Active SLED Opportunity · OHIO · CENTRAL OHIO TRANSIT AUTHORITY (COTA)
AI Summary
COTA seeks executive search firms to provide recruitment services for senior leadership roles supporting major transit initiatives. The RFP emphasizes qualifications, experience, strategic alignment, project management, cybersecurity, and cost. Proposals due by May 1, 2026.
The Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA) is seeking qualified firms to provide executive search and recruitment services to support the identification and placement of executive and senior-level leadership positions. Services will be utilized on an as-needed basis and may include candidate sourcing, evaluation, and placement for Chief- and Director-level roles. The selected Contractor(s) will be expected to deliver high-quality candidates using industry best practices and effective recruitment strategies to support COTA’s operational and strategic needs.
COTA is undergoing a period of significant growth and transformation, driven by major mobility initiatives such as the LinkUS program and the planned expansion of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors. These efforts require strong leadership to ensure successful implementation, operational excellence, and alignment with long-term organizational goals. To support these initiatives, COTA is seeking experienced executive search firms capable of identifying and securing top-tier talent. Contracts may be awarded to multiple firms, with work assigned on a competitive, as-needed basis to ensure flexibility and access to qualified candidates as organizational needs evolve.
COTA will evaluate the qualifications of personnel proposed for this engagement based on their relevant experience, technical expertise, and demonstrated ability to perform the required services. Consideration will be given to the roles and responsibilities of key personnel, the relevance of their experience to the scope of work, professional credentials, and the adequacy of staffing levels. Proposals will also be assessed on the proposer’s ability to ensure continuity of personnel and provide qualified backups to support successful project delivery.
COTA will evaluate the proposer’s past experience based on the relevance, scope, and complexity of prior engagements with government organizations, transit agencies, and similar public-sector entities. Consideration will be given to demonstrated experience with projects of comparable size and complexity, familiarity with applicable regulations and funding requirements, successful project outcomes, and the proposer’s ability to apply lessons learned to COTA’s project. Proposals that clearly demonstrate relevant, recent, and verifiable experience will be rated more favorably.
COTA will evaluate the proposer’s approach to the design, development, and implementation of the proposed service based on the clarity, feasibility, and effectiveness of the methodology presented. Consideration will be given to the proposer’s understanding of COTA’s needs, the soundness of the proposed design, the appropriateness of development processes, and the ability to implement the service in a timely, coordinated, and controlled manner. Proposals will also be assessed on risk management, quality assurance, stakeholder coordination, and the proposer’s ability to deliver a functional, sustainable solution that meets COTA’s operational and performance requirements.
COTA will evaluate the proposer’s overall strategic approach and methodology based on the clarity, coherence, and alignment of the proposed strategy with COTA’s objectives and operational needs. Consideration will be given to the proposer’s understanding of the scope of services, the soundness and integration of the proposed methodology, and the ability to translate strategy into effective execution. Proposals will be assessed on innovation where appropriate, practicality, adaptability to changing conditions, and the extent to which the approach demonstrates a clear path to achieving successful and measurable outcomes for COTA.
COTA will evaluate the proposer’s understanding of COTA’s business plan and long-term vision based on how clearly and accurately the proposal reflects COTA’s strategic goals, operational priorities, and organizational context. Consideration will be given to the proposer’s ability to align the proposed services with COTA’s mission, strategic initiatives, and future direction, as well as to demonstrate how the engagement will support COTA’s short- and long-term objectives. Proposals that show a strong, thoughtful understanding of COTA’s vision and articulate meaningful alignment will be rated more favorably.
COTA will evaluate the proposer’s project management approach based on the clarity, completeness, and practicality of the methodology presented. Proposals will be assessed on how effectively the approach addresses resource allocation, risk identification and mitigation, schedule management, progress monitoring, issue resolution, and quality control. Emphasis will be placed on the proposer’s ability to demonstrate structured governance, realistic staffing plans, proactive risk management, clear communication protocols, and measurable controls to ensure timely, high-quality delivery of the engagement.
