693JJ321NF00008_Q and A 1 - 23_3-29-22.pdf

693JJ321NF00008

Questions and Answers (Q&A) 1 - 23

3/29/2022

Task Area 1: Operate a National Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center

1. QUESTION: Task 1.2.1 (Page 8) includes the following two bullet points:

• Host free monthly Webinars on important issues related to walking and bicycling. The Webinars will be 1-1.5 hours each and topics will be identified in the annual work plan.

The Recipient will be responsible for all promotion and technical logistics for the monthly Webinars.

• Host additional Webinars on recent and ongoing pedestrian and bicycle research projects and products and “hot” topics mutually agreed upon with the AOR (anticipate 6 to 10 annually).

We have observed a growing number of webinars on active transportation over the past decade;

18- 22 webinars a year from PBIC seems like a lot. Looking at the current website (https://www.pedbikeinfo.org/webinars/), PBIC offered 10 webinars in 2021, 15 in 2020, and 10 in 2019. Based on this, we would appreciate clarification on the number of webinars the next PBIC is expected to host, since the expectation in this and the last NOFO is/was for 18-22 annually.

ANSWER: The expectation is in the range of 18-22: regular monthly webinars, plus 6 to 10 additional webinars. The previous agreement did not specify as many.

2. QUESTION: Task 1.2.1 (Page 8) includes the following item:

• Plan, organize, host, facilitate, and participate in virtual meetings and conferences (approximately quarterly) with key partners and stakeholders (including video, Web, and teleconferences) to promote walking and bicycling.

Are there on-going groups of key partners and stakeholders that the PBIC has been hosting at such meetings? If so, is there an expectation to continue those? If so, could the FHWA provide some additional detail on the existing effort?

ANSWER: This is a new subtask. Anticipated duties include planning, organizing, hosting, and facilitating quarterly meetings of key partners and stakeholders such as peer exchanges with State and/or local coordinators or officials, national nonprofit organizations, and researchers.

3. QUESTION: Task 1.2.1 (Page 9) includes the following item:

• Provide targeted material to meet emerging needs related to pedestrian, bicycle, and micromobility safety and network connectivity, identified by the AOR. As part of the development of the annual work plan, the AOR and the Recipient will identify quick turnaround tasks (4-8 weeks in duration) to include, such as issue briefs, case studies on a specific topic, or graphic design layout of information developed by FHWA staff. This information will be posted on the Website as appropriate. Example: if FHWA holds a series of workshops on Complete Streets and Complete Networks, the Recipient may be asked to develop a paper describing the current state of the practice to share with participants.

Is there an estimate for the number of such targeted materials to be developed each year? Also, we assume that these are distinct from the case studies (minimum two annually) included in another part of the task.

ANSWER: This task will provide flexibility to address emerging needs. Examples from the past several years include rapid reply research on bikesharing, pedestrians and bicyclists on https://www.pedbikeinfo.org/webinars/

3/29/2022 highway bridges, ebikes, equity, micromobility, automated and connected vehicles, and street changes due to COVID response. Other topics may relate to complete networks, accessibility, or other emerging topics that need quick-turnaround research and/or synthesis. These are not the same as the case studies for multimodal planning and safe routes to school.

4. QUESTION: Task 1.2.12 (Page 9) includes the following item:

• Travel to targeted sites (2 to 3 per year) around the country that have been identified by key partners and stakeholders as needing training and participate in conferences attended by key partners and stakeholders that should be aware of and using FHWA resources..

Is the travel to the targeted sites in addition to the travel to conferences? How many conferences are expected to be covered?

ANSWER: This task supports attending conferences and workshops in targeted sites to provide specific additional training to promote safe and accessible bicycling and walking. The expectation is 2 to 3 per year. This is not part of other national conference attendance.

5. QUESTION: The 2016 version of this opportunity included the following item under Task

1.2.2:

• Support nonmotorized data initiatives by promoting and expanding the use of the

Nonmotorized Toolkit and by disseminating lessons learned from pedestrian and bicycle counting activities.

