP role in which the EAP ensures a smooth transition into the mental health benefit for those cases being referred beyond the EAP for mental health services? 
A) the gatekeeper role is more a traditional EAP role in which the EAP ensures a smooth transition into the mental health benefit for those cases being referred beyond the EAP for mental health services

Q) We understand the pricing proposal needs to be delivered in its own separate sealed envelope.  Can that separate sealed envelope be in the same package as the rest of the proposal?
A) Yes, same envelope.  

Q) And do you want the pricing proposal the same 3 ways – 1 hard copy original, 1 electronic and 1 redacted?
A) Yes, correct


Q) I notice in your RFP it asks for Certified Employee Assistance Professional “Firms” to apply.  How many people in a firm have to be CEAP certified in order to qualify as a certified firm? OR, if our organization contains any CEAP employees, does that qualify us?

A) Credentials can be found at:  Please just indicate in your response how many people in your organization are CEAP certified.


Q) The addendum includes some utilization figures, but full utilization reports typically provide much more detailed information and typically allow us to offer a more competitive rate. Please provide utilization reports for 2015 and 2016. 
A) Please see attached usage report.

Q) How many EAP cases were there in 2016? 2015? 
A) Please see attached usage report, click above link

Q) How many EAP cases were referred to a provider/counseling sessions in 2016? 2015?  
A) Please see attached usage report, click above link

Q) How many EAP face-to-face counseling sessions were completed in 2016? 2015?  
A) Please see attached usage report, click above link 

Q) What was the average number of visits per EAP face-to-face case in 2016? 2015?  
A) Please see attached usage report, click above link 

Q) The addendum provided the number of calls handled in 2015 and 2016 Q1-Q3. What is the breakdown of these calls- how many were for EAP services, and how many were for work/life services? 
A) Please see attached usage report, click above link 

Q) How many work/life cases were there in 2016? 2015? 
A) Please see attached usage report, click above 

Q) How many training/topical seminar hours were used in 2016? 2015? 
A) On average, our current vendor has done 24 trainings annually (12 Wellness; 12 Social-Emotional).  One of our goals is to make these webinars available via not just via webinar but via recording 

Q) How many critical incident response/CIR/CISD hours were used in 2016? 2015? 
A) Please see attached usage report, click above link 

Q) How many CIR hours per year would you like included in the quote? We can embed a certain number into the PEPM rate. CIRs are always available on a fee-for-service basis as well.  How many on-site orientation hours were used in 2016? 2015? 
A) Please see attached usage report, click above link 

Q) To confirm, responses are due on 2/9, correct?
A) Yes, correct

Q) On page 12, #13 you reference recorded training videos. Are you looking for recorded orientation sessions or supervisory trainings/seminars? 
A) On average, our current vendor has done 24 trainings annually (12 Wellness; 12 Social-Emotional).  One of our goals is to make these webinars available via not just via webinar but via recording 

Q) Can you provide the number of face to face sessions that occurred by year over the past 5 years (or as far back as you can provide)
A) See attached report, click above link 

Q) Can you provide the number of CIRS occurrences (versus hours) by year over the past 5 years (or as far back as you can provide)
A) See attached report, click above link


Q)  The 5/10 EAP visit allowance per person.  Is that per year or per issue
A) The 5/10 EAP visit allowance per person is per year.

Q) Is the 61,000 annual spend covering a 5 session model or 10 session model? 
A) A 10 session model


Q) Does Lake County have an existing EAP?  If so who is the vendor?
A) See page 10 of the RFP. The existing Vendor is ComPsych Corporation.

Q) What is their annual spend with their EAP vendor?
A) Lake County spends approximately $61,000 annually for EAP services

Q) Why are they getting an additional bid.
A) The current contract is expired

Q) It pertinent, why are they dissatisfied with in their current vendor?
A) The current contract is expired.

Q) What is their current Utilization Rate? 
A) Lake County uses their current vendor in a variety of manners.  They provide monthly social-emotional Webinars for our employees.  In Q1-Q3 of 2016, 734 employees participated in training; in 2015 2,2,54 participated in training.  In terms of access to services, in Q1-Q3 of 2016, our vendor took 188 telephone calls; 719 utilized online access for a total of 907 interactions.   In 2015, our vendor took 262 telephone calls; 1031 utilized online access for a total of 1293 interactions.  In Critical Incident debriefing and Health Fair participants with the numbers above, total utilization is 1,642 for Q1-Q3 for 2016 and 3,560 for 2015.
Q) How many different locations are there to their 2700 population?
A) Lake County employees work at locations throughout the County however the two primary locations are 18 N County Street, Waukegan, IL and 3010 Grand Ave, Waukegan, IL

Q) Will the answers to my questions be emailed directly to me?  Could you please provide the date when responses will be emailed?
A) See page 3 of the RFP item #6 under General Terms and Conditions

Q) Is the intended implementation date 4/1/17 or 5/1/17?
A) Target contract execution date is listed on the RFP page 10. Any Implementation will occur after this date.


No questions at this time.






The Addendum URL in the original RFP posting was incorrect.  The correct Addendum blog URL that will be used to make comments and ask questions is: /addendums/17-3191506-pw---des-plaines-watershed-plan-request-for-consultant-assistance/addendum-1/.  This URL/link can also be found in the RFP posting.

Questions and comments related to this RFP may be submitted via this Addendum blog or via email to Questions and comments will be answered in this blog.


Question 1:

Can you advise us as to the amount that SMC was awarded for the grant not including the amount expected to be provided to the consultant? 

Answer 1:

The Des Plaines River Watershed-Based Plan is being undertaken with funding support from IL EPA under Financial Assistance Agreement #3191506 Des Plaines River Watershed BMP Implementation and Planning Program.  The total amount of the grant is $658,162 for a scope that includes: a watershed resource inventory; an expanded area for watershed-based planning (this request for consultant assistance); development of a small watershed assessment and action planning (SWAAP) pilot study; a water quality monitoring program implemented by the Des Plaines River Watershed Workgroup (DRWW); and 3 BMP implementation projects (Mundelein Park District, College of Lake County and Lake County Forest Preserves). The total amount of the grant budget for the watershed resource inventory (WRI) and watershed-based plan (WBP) is $317,500. $217,500 is the amount of the WRI and WBP that is not expected to be used for consultant assistance.

Question 2:

Is the amount of scope to be included for the cost a primary consideration for selection of the qualified consultant? 

Answer 2:

Page 17 of the RFP describes the Evaluation Procedure, criteria and scoring system for proposals submitted in response to this RFP.  The Proposed Fee is evaluated allowing for a maximum score of 5 of a total of 100 points. SMC requests receipt of proposals that at minimum address the Scope of Work items/tasks that are designated for consultant assistance (Consultant) in Attachment B.  Firms may propose additions or changes to the Scope of Work, but these changes/additions need to be supported with the rationale/reason for proposing the change, and should be submitted as separate cost items in the proposal.


Questions and comments related to this RFP may be submitted via this Addendum blog or via email to Questions and comments will be answered in this blog.

02/01/2017 – DPR Watershed Pre-Proposal Meeting Q&A

Patty Werner – RFP & Grant Overview presentation (can be found under bid posting document tab)

Jeff Laramy – GIS mapping presentation

Question 1:

Can you give a timeline for DRWW water quality data collection (when will the SMC/consultant receive the information)

Answer 1:

The Des Plaines River Watershed Workgroups (DRWW) final water quality data collection and final analysis reporting is due to be delivered to DRWW by September 1, 2017. SMC expects to receive and transfer the final analysis report to the consultant in September 2017.

  • DRWW has received the water chemistry data for the 2015-2016 monitoring period. It is being formatted for delivery to IL EPA by March 31, 2017. The number of water chemistry sample locations increased from 44 sites in 2015 to 63 sample sites in 2016, and will expand to all 70 sites in 2017.
  • Bioassessment data (fish and macroinvertebrates) and sediment samples were collected at 70 monitoring sites in 2016.
  • Flow is being monitored at 21 of the water quality monitoring sites (6 of these sites are USGS stations). 

An on-line application on the DRWW website shows the location of the monitoring sites.

Lake County Impaired Waters Web Map (WebApp)

Question 2:

What is being done with the headwaters (Wisconsin)? 

Answer 2:

SMC is using the Dutch Gap water quality information that was provided for the North Mill Creek-Dutch Gap Canal Watershed Plan.  DRWW does not have any monitoring sites in Wisconsin.  SMC will inquire with the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Plan Commission about more recent water quality data for Dutch Gap Canal. SMC will include this information in the Chapter 3 watershed assessment if available.

Question 3:

Is the DRWW calculating pollutant loads using the flow data that is being collected, and is the consultant expected to use the flow data to calculate pollutant loading.

Answer 3:

The DRWW intends to use the flow data for calculating pollutant loading, but this task is not included in their contractor’s current scope of work.  The consultant is not expected to calculate pollutant loading using the flow data, but may certainly do so if they choose to use it with their pollutant loading model. It is up the consultant to propose how they want to model pollutant loads.  The model must be approved by SMC.

Question 4:

Do the catchments shown on the map in the presentation coincide with the drainage catchments delineated for the previously completed subwatershed plans such as the North Mill-Dutch Gap Watershed-Based Plan? 

Answer 4:

SMC has delineated 422 catchments that will be used for this planning project. The 2007 DTM was used for the catchment delineations. This data was not available for some of the previously completed subwatershed plans, so the catchments for this project do not match the catchments/subwatershed management units used for previously completed subwatershed plans.

Question 6:

Is lateral recession collected as a point or line in the field (during the stream inventory)? Is bank height included? Did you categorize segments based on low (lateral recession rate)?

Answer 6:

Lateral recession is collected in the field as a point and then translated to a line in the office. Yes, bank height is collected. Streambank measurements are used to categorize lateral recession rates as low, medium, high levels of erosion and recession. Line files for left and right bank are available to the consultants. Lateral recession rates were not calculated for streambank areas having little to no erosion.

Question 7:

Are lateral recession rates measured in the lake shoreline assessment?

Answer 7:

Lake shoreline erosion is categorized as being none, slight, moderate or severe. No lateral recession rates were measured for lake shorelines.

Question 8:

Is flow data presently available at the DRWW “flow” monitoring sites?

Answer 8:

No, the monitoring for those sites just began in November/December 2016. Flow data collected from a total of 7 events in 2016-2017 will be delivered to DRWW with a final report in September 2017.

Question 9:

Will there be interpretation of the DRWW biological data? How do you see the biological data being used?

Answer 9:

Midwest Biodiversity Institute (MBI) is doing the biological assessment for DRWW. The water quality assessment report that is due to be delivered to DRWW in September 2017 will interpret areas that are habitat limited, water quality limited etc… based on the biological, and water and sediment chemistry data. The report to DRWW will be a comprehensive reporting of chemical, physical, and biological quality using tables and graphs to report the results. This will include an assessment of Publically Owner Treatment Works (POTW) pollutant loadings, chemical water quality criteria exceedances, exceedances of biologically relevant thresholds, sediment chemical threshold exceedances, analysis of habitat attributes, and reporting fish and macroinvertebrate Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) and metrics results. MBI will report the results of the data analyses and causal assessment. Conclusions about causes and sources are explained including any patterns observed in the study area such as the differences in results observed between POTW influenced and nonpoint source influenced sites and reaches. The MBI report results will be used to identify action plan recommendations as appropriate.

Question 10:

Can you describe the level of updates/effort required for the action plan recommendations of the previously approved subwatershed plans?

Answer 10:

SMC has compiled the action recommendations in all of the previously completed subwatershed- plans into a spreadsheet and file geodatabase. These recommendations will be updated by the consultant with assistance from SMC based on input from stakeholders regarding the status of project implementation. SMC intends that all of the previously identified action plan recommendations will be included in the Des Plaines River Watershed Action Plan.  The format for including this large dataset remains to be decided by SMC and the consultant.

The consultant will develop site-specific project maps for each major jurisdiction. Site-specific project maps in existing subwatershed plans will need to be updated to remove projects already completed and add new projects as appropriate. SMC has GIS files for the original action plan maps for most of the subwatersheds. The consultant will have to assist in determining with SMC how to best represent the project recommendations graphically.

Question 11:

Are there any Total Maximum Daily Load studies (TMDL’s) in the watershed?

Answer 11:

The Des Plaines River-Higgins Creek TMDL report is completed. The TMDL study includes numerous lakes in the southern half of the watershed planning area and includes Buffalo Creek. The TMDL report needs to referenced and used where applicable to action recommendations. The Des Plaines River watershed plan should focus on the best and most practical ways to reduce the pollutants of concern that are affecting impaired waters whether those waters are listed as impaired on the TMDL, 303(d) list or based on water quality data collected by DRWW or Lake County Health Department for lake reports.

Question 12:

12a. Will the consultant be expected to coordinate with Midwest Biodiversity Institute (MBI) on final watershed plan recommendations based on the MBI water quality report for the DRWW? 

Answer 12:

12a. MBI is doing a total assessment using all the water and sediment chemistry and biological data that is being collected. It is expected that MBI will present recommendations that will need to be included in the action plan, and a recommendation for changes to the monitoring strategy if needed. The consultant will use the MBI report that is scheduled to be delivered to DRWW in Sept. 2017 for developing the action plan, and is not expected to coordinate or work with MBI.

Question 13:

Is 2005 land use data layer the best available data?

Answer 13:

The 2010 land use data layer has just recently been finished, but SMC plans to use the 2005 land use since that was the best available data when SMC started the planning process for this watershed plan. There were not many changes between the 2005 and 2010 land use maps.



Question 1:

Does SMC have an inventory of NPDES discharges in the watershed, and if their discharge limits in terms of flows and nutrient concentrations are available?  Is the information in a database or spreadsheet?  If not, is this task part of the consultant’s responsibilities?

Answer 1:

SMC has summarized and referenced information related to wastewater dischargers as reflected in the PDF versions of the draft spreadsheets added to the RFP posting and is available on the SMC website:  Any additional information that is needed will be compiled by the consultant with assistance from SMC staff.

Question 2:

Can we get the sign-in sheet (for the pre-submittal meeting)?