COTA will evaluate the proposer’s approach to cybersecurity and data protection based on the strength, completeness, and clarity of the controls described. Proposals will be assessed on how effectively the proposer safeguards COTA’s physical and digital assets, protects the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data, and mitigates cybersecurity risks throughout the engagement. Consideration will be given to demonstrated security governance, data handling practices, access controls, incident response procedures, compliance with applicable standards and regulations, and the proposer’s ability to securely manage and protect information shared with COTA.
Cost proposals will be evaluated using a comparative scoring formula. The proposer submitting the lowest total cost will receive the maximum cost score. All other cost proposals will be scored proportionally using the following formula:
Lowest cost submitted ÷ proposer’s cost submitted × 5 = cost points awarded
Cost proposals must be complete and submitted in accordance with the RFP instructions. Only cost proposals deemed responsive and reasonable will be considered in the cost evaluation.
At COTA’s discretion, and if deemed necessary, selected proposers may be invited to participate in presentations or interviews as part of Phase 2 of the evaluation process. This phase is intended to provide proposers an opportunity to clarify and expand upon information contained in their written proposals and to demonstrate their understanding of the project, proposed approach, and team capabilities.
Presentations or interviews may include discussions of the proposer’s methodology, project management approach, key personnel, relevant experience, and implementation strategy, as well as responses to questions from the evaluation committee. Participation in Phase 2 does not guarantee award.
If Yes, identify each subcontractor and describe the scope of services to be performed, the subcontractor’s qualifications and experience, and the proposer’s approach to managing and overseeing subcontracted work.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please Upload your TECHNICAL response, including any and all required forms listed in the solicitation and the corresponding attachments.
**Do not upload cost information in here. You will have another opportunity to upload cost in the subsequent section.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
This document must be physically signed and notarized to be accepted.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
This document must be physically signed and notarized to be accepted.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
This document must be physically signed and notarized to be accepted.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
This document must be physically signed and notarized to be accepted.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Enter the name and title of the respondent’s authorized official that will be charged with signing the awarded contract.
Enter the number of years the Vendor’s firm has been in business.
Provide the Vendor’s gross annual receipts for the most recently completed fiscal year.
Please enter a CAGE Code if applicable.
CAGE stands for Commercial and Government Entity. A unique CAGE code is assigned to all businesses and individual's that complete the System for Award Management registration process. This "system" is a database that contains information about all active government contractors.
Enter the full name, title, and email address of the authorized company representative submitting the proposal on behalf of the Vendor.
By confirming, the Vendor agrees to Net 30 payment terms as set forth in the Terms and Conditions.
Upload a tracked-changes (redlined) version of the Contract Terms and Conditions included in the solicitation.
Redlines must be limited to items that were submitted by your firm during the official Q&A period and subsequently acknowledged or addressed by the Agency.
Do not include new or additional requested changes that were not raised during the Q&A period.
Failure to comply with these requirements may result in the Agency deeming your response non-responsive or requiring withdrawal of unapproved redlines during contract negotiations.
By certifying, the Bidder certifies that they are duly authorized to submit this proposal on behalf of the Vendor.
What is the proposed contract term (years)?
What is the proposed contract term (months)?
Enter the total number of one-year option periods to be included beyond the initial base term.
Do not include the base term in this number.
Option years must be supported by budget planning and operational need.
Each option year must be exercisable at COTA’s sole discretion.
If federal funds are involved, ensure the total potential contract term (base + options) complies with applicable federal regulations and does not create an impermissible multi-year commitment without funding availability.
If no option years are anticipated, enter “0.”
Select the payment method that best aligns with the anticipated contract structure and scope of work. The payment method should reflect the level of scope definition, risk allocation, and funding source.
Firm Fixed Price (FFP): Use when the scope is clearly defined and deliverables are measurable.
Unit Price: Use when quantities may vary but pricing per unit is established.
Time & Materials (T&M) / Labor Hour: Use only when the scope cannot be fully defined in advance. A not-to-exceed ceiling must be established.
Cost Reimbursement (CPFF, CPIF, etc.): Requires justification and financial oversight; typically used for complex or research-based services.
Milestone / Deliverable-Based: Payments tied to completion and acceptance of defined phases or deliverables.
