RFP #964 — NE Allworth Road Rock Creek Crossing Improvements

Engineering design and environmental documentation / permitting for replacing two failing culverts with a fish-passable structure over Rock Creek (NE Allworth Road @ NE 209th Avenue), PRJ0004066 / CRP 353612.

Solicitation	Request for Proposal #964 (Architectural and Engineering Services)
Agency	Clark County, Washington — Public Works Department
Released	Wednesday, August 26, 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	$600,000 including extensions; three-year contract intended to run February 2027 – December 2029 (Section IB-5, PDF p.13)
County contact	Scott Fakler, Capital Project Manager III, Scott.Fakler@clark.wa.gov, 564-397-4648 (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: a Questions and Answers document (updated September 24, 2026) is posted; no addendum is listed. The RFP's final date for an addendum was September 24, 2026 (Section IA-9, PDF p.7). The Q&A does not change the due date, page limit or copy counts. What it does say (paraphrased — read the original before relying on it):

No relevant hydraulic, hydrologic or geomorphic studies or models exist for the site; the county does not know of any past environmental work in the area (Q1).
The county is not planning to provide a full WDFW fish-passage barrier assessment, but can ask the local WDFW biologist about an updated assessment (Q2).
No information from the RATA funding application will be provided (Q3).
The county-performed topographic survey will not include a bathymetric survey of the stream (Q4).
The county has no existing geotechnical or structural data for the existing culvert (Q5).
The county expects to interview three consultants (Q6).

