--- title: "AIDEA’s Fixed-Income RFP: What the Eligibility Waiver Changes | Altss Blog" description: "AIDEA waived firm-size and age tests before its November 20 RFP deadline. Assess the remaining performance, liquidity, custody and fee requirements." canonical: "https://altss.com/blog/aidea-fixed-income-rfp-addendum-eligibility-november-2026" --- [Altss Research](https://www.linkedin.com/company/altss) 6 min read Updated Nov 13, 2026 Share # AIDEA’s Fixed-Income RFP: What the Eligibility Waiver Changes AIDEA waived firm-size and age tests before its November 20 RFP deadline. Assess the remaining performance, liquidity, custody and fee requirements. [Back to blog](https://altss.com/blog) Share [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=) [X](https://x.com/intent/tweet?url=&text=AIDEA%E2%80%99s%20Fixed-Income%20RFP%3A%20What%20the%20Eligibility%20Waiver%20Changes) Copy link AIDEA's fixed-income manager search deserves a second look from firms that ruled themselves out on size or age. A November 10 addendum removes the original minimum of $1 billion in firm assets under management and three years of firm operating history. That changes who can submit a proposal; it leaves a demanding investment and operating case to make. The Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority's [official procurement page](https://www.aideaaeaprocurement.org/) lists RFP AIDEA27-017 as active, with proposals due November 20, 2026, at 2:00 p.m. AKST. The documents were reviewed on November 12. For a smaller or newer manager, the useful decision is whether the remaining performance evidence, liquid investment strategy and custody arrangements justify reopening the bid. ## The original firm-size screen has been waived Section 1.04 of the original solicitation required both the $1 billion minimum and the three-year operating history. [Addendum Four](https://www.aideaaeaprocurement.org/Home/File/10628) explicitly waives that item and says offerors need not meet either threshold to submit. All other qualifications and requirements remain in effect. The chronology matters. November 10 is the date of the public addendum. The investment committee approved the waiver on October 9, as recorded in an October 14 memorandum attached to it. The addendum therefore communicates an earlier decision; it does not document a new November 10 committee vote. A screening decision based on the original firm-size clause can now be revisited. The reason to reopen is specific: the published exclusion that drove the no-bid no longer applies. It is not evidence that every boutique manager, newly formed firm or proposed strategy will qualify. ## Firm age and investment evidence are different tests The prior-experience schedule reproduced in Addendum Four still asks for quarterly time-weighted performance, third-party reports comparing the firm's risk and return with similar managers, financial and staffing stability, and evidence that the proposed strategy has been followed successfully over time. For a newer firm, the work therefore moves from satisfying a minimum corporate age to explaining the investment record and the organization behind it. A useful response would connect three things: - The proposed strategy to the historical accounts used to demonstrate its results, including any differences in mandate or implementation. - The people responsible for those results to the current portfolio, research, trading and control functions. - The operating resources available today to the reporting and investment responsibilities the firm would assume for AIDEA. These are practical implications of the surviving requirements, not additional eligibility rules imposed by the solicitation. A spinout should also distinguish predecessor results from results earned at the current firm. The published waiver does not settle whether a particular predecessor record will be accepted. ## A public-market strategy still needs the right implementation [Addendum Three](https://www.aideaaeaprocurement.org/Home/File/10627), dated November 9, makes the investment boundary concrete. Assets must be fully liquid and publicly traded. The answer to a proposed private-credit allocation below 10% is still no. A private-credit sleeve does not become eligible merely because it is small. The same addendum requires a separately managed account with assets held at U.S. Bank inside AIDEA's account. It permits a publicly traded commingled vehicle, such as a mutual fund, within that arrangement; a non-publicly traded commingled vehicle is unacceptable. A manager should therefore show the actual proposed holdings and account structure, rather than assume that the strategy's name establishes fit. There is broader room to argue the credit mix. AIDEA does not specify an investment-grade versus non-investment-grade range in these answers; the manager must justify the proposed balance on risk and return. It also allows a strategy-appropriate benchmark, while retaining comparison with the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index. For a high-yield or multisector team, those two comparisons create different jobs. A strategy benchmark helps explain execution within the chosen opportunity set. The Aggregate comparison helps explain why AIDEA should accept the proposed departure from broad-market fixed income. A persuasive proposal would make the sources of