693JJ3-20-BAA-0003 5-28-20.pdf

Broad Agency Announcement

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT

Innovative Tools, Techniques, and Processes to Accelerate Project Delivery

May 28, 2020

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT (BAA)

May 28, 2020

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

SECTION 1

Section Title Page

1 BAA Process Overview 3

2 Statement of Objectives 5

3 General Proposal Information 8

4 Instructions for Submission of White Papers 11

5 White Paper Content 12

6 White Paper Evaluation 13

7 Instructions for Full Proposals 14

8 Proposal Format 15

9 Evaluation Criteria for Proposals 18

Technical Discussions and Cost/Price Negotiations 20

11 Attachments 21

SECTION 1 – BAA PROCESS OVERVIEW

1.1 General Information

CONTRACTING POINT OF CONTACT:

Dan Confer Contracting Officer Email: Daniel.Confer@dot.gov; HCFA-21SRI@dot.gov

1.2 Summary of Important Dates

This Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) describes a two-phase process for proposal submission and evaluation. In the first phase, short pre-proposals will be submitted for review. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) will then ask for full proposals of those pre-proposals that are of interest to FHWA. Further detail on proposal dates are as follows:

The FHWA anticipates that the proposal, evaluation, and award process for this BAA will proceed generally in accordance with the following schedule:

BAA opens (FBO Publication) 05/28/2020

White Papers Due Noon EST 07/13/2020

Invitation for Full Proposal

8/7/2020

Full Proposals Due Noon EST

8/26/2020

Anticipated Date for Awards Early FY21

Proposals shall be sent by electronic transmission to Daniel.Confer@dot.gov and HCFA- 21SRI@dot.gov. Any questions relating to this announcement must be emailed to the contracting point of contact. No telephone requests will be taken.

1.3 BACKGROUND

This Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) is written in support of FHWA Innovative Tools, Techniques, and Processes to Accelerate Project Delivery. The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act’s (FAST Act) Subtitle C and FHWA’s goals and objectives include deploying proven innovations that accelerate the project delivery process for surface transportation projects by institutionalizing best practices and expediting complex infrastructure projects without undermining critical environmental laws or opportunities for public engagement.

mailto:Daniel.Confer@dot.gov mailto:HCFA-21SRI@dot.gov mailto:Daniel.Confer@dot.gov

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

Planning and Environment Linkages (PEL) represents one such collaborative and integrated approach to transportation decision-making that 1) considers environmental, community, and economic goals early in the transportation planning process, and 2) uses the information, analysis, and products developed during planning to inform the environmental review process.

PEL aims to create a more unified decision-making process, reduce duplication of efforts, and result in more informed project-level decisions. For additional information on PEL, please visit the program website.

1.4 LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY

Specific statutory authority for conducting this effort is found in the Efficient Environmental Reviews for Project Decision-making 23 U.S.C. 139(f)(4)(E) “the lead agency shall reduce duplication, to the maximum extent practicable, between the evaluation of alternatives under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); and the evaluation of alternatives in the metropolitan transportation planning process under section 134 or an environmental review process carried out under State law” and Integration of Planning and Environmental Review in 23 U.S.C. §168, which authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to allow”…agencies to adopt or incorporate by reference and use a planning product in proceedings relating to any class of action in the environmental review process of the project.”

Funding is authorized under Section 6002(a) of Public Law 114-94, the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act). The authority to enter into a contract or cooperative agreement for this effort is found under 23 U.S.C. § 502 - Surface Transportation Research, Development, and Technology, paragraph (b) (3), which states that:

The Secretary may carry out research, development, and technology transfer activities related to transportation—

(A) Independently;

(B) In cooperation with other Federal departments, agencies, and instrumentalities and Federal laboratories; or

(C) by making grants to, or entering into contracts and cooperative agreements with one or more of the following: the National Academy of Sciences, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, any Federal laboratory, Federal agency, State agency, authority, association, institution, for-profit or nonprofit corporation, organization, foreign country, or any other person.

The Government may award contracts or Cooperative/Assistance agreements as a result of this announcement. Awards of Cooperative/Assistance agreement will be subject, to a 20 percent cost sharing requirement.

PURPOSE

The FHWA, Office of Planning, Environment, and Realty, is soliciting proposals for research and development projects that could lead to innovative changes and revolutionary advances for transportation in the United States. The objective is to advance the practice and application of https://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/env_initiatives/pel.aspx

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

environmental analysis in the transportation planning process among States, metropolitan, transit, regional, local, and Tribal governments in response to the FAST Act and to identify new tools, techniques, and approaches that respond to national transportation priorities.

