SLED Opportunity · OREGON · WASHINGTON COUNTY

    Washington County Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan

    Issued by Washington County
    countyRFPWashington CountySol. 237036
    Closed
    STATUS
    Closed
    due Apr 16, 2026
    PUBLISHED
    Mar 16, 2026
    Posting date
    JURISDICTION
    Washington County
    county
    NAICS CODE
    541620
    AI-classified industry

    AI Summary

    Washington County seeks a consultant to update its FEMA-approved Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan through a collaborative process involving staff, partners, and stakeholders. The project includes planning, facilitation, technical guidance, and toolkit development to ensure FEMA compliance and community engagement.

    Opportunity details

    Solicitation No.
    237036
    Type / RFx
    RFP
    Status
    open
    Level
    county
    Published Date
    March 16, 2026
    Due Date
    April 16, 2026
    NAICS Code
    541620AI guide
    Jurisdiction
    Washington County
    State
    Oregon
    Agency
    Washington County

    Description

    Washington County seeks a qualified consultant with demonstrated expertise in developing FEMA-approved Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazard Mitigation Plans (NHMPs). The selected contractor will partner closely with the County to complete the required five-year update of its NHMP through a collaborative process that engages internal staff, external planning partners, and community stakeholders.

    This effort will include the contractor:

    • Working under the guidance of the County Project Manager, ensuring decisions and actions are co-developed and aligned with County priorities.
      • Jointly planning, coordinating, and facilitating all meetings with active participation from County staff and planning partners.
      • Documenting discussions, decisions, and outcomes in a transparent manner accessible to all stakeholders.
      • Managing correspondence in a way that fosters open communication between the contractor, County Project Manager, and all participating jurisdictions.
    • Collaborating with existing and new planning partners to update current annexes and co-create new jurisdiction-specific annexes for inclusion in the updated NHMP. This includes:
      • Hosting collaborative workshops and working sessions.
      • Ensuring all partners have meaningful input and shared ownership of the final product.
    • Providing technical guidance as a collaborative advisor, supporting County staff and partners throughout the process to ensure FEMA compliance. This includes:
      • Drafting and refining plan components through iterative feedback loops.
      • Incorporating stakeholder input at every stage before finalization.
    • Developing an onboarding tool kit in partnership with the County, including standard forms, templates, surveys, and guidance materials. This toolkit will enable the County to onboard future planning participants following the completion of this project.

    The selected contractor must demonstrate a track record of successfully completing FEMA approved NHMPs in multi-jurisdictional contexts, with an emphasis on facilitating inclusive, transparent, and collaborative planning processes.

    Background

    Washington County is a suburban county located on the west side of the Portland, Oregon metropolitan region. Its boundaries extend from the City of Portland to the Oregon coast range. The current population is approximately 617,713 and is growing. It has a mix of urban, suburban, and rural areas. The eastern half of the County is comprised of service industries, light manufacturing, residential, and commercial activity. It is relatively densely populated. The western half is primarily agricultural and private forest lands across rural settings, together with several smaller incorporated and unincorporated communities.

    The County seat of government is in Hillsboro, Oregon. The County has experienced substantial growth over the last fifty years principally in the electronics and high-tech industries. Fifty-seven percent of the state’s population growth in the past five years has occurred in Washington County.

    Washington County is one of the most diverse counties in Oregon with Hispanic or Latino of any race (19%) and Asian (12%) being the largest non-white groups. Ten percent (10%) of the population has a disability, seventeen (17%) percent are born outside of the United States, and twenty-five (25%) precent speak languages other than English.

    The current multi-jurisdictional NHMP include the following partners:

    Current NHMP Plan Holders (2023 Washington County NHMP)

    Cities

    City

    2025 Population (Estimate)

    Washington County

    617,713 (Incorporated & Unincorporated)

    Hillsboro

    111,150

    Tigard

    57,867

    Beaverton

    98,488

    Forest Grove

    27,323

    Cornelius

    16,008

    Sherwood

    20,438

    North Plains

    3,419

    Special Districts

    Special District

    Service

    Clean Water Services

    Surface and wastewater collection and treatment agency for urban residents of Washington County.

    Tualatin Valley Water District

    Water provider for approximately 215,500 accounts in and around Washington County.

    Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District

    Provides park and recreation facilities, programs, services, and natural areas that meet the needs of the diverse communities it serves throughout Washington County.

