Property management plus case management for 23 formerly homeless families in five small East Oakland buildings. The RFP never lists the properties, never says who pays the case managers, and lets OAHPI add more buildings at the fee you quote. Small contract, big scope.
What OAHPI is buying and who lives there
Oakland Affordable Housing Preservation Initiatives (OAHPI) is the nonprofit affiliate that holds the Oakland Housing Authority’s former scattered-site public housing, roughly 1,539 Section 8 units across 248 sites. This RFP is for a much smaller piece of it: full-service property management for permanent supportive housing, run under a 2020 partnership with the Alameda County Health Care Services Agency and OHA.
The only unit list in the package is an invoice template in Exhibit G: five East Oakland buildings, 23 units, 63 bedrooms, all two- and three-bedroom family units. That matches OHA’s Building Bridges: Key to Home program, which moved 23 families with children out of Project Roomkey hotels into permanent housing. OHA reports 23 of 23 families housed every month in FY 2024 and FY 2025.
This is not a conventional management contract. Tenants arrive through the County’s Coordinated Entry System under California Housing First rules. On top of leasing, maintenance, and books, the contractor owes tenant case management: service plans, benefits advocacy, wellness checks, three contacts in the first 60 days, monthly community meetings, and a public line for neighbors with a two-business-day response. OHA’s 2020 board approval named Housing Consortium of the East Bay as the manager.
The three items that decide whether this bid pencils
The verdict and who it applies to
This fits a Bay Area manager that already runs permanent supportive housing with case managers on payroll, knows Alameda County Coordinated Entry, and can fold five scattered buildings into an existing East Oakland maintenance route and on-call rotation. It does not fit a conventional affordable or market-rate manager. Section III.C makes PSH management and services to formerly unhoused clients a minimum qualification, and the client references form is a disqualification item.
It is Conditional rather than Strong because the incumbent has run this exact program for five years, at full occupancy in the last two reported years, the case management scope has no payer, and the property list, sample contract, and partnership MOU that define the work are referenced but not attached.
If you qualify, the opening is the part the RFP leaves blank. Put a per-unit assumption behind your flat fee, state exactly where County case management ends and yours begins, and show a scattered-site 24/7 coverage model for five buildings.
Status: open. Questions and contract clause objections close September 25, 2026 at 2:00 PM PT. Proposals due October 5.
5 buildings · 2 neighborhoods · roughly 4 miles apart. Shaded areas are approximate. Buildings are shown by neighborhood, not by address.
Two six-unit buildings and one four-unit building along the numbered avenues: ten three-bedroom and six two-bedroom units. The larger of the two clusters and the likely base for maintenance and on-call coverage. The 24/7 management presence requirement has to be met across both clusters without a staffed office at every address.
A four-unit and a three-unit building on the same street, all three-bedroom units. Closer to downtown than Cluster A, and the natural second stop on any daily route. At three and four units per building, a single down unit takes that building below the 98% market-ready standard on its own.
| Cluster | Buildings | Units | Bedrooms | Mix |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A: Deep East Oakland | 3 | 16 | 42 | 10 three-bed, 6 two-bed |
| B: San Antonio | 2 | 7 | 21 | 7 three-bed |
| Total | 5 | 23 | 63 | 17 three-bed, 6 two-bed |
From the RFP as issued September 8, 2026. No addenda had been issued at the time of analysis.
| Milestone | Date | Status |
|---|---|---|
| RFP issued | Sep 8, 2026 | Past |
| Pre-proposal conference (Microsoft Teams, optional) | Sep 21, 2026, 11:00 AM PT | Upcoming |
| Questions and contract clause objections due | Sep 25, 2026, 2:00 PM PT | Hard gate |
| Proposals due via Housing Agency Marketplace | Oct 5, 2026, 10:00 AM PT | Deadline |
| Evaluation, presentations, reference checks | Not specified in RFP | Upcoming |
| Letter of award or non-award by email | Not specified in RFP | Upcoming |
| Protest window | 5 business days from notice of final selection | Upcoming |
| Operating Budget and start-up cost statement | Within 30 days of award | Upcoming |
| Commencement of services | Within 30 days of notice to proceed | Upcoming |
| First Monthly Property Report | 3rd of the second month of the Agreement | Upcoming |
| Initial term / options | 2 years / three 1-year options | Upcoming |
September 25 is the real deadline. Questions and contract clause objections close together, ten days before proposals are due. The Sample Contract Agreement you would be objecting to is referenced but not in the package. Request it now, or you sign it as written.
References take the longest. Exhibit D is a questionnaire your clients fill out about you, scoring responsiveness, maintenance, and property condition from 1 to 10. It has to come back before October 5. Send it in week one.
Transition is a handoff, not a lease-up. The template shows zero vacancies. A new manager takes over 23 occupied households with open case files, inside a 30-day mobilization, without interrupting County services. Show that week by week in the Project Approach.
100 points, four criteria
Technical carries 80 of 100 points, but the RFP contradicts itself on award basis. Page 2 says contracts go to qualified contractors “who provide low quotations,” while the reservation of rights says best value. Treat price as more sensitive than 20 points suggests. There are no preference points of any kind.
| Criterion | What evaluators want | Points |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Qualifications & Experience | References from owners with PSH or low-income tenants (public housing, PBV, HCV, LIHTC), financial resources, performance record, client records, business systems | 30 |
| 2. Staffing | Staffing levels for each property, qualifications for each position from property manager to regional director, job descriptions, resumes | 20 |
| 3. Project Approach | Understanding and plan, milestones, schedule in elapsed weeks across the full term, resources OAHPI must provide | 30 |
| 4. Proposed Cost | Compensation structure, hourly rates, administrative fees, chargeable expenses, billing method and frequency | 20 |
| Total | 100 |
Two things I would watch. First, Staffing is worth 20 points, but the required response format has no Staffing section. Build one inside Firm’s Qualifications and label it so an evaluator can find it. Second, Proposed Cost is scored on hourly rates and billing method, and the cost form only asks for a monthly management fee and a monthly bookkeeping fee. Answer the rest in a cost narrative, or leave points on the table.
Disclose your AI use. The certification form asks whether generative AI was used to prepare the proposal or the questions. If the answer is yes, say so and explain how, with who reviewed the content.
Gates, fit, and the pass signals
A Bay Area PSH operator with in-house property management and case management, Housing First practice, Alameda County Coordinated Entry and HMIS experience, family PSH references, and an existing East Oakland maintenance route that can absorb five small buildings.
You have no PSH or formerly-unhoused references, you would need to hire case managers from scratch, you need a defined door count to price, or you cannot carry a flat monthly fee that also has to cover whatever OAHPI adds later.
The bid decision document and the research behind it
Submit the form and both PDFs open on the next page.