Responses to Timely Questions Received Phase I 91990022R0001 Amendment 0001.pdf

AMENDMENT #1

Request for Proposals 91990022R0001

Small Business Innovation Research Program (SBIR) Phase I Closing Date: February 1, 2022 11:00 A.M. ET

U.S. Department of Education’s (Department or ED)

Responses to Clarification Questions Submitted by January 10, 2022

NOTES:

WARNING! Offerors must note that there are email attachment size restrictions. The Department of Education cannot accept attachments larger than 25 MB. The Government is not responsible for attachment size restrictions that may exist on offerors' email servers! Offerors are advised to check with their provider for information on email size restrictions and plan accordingly.

If offerors attempt to submit a proposal to Tracey.Perry@ed.gov and receive an error message, they MUST contact Tracey Perry (or Thomas.Smith@ed.gov) PRIOR TO THE CLOSING OF THE SOLICITATION during standard business hours (8:00 A.M. ET to 5:00 P.M. ET, Monday through Friday). The solicitation closes promptly at 11:00 a.m. ET, on February 1, 2022. Late proposals will not be accepted.

154 questions were submitted in writing by potential offerors by January 10, 2022.

The questions and answers are provided below. 14 questions were submitted requesting clarification on the Data Security Liaison role and responses to all questions in this area are listed under question 14. All other questions and answers follow.

Potential Offeror Questions and Responses by the Department of Education:

1. I noticed a newly added role of data security Liaison. May I ask what kind of qualification the role should have? Does this person have to be part of the team or is outsourcing acceptable?

2. The solicitation requires a ‘data security liaison’ – but doesn’t really describe what that person’s role is. Could you provide some insight? I can’t find the clause it references, and google turns up nothing.

3. Data Security Liaison ‐ Does this person need to have documented experience/expertise in this role? Can it be fulfilled by someone currently in the Human Resources or IT department?

4. Are there any specific guidelines for the Data Security Liaison role? Does this individual require any specific certifications / experience?

5. Data Security Liaison ‐ We don’t currently have a designated person for this within our company. Is there training or certification that this person needs to complete to qualify for this role?

6. Can you give more details on the responsibilities and functions of the Contractor Vetting Security

Liaison position (CVSL)? This is very vague.

7. Page 12 ‐ Does the Data Security Liaison have to be a full‐time employee or a company? What is the minimum qualifications for a Data Security Liaison?

8. Our company will not require access to any ED facilities, computers, property, etc. Everything will be completed with company owned assets and personnel. What work will be required of the contractor vetting security person?

9. Do you have an estimate of how many hours you expect to have us bid for the CVSL? I am afraid we are underestimating this because we don’t understand how it applies to us.

10. Data Security Liaison ‐ Can his applicable hours be charged directly to this contract? Not absorbed into G&A?

11. Data Security Liaison ‐ This person should work minimal hours. Must they complete a timesheet for every week of the contract length or only for the weeks they bill to this grant?

12. How can ED/IES SBIR applicants address the PI/ Data Security Liaison requirement if they are the only person at their company? The solicitation states that the roles must be different people.

13. Contractor Vetting Security Liaison duties/reporting ‐ If the bidder will NOT be accessing any Department of Education facilities/space/IT systems, most of these requirements are not applicable, correct?

14. Will the contractor be required to undergo security screenings if all testing and communication with students/test subjects is remote via video? See excerpt below: All ED Contractor and Subcontractor employees must undergo personnel security screenings if, during the performance of the contract, they will be required to: Obtain a PIV ID for authorized unescorted access to ED facilities/space and/or access toED IT systems. Access ED information, such as Privacy Act‐ protected, Personally Identifiable Information (PII), proprietary, or “Controlled Unclassified Information” as defined in 32 CFR Part 2002 or other sensitive ED IT information systems, ED information, ED facilities or space, and/or perform duties in a school or location where children are present.

RESPONSES to QUESTIONS 1 TO 14:

The Data Security Liaison will be responsible for managing the data security clearance process for all project team members.

No documented expertise as a Data Security Liaison is required.

The individual who is assigned to be the Data Security Liaison should possess strong administrative skills and attention to detail, to ensure compliance with data security requirements.

The exact number hours that a Data Security Liaison will work on an ED/IES SBIR contract can vary from project to project and depends on many factors. At a minimum, the role will require daily administrative work for several weeks of the Phase I project.

The offeror must determine an individual at the company or outside of the company to conduct this work.

The precise tasks of the role will be provided upon award. The Department of Education will provide a training for the Data Security Liaison at the beginning of the contract.

A determination will be made at the beginning of the contract by the Department of Education for the project teams members that will be required to proceed through the data security clearance process. Project team members that have access to students (whether in person or through remote interactions) or who have access to data with personally identifiable information will be required to go through the data security clearance. Offerors can determine how to structure the role of the Data Security Liaison in the project budget.

15. Last year solicitation has separate requirement for the Data collection role. We did see the requirement for Data security this time but not data collection. Do we still need to specify and call out the person who will do Data collection?