1.5 PROGRAM SCOPE

State and local agencies can achieve significant benefits by incorporating environmental and community values into transportation decisions early in planning and carrying these considerations through project development and delivery. Research is needed to identify innovative approaches for accelerating project delivery, including but not limited to PEL. Examples include techniques for avoidance and minimization of impacts; utilizing planning data in NEPA, including employment, growth, population, travel demand, resilience and vulnerability assessments land use and land cover mapping; and methods for documenting early resource agency coordination and public involvement conducted in planning.

SECTION 2 – STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES

Under this solicitation, FHWA will award funds for the development and evaluation of approaches to accelerate project delivery. This solicitation is intended to spur innovation and focus high-level research and development to meet the requirements of the FAST Act for accelerating the environmental review process for surface transportation projects by institutionalizing best practices and expediting complex infrastructure projects without undermining critical environmental laws or opportunities for public engagement.

2.1 APPLICATION AREA DESCRIPTIONS

The FHWA Office of Planning, Environment, and Realty is soliciting proposals for research and development projects that could lead to innovative changes and revolutionary advances for transportation in the United States.

Application areas are broadly described as:

1. Successful practices using PEL or PEL-like processes in a collaborative and integrated approach to transportation decision-making.

2. Successful practices and application of environmental analysis in the transportation planning process that can be relied on for NEPA documentation or to inform permit or approval actions.

3. Techniques that identify, analyze, and prioritize potential natural and human environmental mitigation.

4. Methodologies for the development of programmatic mitigation plans as part of the statewide or local planning process that can be relied on for NEPA documentation or to inform permit or approval actions.

These projects will support advances in knowledge and practice of what, when, and how planning products can be carried forward into the environmental review for a project. Strategically, this research will enhance existing approaches and methodologies, or enable and expedite the

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

development of innovations that will accelerate project delivery by providing continuity between the transportation planning and NEPA processes.

Application Area 1: Successful Practices using PEL in a Collaborative and Integrated Approach to Transportation Decision-making.

These include:

• Collaborative approaches to developing purpose and need statements during planning that define the transportation problem, justify why an action may be required, and support the screening of alternatives such that the purpose and need statement can be used in the NEPA process. Research could include consideration for:

o Integrating approaches for performance-based planning and programming (PBPP) with a planning and environmental review process that supports consistently using a strategic, data-driven approach to establishing goals, objectives, and performance measures for accountable and transparent transportation decision-making.

o Scenario planning.

o Safety planning.

o Equity planning.

o Resilience planning.

o Congestion management process.

• Collaborative approaches that successfully engage Federal land management agencies and Federally recognized tribal governments.

• Collaborative approaches between planning and environmental agencies to identify and screen alternatives during transportation planning that results in NEPA-compliant identification of a reasonable range of alternatives and/or elimination of unreasonable alternatives from detailed study prior to initiating the NEPA process.

• Data management and data governance tools and approaches that optimize information sharing, enable more effective collaboration with other agencies, and reduce duplication of effort, such as tools and methods for:

o Establishing timelines for engaging other agencies and determining decision points.

o Cataloging GIS resources from multiple agencies and organizations in ways that allow those data to be readily identified and incorporated into the transportation planning and environmental review processes.

o Effectively updating information and data sets useful in the transportation planning and environmental review processes.

• Collaborative approaches to considering and developing innovative financing, project bundling, and value capture strategies during the transportation planning and environmental review processes to accelerate project delivery.

• Innovative approaches to improve how stakeholders and members of the interested public can access and review project information, provide feedback, and engage in the transportation planning, project development and decision-making processes that result in more effective addressing of community needs, better project outcomes and more efficient environmental reviews, such as;

o Data-driven public involvement strategies (both for gathering and disseminating information) for transportation projects that helps to create precise “maps” of

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

transportation choices, system performance and needs, stakeholder interests, vulnerability and risk information, community needs and usually traveled places.

o Tools and strategies for effectively documenting the information obtained and developed through public involvement, to inform the environmental review process.

o Information that qualitatively evaluates and compares the effectiveness, costs and benefits of using traditional and virtual public involvement strategies.

Application Area 2: Successful practices and applications of environmental analysis in the transportation planning process that can be relied on for NEPA documentation or to inform permit or approval actions.

These include:

• Strategies for institutionalizing PEL by formally adopting an agreed upon PEL process into an agency’s procedures and policies for developing planning products (analyses and decisions) that can be readily used in NEPA.

• Information that qualitatively evaluates and compares the effectiveness, costs and benefits of traditional and PEL approaches to transportation planning, NEPA and environmental permitting.

• Successful practices and/or tools for generating, evaluating, screening and documenting alternatives and eliminating unreasonable alternatives during the planning process for use in NEPA, such as questionnaires, checklists, frameworks, or standardized tools.

• Successful practices enabling permitting agencies to rely on information or products developed during the planning and NEPA processes to inform its permit or approval action.

