New Homes Baseline and Market Characterization Evaluation Question & Answer July 19, 2016

Transcription

1 New Homes Baseline and Market Characterization Evaluation Question & Answer July 19, Could you clarify the expected completion date for the project? Section 2.1 of the RFP lists August 31, 2017 as the desired completion date for the project, but Section shows an end date of December 31, The successful Bidder will follow the key dates for deliverables established in the RFP (Part A, Section 2.1; #5 Draft and Final Report, In-Person Presentation and Dataset): Draft Report July 31, 2017 Presentation of Key Findings August 14, 2017 Final Report August 31, 2017 Extra time was added to the contract (December 31, 2017) in case the schedule would be altered for any reason. 2. Table 4, in Part B, Section 3, requests weekly hours by employee. Since this is a fixed-duration effort, is it acceptable to provide total hours by employee? If not, please clarify how weekly hours should be calculated for bidding purposes for employees who will not work on the project over its entire duration. The successful Bidder will provide one of the following responses: full-time (40 hours), part-time (between 10 and 30), or as needed (under 10 hours). This will be an approximation of time staff will spend on the project and will provide the Bid Evaluation Team with an estimate of the resources committed to the project. 3. Could you clarify how you would like bidders to present the proposed budget for the project? Part A, Section 2.1 of the RFP states that Bidders should submit separate budget options for each distinct task proposed under this objective. However Table 5 in Part B, Section 4 only shows costs by budget category and year not by task: are you asking for a separate table like Table 5 for each task? For each specific task that the bidder proposes to meet the objectives and deliverables described in Part A, Section 2.1, the bidder shall breakout the task dollar amount by budget category and year, as illustrated in Part B, Section 4, Table 5. One table encompassing all of this information or separate tables is allowed. The initial budget for the evaluation is $100, as shown in Part A, 2.3; Table 5 Estimated Budget by Year. The successful Bidder will demonstrate the minimum requirements for the baseline and market characterizations study are met within the budget. The successful Bidder will provide additional budget detail for task options which exceed the original budget (larger sample size, measure level data collection, etc.) 4. Could you please clarify what information you would like bidders to provide in Part B, Section 2E (Program Targets)? The successful bidder should define key performance indicators (KPI s) and/or any targets that can help ensure the evaluation and related deliverables are in line with the timeline, budget, and objectives established in the RFP. 1

2 5. Is there a page limit for proposals? If so, what is it? No, the page limits were removed. The successful Bidder will provide sufficient detail to ensure their proposal is understood, but should do so in a succinct manner. 6. Could you provide additional clarification regarding the statement in Part B, Section 4.10 that successful Bidders also may not provide services for Wisconsin utilities voluntary programs or for CTC programs? Does this mean that a successful bidder may not provide any services for any types of voluntary utility programs even if it is for a sector unrelated to residential new construction? The Procurement Lead will contact the appropriate individuals to obtain the necessary clearances. If there may be a conflict, please contact the Procurement Lead and she will follow-up as necessary. 7. The RFP calls for the baseline work performed to inform, among other areas,... air infiltration levels (CFM),... duct leakage in new homes. This implies the need for bidders to conduct onsite blower door tests and other fieldwork, which can be very costly. Given the $100,000 budget available for both studies, would you be willing to accept bids that excluded this type of date collection or alternatively extended the date for completion of this fieldwork beyond August 31, 2017 to allow for more focus on gathering of data from trade allies to inform the market characterization work? This delay would increase the accuracy of any forecasts of the likely trends in the baseline usage for new construction projects over time, and provide better support for proposed program design improvements? The schedule outlined in the RFP was designed to allow for a re-launch of the New Homes program for If a Bidder is recommending the schedule should extend beyond August 31, 2017; the Bidder should provide justification (additional data collection) for the extension and address whether preliminary data or findings would be available for August 2017 that would allow the Program Administrator to relaunch the New Homes Program. The Program Administrator does have flexibility with the timeline, but also must weigh the delay of relaunch when making a final schedule decision. 8. Does the sponsor anticipate bidders will develop a single year baseline condition for different types of buildings or is a forecast of a most likely dynamic baseline energy usage that changes over time expected? Both methods are feasible but one is a little more expensive. We encourage Bidders to make recommendations based on their experience and provide cost estimates and timelines for options, while highlighting the benefits and/or drawbacks. 9. Is there any publicly-available empirical data on air infiltration levels or duct leakage observed in new homes in Wisconsin that could be provided by the sponsor to inform this project? For example, is there any analysis or data from recent EM&V work that could be provided to potential bidders? This could include results from blower door tests conducted during on site home audits or other methods used to infer duct leakage rates in new homes. Bidders may download and use existing evaluation work posted to the Focus on Energy website in proposals. Additional material may be available to the selected Bidder. 2