RESPONSE: The proposal must identify who will act as the Data Security Liaison. The research plan should indicate what individual will lead the research and collect data to inform the development and evaluate the prototype.

16. Are L3Cs (Low‐profit Limited Liability Company) eligible to apply?

RESPONSE: A Low‐profit Liability Company would likely be eligible if it meets the requirements stated on Page 48 of the solicitation.

17. What are the requirements for bidding for this RFP?

RESPONSE: Offerors must read the solicitation to determine the requirements for submitting a proposal. No other response can be provided in response to this question.

18. In Section A, how might the various certifications (Items F through I) affect reviewers' scores and/or the Contracting Officer's final award decision? Page 44 mentions: "Staff from ED's Contracts and Acquisition Management office will evaluate business‐related aspects of proposals. The final award decision is made by the Contracting Officer." If two competitive proposals receive the same average score, is the number of certifications used as a tiebreaker?

RESPONSE: Reviewers evaluate proposals based on the criteria listed in Section V. Method of Selection and Evaluation Criteria. While the number of certifications is not used as a tiebreaker, offerors must provide information for all required certifications in order to pass the Stage 1: Pre‐ Review Screening detailed on page 43.

19. Will a competitive proposal (e.g., Proposal A) with an average score that is one or more points lower than the average score of another competitive proposal (e.g., Proposal B): might Proposal A, the lower‐scoring proposal in this scenario, be awarded a grant ahead of Proposal B if Proposal A answers YES to one or more of the four aforementioned certifications and Proposal B answers NO to all of them? Or is it the case that, because Proposal B is the higher‐scoring one, it will always be awarded a grant ahead of Proposal A, regardless of the number of certifications that Proposal B has (even if zero)?

RESPONSE: As stated in Section V. Method of Selection and Evaluation Criteria on page 43 under STAGE 1: Pre‐Review Screening, All Phase I proposals will proceed through a pre‐review screening to determine responsiveness to the specific requirements of the solicitation. If the answer to any of the required questions is "NO," the proposal will not be reviewed or receive further consideration.

No further information can be provided in response to this question.

20. For proposals that are selected for Stage 3 Technical Evaluation: to mitigate the impact of any conscious or unconscious biases, to what extent might information that identifies offerors’ gender, race/ethnicity, etc. be removed from reviewer view? Specifically, are offeror and team member names hidden from reviewer view, or can they be if requested?

RESPONSE: Proposals will not be redacted in any way. The Department uses multiple stages of review, and panels of reviewers of varied backgrounds, to help mitigate the potential for unconscious bias.

21. In the event that, during the Stage 3 review, one of the three scores is significantly higher or lower than the other scores or the average of all three scores (e.g., more than 20 points higher or lower, or whatever threshold might be set), to what extent might there be a review of that outlying score and evaluation?

RESPONSE: As stated in the solicitation on page 44, Reviewers will assign scores based on these evaluation criteria, with the maximum number of points for each criterion listed in parentheses. No other processes are used that are not described in the solicitation.

22. We submitted a proposal under a company name. Since then, we've re‐organized the company under a new company name. In logging in to SBIR.gov, I could not find a way to change the company name. Is there a way of doing this? Or need I set up a new account?

RESPONSE: The ED/IES SBIR program does not manage SBIR.gov, hence the offeror can submit this question to SBIR.gov. If no response is provided, the offeror can register the company under a new name for the purpose of this proposal. The offeror is free to withdraw previously submitted proposals, or update their proposal, up until the close date and time of the solicitation.

23. The proposal is designed as an early intervention and will be used by both students and their families. Which is the best fit? PRIORITY AREA 1: New Education Technology Products for Use by

Students, Educators, or Administrators PRIORITY AREA 2: New Education Technology Products Used by Infants, Toddlers, or Students With or At Risk for Disabilities, or Teachers (or other Instructional Personnel, Related Services Providers, or Family Members) in Early Intervention or Special Education Settings RESPONSE: The offeror must determine the appropriate Priority Area for a proposal based on the population targeted.

24. Do you know of similar opportunities for nonprofits within the DOE?

RESPONSE: While separate programs, the IES Research Grants programs makes awards for R&D of education and special education technologies. Visit the IES websites at the National Center for Education Research and the National Center for Special Education Research for more information.

Several other offices at the Department of Education also provide funding for R&D and evaluation of education technology.

25. Can there be Co‐PI's for this proposal?

RESPONSE: Offerors can name Co‐PI’s in a proposal. However, there is no official slot to designate a Co‐PI in the proposal.

26. Is the application something that will be posted to the website or something we create from scratch?

RESPONSE: There is not a downloadable from which to construct the proposal. Offerors can create their proposal using the sections in the solicitation as a guide.

27. When is the deadline?

RESPONSE: February 7, 2022, at 11AM Eastern Standard Time.

