RFP #962 — Parks Levy Public Education and Communications

Communications strategy and public education program supporting a potential November 2027 regional parks funding measure for Clark County Parks and Nature.

Solicitation	Request for Proposal #962 (Professional, Technical and Expert Services)
Agency	Clark County, Washington — Public Works, Parks and Nature Division
Released	Wednesday, September 9, 2026
Proposals due	Wednesday, October 7, 2026 by 11:00 am (Pacific time, at the Purchasing office in Vancouver, WA). LATE PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED – NO EXCEPTIONS (cover page).
Anticipated value	$70,000, local funds only, no federal funds (Section IA-7, PDF p.6); contract intended to run November 1, 2026 – December 1, 2027 (Section IB-5, PDF p.10). Note: the selection timeline (Section IA-9, PDF p.8) separately says the contract is intended to begin November 16, 2026 — a minor internal inconsistency in the RFP.
County contact	Evelyn Ives, Capital Project Manager II, Evelyn.Ives@clark.wa.gov, 564-397-5885 (cover page)
Addenda & Q&A published at	Clark County RFP page (clark.wa.gov/internal-services/request-proposal-1). Addenda are also issued to all recorded plan holders.

Prepared by Deadline Bid Desk from the published RFP. Verify every row against the RFP and addenda before submitting; the county's documents govern.

Addenda and Q&A status

Checked on the county RFP page on September 25, 2026: only the RFP document and the Plan Holder List are posted — no Q&A document and no addendum. The question deadline was September 23, 2026 (4:00 pm Pacific) and the RFP's final date for an addendum was September 24, 2026 (Section IA-9, PDF p.8), so the window has closed on paper; still, re-check the county page for late postings before you submit, because the cover sheet requires you to acknowledge any addenda that were issued (row 10 below).

Compliance matrix

Every mandatory submission requirement we could extract from the RFP, with the place it appears and the exact language that makes it mandatory. Page numbers are PDF pages of the RFP document as published. Print this, work down the checkboxes.