• Inventories of planning products that inform transportation project proponents about those that may be used in NEPA, including identifying those which are routinely used and in what circumstances. Products which are not routinely used would be identified and information provided describing why they are not frequently used while making suggestions for how to make these other planning products more useful.

• Successful tools and techniques to document a comprehensive record of data collection, analysis, collaboration, public participation, and decision-making throughout the transportation planning process that meets the requirements for use in NEPA.

Application Area 3: Techniques that Identify, Analyze, and Prioritize Potential Natural and Human Environmental Mitigation.

These include:

• Tools and approaches for identifying which data (e.g. GIS layers) are most useful to both planners and environmental practitioners relating to different natural and human environmental resources.

• Innovative methods for obtaining and sharing data that can be used in identifying, analyzing and prioritizing natural and human environmental resources in the planning and environmental review processes.

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

Application Area 4: Methodologies for the development of programmatic mitigation plans as part of the statewide or local planning process that can be relied on for NEPA documentation or to inform permit or approval actions.

This includes:

• Programmatic mitigation plans developed or adopted on a regional, ecosystem, watershed, or statewide scale to address the potential environmental impacts of transportation projects.

SECTION 3 – GENERAL PROPOSAL INFORMATION

3.1 GENERAL INFORMATION

All business and administrative correspondence or questions on this BAA shall be directed to the Contracting Officer identified in Section 1.

The FHWA has budgeted approximately $1,000,000 to fund this research announcement.

Proposals will be evaluated using a two-part process consisting of pre-proposals and full-proposals. Offerors whose pre-proposals are of interest to the FHWA will be invited to submit full proposals. The FHWA may decide to award to all, none, or a subset of the acceptable proposals meeting its needs. The FHWA anticipates making multiple awards, typically of 12-24 months’ duration with the size of individual awards varying on the type of research area and study requirements. The FHWA strongly encourages cost sharing under any contract that may result, and can offer cooperative agreements if the proposer can offer a cost share of 20 percent from non-federal sources of funding.

The FHWA strongly encourages proposals that offer a significant portion of non-federal matching funds or in-kind resources. Price reasonableness and realism will also be considered in the overall selection process. Individual proposal evaluations will be based on the acceptability or non-acceptability of the proposal without regard to other proposals submitted under the announcement. Selection will be based primarily on scientific or technical merit, partnership, relevance and importance to agency, and the availability of funds.

For cooperative agreements, the Federal share of the cost of a project or activity carried out under this program is up to eighty (80) percent, unless otherwise determined by the Secretary of Transportation. The number of awards, and their dollar value, will vary depending on the merit of proposals received as well as their potential to lead to transformational changes and advances in transportation planning practice. Not all technically meritorious proposals may be funded due to budgetary constraints. Offerors should prepare proposals with a baseline period of performance of 12-24 months and, if needed, with one or more options up to an additional 24-month period of performance.

3.2 OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

Proposals that plan to collect information from more than 9 non-Federal entities may require the FHWA to obtain clearance prior to the commencement of any information collection (Approximate time for clearance is 6 months). Awards involving any Privacy Act-covered data will require special clearances and protections.

It is the policy of the FHWA to treat all proposals as competitive information and to disclose the contents only for the purposes of evaluation. Only Government evaluators will make selections under this BAA. This announcement constitutes the public announcement as contemplated by FAR 5.203(e) and is in accordance with the competitive procedures outlined in FAR 6.102(d)(2)(i). No formal Request for Proposals or other solicitation regarding this announcement will be issued. Requests for the same will be disregarded.

3.3 DELIVERABLES

The specific deliverables will depend upon the scope and objectives of the negotiated award. At a minimum, the contractor shall present written results for at least a peer exchange, webinar, or workshop and submit a final report with a technical summary that documents the research conducted in each task identified in the proposal. Additional deliverables, such as interim reports, documentation, and instrumentation could be required and the specific deliverables shall be identified in the final statement of work.

3.4 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

The contract period of performance is negotiable, but shall be no more than 24 months from date of award.

3.4 FULL-PROPOSAL INFORMATION

The Government reserves the right to select for award any, all, part, or none of the proposals received in response to this announcement. In addition, the Government reserves the right to award either contracts, grants, or other instruments determined to be of benefit to the government in achieving the goals of this program. This BAA is an expression of interest only and does not commit the Government to pay any direct pre-proposal or proposal preparation costs. All responsible sources capable of satisfying the Government's needs may submit proposals, which will be evaluated. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) and Minority Institutions (MI) are encouraged to submit proposals and join others in submitting proposals. However, no portion of this BAA will be set aside for HBCU and MI participation due to the desire to solicit ideas as broadly as possible.

The FHWA has budgeted approximately $1,000,000 to fund this research program. Proposals will be evaluated using a two-part process consisting of pre-proposals and full-proposals.

Offerors whose pre-proposals are of interest to the FHWA will be invited to submit full proposals.