28. The solicitation says that the PI needs to be an employee of the company at least 50% of the time.

How would this work if the PI is a consultant/subcontractor? Are there options to waive the requirement? Different interpretations?

RESPONSE: The PI must be employed by the company. A consultant cannot serve as a PI. As indicated in the Funding Agreement Certification, a request can be made to the Contracting Officer for a deviation; however, that request will not be considered unless the proposal is otherwise considered successful and selected for award. Requests for deviations are not routinely granted and are not guaranteed.

29. In the budget document, it says that "subcontractors can be no more than 33% of the Phase I price." Given that most small companies developing technology products are using some level of consultants and contractors and that companies will also need to subcontract to a PI, this seems like it would eliminate the ability of most small businesses to participate. So, as an example, my company's Head of Product is a consultant, we have an outsourced engineering team and we want to contract with a PI. These three items comprise 90% of my expenses. Would this exclude me from participating? Am I missing something about the definition of "outsourcing"?

RESPONSE: The Phase I ED/IES SBIR solicitation does indeed state that "subcontractors can be no more than 33% of the Phase I price." Offerors who submit a proposal to the SBIR program across all agencies must adhere to this requirement. As stated in the SBA SBIR/STTR Policy Directive, for both Phase I and Phase II, the primary employment of the Principal Investigator/Project Manager must be with the SBC at the time of award and during the conduct of the proposed project.

30. What advantage does an applicant have if they are located in a HUBZone?

RESPONSE: There is no advantage in terms of the evaluation of the proposal. HUBZone and other certifications are for informational purposes and are reported to the Small Business Administration on an annual basis.

31. Do we need to have the HUBZone‐owned SBC certification or are there other metrics for determining what counts as a small business?

RESPONSE: There is no requirement to be a HUBZone SBC. Offerors can review the eligibility requirements listed on page 49.

32. It seems that I cannot use a foreign‐based researcher w/out special permission. Is that correct? And what would be the procedure to get an exemption to this limitation?

RESPONSE: All work on SBIR contracts must be performed in the United States. As stated in the SBA SBIR/STTR Policy Directive, “For both Phase I and Phase II, the R/R&D work must be performed in the United States. However, based on a rare and unique circumstance, agencies may approve a particular portion of the R/R&D work to be performed or obtained in a country outside of the United States, for example, if a supply or material or other item or project requirement is not available in the United States. The Funding Agreement officer must approve each such specific condition in writing.” Requests for a deviation will not be considered unless the proposal is otherwise considered successful and selected for award. Requests for deviations are not routinely granted and it is the opinion of the Funding Agreement officer that a researcher being based outside of the United States does not rise to the level of a “rare and unique circumstance”.

33. It seems that a researcher who works on the project that is not an employee of the Awardee's company will be considered a contractor. Is that correct?

RESPONSE: An individual on the project team who is not employed by the small business would be considered a “sub‐contractor.”

34. I'm wondering about including confidential information in my proposal for the ED/IES solicitation.

The solicitation states "In the evaluation and handling of proposals, ED will make every effort to protect the confidentiality of the proposal and reviews of the proposal." (pg 43) Then goes on to say on pg 58 that trade secrets are considered safe from FIOA requests. Does this mean that my whole proposal is treated as confidential by default? Or do I need to mark sections with confidential information in some way? Other agencies (e.g. DoE) seem to require confidential information/sections be marked using particular methods.

RESPONSE: There is no requirement to indicate that information is confidential. Offerors are permitted to mark that sections are confidential and should therefore be redacted in any FOIA request.

35. The sample budget has the line items of Technical Assistance (maximum of $6,500) and Consultant listed separately than Subcontractors. Can the budgets for these items be outside of the 1/3 requirement for Subcontractors?

RESPONSE: No, the use of Technical Assistance and Business Assistance funds would count as part of the 1/3 requirement.

36. How much can be budgeted for the Consultant line item? We did not see any guidance for this in the solicitation.

RESPONSE: The small business must spend 2/3 or more of the Phase I budget, and the remainder can be budgeted to sub‐contractors or consultants.

37. Can the proposed work exceed 8‐month? We have heard that some SBIR programs allow no‐cost extensions. So we wanted to know whether ED/IES allows this.

RESPONSE: The project timeline in a proposal is required to be 8‐months. It is possible a Phase I project could be extended if a request was made to the Contracting Officer, however in order for a Phase I awardee to be eligible to submit a Phase II (usually a month or two after the end of a Phase I contract) the Phase I award must be completed.

38. Anticipated users for our tool are students, instructors, and instructional designers at Junior / Technical Colleges. Given that, is a letter of support for our proposal from a Community College Dean or VP, useful?

RESPONSE: The offeror must determine the appropriate letters to include in a proposal.

39. It says work must be done under the auspice of an education setting. This seems broadly defined, but just to be sure, would this include science centers, museums, and library systems?

RESPONSE: Yes, an education setting can include formal or traditional settings (e.g., schools) or informal settings defined by an offeror.