additional return, drawdown exposure and liquidity demands intelligible under both views. ## Compare fees at the evaluated account sizes The [RFP's cost evaluation](https://www.aideaaeaprocurement.org/Home/File/10623) assigns 40% of available points to cost. Section 4.08 specifies an equally weighted average of annual dollar costs at hypothetical allocations of $5 million, $10 million and $25 million. Applicable additional recurring expenses are included; custody fees paid directly by AIDEA under its existing arrangement are excluded. There is an unresolved inconsistency in the published instructions. Section 3.07 says the $10 million allocation will be used to calculate the Cost Proposal score, while Section 4.08 and its worked example use all three sizes. A bidder should seek procurement clarification before final pricing; the comparison below follows Section 4.08 and does not resolve that conflict. Under Section 4.08, that is not an average of three fee percentages. The RFP's own example gives one offeror rates of 0.50%, 0.40% and 0.30% at the three account sizes, producing an evaluated annual cost of $46,666.67. Another offeror charges 0.40%, 0.45% and 0.35%, producing $50,833.33. The first offeror is more expensive at $5 million but less expensive under the full comparison. Before approving a fee schedule, a manager should run the documented calculation alongside its own cost to serve each account size. Optimizing the entry-level headline rate can obscure both the evaluated result and the economics of supporting a smaller actual account. The hypothetical evaluation sizes should not be treated as a forecast of the assets the firm will receive. ## Reopen the bid for a reason that survives the addenda The original RFP describes about $25 million as an anticipated initial aggregate allocation across selected firms, with the division and timing undecided. Selection into the indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract structure does not promise funding. [Addendum One](https://www.aideaaeaprocurement.org/Home/File/10625) also describes the search as supplementary: AIDEA is seeking additional options, rather than replacing the existing managers identified in its answer. That context changes the proposal's investment argument. A manager should explain the additional portfolio capability it offers and the practical account size at which it can deliver it. An argument built around displacing an incumbent would answer a different question from the one AIDEA has described. The resulting bid decisions are concrete: - Revisit an earlier no-bid if the firm-size or firm-age clause was the decisive obstacle and the surviving investment evidence is available. - Proceed only with an implementation that fits the public-market, liquidity and U.S. Bank account requirements, and with fees tested across the specified sizes and the scoring discrepancy clarified. - Decline if the proposed product depends on a private-credit allocation, an unacceptable vehicle or a separate custody arrangement that the manager cannot change. This is a useful extension of the mandate-specific decisions in Altss's [October investment-manager RFP review](https://altss.com/blog/october-2026-investment-manager-rfps-deadlines-mandates): an addendum can change the eligible firm without changing the portfolio job. Before submitting, revisit the official procurement page for any subsequent amendment and follow the complete solicitation instructions. The November 20 deadline and the waiver are consequential together; neither substitutes for a credible investment proposition. Share this article Share ## Related articles [Image: Mukesh Ambani's Family Office: Scale and Strategy in India's New Capital Era (2026)](https://altss.com/blog/mukesh-ambani-s-family-office) LP Intelligence 10 min read ### [Mukesh Ambani's Family Office: Scale and Strategy in India's New Capital Era (2026)](https://altss.com/blog/mukesh-ambani-s-family-office) A comprehensive 2026 profile of Mukesh Ambani's family office — its structure, investment strategy, allocator behavior, and practical advice for fund manag [Altss Research](https://www.linkedin.com/company/altss) Sep 19, 2025 [Image: Endowments & Foundations as LPs: GP Guide 2026](https://altss.com/blog/endowments-foundations-as-lps-2026) LP Intelligence 18 min read ### [Endowments & Foundations as LPs: GP Guide 2026](https://altss.com/blog/endowments-foundations-as-lps-2026) How endowments and foundations allocate to alternatives, how the 2025 endowment tax reshapes GP fundraising, and how to navigate the 6–18 month decision. [Altss Research](https://www.linkedin.com/company/altss) Feb 8, 2026 [Image: Global Single-Family Office Migration and Regional LP Activity Trends (2026)](https://altss.com/blog/global-single-family-office-migration-and-regional-lp-activity-trends-2025) LP Intelligence 15 min read ### [Global Single-Family Office Migration and Regional LP Activity Trends (2026)](https://altss.com/blog/global-single-family-office-migration-and-regional-lp-activity-trends-2025) Data-driven analysis of family office migration across Florida, Singapore, Dubai, Italy, and Brazil. Includes LP activity trends, tax policy drivers, and a [Altss Research](https://www.linkedin.com/company/altss) Aug 20, 2025 ## Canonical URL https://altss.com/blog/aidea-fixed-income-rfp-addendum-eligibility-november-2026