    Cornelius Fire District

    Fire/EMS provider serving the rural areas surrounding the City of Cornelius.

    Forest Grove Fire District

    Fire/EMS provider serving the rural areas surrounding the City of Forest Grove.

     

    These jurisdictions have committed to participate in the plan update, for a total of 11 planning participants. For this project, the City of Cornelius, Cornelius Fire District, City of Forest Grove, and Forest Grove Fire District will each need to have separate annexes developed. In the current plan, the two fire districts participated jointly with the cities.

    Additionally, the two cities and four special districts listed below have committed to participate in this project, as new planning partners:

    New Jurisdictions

    Cities

    City

    2025 Population (Estimate)

    Banks

    1,829

    Tualatin

    28,074

    Special Districts

    Banks Fire District

    Fire/EMS provider serving the City of Banks and the Banks Rural Fire Protection District.

    Raleigh Hills Water District

    A domestic water supply district covering approximately two square miles of unincorporated Washington County in the Raleigh Hills area serving about 4,500 accounts.

    Tualatin Valley Irrigation District

    Operates Scoggins Dam and maintains pumps and piping to provide irrigation for agriculture in western Washington County.

    West Slope Water District

    Located in Washington County, west of Portland. The service area is about 3.5 square miles and provides water to 10,300 accounts.

    Project Details

    • Reference ID: 2026.024-RFP
    • Department: Emergency Management
    • Department Head: John Wheeler (Manager)

    Important Dates

    • Questions Due: 2026-04-15T00:00:00.701Z

    Addenda

    • Addendum #1 (released 2026-04-02T17:09:11.238Z) —

      A Non-mandatory informational pre-proposal conference call will be held Thursday, April 9th from 10am to 11am via Microsoft Teams. This will be an open Q&A time for potential respondents to speak with members of our team assigned to this project. The information for the call is below:

      Microsoft Teams meeting

      Join: https://teams.microsoft.com/meet/23519572157811?p=X7QOK4U34A9YlnAYb2

      Meeting ID: 235 195 721 578 11

      Passcode: Rm6xA9qV


      Need help? | System reference

      Dial in by phone

      +1 971-337-3439,,52219018# United States, Portland

      Find a local number

      Phone conference ID: 522 190 18#

    • Official Notice #1: Edits to Answers in Q&A Section (released 2026-04-08T20:57:49.742Z) —

      The County has edited answers to questions 4, 6, 16, 17, 18, 22 & 23  on 4/8/2026 at 1:45pm PST and encourages all followers and potential proposers to revisit these questions to review the new answers. 

    • Official Notice #2: Pre-proposal Meeting Attendees (released 2026-04-09T17:37:36.364Z) —

      An informational non-mandatory preproposal meeting was held on April 9, 2026 at 10:00am PST via Microsoft Teams. The meeting was not recorded, all questions were instructed to be submitted in writing through the question & answer section of the RFP. A list of the attendees is attached for reference. 

    • Official Notice #3: Update to Question #8 (released 2026-04-09T23:09:44.217Z) —

      The response to question #8 has been updated in the Q&A Section

    Evaluation Criteria

    • Page Count (5 pts)

      The proposal response was within the specified page limit of twenty (20) pages for Evaluation Phases Sections 4.3, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8 & 4.9 combined and a page limit of two (2) pages for Evaluation Phases Section 4.2.

    • Table of Contents and Transmittal Letter (10 pts)

      (Limit for these items is two (2) pages – These pages do not count against the page limit)

      Table of Contents

      • Identification of material submitted by section
      • Cross reference to section of RFP

      Transmittal Letter

      1. General introduction stating the proposers understanding of the services to be provided,
      2. Positive commitment to perform the service within the time period specified,
      3. Statement that the proposal is a firm and irrevocable offer for the stated time of project.
      4. Name(s) of person(s) authorized to represent the proposer, title, office, and mailing address, telephone number, email address; and,
      5. Signature of authorized party
    • Firm Qualification and Experience (5 pts)

      (These pages count against the page limit)

      Briefly introduce your firm, indicating whether your firm is local, regional, national, or international. State the size of the firm, number of staff, the location of the office from which the work on this project is to be performed, and the number and nature of the professional staff to be assigned to this project on a full-time basis and the number and nature of the staff to be so assigned to this project on a part-time basis.

