70FA6019I00000002_(FEMA_CERC_RFI)_FBO_-_14_November_2018.pdf

Solicitation Number: 70FA6019I00000002 Notice Type: Request For Information (RFI)

Synopsis:

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Federal Insurance & Mitigation Administration (FIMA) Risk Management Directorate’s (RMD) Community Engagement & Risk Communications Support Services (CERC)

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration (FIMA), Risk Management Directorate (RMD) requires strategic and risk communication, mitigation planning, behavioral science, and partnership services to assist with delivering Community Engagement and Risk Communications requirements.

RFI Questions FEMA is asking Industry’s input to the questions posed below related to the FEMA-FIMA CERC support services requirement. Please refer to the incorporated draft Performance Work Statement (PWS) and information contained within the questions to provide a response. Please answer the following questions as they pertain to your expertise:

1. FEMA is shifting from primarily communicating about risk to also driving risk reduction action. This shift is captured in the FEMA Strategic Plan, specifically goals 1.1 and 1.2. There is also recognition that this requires empowering key influencers to effectively accomplish these goals. As this shift occurs, how would industry advise the Government to employ scope performance requirements outcomes/results that could be incorporated into the PWS, or provided as supporting solicitation information, related to behavioral science and risk communication concepts and skills to effectively increase understanding and drive action?

2. FEMA is focusing on leveraging and empowering new partners and stakeholders to communicate risk and drive risk reduction action. Currently, traditional stakeholders include subject matter experts such as floodplain administrators, state hazard mitigation officers, flood insurance agents, engineers, planners, conservation departments, building code/zoning officers, etc. What non-traditional stakeholders and skills should be included and/or prioritized to carry this forward?

3. FEMA has dispersed offices across the United States - Washington, DC and Regional Offices in Boston, MA; New York, NY; Philadelphia, PA; Atlanta, GA; Chicago, IL; Denton, TX; Kansas City, MO; Denver, CO; Oakland, CA; and Bothell, WA. CERC services require a standardized approach to delivering support and executing effective engagement and communications while allowing for Regional office tailoring and nuances. It also requires effective coordination to leverage lessons learned in various offices that can be implemented across the country. What recommendations do you have for scope performance requirements outcomes/results that could be incorporated into the PWS, or provided as supporting solicitation information, related to practices and structures that can be used to manage standardized support across this geographic dispersion, taking into account these considerations?

https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1533052524696-b5137201a4614ade5e0129ef01cbf661/strat_plan.pdf

4. FEMA is responsible for developing technical mapping products that have also been used as risk communications tools. What recommendations do you have for scope performance requirements outcomes/results that could be incorporated into the PWS, or provided as supporting solicitation information, related to more effectively communicating personalized risk in a way that drives consumers to take action?

5. What recommendations do you have related to how FEMA can tailor or provide all its products

(regulatory and flood risk products) and data to communities and citizens in a way that is easily understood or interpreted by technical and non-technical stakeholders?

6. FEMA engages with communities around the Risk MAP structure which often leaves communities with significant time gaps between engagements. What recommendations do you have for scope performance requirements outcomes/results that could be incorporated into the PWS, or provided as supporting solicitation information, related to effective engagement in between the structured process to continue to increase risk understanding and drive risk reduction action?

7. FEMA has been tasked by the Technical Mapping Advisory Council (TMAC) to incorporate future conditions into its flood risk products. Changing risk and risk uncertainty are difficult to communicate and harder to account for when deciding to take risk reduction action. Please advise on what information would be needed or helpful to receive from the Government in order to explain effective means of communicating changing risk and risk uncertainty to technical and non-technical audiences.

8. FEMA produces regulatory and non-regulatory products that incorporate current technology and data to develop detailed, technical risk information products. Regularly, non-technical audiences argue the validity of the maps due to their impacts, not necessarily the understanding of the technical aspects. In using behavioral science and risk communications concepts, how much should the technical information be incorporated into communicating risk to increase understanding and drive action?

9. FEMA has a virtual reality tool called IMMERSED to leverage behavioral science concepts and technology to increase understanding of risk. What other technology can or should be leveraged to drive risk awareness, understanding, and action?

10. FEMA-FIMA needs to be adept at best servicing our customers’ needs. Doing so requires knowing our customers and gathering their feedback on our products. What recommendations do you have for scope performance requirements outcomes/results that could be incorporated into the PWS, or provided as supporting solicitation information, related to user or customer testing and/or reviews performed on these products? Which users or customers would you ask to participate in those reviews?