40. Inquiring about whether a human subjects narrative is required as part of the SBIR IES Phase I 2022 application. We do not see this requirement explicitly listed in this year's RFP. Can you please clarify?

RESPONSE: The guidelines do not request that offerors provide a plan for Human Subjects. All small businesses that receive awards must be in compliance with the regulations issued by the U.S.

Department of Education to safeguard the rights and welfare of human research subjects during the project.

41. Can offerors (either the same individual or different individuals from the same team) submit distinctly different proposals, as was allowed in previous years?

RESPONSE: Yes.

42. Page 4 mentions: "All proposals must be for the development of either: i. a new education technology product for which no (or limited) previous development has occurred OR ii. a new component to be added to or integrated with an existing education technology prototype or product..." Would all products that have not yet been publicly released be considered "new technology products"?

RESPONSE: If a product is already developed but has not been publicly released, it would not be considered a new product.

43. How is "limited previous development" defined?

RESPONSE: An offeror must determine the level of previous development that has occurred and design the proposal based on this determination.

44. We recently submitted a different, but related proposal for an NSF SBIR Phase I that is currently under review. There is almost no overlap between the proposed work. Do we need to disclose this, and if so, where?

RESPONSE: Yes, the offeror must disclose this information on page 31, SECTION H: SIMILAR OR

CLOSELY RELATED AWARDS OR PROPOSALS.

45. We have submitted a similar proposal to a philanthropic organization that is currently under review. Should we disclose this in Section H?

RESPONSE: There is no requirement to disclose a similar proposal to a philanthropic organization that is currently under review.

46. If we apply for $6,500 in TABA money, does that count towards our $250,000 budget for a Phase I?

47. For SECTION A), is there a special form, or should we re‐create the sections in a word document?

RESPONSE: Yes, offerors can create the section in a WORD document.

48. In SECTION A) part R), is there any limit on who can be the authorized representative? Can the authorized representative also be the PI?

RESPONSE: The authorized representative must be employed by the small business. Yes, the authorized representative can be the PI.

49. Can the letter of agreement for participation be from the same organization as one of our commercial pathways letters? They are willing to write two separate letters. We are working with teacher training organizations, who would also be our customers for the product we are developing.

RESPONSE: The offeror can make the determination for what letters to include.

50. My current visa status doesn't allow me to work for the company. I have an H1‐B visa in my position as a research professor. In our SBIR proposal, the plan is for me to conduct the data analysis for our pilot implementation. Is it acceptable or preferable for IES for me to be funded either: as a consultant at the university, administering the grant, or by making the University a sub‐ awardee. All other owners of the company would be employed as part of our proposed SBIR.

RESPONSE: The offeror must determine how what arrangement to make with project team members outside of the company.

51. Given there is a huge push toward solving climate issues and lots of innovation, it became apparent that we as a nation would benefit from such a project. Before applying I would like to know if this project falls under the acceptable projects for the SBIR grant. Can you tell me if this concept and the content qualifies?

RESPONSE: The priority areas permit for projects focusing on areas including STEM and social studies. It is possible that a project focusing on climate change would be included in those areas or others.

52. Are we supposed to submit a letter of intent to apply for this solicitation?

RESPONSE: No.

53. Is it okay to for us to scale back the work we would have done in Phase II into a new Phase I?

RESPONSE: The solicitation requires the development of a prototype of a new education technology product in Phase I. The Phase I proposal is not intended to propose a project to be a continuation of a previously funded Phase I project.

54. This would be a new prototype but informed by the research tool. This assessment would generate performance reports and teaching recommendations. Does it meet the criteria since the tool is new?

55. We have a currently funded Phase I project with the NSF to develop an Education Technology

Product. Would it be acceptable under the DoEd solicitation to propose to develop a product that supplements the NSF effort? The product we would like to propose does not duplicate any work under the currently funded NSF project but will greatly enhance it. This product we want to propose is not covered under the currently funded NSF project.

RESPONSE: Offerors are permitted to develop a new education technology product that adds to an existing prototype of fully‐developed product.

56. We have partnered with a researcher and now have access to university patents. We would like to collaborate on a new product that would connect with the current one we have in the market. Is this an add on and in that case would it be considered?

57. Regarding Section E: Letter of Agreement to Participate in the Phase I R/R&D, can you please define “educational setting?”

RESPONSE: An education setting can include formal or traditional settings (e.g., schools) or informal settings (e.g., library). As noted in Section E, research is permitted to occur outside of an education or special education setting for products used outside of such settings. In such cases a letter from a representative of an education or special education setting is required indicating that research will be conducted under the auspice of their organization.

58. My company is about to submit a proposal to NSF with some similarities in the proposed solution underlying technology, however, it is not 1:1 repurpose. I understand the federal government doesn't want to pay twice for the same solution with taxpayer dollars, but if the use‐case and solution endpoints are going to be completely different, does that preclude my organization from applying to both?