      If the proposer is a joint venture or consortium, the qualifications of each firm comprising the joint venture or consortium should be separately identified and the firm that is to serve as the principal should be noted.

    • Experience-Examples (10 pts)

      (These pages do not count against the page limit)

      Please provide examples of the following items:

      1. A list of FEMA-approved multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plans completed within the last three years. Include the plan title, jurisdictions involved, and date that FEMA approval was received. If available, list plans for jurisdictions that are comparable to Washington County.
      2. One example of a multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan completed in the last five years. This can be submitted via a link or can be attached to the proposal (these pages do not count against the page limit). If available, provide a plan for a jurisdiction that is comparable to Washington County and that demonstrates collaboration with a diverse range of stakeholders, including local governments and special districts
      3. One example of a crosswalk analysis document completed within the last five years. If this is included within the hazard mitigation plan example, please note the page numbers where the crosswalk analysis can be found. This can also be submitted via a link or an attachment to the proposal.
      4. One example of GIS products produced by your firm. If this is included within the hazard mitigation plan example, please note the page numbers where the GIS products can be found. This can also be submitted via a link or an attachment to the proposal.
    • Personnel Qualifications and Experience (15 pts)

      (These pages do not count against the page limit)

      Staff consistency, level of experience, and level of engagement are important considerations. Provide resumes for employees that will be assigned to this project, including individuals supervising the project. For each employee, separately identify their role and level of engagement in the project (supervise, lead, support, SME, author, etc.).

    • Proposer Strategy / Project Work Plan / Approach (15 pts)

      (These pages count against the page limit)

      In your proposal, identify your strategies in these areas:

      1. Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
      • Collect and confirm information for each hazard identified during the review process.
      • Assess the extent of risk for each hazard, including geographic areas, population impacted, and critical infrastructure at risk.
      • Address jurisdictional land use planning issues and challenges related to hazard vulnerability.
      1. Mitigation Action Development
      • Develop jurisdiction-specific mitigation action plans for each identified natural hazard.
      • Ensure actions are practical, measurable, and aligned with FEMA and ODEM standards.
      1. Communication and Training
      • Maintain timely and transparent communication with project partners and staff.
      • Provide training for participating jurisdictions staff on the NHMP process and steps to successfully achieve plan adoption.
      1. Technical Services
      • Deliver GIS mapping and analysis to support hazard identification and risk assessment.
      • Prepare all components to meet FEMA approval standards for Hazard Mitigation Plans.
      1. Project Management
      • Implement a structured project management approach to ensure milestones are met within established timeframe.
      • Provide a detailed project schedule outlining key tasks, deliverables, and deadlines.
      1. Access and Opportunity

      Proposers should summarize their experience in promoting equity within hazard mitigation planning, including strategies to incorporate diverse perspectives and address the needs of marginalized and underrepresented communities.

    • Independence (5 pts)

      (These pages count against the page limit)

      Provide an affirmative statement that the firm is independent of any of the partner jurisdictions including Washington County, and the following cities and special districts:

      Cities of Washington County

      City of Hillsboro

      City of Tigard

      City of Beaverton

      City of Forest Grove

      City of Cornelius

      City of Sherwood

      City of Tualatin

      City of Banks

      City of North Plains

       

      Special Districts (Fire Districts, School Districts, Water Providers)

      Banks Fire District

      Clean Water Services

      Cornelius Fire District

      Raleigh Hills Water District

      Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District

      Tualatin Valley Irrigation District

      Tualatin Valley Water District

      West Slope Water District

      Forest Grove Fire District

       

      List and describe the firm’s professional relationships involving any of the listed partner jurisdictions for the past five (5) years, together with a statement explaining why such relationships do not constitute a conflict of interest relative to performing the services required by this RFP.

      In addition, the firm shall give the County written notice of any professional relationships relevant to this project entered into during the period of the agreement.

    • References (10 pts)

      (These pages count against the page limit)

      Provide the agency name, address, contact person, email address, and telephone number for three (3) mitigation planning projects your firm has completed, with particular emphasis on jurisdictions similar to Washington County. References must be for services provided within the last five (5) years.

      Provide the name of all cities, counties, and special districts for which the firm has provided similar work during the past five (5) years. These engagements should be ranked by total staff hours. Indicate the scope of work, date, engagement partner, and total hours.