Answer 2:

The sign-in sheet is added to the RFP posting as a scanned PDF image and is available on the SMC website:

Last Post: Addendum #1 - 2/7/2017



1. Is it a requirement that the on-site the provider have multiple Occupational Health Clinics located within Lake County, IL that are accessible to Lake County employees?  Yes, this is a requirement

2. Can you clarify what you are looking for in regards to “fit testing” event? On an annually bases we fit test 700 staff member to wear N95 mask for air borne exospores

3. In order to be considered to be a chosen vendor for Lake County, does the vendor need to be able to provide all of the vaccinations listed? Yes

a. TB Screening
b. Flu Shots
c. Hep B series
d. MMR
e. Tdap

3/27/2017 - No questions at this time




Q) Is a disruption and geo also required for the Medicare population (attachment C2)?
A) The County is not ask for the disruption at this time.

Q) Do retirees contribute to the retiree drug plan, if so, how much is the retiree’s contribution (%)?
A) Retires pay 100% of the premium however this is not separated out from the medical benefits.


Q) Can I get  a census file with zip codes?  The one we have doesn’t have zip codes and we need the zip codes to do the GeoAccess.
A) Please see the attached census with zip codes.


Q)  Does Lake County currently have an EGWP program in place?  If so, who is the provider?
A) Yes, Lake County has an EGWP in place and ESI is the vendor.


Q) Could you provide contact information for Judy Ott at BCBS?
A) Once a vender is selected through this procurement process this information will be shared however at this time the County doesn’t want to inundate BCBS with calls and/or inquiries.


Q) Could you please provide the name of the rep at BCBSIL, as we need to discuss integration with them prior to moving forward?
A) Judy Ott

4/28/17 -

Q) Could you also tell us who the incumbent medical carrier is that we would need to integrate with?
A) Blue Cross Blue Shield is the current medical carrier and yes the PBM will need to integrate with that provider.

Q) How many eligible retirees and family members is Lake County providing benefits and its Lake County currently participating in a EGWP program?
A) Based on the member counts, there are 155 retirees/members eligible for the EGWP program

Q) Can you provide me with TAB 8.0 Response to Questionnaire Medicare  D A) Please see the link below for the Medicare part D Questionnaire

4/26/17 - Q) One of the minimum criteria states: “Vendor must have a minimum of 1,000,000 covered lives. “Can you please confirm if this is a strict requirement? A) Proposers can still submit a response to this RFP with a noted exception if they are unable to meet this requirement.

Q) Page 14 of the RFP details the Submittal Requirements of this bid. Tab 8.0 references a Medicare Part D questionnaire; however, I don’t see that in any of the documents. Can you please advise? A) Yes, correct the attachment should have been attached as part of the RFP. See attached the Medicare Part D questionnaire.

Q) There are two (2) claims files attached: Attachment C1 and Attachment C2. What are the differences? A) Attachment C1 is current commercial employees and Attachment C2 is for retirees over 65 years of age

4/18/17 - No questions at this time








Q) Is the County willing to negotiate Section 19 (Page 8) regarding “Most Favored Customer” status?
A) A bidder can take exception with any of the terms and conditions found in the bid by noting an exception on the response. The response can include a proposed change and the County will review accordingly. 


Q) Please confirm that the Alternative Bid must contain 25% total renewable energy (RPS additional green = 25% of total), and not 25% in addition to the RPS requirements. 
A) Total 25% renewable energy

Q) Would Lake County be willing to accept dual billing, or consolidated utility billing, in lieu of Single Billing Option (SBO)?
A) Yes

Q) If an alternative billing arrangement was acceptable to the County, would it also be willing to accept monthly reporting (from Section 25 on Page 10) that did not include utility distribution charges?
A) Yes,  Lake County would consider

Q) Section 4 (Page 5) indicates that each bid must include (among other things) a Certificate of Insurance (“COI”).  However, Section 13 (Page 7) indicates that the winning contractor must provide a COI “15 days before the start of the project.”  Please advise as to when a COI naming Lake County as additional insured would need to be provided.
A) The winning contractor must provide a COI “15 days before the start of the project

Q) Section 8 (Page 6) indicates that the County may extend the contract for 60 days for re-contracting purposes.  Please advise as to whether the County would accept a variable holdover rate for that period, or expects an extension of the fixed contract rate.
A) The County would not accept a variable holdover rate for that period. The County would expect an extension of the fixed contract rate.

Q) Section 17 (Page 8) indicates that the County can terminate the agreement if the contractor is acquired by another party.  Would the County agree to be responsible for an early termination fee in this instance?
A) This could be negotiated if this would occur. 

Q) Though it was not requested as part of the submission package, does the County want suppliers to submit a Terms and Conditions document? 
A) This is not required

Q) Does the County anticipate providing additional terms or conditions? 
A) No, the bid document will be part of the supplier agreement

Q) Does the County plan to execute a supplier agreement, or will it be providing the form of agreement?
A) Yes, the County plans to execute a supplier agreement

Q) Please provide the service address for each account.
A) Exhibit A contains the service addresses as well as the billing accounts and utility accounts needed for bidding on bid # 17024





Q) References – Are you requesting 3 references total?  Or 3  for each scope/task type?  Is there a limit that we should not exceed?
A) We are requesting 3 references total for projects of similar scope and size that Lake County is seeking in the RPF scope of work.

Q) The reference form requests “# of employees”.  Can you clarify this?  Is it he # of employees for the agency/unit of local government that we provided services to?  Or is the # of employees that our company dedicated to the project?
A) The question is referring to the size of the government agency that services were provided.

Q) Will the consultant be responsible for audits of all of the buildings on the list you provided?
A) Yes

Q) Has Lake County completed a comprehensive GHG inventory in the last 5 years that we will be able to use as a baseline for the measurement of county initiatives?  If yes, is a copy of previously-completed inventories available?
A) No

Q) Is there a specific of list of current and prior practices/projects that Lake County wishes to analyze for impact on the County’s carbon footprint?
A) Yes, however the County desires for the consultant to bring fresh ideas and prospective to this topic

Q) Are you able to provide examples of egov technology that have been implemented?
A) System implementations that allow for the public to complete requests/tasks online that would previously require a in person trip into a County building.


Q) What is the estimated budget for the project?
A) Please refer to pervious response provided to the question

Q) What is the expected timeframe/completion date of the project?
A) Lake County is flexible in regards to timeframes. Proposals can include suggested timeframes if the prosper wishes.   

Q) What is the page limit? Single or double sided?
A) There is no page limit

Q) Is there an incumbent for sustainability consulting services? If yes, which firm?
A) No

Q) Will the selected team have access to the City's sustainability related data? Is it anticipated that any data will need to be purchased? Is the consultant expected to gather new data?
A) Yes the selected vendor will have access to any relevant sustainability data.
Yes the selected vendor should expect to gather new data

Q) Is there any SBE/DBE/WBE goal (as a prime or subcontractor)
A) No

Q) Why does the procurement go through the Health, committee rather than facilities (which report to finance).
A) The tasks listed in this RFP affect many departments in the County and the County staff intends to seek Committee approval as well as County Board approval for this project when appropriate.


Q) Can you post a copy of Lake County's contract templates including general terms and conditions for review?

A) Please see attached


Q)What is the current funding source for the Scope of Work in the RFP?
A)The project will be funded out of the General Corporate Fund with the County Administrator’s Office as the lead department.

Q) Is the Joint Purchasing clause within the terms and conditions of the RFP applicable to this contract?
A) Yes

Q)If yes, would the County be open to revising the language in the 3rd paragraph?
A) All vendors are to follow the exception process as outlined in the RFP to take exception to any part of the RFP including of the terms and conditions.

Q) Will each Payment & Performance (P&P) need to be 100% of the Purchase Order (PO) price?
A) Lake County does not require performance Bonds for this project

Q) When would the Performance Bonds be retired?  Or would that be specified per each PO – through a guaranteed period or other?
A) Lake County does not require performance Bonds for this project


Q) Does the project in RFP 17098 have a budget?  Or budget parameters?
A) Procurements that exceed $50,000 need to be approved by resolution by the County Board.  




Please see the attachments. A.  B.  C.  D.  E.  F. 


Q) What assistance is provided to the auditors by the internal audit function of the County?
RESPONSE: Internal reviews are routinely conducted. The County has documented internal control procedures for many of our financial processes.

Q) Does the County desire an opinion on the basic financial statements with an “in relation to” opinion on the combining and individual funds and Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards consistent with prior years?
RESPONSE: Yes. The County desires consistency and full compliance.

Q) May we receive copies of the following reports listed on pages 13-14 of the RFP:

a. Report on Internal Control
b. Lake County Health Department
i. FQHC Report
ii. Department of Human Services Grant Report
iii. Department of Human Services Consolidated Financial Report (CFR)
iv. Department of Children and Family Services CFR
v. Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services CFR
c. Office of Circuit Court Clerk – Supplementary Financial and Compliance Report
d. Lake County Public Works – Waterworks and Sewerage Systems Fund
e. Public Works – Regional Financial Reports
f. Emergency Telephone System Board (ETSB)


Q) Page 14 of the RFP notes that County staff prepare the basic financial statements as well as the notes to the financial statements and the statistical section.  Are these camera ready drafts?  What about the remaining information in the CAFR (e.g., introductory section, letter of transmittal, management’s discussion and analysis) as page 15 notes that report preparation is the responsibility of the auditors.
RESPONSE: Financial statements and statistical section provided as formatted spreadsheets. Introductory sections, letter of transmittal, MD&A are prepared by County staff in word/excel format for compilation by auditors.

Q) May we receive a copy of the County’s most recent Indirect Cost Allocation Plan identified on page 15 of the RFP?

Q) How many adjusting journal entries were proposed by the prior auditor? If any, may we obtain copies?
REPONSE: In FY16, there were two. The first reclassified amounts to adjust AR that was recorded in 2017 instead of 2016 “Accounts Receivable” to “Due from/to Governmental Agencies Other Governments.” The second adjust accounts receivable both in “regular receivable” and accounts receivable “adjusted.”  In addition, there were other adjusting journal entries performed by the County after the Trial Balance was given to the auditors at the end of February. Some of these were necessary based on conversations with the auditors and some were timing issues (e.g., payroll accrual resulting from ongoing bargaining unit contract negotiation) for ETSB and SWALCO.

Q) What were the prior year audit fees?  Are these fees for the same services requested in this request for proposal? Please provide a breakdown of the fees in the same manner as requested on page 21 of the RFP.

RESPONSE: The contract for the County, including Public Works, was for $206,400. ETSB was $8,200 and SWALCO was $7,400. This does not include the regional reports. The contract was based on not-to-exceed pricing and this information was not provided. The number of auditors and the length of visits varied depended on the nature of the fieldwork.

Q) Did the prior auditor issue a management letter?  If so, may we obtain a copy?

RESPONSE: Yes. The letter will be made available to those firms who are invited for oral presentations.

Q) Does the County prepare all work papers related to the audit?

RESPONSE: Yes. All work papers are prepared by County staff for audit.

Q) What general ledger software is used by the County?  What other financial software(s) is (are) utilized by the County?

RESPONSE: Oracle eBusiness Suite

Q) What case management system is utilized by the Office of the Circuit Court Clerk?

RESPONSE: The Circuit Clerk uses a software program (“CRIMS”) to account for the citations issued as well as the accounting transactions, including cash receipts and disbursements.

Q) Are all funds recorded in the general ledger software?

RESPONSE: Not all Agency funds are in Oracle. The County Collector, Drainage District, Circuit Court, County Clerk, Health Department, Sheriff, State’s Attorney and Winchester House have accounts that are not in the County’s general ledger.

Q) Are all trial balances by fund adjusted to GAAP?


Q) How does the County capture the information necessary to convert the governmental fund financial statements to the governmental activities statements?

RESPONSE: The complete trial balance for all funds is mapped to allow for sorting by function.

Q) Does the County’s chart of accounts have consistency of account number sequencing between funds?


Q) Are the County’s cash receipts and cash disbursements (purchasing) functions centralized or decentralized?  If decentralized, what locations perform these functions?

RESPONSE: The County has centralized purchasing. The majority of revenues are processed by the treasurer’s office. Customers/residents can pay fines, fees and bills at the Central Permit facility.

Q) What long-term debt issuances are anticipated during the next two fiscal years?
RESPONSE: SSA water projects and refinancing.

Q) What actuary does the County utilize to perform the OPEB valuation? Are there any explicit benefits provided to retirees or is the liability based only on an implicit benefit?

RESPONSE: The County actuarial valuation for FY2016 was from Arthur J Gallagher & Co and based on implicit benefit.

Q) Does the County expect any changes to its self-insurance program?

Q) Does the County utilize a third party administrator for its risk management program covering risks other than employee health?

RESPONSE: IPMG for property, liability and auto.

Q) Does the County prepare the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards?

Q) What are the anticipated major programs for fiscal year 2017?
RESPONSE: Same as prior years, HUD, DCEO, DPH, EMA

Q) Is Federal funding expected to remain consistent with prior years?

Q) The language in paragraph 18 on page 5 (“Indemnification”) of the request for proposal violates the independence standards set forth by AICPA professional standards. Will the County waive this condition for all proposers?


Q) Why is the County requesting RFPs this year?
RESPONSE: The contract with the existing auditor is up after several years and it is in the best interest of the County to seek a request for proposals for these services

Q) Is your current provider allowed to submit a proposal?

Q) Are there any service issues with the current provider?


Q)Will the County provide copies of the additional reports to be issued which are not located on the website?
a. Health Department reports
b. Circuit Court Clerk
c. Public Works audit
d. Public Works regional reports


Q) Was there a management letter issued in 2016?  If so, can the County provide a copy?

RESPONSE: Yes. The letter will be made available to those firms who are invited for oral presentations.

Q) Approximately how many and what types of audit entries were made in FY2016?  Is this typical?

REPONSE: In FY16, there were two. The first reclassified amounts to adjust AR that was recorded in 2017 instead of 2016 “Accounts Receivable” to “Due from/to Governmental Agencies Other Governments.” The second adjust accounts receivable both in “regular receivable” and accounts receivable “adjusted”

In addition, there were other adjusting journal entries performed by the County after the Trial Balance was given to the auditors at the end of February. Some of these were necessary based on conversations with the auditors and some were timing issues (e.g., payroll accrual resulting from ongoing bargaining unit contract negotiation) for ETSB and SWALCO.

