SLED Opportunity · OKLAHOMA · THE CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY AND TRUSTS
AI Summary
The City of Oklahoma City seeks proposals to update EMBARK's Fare Change Policy to align with current practices and community needs. This RFP involves fare policy consulting and transit planning services, with a focus on transparency and technology-neutral recommendations.
The purpose of this project is to update the Central Oklahoma Transportation and Parking Authority’s (COTPA) Fare Change Policy to ensure it reflects current operational practices, industry standards, and community needs. Regular updates help maintain transparency, consistency, and fairness in how fares are applied and managed by the EMBARK Fare Change Policy. In 2017, EMBARK initiated a fare study to establish a fare policy, evaluate EMBARK’s fare structure and develop a fare collection strategy. This Fare Change Policy Project is the outcome of the fare study, due to the 5-Year Board Initiatives that were adopted by the COTPA Board of Trustees on September 2, 2016. **Solicitation Type**: RFP - Request for Proposal (Formal) **Source ID**: PU.MU.USA.2722754.C19106251 **Piggyback Contract**: No **Question Acceptance Deadline**: 04/08/2026 11:00 AM EDT **Questions are submitted online**: Yes **Bid Submission Type**: Electronic Bid Submission **Owner Organization**: Central Oklahoma Transportation and Parking Authority **Solicitation Number**: RFP-COTPA-26-001 **Reference Number**: 0000408027 **Pricing**: In attached document **Bid Documents List**: | Item Name | Description | Mandatory | Limited to 1 file | |---|---|---|---| | Proposal Documents | Attach Proposals Document(s) as requested in the RFP. | Yes | No | | Letter of Authorization | Attach Completed Letter of Authorization (if needed) | No | Yes | | Exceptions | Attach Exceptions to RFP Requirements (if needed) | No | No | **Pre-Bidding Events**: Event Type: Prebid Conference | Attendance: Recommended | Event date: 03/19/2026 11:00 AM EDT | Location: Microsoft TEAMS | Event Note: Online Audio and Video Teams Meeting Web Address: (Contact Caytlin Bierwirth) Meeting ID: 258 377 140 268 18 Meeting Passcode: 3EW6E77K Phone call with Audio only: +1 405-534-4946, 769499406# United States, Oklahoma City Phone conference ID: 769 499 406# **Questions and Answers**: - Q1 Arrow Right Question: RFP-COTPA-26-001 Proposer Questions 1. BUDGET ESTIMATE Does COTPA have an internal budget estimate or target range for this engagement, or is pricing entirely open to proposer discretion? Any guidance on budget parameters would assist proposers in developing responsive and realistic fee proposals. 2. INCUMBENT CONSULTANT Has a consultant previously supported EMBARK's fare policy work or related studies, and if so, is that firm eligible to respond to this RFP? Understanding whether an incumbent relationship exists will help ensure a level playing field for all proposers. 3. FAREBOX TECHNOLOGY TIMELINE Given that COTPA is planning a separate procurement to replace its farebox technology, how should proposers scope fare policy recommendations relative to technology decisions that have not yet been made? Should the policy framework be technology-neutral at the principles level, or is COTPA expecting technology-specific recommendations within this engagement? 4. FEDERAL FUNDS CONFIRMATION Will federal funds be expended under the resulting Professional Services Agreement, thereby triggering the Federal Clauses document included in the RFP package? Confirming this will clarify the full compliance obligations for the selected Services Provider. 5. EVALUATION CRITERIA WEIGHTING The RFP references nine evaluation factors under City of Oklahoma City Ordinance Section 2-417 but does not assign relative weights to each factor. Can COTPA share the approximate weighting or priority ranking of these criteria so that proposers can ensure their submissions are appropriately structured? Arrow Right Answer: 1. At this time, COTPA is unable to share any financial information related to this RFP. We appreciate your understanding and encourage you to utilize the details provided within the solicitation documents to prepare your response. Please let us know if there are any other aspects of the RFP we can clarify 2. EMBARK has not engaged a consultant specifically for fare policy development in recent years. Any firms that have supported EMBARK on other unrelated projects are fully eligible to respond to this RFP. There is no incumbent consultant for this scope of work, and all proposers will be evaluated on an equal basis. 3. Because COTPA will be conducting a separate procurement for new farebox technology, fare policy recommendations developed through this engagement should be technology‑neutral at the principles and framework level. This ensures the policy direction remains valid regardless of the specific fare collection system ultimately selected. However, where helpful, proposers may include conditional or scenario‑based considerations that outline how certain policy options could align with, or be enabled by, different types of fare technology. COTPA is not expecting technology‑specific recommendations at this stage, but any insights that help inform future technology decisions are welcome. 03/21/2026 01:59 PM EDT 03/24/2026 12:42 PM EDT - Q2 Arrow Right Question: RFP-COTPA-26-001 Proposer Questions 2 6. LRTP COORDINATION SCOPE To what extent does COTPA expect the selected consultant to coordinate directly with ACOG staff on the Long Range Transit Plan (LRTP)? Will ACOG staff be available for meetings and data sharing as part of this engagement, and is that coordination included within the base scope or treated as an optional task? 7. DATA AVAILABILITY What ridership, revenue, and fare transaction data will COTPA make available to the selected consultant, and in what format? Understanding data availability upfront is critical to scoping the fare modeling tool deliverable accurately. 8. BOARD PRESENTATION FORMAT Is the Month 8 Board presentation expected to be a formal COTPA Board of Trustees public meeting presentation, or an internal EMBARK leadership session? This distinction affects preparation requirements and scheduling. 9. PARKING-TRANSIT INTEGRATION SCOPE How deeply should proposers scope the parking and transit fare integration analysis described in the RFP? Is COTPA expecting policy principles only, or a detailed implementation framework for integrated payment products across transit and COTPA parking facilities? 10. CONTRACT DURATION VS. PROJECT DURATION The Notice to Proposers states a Professional Services Agreement duration of three years with renewal options for two additional one-year periods. However, the Special Provisions describe a single 6-to-8-month project scope. Can COTPA clarify whether additional task orders or consulting projects are anticipated under the three-year contract term beyond the initial fare policy engagement? Arrow Right Answer: Please refer to the addendum 03/21/2026 02:00 PM EDT 04/02/2026 09:30 AM EDT - Q3 Arrow Right Question: On-board Survey When did you complete your last on-board survey and will that data be available for Title VI Analysis purposes? Arrow Right Answer: Our last onboard rider survey was completed in the fall of 2024. The data can be found online at EMBARK Transit Rider Survey | ETC Institute. 04/01/2026 04:21 PM EDT 04/08/2026 04:11 PM EDT
SLED stands for State, Local, and Education. These are solicitations issued by state governments, counties, cities, school districts, utilities, and higher education institutions — as opposed to federal agencies.
SamSearch Platform
AI-powered intelligence for the right opportunities, the right leads, and the right time.