RESPONSE: Offerors are permitted to submit identical or similar proposals to different agencies provided this is disclosed in Section H. Disclosure of Similar or Related Awards or Proposals.

Offerors may not accept an award to conduct work that is the same or similar to work that is funded by another agency.

59. Is there a fillable template (word document) to complete the proposal or should we recreate what is in the request for proposal the best we can?

RESPONSE: Offerors can create a template.

60. According to Section E: Letter of Agreement to Participate in the Phase I R/R&D, "offerors should provide one and only one letter of agreement from a representative of an education or special education setting that will participate in the Phase I research." Does a letter from a teacher/ professor satisfy the requirement for Section E? If not, then what level of administration within an education setting required to provide the letter?

RESPONSE: Provided the teacher/professor is a representative of the education setting, that should be sufficient.

61. Would having citizens of Latin American countries as employees would render us ineligible.

RESPONSE: To meet the data security clearance requirements, all project team members are required to be citizens of the United States or Permanent Resident Aliens in the United States.

62. Can we compensate the participants in the research? Is there a formula/limitation on the payment?

RESPONSE: Yes. Researchers can use acceptable standards from the field to determine the payment and process.

63. Can we get a sample project that was awarded in the past?

RESPONSE: Prior proposals that led to projects that were funded include proprietary information are not made available for publication. Abstracts for all funded projects are posted on this page:

https://ies.ed.gov/sbir/awards.asp

64. On page 26: Support of Potential pathways: Will we need to provide documents from our supporters ( companies, schools, etc.) that are wanting to use our product but waiting for us to further develop it? If so, do they need to just write out their interests in our product?

RESPONSE: The solicitation includes guidance on letters supporting commercialization in Section F:

Letters for Support for Potential Pathways to Commercialize the Proposed Product.

65. On page 32: Technical and Assistance Business Plan (TABA): I wanted to clarify that if we choose to use technical assistance, this indicates we would temporarily staff someone of our choosing but as a contractor just for this project?

RESPONSE: Based on the guidelines in Section I, offerors can determine how and who to provide TABA funds to support business planning up to the stated dollar amount of $6500 in Phase I.

66. On pages 53‐54: Innovations, Inventions, and Patents/ Copyrights: For this I wanted to clarify, will we own our data rights? Also, will we have the right to distribute our product worldwide but we need to add, "made in America"?

RESPONSE: The government does not and will not own any of the rights to products developed through ED/IES SBIR awards, although the government retains a royalty‐free license to use the products if it chooses to do so. (It is noted this has never occurred in the history of the program.)

Awardees must reference the award from the ED/IES SBIR program as specified in the solicitation.

The Department does not provide guidance regarding manufacturing markings.

67. Another question is about the 4‐year period, will the government be allowed to use our data rights publicly? RESPONSE: The government retains a royalty‐free license to use the products if it chooses to do so. (It is noted this has never occurred in the history of the program.)

68. What happens when the government has a royalty‐free license? Can they implement our product or sell our product?

RESPONSE: No information can be provided on what would happen if the government used its royalty‐free license for a product that was developed through its program. (It is noted this has never occurred in the history of the program.)

69. Would the solicitation topic, Priority Area 1, be appropriate for a “STEM hardware ecosystem” and closely tied lesson plans that does not exist in the market today RESPONSE: Offerors must determine the appropriate fit for a proposal based on the information in the Priority Areas.

70. What educational timeframe is desired….days, weeks, or months? How many lesson plans should this span? How many learning objectives need to be met?”

RESPONSE: Offerors must determine the appropriate timeframe for a proposed project based on the information in the solicitation.

71. What age range of students should our concept be applicable?

RESPONSE: Offerors must determine the age range for a proposed project while considering the guidelines in the solicitation.

72. Would proposals that develop products spanning a broader student age range be scored higher?

RESPONSE: No response can be provided in response to this question.

73. How do you submit?

RESPONSE: Offerors should refer to V. Method of Selection and Evaluation Criteria.

74. “Each employee of the offeror with the authority to bind the offeror must certify the following statement by providing the information below” In the above (Quote/Unquote) we assumed "offeror" as "applicant". Please confirm if otherwise.

RESPONSE: The terms offeror and applicant are used interchangeably.

75. We would like to know scope/application/details of below mentioned line (on Page 6) “All proposals must include measures of learner outcomes” RESPONSE: Offerors must determine the appropriate measures of learning outcomes for a proposal with the guidance that is stated in the solicitation.

76. Please advise how to get forms for Section A and Section J.

RESPONSE: Offerors can cut and paste text from the solicitation to design a Phase I proposal aligned to the sections.

77. Can there be more than one sub‐contractor?

78. Can we award the sub‐contract to a sub‐contractor not located in USA ?

RESPONSE: No, all work under an ED/IES SBIR awards needs to be performed in the U.S.

79. Can the sub‐contractor have a branch/representative office in USA, and out‐source the R&D work to their branch/head‐office located outside USA ?

RESPONSE: No, all work under an ED/IES SBIR awards needs to be performed in the U.S.