Q) When will the final adjusted trial balances and the draft of the CAFR be provided to the auditor for review each year?

 RESPONSE: Yes. Refer to response(s) in the above questions

Q) When is the targeted issuance date for each report?
RESPONSE:  The number of auditors and the length of visits varied depended on the nature of the fieldwork. The County tries to be flexible in scheduling fieldwork but it has historically been performed from October – April for the various aspects of the County’s audits and reports and Single Audit. Most reports should be complete 180 days after the end of the fiscal year, except for the regional reports, which are due 7 months after the end of the fiscal year. The Report J part of the Circuit Clerk report is due by January 31 and historically the whole Circuit Clerk report has been complete by this time. The Health reports should be complete 120 days after the fiscal year end.

Q) What is the typical prelim and fieldwork duration?  How many auditors are normally in the field?
RESPONSE:  Please refer to response above

A typical schedule is listed below:
Lake County 
Fieldwork Schedule 

 Preliminary Fieldwork December 7-8
IT Controls February-March
Cash and Investments Pre-Audit January 23-25
Circuit Clerk Audit January 9-11
General Fund, ETSB February 20-February 24
Health financial audit and FQHC report February 27-March 3
DOT, County Capital Assets March 6-10
Public Works/SWALCO March 13-17
Single Audit (Health programs) March 27-31
Single Audit (non-Health programs) March 20-24
PW Regional Reports Late April
**CAFR Timeline - see separate document
CAFR Timeline 
All audit work is completed and reviewed, including segments such as Winchester, DOT, Public Works. Any adjustments are communicated to Deputy for CAFR preparation. March 18
Provide a reviewed draft of the Public Works financial statements to Deputy for CAFR preparation. March 25
Conduct Exit Conference with County TBD
Complete draft financial statements to Auditor (schedules, notes, government wide). April 13
Review financial statements and provide feedback to county.  Baker Tilly to maintain active version of report at this point. April 13
Formatting as needed April 20
Provide complete formatted report back to County. April 22
Send MD&A, transmittal letter, and statistical schedules to Auditor. April 26
Review MD&A, transmittal letter, and statistical schedules April 30
Incorporate all report elements, page number, etc. May 3
Send attorney letter to Auditor May 3
Send covers, spirals, dividers, etc. to Auditor for printing. May 4
Partner review of report May 5
Pre-issuance partner review May 10
Clear PI comments, any final report adjustments May 11
Report copying and production  May 12
Receive assembled reports.  Distribute as appropriate May 13

Q)Does the County prepare the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards?  When is it ready for the auditors?

 RESPONSE: Yes. Please see the Single Audit report for FY 2016. No major changes are expected.  Refer to response(s) in pervious questions

Q)What assistance does the County expect they will need from the auditors for implementation of new GASB standards?
RESPONSE: The County expects a great deal of guidance and direction with the introduction of any new standards. However, the County will perform the implementation.

Q) Are all programs – i.e. payroll processing, fixed asset management programs, etc. – integrated with the general ledger?
RESPONSE: Yes. Oracle eBusiness Suite

Q)What system does the County use to track fixed assets?
Response: The County uses Oracle Assets module. Some capital assets are currently tracked on an Excel spreadsheet, including accumulated depreciation and depreciation expense by function.

Q) Does the County anticipate having any new bond issues for 2017?


Q) Is the County willing to release the prior year fee?
RESPONSE: The contract for the County, including Public Works, was for $206,400. ETSB was $8,200 and SWALCO was $7,400. This does not include the regional reports. The contract was based on not-to-exceed pricing and this information was not provided. The number of auditors and the length of visits varied depended on the nature of the fieldwork.

Q) Who provides the actuarial services for the OPEB plan?

RESPONSE: The County actuarial valuation for FY2016 from Arthur J Gallagher & Co.

Q) Were there any additional billings by the predecessor audit firm for services beyond the scope of the audit?


Q) Does the County maintain documentation of its processes and controls over significant transaction cycles such as payroll, cash disbursements, billings, etc.?

RESPONSE: The County has documented internal control procedures for many of our financial processes.

Q) Page 14 of the RFP states the County prepares the basic financial statements as well as the notes and statistical section.  Does the County draft the other portions of the CAFR (other than the audit opinion)?  Does the County prepare the other financial reports such as SWALCO, ETSB, Public Works, etc.?
RESPONSE: Yes, the County drafts the other portions of the CAFR other than the audit opinion and the table of contents and cover pages. Public Works creates the statements, schedules, and notes of its annual financial report. The Health Department prepares its own reports (CFR, FQHC, and Grant report). All other reports are prepared by the auditors.

Q)  Are all County funds and transactions, including agency funds, maintained on the County’s general ledger?  Please describe any that are not.
RESPONSE: Not all Agency funds are in Oracle. The County Collector, Drainage District, Circuit Court, County Clerk, Health Department, Sheriff, State’s Attorney and Winchester House have accounts that are not in the County’s general ledger.

Q) When was the complete draft of the CAFR (including MD&A, transmittal letter and statistical section) provided to the auditor for the FY2016 audit?  What was the level of auditor edits to this draft (minor format changes, a few number / disclosure changes, or numerous number and / or disclosure changes)?
RESPONSE: Refer to response(s) in Question 8 and 9.  The various pieces of the draft were provided in mid-April. There were numerous formatting changes made and some number/disclosure changes.

Q) What third party service providers does the County use (insurance claims, etc.)?

RESPONSE: The County does not use a third-party administrator. A SAS 70 has been provided from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois. A third-party audit of adjudicated claims from Health Insurance carrier are performed for contract compliance.  The County has an annual actuarial study done to determine claims accrual information.

Q) Could the most recent reports of those entities listed on pg. 13 & 14 of the RFP be made available to bidders?  Specifically, the various Health Dept. reports, Circuit Court Clerk report, Public Works report, regional audit reports, SWALCO report, and the ETSB report.


Q) Pg. 21 asks that bidders delineate price by service segment – in the name of transparency, could you please make available the fee breakdown by service segment for the past three audit cycles?


Q) Were any scope modifications made to the contract with the predecessor audit firm?

Q) Could you please tell us how many auditors and the timing of fieldwork (duration and time of year) of the predecessor auditor?  How long for interim and how long for final fieldwork
RESPONSE: Refer to response(s) in Question 8 and 9.  The County tries to be flexible in scheduling fieldwork but it has historically been performed from October – April for the various aspects of the County’s audits and reports and Single Audit. Most reports should be complete 180 days after the end of the fiscal year, except for the regional reports, which are due 7 months after the end of the fiscal year. The Report J part of the Circuit Clerk report is due by January 31 and historically the whole Circuit Clerk report has been complete by this time. The Health reports should be complete 120 days after the fiscal year end.

8/7/17- The RFP due date has been extended an additional week. RFP responses are now due by 8/17/17 no later than 2pm

Q) Page 9 of the RFP, section 35 refers to the County’s information security policy and privacy standards, and that the proposer agrees services will meet or exceed those.  Can you please provide a copy of those standards / document for our review?
A) Please see the attached document

Q) We would like to request your guidelines for submitting the Audit Services proposal.
A) All the guidelines and submittal requirements for this solicitation can be found within the RFP document, please refer to the RFP



Q)You mention 180 employees swap shifts.  Which department(s) have the requirement for shift swaps?

A)Correction Officers and some Health Department employees

Q)Which department(s) require a first come first serve or lottery style for vacation requests?  How many employees does this impact?  How are you managing this today?

A) Sheriff’s Office, Division of Transportation, Public Works, some Health Dept. employees and Facilities Maintenance which effects approximately 600 employees.  Departments are managing this on their end.

Q)Does your Sheriff’s department currently  use a Public Safety Scheduling Solution?   If so, what system and will you continue to use that system or is scheduling for your Sheriff’s department expected to be included as a part of this project? 

A)They use a scheduler but it is not being used to its fullest capacity (does not meet our needs).  We will want to get a new scheduler and yes as part of this project. 

Q)Will employees of your Sheriff’s department be required to clock in/out or record start and stop times or will they be paid based on a confirmed schedule?  A) At this time, it is believed they will be paid accordingly to their schedule.


Q) How many of the 2700 employees currently use the time capture solution today?
A) All hourly employees will need timekeeping which is approximately 2100 employees. Some exempt employees have to track time for grant and costing purposes – approximately 160. And all exempt employees use it for time off tracking. (630 EE’s)

Q) Section 2 of the General Terms and Conditions describes the process a Proposer should use to provide copies that have been redacted of information that is exempt from disclosure under the Illinois FOIA.  However, it does not include any commitment by the County that, in the absence of a FOIA request, the County will preserve the confidentiality of marked materials.  Will the County kindly provide that commitment?  The body of laws known as the Statute of Frauds (a set of laws requiring certain types of commitments to be in writing to be enforceable) requires that a confidentiality commitment be in writing.  
A) To the extent Lake County comes into the possession of any trade secrets or any other proprietary or confidential information Lake County shall protect the confidentiality of such information to the maximum extent allowed by law.
The vendor is responsible for determining which information is proprietary or confidential consistent with Section 7(1)(g) of the Illinois Freedom of Information Act, 5 ILCS 140/7(1)(g), which provides an exemption for:

 information obtained from a person or business where the trade secrets or commercial or financial information are furnished under a claim that they are proprietary, privileged or confidential, and that disclosure of the trade secrets or commercial or financial information would cause competitive harm to the person or business, and only insofar as the claim directly applies to the records requested.

The vendor shall provide Lake County an edited copy of any document it claims contains proprietary and confidential information, with the propriety and confidential information removed, for public disclosure.  The removal shall be clearly marked or otherwise indicated on the document.
Workday shall indemnify Lake County against any legal liability associated with challenges to withholding the information.  This includes applicable costs and legal fees Lake County incurs or a requesting party may receive.  The vendor releases Lake County from any claims or liability in the event that Lake County is required by law to release such information.



Q) Which interfaces will you need built to/from your new HR/PR system? 
Oracle ERP?   Benefits Providers?

A) Oracle Payroll Integration with other Oracle ERP Modules:
Lake County use Oracle ERP for their HR, Finance, Procurement and Asset Management needs. The current Oracle Payroll is an integral part of this system and linked to many modules.
The following describes the summary level integration of payroll:
Oracle Human Resources: stores Employee data and costing information
Oracle Accounts Payable: receives third party payments information from payroll and sends employee reimbursement data to payroll
Oracle Benefits: provides benefit plan deduction information for payroll to process
Oracle Time & Labor: provides approved timecard data to payroll
Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition (OBIEE): reads payroll data to create BI dashboards
Oracle General Ledger: receives processed employee payroll entries with the accounting data
Oracle Projects & Grants: receives the processed payroll data of the employees related to specific projects and/or grants
Oracle Cash Management: receives checks/direct deposit information along with positive pay file
Oracle Hyperion: Payroll data is interfaced to Hyperion system for budgeting
Lake County has many vendor interfaces using the payroll data periodically. The interfaces include the following:
• IMRF – Retirement system
• Unemployment
• TALX – Employee verification
• AFLAC - Insurance
• Compsych – FMLA data

Note: We expect the vendor to have experience in integrating with Oracle ERP, because these connection points require many data elements exchanged between payroll and other Oracle Modules

Q) Lake County explains that the Intent of the proposal is for Outsourcing Payroll. Additional information in the proposal ask for validation of functional requirements and pricing  for Electronic Time Collection, Payroll and Tax processing, and Benefits Administration. What exactly is the scope of the project that Lake County is asking to be proposed. Are the additional services options or to be included in the initial scope?

A) Please refer to the Scope of Work for on page 11 of the RFP


Q) It is mentioned in the document that Lake County would like an “outsourced comprehensive payroll solution”.  Can you please provide Lake County’s definition of “outsourced”?  Do you intend to retain payroll staff at Lake County or do you want to payroll to be completely administered by the vendor?
A) We are looking for a payroll solution to provide payroll services/processes but not replace our payroll staff. 

Q) Please provide:
a. Number of locations  We have 27 departments
b. Number of locations that process payroll Most of them do timekeeping but our Central Payroll department does all the payroll processing.  Our Sheriff’s Office, Health Dept. and Division of Transportation have at least one dedicated payroll staff. 
c. Number of collective bargaining units We have 11 with one in the works. 
d. Please provide a list of any third party exports required (ie benefit carriers, retirement) Blue Cross Blue Shield, Optum(Rx), Delta Dental, Superior Vision, Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund, Nationwide Retirement, HSA & FSA
e. Number of benefit plans required. We have four Medical plans, two dental, two vision plans and voluntary benefits

Q) When would Lake County like to go live on the solution?

A) January 2019

Q) Who are the other vendors responding to this RFP?

A) Lake County will accept all vendors proposals through the deadline of October 12, 2017 at 2p.m.

Q) It is against our security policy to provide documents via USB flash drive.  Can we share the document via Dropbox or another secure platform?

A) Please password protect the USB flash drive

Q) Who is the 3rd party consultant referred to in the RFP evaluation criteria? 

A) Matrix Consulting

Q) The scope of this solution includes time keeping, payroll and benefit management, but not the County’s complete HR business functions being served by the current Oracle E-Business Suite solution.  Will the County be looking to implement solutions for its other HR business functions that are not currently in scope of this RFP in the near future?  YES Will consideration be given for a solution that can meet all of the County’s HR (and Financial) business needs for future business planning as opposed to only the scope of this RFP? YES

Q) Is the County looking to outsource all of its payroll, timekeeping and benefit business functions as part of this solution (i.e. not have employees responsible for these functions), or only to purchase and implement technology solution to enable all of these business functions and reporting (with employees continuing to be responsible for these business functions)? A)  The latter, only to purchase and implement technology solution to enable all of these business functions and reporting (with employees continuing to be responsible for these business functions) Said differently, the County is currently using Oracle which provides the technology for the business processes, but the County employees still manage the business processes. Is the County looking to keep this approach (and simply replace the technology) or is the County looking to outsource these business functions to a 3rd party?

A)  the County looking to keep this approach (and simply replace the technology)


Q) Redacted Version: Does the redacted version need to be printed?  Or should this version be added to the USB? A) The redacted copy can be provided with a USB and does not have to be printed.

Q) USB: Per Ultimate Software’s Security policies and procedures, all USBs need to be encrypted and password-protected.  Will you accept a password-protected USB?  The document will NOT be password protected. A) Yes, a password protected USB is acceptable.