The FHWA may select for award all, none, or a subset of the acceptable proposals to construct a

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

balanced program meeting its needs.

Note: Awards with a total value (including full period of performance and any option periods) of $150,000 and below will be issued as purchase orders.

Note: Awards over $150,000 will be issued as contracts or cooperative agreements. The FHWA strongly encourages cost sharing under any contract that may result, and can offer cooperative agreements if the proposer can offer a cost share of twenty (20) percent or greater from non-federal sources of funding. For cooperative agreements, the Federal share of the cost of a project or activity carried out under this program is limited to eighty (80) percent, unless otherwise determined by the Secretary of Transportation.

The number of awards, and their dollar value, will vary depending on the merit of proposals received and their potential to lead to transformational changes and advances in transportation planning and environmental review practice. Offerors should prepare proposals with a period of performance of approximately 12 months, and no more than 24 months.

The scope of this announcement is intentionally broad to invite innovation and to provide the FHWA the flexibility to sponsor research that best addresses its objectives. In keeping with FHWA’s desire for innovation and flexibility, the specific approach in the selected full proposals will vary and will be negotiated. Any resulting contracts will contain appropriate federal agency clauses for the type of procurement vehicle awarded. Prior to award, the Offeror shall be required to submit “Certifications and Representations.” Data and reporting requirements will be negotiated with the offeror (s) selected for award(s).

The proposal submission shall be conducted in two phases:

1. Pre-proposal for FHWA review

2. Full Proposal.

Proposals may respond to one or more of the subject areas but must indicate which area is primary and which area, or areas, are subordinate. Organizations also may submit more than one proposal when the proposed effort includes multiple disparate objectives and tasks, covers multiple or disparate technologies areas, or would have a more supportable budget if provided in parts;

however, each proposal will be considered independently. Proposals will be evaluated using a two-part process: pre-proposals and full proposals.

The FHWA will evaluate pre-proposals against the evaluation criteria outlined in Section 5 below.

Those offerors whose pre-proposals are of interest may be invited to submit a formal full proposal, as described below. Offerors whose pre-proposals are determined not to be of interest are precluded from submitting a full proposal. Approximately thirty (30) days after the pre-proposal submission deadline, offerors submitting pre-proposals will be contacted by the Technical Point of Contact with a letter informing them either that the FHWA is requesting a formal cost and technical proposal, or that the effort proposed is not of interest to the Government.

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

The FHWA strongly encourages proposals that offer a significant non-federal matching funds or in-kind resources. Good proposals will evidence strong internal backing with matching funds, innovative approaches in contracting and leveraging current and past technology development efforts that support this program. Cost reasonableness and realism will also be considered in the overall selection process. Individual proposal evaluations will be based on acceptability or non-acceptability without regard to other proposals submitted under the announcement. Selection will be based primarily on scientific or technical merit, partnership, relevance and importance to agency, and availability of funds.

This BAA is an expression of interest only and the Government will not pay any direct proposal preparation costs. All responsible sources capable of satisfying the Government's needs may submit proposals, which will be evaluated based on the evaluation criteria outlined in Section 9.

The number of awards, and their dollar value, will vary depending on the technical merit of proposals received and the availability of funding.

SECTION 4 – INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

The Offeror is required to follow the guidance contained herein. The following sections provide information on proposal format, the submission process, evaluation and funding processes, and other general information. The Offeror may submit more than one proposal; however, each submittal must be in response to a complete and standalone innovation that supports a topic on the BAA. The topic of the proposal must be clearly identified in the proposal title on the cover page.

4.1 BAA QUESTIONS

Questions concerning the BAA shall be submitted via e-mail to the FHWA Contracting Officer.

Questions shall be provided using Attachment F.1 – BAA Question and Answer Model. All questions should be provided to:

Daniel Confer Contracting Officer Federal Highway Administration Email: Daniel.Confer@dot.gov HCFA-21SRI@dot.gov

Questions regarding this BAA solicitation shall be submitted no later than Noon (EST), June 19, 2020.

4.2 BAA PROPOSAL DUE DATES

4.2.1 PRE-PROPOSAL SUBMISSION DUE DATE

The Offeror shall submit a signed and dated white paper proposal in accordance with Section 5 of this BAA no later than Noon (EST), July 13, 2020. Proposals shall be submitted in an electronic format (Word, Excel, and PDF) to the following email addresses: Daniel.Confer@dot.gov and HCFA-21SRI@dot.gov. BAA White Papers shall be provided at or before the exact time specified

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

in this section of the BAA. Facsimile transmissions or hard copy transmissions of the white paper will not be accepted; any sent will be disregarded.

4.2.2 FULL PROPOSAL SUBMISSION DUE DATE

The Offeror shall submit a signed and dated full proposal in accordance with Section 5 of this BAA by the data and time specified in the Government’s request for the full proposal submission.