      List any contracts terminated for cause with the same time-period and include the reason why.

    • Project Budget (15 pts)

      (These pages count against the page limit)

      The proposal shall include the proposer’s fixed-price estimate for the proposed project approach. Proposals shall indicate costs for completing the project and include the following:

      • For each assigned staff member (principal, associates, administrative/support, etc.) list their hourly rate, total number of project hours, and total labor cost.
      • For each phase or element of the project (e.g., startup, community profile, risk assessment, public engagement, plan development, etc.), list the total hours and total cost.
      • List reimbursable expenses including travel costs.

      The County will require proof of costs for airlines, hotels, and transportation when allowed and will pay in accordance with per diem reimbursement.

      County will not reimburse mileage within a 50-mile radius from County building location. If your office resides outside the 50 miles, please provide a memo to Contract Administrator to allow the difference after deducting the 50 miles for all future reimbursement invoices. County may reimburse Contract Administrator pre-approved travel expenses (i.e., hotel, Portland Oregon meal per diem) for visiting sites outside the 50-mile radius in accordance with the County's Travel Policies.

    • Interviews (10 pts)

      The County will conduct interviews with the top scoring proposers. The scores from the written proposals will be considered preliminary and may be updated based on the interview. Final scores will be determined based on the points assigned to the proposals and the interview process.

    Submission Requirements

    • Electronic Submittal (required)

      By electronically submitting this response the Supplier attests and certifies that:

      1. Person completing this response represents that I am either authorized to bind the Supplier, or that I am submitting the Response on behalf of and at the direction of the Supplier's representative authorized to contractually bind the Supplier.

      2. I represent that the Supplier or its applicable representative(s) has reviewed the information contained in this Solicitation Package and that the information submitted is accurate.

      3. Respondent agrees that the action of electronically submitting its response constitutes:

      a. an electronic signature on the responses, generally,

      b. an agreement to conduct business electronically,

      c. an electronic signature on any form or section specifically calling for a

      signature, and

      d. an affirmative agreement to any statement contained in the solicitation

      that requires a definite confirmation or acknowledgement.

    • Solicitation Requirements (required)

      Proposer read through and confirm that you met all of the Solicitation requirements?

    • Cooperative Purchasing (required)

      Will the proposer extend pricing and terms to other public agencies?(there is no penalty for not agreeing to extend pricing)

    • Past Employment (required)

      Have you or a member of your staff been an employee of Washington County in the last six months?

    • Oregon Secretary of State Business Registry (required)

      Enter your registry number without dashes or spaces. If you are not currently registered enter N/A. If you are the successful bidder you will be required to register with the Secretary of State in order to contract with the County, per OAR 125-246-0330

    • Tax (required)

      The proposer hereby certifies that they have complied with the tax laws of Oregon and all political subdivision of the State of Oregon, including ORS 305.620 and ORS chapters 316, 317 and 318. Washington County may terminate the contract if contractor fails to comply with any tax laws during the term of the contract.

    • Contact Name, Email, and Phone Number (required)

      Provide the name, email, and phone number for the contact in case of questions, or interview or demonstration arrangements.

    • Proposal Content

      The proposal shall be prepared succinctly, providing a straight forward, concise description of the proposer’s ability to meet the requirements of the RFP. There should be no unnecessary attachments or exhibits.

      Proposal should contain no more than twenty (20) 8.5" x 11", pages of written material (excluding biographies and brochures which may be included in an appendix) describing the ability of the proposer to perform the work described. The minimum font shall be twelve (12) point single spaced and the minimum margins shall be one (1) inch on all sides.

    • Proposal Content (required)

      Upload your proposal here. After uploading documents responders are encouraged to open and review uploaded documents to verify that they can be opened and are the correct documents before submitting.  If the County cannot open any of the documents submitted the entire proposal will be disqualified. 

    • Separate Cost Proposal (required)

      Confirm that your fee proposal is not attached in your Proposal and is attached separately here.

    • Insurance Requirements

      County insurance requirement can be found under the section titled Attachments. The County may consider reducing insurance for these services. Please upload your Certificate of Insurance (Accord form) to indicate the level of insurance you currently possess.

    • Confidential Information

      Upload all pages or documents containing information exempt from disclosure per the Proprietary Information, Ownership and Use of Documents article of the Terms and Conditions Section.