Q) Total Amount of Employees for Lake County?

A) 2,700

Q) How many Managers would use this system? I saw 29 departments, so at least 29, but do you have other assistant managers or other personnel that would look at a timecard and change anything? We do have an audit trail that will mandate comments on why things were changed. Not sure at this time. 

A) Yes, we currently are set-up to allow supervisor’s, managers, timekeepers and department Liaisons view and make changes.  Most departments use supervisor/manager approvals along with a liaison who could correct as well.

Q) How many Accrual (PTO, Vacation, Sick) Policies?

A) We currently have personal, vacation, sick, fixed holiday’s, floating holidays and compensatory time.

Q) How many Time Clocks are needed? Looks like 45 TimeClocks. Are they Badge Swipe? Are they Biometric? Are they Proximity? Approximately 45 are needed. 

A) We have 5 biometric and the rest are badge swipe.

Q) How many employees would need to swap shifts?


Q)Are you looking at a Cloud Environment or an on Premise solution?

A) Cloud environment.

A.      How many EIN’s? I would guess only one, but wanted to confirm. A) one
B.      How many Direct Deposits?  A) Averaging about 2,430 a pay period
C.      How many Agency Checks (garnishments, child support, etc…) A)25
D.      How many W-2 in the tax year of 2016? I saw 3,795. A)This is correct (includes election workers and other non-employee W2’s)



A) Can Lake County provide a copy of the Lake County Employee Census and Claims history as part of this RFP process?
Q) At this time Lake County cannot provide census or claims history.


Q) The scope of work has a section “Retiree Health Strategy”, which specifies that the “OPEB liability impact” be considered. Is a valuation of OPEB liabilities for accounting and/or funding purposes included in the scope of the RFP?
A) Yes

Q) Reports that must be run recurring can the process be automated to make sure theCounty gets those reports.
A) Yes 





Q) Why is the search being conducted?
A) We are looking for advisory services for additional fiscal oversight and financial responsibility.

Q) Which firm currently provides the services?
A) No one

Q) Will the incumbent provider be invited to rebid?
A) N/A

Q) What is the current asset size of the plan’s investment portfolio?
A) Approx. $166M


Q) Are Lake County 457 participants eligible for Social Security?


Q) If they are eligible for Social Security, how do they participate


Q) If they are eligible, how many actually participate?



Q) Is this bid for an annual retainer to provide the services listed in the Scope of Work – or a short-term project?
A) annual retainer

Q) Can you confirm, Lake County does not currently utilize a consultant for these services?
A) we do not currently utilize a consultant

Q) Are you able to provide information regarding the total amount of assets in the 457(b) Retirement Plan?
A) APPROX. $145M


January 10, 2018

Q: We are currently operating a community youth employment program and have several business partnership MOU's.  Our existing partners have agreed to extend their services to the WIOA Youth program as well.  Can we use our existing Program Partnership MOU's or do we have to have them do new MOU's for this grant?
A: Existing employer partnerships can be included as part of the proposal. Entities that are selected and awarded WIOA funds may need to modify existing Partner MOU’s to ensure terms and conditions align with WIOA grant funds.

January 4, 2018

Q) 1.  Below is the answer to a question regarding what the performance goal is for the local Board.  The WIOA performance measures negotiated by the Workforce Development Board of Lake County for PY2016 and PY2017 are:
• Employment rate 2nd quarter after exit; performance goal: 58%
• Employment rate 4th quarter after exit; performance goal: 66%
• Credential attainment; performance goal: 80%
What were the results of the 2016 performance for the local area in the 3 areas? A) Performance was not measured and reported against the WIOA Performance measures in 2016.

Q) Since equipment charges are not allowable under this grant will computers be provided at the One Stop office if space is secured? A) The Job Center of Lake County does not provide computer equipment for use by partners of the MOU occupying space in the Job Center.

Q) Is the state data base to record case management services,  activities etc, IWDS? A) Yes, the state data base is the Illinois Workforce Development System (IWDS).

January 4, 2018

Q) What is the cost to rent space in the One Stop office?  A) Currently the Job Center of Lake County does not rent space to agencies that are not a partner to the Job Center of Lake County MOU and cost sharing agreement. The agencies that are partners to the MOU and are co-located at the Job Center contribute $362.08 monthly per cubicle space to the facility costs. 

Q) What is the average cost per Cube?  A) The monthly cost per Job Center cubicle for a partner to the MOU is $362.08 and is subject to change annually. Per Office? The Job Center of Lake County does not have office space available.

Q)Would the One Stop Operator have space available for 3 staff members, if selected? A) The Job Center of Lake County does not have space available for three staff from a partner agency.

December 15, 2017

Q: Does this RFP allow for Profit?

A: Yes, under WIOA Section 121(d) & 134(b), Private For-Profit entities may serve as service providers and fair & reasonable profit must be negotiated as a separate line item of cost (2 CFR 200.323).

Q: As you proposal allows for for-profit organizations to respond per WIOA regulations, I am hoping you can direct me to the place on the budget where we can list the amount of profit presented for consideration.

A: Profit should be presented on the ‘Other’ Budget Line item.

**Fillable forms have been added to the RFP documents**

December 15, 2017

The following two changes were made to attachment E—Monthly Expense Report.

1. First change: (Located at top left corner)
The following has been omitted:
INSTRUCTIONS: Do NOT fill in this sheet. It will pull directly from the budget worksheet.
NOTE: Budgets reflect a 52 week (12 month) program year from 7/1/2018-6/30/2019

It was replaced by the following:
INSTRUCTION: Budget reflects a 52-week (12 month) program year from 7/1/2018 - 6/30/2019.  Enter your total budget by line item in column C. Allocate those expenditures by month in columns F through R. Columns F through R will be summarized in column E. Column E should equal column C requested line budget.

2. Second change: (Located in Column C, row 12)
The following has been omitted:
Awarded Budget

Is was replaced by the following:
Total Budget

December 1, 2017
Q) What are the numbers of in-school and out-of-school youth currently being served?
A)Thirty-six in-school youth and eighty-eight out-of-school youth are currently being served.

Q) What are the current performance outcomes?
A)The WIOA performance measures negotiated by the Workforce Development Board of Lake County for PY2016 and PY2017 are:
• Employment rate 2nd quarter after exit; performance goal: 58%
• Employment rate 4th quarter after exit; performance goal: 66%
• Credential attainment; performance goal: 80%

Q) When will the negotiated median earnings be determined by the Board and how should proposers respond to this requirement?

A) The Board does not have a timeframe from DCEO as to when the median earnings goal will be negotiated. Proposers can use past program performance to determine their proposed median wage.

November 30, 2017

Q) On page 20 under Organizational Information there is not a maximum page limit specified, please clarify.
A) The Organization Information should be included in the submission of section e (Program Description) and the maximum page for this section is 10 pages

Q) Please define low income as it pertains to this RFP
A) Proposers should use the WIOA definition for low income when submitting a proposal in response to this RFP

Q) On page 22 the Budget Narrative is discussed in section 3. Can rent costs be included in this narrative? 
A) Rent costs can be included that are direct program expenses

Q) Can a program connect with the One Stop Operator in response to this RFP?
A) Yes, the One Stop Operator can be contacted directly and a partnership can be developed if desired by the proposer.

Q) Are there specific target geographic areas in Lake County that the grants will be awarded too?
A) No, all of Lake County is eligible

Q) Is there a requirement for funds to be spent on training?
A) No, there is not a requirement

Q) What are the projected youth serviced per program?
A) There is not a specific number however in the past the average number has been around 20 youths service per program

Q) Can an existing program propose expanding services to respond to this RFP?  
A) Yes



The conference line is still not working.

Please use the following number for the 9AM call:
Code 2233


Due to unforeseen technical difficulties the Per Proposal call will be rescheduled for tomorrow (2/27/18) at 9AM.





Q) For the evaluation factors listed on page 18, how are they scored (e.g., ability to design a results-driven program is worth X% of the score)?
• Understanding and ability to meet and/or exceed the scope of services – 25%
• Ability to design a results-driven program with strategic incentives to increase employee participation in similar sized organizations. – 25%
• Variety and range of services provided to employees through the wellness platform – 20%
• Project Plan – 15%
• Cost Proposal – 15%


Q) Can you please send us the Lake County’s Information Security Policy and Privacy Standards for review? A) This policy and standard does not apply to this RFP service, please disregard.

Q) Will you consider/accept redlines on either the General Terms and Conditions and the Information Security Policy referenced above? A) All redlines to the General Terms and Conditions need to be notes as exceptions in the RFP response in order to be considered by Lake County

Q) There is a “maximum cash payout” of $450 (previously $600). How much of that payout is based on HRA completion, on the screening, and on event participation? (for 2017) A)For 2017 it was $150 for employee and $50 for spouse

Q) What kind of biometric tests are being run (e.g., standard lipids, expanded panel, cotinine, etc.) and is the method via fingerstick or venipuncture? A)Standard lipids with A1C and it is via fingerstick

Q) In the response to a previous question in the addendum, you say that spouses are included in some aspects of the current program and you want proposers to recommend a wellness offering we believe would be most suitable to you. How many spouses/partners are eligible to participate in the program currently, and what aspects are they included in? What incentives, if any, exist for spouse/partner involvement? A) Spouses were able to participate in the 5K, receiving $15. They could submit extra points for preventative screenings (med-dent-vis-colonoscopy-mammogram-osteoporosis) they received $10 for each screening with a max up to $120. Disease Management, $25 for EE or SP. Exercise classes $5 for each session maxing $20. Flu Shot, $5. Sanctioned races $3 per mile, no max. Self-reporting $3 per month. Smoking cessation, $25. Weight management program $1 per week

Q) Is Lake County open to the idea of a three-year contract term instead of a two-year term? A) Yes

Q) Does Catapult currently administer both an HRA (paper? online?) and biometric screenings, or is the HRA a separate document or online questionnaire developed by another vendor? A)Onsite biometric screenings

Q) Question A2 says that onsite biometric screenings are a “future need” – is Lake County contractually required to use Catapult or another biometric vendor through a particular date? If so, when? A)Catapult contract ends 6/13/18

Q) What kind of biometric tests are being run (e.g., standard lipids, expanded panel, cotinine, etc.) and is the method via fingerstick or venipuncture? A)Standard lipids, fingerstick

Q) What kind of health coaching (onsite, telephonic, online; lifestyle management, disease management), if any, is currently offered to Lake County employees? Who provides the existing program? Is participation incentivized at all? How much participation has there been? A) Health coaching - telephonic and online, lifestyle management, disease management is available through Blue Cross Blue Shield’s well on-target-program. The incentives are through well-on-target and not currently incorporated with Lake County Wellness program.

Q) Please clarify the timing of the formal presentation referenced in item J5 – shortly after implementation is completed and the program is launched? And would this be a single presentation to all of the groups listed (as opposed to one to Lake County administration, another to the Health & Community Services Committee of the County Board, etc.)? A)Yes, single presentation. The timing is TBD but I would assume it would be an annual executive summary report.

Q) A previous question in the addendum asks where in our responses you’d like us to include any addenda. If the addenda are just these vendor questions about the RFP, is there any need to include those questions and answers in our responses? A) No, but the addenda acknowledgement form is required

Q) If your benefit plan year is January through December, are you wanting to roll out the program to employees (and possibly spouses) on Jan. 1, 2019, or is there a different target date (besides the mid-May kickoff meeting already mentioned)? A) We were targeting June 2018 if possible

Q) Providing a “total price as a fixed fee for all services delineated in the RFP” may not be possible, considering various variables – such as coaching participation, incentives, participation in biometric screenings, fluctuation in the size of Lake County’s employee count, etc. Please advise on the amount of flexibility we can have in how we provide pricing. A) Please breakout the pricing if possible – what the pricing is running the program for employees, add price for spouse and prices for biometric screenings, etc

Q) The Termination text on page 4 appears to allow Lake County to terminate at any time for convenience as long as it gives 30 days written notice. Please advise on the amount of flexibility we can have regarding termination terms, especially if it is without cause. A)Any exceptions to the RFP should be noted in the proposers response. This includes exceptions to the Terms and Conditions found in the RFP.


Q) Are we able to send the final copy on a CD vs a USB? 

A) Yes either is fine


Q) For who Lake County awards business to, will they be using the vendor's contract and then integrating "General Terms and Conditions" stated within the RFP document? A) Yes


Q) Are you willing to use a different HRA than you currently offer?
A) Yes

Q) Is the county interested in an onsite wellness coordinator available full-time to implement wellness initiatives or simply wellness consultation services? A) The County is looking for Wellness Consultation Services.


Q) Can an editable version of the RFP document be made available? A) Not at this time. 

Q) Timing - What is the County’s benefit plan year, i.e. Jan-Dec? Jul-Jun? A) Jan-Dec

Q) Budget - Is there a set budget allocated for this project or is this RFP process exploratory in order to request budget approval? A) There is a budget allocated for this endeavor and County Board approval is required for professional services over $50,000.

Q) Page 3. If addenda are issued, where in our response would you like us to include them? A) All questions and answers pertaining to this RFP can be found using the addendum link.

Q) Page 20. Proposal Price Sheet. Pricing Table – Are spouses eligible to join the program? A) Spouses are currently included in some aspects of the current program however the County is looking for proposers to recommend a Wellness offering that they seem is most suitable for Lake County.


Q) Please advise the effective date you wish to pursue for the Lake County Wellness program
A) The County anticipates an initial kickoff meeting around May 14, 2018 and is looking for the proposer to advise on an implementation timeline to establish an effective date.



Q) Is the reference to fixed price for a fixed hourly rate that includes travel and additional costs or is it a fixed total price for the services provided for the entire year including any over time that may be needed? A) It is a fixed total price for the services provided for the entire year including any over time that may be needed

Q) Does Lake County expect OCM (Organizational Change Management) resources to be onboarded in addition to PM? A) Yes, the County is switching from Oracle to Ultimate Software and we expect  there to be organizational change management involved with the project management.