80. The interim report to be submitted at the end of week 1, cannot include "the description of the research and development carried out........."Please confirm what to be included in the interim report to be submitted at the end of week 1.

RESPONSE: The ED/IES SBIR program office will send a report request to new awardees during the first days of the contract. The report will request details on research and development activities that will occur between report 1 and 2.

81. We would like to be clear whether technology to improve instructional and/or pedagogical practices would fall under Priority Area 1 for teachers and administrators, Item a) facilitate instruction?

RESPONSE: Yes, as stated in the Priority Areas, products to facilitate instruction would be appropriate.

82. If the small business concern (or offeror) has not received any similar or closely related prior award, then what should be included in the Section H of the proposal.

RESPONSE: In this case, an offeror can insert: “No similar or closely related proposals or awards” or

“Not Applicable.”

83. Can we include a Blank Page with the heading Section H ‐ No similar or closely related prior award received

84. Could you point me to where I can find all information about the 2021 awardees that is publicly available, including the abstracts of each awarded proposal.

RESPONSE: https://ies.ed.gov/sbir/awards.asp

85. “Describe the new education technology product that would be fully developed if awards were provided in Phase I and II from the ED/IES SBIR program (200 word maximum).” Do you want to see any commercialization plan in that at all or just the technical description?

RESPONSE: The description of the new education technology product is what is requested.

86. Is the electronic signature still a hand‐written signature (just digitally) or is it fine for it to be typed

(in Italics or something?)

RESPONSE: An electronic signature is preferred; however, an actual signature that has been scanned is also acceptable. A typed signature is least preferable but may be allowed at this stage.

If selected for award, signatures may need to be re‐submitted electronically at the time of contract award.

87. "All citations should be included on page 11, or the page immediately after the project narrative ends." Can I have more than 1 page of citations? There was no page limit to this section in previous years.

RESPONSE: That is correct, there is no page limit on citations.

88. Given our company's innovation is more a novel, re‐bundled service and business model ‐‐ not a new technology, per se ‐‐ would that disqualify and/or put us at a significant disadvantage to win a Phase I grant? It's not clear to me whether ED/IES SBIR grants are exclusive for only software & hard‐tech innovations.

RESPONSE: No response can be provided in response to this question. The offeror must determine whether the concept fits within the priority areas for a new education technology.

89. My company, (US‐based) is wholly owned by the UK company. The owners of this UK company are UK citizens. Does this mean that we are ineligible to apply for IES SBIR funding?

RESPONSE: Yes, as stated in the eligibility requirements, offerors must be U.S. owned and operated.

90. I have a previous pitch that was invited for a full application. No application has been submitted yet. Does this preclude me from applying to this new Solicitation with a different technology for the FY2022 Solicitation?

RESPONSE: Offerors are permitted to submit identical or similar proposals to different agencies provided this is disclosed in Section H. Disclosure of Similar or Related Awards or Proposals.

91. On page 24 the solicitation states "In SECTION E, offerors should provide one and only one letter of agreement from a representative of an education or special education setting that will participate in the Phase I research." Does this mean that only one site can participate in the Phase I research or can additional sites be included in the research, but you only want one letter of agreement?

RESPONSE: The ED/IES SBIR program is only requesting one letter. (More than one site may be participating in the proposed research.)

92. I have been attempting to start a workspace in Grants.gov for the Department of Ed SBIR Phase 1 RFP. I can't find an active grant when I search. Is it possible I'm looking in the wrong place or has it not been activated yet?

RESPONSE: ED/IES SBIR is administered using a contracts program ‐ Grants.gov is not utilized. See the solicitation for information on preparing and submitting a proposal in response to the solicitation.

93. If an applicant proposes work that leverages existing IP owned by another entity (in this case, a non‐profit), would the IP resulting from the grant belong to the awardee or to the non‐profit?

Would that response be different for existing IP vs new IP created through the project?

RESPONSE: The awardee and other entities would need to determine the owner of the existing and new IP. Neither the ED/IES SBIR program, nor the government, would have a role in determining the owner of the new or existing IP.

94. Does Department of Education have a pre submission process, where a shorter proposal can be submitted with a quicker turnaround as a basis of determination amount the full application?

95. The link I references, what is the format of the application.

RESPONSE: The solicitation provides formatting instruction.

96. What are the dates of the submission?

RESPONSE: the proposal submission date and time is February 1, 2022, at 11AM Eastern Standard Time.

97. What are the other steps needed?

RESPONSE: The solicitation provides instructions on submitting a proposal.

98. Registering with D&B, government site for grants. What are the requirements to apply?

RESPONSE: The solicitation provides instructions on what is needed to submit a proposal.

99. Do we need to have a certified Facilities Security Office and this person should be our CVSL? (DoD requires FSO.)

RESPONSE: There is no requirement for a Facilities Security Office under this solicitation.

