RFP Details – Grant Administrator

Query:  What fee structure is preferred, and are grant administration fees eligible expenses under the NYSCA and NY Forward awards?

Response:  It is our understanding that NYSCA will allow some administration fees and NY Forward will not.

Query:  What are the MWBE and SDVOB participation goals and reporting requirements for each grant?

Response:  We are looking for a 30% participation across the entire project and the Grant Administrator will monitor solicitation, selection, and participation to ensure that his objective is met or exceeded.

Query:  What are the anticipated contract term, payment terms, and insurance requirements for the selected consultant? Will the grant administrator’s invoices be paid on a set schedule, or only after the library receives grant reimbursement?

Response:  Please make a recommendation in your proposal.

Query:  Has a general contractor been selected? What level of construction monitoring, site visits, and meeting attendance is expected of the grant administrator, and may tasks that do not require on site presence be performed remotely?

Response:  No. We expect a high level of communication between Grant Administrator, Architect, General Contractor and the Library to ensure that grant requirements are met in a timely fashion and funding is available for the work as needed. We are looking for a firm that is exceptionally competent and cost effective. We expect the firm to be available when questions arise and to be on-site only when necessary.

Query:  Has an architect been selected, what stage is the design in, and what construction administration services will the architect provide?

Response:  No. We have a conceptual design that will require some changes. The administrative services from the architect will need to be negotiated.

Query:  What is the current status of SEQR (including the lead agency), SHPO review through CRIS, and EPF cultural resources clearance?

Response:  We are unaware of any SEQR work or the need for it. SHPO has issued a preliminary approval and wants a copy of the final design when it is available. We are unaware of any EPF clearances needed.

Query:  Have any environmental assessments, historic preservation submissions, technical studies, or grant administration activities already been completed or initiated?

Response:  None that I am aware of.

Query:  What is the anticipated construction completion date, and will the work be carried out in a single phase or in multiple phases?

Response:  The entire project will probably take around 24 months and probably done in phases although this is dependent on funding and contractor availability.

Query:  Should proposals be priced for the currently awarded $2 million only, or also for the pending $1.9 million in applications and matching funds? If the pending grants are not awarded, will the project scope, schedule, or phasing change?

Response:  The proposal should encompass the whole project. If some of the grants are not awarded there will be an amendment to the RFP posted. Naturally there will be changes in this case.

Query:  Which agencies are reviewing the pending applications, and are any federal awards anticipated that may require NEPA review?

Response:  NYMS, EPF, State Aid for Library Construction and CDBG. CDBG is the only federal source.

Query:  Are the awarded grant agreements, approved budgets, and reporting schedules available for review by prospective bidders?

Response:  We do not have these yet other than the award letters from NYSCA and NY Forward.

Query: Has PMLA retained a certified environmental consultant? Is it  intent that the grant administrator will organize and compile the documents prepared by this consultant , or that the Grants Administrator will include the services of an environmental consultant in its fee and proposal?

Response: No, we have not hired an Environmental Consultant for anything other than an asbestos survey. We expect that if one is needed, this will fall in the realm of the Architect/Engineer. It is the Grant Administrator’s responsibility to understand what documents are required by the funding agencies, track their development and ensure that they are submitted in a timely manner.

Query: Does having a proprietary software that can integrate with the NYS Financial Management System add value to the grant managers work flow regarding data collection and submission of vouchers and the reimbursement process?

Response:  We are looking for a firm that is exceptionally competent and cost effective with excellent communications skills.

Query: Will PMLA require the Consultant to provide boots on the ground staff with physical presence in the role of Grants Administrator?

Response: No. We expect the Grant Administrator to be available and able to be reached when information needs and questions arise. They should be extremely effective with electronic communication. They would only need to be on-site when problems, changes, or confirmations require it. 

Query: Did you hire a grants consultant to prepare these grants for your organization and is that person still involved? Have you engaged consultants to help prepare a scope of work for the grant proposals and how is that entitled  still involved?