Q) Who is your current HRIS Payroll system provider? A) ORACLE

Q) Within the RFP, a statement is made that an RFP was issued in 2017 to select a vendor to implement a new system. Has a vendor been selected and notified, and if so, who is the vendor? A) ULTIMATE SOFTWARE/ULTIPRO

Q) Can you provide a copy of the HRIS/Payroll RFP that was issued in 2017? A) YES

Q) Does the scope of the HRIS Payroll system implementation include timekeeping, or is timekeeping considered a separate function? A) WE WILL IMPLEMENT TIMEKEEPING AS PART OF THE HRIS PAYROLL IMPLEMENTATION.

Q) What role does the County currently play in the payroll process (e.g., prep, then submit for cut, remit and reporting or do you just submit a file, the provider manages the rest of the process)?  A)WE CURRENTLY USE ORACLE, WHO IS NOT A SERVICE PROVIDER.  WE CURRENTLY COMPLETE THE ENTIRE PROCESS IN HOUSE.

Q) What role do you envision the County playing in the payroll process after the new system is implemented?  A) ULTIMATE/ULTIPRO IS A PAYROLL SERVICE PROVIDER.  OUR ROLE WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE VENDOR.

Q) What changes do you see in interfaces once the new system is implemented (e.g., KBace, IntelliTime, Electronic Time Clocks)?  A) WE PLAN ON USING ULTIPRO TIMECLOCKS AND REPORTING.

Q) What is the current timeline (including go-live date) for the HRIS Payroll system implementation?  A) WE HOPE TO GO LIVE BY JANUARY 1, 2019

Q) With the new system, will you follow the same process, or will you leverage different methods to capture time? If different methods, which ones? A) WE WILL BE EXPLORING DIFFERENT METHODS AS PART OF THE PROCESS.

Q) Please provide a roster of reports you currently receive (title, format, and frequency)?  A) WE CURRENTLY RUN REPORTS ON SEVERAL SYSTEMS.

Q) What will be different with your new system in terms of reporting?  A) WE WILL JUST BE USING ONE SYSTEM AND STANDARD PAYROLL REPORTS.



Q) Has the County started to identify what any future county needs might be, and if so, can you elaborate what they are? A)NO

Q) For time and attendance, what process do you follow today – i.e., what methods do you currently use to capture time (timeclock, biometrics, mobile spp). What do you do today and will you do the same thing or leverage different methods of capturing time A) WE CURRENTLY USE TIMECLOCKS AND MANUAL ENTRY.  WE PLAN ON OFFERING NEW WAYS TO CAPTURE TIME THROUGH ULTIPRO.

Q) Do you measure data quality? If so, how do you measure it, and where you are currently in terms of data quality? If not, how would you prefer to rate current data (e.g., on a Likert scale)?  A) WE DO NOT CURRENTLY MEASURE DATA QUALITY OTHER THAN AUDITS

Q) Can you provide a summary of your staff in terms of the following:
How many employees are hourly versus salaried?  A) APPROX. 700 SALARY; 2000 HOURLY
How do your employee progress through pay structures?  A) WE ARE NOT SURE WHAT INFORMATION YOU ARE LOOKING. 

Q) Please provide a list of your collective bargaining units, and the number of employees represented by each.
A) AFSMCE (Coroner)- 10
Local 150 (DOT)- 65
Local 150(PW)- 45
Local 150(FAC)- 21
Local 150 (HD)- 10
ICOP (HD)- 10
ICOP (SO)- 157
Teamsters (Correction Officers)- 182
Teamsters (Correction Sgt)- 14
Teamsters (Correction LT)- 5
Teamsters (PO Sgt)- 17
Teamsters (PO LT)- 5

Q) Please share documents regarding your pay structures.  A) WE ARE NOT SURE WHAT INFORMATION YOU ARE LOOKING. 

Q) Are you expecting full-time, on the ground project management or is a virtual/hybrid model acceptable?  A) ON-SITE AS NEEDED, VIRTUAL WHEN POSSIBLE

Q) Is the RFP allowed to be submitted via email? A) No

Q) Beyond the 6 addendum pages at the end of the document is there a format you would like the RFP submitted? Are we able to use our documents and customize based off the needs of Lake County? A) The submittal requirements are outlined within the RFP and yes the documents can be customized

Q) Do you have a new system picked for implementation or is Lake County also looking for assistance with system selection? A) Ultimate Software is selected already

Q) In addition to payroll, is Lake County planning on implementing any additional modules to the new HRIS system? A) Yes, possibly in the future

April 12, 2018

Q) What is the proposed implementation duration of the HRIS system? A) Jan 2019 no later than April 2019

Q) Can you provide the preliminary project plan provided by Ultimate Software Ulti Pro system? A) No, not at this time. This will be made available later in the procurement selection process if needed

Q) Can we submit exceptions to the County’s standard contract? A) Yes, as part of the exception process with this RFP

Q) Is the County willing to negotiate exceptions to the standard contract? A) Yes

Q) Can you clarify what services are expected related to Finance and Procurement Management? A) There are no expectations related to Procurement Management however the project manager may need to be aware of the financial aspect of the contract the County has with Ultimate Software. 

Q) Would the County please elaborate on any additional business drivers for this opportunity beyond those identified in the RFP?
A) There are none.

Q) It is noted that the RFP references “the selection and implementation for various systems” as the intent. Which systems does the County intend to be selected and implemented as part of this project?
A) Ultimate Software/UltiPro

Q) The “Background” section indicates an RFP was issued for payroll services. Would the County confirm that is for “outsourced” payroll services? If so, what is the status of that procurement?
A) This is an outsourced SaaS agreement for a Payroll Services Provider.  The procurement is complete and the contract is signed.

Q) The “Expectations of the Project Manager” section indicates various references to an HRIS system. Is that one of the systems the County expects to be selected and implemented as part of this project? If so, what is the status of that particular selection and implementation initiative?
A) Both Payroll and a basic HRIS implementation will be done with Ultimate Software/UltiPro.

Q) Related to the question above, would the County confirm the “HRIS Project Manager” is a County employee as opposed to a vendor project manager? If a vendor project manager, what software company is involved?
A) We have both an internal HRIS Project Manager and a Project Manager through Ultimate Software/UltiPro.


Q) Further under “Project Management,” reference is made to the effort of outsourcing payroll functions. Is this one of the selection and implementation projects the County expects as part of this initiative?
A) We will be converting our payroll processing and HR software from Oracle to Ultimate Software/UltiPro.  This includes implementing UltiPro’s Human Resources; Payroll Administration; Tax Management and Compliance; Time, Attendance and Scheduling; and Benefits Administration; Time Clocks; Recruiting and Onboarding; Open Enrollment and Life Events.

Q) The Submittal Requirements section indicates proposers should indicate an “overall understanding of each project they are submitting for.” Would the County please clarify, by providing what may be a listing of available projects as well as a confirmation that proposers may propose on some, but not all?
A) This RFP is just for the Ultimate project.

Q) As it relates to the cost worksheet, would the County please clarify the following:
a. Both a total fixed-fee and a “proposed annual” cost are requested. Which would the County prefer? A) Please provide both
b. Would the County please clarify the specific software selection and/or implementation projects that make up this cost total? A) This RFP is just for the Ultimate project
c. For the basis of estimating implementation services, please provide an estimated timeline for each of the implementation projects. A) The RFP is looking for the project manager to make recommendations on implementation plans. The County would like to “go live” with the new system on Jan 2019 but no later than April 2019.

Q) Would the County please confirm whether there is a local preference for this initiative? If so, what weight will that preference have in the evaluation? A) This is not part of the evaluation criteria


Q) what payroll/HR system is it that you're moving to from your current Oracle EBS?
A) Ultimate Software Ulti Pro system


Q) Whether companies from Outside USA can apply for this? (like, from India or Canada) A) Yes, all proposals will be considered

Q) Whether we need to come over there for meetings? A) Yes, in person meetings will be required

Q) Can we perform the tasks (related to RFP) outside USA? (like, from India or Canada) A) Some tasks may be performed remotely however several tasks will require in person interaction to be performed to the expectations of this RFP

Q)Can we submit the proposals via email? A)No, please follow the RFP submittal process outlined in this RFP


Q) Please provide the reinsurance terms you would like quoted, i.e. specific deductible, contract type, commission, etc. 
A) Section 12.3 and 12.4 include all contract basis and requested specific deductible levels.

Q) Also, I did not find Cobra indicated on the census.  Please let me know if there are individuals enrolled in Cobra. 
A) There are approximately 8 COBRA employees that were not included in the census.  The information we have on the COBRA enrollees is as follows: 
4 PPO Single
2 PPO Family
2 Regular HMO Single

Q) Please provide current and/or renewal rates.
A) Current rates will not be released.  Renewal rates for a 1/1/19 effective date are not available.

Q) Are you willing to sign and execute a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) for us to release provider-level discount data as requested in the RFP (Attachment G)? Can you confirm that the full discount data will be accessed by both Lake County and Segal?
A) Discount data at the provider level will be analyzed by Segal. Lake County evaluation committee members will only have access to high-level, overall discount information.  One component of the discount analysis will be to use the Uniform Data Submission (UDS) evaluation system, to which Segal and you have already agreed to a separate NDA.   Lake County has signed the UDS agreement that pertains to plan sponsors.

Q) The RFP states that BCBSIL currently provides "a voluntary, self-directed wellness program" that "includes access to health experts for stress management programs and physical activity programs." Does Lake County want vendors to quote telephonic and/or digital wellness coaching services?
A) No, this program being referenced was not to be duplicated. 
Q) Please describe your current Case Management offering in greater detail.
a. What is your Case Management reach/engagement rate?
b. Please provide engagement statistics by modality (i.e. telephonically, digitally, in person).
c. Please provide your definition of engagement.
d. Please provide the current ROI attained as well as a list of clinical care and utilization improvement statistics.
e. Please provide additional insight into what is working well and what you would like to see improved.
A) This information is not available

Q) Please describe your current Disease Management offering in greater detail.
a. What is the prevalence rate by disease state?
b. Please provide the current ROI attained as well as a list of clinical care and utilization improvement statistics.
c. Please provide additional insight into what is working well and what you would like to see improved.
d. What percent of members with a chronic illness are identified as high risk, moderate risk and low risk? Of those, what percent are engaged by modality (i.e. telephonically, digitally, in person)?
e. Please provide your definition of engagement.
f. What is the average length of time individuals are engaged in your current Disease Management programs by modality (i.e. telephonically, digitally, in person)?
A) This information is not available
Q) Please describe your current behavioral health offering in greater detail.
a. What is your behavioral health utilization?
b. What are your high-cost behavioral health drivers?
c. Please provide further information on your network access and out-of-network utilization.
o What is your in-network versus out-of-network utilization?
o Where is out out-of-network utilization concentrated (location, facility, etc.)?
o Do you have significant out of network usage consolidated with a few providers?
o What is driving your out-of-network utilization? For example, do you need more of a specialty provider, more general providers in a specific area, or are individuals travelling for substance abuse treatment?
o Are there specific challenges with outpatient treatment access?
d. Please provide your last three years of behavioral health utilization reports.
e. Please provide a more detailed description of your substance abuse issue.
o Are you experiencing significant out of network utilization related to substance abuse treatment? If so where is the utilization by region and specific facilities?
o What substances are driving your substance abuse utilization (opioids, alcohol, other)?
o What age groups are driving the utilization?
o What cost impact has substance abuse treatment had over the last three years?
f. What is your current readmission rate?
g. What is your current recidivism rate?
h. Who is your EAP provider?
o Would you like vendors to supply an EAP quote?
i. What is your level of satisfaction with your current medical/behavioral integration? Do you feel there is room for improvement? If so, what are the current challenges?

A) This information is not available.


July 19, 2018

Q) Who will be responsible for the graphic design, layout and production of the final strategic plan documents stemming from this contract: the consultant or Lake County staff?
A) The Lake County Staff

Q) What types of engagement with departmental staff was performed for previous strategic planning updates?

A) Yes. Also a Citizen survey and TownHall meetings - posted to website under strategic plan; also Leaders round tables and report is available

Q) When was the last time this service went through a competitive solicitation process?
A) This service has not been previously solicited

Q) Project Timeline: Given the short turnaround between the Deadline for submission of questions and the RFP Opening would Lake County consider pushing back the RFP Opening date?

A) No, Lake County is not considering extending the due date at this time
Q) Page 13, Scope of Work. The beginning of this section states that “The County has five primary objectives”, but only 4 items follow. Can the County please confirm that there are only four primary objectives or provide the fifth?

A) There are only four objectives, please refer to the addendum as this was already clarified by the County
Q) Page 14, 3. Performance Levels/Contractor Expectations: What are the number and frequency of conversations/meetings? On average how many people will be in the meetings.

A) Lake County is seeking the proposer in their RFPs response to identify the number of meetings (both in person and remotely) that are needed to support a positive outcome – or delineate the minimum number of meetings required.  The proposal should include the number of meetings suggested to support the outcome being proposed. 
Q) Page 18, b. Who are the Evaluation members and what departments are they from?

A) This is yet to be determined by the County
Q) Lake County has been conducting strategic planning every two years. Have there been any changes to the stakeholders for this project, and are there any new ones?

A) No major changes in stakeholders: Internal audience includes: board members, elected officials and dept heads, key staff
External audience includes: mayors and local elected officials, general public and public interest groups (Sierra Club, Transportation Alliance, etc)

July 18, 2018

Q) Under Scope of Work (p. 13), the RFP stated that Lake County has five primary objectives, but only four were listed. Is there a fifth objective that should be included?
A) This is a mistake and there are only four primary objectives and they are listed.
Q) What type of county and community assessment data is available to help inform the strategic planning process?
A) Yes. Citizen survey and TownHall meetings - posted to website under strategic plan; also Leaders round tables and report are available
Q) During past years, Lake County obtained community and stakeholder input to identify county needs and issues for strategic planning purposes. 
a. Will the County be conducting similar activities to identify county/community needs and issues for this Strategic Plan update? 
b. Will this information be made available to the consultant?
A) A and B yes; looking for suggestions from consultant but County will implement
Q) Does Lake County anticipate that additional community and stakeholder input may be needed as part of the strategic planning process?  If yes, would the consultant be responsible for completing that work?
A) Yes and County will be primarily responsible unless consultant recommends facilitated sessions /meetings  

July 12, 2018

Q) Please provide the budget for this project.
A) Lake County is looking for a proposed budget to be included in the Proposer’s response however professional services over $50,000 required Lake County Board approval.