Progress Payments: Generally used for construction projects based on percentage of completion.
Subscription / Recurring Fee: For SaaS, licensing, or ongoing support services.
Select the evaluation and award methodology that will be used to determine the successful proposer. The selection method must align with applicable federal, state, and agency procurement requirements.
Best Value (Trade-Off): Award is based on a combination of technical merit, experience, and price, where higher technical quality may justify a higher cost.
Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA): Award is made to the lowest-priced proposal that meets all minimum technical requirements.
Qualifications-Based Selection (QBS): Used for Architectural & Engineering services. Firms are ranked based on qualifications only, and price is negotiated with the highest-ranked firm.
Competitive Range & Best and Final Offer (BAFO): A shortlist of the highest-rated proposers may be established for discussions, clarifications, and the submission of revised proposals prior to final evaluation and award.
Fixed Budget / Feasibility Selection: A maximum budget is established in advance, and proposals are evaluated based on technical merit and feasibility within the stated budget constraint.
Enter the DBE participation percentage established for this contract.
Enter the maximum page limit for the proposal submission (excluding required notarized forms and the separate price proposal).
Q (No subject): Do you envision this engagement being delivered remotely, or would you prefer an on-site presence from our team? Or a combination of both?
A: We would ideally prefer to partner with an agency that can provide a local presence, as this allows for more seamless coordination and on‑site support when needed. That said, we are open to working with a remote team as well. The key requirement is that the candidates presented clearly understand and are prepared to meet the in‑office expectations of the role. As long as that alignment is maintained, we are comfortable with either a remote or hybrid engagement.
Q (No subject): Do you have a preferred talent assessment for candidate selection and leadership alignment? For context, our firm leverages Predictive Index to support data-driven talent decisions and can facilitate a strategic board alignment session to strengthen leadership cohesion and define organizational priorities.
A: We do not have a strict preference regarding which assessment tools are used. We welcome any tools or evaluation methods the selected agency believes will best support their ability to deliver a highly qualified candidate pool.
Q (No subject): Do you already have a compensation benchmark for this role that you would like feedback on, or would you be seeking this to be developed by the selected search firm?
A: The salary range will vary depending on the specific role we are engaging your team to support. Because of that, we don’t have a single predefined range to provide upfront.
Q (No subject): What strategic priorities and organizational challenges should a search partner understand to successfully support leadership recruitment across functions?
A: We'd direct you first to COTA's newly adopted 2026–2030 Strategic Plan, which provides the most complete picture of our priorities and direction: https://cota.com/static/aec298de597d8d800d4f5e7221aa4a46/COTA_strategic_plan_2026.pdf COTA is executing on LinkUS, the most significant transit expansion in Central Ohio's history. Delivering on this commitment is the defining organizational challenge across functions. Success is measured against four outcomes: Customer Experience, Employee Engagement, Community Value and Fiscal Responsibility. Leaders at every level are expected to advance all four. Our core values — Safety, Empowerment, Accountability, Teamwork and Service — serve as non-negotiable cultural criteria alongside functional qualifications. Finally, Central Ohio is one of the fastest-growing regions in the country. The ability to lead effectively in a high-growth, high-complexity environment is essential for any search.
Q (No subject): What level of consistency is desired across searches (process, candidate evaluation, stakeholder engagement, reporting)?
A: We expect the overall search process and cadence of communication to remain consistent across all engagements, including regular updates and transparent reporting. The level of candidate evaluation and stakeholder involvement may vary depending on the specific role, and those details would be further defined during the intake call for each search.
Q (No subject): How does the organization approach diversity, equity, and inclusion in executive leadership searches, and what expectations should a search partner be prepared to meet?
A: COTA does not apply rigid diversity requirements to executive searches. However, we recognize that the strongest leadership teams reflect the communities they serve, and Central Ohio is growing and diversifying rapidly. Our ability to deliver on LinkUS and our broader mission depends in part on leadership that understands and reflects that community. We expect a search partner to present diverse candidate slates as standard practice, employ inclusive sourcing strategies beyond conventional networks, and apply consistent evaluation criteria across all candidates.