Proposals will be due no later than Noon (EST) August 26, 2020. The Government anticipates that this request will be made within two to three weeks of the White Paper submission date.

Proposals shall be submitted in an electronic format (Word, Excel, and PDF) to the following email address: Daniel.Confer@dot.gov and HCFA-21SRI@dot.gov. The final proposal shall be provided at or before the exact time specified in this section of the BAA.

4.3 PROPOSAL FORMATTING

The Offeror shall adhere to the following format requirements in the Pre-Proposal and Full Proposals:

a) Proposal title shall adhere to the following naming convention: “Topic #, Proposer – Innovative Tools, Techniques, and Processes to Accelerate Project Delivery.”

b) Proposals shall be formatted for 8½ x 11-inch paper.

c) Text shall be Times New Roman or Arial font, size no less than 12-point font.

d) Page margins (exclusive of headers and footers) shall be a minimum of 1inch top, bottom and each side. Columns shall not be used as they are difficult to read electronically.

e) Footnotes, legends, or labels associated with tables or diagrams, and other information that is ancillary to the main text, may be presented in a smaller, but still legible font.

SECTION 5 – WHITE PAPER CONTENT

All pre-proposals should be submitted in Microsoft® Word or text searchable Adobe® Portable Document Format (PDF). The white papers shall be no longer than 10 pages in length, and include the following sections:

Cover Page (not included in the page limitation): This must include (1) the BAA number,

(2) proposal title, (3) type of organization (State DOT, local public agency, private sector/industry, public/private sector partnership, HBCU or MI, etc.) (4) estimated project duration, (5) technical and administrative points of contact including addresses, telephone numbers, electronic mail addresses, (6) type of award anticipated (contract, or assistance agreement) and (7) a project abstract of no more than 200 words. The cover page does not count against the page limit for the proposal.

i. Discuss the pertinence of the proposed research to FHWA’s program goals and objectives.

ii. Demonstrate the proposed research’s ability to accelerate project delivery (2 – 3 pages).

iii. Discuss the products envisioned from this immediate effort and how they will accelerate project delivery (2 – 4 pages).

iv. Discuss your team composition, roles and responsibilities, and research approach for this

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

proposed effort (2 – 4 pages).

v. Briefly describe the expected high-level tasks, total time, and total cost (1 page).

vi. Business Information: (not included in the 10-page limitation above) All offerors shall include in the Initial Proposal the following mandatory business information regarding your business or institution:

a. Business Type (Small, Large, State, etc.).

b. Federal Tax Identification Number (TIN).

c. Dun & Bradstreet Number.

d. Confirmation of a current SAM.gov registration for your organization.

e. Name and contact information (mail address, telephone, and email address) of your authorized business representative/point of contact.

f. A preliminary and summary level cost estimate to accomplish the technical.

approach described; identification of required non-Federal cost share (required for proposed allocations to a State or for assistance agreements).

SECTION 6 – WHITE PAPER EVALUATION

The basis for selecting pre-proposals will be technical merit, the importance to the FHWA programs, the availability of funds, and cost realism and reasonableness. The white papers will be evaluated based on the following criteria, listed below in descending order of importance:

i. The proposed research is pertinent to FHWA’s program goals and objectives.

ii. The proposed research has a new and innovative approach, or would result in a new and innovative product.

iii. The pre-proposal is well-conceived and scientifically/technically sound.

iv. The pre-proposal is offered by a responsible offeror with a team that is likely to deliver on time and on budget.

v. How much effort will be needed to translate the proposed products into practical outcomes, or be replicated by others.

vi. How the research leverages existing research, related products, or other FHWA efforts.

vii. The pre-proposal’s cost realism and reasonableness, based on proposed high-level tasks, total time, and total cost.

The evaluated white papers will be divided into the following two categories:

i. Category I: Category I proposals are well-conceived, scientifically/technically sound, pertinent to program goals/objectives, and offered by a responsible offeror. Category I proposals are recommended for full proposal (subject to availability of funds) and normally will be displaced only by other Category I proposals. Some proposals are scientifically or technically sound but may require further development.

ii. Category II proposals are not technically sound or do not meet agency needs. Proposals in this category are not recommended for full proposal.

Offerors whose proposals are evaluated as Category I will be asked to submit full proposals.

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

SECTION 7 – INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMISSION OF FULL PROPOSALS

7.1 Full Proposal Instructions

After the pre-proposals evaluation stage is complete, offerors who are invited to submit full proposals will be notified of the actual dates for submission and will provided with specific instructions for submission of full proposals. It is anticipated that full proposals will include a technical proposal that is 15 pages or less in length, as well as a separate cost/price proposal.