11. Based on the needs of the CERC requirement, what recommendations do you have related to structuring a solicitation that encourages industry innovations in stakeholder engagement (not specifically community engagement) and program management that would be beneficial to FEMA?

12. FEMA works with state, local, tribal, and territory (SLTT) governments to produce high-quality flood risk information. That information is often not used to the fullest capability as it’s often conveyed in a technical manner that is not widely understood outside of non-technical audiences. How should https://www.fema.gov/risk-map-flood-risk-project-lifecycle http://www.fema.gov/immersed

FEMA be working with its own technical experts to convey this information in a way that can be widely understood and leveraged?

13. Describe your efforts in contract transition that have been successful on other contracts that you have worked on. What are some best practices for transitioning into a new contract? What are some best practices for transitioning out of a contract? What is the recommended timeframe your company would need to transition into a new organization and operate effectively?

14. After a review of the draft PWS, do you have any overarching comments or concerns about the information that is being provided? What information, if any, is needed to clarify the Tasks or background information? Are there any missing scope elements that you would deem necessary to administer a successful CERC contract? What, if any, additional information do you need from the Government as part of the PWS or document library to fully understand the scope and scale of a potential transition?

15. What recommendations do you propose for performance standards and corresponding metrics have worked well for you previously as part of contract performance management/quality assurance? What, in your opinion, was/were the most effective standard(s) and metric(s) in achieving the ultimate outcomes desired from the Government?

Question & Answer Period Prior to submitting a response to this RFI, FEMA is allowing a question and answer period relating only to the questions contained within this RFI. Only electronic submissions will be accepted and are due to the contracting officer, Barry Taylor, Barry.Taylor@fema.dhs.gov, and the Contract Specialist William Sanfilippo, william.sanfilippo@fema.dhs.gov, no later than 2:00 PM (EST) on 16 November 2018. The subject line of the email shall contain the following: Questions for RFI 70FA6019I00000002 FIMA – CERC. The government anticipates providing answers to the RFI questions on 20 November 2018.

RFI Submission Requirements RFI responses are due to the contracting officer, Barry Taylor, Barry.Taylor@fema.dhs.gov, and the Contract Specialist William Sanfilippo, william.sanfilippo@fema.dhs.gov, no later than 12:00 PM (EST) on 26 November 2018. The subject line of the email shall contain the following: Questions for RFI 70FA6019I00000002 FIMA – CERC. Only electronic submissions will be accepted.

Submission to this RFI shall include the following information:

1) Organization name, physical address, point-of-contact’s name and email address and telephone number, website address, and DUNS number and/or CAGE code;

2) Statement of company’s current socio-economic designation (i.e. HUBZone small business concern, service-disabled veteran-owned small business firm, 8(a) contractor, woman-owned small business, small business, or large business); and

3) Tailored responses to the incorporated questions shall be no longer than fifteen (15) pages addressing your insight and perspective on the matters being proposed by the Government.

Formatting specifics are:

1) 8 ½ x 11 size pages,

2) 1 inch margins (top, bottom, and sides) mailto:Barry.Taylor@fema.dhs.gov mailto:Barry.Taylor@fema.dhs.gov

3) Times New Roman font – no smaller than 10 point

4) Page limitation does not include: 1 cover page or 1 letter of introduction. The cover page or letter of introduction shall not exceed one (1) page.

Do not include promotional materials.

RFI Disclaimer This RFI is part of the Government program’s market research efforts and issued solely for informational and planning purposes. It does not constitute a solicitation or a promise to issue a solicitation in the future. This RFI does not commit FEMA to contract for any supply or service whatsoever. Not responding to this RFI does not preclude participation in any future solicitation, if any is issued. Responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by FEMA to form a binding contract. No solicitation is currently available. Any future solicitation package will be made available on the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website https://www.fbo.gov, or other determined appropriate government point of entry. Interested parties are solely responsible for monitoring the relevant government point of entry websites for the release of a solicitation package and/or any updates/amendments.

At this time, one-on-one telephone or in-person due diligence sessions are not planned but may be considered should the government deem them necessary to obtain sufficient level of knowledge required for the completion of the market research.

In order to receive an award from any resultant solicitation, should one be issued, the successful offeror must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM). The SAM website is https://www.sam.gov.

No reimbursement will be made for any costs associated with providing this information in response to this synopsis or any follow-up information requests. All costs associated with responding to this RFI will be solely at the responding party’s expense.

https://www.fbo.gov/