    • Changes Requested to County Contract Standard Terms and Conditions

      Upload any alterations requested to Washington County's contract standard terms and conditions per the Form of Contract article of the Terms and Conditions Section.

    • Solicitation Awareness (required)

      How did you hear about this opportunity?

    • Pre-Proposal Conference (required)

      Will there be a Pre-Proposal Conference?

    • Please select the options that pertain to this solicitation.
    • Electronic Pricing Table (required)

      Would you like to have bidders respond to an electronic pricing table through ProcureNow?

      Choose this if you want them to provide rates or pricing in a format dictated by you.

    • Separate Fee Proposal Upload (required)

      Will you want your bidder to separate a Price Proposal from the rest of the Response?

    • Page Limit (required)

      Proposal should contain no more than 'Page Limit 8.5" x 11", pages of written material (excluding biographies and brochures which may be included in an appendix) describing the ability of the proposer to perform the work described.

    • Will you be issuing more than one contract? (required)

      Is this a multiple award type solicitation?

    • Term of Contract (required)

      Unless authorized by the Board a contract cannot exceed five years, but there are various ways that contracts can be set up. Please choose your preference. Options 2 - 3 will require amendments to extend the contract at the designated times.

    • What is the Funding Source? (required)
    • Federal Funds (required)

      Will Federal Funds be used to pay part or all of the agreements made under this solicitation

    • Cost/Pricing Model

      What is the expected resulting Contract Type with a selection of "Firm-Fixed-Lump-Sum" Firm-Fixed-Unit-Price", "Cost-reimbursement + Fee/Profit/Incentive" "Mixed/Flexible" would then provide us a clear picture of what the price-proposal or cost-proposal structure needs to be, and this the approriate instructions to the proposer can be provided.

    • Subrecipient/Contractor *Related to Fed Funds only*

      Based on the intended scope of work for the awarded agreement, will the proposer be case as a subrecipient under 2 cfr 200.331

    • Fixed Award Permission *Related to Fed Funds only* (required)

      Do you have prior approval from the federal awarding agency to enter into a fixed awward? Did you inform them of the requirement for them to upload documentation of the pre-approval either from official guidance or from direct communication (email).

    • Beneficiary (required)

      Is this a solicitation for proposals/applications for a beneficiary program?

    Questions & Answers

    Q (Timeline): Questions are due two days before the proposal due date. Would the County consider revising the dates so that there is more time to adjust the proposal as needed after the Q&A is released?

    A: Not at this time. If there are questions, you can submit them earlier than the due date. The "due date" is the date we cut off any questions.


    Q (Pre-bid meeting?): Would the County consider hosting a virtual pre-bid meeting for this procurement?

    A: An informational non-mandatory pre-proposal meeting will be held on Thursday, April 9th from 10:00am to 11:00am via Microsoft Teams. See addendum #1 for details.


    Q (3.2 Expected Deliverables): Please clarify whether public outreach will be requested in any languages other than English? If so, please specify which languages.

    A: Outreach activities should accommodate Spanish speakers. Proposers are encouraged to include costs for any translation and interpretation services in a separate line item in their project budgets.


    Q (3.1 Overview and Purpose): The RFP states, “Provide a server or cloud collaboration platform accessible by all County and partner jurisdiction staff for the hosting and sharing of working drafts and other project documents. Security must meet or exceed County security requirements for online platforms.” Please provide the security requirements for online platforms.

    A: For platforms the vendor provides through a contract they have with a provider, the County has no general requirements. The County would encourage multi-factor authentication and data encrypted at rest and in transit. If controlled information is stored on the platform (e.g., HIPPA, CJIS, PII, financial), which is not expected, the County would have additional requirements. For its internal use, the County has approved several collaboration platforms including SharePoint and other Microsoft solutions, BaseCamp, Slack, and Google Drive and Workspace.


    Q (3.1 Overview and Purpose): Please clarify whether the Plan update needs to align with any standards, such as EMAP or CRS.

    A: The plan update does not need to align with any other standards than what’s described in FEMA guidance and the Disaster Mitigation Action of 2000. No planning partners are EMAP accredited or participate in CRS.


    Q (No subject): Please clarify whether there are any specific meetings the County would like to hold in person.