Re-check the county page for late postings before you submit. The cover sheet requires you to acknowledge any addenda that do get issued (see row 11 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 #964 — mandatory requirements
#	Requirement	Where it appears (verbatim key phrase)	Format rule / consequence	Done
1	Submit one original, four complete copies, and one complete electronic copy on USB flash drive.	Cover page (PDF p.1): One (1) Original, Four (4) Complete Copies, One (1) Complete Electronic Copy (USB flash drive).	Six physical items in the package. Proposals received with insufficient copies (as noted on the cover of this document) cannot be properly disseminated and may not be accepted (Section IIB-1, PDF p.15).	☐
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.15): 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.15): The outside of the envelope/package shall clearly identify the three items.	Label: "RFP #964 — NE Allworth Rd Rock Creek Crossing Improvements" plus proposer name and address.	☐
5	Proposal body limited to ten (10) pages, excluding resumes, coversheet and debarment form.	Section IIB-2 (PDF p.15): Proposals must be clear, succinct and not exceed ten (10) 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.16). 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 IB-10 (PDF p.14): All proposers are required to be listed on the plan holders list. Attachment B (PDF p.21).	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	Do not include cost or pricing. This is a qualifications-based selection under 39.80 RCW.	Section IA-1 (PDF p.5): This is a qualifications-based selection process, do not submit costs with proposal. Repeated at Section IIC-6 (PDF p.17).	Submitting pricing contradicts an explicit instruction in a process where The ability to follow these instructions demonstrates attention to detail (PDF p.16).	☐
9	Respond to every section of the RFP.	Section IA-1 (PDF p.5): Proposers shall respond to all sections to be considered.	Cover all four content sections (rows 13–16) plus required forms.	☐
10	Use Attachment A as the proposal cover sheet, signed by a person with authority to bind the firm.	Section IIC-1 (PDF p.16): This form is to be used as your proposal Cover Sheet. Attachment A (PDF p.20) carries the certification and signature block.	Complete all fields including Tax Identification Number; authorized signature and date.	☐
11	Acknowledge receipt of addenda by checking the box(es) on the Attachment A cover sheet ("None" if none were issued).	Attachment A (PDF p.20): 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.	☐
12	Complete, sign and submit Attachment C — Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters.	Section IB-6 (PDF p.13): All proposers must fill out, sign and submit the certification with their proposal to be eligible to participate. Form at PDF p.22.	Debarred or suspended (federal or WA State) suppliers may not participate.	☐
13	Content — Project Team: organizational chart showing prime and sub-consultants, lead members, titles, areas of responsibility, plus a list and resume of all team members with technical expertise, title, years of experience and relevant project work.	Section IIC-2 (PDF p.16): Provide a team organizational chart, showing the prime consultant and sub-consultants.	Resumes are excluded from the 10-page limit (row 5) — use that.	☐
14	Content — Management Approach: management approach for design/permitting/construction with the County and external agencies; how the team evaluates and presents information for decisions; QA process for deliverables; how County review comments are addressed.	Section IIC-3 (PDF p.16): Describe your team management approach for a successful design, permitting and construction project (four bullets).	Answer all four bullets.	☐
15	Content — Respondent's Capabilities: minimum three recent reference projects demonstrating the Section IB-1 work, each discipline represented; include owner name, address, phone, project title, contact person; discuss challenges, resolutions and schedule changes.	Section IIC-4 (PDF p.16): Provide a minimum of three (3) recent reference projects. Projects demonstrating efforts with joint consultant/local agency teams are preferred.	This section carries 50 of 100 Tier One points — the largest single weight in the evaluation.	☐
16	Content — Project Approach and Understanding: describe the work per Section IB, the approach to design and environmental permitting needs, the voluntary SBE goal and the schedule, and anticipated project challenges.	Section IIC-5 (PDF pp.16–17): Describe the work to be performed based on the required services described in Section IB.	Must address the SBE goal and the schedule explicitly, not just the engineering.	☐
17	Identify a single firm as the "prime"; present the proposal as a joint team; identify all proposed subcontracting and the approach to the voluntary SBE goal.	Section IB-1 (PDF p.8): a single firm must be identified as the "prime". All proposed subcontracting as well as the approach for meeting the voluntary SBE goal must be identified in the proposal.	Firms that do not follow this guideline will be eliminated from consideration.	☐
18	Voluntary 10% Small Business Enterprise (SBE) goal: if the prime is not itself an SBE, document its efforts to subcontract with SBE firms.	Section IA-7 (PDF p.6): this project is subject to a voluntary ten percent (10%) Small Business Enterprise (SBE) goal; documentation of efforts is required if the prime consultant is not one itself.	Zero DBE / FSBE goal is assigned; the SBE goal is voluntary but the documentation of efforts is not.	☐
19	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.	☐
20	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.	☐
21	Post-award (not in the proposal): register and enter an E-Verify MOU before contract execution; sole proprietors must submit a letter stating such. Insurance per the WSDOT Local Agency A&E agreement, Section XII Legal Relations.	Section IA-10 (PDF p.7); Section IB-9 (PDF p.13): The firm awarded the contract will be required to have insurance in effect as specified in the contract.	Not scored, but line up E-Verify and insurance certificates for the November 2026 – February 2027 negotiation window.	☐
22	Do not include sales brochures or extra support documents; avoid non-recyclable bindings (PVC binders, spiral bindings, glossy covers) — county preference, not a pass/fail rule.	Section IIB-2 (PDF pp.15–16): Additional support documents, such as sales brochures, should not be included with each copy unless otherwise specified.	Recycled/recyclable materials encouraged. Color acceptable but content should not be lost by black-and-white printing or copying.	☐

Ambiguity worth verifying with the county: the RFP's Timeline for Selection (Section IA-9, PDF p.7) lists "Proposals Due October 7, 2026" without a time; the cover page gives 11:00 am. Treat 11:00 am as governing, and aim for the prior county business day given the 3:00 pm office closing time.

Evaluation breakdown

Two-tier, 200 points total in the event interviews are performed (Section IIIA-2, PDF p.18). All received proposals are scored on Tier One, multiplied by .40; top scorers are invited to interview and scored on Tier Two, multiplied by .60. The county intends to interview a minimum of three teams if enough proposals arrive (Section IIIA-1, PDF p.18; confirmed in Q&A #6).