100. Upon notification of win, what specific company documents/financials are required to be shared with the government? From page 52: Before award of an SBIR funding agreement, the Government may request the applicant to submit certain organizational, management, personnel, and financial information to assure responsibility of the applicant.

RESPONSE: The Department typically performs due diligence by searching available information on entities such as sam.gov, Dun & Bradstreet, etc. It is not typical that further information be requested direct from the offeror, unless other sources yield negative findings.

101. At the end of the contract (January 2023), will the company be required to submit financials other than those pertaining to the $250K grant? We are not comfortable sharing financials.

RESPONSE: There is no such requirement under this contract, due to its dollar value. Offerors should note that if they are selected for award, successfully complete Phase I, and are then selected for a Phase II award, additional reporting may be required in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 4.1703. Please refer to https://www.acquisition.gov/ for reference.

102. What certifications will need to be completed at AWARD of contract? The RFP includes this section “SECTION J. REQUIRED CERTIFICATIONS TO COMPLETE NOW AT THE TIME OF THE PROPOSAL”. Will there be future requirements and what are they?

RESPONSE: The solicitation provides full instruction with regard to required certifications, terms and conditions. The SBIR‐STTR Funding Agreement Certification must be submitted with the proposal, and must be accurate and current if selected for award, at the time of award. The SBIR‐ STTR Funding Agreement Certification – Lifecycle Certification, must be submitted as requested during the performance of the contract.

103. Evaluation of proposal. I understand what the technical reviewers are judging/scoring. But what is the ED staff looking for in business evaluation? Is this just the budget and budget justification?

From page 44 “Staff from ED's Contracts and Acquisition Management office will evaluate business‐ related aspects of proposals.”

RESPONSE: The submitted budget must not exceed $250,000, and must otherwise conform to all RFP requirements (such as not exceeding subcontracting limits). There are no other evaluation criteria associated with the budget, and offerors are encouraged to propose for the full $250,000.

No advantage is given to a proposal that is for less than $250,000.

104. RFP says that food expenses are not allowed. Our Education Researcher and PI will need to travel to our testing site and we will pay her travel expenses. Is food per diem expense allowed in this instance?

RESPONSE: Generally speaking, no, food is not authorized. If selected for award, the Contracting Officer may provide written consent in accordance with contract clause 31.205.70 FOOD COSTS, as found in the solicitation.

105. If we have consultants as part of the project team, how should we list them on our budget? Is it sufficient to make a note in the "Consultants" section that the individual(s) are accounted for as part of the Project Team budget?

RESPONSE: Consultants who are not employees should be included with subcontractors.

106. I noticed this time you have only provided the instructions in PDF format (typically you provide a word format). It is difficult to copy‐paste the tables from the PDF into a document because the formatting doesn't copy correctly. Would you be able to provide a Word copy of the instructions as well?

RESPONSE: A MS Word copy of the RFP has been uploaded as an attachment. The .pdf version of the solicitation is considered the official copy.

107. Could you respond to all of the ones that come through so that we can diagnose the issue and confirm that you actually received my submission this time?

RESPONSE: The Department will reply to all emails submitting a proposal in as timely a fashion as may be permitted by the circumstances. Offerors seeking a more immediate response that their proposal has been received, should submit their proposal well in advance of the deadline.

108. Requirements for Letter of Agreement to Participate In the Phase I R/R&D , pg 24, Section E and Letters of Support for Potential Pathways to Commercialize, page 26, section F. Does the government have a template, an outline, or specific content that should be included in the letters? if so, please provide.

RESPONSE: While the solicitation does provide guidance on letters in both sections, no specific template is available.

109. Video Demonstration, pg 13, section A, p). Can the video be an animation of the proposed product and use case, or does the video have to demonstrate an actual prototype of the product?

RESPONSE: The guidelines for a video demonstration are presented on page 13. No further guidance can be provided.

110. Please clarify Priority Area II, pg4. Priority area II described on page 4 is different from page..

RESPONSE: Further detail regarding Priority Area 2 is provided beginning on page 6.

111. Please define "limited development", page 4

a. "...a new education technology product for which no (or limited) previous"

b. How do we distinguish limited development ( enough to produce the video suggested on pg 13) from too much development (..." Proposals to continue the same course of development for an existing prototype or product are not permitted" pg 4)?

RESPONSE: An offeror must determine the level of previous development that has occurred and design the proposal based on this determination, including whether to present existing components of an education technology prototype or product or not in the proposal to create a new education technology product or add to an existing prototype or fully developed education technology product.

112. Principal Investigator 's(PI) role in the small business, pg 10: Does the PI have to be an employee of the small business applicant? Or can the PI be a member of the team that included the small business and other individuals and companies?

RESPONSE: As stated in the requirements, the PI must be employed by and must spend at least 51% of time with the small business during the project.

113. Project Team, pg11. Are there any limits on the project team size or composition (number of companies, and or individuals)?

114. The instructions indicate that if a prototype is already in development a proposal should not be submitted, however the choices below seem to indicate that you can still submit a proposal for prototypes that exist/have already been developed. Can you please clarify?