Q (No subject): What does an ideal long term partnership with an executive search firm look like in terms of communication, responsiveness, and value added support?
A: The ideal long‑term partnership is one that aligns with the expectations outlined in the scope of work, particularly around transparent communication, responsiveness, and reporting. As long as the firm maintains that level of consistency across all searches and continues to provide high‑quality candidates, that represents the type of partnership we’re looking to build.
Q (Geographic & Diversity Considerations): Local Preference Scoring: "How many points, if any, are allocated specifically to the 'Central Ohio Preference' during the Phase 1 evaluation?" Remote Search Operations: "As a remote-first company, is it acceptable for the Contractor's project management and sourcing team to be located out-of-state, provided they can coordinate on-site interviews in Columbus when required?" DBE/MBE Goals: "Has COTA established a specific percentage goal for Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) participation for this particular solicitation?
A: There are no specific evaluation points assigned to the "Central Ohio Preference". It is acceptable for the Contractor's project management and sourcing team to be located out-of-state, provided they can coordinate on-site interviews in Columbus when required. COTA has not established a specific Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) participation goal for this solicitation. However, proposers are strongly encouraged to include Small Business Enterprise (SBE) and DBE firms to the maximum extent practicable.
Q (Technical & Security Requirements): Cybersecurity Testing: "The RFP requires Policies & Plans to be tested every 18 months. Does COTA require a formal third-party audit report (such as a SOC 2), or is a self-certified internal testing report sufficient for a small business?" Technology Roadmap: "Section 3.1.41 requires a 'Technology Roadmap'. Does this apply to the Contractor's internal recruitment tools, or is it only required if the Contractor is providing a platform for COTA's use?"
A: Any proposal handling PII or sensitive data on behalf of COTA must include documentation of the vendor's security controls. Acceptable forms of evidence include SOC 2, SSAE-16, FedRAMP, self-certified internal assessments, or third-party/SaaS platform compliance documentation. All submissions will be scored based on the security evidence provided. Vendors are encouraged to provide as much supporting detail as possible. The Technology Roadmap applies only if the application supporting the proposal was internally developed and maintained by the vendor's development team.
Q (Operational Scope & Performance): Liquidated Damages: "Regarding Section 3.1.29, will the daily liquidated damages for 'delayed milestones' be waived if the delay is caused by COTA-controlled factors, such as hiring manager availability or internal scheduling delays?" Replacement Guarantee: "The 90-day candidate replacement guarantee is noted. If a search for a replacement candidate is unsuccessful after a good faith effort, is the Contractor required to refund the original placement fee?" Advertising Costs: "The RFP states advertising costs are reimbursable. Is there a pre-approved budget limit for advertising per search, or is prior written approval required for every individual posting?" Interim Placements: "For the 'rare' interim placements where the Contractor is the Employer of Record , will COTA provide a separate fee schedule or markup rate to cover payroll taxes, insurance, and benefits?"
A: Liquidated Damages: Yes, the daily liquidated damages for 'delayed milestones' will be waived if the delay is caused by COTA-controlled factors, such as hiring manager availability or internal scheduling delays. Replacement Guarantee: Yes, the Contractor would be expected to refund the original placement fee if a replacement candidate cannot be successfully identified within the 90-day guarantee period following a good faith effort. However, COTA recognizes the time, resources, and professional services invested by the Contractor. In such cases, COTA would engage in good faith discussions with the Contractor to determine an equitable resolution that minimizes financial impact to the Contractor while ensuring accountability for the outcome. Any agreed-upon resolution would ensure that reasonable efforts performed by the Contractor are fairly compensated. Advertising Costs: Advertising recommendations will be reviewed during the intake meeting at the start of each search. Following that discussion, prior written approval will be required for each individual posting before it is published. Interim Placements: For any interim placement in which the Contractor serves as the Employer of Record, the Contractor shall provide COTA with a separate and clearly defined fee schedule or markup rate. This schedule must itemize all associated costs, including but not limited to payroll taxes, insurance, and benefits for which COTA will be financially responsible. Such rates shall be submitted to COTA for review and approval prior to the commencement of any interim assignment.
