Request for quote (RFQ) Ref TDTH-TF-HRM - Consultancy Services to deliver Heat Risk Methodology 


This RFQ seeks to engage a suitably qualified consultancy to develop and pilot a methodology for conducting place-based heatwave risk assessments.

The Methodology will be co-designed with a working group of professional stakeholders and will be supported by an expert advisory panel. The Methodology should:

  • Focus on risk as it relates to human health and safety
  • Take a systems approach
  • Meet the needs of local authorities – including allowing review on a regular basis.
  • Be applicable to different geographic areas across Sydney (and ideally NSW)
  • Speak to the broader policy context – including state and federal risk assessments.

WSROC welcomes consortia or partnership arrangements to deliver the project. 


RFQ documents and lodgement:

A copy of the full RFQ can be downloaded at the link below:

Request for quote (RFQ) Ref TDTH-TF-HRM - Consultancy Services to deliver Heat Risk Methodology (pdf) 

RFQ responses should be submitted to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Enquiries can be directed to Kelly Gee – This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or 9671 4333 


Closing date: 5.00pm AEST Monday 24th July 2023. Late submissions will not be accepted. 





RFI – 13/07/2023 How technical or simple do you want the risk assessment to be? What is the level of capability of the users?

This will need to be determined with the project working group, however given that the risk assessments should be able to be delivered within current council resources, overly technical modelling would not be appropriate. That said, this risk assessment methodology should pave the way for/ inform more sophisticated risk modelling in future by different agencies.

As such, the focus for this project should be getting the rationale behind the methodology right. In doing so it should answer the following questions:

  • What’s does best practice heat risk assessment look like? What indicators/elements should be included?
  • What data is available now/what type of data is still needed?
  • What can councils do now with the resources they have?
  • What should ideally be happening in future?

Councils need a tool they can use today, however the methodology will provide WSROC with a starting point for advocacy around how heatwave risk assessment should be conducted.



RFI – 13/07/2023 Should the risk assessment be qualitative or quantitative, or include elements of both?

This will need to be determined in consultation with stakeholders and their needs however we expect that elements of both qualitative and quantitative risk assessment may be required.



RFI – 13/07/2023  What is the role of the Risk Assessment Pilots? Will the consultant be delivering these assessments.

The Pilots are to test the efficacy of the risk methodology in practice. The consultant should work closely with the pilot councils to undertake the risk assessment and iron out any issues, practical challenges that may arise to inform the final methodology report.



RFI – 14/07/2023 What is the project’s proposed budget?

WSROC does not generally disclose specific project budgets. We can indicate it is within the range of $200-350,000. Noting that there are quite a few moving parts in the broader program and these will need to be considered.



RFI – 14/07/2023 What level of engagement with stakeholders is anticipated?

The consultant is expected to work in consultation with a Project Working Group of practitioners (end users) throughout the development of the Methodology. WSROC also has an Expert Reference Panel comprised of expert researchers in the fields of human thermoregulation, public health, sociology etc.

Stakeholder engagement is required to understand the types of risks practitioners see on the ground – in order to inform the types of data or indicators the risk assessment will need – as well as the types of decisions the risk assessment will inform. It should be noted that current/standardised approaches to risk assessment (i.e. SEIFA and Land Surface Temperature data alone) are inadequate for understanding and treating place-based risk to human health.

It is also expected that the consultant will present findings to the Greater Sydney Heat Taskforce, and collaborate as required with consultancies delivering other parts of the Greater Sydney Heat Taskforce Program.



RFI – 14/07/2023 What level of technical data or heat mapping is required?

We expect that data on issues like heat or socioeconomics will be required for this risk assessment, however we do not expect undertaking new data collection in this space. As stated in the RFQ, the risk assessment must be able to be easily and affordably replicated, and councils cannot afford to commission new heat studies each time they want to undertake risk assessment. We therefore anticipate that the methodology focuses on existing / easy to source data, but also identifies potential gaps in data and provides recommendation for future work.



RFI – 14/07/2023 What is the relationship / alignment with the National Climate Risk Assessment work being led by ACS?

We know that both the Australian (ACS) and NSW Government (OECC) are developing climate risk assessments, and NSW Reconstruction Authority is also currently undertaking a review of the State Level Risk Assessment for heatwave.

WSROC is involved in these ongoing processes. While local risk assessment has different requirements, we want to ensure this process stays across state and federal assessments to ensure assessment methodologies at different levels complement as much as possible.



RFI - 20/07/202Are you able to provide an indicative list of stakeholders that WSROC would like included in interviews and workshops?

Stakeholder lists are yet to be determined, however we expect this to include:

  • Risk assessment users: (council EM/community development/resilience staff)
  • Expert stakeholders: (LHDs, Red Cross, Ambulance, SES, Endeavour Energy, expert researchers) many of whom may also be secondary users.
  • State and federal risk assessors: As outlined in the RFQ, it is also important to ensure the methodology speaks to state and federal work so we anticipate engagement with Australian Climate Services, NSW Reconstruction Authority and Adapt NSW.

WSROC has access to a wide pool of stakeholders. It is not anticipated that respondents should dedicate time to searching for relevant stakeholders. 



RFI - 20/07/2023 Does WSROC anticipate being able to update the entire risk assessment inhouse, even if some parts of this process may require a certain technical proficiency in numerical modelling and a relatively powerful computer?

Councils will be the ones undertaking and updating the risk assessment (not WSROC), so the output should be in a format local government is able to work with. It can be assumed that councils have GIS skills on staff as well as some subject matter expertise. 

I would emphasise that the focus of this project should be developing a really sound, defensible methodology for understanding heat risk. However, at present there is no agreement on what indicators should be considered in a risk assessment.

We acknowledge we may not be able to include all relevant indicators/complex modelling in the council templates during the course of this program due to data availability, resourcing constraints or council skill levels.

A sound base of understanding - including what's required for 'best practice' will allow us advocate for better resourcing and datasets so that the risk assessment can be scaled up in future.

At present one of the biggest tasks for heat risk assessment is understanding the type of risk indicators and data required beyond surface temperature data and SEIFA overlays. 


RFI - 20/07/2023 Does WSROC anticipate that they will need to independently use the risk assessment method/tool in the future not just to update the risk mapping for existing scenarios, but also to predict the impact of potential heat risk mitigation measures? If the latter is true, has WSROC already identified some of the possible heat risk mitigation measures that may need to be assessed using the method/tool? 

It would be ideal if the methodology could be used to assess the impact of heat risk mitigation measures, however this might need to be discussed in partnership with the Project Working Group, and may also depend on budget available. An option could be to provide a suite of options as part of the RFQ response.

If proceeding, risk treatment measures would also need to be worked through with the Project Working Group, and some of the other Greater Sydney Heat Taskforce programs (Cool Suburbs and Heatwave Management Guide). However, broadly treatment would include a mix of mitigation, adaptation and response measures including:

  • Urban design measures (incl Canopy cover, water, cool materials). Please note that these measures are outlined in the Cool Suburbs tool and Resilient Sydney Tool. I imagine that the Project Working Group may wish to determine which of these they want to include noting that local government/emergency sector only has carriage over some of these measures.
  • Home adaptation programs (age of buildings, where upgrades are needed etc)
  • Provision of 'cool spaces' accessible to residents.
  • Energy system adaptation, islanded backup power.
  • Service delivery measures e.g. messaging, home visits, provision of drinking water, cancelling events, WH&S measures, etc?