HomeMy WebLinkAboutAddendum #2 - RFP-Communications Audit
1
2026
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL RFP-2026IT-29693
RFP Issue Date: June 29, 2026
Addendum Date: July 14, 2026
Prepared by Information Technology Department
fernellr@newellmail.ca
2
Addendum #2
TO ALL BIDDERS:
The following changes, additions or deletions are hereby made a part of the Invitation to
Tender Documents for The County of Newell as full and completely as if the same were set
forth therein. Please be sure to submit this addendum with your tender.
Question:
1. Is the County open to working with out of province consultants who have a strong
understanding of the contextual factors faced by Alberta municipalities?
Answer:
Yes. The County is open to proposals from out-of-province consultants. Proponents should
clearly demonstrate their understanding of the unique operating environment of Alberta
municipalities and how their experience is relevant to this project.
Question:
2. What would the County consider a successful outcome six to twelve months after
implementation of the audit recommendations?
Answer:
The County considers a successful outcome to be the implementation of practical, actionable
recommendations that strengthen internal and external communications, improve consistency
and effectiveness, enhance public trust and engagement, and provide a clear framework for
continuous improvement. The County is seeking recommendations that are realistic,
measurable, and appropriate for a rural municipality of its size and resources.
Question:
3. Has the County recently experienced significant organizational change that may have
affected communication effectiveness?
Answer:
No. The County has not experienced any recent significant organizational changes that have
materially affected communications effectiveness. The purpose of this audit is to provide an
independent assessment of the County's current communications program, i dentify gaps and
opportunities for improvement, and establish priorities for its continued development.
3
Question:
4. Are there particular public perception, engagement, or trust challenges the County
would like assessed through this project?
Answer:
The County has not prescribed specific public perception, engagement, or trust challenges for
assessment. The County is seeking an objective evaluation of its overall communications
program and welcomes recommendations that identify opportunities to strengthen public
engagement, build trust, and improve the effectiveness of communications.
Question:
5. What are the most significant communication risks facing the County today?
Answer:
Identifying significant communications risks is considered an important outcome of the audit
itself. Rather than prescribing specific areas of concern, the County is seeking an independent
assessment to identify existing and emerging risks, evaluate their potential impact, and
recommend strategies to mitigate them.
Question:
6. Does the County expect public consultation to be part of the audit, or should the
assessment be limited to internal stakeholders and key external partners?
Answer:
The County anticipates that stakeholder engagement will form part of the audit; however, it
has not prescribed a specific consultation methodology or participant groups. Proponents are
encouraged to recommend an engagement approach that they believe will p rovide meaningful
insight into the County's communications program. This may include internal stakeholders,
members of the public, and other key external stakeholders, as appropriate and within the
available project budget.
Question:
7. Approximately how many stakeholder interviews does the County anticipate being
feasible within the project timeline?
Answer:
The County has not prescribed a specific number of stakeholder interviews. Proponents are
encouraged to recommend an interview approach they believe will best achieve the project
objectives within the available budget of $17,500. While the timeline outlined in the RFP is
intended as a target, the County is open to alternative project schedules where proponents can
4
demonstrate that additional time would provide greater value through more comprehensive
engagement, analysis, and recommendations. The County's preference is to receive the final
report by the end of 2026.
Question:
8. Has a project budget or budget range been established for this initiative?
Answer:
Please refer to Addendum #1.
Question:
9. The proposal template includes a training and documentation section, does the County
envision staff training as part of this RFP? If so, would the training be conducted by the
successful applicant or by the County using a training plan developed by the applicant?
Answer:
Staff training is not expected to form part of the scope of this RFP. The County is seeking
recommendations that may identify training opportunities or capacity -building initiatives;
however, the implementation of any recommended training will be considere d separately
following completion of the audit.