Bond DB Northwood, Bessemer & Joyner

Location:	North Carolina
Posted:	Mar 11, 2026
Due:	Mar 17, 2026
Agency:	Guilford County Schools
Type of Government:	State & Local
Category:	75 - Office Supplies and Devices
Solicitation No:	6809
Publication URL:	To access bid details, please log in.

Attachment Preview

Direct all inquiries to:

Velicia Moore

gaddyv@gcsnc.com 336.370.3240

GUILFORD COUNTY SCHOOLS

Request for Qualifications

Addendum #2

3/10/2026

Purchasing Department

714 Green Valley Road

Greensboro, NC 27408

Request for Proposals: 6809 & 6813

Proposal due date: March 17, 2026

#6809- Design-Build Services – Northwood,

Joyner, Bessemer Elementary Schools

Replacement Project

#6813- Design-Build Services- NW Middle

School, New Build

NOTICE TO BIDDERS

This Addendum No. 2 is for Request for Qualifications (RFQ #6809 & RFQ6813) published in the newspapers

on February 14, 2026.

1. Is there any information about the selected new site for Northwest MS that could be shared (survey info/etc.)?

Response: At this time, the only information that can be provided is address 7729 NC Hwy 68 N Stokesdale, NC

27357 and the current acreage is 26.761 acres. Surveys are not available at this time.

2. Section 2.1 of RFQ #6809 states that “GCS is seeking to award a contract to one design-build firm to provide design

and construction services for the Northwood ES, Bessmer ES, and Joyner ES projects”. This would seem to indicate

that a single design-build team would be awarded all three projects. Can you confirm if that is the intent, or if it is

intended to award projects to multiple design-build teams (i.e. 1 each to 3 teams)?

Response: GCS is exercising its right to consider options for award based on the qualifications received. It is

expected that firms have the current capabilities and capacity to complete the project(s) by the date listed in the

program schedule. Provide a detailed schedule, including milestones, from the notice to proceed date through

post-occupancy services for each project.

3. If submitting for all three Elementary Schools' projects, is a separate RFQ response required for each, or a single

response noting that it is for all three?

Response: A single RFQ for all three can be submitted with the requirement that a schedule shall be provided for

each project as referenced in Question 2 and Question 6.

4. Due Date and Time

a. Page 1 of both RFQs states the SOQ due date and time as no later than Tuesday, March 17, 2026, by 2:00

PM.

b. The proposed dates chart in both RFQs states March 17, 2026, by 3:00 PM.

c. Please confirm the correct submission time.

Response: The correct time for both RFQs is 2:00 p.m.

• Number of Originals

o Both RFQs state one (1) original wet-ink signature, ﬁve (5) copies, and one (1) PDF.

o During the meeting, it was stated that ﬁve (5) hard copies are required, with one bearing a wet signature.

o Please conﬁrm the required number of originals and copies.

Response: Five (5) hard copies with one (1) bearing wet signature and one (1) electronic copy in pdf format.

5. For the replacement schools – Northwood, Bessemer and Joyner will the kids remain on the sites during the

construction or will they be relocated?

Response: This item is under review and consideration by the administration and will be determined during the

preliminary programming phase for the projects.

6. During the pre-proposal meeting, a question was raised regarding whether separate proposals are required for

each project under RFQ #6809.

a. Please confirm that only one complete proposal package is required for this RFQ.

“It is expected that your firm will have the current capabilities and capacity to complete the program by the date

listed in the program schedule. Provide a detailed schedule, including milestones, from the notice to proceed date

through post-occupancy services. Provide reasoning, in this section, for any modifications or alterations your firm

wishes to make to the recommended program schedule.”

Response: Only one (1) complete proposal package is required for RFQ #6809.

However, within that single submission, respondents must provide a clear and detailed breakout by

school/project. This breakout should distinctly identify project-specific experience, team assignments, capacity,

approach, and any other relevant information applicable to each individual school.