3 10. The RFP calls for completion of both baseline and market characterization studies by August 31, Is there interest in having these studies produced in sequence, so that the Baseline study is completed first and the information gained in that study is shared with market actors as part of the interview process in the market characterization study, which could be completed a few months after the baseline study? Our assumption is that using a sequenced approach would provide better intelligence and insights for use in the market characterization study. However we are not aware of other constraints that may be faced by Focus on Energy and thus we submit this question about schedule flexibility to potentially provide more value to the sponsors. The schedule has flexibility, but Focus on Energy also must consider the impact to stakeholders should the program not re-launch for An alternative approach would be to allocate most if not all of the $100,000 budget to completing the baseline study and finish it by the August 31 date requested in the RFP. After reviewing the results, Focus on Energy could then decide what level of budget and scope to allocate to the completion of a market characterization study. Is Focus on Energy open to this type of scheduling approach, and if so would it be possible for bidders to provide separate budgets and timelines for completion of each study (baseline and market characterization) in a sequential approach as outlined above. Our goal is to have enough preliminary data and results from the evaluation to be able to re-launch the New Homes Program for As previously stated, there is some flexibility. 12. In previous baseline studies conducted in Wisconsin, the evaluator was given access to residential audit data collected by program administrators in Wisconsin to help inform the estimation of residential measure market share. Will this data be provided by Focus on Energy to help reduce data collection costs and increase the accuracy of this study? Evaluation data is available on the Focus on Energy website will be available to all Bidders, however; the successful Bidder may receive additional data based on availability. We encourage Bidders to identify data that would be of interest in their proposal. 13. This RFP requests a baseline that "allow(s) the program to calculate a defensible and accurate ex ante savings value per home..." Do you expect the contractor to be involved in the development of either ex ante savings or baseline whole-home energy usage data? Or are you just looking for data on equipment and practices in new homes that would be used to develop such calculations? We expect the successful bidder to propose a scope of work that will result in a recommended single family new construction baseline, which is informed by the data and information collected and assessed as a part of the study. This baseline will be the basis for the program to calculate ex ante savings values. While the successful bidder will not be required to determine what final ex ante savings should be as a part of the scope, conducting a scenario analysis against nationally recognized new construction programs is outlined in Part A, Section 2.1. This will assist in informing potential ex ante values as the program plans for future efforts. 3