The 2022 version (Page 9) does not include that item, but instead includes this item at the same place in the task list:

1. Produce research material on how incorporating schools as a destination in the Bike/Ped network can influence reduction in greenhouse gases (regional).

Was this change in subtasks intended? We ask because the current RFP has this item numbered, rather than bulleted, so it appears out of place.

ANSWER: Yes, this change was intended: this NOFO does not include the nonmotorized toolkit. The numbering is an error: it should have been a bulleted item.

Task Area 2: Pedestrian and Bicycle Research and Technical Assistance

6. QUESTION: Task 2.1 (Page 10) includes the following item:

• Identify and share strategies and opportunities to correct gaps in connectivity and accessibility, such as those identified in pedestrian and bicycle assessments or ADA Transition Plans.

Could this be covered with the case studies, targeted materials, webinars, or other activities listed in different task areas?

ANSWER: Yes.

7. QUESTION: Task 2.1 (Page 10) includes the following items:

• Assist States, MPOs, Federal Land Management Agencies, tribes, local agencies, and other stakeholders to identify, monitor, and assess how to improve transportation choices for walking and bicycling.

• Provide technical assistance to support locally-driven pedestrian and bicycle assessment follow-up activities.

3/29/2022

How are these activities different from the item in Task 1.2.1 to “Provide targeted technical assistance to Federal, State, regional, and local agency staff, and advocacy organizations on pedestrian and bicycle issues…”

ANSWER: Although these are similar tasks, Task 1 is part of National Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center operation, and is intended to provide general technical assistance to promote existing materials. Task 2 focuses on research and technical assistance, and coordinating research, planning, and tracking, including using existing resources to support assessments.

8. QUESTION: Task 2.1 (Page 10) includes the following item:

• Develop a report highlighting examples of new or significantly improved pedestrian and bicycle transportation networks that provide functional connections and transportation choices.

Is FHWA expecting a single report once during the 5-year effort or more than that? We note that there is a 2015 case study report (Case Studies in Delivering Safe, Comfortable and Connected Pedestrian and Bicycle Networks) and a Volume II from PBIC (December 2016). Have there been any updates since 2016?

ANSWER: This is a single report within the 5 year effort.

9. QUESTION: Task 2.1 (Page 10) includes the following item:

• Develop and produce resources (four to six per year) such as white papers, issue briefs, and summary reports to address bicycle and pedestrian planning and access to transit, as it relates to equity, mobility innovation, vehicle automation, multimodal networks, safety, sustainability, and accessibility.

Please confirm that these resources are distinct from and in addition to the case studies and targeted materials (issue briefs, case studies, etc.) listed under Task Area 1. In addition, it is unclear what the topics of these resources should be. Does the “as it relates to equity” clause apply just to “access to transit”? Or “bicycle and pedestrian planning and access to transit”? Are the items after equity separate from “bicycle and pedestrian planning and access to transit”? Are these just possible topic areas and the FHWA expects the proposer to discuss possible topic areas?

ANSWER: The intention is to produce resources covering bicycle and pedestrian access to transit. Topics include equity, mobility innovation, vehicle automation, multimodal networks, safety, sustainability, and accessibility, and others that may be proposed.

9a. QUESTION: In the same bullet point under Task 2.1 (Page 11), the NOFO indicates that the PBIC would be “assisting with follow-up activities identified in the pilot project.”

Please clarify what types of follow-up activities are expected and the extent of this effort.

ANSWER: Included in the anticipated four to six resources under this bullet, the intent is to include among them discussion of issues and lessons learned from the referenced pilot program report.

10. QUESTION: Under Task 2.1 (Page 11) there is a subtask:

• Promote SRTS activities by developing case studies and best practices for improving walking and bicycle conditions to and from school.

3/29/2022

How does this subtask differ from or overlap with the subtasks listed in Task Area 4?

Does FHWA have an estimate of the number of case studies expected per year? If not, what has the existing practice been, i.e. how many case studies are produced each year by the current center?

ANSWER: Remove this item from Task 2.1 on page 11. SRTS is covered in Task Area 4.