A) What consultants facilitated the past strategic planning project and updates?
a. 2008 – Public Knowledge LLC
b. First update – Public Knowledge LLC
c. Second update – Kennedy Consulting LLC
d. Third update – Kennedy Consulting LLC
e. Fourth update – Kennedy Consulting LLC
f. 2017 update – Kennedy Consulting LLC

Q) Page 13, Other Assistance. Please clarify “individual competencies” within the context of strategic planning.
A) The reference to ‘individual competencies’ is contained the ‘Other Assistance’ category – which is focused on potential work in the development of organizational values, goals and objectives.  Within that context, the County believes that such organizational development work that it is important to identify differentiating employee competencies critical to the organization’s and individual’s success.   The development of a competency model and framework will enable the County to align its strategic plan with its vision, values and strategies pertaining to talent management. 

Q) Page 14, Project Status Meetings. Can some progress and ad hoc meetings be conducted via video or are they all to be on-site?
A) Yes, with County Administration Executive team but not with departments/board

Q) Page 14, Final Reports. Does the County require four final reports (Assessment, Facilitation, Plan Development, Other Assistance)? Please clarify.
A) No, four final reports are not required

Last Post: Addendum#1 - 7/10/2018



Q) Item 28 on page 8 indicates that payments shall not exceed the amounts shown in the following schedule; however no schedule was attached.    Will the County provide the total budgeted amount for the project as well as the payment schedule by task as suggested in item 28?
A) The reference in Section 28 to a schedule is a typo and payments will be made based on an agreed upon payment schedule that may be broken down by task. The proposers should include a price proposal as specified with the RFP price proposal section 


Q) In the required references document, will you please clarify what you mean by “# of Employees?” Are you referring to the number of client employees we’ve worked with on each project, or, are you referring to the number of Health Management Associate consultants that worked on each project? A) The County is looking for an idea of the depth of the firm and how many employees work for a particular firm to give the County an idea of the depth of the proposal. Additionally, it would be helpful to include the number of Health Management Associate consultants that worked on each project as a point of reference.

Q) Please indicate the approximate time funding will be available for Task 3 and 4; this will have implications for overall budget. A) This is yet to be determined. These tasks may be a potential future engagement and/or phase of the contract; therefore, the County would like to solicit responses to determine future viability.
Q) Please provide a budget cap or range for the 18-month engagement. A) Professional services over $50,000 require County Board approval. However, the County is seeking proposals that provide a suggested budget for the deliverables specified in the RFP scope of work.

Q) Is the vendor responsible for facilitating all Coalition meetings and all monthly meetings for the four sub-committees? A) Yes. Ministerial support for the meetings will be provided by County staff.

Q) We assume the facilitator and subject matter experts will be required to be in-person for the quarterly Coalition meetings; is this the case? A) Yes, however if a proposer has an alternative offering they are encouraged to include this in their proposal. 

Q)Do all of the sub-committee meetings take place in-person or are some of these conducted via videoconference or teleconference? A) In-person. Upon request videoconference and/or teleconference access can be provided.

Q) If all meetings are conducted in-person and the vendor’s facilitator is on site, is there any flexibility in having subject matter expert/s participate via videoconference or teleconference for either Coalition meetings or sub-committee meetings? Regularly or on occasion? A) The County prefers in-person rather than via videoconference or teleconference; however, if a proposer has an alternative offering they are encouraged to include this in their proposal.   

Q) On the bottom of page 15, the RFP references, ten proposer multi/consecutive day in-person meetings.”  Is this related to facilitation of the quarterly and monthly subcommittee meetings or in addition for some other purpose? A) Yes, this is related to facilitation of the quarterly and monthly subcommittee meetings which may be scheduled to enable multi/consecutive day in-person meeting.

Last Post: Addendum#1 - 7/10/2018



Q) Please provide the number of leaves for each of the past five years. A) 2018: currently 737 unique LOA’s, 2017: 652 unique LOA’s, 2016: 709 unique LOA’s, 2015: 607 unique LOA’s, 2014: 267 unique LOA’s (this is only a reporting period of July – December)

Q) Will the County consider alternative price structures if it benefits the County? A) The County is open to considering alternative price structure.

Q) Where is the County’s current FMLA/LOA service team located? A) Chicago, IL

Q) How many personnel are currently assigned to the County and what are their positions?  Are any of the positions fully dedicated (meaning that are exclusively assigned to Lake County and do not serve any other employers)?  A)There is not a dedicated team for Lake County. There is a call center that handles that specialists manage all leaves for many clients.

Q) Is the County’s expectation/requirement that the “dedicated account representative(s)” (referenced in Scope of Work, Performance Standards, Customer Service) are assigned exclusively to Lake County? A) We are requesting a dedicated representative who will be available to contact when any question/situation/issue may arise and needs to addressed. If necessary, we set up reoccurring meetings we would want to work with the same individual as it is important to us that we have consistency when establishing and maintaining a relationship with a vendor.

With regard to the Scope of Work added in Addendum 1: Lake County Retiree Billing, please provide the following information:
• Q) How many retirees? A) 43
• Q) How many vendors? A) Our current provider does not have a relationship with any of vendors, they collect payments and send directly to us. Though they do hold our rate schedule and would know what benefits a retiree is enrolled in.
• Q) How are rates designed per vendor (age rated, sex rated, smoker, non-smoker, flat rate, tier, etc.)? A) They are a flat rate per plan. The rates are for medical, dental and vision coverages as a retiree.
• Q) With regard to the statement: “provide any legal notices as necessary,”  what types of legal notices are to be provided?  Is this in regard to termination due to non-payment?  A) Yes, we would want to know the schedule/process of when past due/termination notices would go out and how that would be communicated to us. If not, please specify.
• Q) Does the County coordinate all death benefit or disability claims with the vendors? A) In regards to retirees we would coordinated a medical, dental and/or vision benefits in the event of a death of a retiree.


Addendum #1: An additional scope of work was added and a revised price proposal sheet was also added to reflect the additional scope of work. When submitting a proposal in response to this RFP please use the revised proposal price sheet with your proposal.



Q) The County’s website still lists Construction and Facilities as separate divisions within the Department of Finance and Administrative Services. Is Facilities and Construction Services a new department or is it still a division? 

A) Facilities and Construction Services is a new Department.  The history and creation of the Department is covered on page 11 of the RFP under the background section.
Q) Is the FAS assessment available for review prior to submission of our proposal?  A) The FAS assessment is not finalized and is not expected to be finalized prior to the submission date.  In the event it is finalized prior thereto, it would be available.
Q) Is the intent for Phase 1 to be a high-level review to identify topics for additional study? Several of the topics listed under Phase 2 in the Scope of Work are items we would normally do in a Phase 1.   A) Phase 1 is intended to be a thorough review of the Department, its organizational structure and operations with proposed areas for focus.  Phase 2 is intended to focus on a select number of areas and recommendations for further analysis and implementation.
Q) Is there a budget for Phase 1 and/or an overall budget for Phases 1 and 2?  A) There is no set budget for the Phases as the County would like the proposer to provide a price proposal that meets the scope of work while utilizing the expertise of the firm.  Funding for the assessment would be through the County’s GOE account. 

Last Post: Addendum 1 - 11/26/2018


January 29, 2019

Submission DATE EXTENTED: February 7, 2019 by no later than 2:00 p.m. local time.Proposals received after the time specified will not be opened.

January 24, 2019

Q) I'm requesting the average over the past 3 years for the amounts of medical payments (which applies to both medical only and indemnity claims) and total paid (again, inclusive of both medical only and indemnity payments but includes payment amounts for medical, lost time, and additional expenses charged to the claim).  We can average amounts out with the totals of each for the past 3 years.  For example, medical paid for all workers comp claims in 2018 amounted to $2.5M & Total Paid for all workers comp claims was $5M.  In 2017, medical paid was $3M and total paid was $5.75M. In 2016, it was $3M & 7M respectively.  Ideally, if the County can provide those amounts for 2016-2018 it will go a long way for us to appropriately price our fees. 


Year            Number of Medical Payment          Amount Paid (after med review)

2018               1303                                            $537,075.32

2017               1691                                            $877,023.42

2016               1609                                            $840,994.22  

January 16, 2019

Q) Can you confirm # of takeover claims and type of claim?
A) a. WC – 114 (31 medical, 83 indemnity)
     b. Civil - 113

Q) Can you please confirm that FMLA Administration is not part of this RFP? A) Correct, FMLA Administration is not part of this RFP

Q) Can you let us know many nurse casement assignments are referred annually and who is the current vendor used? A) Our current TPA provides case management services.  We do not current track the number of assignments so we are unable to answer this question.

Q) Can you please provide loss runs for the past 3 years?If loss runs are unavailable, can you please provide brief description of liability type of claims.

A) We are unable to provide loss runs. Please see below.

Coverage Number of Claims:
Auto Liability - Property Dama:     1
Medical Malpractice:                     1
General Liability - Property D:      8
Auto PD - Comprehensive:         12
Errors & Omissions:                    18
Auto PD - Collision:                     20
Property:                                     24
Law Enforcement Liability:          29

January 14, 2019

Please note the due date time noted as 3pm on the online posting is incorrect as the due date time is 2pm. All proposals must be received by no later than 2pm on 1/31/2019.

January 9, 2019

Q) Can we propose life of contract pricing only, or will that disqualify us? A) no

Q) Can you provide actual loss data for the last 5 years? A) we are unable to provide actual loss data as we have open matters in litigation.

Q) RFP is titled for Workers’ Compensation and Liability claims however the loss history on page 12 lists property loss frequency – are first party property losses to be included in this RFP? If so, who is the carrier and is it subject to a Self-Insured Retention or Deductible? 

• Property losses are paid through the TPA but adjusted in-house. 
• Subrogation losses (sign damage, signal damage, road damage, etc) is handled by the TPA

Q) Auto physical damage claim services a part the requested Auto claim services? A) yes

Q) In terms of litigated liability claims, what is the county’s expectation of our role?  Will the TPA will still provide full claim handling services and oversight of the litigated file or are litigated claims entirely handed off to counsel? A) The TPA maintains reserves but in general, litigated claims are handled entirely by the States Attorney Office.

Q) Regarding a Performance Guarantee (PG) – does the county have a PG with the current TPA – if so please provide or indicate what preferred metrics the County would like to see incorporated. A) We do not have a current performance guarantee with our current TPA.

Q) Would it be acceptable to the County that we propose providing written status reports (page 14, 3rd last and last bullets) as part of the quarterly claim reviews?  A) While written status reports are part of our claim reviews, in general, we prefer face to face meetings.

Q) The RFP states that responses to County inquiries are required within 1 business day (16th bullet on page 15).  Our standard to provide a 24 hour 3-point contact for new claims, there may be instances when the required response time of within one business day is not feasible, is this acceptable? A) This is acceptable

Q) What service areas is the County looking to improve from the current TPA? A) We are required to procure vendors every 5 years.  This RFP is in response to that requirement.

January 8, 2019

Q)  Please provide the number of takeover claims? A) a. WC – 114 (31 medical, 83 indemnity) b. Civil - 113

Q) Please provide the bill review volume? A) 2018 - 1065

Q)Do we have to provide life of claim pricing as a lump sum, or can we provide pricing on a  per claim basis? A) Please provide per claim pricing with the expectation that it is for the life of the claim by type.

Q)We operate in a paperless environment, what would the volume of paper files the new TPA would take over? A) Zero

Q) Page 11 - Background - please elaborate on the liability program structure.
A) the $2M SIR through Safety National specific to each GL loss

Q) Regarding loss history information - please provide at least 3 full years and current year to date loss runs for all lines of business to service. 
A) We are unable to provide loss runs as they include information on open claims/pending litigation

Q) For WC claims:  Please have loss runs include amounts for medical and total paid. 
A) We are unable to provide loss runs as they include information on open claims/pending litigation

Q) Provide current number of open takeover claims as well as split of the open medical only to indemnity claims.
A) WC – 114 (31 medical, 83 indemnity)

Q) For liability claims:Provide current number of open takeover claims by line of coverage (ex GL BI/GL PD, Auto BI/Auto PD, E&O, etc.)

A)                                             Coverage Number of Claims
Auto Liability - Property Dama:   1
Medical Malpractice:                     1
General Liability - Property D:      8
Auto PD - Comprehensive:         12
Errors & Omissions:                    18
Auto PD - Collision:                     20
Property:                                       24
Law Enforcement Liability:         29

January 7, 2019

Q) Regarding page 9 # 34 - Can you provide copy of or link to the County Information Security policy & privacy standards?  A) This policy applies in the unlikely event that a vendor is asked to use the Lake County Network. This policy can be provided in the event that a vendor is asked to use the Lake County Network.

Q) Current RFP is missing page 10 - please clarify if this is a page number typo or provide missing page.  A) The pages are inadvertently numbered incorrectly; there are no missing pages.

Q) Page 19 - Under scope of services - RFP states: Proposal should be presented in a tabbed format for ease of review in the sections listed: FMLA Admnistration, Reporting, Technology, and Audit Requirements."  However, the 4 sections in the Scope of Work beginning on pages 14-18 are: A. General Requirements and Expectations, B. Information Systems and Technology Requirements, C. Company Information, & D. Communication Requirements.  Please confirm the sections that these are the sections that should be tabbed in the Scope of Services. A) Please disregard the tabbed format on page 19 as this is a typo. Please follow the instructions found in the Scope of Work beginning on pages 14-18 which are: A. General Requirements and Expectations, B. Information Systems and Technology Requirements, C. Company Information, & D. Communication Requirements. 


January 29, 2019


February 7, 2019 by no later than 2:00 p.m. local time. Bids received after the time specified will not be opened.

Last Post: Addendum #1 - 1/14/2019


February 8, 2019

Q) How much funding is available for this contract?  A) We will size the budget to the amount of work the consultant proposes, if that amount of work/approach make sense.

Q) What is the source of funding for this contract? A)This work is for our 2020-24 Consolidated Plan as well as for our CoC, so we are funding it with our CDBG Administration & Planning funds.

The additional data and reports requested have been added to the posting as attachments.  

