Consultant Services for Community Housing Engagement and Planning

Consultant Services for Community Housing Engagement and Planning

The Town of Provincetown (the “Town”) seeks professional consulting services to assist with pre-development strategies for year-round housing projects on various Town-owned parcels, including but not limited to 288A Bradford Street and 22/22R & 24 Nelson Avenue, Provincetown MA. This work is to align with the Town’s ongoing initiatives to increase attainable housing opportunities that meet the needs and values of the community. Further information on these efforts is available for review on the Town website.

Project Sites:

The Town of Provincetown seeks to explore housing development opportunities on multiple Town-owned parcels. The sites identified in this RFP are representative of current priorities and do not represent an exhaustive list.

288A Bradford Street- The Town purchased 288A Bradford Street (a parcel containing 1.7 acres, more or less, and described in a deed recorded with the Barnstable Registry of Deeds in Book 35493 Page 299) for both open space and affordable/community housing development with approval at Annual April Town Meeting in 2022. Site Readiness was completed by the Town in 2025, including the demolition and clearing of the existing structures. The site is located in the N zoning district and includes approximately 29,000 sf of Buildable Area located within the southern portion of the parcel, closest to Bradford Street.

22/22R & 24 Nelson Avenue- The Town purchased 22/22R & 24 Nelson Avenue (abutting parcels containing a total of approximately 1 acre, and described in deeds recorded with the Barnstable Registry of Deeds in Book 36123, Page 111 and Book 36123, Page 223) for affordable housing development with approval at October Special Town Meeting in 2023. Both parcels are located in N zoning district. The parcel at 22/22R Nelson Avenue currently holds approval of Site Plan Review by Special Permit for 12 ownership units, comprising ten market-rate and two affordable units. 24 Nelson Avenue is currently vacant. Both parcels are expecting Town sewer connection to be available in 2027-2030, further increasing density potential.

Project Details

• Department: Procurement
• Department Head: Town Manager (Town Manager)

Important Dates

• Questions Due: 2026-04-13T17:15:00.690Z
• Answers Posted By: 2026-04-15T17:15:09.784Z

Addenda

• Addendum #1 (released 2026-04-06T14:54:31.054Z) —

  No preposal meeting/Site visit will be held. If you are interested in a site visit, please reach out to 

  Mackenzie Perry mperry@provincetown-ma.gov

   

   

   

  Please use the See What Changed link to view all the changes made by this addendum.

Evaluation Criteria

• Experience and Quality of Like Work (10 pts) —

  Evaluation Question: To what extent does the proposer demonstrate successful experience providing pre-development and housing planning services for municipalities, particularly for affordable or attainable housing projects?

  • Highly Advantageous: Extensive, directly comparable municipal housing projects completed successfully; strong alignment with scope and complexity of this RFP.
  • Advantageous: Relevant municipal housing experience with some comparable project elements.
  • Not Advantageous: Limited or indirect experience; few comparable projects.
  • Unacceptable: No demonstrated relevant experience.
• Community Engagement Experience (10 pts) —

  Evaluation Question: How well does the proposer demonstrate experience designing and facilitating effective community engagement processes for housing and land-use projects?

  • Highly Advantageous: Demonstrates robust, inclusive, and successful community engagement processes with clear outcomes influencing development scenarios.
  • Advantageous: Demonstrates adequate experience facilitating community meetings and public input.
  • Not Advantageous: Limited experience or unclear engagement methodology.
  • Unacceptable: No demonstrated community engagement experience.
• Qualifications of Personnel (10 pts) —

  Evaluation Question: How qualified and appropriate are the proposed personnel for delivering the required scope of services?

  • Highly Advantageous: Highly qualified team with clearly defined roles and extensive relevant expertise.
  • Advantageous: Qualified team with appropriate experience and roles adequately defined.
  • Not Advantageous: Some qualifications present, but gaps in expertise or clarity.
  • Unacceptable: Team lacks relevant qualifications or key roles are missing.
• Project Management Approach (10 pts) —

  Evaluation Question: How effective and realistic is the proposer’s approach to managing, coordinating, and delivering this project?

