Request for Proposals

Report on Battlefield Preservation Life Cycle

Civil War Trust

Washington, DC

Posted: 07/08/2013
Submittal Deadline: 07/26/2013

Report on Battlefield Preservation Life Cycle
American Battlefield Protection Program Grant # GA-2255-11-026

July 8, 2013

The Civil War Trust seeks qualified consultants to submit proposals responsive to this Request for Proposals (RFP) to conduct research for, help conceptualize, and establish a model document that analyzes and establishes best practices concerning the battlefield preservation lifecycle.

Two (2) hard copies of each proposal should be sent and arrive no later than July 26, 2013, to:

Matthew George, Land Steward
Civil War Trust
1156 15th Street, NW,
Suite 900
Washington, DC 20005

Questions regarding this Request for Proposals should be directed via email to Matthew George at
mgeorge@civilwar .org.


The Civil War Trust has helped preserve more than 36,000 acres of battlefield land and continues to strive to save more of America’s hallowed ground. Throughout each year, the Trust examines, purchases, eases, interprets, conveys, maintains and/or manages scores of parcels in numerous states. The management of so many unique parcels, spread across a broad geographic region, each of which are in various states of restoration, have differing levels of visitation and disposition, poses a particular and ongoing challenge not only for the Civil War Trust, but for any heritage land organization.

Purpose and Scope of Work

The Civil War Trust seeks to analyze the components of 21st century battlefield preservation and establish a model document that analyzes and establishes best practices concerning the battlefield preservation lifecycle. The document will focus on every phase of the life cycle, from consultation to purchase to interpretation or conveyance and ongoing land management. The report will use as case studies Civil War Trust properties at Brandy Station, Va., McDowell, Va., and Spring Hill, Tn., but will also reference as examples other specific battlefield properties owned by the Trust and other preservation organizations. The report will serve as a roadmap that will assist the Civil War Trust and other preservation groups in navigating the complexities of the battlefield preservation life cycle. It will inform policy and parcel-specific decisions regarding purchase, interpretation and long term stewardship.

Scope of Work
The selected consultant will perform the following tasks in the following categories:
1. Kick-Off
a. Initial meeting with the Civil War Trust.
b. Establish goals and expectations for the final product.
c. Learn about the Civil War Trust’s history and methodology.
d. Be apprised of Trust experience with stakeholders, local groups and the case study sites.
e. Develop the Work Plan thereafter and define the “lifecycle” of battlefield preservation.

2. Research
a. Secure relevant resources from the Civil War Trust including documents, press clippings, reports and interviews with key players in the preservation community.
b. Grasp the basic military, postwar and preservation history at the three case study sites.
c. Understand at least one non-Civil War Trust case study examining the history of a battlefield preserved, the methodology and rationale used, and the relative success of the preservation effort and final disposition.
d. Research the funding sources, government and non-government, that are utilized in 21st century land preservation to gain a sufficient level of expertise so as to examine the methodology and rationale behind preserving a particular parcel.
e. The methods, costs and utility of interpreting newly-acquired parcels. The research will seek to answer a) why an organization might interpret one parcel over another, b) what are the public benefits in interpreting saved land, and c) what are the long term benefits to the Trust by interpreting preserved land.
f. What are the long term costs for preserving land to be owned for longer than five years?
g. At what point should revenues generated from a parcel, or, at what point should structures that need removed before conveyance be considered in the decision making process to purchase a parcel?
h. What are some good examples of stewardship partnerships that are “model” programs and the feasibility of the Trust implementing similar programs?
i. What are the environmental benefits of preserving land acquired by the Trust? Are there revenues that can be better taken advantage of by the Trust in maintaining “green space?”

3. Consultations

a. Consultant will meet with the Civil War Trust as needed to gain a thorough understanding of the business and disciplines employed by the Trust. Particular attention will be paid to the Real Estate, Development, and Education & Land Stewardship aspects of the business.
b. Consultant will meet with the various stakeholders and the public at the case study areas. These will include tenant farmers, volunteer organizations, neighboring park authorities, friends groups, neighboring land owners, user groups, and others.