RESPONSE: The solicitation indicates that Phase I proposals are for the development of a prototype of a new education technology product. Proposals can be for the development of a new prototype where no prior technological development has occurred, or for the development of a new prototype to be added to an existing education technology prototype or one that is already fully developed. Proposals to continue the same course of development for an existing prototype or product are not permitted.

115. Is there a minimum % or maximum % of the total SBIR budget for consultant fees?

RESPONSE: As stated in the solicitation, the small business is required to spend a minimum of 2/3 of the funds in Phase I, while up to 1/3 of the funds can be provided to consultants or subcontractors.

116. What is the source of definitions for consultant versus subcontractor that the Department of Education uses?

RESPONSE: There is no difference between the terms consultant or subcontractor under this solicitation.

117. Who is the Funding Agreement Officer and how can I contact them?

RESPONSE: the Funding Agreement Officer is the Contracting Officer, Thomas.Smith@ed.gov.

118. Is TABA budget part of $250,000 or is over and above this budget.

RESPONSE: TABA is part of the $250,000 budget, not added to a budget of $250,000.

119. We are working to build a gaming solution that will teach <redacted> practices to elementary grade students, while maintaining academic excellence. Our research plan involves the exposure of students to our <redacted product and methodology>. Is our project subjected to protection of human subjects?

RESPONSE: Any project that plans to conduct research on students will be responsible for human subjects protocols if an award is made.

120. Is the PI resume also restricted to one page? Since there is additional information asked for PI to establish the credentials and rationale as compared to others, hence the question.

RESPONSE: Yes, the resume of the PI and all resumes are restricted to one page.

121. We would like to request TABA funding for our project in our proposal, but we need to include the name of the vendor, along with the business assistance they'll provide. Is there a list of approved vendors we can vet before we submit our proposal?

RESPONSE: There is no list of approved vendors that can support TABA.

122. Has the requirement for an education researcher been eliminated? RFP says only PI and DSL is required. If so, is this because Phase 1 should be focused on usability and feasibility testing, rather than testing for educational outcomes?

RESPONSE: The key personnel are required to include a PI and a Data Security Liaison in the table in the Section A. COVER PAGES under M. Offerors are expected to add additional lines for all other key project roles, which will be likely to include developer, researcher, and others.

123. Does the Phase 1 project only require usability and feasibility testing now (leaving the testing of educational outcomes for Phase 2)? The new RFP only mentions usability and feasibility tests. (See section ii. Pilot Research at the end Phase I.)

RESPONSE: The research requirements in the Phase I solicitation are stated in the solicitation as such. Offerors must propose iterative and pilot studies that are appropriate for the prototype of the education technology product that is being developed, which in some cases may include evaluating the promise of a prototype to increase relevant outcomes.

124. “Key terms for Phase 1 Workplan: Promise of Education Outcomes: The extent to which the pilot research shows improvement in education outcomes of interest.” This implies that educational testing should be included in Phase 1. Is educational testing required in Phase 1, or ONLY feasibility and usability?

RESPONSE: There is no requirement to measure the promise the prototype to support education outcomes in Phase I. The research requirements in the Phase I solicitation are stated in the solicitation as such. Offerors must propose iterative and pilot studies that are appropriate for the prototype of the education technology product that is being developed, which in some cases may include evaluating the promise of a prototype to increase relevant outcomes.

125. For part of our SBIR grant project, we plan to consult with a technology partner to develop an app. We haven't currently found the right vendor for this portion of the project and are still locating and interviewing potential fits. Is it beneficial for us to name this company within our application? Can we identify the company later in the process and/or when being awarded the grant?

RESPONSE: Offerors should name key personnel and include resumes for key personnel so that reviewers can evaluate whether the project can be successful in the areas stated.

126. Knowing that the guidelines stated there could be time to review early submissions, could we share our application without this company named and later update it before the February 1 deadline?

RESPONSE: There is no review of early submissions of proposals under this solicitation.

127. Due to year‐end holidays, winter‐break of schools and impact of OMICRON, it is a challenge to convince to get a "letter of support (Section F)". Will appreciate if 1 February 2022 proposal submission date is extended by at least THREE (3) weeks.

RESPONSE: While the ED/IES SBIR appreciates the unique set of challenges caused by COVID19 for all parties involved in constructing a proposal, the submission deadline must remain February 1, 2022, to allow the program to proceed on schedule.

128. "Would the development of an AI/ Machine Learning STEM club be considered for SBIR 91990022R0001 funding?"

RESPONSE: Offerors can review the Priority Areas in the solicitation to determine whether a concept would be appropriate for submission.

129. What are the number of applications submitted on average and the percentage of applicants funded?

RESPONSE: Over the past ten or so years the program has averaged about 225 Phase I proposals and has averaged about 14 Phase I awards per year.

130. Principal Investigator ‐ Is it preferable that this role be external to the business that developed the technology or prototype that is the focus of the application?