The Question/Answer period for this bid has expired.


Questions already answered for this Invitation to Bid will show below.


Q: 67342 Hope Wellness Center* 320 East 20th , which was correct corrected it to be 3500 E 20th. Is this still a part of the bid request?
A: Please include options as appropriate and the applicant shall evaluate and make awards accordingly.

Q: 1. Do the bids have to include all locations provided in the RFP? Or, can bidders bid on a single location? 2. If a service provider is awarded the bid for the Healthcare Connect Fund Program to include the network equipment, is the service provider required to provide all of the equipment listed or only for select locations? 3. When asking for 60Mbps of Internet Access and 500Mbps symmetric Internet Access under the Healthcare Connect Fund Program, is cumulative this for all locations or for each individual location? 4. In the Healthcare Connect Fund Program, can you explain the difference between Internet Access and Internet Access Solution? 5. For both programs, can you explain a backup connection? What is the minimum acceptable bandwidth difference between the primary and backup?
A: 1) No. 2) It is anticipated one vendor will be selected to provide network services. 3) That is the range of service to be provided that may support multiple locations. 4) Intention to have the same meaning - Internet Access 5) A connection other than the Primary. A second or redundant path. Diversity from the Primary is beneficial. Cost effective solutions focused on uptime and throughput are important - no real minimum. Bandwidth on the backup is probably at the same or less, depending on network design.

Q: For the evaluation criteria section, can you explain or give an example for the category, Leverage Existing Resources and Contract Provisions?
A: The criteria shall be used to evaluate the responses as posted per program rules. Existing resources include things like materials, staff, and other assets that can be drawn on by the applicant to function or operate most efficiently and/or effectively. This is one component to be considered when determining the most cost effective solution. Contract provisions speak to the ability satisfy the verbiage in the ITB concerning contracts and the ability or understanding to provide a funded service under the contracts provided.

Q: I would like to confirm that our intended submission format would be considered a responsive submission within the terms of the ITB format. This question applies generally to all ITBs for the RHC program in FY2020 posted on the ADS website. In the "Additional Information" section, the ITB format states: "Existing contracts may exist and may be used as bid responses if proposed by the incumbent service provider and allowable under program rules. Please include a cover letter outlining the historical flow of related funding requests so that the logic behind your offer is easily demonstrated." For RHC participants with existing contracts that cover FY2020, or partially cover the funding year and contain extension clauses, we may choose to respond to the ITB based upon this guidance. A response would include a cover letter, historical flow of related funding requests, copy of the contract, and a proposed extension, if applicable. We would not submit a SPAR or any other documentation in order to avoid introducing any new content that was not included in the original competitive bidding process for the contract. For any services requested that are not covered under the existing contract, we would offer a second, full ITB response with a new proposal, including new pricing and supporting information requested in the ITB. Would this submission format be considered responsive to the ITB format for RHC participants with existing contracts?
A: Yes. The intent of ITB is to provide information that helps determine the most cost effective solution(s) and Hope Community Resources expects the service providers to comply with all program rules in submitting their response as it pertains to new services or with respect to current contractual obligations and/or options.

Q: Can you please confirm if your location at 2301 Sockeye Circle, Dillingham, Alaska 99576 is the red-roofed building at 59°03'16.6"N 158°34'37.8"W?
A: Yes, this is the location - however, Hope Community Resources may not seek USF support at this facility as it appears this facility is or may be reclassified as a residential facility at which telehealth services are provided, versus a clinic per say.

Q: In light of the recent FCC decision to extend filing deadlines for FY2020, would Hope Community Resources be willing to extend the response deadline for their ITB by 1 to 2 weeks? Thank you for considering this request.
A: An extension is appropriate given the extenuating circumstances. We shall remain focused on completing 2020 applications for support so that services can be deployed and funding decisions may be issued in a timely manner. The due date for this ITB is: 05/01/2020.

Q: Could I get the current bandwidth on circuits?
A: Please consider the bandwidth listed within attachment 2 as the minimum bandwidth to be requested for a July 1 startup. Higher speeds may be sought and as indicated backup, secondary, and/or redundant solutions to include Network Reconfiguration Services shall be considered. If services (new or existing) can not be delivered on or by July 1, 2020, please state indicate when service delivery can be expected.

Q: General Announcement
A: There is a clerical error in the ITB for the address of the Hope Wellness Center. The physical address of this location is 3500 East 20th Avenue, Anchorage 99508. Note: This is an urban site and RHC support for this location shall not be sought - however, pricing may be included with your offer.

Q: Please add me to the list. Thank you.
A: Done. Thanks for your interest.

Q: GCI intends to respond to this ITB for Hope Community Resources.
A: Thanks for your interest.

Q: In attachment 1: Locations 16960 Mat-Su Region is not listed in attachment 2: Telecommunications Program Services Band MPLS connections. Is this an over site?
A: This site is considered to be Urban and not eligible to participate in the Telecommunications Program. You may quote service to this location, but we can't seek support for this site in the Telecommunications Program.

Q: Please add me to the list.
A: Done. Thanks for your interest.

Q: PLease add me to the list.
A: Done. Thanks for your interest.