Offerors submitting full proposals will be asked to submit technical proposals that provide a refined research problem statement and work scope, a management plan, technology transition plan, staffing qualifications, and information regarding other ongoing research and work. In addition to the technical proposal, offerors will be requested to submit a cost proposal that provides complete and detailed budget information (length as necessary), information on proposed cost sharing, and other general business information. If necessary, the FHWA will request additional cost back-up information, resumes or supplemental information as appropriate.

Recipients of cooperative agreements will be asked to complete the applicable SF-424 series of forms. Each Offeror shall submit their proposal electronically in Microsoft Word or Adobe Portable Document Format.

The evaluation board may take into account any failure to conform to the instructions and rules in this section, or any attempt to evade these specifications and rules on the basis of technicalities, as indicators of future performance.

If an Offeror does not understand the instructions as described herein, then they must submit their questions(s) to the Contract Specialist (Matthew Carr) for clarification sufficiently in advance of the deadline for the receipt of offers to get an answer in time to meet that deadline.

7.2 Questions on the BAA content, issues, or procedures should be emailed to:

Daniel.Confer@dot.gov and HCFA-21SRI@dot.gov

7.3 Proposal Due Date

Proposals are due by Noon EST on August 26, 2020 electronically to:

Daniel.Confer@dot.gov and HCFA-21SRI@dot.gov

Offers must be received by the time and due date specified herein to be considered timely and acceptable.

SECTION 8 – FULL PROPOSAL FORMAT

8.1 Full Proposal Format

Full proposals shall be submitted by an authorized representative and include a technical proposal 15 pages or less in length, a separate cost proposal, resumes, and past performance. The technical proposal shall include the following four (4) sections and subsections:

Part I Technical Proposal

(1) Cover Page with (A) the BAA number, (B) proposal title, (C) type of business (large business, small disadvantaged business, other small business, HBCU or MI, other educational, or other nonprofit), (D) complete list of subcontractors, (E) technical and administrative points of contact including addresses, telephone numbers, and electronic mail addresses.

(2) Refined research problem statement (up to three pages) with a description of the proposed innovative technology, system or approach, and how the proposed effort will meet the objectives of the broad agency announcement, a comparison of these innovative ideas with current approaches and the current state of the art and the expected impact of the research if successful. The research problem statement shall discuss how the proposed research relates to relevant regulatory and programmatic issues.

(3) Complete work scope (up to six pages) describing research methods, steps, schedule (for a period of performance up to two years) with milestones, expected deliverables and associated evaluation metrics for the proposed effort.

(4) A Management Plan (no more than two pages) describing the overall approach to management of this effort, including a brief discussion of the proposed organization and the use of personnel and other resources. This section shall also describe the partnership structure between the entity proposing work and other public and private sector entities funding or otherwise substantially participating in the work, including State Departments of Transportation, State Air Quality Agencies, Metropolitan Planning Organizations, Universities, Foundations, etc.

(5) A Technology Transition Plan (no more than one page) describing the how the research could be transferred into local or national practice.

(6) Facilities: (no more than one page) describing the facilities that would be used for the proposed effort.

(7) All work plans must include preparation of read-ahead documents, presentation materials, and meeting facilities. In addition, at least one web conference may be subsequently held to respond to reviewer comments and present scenario evaluation findings.

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

(8) The work plan shall clearly indicate how the proposed research will lead to transformational changes and revolutionary advances for accelerating project delivery. The work plan shall clearly indicate if and how the proposed effort will leverage existing research, related products, or other FHWA efforts. The work plan shall describe the necessary tasks required to support the proposed work. The work plan shall describe a timeline for completion of each task and the interrelationships of all tasks.

Part II Staffing Proposal:

(1) Research team qualifications (up to three pages) with title and identification of association to a specific project or functional group within the proposing organization or to a specific proposed subcontractor. Indicate the proposed amount of effort (person-hours) to be expended by each person during the proposed program.

(2) As part of its proposal, the offeror shall designate a Project Manager and other personnel deemed by the offeror to be essential to the successful completion of the contract. These individuals will be listed in the contract as Key Personnel. In the event any of the Key Personnel are unable to perform as proposed for any reason during the performance of the contract, the contractor shall immediately notify the COR and Contacting Officer in writing. Such notice shall include an explanation of the problem, a proposed replacement by someone of equal or better qualifications and experience, and shall explain the impact on performance. All replacements are subject to the prior written approval of the Contracting Officer. However, the Government reserves the right to approve such replacements retroactively when circumstances prevent advance approval.

Part III Past Performance/Experience

(1) Reference to past relevant research at the national, state or regional level (up to two pages) describing capabilities, work, and significant accomplishments in areas associated with proposed research area or in closely related areas. Associate the described relevant experience to the specific project group or functional group in the proposing organization or to the specific proposed subcontractor(s).