11. QUESTION: Task 2.2 (Page 11) includes the following language: “The Recipient will participate in FHWA bicycle and pedestrian working group meetings (approximately six in the first year of performance) to contribute to the development of priorities that may be included in the next research roadmap for bicycle and pedestrian planning.” This section of the NOFO is focused on the FHWA Strategic Agenda for Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation, which is broader than a “research roadmap.”

Please clarify whether we would be participating in a working group to update the broader Strategic Agenda or an effort focused only on research.

ANSWER: The Recipient is expected to contribute to discussions on research needs that are appropriate for FHWA to lead on, that would be a part of a broader strategy document.

Task Area 3: Pedestrian and Bicycle Crash Analysis Tool – Website Updates

12. QUESTION: This task (Page 12) requires the PBIC to make updates to the “Pedestrian and

Bicycle Crash Analysis Tool and provide URL links to the new Website location for the tool.”

Please explain this task more clearly. What is “the new Website location”? The current website (https://pbcat3.org/) is hosted by the Turner-Fairbank HRC. Does this NOFO expect the recipient to host the PBCAT website instead? Or would we be working with Turner-Fairbank to make updates? If so, please explain how we would have access to make such changes. In addition, who is responsible for identifying substantive content updates to the site?

ANSWER: Task 3 should have been removed from the NOFO. The PBIC will not be required to support PBCAT. The deliverable has been removed from the Table of Deliverables.

Task Area 4 (will become Task Area 3): Support Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS) Activities and Produce Case Studies Around Child Safety

13. QUESTION: How are the activities in this task (Pages 12-13) expected to be coordinated with any efforts of the National Center for Safe Routes to School that are supported by US DOT, including FHWA?

ANSWER: This effort will be FHWA support for Safe Routes to School efforts and take over tasks funded under the previous agreement.

14. QUESTION: The task (Page 12) includes “Prepare fact sheets on SRTS lessons learned in low-income areas.” How many fact sheets are expected?

ANSWER: For Task 3 (revised task number), the Table of Deliverables is revised to require 1 case study or fact sheet that many cover Task 3 activities per quarter, for a total of 20, to be documented in annual workplans. See below.

https://pbcat3.org/

3/29/2022

15. QUESTION: The task (Page 12) includes “Develop a white paper on best practices for implementing SRTS projects in underserved communities.” Please confirm that this in addition to the 4-6 resources, including white papers, listed under Task 2.1.

ANSWER: This activity is for Task Area 3 (revised), not for other Task Areas. See revised Table of Deliverables below.

16. QUESTION: The task (Page 12) includes “Document the social impacts that the legacy of segregated schools has on biking and walking; identify community and built environment characteristics that may inhibit walking and bicycling around low-income area schools.” This could be a very large research effort. We assume that FHWA is only expecting the use of secondary sources for this effort. Is that correct? Could FHWA provide additional detail on the expectation for this effort? It would seem that the product of this effort could be a white paper. Is that consistent with FHWA’s expectation?

ANSWER: It is appropriate to use any available relevant resources. FHWA expects a white paper of 15 to 30 pages.

17. QUESTION: The task (Page 12) includes “Conduct research and provide SRTS data that focuses on design and barriers to walking and biking to school.” This could be a large research effort involving original data collection. Could the FHWA provide further details on the expectation for this task? Is the expectation to use data from http://www.saferoutesdata.org/? If so, since that resource is being shut down, would FHWA provide access to the data?

ANSWER: The expectation is to develop case studies that focus on design and barriers to walking and biking to school. FHWA will provide alternative sources for data collection as appropriate. The data system was not created with funds under the current agreement and has been supported in part through other fund sources, however, all States will have data available to them.

18. QUESTION: The task (Page 12) includes the following item:

• Produce a Webinar and handbook that focuses on such topics as school crossings, incomplete sidewalks that prevent children from walking to school, and the importance of implementing complete streets, as it relates to safely accommodating people of all ages and abilities regardless of whether they are drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, or public transportation riders.