Q (Contract Structure & Financials): Incumbency & Historical Spend: "Can COTA identify the current incumbent(s) providing executive search services and provide the total annual spend for these services over the last three to five fiscal years?" Budgetary Limits: "The RFP mentions an 'Overall annual limit' for the contract. Can COTA disclose what this maximum dollar threshold is for the initial three-year term?" Assignment Distribution: "Regarding the 'Competitive' distribution of assignments , does this imply that awarded firms will be required to submit a secondary 'mini-bid' or proposal for each individual search authorization issued?" Payment Milestones: "Source 4 states services are priced as a contingency fee, while Source 377 describes a 'fixed-price professional services contract'. Will COTA consider a hybrid model that includes a non-refundable commencement fee to cover initial sourcing and advertising costs?"
A: Incumbency & Historical Spend: The current incumbent providing executive search services is David Gomez Partners. Our agreement was from March 19, 2025 to March 18, 2026. The Contract was valued at $135,000, of which we spent $93,103. Budgetary Limits: The anticipated budget amount is $300K for a three-year term. Assignment Distribution: COTA intends to engage multiple awarded firms to support our searches. When a search is initiated, all selected firms will be notified simultaneously and may begin sourcing candidates immediately. No secondary ‘mini‑bid’ or proposal will be required. Each firm will proceed in accordance with the Scope of Work, and COTA will continue to review and evaluate candidates from all participating firms until the position is successfully filled. Payment Milestones: COTA’s model is based on a placement fee, typically calculated as a percentage of the selected candidate’s base salary and paid to the firm that successfully identifies the hire. While we do not intend to utilize a hybrid model with a non‑refundable commencement fee, COTA is able to reimburse advertising costs when those expenses are pre‑approved, in writing, by a designated COTA representative. In instances where multiple firms are engaged on the same vacancy, COTA may elect to manage advertising directly to avoid duplicate postings.
Q (No subject): Q1. How many firms does COTA anticipate awarding under this solicitation? Q2. When search assignments are distributed competitively among awarded firms, what specific criteria will COTA use to select among them for a given assignment? Q3. Is there a minimum guaranteed number of search assignments per awarded firm per contract year? Q4. For the hourly rate line item in the pricing proposal, is this intended solely for interim or temporary placements, or could it also apply to other billable activities such as retained search support or candidate assessment coordination? Q5. For the recruitment fee line item, how does this differ functionally from the placement fee percentage? Is this intended for retained search arrangements, flat-fee searches, or another specific scenario? Q6. Are assessment tool costs reimbursable in addition to travel and advertising, or are they expected to be included within the placement fee? Q7. Will pricing be fixed at contracted rates for all task orders issued during the contract term, or may rates be renegotiated on a per-assignment basis? Q8. Will COTA require diversity outreach metrics or reporting as part of each search assignment deliverable, and if so, what format or framework is preferred? Q9. What applicant tracking or candidate management systems does COTA currently use, and will the contractor be expected to interface with or submit candidates through those systems? Q10. For the 90-day replacement guarantee, does the clock start at the candidate's official start date, and does the replacement obligation apply to both voluntary resignation and termination for cause, or only one scenario?
A: Q1. This will be dependent on the number of qualified proposals we receive but we anticipate awarding approximately 1-2 firms. Q2. We will engage with each firm that submits a candidate until the position is filled. Q3. No. Q4. The hourly rate line item in the pricing proposal is meant for the agency to outline costs tied to billable hours. It is not intended to represent fees for interim or temporary placement for a specific role. Q5. The placement fee percentage represents the outcome‑based fee associated with a successful hire and is calculated as a percentage of the selected candidate’s first‑year base salary. The recruitment fee line item is intended to accommodate agencies that structure their search services using alternative pricing models. This line item functions interchangeably with the hourly rate section, depending on the agency’s approach. Agencies that conduct searches on a flat‑fee basis should provide the total flat fee under the recruitment fees section, inclusive of any anticipated candidate‑related expenses such as travel. Agencies that conduct searches on an hourly basis should instead provide those costs under the hourly rate section. The recruitment fee and hourly rate fields are designed to capture different pricing methodologies for search services, while the placement fee percentage remains a distinct, hire‑dependent charge. Q6. No, assessment tools costs are not reimbursable. Q7. The placement fee/proposed percentage of selected candidate’s first year salary is fixed and will not be renegotiated per assignment. Q8. No, diversity outreach metrics or reporting is not required as part of each search assignment. The expectation is for the selected search partner to present diverse candidate slates as standard practice, employ inclusive sourcing strategies beyond conventional networks, and apply consistent evaluation criteria across all candidates. Q9. COTA’s current applicant tracking tool is iSolved (formerly ApplicantPro). The contractor is not expected to interface with or submit candidates through this platform. Q10. For the 90-day replacement guarantee, the clock starts on the selected candidate's first day of employment. This replacement obligation applies to both voluntary resignation and termination for cause.
