91995922R0001-Amendment-0001-FormSF30.pdf

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NUMBER

IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Previous edition unusable

This amendment responds to questions received from potential offerors. The due date for responses to the RFP is unchanged; Friday, April 15, 2022 no later than 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

1 5

91995922R00010001 MAR 25, 2022

NAGB

National Assessment Governing Board 800 North Capitol Street NW, Suite 825 Washington DC 20002-4233

See Block 6

91995922R0001

FEB 28, 2022

See Schedule

Attachment Page

PAGE 2 OF 5 91995922R00010001

RFP# 91995922R0001

Amendment 1: Responses to Clarification Questions

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS # 91995922R0001

UPDATE OF NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL

PROGRESS (NAEP) FRAMEWORKS FOR SCIENCE AND

ANOTHER SUBJECT

March 25, 2022

PAGE 3 OF 5 91995922R00010001

RFP# 91995922R0001

Amendment 1: Responses to Clarification Questions

The following responses to clarification questions are provided as an amendment to the Request for Proposals (RFP).

General Questions:

1. Is there an incumbent contractor performing these services, or is this is a new contract?

If there is an incumbent, could you please provide the current and/or previous contract number?

There is no incumbent. The last time a Science Framework was updated was in Fiscal Year 2004. This work - updates to the NAEP Science Framework - will be the first updates in a very long time. Requirements for Framework Development or Updates are not conducted regularly and are dependent on the NAEP Assessment Schedule.

The Governing Board does not currently have any ongoing framework development contracts for any subject area.

Attachment A: Statement of Work Questions:

2. The revised Framework Update Policy gives the Governing Board direct review and approval of the panels through the Assessment Development Committee (ADC) and Executive Committee.

(a) What is the Board’s process/policy for the ADC and Executive Committee to manage the panel composition?

The updated Board policy statement that was approved on March 3, 2022 states: “The ADC shall review panelist nomination materials and develop a recommended slate of panelists, and the panelist recommendations shall be subject to Executive Committee approval.” The Board has not yet specified how this new policy principle will be implemented, but staff anticipate there being two distinct parts to this requirement.

First, ADC will need to come to consensus on a recommended slate of panelists to put forward to the Executive Committee for approval; this activity will require support from the framework development contractor, including recommendations for the slate of panelist and justification for how the slate includes those with the most outstanding content and education credentials to represent multiple perspectives on key issues. The recommendation would likely need to include the ideal slate (i.e., 30 panelists) and a number of additional alternates. In addition to preparing a recommendation and supporting materials, the framework development contractor would likely need to attend a virtual meeting with ADC to discuss the slate and address questions.

https://www.nagb.gov/naep/assessment-schedule.html https://www.nagb.gov/content/dam/nagb/en/documents/policies/assessment-framework-development.pdf

PAGE 4 OF 5 91995922R00010001

RFP# 91995922R0001

Second, ADC will provide a recommendation to the Executive Committee for approval.

The Executive Committee would then convene virtually to discuss the recommended slate and proposed alternates, and determine whether to approve the slate as is, modify the slate, or reject the slate. The framework development contractor should be available to attend part of the Executive Committee virtual meeting on this topic in the event that there are specific questions.

(b) What is the role of the contractor in generating the final panel membership after Board review (since this has budget implications for the time the contractor will spend on this after preparation of the initial panelist nomination materials)?

It is anticipated that the framework development contractor would generate the final panel membership in consultation with Board staff by moving forward with the approved slate and augmenting it (as necessary) with individuals from the pool of alternate panel members that the Executive Committee has approved.

(c) Will the Board strike individual panelists and send the slate back to the contractor to recommend replacements from the nominating pool?

Board staff anticipate that the most expedient way of addressing any concerns with the slate would be to pre-approve a pool of alternate panel members in the event that the Board has concerns with individual nominees and/or if some individuals are no longer available to participate by the time that final decisions are made. If there are major concerns with the recommended slate, it is possible that a new slate would need to be constructed and the Executive Committee would reconvene to review it.

3. The RFP calls for 6 members of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), but the contractor will need to submit 12 names for Governing Board review. How many candidate TAC members should we list in the proposal and provide letters of commitment for?

The Instructions to Offerors specify that commitment letters should be provided for the 12 TAC candidates, but that 6 of those candidates will ultimately be selected.

4. Can representatives from other federal agencies participate on the panels and as members of the TAC and Educator Advisory Committee?

There is no blanket prohibition for representatives from other federal agencies to participate on the panels or as members of the TAC and EAC; the development of NAEP frameworks previously has included panel members who are representatives of other federal agencies. It is possible that there could be a specific concern with a representative or particular agency due to a conflict of interest.

PAGE 5 OF 5 91995922R00010001

RFP# 91995922R0001

Attachment C: Instructions to Offerors Questions:

5. For past performance, the RFP states that “Prior work completed under Governing Board contracts may be used as one of the references.” And then 2 sentences later states that “National Assessment Governing Board staff shall not be available as references or be requested to complete Attachment E for any offeror.” Can you clarify how to reference prior work completed for the Governing Board?

Prior work done for the National Assessment Governing Board may be used as one of the references described in the narrative portion of an offeror’s Volume III – Past Performance - proposal submission. However, National Assessment Governing Board staff shall not be asked to complete and send any Attachment E – Past Performance Reference Form – relating to any previous work done for the Governing Board. Previous Governing Board contracts shall be evaluated internally. The reference forms must come from sources outside of NAGB. The projects in the narrative do not have to be the same projects in the reference forms.

6. Please clarify that at least one of the three references must come from a subcontractor (if the offer is submitted by a large business)?

Yes. If the offeror is a large business, they must submit past performance information for a proposed subcontractor. A Small Business Subcontracting plan is required, and effective use of small businesses is paramount.