RFP #962 — mandatory requirements
#	Requirement	Where it appears (verbatim key phrase)	Format rule / consequence	Done
1	Submit one original and one electronic copy on USB. (No additional paper copies are requested for this RFP.)	Cover page (PDF p.1): One (1) Original, One (1) electronic copy on USB.	Proposals with insufficient copies may not be accepted (Section IIB-1, PDF p.14).	☐
2	Deliver by UPS, FedEx or hand delivery to Clark County, ATTN: Office of Purchasing, 1300 Franklin Street, 6th Floor, Suite 650, Vancouver WA 98660. USPS delivery is listed as Not Available.	Cover page (PDF p.1). Office hours 8:00 am – 3:00 pm, Monday – Friday, except Legal Holidays.	No electronic mail submissions. Do not mail via the US Postal Service.	☐
3	Sealed proposal received by 11:00 am, Wednesday, October 7, 2026.	Cover page (PDF p.1); Section IIB-1 (PDF p.14): Sealed proposals must be received no later than the date, time and location specified on the cover.	Responses received after submittal time will not be considered and will be returned to the Proposer - unopened.	☐
4	Mark the outside of the envelope/package with (1) the RFP number, (2) the title, (3) your name and address.	Section IIB-1 (PDF p.14): The outside of the envelope/package shall clearly identify the three items.	Label: "RFP #962 — Parks Levy Public Education and Communications" plus proposer name and address.	☐
5	Proposal body limited to fifteen (15) pages, excluding resumes, coversheet and debarment form.	Section IIB-2 (PDF p.14): Proposals must be clear, succinct and not exceed fifteen (15) pages, excluding resumes, coversheet and debarment form.	Extra pages may not have the additional pages of the proposal read or considered. Double-sided sheets count as two pages (PDF p.15). Content must survive black-and-white copying.	☐
6	Register with the MRSC Rosters (select Clark County).	Section IA-2 (PDF p.5): your business must be registered with the MRSC Rosters.	Failure to register may result in your proposal being marked non-responsive.	☐
7	Be on the Plan Holders List before submitting; if not listed, email Attachment B (Letter of Interest) to Koni.Odell@clark.wa.gov and Misty.Davis@clark.wa.gov.	Section IA-3 (PDF p.5) and Section IB-11 (PDF p.13): All proposers are required to be listed on the plan holders list. Attachment B (PDF p.20).	Proposals received by Clark County by proposers not included on the Plan Holders List may be considered non-responsive. The Letter of Interest is emailed beforehand, not submitted with the proposal.	☐
8	Respond to every section of the RFP.	Section IA-1 (PDF p.5): Proposers shall respond to all sections to be considered.	Cover all five content sections (rows 12–16) plus required forms.	☐
9	Use Attachment A as the proposal cover sheet, signed by a person with authority to bind the firm.	Section IIC-1 (PDF p.15): This form is to be used as your proposal Cover Sheet. Attachment A (PDF p.19) carries the certification and signature block.	Complete all fields including Tax Identification Number; authorized signature and date.	☐
10	Acknowledge receipt of addenda by checking the box(es) on the Attachment A cover sheet ("None" if none were issued).	Attachment A (PDF p.19): Proposer shall acknowledge receipt of Addenda by checking the appropriate box(es).	Failure to do so, shall render the proposer non-responsive and therefore be rejected. As of Sept 25, 2026 no addendum is posted — verify again before submitting.	☐
11	Complete, sign and submit Attachment C — Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters.	Section IB-7 (PDF p.11): All proposers must fill out, sign and submit the certification with their proposal to be eligible to participate. Form at PDF p.21.	Debarred or suspended (federal or WA State) suppliers may not participate.	☐
12	Content — Project Team: overview of firm and team with key personnel, roles and responsibilities: (1) brief bios, (2) organizational chart, (3) description of experience with public education campaigns, stakeholder engagement, graphic design and visual communication, (4) subconsultants and roles.	Section IIC-2 (PDF p.15): An overview of the firm and team including key personnel, roles and responsibilities (four numbered items).	Resumes are excluded from the 15-page limit (row 5).	☐
13	Content — Management Approach: identify the proposed project manager and key personnel with relevant experience, qualifications and project roles for each member.	Section IIC-3 (PDF p.15): Identify the proposed project manager and key personnel of the project team.	Name the PM explicitly.	☐
14	Content — Respondent's Capabilities: no more than five relevant projects of similar scope and size, at least three for public agencies, each with: name, website (if applicable), description, communication materials produced, reference (full name, email, phone), and project budget.	Section IIC-4 (PDF p.15): no more than (5) five relevant projects; At least (3) three of the projects listed must be for public agencies.	Six data points per project — omitting reference contact details or budgets leaves points on the table (References criterion = 25 pts).	☐
15	Content — Project Approach and Understanding: (1) understanding of project goals, context and significance, (2) detailed narrative of approach and methodology, (3) specific strategies for public communications and stakeholder engagement, (4) proposed project schedule by task/phase with assumptions on meetings, reviews and deliverables.	Section IIC-5 (PDF p.16): Detailed narrative describing the proposed approach and methodology for completing the scope of work.	The schedule with assumptions is a distinct required item — include it.	☐
16	Content — Proposed Cost: provide a lump sum cost based on the services listed in the RFP; the proposal shall include your true estimated cost irrespective of the budgeted funds.	Section IIC-6 (PDF p.16): Consultants should provide a lump sum cost based on the services listed in this RFP. Section IA-7 (PDF p.6): The proposal shall include the Proposers true estimated cost to perform the work irrespective of the budgeted funds for this work.	Verify with county: the Interlocal Cooperation Act paragraph (Section IA-4, PDF pp.5–6) carries boilerplate reading do not submit costs with proposal, which contradicts IA-7, IIC-6 and the 10-point Cost criterion. The RFP states this is not a qualifications-based A&E selection (Section IA-1, PDF p.5), so cost appears required — but confirm in writing before submitting.	☐
17	If subcontracting, a single firm must be identified as the "prime"; subcontracts must include the necessary clauses from Clark County contracts.	Section IB-1 (PDF p.8): a single firm must be identified as the "prime".	Subcontracting also requires county approval per the General Terms (PDF p.2).	☐
18	Include a conflict-of-interest statement disclosing or denying any interest a Clark County employee/official or Advisory Board member may have in your firm or the project.	General Terms and Conditions (PDF p.2): All proposals submitted must contain a statement disclosing or denying any interest, financial or otherwise.	Applies even if the answer is "none" — say so in writing.	☐
19	Identify any outside assistance used in preparing the proposal (Authorship clause); consortium members must certify each member can meet the RFP requirements.	General Terms and Conditions (PDF p.2): Applicants must identify any assistance provided by agencies or indivi-duals outside the proposers own organization [sic — hyphenation in original].	No contingent fees for such assistance are allowed under any resulting contract.	☐
20	Post-award (not in the proposal): E-Verify MOU before contract execution (sole proprietors submit a letter stating such); proof of insurance before performance starts — CGL $1M/$2M, professional liability $1M/$3M, auto $1M (or a letterhead statement that no vehicles are used), $1M umbrella, waiver of subrogation, Clark County as additional insured, insurers rated A-VII or better.	Section IA-10 (PDF p.8); Section IB-10 (PDF pp.11–12): Proof of Insurance shall be provided prior to the starting of the contract performance.	Not scored, but the $70,000 budget has to absorb these premiums — check your coverage before pricing.	☐