4. Report Outline

The consultant will establish a report outline that will be similar to the following:
1. Introduction
2. Preserving Battlefields
a. Brief History
b. Desirability
c. Steps in Acquisition
d. Community Involvement From the Start
e. Considerations in Securing Stewardship Partners
f. Can Education & Interpretation Aid in Acquisition
g. How to Fund
3. Ownership
a. Goals
b. Interpretive Planning
c. Revenue
4. Land Stewardship
a. Best Practices & Standards
b. Community Engagement
c. Land Use & User Groups
5. Restoration
a. Considerations and Costs
b. Funding/Grants
6. Conveyance
a. Rationale for Conveying Land Quickly
b. To Whom to Convey
7. Case Studies: A Tale of Four Battlefields
a. Case Study Introduction
e. One (1) non Trust example
8. Battlefield Preservation Lifecycle: A Preservation Model
9. Policy Statements
a. Rationale
b. Decision Tree
10. Conclusion

5. Draft Report
The selected consultant will submit a draft report after completing all necessary research and all on site consultations.

6. Review
The draft report will be reviewed by the Civil War Trust, the American Battlefield Preservation Program (ABPP), and others the Trust may designate. The selected consultant should allow for two rounds of editing with the Trust, ABPP and others to provide detailed recommendations and edits.

7. Final Report
The selected consultant will submit a Final Report for review by the Trust, ABPP and others establishing a model document that will inform policy and parcel-specific decisions regarding purchase, interpretation and long term stewardship components inherent in 21st century battlefield preservation.


The Civil War Trust expects consultants to complete the work in ten months, according to the following timeline:

Month 1 — RFPs out
Month 2 — Consultant selected
Month 3 — Kickoff, Commence Research, Conduct on-site consultations
Month 4 — Complete Research, Report Outline
Month 5 — Commence draft report
Month 7 — Draft report delivered
Month 8 — CWT and ABPP comments back
Month 9 — Final Report Delivered

Responding to this Request for Proposals
Submissions should not be overly complex. Elaborate artwork, expensive paper or bindings and costly visual and other presentation aides are not necessary. Submissions should be fewer than fifteen pages in length, including any appendices. Submissions exceeding fifteen pages in total will not be considered. Qualified proposals must include the following items in the following order:

a. A detailed description of the consultant’s proposed approach for undertaking the project as described in the “Purpose and Scope of Work” section of this Request for Proposals.
b. A statement of qualifications and experience for the firm, the lead team members and any relevant subcontractors. Consultants should have strong professional qualifications relevant to this project, ideally in at least most of the following categories: historic real estate acquisition and conveyance, knowledge of land conservation methods, historic interpretation models, land use and long term management techniques. Demonstrable experience and knowledge of historic land preservation, sources of funding, and land management is preferred.
c. A concise discussion of related project experience by the proposed firm and relevant subcontractors, including information regarding individual team members, and a description of comparable projects similar to the proposed Plan. If space allows, consultants are welcome to submit examples of previous work.
d. A list of three (3) references for similar projects, including the client’s name, address, phone number and email address.
e. A proposed timeline for the project as described herein.
f. A “firm fixed price” cost estimate that covers all the tasks outlined in the scope of work. We prefer that cost estimates be broken down by task and further by labor and travel or other related expenses.
g. Any additional information that you deem pertinent to your proposal and that might provide useful during the review process.

Selection Criteria
The following factors shall be considered in selecting the consultant:

a. General qualifications of the firms and individuals assigned to the project relative to the skills and disciplines needed for the project.
b. Experience with similar projects in light of the subject matter, scale and context.
c. Proposed approach of the consultants relative to the circumstances and the Civil War Trust’s needs including their ability to provide the needed services within the available budget.
d. References from past clients on similar projects.

If you would like a copy of the full RFP in PDF, please email Matthew George at