  • Highly Advantageous: Clear, well-structured management approach with strong coordination, communication, and risk mitigation strategies.
  • Advantageous: Adequate project management approach with reasonable detail.
  • Not Advantageous: Vague or underdeveloped management approach.
  • Unacceptable: No clear project management plan.
• Knowledge of Massachusetts Laws & Public Procedures (10 pts) —

  Evaluation Question: To what extent does the proposer demonstrate knowledge of Massachusetts public laws, regulations, and municipal procedures relevant to housing development?

  • Highly Advantageous: Demonstrates strong, specific knowledge of applicable MA laws and municipal processes.
  • Advantageous: Demonstrates general familiarity with relevant laws and procedures.
  • Not Advantageous: Limited or high-level understanding only.
  • Unacceptable: No demonstrated knowledge.
• Financial & Subsidy Expertise (10 pts) —

  Evaluation Question: How well does the proposer demonstrate knowledge of State and Federal housing funding programs and the ability to prepare realistic development proformas?

  • Highly Advantageous: Demonstrates deep expertise in multiple funding sources and strong financial modeling experience.
  • Advantageous: Demonstrates working knowledge of funding programs and basic proforma development.
  • Not Advantageous: Limited financial or subsidy experience.

  Unacceptable: No demonstrated financial knowledge

• Quality of Proposed Deliverables & Scenarios (10 pts) —

  Evaluation Question: How well does the proposal address the required deliverables, including development scenarios, RFP preparation, and financial analysis?

  • Highly Advantageous: Deliverables exceed requirements and demonstrate strong understanding of feasibility and Town goals.
  • Advantageous: Deliverables meet requirements and are clearly described.
  • Not Advantageous: Deliverables are incomplete or insufficiently detailed.
  • Unacceptable: Required deliverables are missing.
• Schedule & Budget Control (10 pts) —

  Evaluation Question: How realistic and achievable is the proposed schedule and budget, and how well does the proposer demonstrate past performance in meeting both?

  • Highly Advantageous: Strong track record of delivering projects on time and within budget; schedule is clear and realistic.
  • Advantageous: Adequate schedule and budget with reasonable assumptions.
  • Not Advantageous: Schedule or budget appears unrealistic or poorly supported.
  • Unacceptable: No clear schedule or budget control demonstrated.
• Firm Capacity & Availability (10 pts) —

  Evaluation Question: Does the proposer demonstrate sufficient capacity to complete this project in a timely manner given current workload?

  • Highly Advantageous: Clearly demonstrates strong capacity and availability of key staff.
  • Advantageous: Adequate capacity with manageable workload.
  • Not Advantageous: Capacity concerns or limited staff availability.

  Unacceptable: Insufficient capacity to perform the work

• References & Past Performance (10 pts) —

  Evaluation Question: How favorable and relevant are the proposer’s references with respect to meeting project goals, schedules, and quality standards?

  • Highly Advantageous: References are highly relevant and consistently positive.
  • Advantageous: References are positive and generally relevant.
  • Not Advantageous: Mixed or minimally relevant references.
  • Unacceptable: No references or unfavorable feedback.
• Price Evaluation (100 pts)

Submission Requirements

• Name Of Company (required)
• understanding of Proposal Criteria —

  Proposal Criteria

  Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 30B and applicable procurement regulations. The Town will award the contract to the responsive and responsible proposer whose submission is determined to be most advantageous to the Town, taking into consideration qualifications, experience, technical merit, and price.

   

  The Town reserves the right to request interviews, clarifications, or additional information as deemed necessary. The following criteria will be used to evaluate proposals; no single criterion shall be determinative.

