Organisational Experience and Relevant Projects - 20%

Provide details of at least three similar feasibility studies your organisation has delivered, specifically relating to:

1. disaster management infrastructure
2. emergency operations centres
3. multi-criteria site and facility assessments

Describe your organisation’s familiarity with the Queensland Disaster Management Arrangements (QDMA) and relevant state/national guidelines.

Capacity and Capability - 25%

Provide details of the proposed project team, including:

1. key personnel
2. relevant qualifications
3. experience in disaster management, feasibility studies, facility planning, or hazard assessments

Describe your access to multidisciplinary expertise required for this project, including specialists in:

1. risk and hazard analysis (flood, bushfire, exposure)
2. infrastructure and essential services engineering
3. ICT and telecommunications resilience
4. planning and asset management

Methodology and Approach - 20%

Provide a detailed description of your proposed methodology for delivering the LDCC Feasibility Study, including:

1.approach to stakeholder consultation
2. method for identifying minimum facility design and success criteria
3. multi-criteria analysis (MCA) framework
4. site/options identification and shortlisting methodology

Explain how your approach aligns with the example methodology referenced in Council’s specifications (State guideline: Flood Evacuation Route Improvements), or provide justification for an alternative robust approach.

Provide your proposed project schedule demonstrating your ability to meet the 30 June 2026 deadline.

Value for Money / Price - 20%

Please complete the Schedule 6 - Response Annexures.

Provide a fixed lump-sum price for delivery of the LDCC Feasibility Study, inclusive of all travel, stakeholder engagement, and reporting costs.

Provide a breakdown of costs for:

1. labour hours by role
2. key milestones
3. optional deliverables for scaling up/down project scope

Question:
Good morning. Can you clarify the extent of engineering / property / QS expertise required for this work? For example, will the consultant be responsible for the identification of potential locations for the new build option discussed in Section 3(2)(e) of the scope and the identification of high level cost estimates discussed in Section 5 of the scope or will this come from the stakeholder consultation and LDCC SME discussions?

Answered on 11/Mar/2026 02:14 PM:


The level of detail expected in the study report should not require engineering/property/QS expertise as the study report need only contain high level estimates and assessments, not detailed design. However, the study report will need to include comment on the need for further specialist assessment and/or input as required, as well as the limitations of assessments made. It is expected that the supplier will contribute to the identification of potential locations, supplemented by the contributions of key stakeholders and other relevant corporate knowledge e.g. land ownership, options considered to date etc.

Question:
Good afternoon,

If any lead consultants require the services of a Quantity Surveying firm to assist with cost estimate deliverables under Section 4 of the Specification, HMC Quantity Surveyors would be pleased to assist.

We bring extensive experience in municipal infrastructure and disaster management facility projects similar in nature to the subject tender, and would welcome the opportunity to support the City of Ipswich in achieving the objectives of this project.

Regards,

TJ Miller

Answered on 11/Mar/2026 02:15 PM:


Not a question. No response required.

Question:
Is it expected that (rapid) financial and economic assessments are undertaken as part of the LDCC options feasibility study?

Answered on 11/Mar/2026 02:14 PM:


Thank you for your query, listed below is the response:

Detailed financial and economic assessments are not required, however suppliers will be required to provide high level cost estimates for short listed options only, using an appropriate and defensible methodology.

Question:
Can you please clarify if the the “Requirement to deliver by 30 June 2026” is correct, given the contract is anticipated to commencement April-May 2026? Are you seeking accelerated delivery to meet this deadline?

Answered on 11/Mar/2026 02:15 PM:


Yes, the 30 June 2026 delivery date is correct, and we are seeking accelerated delivery. We have a fair amount of corporate knowledge to contribute to the project that we believe will assist with the tight timeframe.

Question:
Are you able to confirm the evaluation percentages for each of the four criteria? In the ‘Request Summary Report’ the four criteria sum up to 85% in total.

Answered on 11/Mar/2026 09:57 AM:


Thank you for your query, the evaluation criteria and weightings for this RFQ are as follows:

1. Demonstrated Experience - 20%

2. Demonstrated Capacity & Capability - 25%

3. Methodology - 20%

4. Value for Money / Price - 20%

5. Local Support (Buy Ipswich Approach) - 15% - There is a section on the Schedule 6 - Response Annexures to complete for this criteria

Total = 100%

Question:
Hi Robyn,

Please see our clarification questions below:

Clarification One - Single Supplier: Page 1 of Schedule 4 (Specification) states that “It is Council’s preference to award to a single supplier.” Can Council please confirm whether the appointed consultant may utilise subcontractors or specialist sub-consultants (for example, to support cost estimation, design input, etc.), with the prime consultant remaining responsible for overall delivery?

Clarification Two – Future work: Can Council please confirm whether undertaking this feasibility study would preclude the successful consultant or its subcontractors from participating in any future work associated with the LDCC project, such as detailed design, business case development, or subsequent advisory services?

Clarification Three - Multi-criteria assessment (MCA): Section 3 of the Specification requires a multi-criteria analysis of potential options. Can Council please confirm whether the multi-criteria assessment for the long-list of options is expected to be primarily qualitative, with more detailed analysis (i.e. high-level cost design, financial and economic) applied to the short-listed options?