Feb 1, 2019

Please note an exhibit A has been added to the posting to provide additional information relevant to the solicitation

Jan 25, 2019

Q) Is it only Lake County or Illinois firms that qualify to apply for the project?
A) No

Q) Can proposals be mailed in? As it is written the RFP seems to suggest that proposals be hand delivered to the address specified on the 9th floor office at 18 N County Street by the due date.
A) Yes, proposals can be mailed in.

Q) My firm is a sole proprietorship. There is a requirement in the RFP for an Account representative. I do my own accounting for the business. Does this disqualify me from making a proposal?
A) An “account representative” serves as the main contact between the vendor and Lake County. This is not the same as the person who does accounting for a business. You may serve as the account representative for your firm; however, please note that this is a large project with a short turnaround time, and staff capacity is a factor that is considered when selecting the best proposal.

Q) The timeline seems unreasonable for the research and delivery of the study. The contract extension occurs on April 9th and the research is expected to be completed April 15th with a draft report due Ma1st. This doesn't seem to make sense because the RFP is already limiting innovative approaches that could be used for the study by prescribing the use of the research approach, "perform outreach, interview stakeholders, and complete research." That also leaves only one week for the study. Why is there a rush to get the study completed?
A) The study must be completed according to the timeline provided. Only vendors that have the capacity to complete the work in the timeline provided should respond to the RFP. The contract for the Gap Analysis report will be executed on April 9th with a draft due on May 1st.  The County reserves the right to enter into contracts with qualified proposers to perform research duties of a limited scope prior to executing the Gap Analysis contract on April 9th. 

Q) Will you please provide my firm with access to the HMIS data for Lake County if you think my firm qualifies?
A) HMIS calculations of HUD’s system performance measures will be posted in this Answer section as soon as they become publicly available.


March 1, 2019

Q) What  sort of proof would the Lake County Purchasing Division like in terms of being an approved vendor under the Adjustable Block Program? My company is already a registered vendor under the program and we are listed here: Would the County like a screenshot of this webpage where my company is listed? Or is there an alternative sort of representation to show that we are a vendor?

A) A screenshot of the IPA’s Approved Vendor search page listing the company and its Approved Vendor Type will suffice.

Q) For Scope 1, how long would the County like the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) term lengths to be?

A) Term lengths are at the Proposers’ discretion.

Q) What will happen if the Adjustable Block Program is completely filled up at the time of bid award? Will Lake County be willing to make a commitment to a bid winner for the next incentive program coming out of IL? Or will the County release a new RFP if a new IL solar incentive program comes out and not continue with the winner of this RFP?

A) The County understands that the projects proposed in this RFP may not complete the required steps in time to be included in the first round of the IPA’s funding program (e.g., design, permitting, interconnection agreement).  The County intends to complete these projects with the selected Proposer(s) in whichever IPA funding round aligns with project readiness.

February 27, 2019

Q) Are load  profiles for the behind-the-meter sites available to determine appropriate sizing of facilities and possible economic benefits that the consumer would accrue?

A) Account data for each specific facility is not available during the bidding process but will be available to the selected proposer(s) upon contract award.  For the proposal, Proposers should estimate the size/capacity of the solar PV system based on the area of available rooftop and/or land, and should assume that each facility listed in Attachment A consumes more power per year than can be produced on site. 

Q) Libertyville Campus: the parcel listed on the RFP is about 30 acres, yet 40 acres is said to be available. Is the entirety of that land available or only the parcel listed?

A) A section of this parcel is protected wetlands which is not available for development. Additionally, the property is part of a Planned Urban Development (PUD) and it is likely that a proposed solar array will trigger a PUD amendment requiring a public hearing, site plan review, etc. The final size of the array will depend on Village of Libertyville regulations.
Q) Wastewater Treatment Plant (Mundelein): Is all open ground between both facilities available for solar?

A) Of the five acres originally identified, four are wetland/floodplain.  Proposers should determine suitability accordingly.

Q) City of North Chicago Closed Landfill (Site #42): 11.8 acres does not seem to be available as a portion of the landfill is currently being utilized. Will that area be available for solar or will only the western side remain available for solar?

A) A section of this property is currently under a lease agreement which expires in 2019.  The entire site will be available for development.

Q) N. Butrick Landfill Site (Site #45): The RFP lists about 25.66 acres available yet the site only seems to have 7.5 acres available. Are there multiple sites not listed in the RFP?

A) This response revises the available acres from 25.66 to 7.5.  The balance of the area on the south of the site is wetland, unavailable for development.

Q) Does the county assume the projects will seek an ABP award upon receipt of notice of award/contract negotiation with the county?

A) As noted in Task 1 and Task 2 of both Scope 1 (behind the meter) and Scope 3 (land lease), the County assumes that the timeline for the selected proposer(s) applying for the Illinois Power Authority’s Adjustable Block Grant Program will be dependent on the project achieving required milestones (e.g., design, interconnection agreement, permitting, etc.).

February 22, 2019

Q) Are load profiles for the behind-the-meter sites available to determine appropriate sizing of facilities and possible economic benefits that the consumer would accrue?

A) Account data for each specific facility is not available at this time but will be provided to the selected proposer(s) upon contract award.  For the proposal, Proposers should estimate the size/capacity of the solar PV system based on the area of available rooftop and/or land, and should assume that each facility listed in Attachment A consumes more power per year than can be produced on site. 

February 18, 2019

Q) Have you scheduled a site visit for the Solar RFP?

A) The County does not plan to offer visits to the 45 sites during the bidding process.

Q) Our Team assumes each of these buildings can use as much solar capacity as is included in the ComEd Capacity row on the provided Attachment A B and C Spreadsheet.  We would like to ask if there are there any limiting factors, such as the annual electricity usage of each building, that could be provided for each site in Scope 1?

A) To clarify, the ComEd capacity figure is the volume of power that is available on the section of the grid in which each facility is located, not the capacity of each facility to generate or consume electricity.  The annual electricity figures for each facility will be provided to the selected proposer after the contract award.

Q) Our Team would like to confirm that the Award(s) for Scope 1 of this RFP opportunity would be awarded on a site-by-site, rather than forty-site portfolio-wide Award based on our reading of point 5 on page 5 of the RFP.  We would like to request the County confirm whether it is seeking a site-specific or portfolio-wide PPA rate within Scope 1 of this RFP and whether projects will be awarded on a site-by-site, community-by-community, or portfolio-wide basis to ensure the accuracy of our response?

A) The County may award Scope 1 to a single proposer or to multiple proposers.  Proposers should submit the PPA price or prices as it sees fit. 

Q) Can utility account information (account numbers, or annual kWh usage) be provided for each of the BTM sites in this RFP?

A) This information will be provided to the selected proposer(s) after the contract award.

Q) Can you provide more information about the sites:
a. Areas where we can place panels?
b. Locations of utility meters / interconnection points?
c. Sizing of your switchgear?

A) 5a. Attachment A notes which facilities have space available on rooftops and which have land, and Amendment 1 provides aerial maps of each site.  For those with land, proposers may assume that most of the vacant area surrounding the facility is available for solar development, however, areas with existing tree cover may have limited availability for development.

5b. This information will be provided to the selected proposer(s) after the contract award.

5c. This information will be provided to the selected proposer(s) after the contract award.

Q) We cannot initiate engineering designs for the sites in this RFP until we have a firm estimate of how large we can design our systems. In addition to the land areas you provided in Attachment 1, we will also need annual energy consumption data at each site so that we know what our target solar generation will be. This can be provided by sending us the annual kWh numbers, or by sending the ComEd utility account numbers.  At a minimum, we need a two- to three-week lead time from initiating the engineering designs to submit our Proposal. As a result, we would like to request an extension to this RFP such that the new deadline is at a minimum two weeks from the release of the requested information.

A) The RFP is not requesting any engineering plans or drawings with the proposal, that phase will be completed after contract award.  Proposers should estimate the size/capacity of the solar PV system based on the area of available rooftop and/or land, and should assume that each facility listed in Attachment A consumes more power per year than can be produced on site.  The County does not intend to extend the proposal submission deadline.

February 15, 2019

Exhibit D- Maps was posted to the RFP bid package today.


March 25, 2019

Q) Are any employees in the study represented by a collective bargaining unit or union? If so, please provide the union/union names. A) Please refer to the March 7, 2019 Addendum already posted.

Q) Does the County have a budget for the study that it can share with us? A) Please refer to the March 7, 2019 Addendum already posted

March 21, 2019

Q) We understand that the County would like a proposal for up to 100 benchmark positions in the classification and compensation, but is it your intent to also have the consultant review and analyze the salaries and benefits for all of the positions in the organization using the information gathered on the benchmark positions? If so, please advise how many positions/classifications there are in the County, and how many employees would be included in the study.
A) We are looking for vendor to benchmark up to 100 positions. For those benchmark positions we need salaries analyzed, not all of our positions. We also want our salary ranges analyzed to ensure we are competitive. Benefits - general overview, that should include employee premium cost and total cost.

March 19, 2019

Q) Could you please elaborate on the level of detail the County desires in analyzing the competitiveness of the benefits program offered to employees and executives? 
A) The County is looking for a general overview. This should include employee premium cost and total cost.

March 18, 2019

Q) On page 15 the RFP states: “8. Provide one to three examples of similar work including one reference for similar work with a Continuum of Care.”  It looks like the County wants project abstracts here.  It states “Continuum of Care” rather than “Compensation Study”. Please clarify. 

A) Thank you for pointing out this error and you are correct on page 15 when it states “Continuum of Care” it should read “Compensation Study”.

March 7, 2019

Q) Are there any specific L/W/MBE goals established for this project? A) No there are not any specific goals established specifically for this project. Please refer to the RFP document for further clarification.

Q) What consultant did the County use for the benchmark positions in 2014-15?
A) Buck Consultants

Q) Under scope of work, it suggests the successful vendor is to recommend new salary ranges.  Our experience has shown that the creation of new salary ranges for an entity the size and complexity of Lake County would require a far more comprehensive examination of both internal equity and external competitiveness than this RFP seems to require.  Can you please provide additional information on the County’s desired deliverable and expectations for this study? 
A) We do have salary ranges, we want to ensure our ranges are current with market for the benchmark positions we will provide.  No slotting is expected

Q) What involvement from unions does the County anticipate during this project?
A) None    

Q) Are the County’s existing job descriptions current?A) For those included in the survey, they will be current.

Q) What is the County’s approved budget for the project? A) This project was budgeted as part of the FY19 budget. All professional services procured exceeding $50,000 require competitive procurement and County Board approval.


April 17, 2019

Q) Page 4 of RFP states 30 day notice to cancel, our agreements are a minimum of 12 months. Will the County be willing to negotiate these terms? A) Please include any exceptions to the RFP terms and conditions as an exception as identified in the RFP.

Q)Page 12 #4 mentions that the “Proposer will create curriculum and training which will allow employees to earn various professional certifications.” What type of Certifications? A) Please refer to the addendum as this questions was already answered in a pervious addendum.

Q) Page 12 #9: Our content isn't custom, so what do you mean by “Describe if materials can be customized for future use with updated concepts/information.“?  A) If proposed material isn’t customizable then describe how the proposed material will meet the needs of the County. 

April 15, 2019

Q) Does the project represent a continuation of a past or current effort or is this a new initiative? A) There was a past program designed to provide training for emerging and current supervisors.  The program run successfully for 5 years and then interest started to fall.

Q) If you have used a similar process in the past, what parts do you wish to retain, and which parts do you wish to improve or discard? A) We know employees are not making a connection between training and promotional opportunities, departments are not giving employees room to use the training they received and there is no way to determine if training is practical and worth while as far as application is concerned. The training was/is needed however its practical application/relevance is at question.

Q) Do you have an incumbent who provides similar services to those described in the RFP? A) No.

Q) What is your budget or budget range or how much have you spent on similar work in the past? A) The County has not procured a similar service in the past
Q) What is your estimate of the number of individuals who would be served by the project?  The initial project should involve managers and emerging managers. About 250 employees went through the previous program in 5 years so, I would anticipate 30-40 people per year. If this program is successful and trainees are able to implement practices and principles for which they receive training, we will provide more structured training plans to technical and administrative personnel. 

Q) What are their titles? A) All Supervisory position and professional level non-supervisory positions. 

Q) Are you anticipating individual services, group services, or a mixture of both? A) Proposals should include a recommendation.

Q) What is the anticipated size of each training cohort? A) Proposals should include a recommendation.

Q) If there is a face-to-face trainer, can there also be a virtual trainer? A) Yes, provided it is effective.

Q) What is your preferred modality for meetings (in-person, virtual)? Will all meetings be conducted using the same modality? A) You should provide us with a recommendation.

Q) Do you have a preference for local businesses or vendors? A) No

Q) Is the proposed project based on similar programs that have been developed elsewhere or used by other organizations? A) Not to our knowledge 

Q) Why are you choosing to outsource this project rather than staffing it internally?  A) The cost of a internal resource and the knowledge/expertise needed to implement relevant programs is varied and we have found it difficult to find one person who can stay abreast of changing techniques/methods to provide a comprehensive org development plan.

Q) Will answers to questions from all potential be shared among them? A) Yes, all questions and answers are posted as defined in the RFP using the addendum process

Q) Will we be able to learn who the other bidders are? A) No, this is one distinction of a RFP vs. a public bid opening. Sealed proposals are not publicly opened 

Q) In our proposal, may we include references and hyperlinks to electronic resources, e.g, to web pages? A) Yes

Q) The proposal price sheet calls for “a flat fee for the core program.”  We assume that this includes all consulting services and recommendations for development programs for several levels of County employee.  Since the number of employees to be trained is not specified, is it acceptable to include the cost for delivering  pilot sessions for these levels?  A) We will consider any pricing you provide, however, you should have an idea of the number of employees your programs can effectively accommodate.  We do not have a specific timeline to get a specific number of employees trained.  While we will consider a pilot session cost, I don’t see the need for it if we have course content.