Is this webinar one of the 18-22 expected under Task Area 1? What is the expectation for the Handbook? How would it differ from existing resources, such as the “Safety-based prioritization of schools for Safe Routes to School infrastructure projects: A process for transportation professionals” developed by the National Center for Safe Routes to School? Or the guide available here: http://guide.saferoutesinfo.org/?

ANSWER: This activity is for Task Area 3 (revised). The handbook would build on the existing resources mentioned above and determine what gaps there are given today’s context, particularly because Safe Routes to School now includes high schools, but the resources mentioned in the question did not.

http://www.saferoutesdata.org/ http://guide.saferoutesinfo.org/

3/29/2022

19. QUESTION: The task (Page 12) includes “Produce analyses and case studies around multimodal network connectivity, such as planning walk sheds for walking to school.” How many case studies are expected?

ANSWER: For Task 3 (revised), the Table of Deliverables is revised to require 1 case study or fact sheet that many cover Task 3 activities per quarter, for a total of 20, to be documented in annual workplans. See below.

20. QUESTION: There is a subtask on (Page 13): “Produce research material on the role that pedestrian and bicycle networks around school areas play or could play in reducing greenhouse gases (regional).” Is this subtask the same as the one listed under 1.2.2, “Produce research material on how incorporating schools as a destination in the Bike/Ped network can influence reduction in greenhouse gases (regional).”?

ANSWER: This activity is for Task Area 3 (revised), not for other Task Areas.

21. QUESTION: Another bulleted item (Page 13) includes “Develop white paper, webinar, and fact sheet on SRTS for students with accessibility and mobility challenges in rural areas.” Can this webinar be one of the 18-22 listed in Task 1.2.1? Please confirm that this white paper is in addition to the 4-6 resources, including white papers, listed under Task 2.1.

ANSWER: This activity is for Task Area 3 (revised), not for other Task Areas.

Table of Deliverables

Task

Deliverable(s)

Due Date

Section 508 Compliant

1.1 Kickoff meeting and work plan 8 days after the effective date of this Agreement

No

1.2.1 Provide technical assistance to

transportation professionals

Ongoing (To be documented in annual workplan)

Yes

1.2.2 Strategies for improving pedestrian

and bicycle safety and mobility.

Ongoing (To be documented in annual workplan)

No

1.2.3 Support the State DOT Bicycle and

Pedestrian Coordinators

Bimonthly No

2.1 Research Coordination, Planning, And

Tracking Activities

Ongoing (To be Documented in annual workplans)

No

2.2 Support Connected Pedestrian and

Bicycle Transportation Networks

Ongoing (To be Documented in annual workplans)

No

3 Ped/Bike Crash Analysis Tool Ongoing (To be Documented in annual workplans)

Yes

Safe Routes to School Activities and Case Studies and Fact Sheets covering topics in Task 3

1 Case Study or Fact Sheet Quarterly on SRTS activities (20 total, to be documented in annual workplans)

Yes

3 White paper on racial equity issues (include topics in the racial equity section of the statement of work).

One year after agreement date Yes

3/29/2022 3 Research and webinar on Complete

Streets and Networks and SRTS One year after agreement date Yes

3 White paper and webinar on SRTS for accessibility (include fact sheets and case studies in overall Task 3 deliverables)

Two years after agreement date

Yes

Transition Plan 6 months before the end date of this Agreement

No

N/A

Annual Budget Review and Program Plan. Note: See NOFO Section F.2.O

Annually

N/A

Quarterly Progress Reports, including a Federal Financial Report. Note: See NOFO Section F.3.

Quarterly

22. QUESTION: Page 20 references that we should provide “Direct labor-by-labor categories” in the detailed budget. Can you provide the labor categories to use, or are these at our discretion to establish?

ANSWER: Labor categories are at the applicant’s discretion to fulfill the required tasks.

23. QUESTION: Page 30 states that FHWA anticipates making an award on or about September 30, 2022. Is this to be considered the earliest available start date, or the latest available start date? In other words, can proposing teams assume any start dates prior to September 30?

ANSWER: September 30, 2022 is anticipated to be the latest start date.