Clarification Four - Contract Terms and Conditions: The RFQ documentation includes a Proposed Professional Services Contract. Can Council please confirm whether it would be open to contracting under the Queensland Whole-of-Government Panel GGS0111-24, if the successful consultant is an approved panel supplier?

Clarification Five - Existing Site Information: Can Council please confirm whether any existing site assessments, facility studies, hazard mapping, or internal documentation related to the current LDCC will be made available to the successful consultant?

Thanks

Answered on 11/Mar/2026 03:29 PM:


thank you for your query, please find listed below the responses:

Q - Single Supplier: Page 1 of Schedule 4 (Specification) states that “It is Council’s preference to award to a single supplier.” Can Council please confirm whether the appointed consultant may utilise subcontractors or specialist sub-consultants (for example, to support cost estimation, design input, etc.), with the prime consultant remaining responsible for overall delivery?

A - Yes, a consortium of suppliers/use of sub-contractors is acceptable, provided a lead consultant is nominated for ease of communication, contract management, responsibility etc.



Q - Future work: Can Council please confirm whether undertaking this feasibility study would preclude the successful consultant or its subcontractors from participating in any future work associated with the LDCC project, such as detailed design, business case development, or subsequent advisory services?

A - No, involvement in this project would not preclude suppliers from participating in future related or unrelated work with council.



Q - Multi-criteria assessment (MCA): Section 3 of the Specification requires a multi-criteria analysis of potential options. Can Council please confirm whether the multi-criteria assessment for the long-list of options is expected to be primarily qualitative, with more detailed analysis (i.e. high-level cost design, financial and economic) applied to the short-listed options?

A - That is correct, the MCA should be used to ensure the viability of all options is given due consideration using an appropriate and consistent method, however a higher level of analysis and estimates is only required for the short listed options.



Q - Contract Terms and Conditions: The RFQ documentation includes a Proposed Professional Services Contract. Can Council please confirm whether it would be open to contracting under the Queensland Whole-of-Government Panel GGS0111-24, if the successful consultant is an approved panel supplier?

A - Professional Services Contract



Q - Existing Site Information: Can Council please confirm whether any existing site assessments, facility studies, hazard mapping, or internal documentation related to the current LDCC will be made available to the successful consultant?

A - Yes. Assessments, studies and other relevant information to support analysis and recommendations will be provided to the successful supplier for consideration as part of the project (this may include confidentiality/data sharing arrangements, as required by council).

Question:
Good morning,

We are requesting more information for the following;


• Can Council confirm the Outcome of the project is to identify the Preferred Options as per the methodology identified on page 5 of the Flood evacuation Route Assessment documentation

If so, what level / detail is expected in defining each option (concept designs /layouts, site test fit, etc.)?

What level of cost accuracy is expected for high-level estimates (i.e. 25%, 50%)? Should costing include:

o Land acquisition?

o Lifecycle / operating costs (or capital / development costs only)?

• Will Council provide the current long list of options referenced?

• Will council provide any condition assessments of the existing LDCC facilities?

• Should land acquisition feasibility be considered for new build options?

• Can Council give an indication of the anticipated functional size of the LDCC - how may employees the centre will be expected to accommodate? On an ongoing, and on peak demand basis?

• The Program for the project envisages the project completion by June 26, and also notes that consultation with key stakeholders may be interrupted particularly during February and March. Can Council confirm the project timelines?


Thank you.

Answered on 19/Mar/2026 08:16 AM:


Q - Can Council confirm the Outcome of the project is to identify the Preferred Options as per the methodology identified on page 5 of the

A - Flood evacuation Route Assessment documentation If so, what level / detail is expected in defining each option (concept designs /layouts, site test fit, etc.)? Confirming the outcome required is to identify preferred options for a future LDCC in Ipswich. The supplier is not required to use the methodology referenced in the scoping document; this was provided as an example only. The supplier may use any appropriate methodology in the development of the feasibility study, provided it is robust enough to ensure council’s requirements are met. There is no requirement to produce designs or layouts. The level of detail for options is high level estimates only e.g. the ideal solution for a particular site might be of A size, with B features and C approximate floorspace, built to D standard, using E quality materials.

Q - What level of cost accuracy is expected for high-level estimates (i.e. 25%, 50%)? Should costing include: Land acquisition? Lifecycle / operating costs (or capital / development costs only)?

A - Estimates are not expected to be detailed, given detailed building designs are not in scope, and therefore could be based on general industry standard costs, similar projects/builds etc. provided the rationale is sound and clearly articulated in the report. Capital/development costs should be included, as well as land acquisition where relevant. Operating cost estimates should be included if possible, but are not required to be detailed.

Q - Will Council provide the current long list of options referenced?

A - Council will provide all options considered to date.

Q - Will council provide any condition assessments of the existing LDCC facilities?

A - Yes.

Q - Should land acquisition feasibility be considered for new build options?

A - Yes.

Q - Can Council give an indication of the anticipated functional size of the LDCC - how may employees the centre will be expected to accommodate? On an ongoing, and on peak demand basis?

A - Yes, this will be provided as part of consultation with key stakeholders.

Q - The Program for the project envisages the project completion by June 26, and also notes that consultation with key stakeholders may be interrupted particularly during February and March. Can Council confirm the project timelines?

A - We are aiming for completion by end of financial year 30 June 2026 (26 June being the Friday prior). It is our intention to initiate the project immediately/ASAP after award to support achievement of this timeframe.