The intent is to receive one comprehensive submittal for evaluation purposes, while ensuring sufficient clarity and

separation to assess qualifications and approach for each project independently.

Please ensure the proposal is organized in a manner that allows the evaluation committee to easily distinguish

information specific to each school.

b. The RFQs reference a program schedule; however, during the pre-proposal meeting, project-specific

schedule timelines were not available. Please confirm whether the Owner will provide the program/project

schedule timelines for all projects included in these RFQs.

Response: At the time of selection and recommendation, the Owner will provide the program for each

project including timelines for each project.

c. If the program schedules will not be provided, please clarify whether respondents are expected to submit a

preliminary schedule with their RFQ submittals.

Response: A schedule should be provided specific to the timeline or total days to complete design and

construction services specific to the phases pre-programming, programming, schematic, design

development, construction documents, bidding/ procurement, and construction.

7. Section 3.8 states “Provide a comprehensive list of ALL school and/or similar projects completed or begun within

the last ﬁve (5) years, with contact information, along with a project description. Identify in the reference list which

projects this team has performed collectively. The Owner reserves the right to check additional references beyond

those provided in the submittal.”

• Is this reference list in addition to the references requested in Section 4.3.3, Tab 2?

• If so, please advise where this additional list should be included within the proposal.

Response: Yes. The comprehensive list required by Section 3.8 (References) is separate and in addition to the

representative project experience submitted in Section 4.3.3, Tab 2, which is limited and evaluative in nature. The

full reference list must be included within the body of the SOQ under Section 3.8, organized as required, and counts

toward the applicable page limits; it may not be submitted as an appendix

8. What is the address for the new Northwest Middle School site?

Response: 7729 NC Hwy 68 N Stokesdale, NC 27357

9. Are there Ed Specs for the Elementary School projects that could be shared?

Response: GCS Design Guidelines will be provided to the selected firm(s)

10. Have the multiple parcels comprising the Northwest MS site already been combined/rezoned, or would that need

to be accomplished as part of the project?

Response: This is in progress and will not be accomplished as part of the project.

11. Is any scope of work related to the existing Northwest MS campus anticipated to be included in this project budget

(i.e. abatement/demolition/etc.)?

Response: There is no work related to the existing Northwest MS campus to be included in this project budget.

12. Negotiations & Modifications of Contract Documents references an attached sample contract. We were unable to

locate the sample.

Response: A sample contract will be provided in the addendum

13. Is there a timeline for the schools to start construction and will all three start together?

Response: There are estimated timelines that are currently under review by GCS and the County Commission.

These current estimated timelines can be reviewed on the GCS’s Dashboard for New & Renovated Schools.

14. When we click on the link for the GCS Board Policy Link it will not open from the RFQ.

Response: The link can be found on GCS’s website under Menu/ About/ Board of Education with a quick link to

Board Policy Manual. This link should assist https://v3.boardpolicyonline.com/b/bl/guilford_new

15. Can GCS provide a general timeline for when GCS expects construction to start for each elementary school? This

information will assist with developing a schedule we must include for Section 3.7 of the RFQ.

Response: There are estimated timelines that are currently under review by GCS and the County

Commission. These current estimated timelines can be reviewed on the GCS’s Dashboard for New &

Renovated Schools.

16. Can the schedule (Section 3.7) and References / comprehensive list of ALL school projects (Section 3.8) be inserted

as an Appendix or should this be included in the body of the RFQ response, counting towards the overall page limit?

Response: The schedule required in Section 3.7 and the comprehensive list of references required by Section 3.8

must be included within the body of the SOQ in their respective sections and count toward the applicable page

limits. The RFQ does not provide for appendices outside the prescribed SOQ organization, except for forms and

specific letters expressly directed to Tab 5- Forms.

17. We are looking to provide our services specifically in the abatement and demolition portion of these projects. Are

there specific bid documents for that area of the projects? Along with that question, do you all have copies of the

asbestos reports for these schools?