(2) Other proposals (one page maximum) summarizing current and pending proposals being executed or proposed to be executed with the support of personnel proposed in this effort. This list shall include project scale, start and end dates, and the average amount of time planned or currently being expended on each effort. The list shall be organized by names of the key personnel and other significant senior personnel. If none, state none under this section.

(3) A Bibliography (one page maximum) of relevant technical papers and research notes which support the technical concepts and innovative ideas described in this proposal.

Part IV Cost/Price Proposal

In addition to the above 15-page or shorter technical proposal, offerors shall submit a cost proposal that provides complete budget information (length as necessary). Each summary budget shall include costs by each major cost category such as direct labor, fringe benefits, subcontracts, travel

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

and other direct costs, overhead/indirect costs, and fee (if applicable). Direct labor information shall provide detail regarding each proposed individual or labor category, the number of hours or percent of time proposed for each period, and the unburdened hourly rate or salary for each person or category. For other direct costs (travel, materials and supplies, etc), provide detail and explanation for how each element of cost was derived and estimated. For any subcontracts, provide a separate detailed budget for the subcontract work, and provide a price analysis of the work.

Please note that the FHWA can pay per diem for travelers, but cannot pay for meals or receptions under contracts. Only small printing/duplicating costs should be proposed, if needed; any large printing jobs must be carried out by the FHWA in accordance with Government Printing Office regulations.

A separate detailed cost breakdown shall also be provided by task and subtask, using the same task or subtask numbers as described in the scope of work in the technical proposal. If necessary, the government will request additional cost back-up information, resumes or supplemental information as appropriate. Details of any cost sharing to be undertaken by the offeror shall also be included in the cost section. Describe the type of funds (cash, in kind, etc.), and its contribution and relationship in enhancing the proposed effort. With the budget include the following mandatory business information regarding your company: Business Size; Federal Tax Identification Number (TIN); Dun & Bradstreet Number; Name and contact information (mail address, telephone, and email address) of your authorized business representative/point of contact. An SF1411, Contract Pricing Proposal Cover Sheet, is not required for this submission of your proposal.

(2) An estimated budget and spending plan for completion of the project must be clearly labeled and identified in the cost proposal (See Attachment F.2).

8.2 Subcontractors

Subcontractors’ proposals must be similarly structured. All subcontracted work must be properly identified as such. If a subcontractor elects to submit an abbreviated proposal, it is the offeror’s responsibility to see that the subcontractor submits the information requested in the four (4) sections above and submits the proposal directly to the Government’s point of contact. The offeror must ensure that the subcontractor adheres to the guidance set forth herein. FAR 15.404-3 requires that the offeror provide an analysis of subcontractors’ cost proposals. To that end, offeror’s proposal must:

(1) Identify principal items/services to be subcontracted.

(2) Identify prospective subcontractors and the basis on which they were selected. If non-competitive, provide selected source justification.

(3) Identify the type of contractual business arrangement contemplated for the subcontract and provide a rationale for same.

(4) Identify the basis for the subcontract costs (e.g., firm quote or engineering estimate, etc).

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

(5) Identify the cost or pricing data or information other than cost or pricing data submitted by the subcontractor.

(6) Provide an analysis of the proposed subcontract in accordance with FAR 15.404-3(b). Provide an analysis concerning the reasonableness, realism and completeness of each subcontractor’s proposal. If the analysis is based on comparison with prior prices, identify the basis on which the prior prices were determined to be reasonable. The analysis should include, but not be limited to, an analysis of: materials, labor, travel, other direct costs and proposed profit or fee rates.

i. Changes to Pricing Proposals: Changes to previously submitted proposals must include documentation indicating how a previously submitted proposal is impacted or affected.

(1) If changes to the original proposal are relatively insignificant and involve only minor changes to elements such as labor rates, overhead and General and Administrative (G&A) rates, bill of material changes, travel costs, and Other Direct Costs (ODC’s), these change can be accomplished through the use of change pages or slip pages accompanied by new cost summaries.

8.3 NOTE: The requirements of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act applies to all deliverables under any resulting award, including the final report. The applicability of Section 508 will be determined on a case-by-case basis depending on the nature of deliverables under each award that results from this BAA.

8.4 NOTE: Rights to copyrightable software delivered under any resulting award of this BAA shall be determined in accordance with 48 CFR 52.227-14 and alternatives I, II, III. Furthermore, all software deliveries, preliminary and final, will include as a minimum, well-documented source code in electronic readable format, overall software architecture documentation, overall and individual module interface documentation, and a user’s operations manual. All hardware deliveries will include all documentation necessary to reproduce (assemble) and operate the delivered hardware system(s). Also, if applicable, provide a summary of any proprietary claims to results, software, hardware, prototypes, or systems supporting and/or necessary for the use of the research, results, software, hardware, prototype, or system proposed for development under this broad agency announcement. If there are no proprietary claims, this section shall consist of a statement to that effect.