    A: The County is not requiring in-person meetings, but proposers have the discretion to include in-person meetings in their proposals. This is encouraged for the first meeting with the planning partners but not required.


    Q (No subject): Does the County wish to have the update include High Hazard Potential Dam profile?

    A: We are not familiar with this specific product and don’t have it as a requirement. Proposers are welcome to include this in their proposals if they believe it would provide value to the planning partners. Note that the County has good visibility on the risks of its high hazard dams, especially the Bureau of Reclamation’s Scoggins Dam, which is the most significant, high hazard dam in the County. It is well studied and has been the subject of policy considerations for addressing its risks for more than a decade. Kay Lake dam is a very small, privately owned dam; Barney Dam is on the border between Washington and Tillamook counties and mostly presents risks to Tillamook County.


    Q (No subject): Is there an ArcGIS license at the County level that can be used to build the Story Map? If not, will the County have that in time for production?

    A: Yes, the County has an ArcGIS. Per RFP 3.1 (P), proposals. We are checking with our IT department concerning if the County can take “Ownership” of a Story Map built outside the County’s IT system. Once we receive the answer, we will be updating this response. Update 4/9/2026: The selected contractor will have to go through a vetting process to include a background check with the Sheriff's office to be given access to the County's ArcGIS online site. This will allow the contractor to work directly into the County ArcGIS system with restrictions.


    Q (Annual Reviews?): Have annual reviews of the 2023 HMP been completed?

    A: Yes, we have completed annual reviews since the 2023 NHMP. Our latest review will be completed by May 29, 2026.


    Q (No subject): The RFP noted that two cities and four special districts have been added as planning partners. Please clarify whether the new special districts will have their own annexes or be grouped differently.

    A: They will have their own annex.


    Q (3.1 Overview and Purpose): Please clarify whether the County would like Hazus to be run as part of the plan update.

    A: Yes, we would like Hazus ran for the county.


    Q (Funding Source): Did the County receive a grant for this project or is this self-funded?

    A: Self-funded


    Q (SharePoint site?): Regarding the server or cloud collaboration platform- would a SharePoint site meet the County's security requirements for online platforms?

    A: Yes, as long as the contractor is the owner of the cloud collaboration platform.


    Q (Project End Date): For clarification, does the December 5, 2027 deadline represent the due date for the final plan deliverable to the County, or the date by which FEMA approval must be obtained? The current HMP does not expire until April 19, 2028.

    A: This is the date for the final plan delivered to the County. Once submitted the County will submit it to the State for review who will then submit it to FEMA. If edits were required, the contractor needs to be available to assist the County in make the necessary edits.


    Q (No subject): Please confirm that there are 18 total participating jurisdictions (nine cities, nine Special Districts) that will require jurisdiction annexes. Do any of the new participants have individual LHMPs?

    A: There are 19 total participating jurisdictions (Washington County, City of Hillsboro, City of Beaverton, City of Tigard, City of Forest Grove*, City of Cornelius*, City of Sherwood, City of North Plains, Clean Water Services, Tualatin Valley Water District, Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District, Cornelius Fire District*, Forest Grove Fire District* New Jurisdictions: City of Tualatin, City of Banks, Banks Fire District, Raleigh Hills Water District, Tualatin Valley Irrigaion District, West Slope Water District * Indicates planning partners that will need to be considered as "New Jurisdictions". The reason behind this, was that during the 2023 planning process, the City's of Forest Grove, City of Cornelius, Forest Grove Fire District, and Cornelius Fire District completed the process as "joint partners" and not as "individual" planning partners. So, during this project, they will all need to have their own "Annexes" developed.


    Q (No subject): Is the onboarding toolkit intended to prepare participating jurisdictions to lead their own jurisdiction-specific outreach and author their own jurisdictional annexes, or will the contractor be expected to lead the jurisdictional annex development process? Will collective workshops, working sessions, and/or planning meetings across jurisdictional participants suffice, or would the County seek jurisdiction-specific sessions?

    A: The onboarding toolkit is for use by the County in partnership with new jurisdictions that wish to develop annexes after this project is complete. This is an accommodation for several, small agencies that weren’t able to join this project due to budget or other limitations. The intent is not for the contractor to use the toolkit or for the new jurisdictions to use the toolkits independently. We expect the County to be the primary user.