   

  1. Experience and Quality of Like Work
     Demonstrated experience providing comparable pre-development planning and housing consulting services for municipalities, particularly affordable or attainable housing initiatives.
  2. Community Engagement Experience
     Demonstrated experience planning and facilitating public engagement, visioning workshops, and community education related to housing or land-use projects.
  3. Qualifications of Personnel
     The qualifications, experience, and suitability of the proposed project team, including identification of key staff and any subconsultants.
  4. Project Management Approach
     The proposer’s approach to managing the project, coordinating with Town staff and working groups, and ensuring timely and effective completion of all tasks.
  5. Knowledge of Massachusetts Laws and Public Procedures
     Demonstrated knowledge of applicable Massachusetts laws, regulations, and municipal procedures relevant to housing development and public-sector projects.
  6. Financial and Subsidy Expertise
     Demonstrated knowledge of State and Federal housing funding programs, subsidy resources, and experience preparing development proformas or financial analyses.
  7. Understanding of Scope and Quality of Deliverables
     The proposer’s demonstrated understanding of the Scope of Services and ability to produce the required deliverables in a clear, complete, and professional manner.
  8. Schedule and Budget Control
     The reasonableness and feasibility of the proposed schedule and budget, and demonstrated ability to complete similar projects on time and within budget.
  9. Firm Capacity and Availability
     The firm’s capacity to perform the work in a timely manner given current workload, staffing levels, and other contractual commitments.
  10. References and Past Performance
      The quality and relevance of references, including prior performance on similar projects and ability to meet contractual obligations.

   

• Certificate of Non-Collusion* (required) —

  By confirming, the proposer, submitting this proposal response, certified under penalties of perjury that this bid or proposal has been made and submitted in good faith and without collusion or fraud with any other person. As used in this certification the word "person" shall mean any natural person, business, partnership, corporation, union, committee, club, or other organization, entity, or group of individuals.

• Minimum Proposal Requirements: —

  At a minimum, the following information must be provided within the proposal:

  • Required Certifications
  • Executed Certificate of Non-Collusion (as required by M.G.L. c. 30B).
  • Executed Certificate of Tax Compliance (as required by M.G.L. c. 62C, §49A).
  • Statement signed by an authorized representative certifying under penalties of perjury that the information provided in the proposal is true and correct.

   

• Firm Information —

   

  Provide the following information for the proposing firm and any subcontractors:

  • Name of organization
  • Principal office location
  • Size and type of organization
  • Years in business
  • Identification of any subcontractors and description of their role in the project
• Project Team —
  • Identification of the Lead Consultant.
  • Names and titles of all key personnel who will be directly involved in the project.
  • Resumes for each key person.
  • Description of each individual’s duties and responsibilities for this project.
• Relevant Project Experience —
  • List of all public projects undertaken within the past five (5) years, including client contact information.
  • Descriptive material for comparable projects completed, with emphasis on economic development planning and/or community engagement related to housing, land use, or affordable housing initiatives.
  • List and description of projects demonstrating familiarity with public-sector work in Massachusetts.
• Current Projects —
  • Client list and contact information for all current projects being undertaken by the firm.
• References —

  Provide a minimum of two (2) client references for whom similar services have been performed. Include:

  • Client name
  • Address
  • Telephone number
  • Contact person
• Additional Qualifications —

  Provide any additional qualifying statements relevant to the evaluation of qualifications and experience, including:

  • Specialized training
  • Certifications
  • Relevant professional experience of project personnel
• Project Approach and Timeline —

  Provide a detailed description of:

  • The proposed method for organizing and executing the project;
  • The overall work plan;
  • Key tasks and deliverables; and
  • A projected timeline including major milestones.
• upload any supporting documentation —

  PLEASE DO NOT UPLOAD ANY MATERIALS WITH PRICING INFORMATION 

• CERTIFICATE OF CORPORATE VOTE (required) —

  Please download the documents below, complete them, and upload them.

• CERTIFICATE AS TO PAYMENT OF STATE TAXES (required) —

  Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.

• No Pricing materials have been uploaded in this section. (required) —

  Pricing Proposal shall only be upload to question 16

• Pricing Proposal (required) —

  The Price Proposal shall include:

  • A detailed fee schedule, including hourly rates by personnel classification and/or task-based fees;
  • A total not-to-exceed contract amount;
  • Identification of any reimbursable expenses and associated rates or limits; and
  • Signature of an authorized representative of the proposer.

   

  Any proposal that fails to include all of the above information will be rejected as unresponsive, and

  will not be afforded a complete review.

Questions & Answers