Response: This RFQ is a qualifications-based solicitation for a single Design-Build entity and does not include

separate bid documents for abatement, demolition, or other individual scopes; firms providing those services must

partner with a responding Design-Build team. Any available asbestos or environmental reports are treated as

reference documents and are distributed only to Design-Build respondents in accordance with the RFQ’s sensitive

information requirements

18. Section 4.3.3: Can you clarify what is meant by “Compensation Structure”?

Response: Compensation Structure refers to the method, framework, and terms under which the Design-Build Firm

will be paid for all services associated with the planning, design, construction, management, and delivery of the

school facilities included in this RFQ. This structure outlines how costs are organized, calculated, and reimbursed

19. Section 4.3.1: For the cover letter, should capacity, EMR rating, and surety information be provided for all partners

or only the lead firm?

Response: No. These items are attachments required to be placed elsewhere in the SOQ package.

20. Section 4.3.1: For the cover letter, should bonding capacity, EMR rating, and surety information be provided for all

partners or only the lead firm?

Response: No. These items are attachments required to be placed elsewhere in the SOQ package

21. Should litigation history be included in the "Cover Letter" section or under "Tab 5: Forms" with Form 4?

Response: Litigation information is required in Tab 5 Forms as noted in Form 1 Question 2 and Form 3 Question

22. Do we need to include a schedule (see last paragraph on page 10 of RFP)?

Response: Yes. There are estimated timelines that are currently under review by GCS and the County Commission.

These current estimated timelines can be reviewed on the GCS’s Dashboard for New & Renovated Schools

23. Please confirm if any of the following sub-consultants should be included in the Design-Build team: geotechnical

engineering, traffic consultant, surveying, commissioning agent, and permitting expeditor.

Response: Geotechnical engineering, traffic engineering, surveying, commissioning, and CMT/ Special Inspections

services will be provided by the Owner. The D/B will be responsible for all permitting so it is at the firm’s discretion

to engage a permitting expeditor.

24. Do we need to include references (see first paragraph on page 11 of RFP)?

Response: Yes

25. The RFQs reference GCS’s Energy and Natural Resource Conservation and Management Policy, however the

hyperlink is not active in the PDF. We have searched online, but want to be confident we are referencing the

correct final document for this policy. Please provide a new link to this.

Response: Link is in reference to Board policy 6530-R Energy and Resource Conservation located at this link

https://v3.boardpolicyonline.com/b/bl/guilford_new

26. Please clarify if these projects will be “designed to” or actually certified under the LEED for Schools guidelines.

Response: Projects will be “designed to” LEED silver per Guilford County Board of Education Policy/ Regulation

Code 6530-R, this can be found on GCS’s website under the Board of Education Board Policy Manual.

27. Please clarify if firm information and resumes are should be included for all design disciplines (Civil, structural, MEP,

etc.). (See 4.3.2.e of the RFQ) If so, would this be included in the 12 page limit of the Project Personnel section?

Response: Information for all design disciplines should be brief as stated in Section 4.3.2.e. Resumes will not be

included as part of the 12-page requirement.

28. The RFQ references a sample contract is attached, but the sample contract does not appear to be included in the

provided RFQ PDF. Can GCS please provide the full draft contract, including all general conditions, exhibits, and

attachments?

Response: Sample contract will be provided in the addendum

29. Will the contract include liquidated damages, incentives, or early completion provisions? Scope, Design

Requirements & Standards

Response: Contract will include language related to liquidated damages and incentives at the discretion of the GCS

30. Will GCS release any available programming documents, concept plans, feasibility studies, site information, traffic

studies, or geotechnical data for Northwood, Bessemer, or Joyner elementary schools?

Response: The information will be made available at the time of selection recommendation as this information is

currently being compiled specific to these schools.

31. Can GCS provide its current design standards in full (beyond the reference in Section 2.2)? Project Delivery,

Preconstruction & Coordination

Response: GCS Design Standards will be provided to the selected firms. Currently, the standards are consistent with

current standards of the NC Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI).