Tier One — written proposal (100 points, weighted ×0.40)
Criterion	Points	What an evaluator can actually reward
Project Team	10	A named team whose org chart, disciplines and resumes map one-to-one onto the Section IB-1 services (civil, traffic, geotechnical, environmental, hydraulic/geomorphic, structural).
Management Approach	20	A concrete answer to each of the four IIC-3 bullets — especially the deliverable-QA process and the mechanism for closing out County review comments between the 90%, 99% and 99.5% submittals.
Respondent's Capabilities	50	Half the written score. Three or more recent, verifiable reference projects covering every discipline, ideally joint consultant/local-agency teams, with honest discussion of challenges and schedule changes as the RFP asks.
Project Approach and Understanding	20	An approach that reflects this site's actual constraints — no existing models or geotech data (per the Q&A), fish-passage design to WDFW Stream Simulation, the 60% permit set feeding a year-long permitting window, and the SBE goal.
Total	100

Tier Two — interview (100 points, weighted ×0.60)
Criterion	Points	What an evaluator can actually reward
Communication Quality and Clarity	10	Plain answers from the people who will do the work, not a business-development recital.
Project Management Leadership and Team Cohesion	15	Evidence the named PM has run this team before and can show how prime and subs actually coordinate.
Field Experience and Real Time Problem Solving	25	Specific war stories: in-water work windows, temporary water management, scour surprises — resolved on comparable crossings.
Understanding Key Project Challenges	30	The largest interview weight. Naming this project's hard parts unprompted — data-poor site, fish passage vs 100-year flood geometry, permit sequencing against the ROW schedule.
Fit with County Expectations	20	Comfort working under the WSDOT Local Agency A&E agreement, county-led permitting submittals, and the county's meeting cadence (up to 24 progress meetings).
Total	100

Note the arithmetic: the interview is worth 1.5× the written proposal (60 vs 40 weighted points). The written proposal's job is to get you into the room; Respondent's Capabilities (50 pts) is what gets you there.

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 + 4 copies + 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.
No pricing anywhere — qualifications-based selection.
Questions closed September 22, 2026, 3:00 pm PST; final addendum date was September 24, 2026. Q&A posted on the county RFP page — read it before submitting.

Sample: project approach and understanding — an opening

Every bidder has to write Section IIC-5. Here is how we would open it. Firm facts are placeholders; the project facts are from the RFP and the county's published Q&A.

Rock Creek has outgrown the two corrugated metal pipes that carry NE Allworth Road across it. The RFP is candid about their condition: the 60-inch and 36-inch CMPs are heavily corroded along their bottoms, the roadway embankment shows severe scour, and two transverse depressions are visible in the road surface — evidence that the crossing is failing from below. [FIRM] reads this as two problems that must be solved as one: a structural replacement sized for the 100-year hydrologic condition, and a fish-passage barrier correction designed to WDFW's Stream Simulation guidelines. The 30% alternatives analysis is where those two demands either reconcile or collide, and we treat it as the project's critical decision point rather than a formality: each alternative will carry an aerial layout, a defensible cost estimate built from current county bid tabs, and an explicit statement of its permitting and right-of-way consequences, so the County can choose a structure knowing what it commits to downstream.

The county's Q&A responses sharpen the picture. There are no existing hydraulic or hydrologic models for the site, no bathymetric survey in the County's scope, and no geotechnical or structural data for the existing culverts. Early field data collection therefore sits on the critical path: [FIRM] would mobilize geotechnical exploration and hydraulic/geomorphic field work immediately after the kick-off meeting, so that the December 2026 – March 2027 survey window the County has reserved for its own topographic work is matched, not followed, by ours.

Permitting drives the schedule. The 60% Permit Set must contain everything the County needs to pursue the HPA, the Corps Nationwide Permit with Ecology's water quality certification, and the County's own floodplain and wetland/habitat permits — and the published schedule then allows a full year for the permitting process. Because the project carries no federal funds, the County will not prepare a NEPA document; but our Section 106 cultural resources survey and ESA Section 7 documentation must still stand up to the Corps' own compliance review, which shapes how we scope and write them from day one. Right-of-way follows the 90% set, so encroachment and easement questions get settled in the post-30% window the RFP reserves for exactly that discussion.

[FIRM] would deliver this with [PM NAME] as project manager and a Washington-licensed engineer stamping every submittal, supported by [SUBCONSULTANT ROLES]. Our commitment to the voluntary 10% SBE goal is set out in Section [X], and our approach to the County's review cadence — five design review milestones, comment resolution logged and closed in writing — in Section [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.