Q (No subject): Q11. Will COTA provide feedback on unsuccessful candidates during the search process, and if so, at what stage of the evaluation is feedback typically provided? Q12. Will contractors who cannot serve as employer of record be disqualified from interim placement assignments entirely, or simply excluded from that category of work while remaining eligible for permanent placement assignments? Q13. For interim placements, will the contractor be responsible for workers' compensation and unemployment insurance compliance in Ohio, and are there specific Ohio state registrations required prior to placing interim candidates? Q14. May references be from non-government organizations if the work involved executive-level recruitment of comparable scope and complexity? Q15. Will COTA contact all references provided, or only those for proposals deemed competitive during initial evaluation? Q16. May proposers include references from transit or transportation industry clients in the private sector, or does COTA prefer public sector references specifically? Q17. Is there a minimum percentage of work the prime contractor must self-perform under this contract? Q18. Will COTA evaluate the qualifications and experience of proposed subcontractors as part of the proposal evaluation, and if so, how will subcontractor contributions be reflected in the scoring? Q19. Must all subcontractors be identified at the time of proposal submission, or may they be added after award subject to COTA approval? Q20. Will this contract be federally funded in whole or in part through FTA, and if so, which specific FTA requirements will flow down to subcontractors?
A: Q11. Yes, feedback will be provided after all candidates have been evaluated throughout each stage of the process, including initial resume reviews, screenings, and interviews. Q12. Contractors who cannot serve as employer of record will be disqualified from interim placement assignments but can continue to support permanent placements. However, we do not intend to engage in many, if any, interim placement requests. Q13. Yes, in the rare event an interim placement is requested, the contractor will be responsible for workers' compensation and unemployment insurance compliance in Ohio. Q14. Yes, references from non-government organizations are acceptable if the work provided involved executive-level recruitment of comparable scope and complexity. Q15. COTA will only contact references for agencies deemed competitive during initial evaluation. Q16. Yes, proposers may include references from transit or transportation industry clients in the private sector. Q17. No, there is no prescribed minimum percentage of work the prime contractor must self-perform. However, it is COTA’s expectation that the selected prime contractor will be the primary entity performing the services under this contract, as the award is based on the qualifications, experience, and approach presented by that contractor. Q18. COTA may review the qualifications and experience of proposed subcontractors to understand the overall delivery approach; however, proposal evaluation and scoring will be primarily based on the qualifications, experience, and approach of the prime contractor. Subcontractor contributions will be considered in a limited, supporting context and will not substitute for demonstrated capabilities of the prime contractor. Q19. Proposers are encouraged to identify any known subcontractors at the time of proposal submission. Q20. This contract will be locally funded. While federal funding is not currently anticipated, COTA reserves the right to require compliance with applicable federal requirements, including FTA provisions, and to flow down such requirements to subcontractors as deemed necessary.
Q (No subject): Q21. Is SAM.gov registration required at the time of proposal submission, or only prior to contract execution? Q22. Has COTA established a contract-specific DBE participation goal for this solicitation? If no goal has been established, what documentation of good faith efforts to engage DBE subcontractors will be required at the time of proposal submission or contract execution? Q23. What specific cybersecurity standards or frameworks does COTA expect vendors to demonstrate compliance with in the cybersecurity questionnaire — for example NIST CSF, SOC 2, or ISO 27001? Q24. Does the 30-page limit include resumes of key personnel, or are resumes excluded from the page count similar to notarized forms and the cost proposal? Q25. Will Phase 2 presentations or interviews be conducted virtually or in person at COTA's Columbus, Ohio offices? Q26. Will COTA share scoring results or evaluation feedback with unsuccessful proposers upon request following award?