Performance obligations to price in (not proposal submittals)

Section IB-1 (PDF pp.8–9) binds the consultant, during performance, to Clark County's IT environment (ESRI ArcGIS, Microsoft 365 GCC, PDF/A archival standards), county-approved secure data handling, county IT approval plus FedRAMP Moderate – equivalent security requirements for any cloud or public-facing tools, full data export in open formats, and WCAG 2.1 AA accessibility standards with ADA/Section 504 compliance for all digital deliverables. Section IB-6 (PDF p.10) applies Washington prevailing wage law to any work that meets the RCW 39.04.010(4) definition of public work — likely not triggered by pure communications consulting, but flag it: verify with county if your scope could touch it. None of these are proposal documents; all of them are cost drivers.

Evaluation breakdown

A 100-point weighted system (Section IIIA-2, PDF p.17). Unlike most county RFPs, the written score decides this one: the consultant with the highest proposal evaluation score will be awarded the project, with interviews only in the event of a tie or if the review panel asks for them (Section IIIA-1, PDF p.17).

Written proposal (100 points)
Criterion	Points	What an evaluator can actually reward
Experience with parks, recreation or public infrastructure funding strategies	10	Named funding-measure engagements, not general marketing work.
Experience supporting ballot measures or voter education initiatives	25	The joint-largest weight: measures you supported, what passed, and what your role actually was — education and outreach, distinct from campaign advocacy.
Public engagement and stakeholder facilitation experience	10	Facilitation with the kinds of partners this project names: cities, community organizations, advocates, government partners.
Quality and clarity of proposed project approach	15	A methodology mapped to the five service areas in Section IA-6 and to the published phase schedule, with a realistic meeting/review cadence.
Experience integrating polling and market research into strategy development	5	Evidence you have turned someone else's survey and focus-group data into messaging — here the research firm is separately retained, with the first survey expected December 2026.
References and demonstrated success on comparable projects	25	The other 25-pointer: up to five projects with reachable references, produced materials, and budgets — completeness of the six required data points is itself the evidence.
Cost	10	A credible lump sum against a stated $70,000 budget; the RFP asks for your true estimated cost, not a number reverse-engineered from the budget.
Total	100

Interview criteria — used only if interviews are needed (100 points)
Criterion	Points
Project Approach and Understanding	35
Demonstrated Project Team Experience	25
Demonstrated communication strategy examples	20
Project budgeting strategy and cost efficiencies	20
Total	100

Half the written points (25 + 25) sit on ballot-measure experience and references. A firm with thinner measure experience can still compete on the 40 points of approach, engagement and cost — but only with an unusually concrete methodology.