32. Does GCS anticipate concurrent or staggered delivery of the three schools?

Response: GCS is currently reviewing all possibilities for delivery in concurrence with the County Commission

financial responsibilities.

33. Does GCS anticipate awarding all three (3) schools to one design-builder, or individually to separate design-

builders?

Response: GCS is exercising it’s right to consider options for award based on the qualifications received. It is

expected that firms have the current capabilities and capacity to complete the program(s) by the date listed in the

program schedule. Provide a detailed schedule, including milestones, from the notice to proceed date through

post-occupancy services for each project. Provide reasoning, in this section, for any modifications or alterations

your firm wishes to make to the recommended program schedule.

34. To prepare an accurate schedule and staffing plan, can GCS confirm the intended award strategy or whether the

SOQ schedule should assume multiple potential scenarios?

Response: GCS is exercising it’s right to consider options for award based on the qualifications received. It is

expected that firms have the current capabilities and capacity to complete the program(s) by the date listed in the

program schedule. Provide a detailed schedule, including milestones, from the notice to proceed date through

post-occupancy services for each project. Provide reasoning, in this section, for any modifications or alterations

your firm wishes to make to the recommended program schedule.

35. Please confirm any target occupancy dates (by school if possible), substantial completion windows, or

academic-calendar constraints that should be reflected in the SOQ schedule. Please also confirm in which section

the schedule should be included.

Response: There are estimated timelines that are currently under review by GCS and the County Commission.

These current estimated timelines can be reviewed on the GCS’s Dashboard for New & Renovated Schools

36. Will the Design-Builder work with any Owner-hired commissioning agents, project managers, or external advisors?

Site Information & Due Diligence

Response: Yes. The program is currently being managed by MEG/ CBRE. Due diligence and other miscellaneous

services provided by Owner will also be engaged and known at the time of project commencement.

37. Are current site surveys, utility maps, environmental reports, or hazardous material assessments available for any

of the campuses?

Response: The information will be made available at the time of selection recommendation as this information is

currently being compiled specific to these schools.

38. Are there any known right-of-way, off-site improvements, or DOT coordination requirements tied to these

projects? Insurance, Bonding, and Risk

Response: Yes. The information will be made available at the time of selection recommendation as this information

is currently being compiled specific to these schools.

39. Can GCS confirm if the Design-Builder is to carry Builder’s Risk, or will GCS consider providing it? Proof of ability to

obtain the policy is required.

Response: Contractor shall carry Builder’s Risk and all other insurances as required to complete the project(s).

40. Will professional liability limits of $3M apply per project or as a program-wide requirement covering all three

schools (in the event all 3 schools are awarded to a single Design-Builder)

Response: Per project.

41. Could you please confirm whether the time due on 3/17 is 2:00 p.m. (page 1) or 3:00 p.m. (page 6)?

Response: The correct time is 3:00 p.m.

42. On page 12 (4.3.2) Tab 1 Proposed Project Personnel, is the 12-page maximum for (A,B,C,E,F) only? (D) requires 2

team member resumes for each of the 8 key positions. To answer the required information on page 13 for each

team member, at least 16 pages will be necessary. Are these resumes part of the 12-page limit?

Response: The two (2) resumes for each position in Item D will not count towards the 12-page maximum. Also,

Combining roles within a Design-Build team is acceptable, provided the team can clearly demonstrate the

qualifications and responsibilities for those functions.

43. To provide the proper details and combine the design-build team responses, would GCS consider extending the due

date?

Response: The date will remain as is

44. Can the responders choose/show in their response whether they are responding to build 1, 2, or all 3 of the

schools?

Response: Responders can include their response specific to the school that they wish to be considered in the cover

letter as well as the cover page if desired.

45. What is the page limit for each response?

Response: Page limits can be found in Section 4 of the RFQ

46. Will there be a staggered start for the Elementary Schools or not?

This is the opportunity summary page. It provides an overview of this opportunity and a preview of the attached documentation.

Bond DB Northwood, Bessemer & Joyner

Attachment Preview

See also