    Q (No subject): For in-person community meetings, how many are anticipated? Should these be in-person, virtual, or a mix? Does the contractor need to budget for any of the following: translated materials, live interpretation, refreshments for participants, printed materials, and/or venue rental?

    A: Per section 3.1 (K) of the RFP, “The number of community meetings is to be determined but will be enough to provide sufficient opportunities for meaningful public input.” Virtual public meetings will be sufficient for any community meetings, though proposers can include hybrid or in-person meetings. Proposers should use their discretion to suggest an appropriate number of meetings. Per the answer to question 3, proposers are encouraged to include costs for any translation and interpretation services in a separate line item. Proposers do not need to budget for any other support for public meetings (food, printing, facility rental).


    Q (No subject): Would the contractor be expected to support approval of the MJHMP through Board of Supervisors or City Councils?

    A: No. The County and planning partners will coordinate the final approval by planning partner boards and councils


    Q (No subject): Would the County be willing to relax the minimum requirement of five (5) years of experience with multi-jurisdictional NHMPs if the contractor can show five (5) years of experience that includes MJHMPs and LHMPs?

    A: No


    Q (No subject): If proposal interviews are held, will they be held in-person or virtually?

    A: Virtually via Microsoft Teams


    Q (No subject): Is there a proposed budget or NTE for this effort?

    A: The proposed budgets must reflect the true cost of this project NTE $200,000.00


    Q (Clarify response to question 7): The current HMP profiled dam failure. FEMA requires that if you have HHPDs (of which you do have 3), and you intend to pursue funding to mitigate damages of those dams, HHPDs are required to be profiled. Can you please clarify your response to Question 7.

    A: A High Hazard Potential Dam Risk Profile is not needed for this project. One of our high hazard dams is federally owned (Bureau of Reclamation). It has been extensively studied and requires remediation. That’s a federal responsibility and options are under review. No remediation is required for the other two dams and so there are no plans to request funding from the HHPD Rehabilitation Grant Program or other grant sources. Aside from the requirements of that grant program, we understand that formal dam risk profiles are not a requirement.


    Q (Formatting of document): Does the County like the format of the current HMP?

    A: The County has no concerns regarding the NHMP format and hasn’t received feedback on the format from the planning partners. Proposers are free to suggest format changes that will improve the readability and usefulness


    Q (In-house resources): Is the County providing any of their in-house facilitation/public involvement staffing to support this project?

    A: The County is willing and able to support public engagement activities.


    Q (Crosswalks): Please provide clarification of RFP item L: Perform analysis and plan crosswalks including crosswalks from NHMP to Community Wildfire Protection Plan, DLCD Goal 7 to Washington County Comprehensive Plan Section 8, and each participating jurisdiction’s appendices to other applicable documents. Can you provide examples of these non-FEMA crosswalks?

    A: The intent is to address 44 CFR § 201.6(b)(3) “Review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information.” Per FEMA’s mitigation policy guide, “A4-a. The plan must document what existing plans, studies, reports and technical information were reviewed and how they were incorporated, if appropriate, into the development/update of the plan.” The example in our current NHMP meets this requirement in each jurisdictional annex in section 5., with the section titled, Plan Incorporation and Integration into Existing Planning Mechanisms. It is also covered in mitigation action item worksheets, in the field, ”Alignment with existing plans and policies.” This was sufficient for the current plan, but proposers have discretion to use a different format for this information. It may include a comparison matrix with narrative discussing alignment, gaps, and policies regarding each referenced plan along with recommendations for integrating the referenced plan with the NHMP and vice versa.”


    Q (# of jurisdictions): Please confirm the number of participating/adopting jurisdictions for this HMP Update that will need annexes and go through the entire planning process (identify hazards, critical facilities, mitigation actions, etc.).

    A: The following jurisdictions will be “Updating” their current Annexes as apart of the County’s Multi-Jurisdictional NHMP: Washington County, City of Hillsboro, City of Beaverton, City of Tigard, City of Sherwood, City of North Plains, Clean Water Services, Tualatin Valley Water District, Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District: Total of 9 (See Special Note) The following jurisdictions will be “new” annexes and will need to go through the “Entire” planning process: Total of 6 (See Special Note) City of Tualatin, City of Banks, Raleigh Hills Water District, Tualatin Valley Irrigation District, Banks Fire District, West Slope Water District Special Note: During the planning process to update the current NHMP, the City of Cornelius, City of Forest Grove, Forest Grove Fire District, and Cornelius Fire District were incorrectly grouped together and developed duplicate hazards and action items instead of being separate planning partners. For this project that you are applying for – each jurisdiction will be “considered” as new planning partners and will need to go through the entire planning process, so they have their own Annexes. They’re planning teams can integrated together for example, the City of Forest Grove and the Forest Grove Fire District, but each jurisdiction “MUST” have their own “ANNEXES” following CFR 201 and FEMA NHMP requirements.


