Q_A_0001.pdf

1. Can you provide more guidance on the transfer of knowledge and what that deliverable looks like? Would the deliverable be a written document, a website, or a public presentation?

As each NPS park unit varies so will the transfer of knowledge deliverable. This is decided in consultation with the park staff. During the writing of the first full draft of the study, there will be a meeting to establish what transfer of knowledge format best fits for the study and the park’s needs. For example in the past transfer of knowledges have been public presentations, a website article, or a storymap.

2. Can you confirm that all of the requests made in the RFP are actually what COR is looking for? We noticed a sentence referring to Colt’s guns on page 3 and are wondering if there are any other potential cut and paste errors.

Yes this was a mistake copy and paste error. The PWS has been corrected and provided.

3. Are you anticipating any oral histories to be included in this project? If so, will you expect any sort of indexing or transcription? How many informants?

I think that most informants have likely passed on, It may be good if we could find some descendants that had knowledge that could be interviewed. I think that if we do collect oral histories they should be at least transcribed.

4. Will the consultant be expected to contact next of kin as part of research into the lives of the individuals?

Any potential consultation with next of kin will take place in collaboration with Colonial National Historical Park’s Cultural Resources Program Manager and the Northeast Regional Historian.

5. Will the consultant be expected to conduct research into the descendent communities of the African American archaeologists of the CCC?

The scope of the project does not directly state that research into descendent communities is necessary. However, if living members or relatives with beneficial information are found or suspected, contacting and interviewing them may become necessary for a complete report.

6. Does NPS have an approximate number of African American archaeologists in the CCC who worked on this site who would be included in this study?

Based on preliminary research there, were probably at least 50-100 who did archeology.

7. Are there records or repositories where pertinent information is known to be kept? Can NPS provide a list of recommended sources and repositories, if known?

NARA, camp newsletters. Park curator can gather more from park archives.

8. Are there any known historians or academics with specific knowledge about this history who NPS would recommend as sources or informants?

The NPS does not have any specific sources at this time.

9. Regarding the individuals included in the study, is “background information on them” understood as a generalized group of African American archaeologists or will the consultant be responsible for conducting detailed genealogical research on each identified individual? If the latter, will a representative sample suffice (assuming there is a large number of known individuals – look to question 6)?

As the NPS does not currently know the total number of archeologists that will be found during the research conducted on this project, we cannot set an accurate value to the number of personnel that will need genealogical research. However, if a large number are found, the consultant and the NPS will decide together on the best candidates to research, but no more than 5 will be thoroughly investigated.

10. Can NPS provide clarification on how the finished product should be bound? Will perfect bound books suffice?

Yes perfect bound would suffice.

11. Can NPS provide more clarification on the review and draft process? Will each review result in another version of that same draft or will the review of draft 1 lead to the submittal of draft 2, etc.?

o Please clarify the following number of deliverable submittals required:

Outline (2) - draft and final Chapter draft (2) - draft and final First Draft (2) - draft and final Second Draft (1) - draft for peer review Final Draft (1) - final incorporates second draft NPS and peer review comments Print Proof Copy (1) Transfer of Knowledge Product (1)

To ensure that the product is taking shape well after each deliverable the NPS has the opportunity to review for 30 days and provide comments. These comments are expected to be addressed in the next draft. Throughout the entire study there is also an open-door policy to meet directly with the NPS staff in order to get clarification on comments. 7 deliverables in total, Outline, Draft Chapter, First Draft, 2nd Draft, Final Draft, Print Proof Copy of final draft, Transfer of knowledge product.

12. A chapter draft may be difficult to finalize without the full results of research and analysis, and additional difficulties may arise integrating this chapter into the full report without allowing for the flexibility and reorganization of data that can arise during the writing process. Can you please provide more guidance on which chapter would be requested and how that chapter would be expected to evolve in the subsequent drafts based on new information?

This can be a rough first draft chapter, typically consultants will send the draft chapter 1.

13. Will there be another round of NPS review of the second draft after the peer review and before the final draft?

No

14. Question about teaming or anticipated type of Consultant o May we subcontract with other firms or individual researchers? Yes o Would NPS recommend that a cultural resource firm team with history professionals or academics? We are open to history professionals or academics.

15. For the draft peer reviews, will these be provided by NPS staff from other regions, an academic institution, or another peer group?

A peer reviewer will be selected during contract performance, the NPS does not currently know the source of our reviewer. Typically, they come from another peer group or academic institution.