4 14. The RFP mentions completing a scenario analysis compared to other industry baselines. Is Focus on Energy seeking actual model simulations comparing a Focus on Energy baseline to these other scenarios? Or simply looking for a comparison of the parameters on paper, such as a checklist or table? Through the scenario analysis, the program is seeking to understand what potential energy savings may be with an updated market baseline compared against various national standards. Bidders should propose how to best accomplish this as a part of their scope of work. 15. Is Focus on Energy looking for a single baseline or wish to differentiate by geography, home size, or other attributes? We look to bidders to propose what they believe is most appropriate and feasible based on the RFP objectives, budget, and bidder experience and knowledge. Historically, Wisconsin s Uniform Dwelling Code has been the assumed baseline to calculate per home savings. 16. What degree of support or involvement, if any, should the contractor anticipate from utilities that participate in Focus on Energy (such as data queries of relevant metrics in the utilities' customer information and billing systems that the contractor may identify)? Support from utilities varies by utility. The Program Administrator will work with the successful Bidder to assist in contacting utilities and make data or other requests. 17. Should the contractor plan for a primarily turnkey project with review of work plans and data collection instruments by the Focus on Energy project manager only, or would you prefer a collaborative or interactive effort that includes the active involvement of the new homes program implementer, evaluation contractor, and/or other stakeholders? We would prefer a collaborative approach. 18. In Section (Bidder Restrictions) of the RFP, it states: Firms that are either prime or subcontractors to Focus on Energy, including the Program Administrator, the Independent Evaluator, the Fiscal Agent or the Compliance Agent. Current Focus on Energy Program Implementers are also ineligible to bid on this RFP as funding is from Environmental and Economic Research and Development Program (EERD).Would the winning contractor be conflicted out of bidding on any future program administrator RFPs? Our firm does not currently implement any programs for WIFOE. However, if awarded this contract, would we be conflicted out of bidding on future program implementation opportunities that occur during the time-frame of this opportunity (10/2016 to 12/2017)? Please reach out to the Procurement Lead with your specific request. The Procurement Lead will be able to make the proper inquiries for you. 19. Does WIFOE have any builder contact lists (or either participants or non-participants) it can share with the winning contractor? Yes, the selected Bidder will have access to list of builders and any contact information we have for them. 4

5 20. In Section 4.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS the RFP requests that the Bidder Submit a copy of the completed and applicable Cost-Effectiveness Calculator (Excel file). This Excel file does not seem to be posted on the website: Can you please advise how we can obtain the Cost-Effectiveness Calculator (Excel file)? This was an error not caught during our proof reading. Bidders on the Evaluation Study do not need to submit a Cost Effectiveness Calculator. 21. Will Focus on Energy provide any contact information for recruiting homes to participate in the site visit study? The selected Bidder will have access to SPECTRUM, which contains current and past program participant information. The Program Administrator will also work with the selected bidder to request customer information from utilities, as appropriate. 22. How does Focus on Energy define market effects? Bidders should refer to the definition provided by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory s Uniform Methods Project. Chapter 23, Estimating Net Savings: Common Practices provides a general definition for market effects. This publication is available at the following weblink: (accessed on 7/18/16). 23. On pg. 18 of the RFP, the Proposal Submission Requirements mention the completed and applicable Cost-Effectiveness Calculator (Excel file). Is this required for this particular proposal? If so, where can this calculator be accessed? This was an error not caught during our proof reading. Bidders on the Evaluation Study do not need to submit a Cost Effectiveness Calculator. 24. On pg. 26 of the RFP, under Bidder s Capabilities and Experience, the number of employees currently based in Wisconsin is requested. Is having a Wisconsin presence a requirement? No, for this project, having a Wisconsin presence or office is not a requirement. 25. The 2013 study (Appendix A of the RFP) includes both residential and commercial evaluations. Is the new study to be strictly residential new construction or are there nonresidential requirements as well? This study will focus on residential new homes, there is not a non-residential component. 26. Will the data that was used in the 2013 study (or prior studies) be available for this scope of work? The baseline for the New Homes program was the Uniform Dwelling Code for Wisconsin. There is not data from a previous study to share. 5

6 27. Will data from the energy efficiency programs be available for this scope of work? Yes, program data will be made available to the successful Bidder. 28. Is the expectation that this study will mirror the methodology/approach that was taken for the 2013 study? We are looking for the Bidder to proposal a methodology or approach for the study. There is no expectation to conform to previous studies. 29. On page 30 of the RFP, Primary contractor and all subcontractors, shall sign a Non-Collusion statement and include in the proposal. Will Focus on Energy provide the Non-Collusion Affidavit form? A Non-Collusion Affidavit will be posted to the Focus on Energy website. 30. For clarification, does Focus on Energy want an copy of the proposal along with five (5) hard copie one (1) flash drive? No , (5) hard copies and (1) flash drive. The is the "intent to bid." 6