Response: Yes. At this point, they are only involved when a question arises concerning the work they have already done.

Query: Has FMLA established a budget (or budget range) for the Grants Administration?

Response: No firm budget has been established. One grant application showed a figure of $125,000 if all grants are awarded.

Query: Confirming that FMLA will be establishing MWVBE goals within the     contracts for architectural and contractor services, that the Architect and GC will be responsible for soliciting MWVBE firms, and that the Grants Administrator will be monitoring both the solicitation and participation. 

Response: We are looking for a 30% participation across the entire project and the Grant Administrator will monitor solicitation, selection, and participation to ensure that his objective is met or exceeded.

Query: Item #10  was also raised in a previous Q&A:  ‘contractor selection, construction monitoring, and site  inspections’ describes tasks normally managed by an Owners Rep  (vs a Grants administrator). Can you clarify further? Does FMLA want an alternate fee to also manage the three tasks in item#10?

Response: The Grant Administrator must serve as a monitor, recordkeeper, and advisor to ensure all administrative and funding requirements are met in a complete and timely manner. We expect the Grant Administrator to possess a thorough understanding of the project scope and available funding to proactively recommend adjustments, allocate funds to appropriate expenses, and prevent budget shortfalls. Proposers are welcome to list these services as a separate line item within their cost proposal.

Query: Item 6 of the Proposal Content section of the RFP asks for “a detailed breakdown of all services to be provided along with cost estimates.” To clarify, this is a request for our fee for services rather than an estimate of construction costs, right?

Response: Correct.

Query: Will electronic submissions via email (PDF) to this address suffice for the November 2 (4:00 PM) deadline, or are hard copies required?

Response: Electronic submission is sufficient with hard copies being mailed by that date.

Query: Is compensation structured on a monthly retainer basis or pegged to disbursement drawdowns?

Response: Please make a recommendation in your proposal.

Query: What is the anticipated start date and expected timeline for the construction administration phase?

Response: Currently we believe we will be able to start in 1Q27 and that the entire project will take between 18 and 24 months.

Query: Does the Administrator oversee the contractor/architect utilization goals?

Response: Yes.

Query: Have environmental reviews been initiated?

Response: We have had an asbestos review done: Asbestos Review Report.
The project has a preliminary approval letter from SHPO.

Query: What board reporting cadence is expected?

Response: Good communications are a necessity; formal reports are less so. The Building Committee will need to have up-to-date information on a continual basis. They will update the Board of Trustees at their monthly meeting. 

Query: Who will serve as primary project decision-maker?

Response: The Board of Trustees has the final decision-making capability for the project. They will appoint a contact person to field questions and responses.

Query: Are there existing MWBE participation targets?

Response: Yes, some grants require 30% participation.

Query: What contractor procurement activities have already occurred?

Response: None

Query: Are reimbursement systems currently established?

Response: No

Query: Has a project budget been developed?

Response: Given that this project is grant dependent, there may be fluctuations to the preliminary budget that was developed in 2025 for filing grant applications. 2025 Preliminary Budget PDF

Query: Has the architect already been selected?

Response: No, see RFP Architect/Engineer

Query: I would happily submit a proposal for your project. However, I bill by the hour and thus my proposal would be based on my hourly rate and not on a lump-sum cost for the services you need.

Response: Currently we are not entertaining proposals based on hourly rates. Should this change, we will notify you.

Query: The RFP is titled grant administration, but the services also read like design and construction oversight, and I’d like to hear how the board sees that role.

Response: As stated in the inquiry, the Grant Administrator is responsible for “paperwork: schedules, vouchers, compliance tracking, MWBE reporting.” In addition to tracking the paperwork, the Grant Administrator needs to be forward-looking and ensure that as project decisions are being made, they will meet grant requirements and be fiscally sound so that funding will be available when needed. We anticipate a close working relationship between the Grant Administrator, Architect/Engineer, and General Contractor as well as the Library to ensure the success of the project.