Lake County Addendum Forum

UPDATED  WED AUGUST 2, 2017 8:50 AM CST

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.

 

UPDATED MONDAY JULY 31, 2017 9:06 AM CST

BID OPENING DATE HAS BEEN EXTENDED TO TUESDAY, AUGUST 8, 2017 @ 2:00 PM.

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.
REVISED DRAWINGS A310, A320, A800 AND A820 PLEASE VIEW BY GOING TO BID DOCUMENTS


CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS AND FORMAL RESPONSES


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 “...do 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.


CHANGES TO SPECIFICATIONS
1.1 SECTION 03 30 00 - CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE
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: www.iselogik.com.

CHANGES TO THE DRAWINGS
2.1 DRAWING A310 - FLOOR PLAN
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).
2.2 DRAWING A800 - DOOR, FRAME, & HARDWARE SCHEDULES
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)
2.3 DRAWING A820 - DOOR DETAILS
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.

 

UDPATED JULY 25, 2017


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.


CHANGES TO SPECIFICATIONS
1.1 SECTION 02 41 00 - DEMOLITION
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."
1.2 SECTION 04 20 00 - UNIT MASONRY
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."
1.3 SECTION 08 11 13 - HOLLOW METAL DOORS AND FRAMES
A. Under Article 2.01 MANUFACTURERS:
1. Add acceptable Manufacturer, Sub-Paragraph A5 to read:
"5.  Mesker Openings Group: www.hollowmetalsubmittal.com."
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."

CHANGES TO THE DRAWINGS
2.1 DRAWING A320 - ROOF PLAN
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

ADDENDUM 1.

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

PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING:

ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
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.

Sincerely,
Illinois Department of Labor

Important Legal Notice:

 

Last Post: ADDENDUM 1 - 7/11/2017

 

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

 

1/24/17

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

1/19/2017

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

 

2/1/2017

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.

1/31/17

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.

1/26/2017

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.

1/23/2017

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

1/23/2017

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:  http://www.eapassn.org/credentials/ceap.  Please just indicate in your response how many people in your organization are CEAP certified.

1/17/2017

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

1/10/2017

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

1/9/2017

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.

1/5/2017

No questions at this time.

 

 

 


 

ADDENDUM 1

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 pwerner@lakecountyil.gov. Questions and comments will be answered in this blog.

1/25/2017

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.

ADDENDUM 2

Questions and comments related to this RFP may be submitted via this Addendum blog or via email to pwerner@lakecountyil.gov. 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.

ADDENDUM 3

02/08/2017

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: https://www.lakecountyil.gov/553/Stormwater-Management-Commission.  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: https://www.lakecountyil.gov/553/Stormwater-Management-Commission.

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

 

4/12/17

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

 


 

5/10/2017-

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.

5/8/2017-

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.

5/5/2017-

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.

5/4/17-

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.

5/3/17-

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

 

 

 

 

 


 

5/16/2017-

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. 

5/15/2017-

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

 


 


 

6/15/2017-

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.

6/8/2017-

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.

6/5/17-

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

A) Please see attached

5/31/17-

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

5/30/17-

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.  

 


 

8/14/2017

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

8/9/2017-

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)

RESPONSE: Yes

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?
RESPONSE: Yes

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?

RESPONSE: Yes.

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?

RESPONSE: Yes.

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?
RESPONSE: None

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?
RESPONSE: Yes

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?
RESPONSE: Yes

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?

RESPONSE: YES

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?
RESPONSE: Yes.

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

RESPONSE: No.

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
e. ETSB

RESPONSE: Yes.

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?

RESPONSE: Yes.

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?

RESPONSE: No.

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.

RESPONSE: Yes.

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?

RESPONSE: Yes.

Q) Were any scope modifications made to the contract with the predecessor audit firm?
RESPONSE: No.

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


 

10/5/2017


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.

10/5/17

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.

 

10/4/2017

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
• AFSCME

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

9/22/2017

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)

9/19/17

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.

9/18/17

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?

A)180

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

A) Cloud environment.

Q)
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)
 


 

11/21/2017

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.

11/20/2017

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 

 

 


 

11/17/2017

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

11/14/2017

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

A)YES

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

A) AUTOMATIC

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

A) ALL

11/13/17

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


 

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