A: Q21. SAM.gov registration is not required at the time of proposal submission. However, the selected contractor must be actively registered in SAM.gov prior to contract execution and must maintain an active registration for the duration of the contract. Q22. COTA has not established a contract-specific DBE participation goal for this solicitation. Accordingly, proposers are not required to meet a numeric DBE goal or submit formal good faith effort documentation at the time of proposal submission. However, proposers are encouraged to make reasonable efforts to engage Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBEs) where practicable. Documentation of such efforts may be requested by COTA prior to contract execution or during the term of the contract to support reporting or compliance needs. Q23. Vendors should adhere to the NIST CSF v 2.0. Evidence of compliance can be SOC 2, SSAE-16, FedRAMP, self-certified internal assessments, or third-party/SaaS platform compliance documentation. All submissions will be evaluated based on the security evidence provided. Vendors are encouraged to provide as much supporting detail as possible. Q24. Resumes of key personnel should be included as part of the 30-page limit. Q25. If presentations or interviews are desired, these will be conducted virtually. Q26. As the evaluation materials are subject to the public records law, proposers can request their evaluations by way of submitting a public records request.
Q (No subject): What is the tentative start date of this engagement?
A: The tentative start date is June 1, 2026.
Q (No subject): Are the incumbents eligible to submit the proposal again? How can we get incumbent pricing?
A: Yes, incumbents may submit for this new engagement. Any previous submitted pricing must be requested through COTA's public records request process.
Q (No subject): Are there any pain points or issues with the current vendor(s)?
A: There were no significant performance issues with previous vendors. Historically, vendors were engaged on a position‑by‑position basis to address specific, near‑term needs. As the organization enters a period of anticipated growth, COTA is seeking to transition to longer‑term vendor relationships that provide greater continuity, scalability, and a deeper understanding of the organization’s evolving workforce needs.
Q (No subject): Could you please share the previous spending on this contract, if any?
A: The previous contract had a not-to-exceed value of $135,000, of which $93,104 was expended.
Q (No subject): How many positions were used in the previous contract?
A: We filled one position with the previous contract.
Q (No subject): How many positions will be required per year or throughout the contract term?
A: At this time, COTA has not established a specific number of positions to be filled per year or over the term of the contract. The volume of positions will vary based on organizational needs, workforce demands, and business conditions throughout the contract period. Proposers should be prepared to scale services up or down as required.
Q (No subject): Can we provide hourly rate ranges in the price proposal?
A: Pricing must be submitted in the format requested to ensure a fair comparison among all vendors. Additional supporting information may be included as part of the solicitation response, provided it is counted within the overall page limit.
Q (No subject): Will the County allow mid-contract price adjustments (e.g., for agency fees or wage rates) during the three-year term, and if so, under what conditions?
A: Pricing should remain firm-fixed for the length of the contract.
Q (No subject): If adjustments are permitted, is there a specified mechanism (e.g., annual review, CPI-based increase, or mutual negotiation) that governs such changes?
A: Pricing should remain firm-fixed for the length of the contract.
Q (No subject): Should the initial proposal reflect fixed pricing for the entire term, or can adjustments be proposed in advance as part of the contract?
A: Pricing should remain firm-fixed for the length of the contract.
Q (No subject): What are invoice/payment terms (NET 30, NET 45, etc.) and required invoice fields?
A: This information is found in the Standard Terms and Conditions.
Q (No subject): What are the reporting requirements?
A: COTA has not established specific reporting requirements at this time. However, the contractor may be required to submit candidate summaries, activity reports, or performance metrics upon request throughout the term of the contract
Q (No subject): Are resumes required at the time of proposal submission? If yes, Do we need to submit the actual resumes for proposed candidates or can we submit the sample resumes?
A: No, resumes are not required at the time of proposal submission as we do not have any active searches in need of support at this time.
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.