March 27, 2019

Q) On pg.12, it is stated that Lake County is looking for an “Occupational Development Program” (bullet 1) and in bullet #4 there is mention of participants earning professional certifications as a result of the program you’re looking to develop. Does this mean you’re looking for job skills (technical skills) training and industry certifications associated with requirements of specific jobs? Or are you looking for overall professional, leadership development (soft skills) training?A) Certifications such as Project Management Certification, SHRM Certification, etc.  and professional leadership development, etc. training

Q) Page 12, bullet 1 also identifies 5 stakeholder groups whose needs should be addressed by the desired program. Is the implication here that there will be different programs developed for each of the 5 groups? A) Different Programs

Q) How long and at what frequency is Lake County looking to have the progra(s) run and sessions take place? (IE – 12 month programs with monthly group sessions and individual support happening outside of the group sessions or 3 month programs with 2 group sessions, etc). A) Lake County is looking for the Proposers recommendations and suggestions as to what would suit the needs of Lake County

Q) Along the lines of wanting to make sure our proposal aligns with your objectives, are you able to provide a budge range of resources for the work you’re seeking? A) No


April 12, 2019

Q) RFP, p. 9. Vendor Disclosure Statement states that vendors shall disclose, “All political campaign contributions made by the vendor or an owner, principal, officer, manager, lobbyist, agent, consultant, counsel, subcontractor, or corporate entity under the control of the vendor to any county board member, county board chair, or countywide elected official as well as contributions to any political action committees within the last five years.” Please clarify whether these campaign contributions are restricted to the last five years for current officials, or within the last five years generally, applicable to officials no longer engaged. A) Campaign contributions for current officials.

April 3, 2019

Q) Will the County consider an extension of the current Due Date? A) No, an extension will not be considered as this time. The due date shall remain on April 23, 2019 at 11 a.m. as stated in the RFI document.

Q) Will the County consider provision of Hardware specifications only, allowing them to procure the hardware at the best possible price for them? A) The proposals received will all be reviewed and considered as we are in a gathering of information stage. All information is welcomed. 

Q) As this is  an RFI, and no Scope or definite installation dates are in place, it is not possible to state who will be DEDICATED to the project, as it is too early to be able to predict who will be available.  Will the County accept a statement that the most qualified, available team will be assigned, based on scope and timing of the project? A) Yes, and if and when a RFP is issued to procure these services then a more specific request for the assigned project team will be part of that RFP. 

Q) Since the purpose as stated for this is  RFI is to gather information is this Disclosure document?  Generally this type of document is normally found in a more formal document such as an RFP that will result in a contract. A) This form is required as part of this process and is used as a tool for the review team to identify any conflict of interests in evaluating the proposals. This form must be included in the proposal response by each responding vendor. 

April 1, 2019

Q) The RFI indicates that “Eight PSAPs are partners in the 9-1-1 Consolidation Planning Project supporting this RFI.” Can the county please specify which 8 PSAPs?

1) CenCom E9-1-1
2) Fox Lake Police Dept.  (FoxComm)
3) Gurnee Police Dept.
4) Lake County Sheriff’s Office 9-1-1
5) Lake Zurich Police Dept. (Through the Lake County ETSB)
6) Mundelein Police Dept.
7) Vernon Hills Police Dept. (with Countyside Fire Protection District Dispatch who is co-located)
8) Waukegan Police Dept.

Q) The RFI indicates that “Participating Law Enforcement Partners - numerous municipalities and the Lake County Sheriff’s Office - are simultaneously researching enterprise Law Enforcement records management systems (RMS) and corrections / jail management systems.” Can the county please clarify whether any future RFP for a CAD system will include requirements for an enterprise suite of CAD, MDC, RMS, and corrections / jail management systems, or if the CAD is likely to be procured separately?
A) The 9-1-1 Consolidation Project is actively coordinating with other public safety functional areas and entities. A goal for the 9-1-1 Consolidation Planning Project is for the participating partners to agree on a scalable enterprise CAD and MDC system that the partners can migrate to as they consolidate in the future.  A vision for the Project is to work closely with other public safety functional areas to select a scalable enterprise CAD, MDC, RMS, and corrections / jail management system that the partners can migrate to in the future.

Q) What is the funding plan for the CAD? Have funds been secured?
A) As stated in the Intent of the RFI document, information received in response to this RFI will be used for establishing budgetary approval for procurement in Fiscal Year 2020 and beyond. 

Q) Should the County decide to proceed past the RFI process, has a time frame been established in which an RFP may be issued?
A) Should the partners decide to proceed with an RFP, the RFP process could occur late in calendar year 2019 or in calendar year 2020.

Q) Who is the technical contact and/or project manager?
A) This has not been established yet as the purpose of the RFI is to identify vendors, their products, and services that can provide a county-wide enterprise CAD system. Additionally, to provide general cost estimates from previous projects, including general pricing structure with the breakdown of standard initial costs, contractual hourly rates, and optional service / maintenance costs.

Q) Have you had any external assistance preparing this RFI?
A) No, the Technology Working Group under the 9-1-1 Consolidation Planning Project drafted the RFI and vetted it through project partners and Lake County Purchasing.

Q) Does the County anticipate any professional or consulting services may be needed to accomplish this effort? (i.e. project planning/oversight, PM, QA, IV&V, staff augmentation, implementation services etc.)?
A) Unable to determine at this time.

Q) As dealing with public sector, we understand that there is generally a process of board approval, has this process been completed?
A) No, as with any RFI the intent is to gather information and obtain facts that can be used in a future procurement endeavor.

March 28, 2019

Q) RFI, p. 3, Paragraph 4 states that responding vendors must submit questions to Lake County by 2:00 p.m. CST on April 16, 2019. As the RFI response deadline is Tuesday, April 23, 2019 at 11:00 a.m. CST, and responding vendors must acknowledge the content and receipt of addenda on the General Information Sheet provided on RFI, p. 6, we respectfully request the deadline to submit questions to Lake County be adjusted to 2:00 p.m. CST on Tuesday, April 9, 2019. This will provide responding vendors with adequate time to fully account for agency responses in the addenda, better satisfying the unique needs of Lake County. A) Lake County declines the request to expend the deadline for questions as it is believed that the current deadline of April 16th allows for sufficient time for vendors to meet the deadline of April 23 to submit proposals in response to this RFI.

Q) RFI, p. 2, Intent section and RFI, p. 4, Project Scope section, item 12 request that responding vendors provide cost estimates for the proposed solutions. As such, we respectfully request that Lake County clarify the total number of concurrent users that are anticipated to use the new software solution. A) Please provide ranges in your response to this question as to an estimated cost. (i.e. 1 – 100 users, 100 – 200 users, etc). The total number of concurrent users of this software solution is unknown at this time.

March 25, 2019

Q) Can you please confirm that RFI #19061 is being issued on behalf of a consortium of public safety entities and does not have any impact nor will we be in violation of any procurement rules for  discussions and demo’s that are happening directly with Lake County Sheriff’s Office on similar projects? 
A) RFI# 19061 is issued by Lake County (on behalf of a consortium of Public Safety Entities in Lake County) with the intent of replacing numerous, independent CAD systems with the transition to a new, consolidated 9-1-1 and Emergency Dispatch construct. The new hardware and software will support 9-1-1 and Emergency Dispatch services for partner municipalities and agencies throughout Lake County. The Lake County Sheriff’s Office inquiry on similar projects and initiatives does not conflict with vendors submitting proposals in response to this RFI.   

Q) Whether companies from Outside USA can apply for this? (like, from India or Canada) A) All proposals will be considered for this RFI.

Q) Whether we need to come over there for meetings? A) This is a request for information. The RFI will be used for establishing budgetary approval for procurement in Fiscal Year 2020 and beyond.

Q) Can we perform the tasks (related to RFP) outside USA? (like, from India or Canada) A) The specifics of this should be included in the proposal.

Q)  Can we submit the proposals via email? A) No, please comply with all submittal instructions found in the RFI document.


April 5, 2019

Q. Do you require both Live and Online auction or will Online only be considered? Lake County is requesting commission fees for both Live and Online. 

A. The County reserves the right to award the contract in whole or in part.  Vendors may submit for one or both.

Q. Is a reserve amount required or will you consider no-reserve auctions?

A. Reserve amounts are not required but may be employed depending on the good or equipment sold.


April 8, 2019

Page 11 of the RFP Section 3 under Background revenue received chart was revised:

Below is a summary of total revenue received from auction sales in the past two (2) years:

                                                 2017                             2018
Lake County Government        $134,306.36                 $166,212.05
Lake County Forest Preserve   $147,192.71                $245,283.15

                                                 2017                             2018
Lake County Government        $67,229.19                   $235,109.02
Lake County Forest Preserve  $3,389.19                     $6,575.24


April 10, 2019

~~Addendum #3

1. Will the County accept alternative or modified solutions to the Scope of Work via exceptions and still be considered responsive? Please reference section G. Exceptions to the RFP found on page 16.
2. Will the County consider vehicle auctions via a program where the public can use a registered broker to purchase? Please reference Section G. Exceptions to the RFP found on page 16.
a. Or, do the auctions have to be directly to the public?
3. What is the address where vehicles and equipment will be expected to be hauled away from to the contractor’s facility? Here are the main locations:
Belvidere Health Center              DOT
2400 Belvidere Road          &       600 W Winchester Road
Waukegan, IL 60085                     Libertyville, IL 60048

4. Our IL locations do not take credit cards. Payment is made via wire transfer or other more secured payment method than credit cards. Will this exception be acceptable to the County? Please reference section G. Exceptions to the RFP found on page 16.
5. Section – Providing information of winning bidders. This information is proprietary and not given out to our clients unless it’s a part of some official legal process such as a subpoena.
a. Will this exception be acceptable to the County? The County request this information for clarification purposes.
6. Will the County provide the titles of the vehicles and equipment to the contractor prior to the auction to ensure a smooth process? For Live Auctions the titles to vehicles and equipment will be provided before scheduled event.  For Online Auctions the title to vehicles and equipment is typically released after payment is received.
7. If a vendor does not auction a type of assets listed in the Scope of Work can that be excluded per an exception? Please reference Section G. Exceptions to the RFP found on page 16.
8. Will the County consider multiple vendors with different levels of service for the various types of assets? The County reserves the right to award the contract in whole or in part.
9. If a vendor only provides online auction solutions, will the still be considered responsive? Lake County is requesting commission fees for both Live and Online.  The County reserves the right to award the contract in whole or in part.  Vendors may submit for one or both.
10. How is the County currently disposing of assets? The County currently uses an Auctioneer Service.
11. Who is the current vendor? Obenauf Auctioneer Services.
12. What was the volume of vehicle assets for the past three years?
a. 2016 = 97
b. 2017 = 78
c. 2018 = 79

13. Are vendors required to submit page two (2) of the RFP. Please refer to page two(2) of the RFP document.


April 15, 2019

~~Q. If we are going to submit online only option do you have/want a different/separate response to the RFP for that? How do we address the live auction section such as line items line 7-11 then? 
A. Please reference section G. Exceptions to the RFP found on pages 2 and 16.

Q. In the Online auctions is there an option for staff to take pictures and post the text?
A. Please reference section B. Online Auctions #2.

Q. Can we also submit if they are going to use credit cards there is a separate fee paid by them for that? This way people paying cash or certified funds wont have to pay that fee.
A. Please reference section G. Exceptions to the RFP found on pages 2 and 16.

Q. Are vendors required to submit page two (2) of the RFP.
A. Please refer to page two (2) of the RFP document.

Last Post: Addendum #1 - 3/22/2019


April 17, 2019

Q) Will the requirements of Purchase Order and Payments (section 12 of General Terms and Conditions) apply to this opportunity? A) When applicable yes but given the unique nature of this particular procurement it is likely not to apply and any executed agreement with a vendor for these services will include the specific requirements that would apply. 

Q) With respect to the County’s Economic Opportunity Program (section 29 of General Terms and Conditions), does the County have a specific L/W/MBE target or goal for this opportunity? A) No, Lake County does not have a specific L/W/MBE requirement as part of this procurement

Q) Total plan assets are noted as ~$150.3 million on page 11, but $148.4 million on page 13.  Can the County explain the $1.9 million variance; are there additional plan assets not reflected in the current investment lineup shown on pages 12 and 13? A) The self -directed brokerage assets of $307,651 and loan assets of $1,640,956 are included in the total assets but not in the investment lineup.

Q) Is a ticker symbol available for the Morley Stable Value Retirement Fund, the Nationwide Large Cap Growth Portfolio and the Nationwide Multi-Manager NVIT Small Company Portfolio Investments? A) No ticker available – Morley is a CIT product and  NVIT is an insurance fund offered under the current variable annuity contract and Nationwide Multi-Manager Small Company is a separately managed account.

Q) Are there any transfer restrictions and/or charges (deferred sales charges, market value adjustments) that will apply upon termination of the current provider's contract?  If so, please describe and quantify.  If a contract termination notification requirement applies, what date did the County provide such notice to its current provider? A) There will likely be a market value adjustment on the Fixed Account. Either party may terminate the agreement with 120 day notification under current service agreement.

Q) Please provide the total amount of contributions for plan years 2017 and 2016.  Do contribution amounts include incoming rollovers and/or plan-to-plan transfers to the plan? A) 2016 Total Contributions $8.1mm including, $1.2mm in Rollovers-in and .9mm “other” (loan repayments/account splits/DROs etc.) 2017 Total Contributions $9.1mm including $1.5mm Roll in and $1.3mm “other”

Q) Please provide the total amount of distributions for plan years 2017 and 2016.
A) 2016   $6,522,094
     2017   $8,171,447

Q) How many other County locations would onsite education services be required at?  How far apart geographically are these sites?  Would the days at these sites be in place of the dates at the County Building or in addition to?  If in addition to, how many additional days would the County require? A) The current arrangement is every other Monday at both the County Building and one other location. Lake County’s preference is that that recommendations be included in the proposal as a recommendation by the vendor as to what would be best suited for Lake County. 

Q) Does the plan include individual life insurance policies?  If so, please identify the company that underwrites the policies and how many active, non-lapsed policies currently exist. A) Yes, there were 320 policies associated with this plan and 50 are currently active.  Transamerica underwrites the policies, payments will need to be send bi-weekly.

Q) Are managed account services currently available under the plans?  If yes, please provide the number of participants and amount of assets under the service.A) Yes, $24,085mm in assets as of 12/31/2018 with 392 participants.

Q) Besides English, what other languages is the County need for participant and sponsor materials to be provided in? A) Spanish.

Q) Does the plan include an automatic enrollment provision?  If it does not, please confirm QDIA notices are not necessary. A) No, the plan does not auto enroll and does not currently provide QDIA notices.