    Q (4. Experience-Examples C. Crosswalk Analysis Document): Will the County accept a completed FEMA Plan Review Tool for a recent hazard mitigation plan as an example?

    A: Yes, we would accept an example to show how the contractor has experience in developing Multi-Jurisdictional NHMP(s).


    Q (No subject): Please confirm whether the requirement to "Provide the name of all cities, counties, and special districts for which the firm has provided similar work during the past five (5) years. These engagements should be ranked by total staff hours. Indicate the scope of work, date, engagement partner, and total hours." refers to the total estimated hours of stakeholder engagement for each jurisdiction. Should the ranking be based on the time each stakeholder spent developing the plan? Since this can vary significantly, it may be helpful to use assumptions such as "limited engagement (10% of time), mid-level engagement (20%), high engagement (30%)," and note that jurisdictions and stakeholders who actively participate with the county and consultant tend to produce more effective, actionable hazard mitigation plans.

    A: "Thanks for this opportunity to clarify the evaluation criteria in RFP sec. 4, phase 1. which is to list all projects in the past five years and rank those engagements by total staff hours and indicate total hours. The “total staff hours” here refers to the total hours the contractor expended on each project, not the amount of time planning partners and stakeholders spent participating in the process. We realize this is different than what was mentioned at the Q&A session. Sorry for the confusion. We weren’t clear on the specific reference for this question."


    Q (Estimated # of hours- clarification): For clarification to a question raised in the pre-bid meeting regarding estimating number of hours: The only reference to this in the RFP is in the Project Budget section when referring to - listing staff hourly rates, total number of project hours, and total labor cost, and listing total hours/cost for each project element (risk assessment, mitigation strategy, etc) and in the References sections as - Provide the name of all cities, counties, and special districts for which the firm has provided similar work during the past five (5) years. These engagements should be ranked by total staff hours. Indicate the scope of work, date, engagement partner, and total hours. In the pre-bid meeting, it sounded like the County wanted a ROM for number of hours required for mitigation actions selected/prioritized- which is not outlined in the RFP. If this is desired, how does the County propose the contractor complete this- hours for grant writing, project management, construction hours, etc? Technical aspects to mitigation projects are likely outside of the wheelhouse for HMP development contractors. Please clarify the response given during the pre-bid meeting.

    A: For RFP sec. 4., Phase 1, 9 Project Budget, all reference to total project hours and costs should only reflect the contractor (proposer) time for each planning project phase. It is not to include planning partner/stakeholder time or implementation costs. Per the answer to question #28, this also applies to 8. References. Only planning contractor time should be indicated there. Sorry for the confusion.


    Q (From pre-bid meeting: County concerns): What are the County's biggest concerns for completing this project?

    A: The biggest concern is hitting our target date for completion of this project. Our current plan expires in March 2028 and planning partners wanted to start earlier in the update process to hit the 2028 date.


    Q (Steering and Technical Committees): Please distinguish the difference in the Steering and Technical Committees as described in the RFP

    A: Steering committee will lead the overall project and will include a representative from each participating jurisdiction. The Technical Committees are the jurisdictions planning team and will be focusing on that specific jurisdiction NHMP annex.


    Q (In Relation to Question 8): Please clarify what level of background checks is required, and if background checks already completed by the selected contractor will suffice. Please also clarify if the selected contractor will be responsible for the cost of the background checks.

    A: The selected contractor will be required to complete the background check with the County Sheriff's Office, and no previous checks will be accepted. The cost of the background check will be covered by the County.


    Key dates

    1. March 16, 2026Published
    2. April 16, 2026Responses Due

    AI classification tags

    Frequently asked questions

    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

    Stop searching. Start winning.

    AI-powered intelligence for the right opportunities, the right leads, and the right time.