Submission logistics

Due: Wednesday, October 7, 2026, 11:00 am Pacific — received, not postmarked.
Method: UPS / FedEx / hand delivery only. USPS: not available. Email: not accepted.
Address: Clark County, ATTN: Office of Purchasing, 1300 Franklin Street, 6th Floor, Suite 650, Vancouver WA 98660. Office hours 8:00 am – 3:00 pm Mon–Fri except legal holidays.
Package: 1 original + 1 USB electronic copy, sealed, envelope marked with RFP number, title, proposer name and address.
Forms in the package: Attachment A cover sheet (signed, addenda boxes checked) and Attachment C debarment certification (signed). Attachment B (Letter of Interest) is emailed beforehand only if you are not on the plan holders list.
Cost: lump sum required in the proposal (see matrix row 16 and the contradiction flagged there).
Questions closed September 23, 2026, 4:00 pm Pacific; final addendum date was September 24, 2026. Nothing posted as of September 25 — re-check before submitting.

Sample: project understanding — an opening

Every bidder has to write Section IIC-5, and it starts with understanding. Here is how we would open it. Firm facts are placeholders; the project facts are from the RFP and its Exhibit A, the Regional Parks Funding Task Team Report (May 2026).

Clark County is not asking for a campaign. It is asking for public education — a disciplined, factual account of why a park system with more than 100 parks and 7,166 acres of parkland is being maintained by 37 operations and maintenance staff, why a third of daily maintenance tasks go uncompleted, and why the county has drawn on reserves for seven consecutive years to keep its regional parks open. [FIRM] understands the distinction and would hold it: every deliverable in this engagement must inform residents about needs, funding gaps and options, and stand up to scrutiny as education rather than advocacy, because the credibility of the November 2027 decision depends on it.

The Task Team report gives the education effort its raw material, and it is strong material. The Greater Clark Parks District, approved in 2005, funds parks only inside Vancouver's unincorporated urban growth area; eight of the county's most heavily used regional parks — Lewisville, Daybreak, Lucia Falls, Moulton Falls, Lacamas, Whipple Creek, Vancouver Lake and Frenchman's Bar — sit outside it, reliant on a general fund that covers about 23% of operating costs and park revenue that covers about 12%. Two funding models are on the table: a county-wide expansion of the metropolitan park district, generating an estimated $15 million a year at roughly today's 13-cent rate, or a six-year regional parks levy under RCW 36.68.525 requiring 60% voter approval. Each carries different equity questions — the report itself flags the layered-tax concern for GCPD residents — and honest materials will present both models' trade-offs plainly.

[FIRM]'s approach follows the county's own phasing. From November 2026 through January 2027 we would build the communication strategy and message architecture, writing to the branding package the county's Public Information Office will supply. When the separately retained research firm fields its first survey in December 2026, we translate — turning price-sensitivity, values and timing findings into message testing and engagement priorities in the February–March 2027 integration window. From April 2027 the work becomes production: presentations, talking points, fact sheets, FAQs and digital content, delivered in accessible, county-compatible formats for the county to finalize and distribute. Stakeholder engagement runs the whole length of the contract, building on the coordination county staff have already begun with the cities and community organizations named in the report.

[FIRM] proposes [PM NAME] as project manager, supported by [TEAM ROLES]; our schedule, assumptions and lump-sum cost follow in Sections [X] and [Y].

This page is free

If you want your response written: Compliance Pack USD 595, full narrative sections USD 1,950 (50% deposit). Charged in ZAR equivalent via card (Yoco). ruben@deadlinebiddesk.com. All work in writing.