SECTION 9 - EVALUATION CRITERIA OF FULL PROPOSALS

9.1 Evaluation Criteria

The primary basis for selecting proposals will be technical merit, importance to the FHWA programs, and the availability of funds. Technical merit will be evaluated based on the following criteria, listed in descending order of relative importance:

Technical Approach

A. Provides a sound, feasible, and achievable technical approach. Discusses the steps (or tasks) to execute the methodology by which the project objective will be achieved.

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

B. Discusses and demonstrates the ability to clearly describe the project objectives, needs, and the manner in which they will be addressed.

C. Demonstrates a solid grasp of the subject area; familiarity with regulatory or programmatic issues.

D. Leverages existing and related products or other FHWA efforts.

Staffing

A. Includes the academic credentials, professional experience, subject matter expertise and technical competence of key personnel for this project, including all the personnel who will participate as subcontractors for this project

B. Discusses the research team's relevant skills and experience that will ensure success. Provides a short bio and list of relevant experience for each technical personnel.

C. Provides contingency plans in place to replace key personnel over the life of the project without any adverse impact on performance.

Team Experience

A. Recent successful research, organization, and material development on the project objective.

Past Performance

The Government will evaluate the relevant merits of the contractor’s past performance on the basis of its reputation with its former customers. The Government may review all or some of the following areas regarding past performance. The lack of a performance record may result in an unknown performance risk assessment, which will neither be used to the advantage or disadvantage of the offeror.

• Timeliness;

• Delivery or Performance;

• Problem Responsiveness;

• Quality of Purchased Product or Services;

• Cost Control;

• Technical Support; and

• Delivered Quantities.

In evaluating Past Performance, the Government may consider information provided by contractors in their proposal submissions, as well as any other information available to the Government.

A. Cost/Price Price will be considered in the ultimate award decision. The Government will evaluate proposals to determine price reasonableness. The Government will accept the offer that is considered the best value to the Government. A best value analysis will be performed taking into consideration the results of the technical evaluation, cost and past performance analysis, and the perceived ability to perform timely, high quality, consistently reliable support services as provided herein.

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

9.2 Non-federal matching funds

The FHWA strongly encourages proposals that offer a significant non-federal matching funds or in-kind resources. Good proposals will evidence strong internal backing with matching funds, innovative approaches in contracting and leveraging current and past technology development efforts that support this program. Such proposals will receive consideration in addition to and above how they respond to the technical criteria above. Cost reasonableness and realism will also be considered in the overall selection process. Individual proposal evaluations will be based on acceptability or non-acceptability without regard to other proposals submitted under the announcement. Selection will be based primarily on scientific or technical merit, partnership, relevance and importance to agency, and availability of funds. Note that all technically meritorious proposals may not be funded due to budgetary constraints.

In addition to the criteria listed above, cost/price will be considered in the award decision. The proposals will be analyzed to assess their price reasonableness. This means that the prices in an offeror’s proposal are realistic for the work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the requirements, and are consistent with the various elements of the offeror’s technical proposal.

In the determination of Best Value, the relative weight given to all evaluation factors other than price, when combined, is more important than price. However, offerors should note that as technical scores approach being essentially equivalent, cost would become more important in the selection decision.

9.3 Administrative Information

It is the policy of the FHWA to treat all proposals as competitive information and to disclose the contents only for the purposes of evaluation. Only Government evaluators will make selections under this BAA. This announcement constitutes the public announcement as contemplated by FAR 6.102(d) (2), and no formal Request for Proposals or other solicitation regarding this announcement will be issued. Requests for same will be disregarded. The Government reserves the right to select for award any, all, part, or none of the proposals received in response to this announcement. In addition, the Government reserves the right to award either contracts, purchase orders, or other instruments determined to be of benefit to the government in achieving the goals of this program.

SECTION 10 - TECHNICAL AND COST NEGOTIATIONS

10.1 Contract Vehicle

The Contract Officer will determine the appropriate award vehicle depending on the work to be performed and notify the offeror of his/her decision.

10.2 Model Proposal

Once the proposal evaluation is completed and ranked, the offerors selected for negotiations will be notified by email. If necessary, this notification may include further instructions. The written notification shall also include a model contract. The model contract provides the basis for negotiations on all contractual requirements, terms, and conditions. If the offeror takes exception

693JJ3-20-BAA-0003

to any requirements, these must be specifically identified in the reply to the Contracting Officer.

The reply must also include any other information required by the Government.

10.3 Revised or Updated Cost/Price Proposal

If necessary, at the same time an offeror is notified of their selection, they may be requested to submit either an updated or revised cost proposal and any additional cost information or backup cost data.

10.4 Technical Proposal Changes

Normally, if any clarifications are needed by the Government technical evaluators, the offeror will be…