91995926Q0010-A0001-Q-A.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 41 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Strategic Communications Services for the National Assessment Governing Board - RFQ 91995926Q0010
- Solicitation number
- 91995926Q0010
- Issued by
-
Department of Education
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers document from Amendment A0001 to RFQ 91995926Q0010 for Strategic Communications Services for the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB). The Q&A addresses technical and business questions submitted by potential quoters regarding the scope of work outlined in Attachment A (Statement of Work). Key clarifications provided include: NAGB will not share internal documents like talking points and presentations but vendors can reference publicly available social media posts and op-eds on the Board's website; historical volumes for deliverables are not specified, but vendors should expect recurring major NAEP Report Card releases every two years for reading and mathematics; research on awareness and attitudes about the Nation's Report Card is welcome to propose; vendors should develop original communications strategies rather than amending existing plans; timeline flexibility exists for the five-business-day turnaround on the Strategic Communications Plan depending on kick-off discussions; rural regions and audiences have historically proven difficult to engage and should be prioritized; NAGB staff reviews all social media content before posting, though the vendor performs the actual posting; and the Board does not currently use a social media archiving platform but vendors may propose federally-approved solutions with current requirements involving spreadsheet logs organized by fiscal year submitted annually to the Department's Office of Communications and Outreach. Regarding resources, NAGB will make available incumbent-developed assets including stakeholder databases, media lists, templates, and historical materials; Board members will be actively involved in outreach based on their role and expertise; the Board anticipates leveraging existing relationships while also developing new engagement pathways; and the procurement budget is between $350,000 and $1,000,000.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 91995926Q0010-A0001-Q-A.pdf | ||
| 91995926Q0010-SF1449-All-Attachments.zip | ZIP file |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Strategic-Communications-Q&A
| Business or Technical Question | RFQ Section | Page # | Question | Response |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 1 | Can the Government provide annual historical volumes for key deliverables under the incumbent contract, including press releases, media pitches, talking points, presentations, op-eds, articles, social media products, and stakeholder briefings? | Talking points, presentations, pitches, and briefings are internal documents and strategies that would not be appropriate to share externally in developing a response to this scope. However, you can visit the Board's social channels on X, LinkedIn and Facebook to see a recent history of social media posts. The Board's website has recent op-eds from members here: https://www.nagb.gov/news-and-events/commentaries.html; and recent press releases and announcements here: https://www.nagb.gov/news-and-events/news-releases.html |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 1 | Can the Government provide a list of recurring events, conferences, meetings, and stakeholder engagements supported by the incumbent contractor during the previous three years? | Stakeholder engagements, conferences and meeting opportunities have varied over the years in terms of timing and partners. Typically, these opportunities are with organizations in the education policy arena, often representing state- and local level stakeholders in a position to inform policy and practice that impact student achievement. What is receurring is the Board's work releasing major NAEP Report Cards, with reading and mathematics every two years and other assessments susually every four years. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 1 | Are you interested in any research on awareness and attitudes about the Nation's Report Card among your priority audiences to support the Strategic Plan? | Research on key audiences would be welcome to propose in a response to the scope. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 1 | Does NAEP have an existing Strategic Communications Plan for communications that this work would amend or revise? Does NAEP have an existing messaging framework that this work would amend or revise? | Vendors are encouraged to propose an original communications strategy that effectively fulfills the contractual tasks and meets the goals outlined in the scope. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 1 | Is there flexibility in the time required for the turnaround of the Strategic Communications Plan (currently 5 business days after initial meeting for the draft)? Or, what is the reason behind requiring the fast turnaround? | There is a possibility of timeline flexibility depending on the contract kick-off conversation and what the successful vendor plans to propose. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 1 | Are there existing messaging frameworks or assets we should align with, or should we plan to build from the ground up? | In terms of responding to the scope, vendors should plan to develop messaging and assets that address the Board's communications goals in the scope. The contractor would be able to use any exisiting assets to help shape future communications strategies and messaging. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 1 | Are there specific stakeholder groups or regions that have been historically difficult to engage and should be prioritized? | Rural regions and audiences have proven to be a challenge in various outreach strategies, but proposals should ensure engagement in this area invovles audiences who are in a position to direct and change policy to improve student achievement. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 1 | Will the successful contractor be granted direct publishing access to NAGB social media platforms, or will all content require review and posting by NAGB staff? | NAGB staff reviews social content before it is posted but the vendor will be required to post and publish on all channels. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 1 | The SOW requires archiving social media posts in accordance with federal requirements. Does NAGB currently utilize a social media archiving platform, and if so, will access be provided to the contractor? | The Board does not currently utilize a platform but vendors are free to propose any solution that is federally-approved. As of now, Social media managers must maintain a log (spreadsheet) organized by Fiscal Year, of all posts made to each social media site. The log must be provided to the Department's Office of Communications and Outreach (OCO) annually. |
| General | Attachment A - SOW | 1 | Does the SOW significantly change the body of work as previously solicited? | While some major communications goals remain, the current scope reflects the Board's work and projected needs developed over the last several years. So vendors should focus on response to the current scope. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 2 | What research have you conducted regarding awareness or attitudes about the Nation's Report Card, and if available, will you be able to share that research? | The Board has not conducted research regarding awareness or attittudes about The Nation's Report Card. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 3 | Your Strategic Vision describes "public, education leaders, and other stakeholders who are in a position to use data to improve student achievement." Do these reflect your primary audiences for the purposes of these communications, and are these all priority? | Yes, stakeholders who are in a position to use data to improve student achievement are the priority audience for the Board. |
| Business | Attachment A - SOW | 3 | Will NAGB make available any incumbent-developed assets, including stakeholder databases, media lists, communications templates, style guides, reporting formats, or historical campaign materials to facilitate transition? | The Board can make these assets available for transition purposes. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 3 | Could the Governing Board provide additional insight regarding the anticipated role and level of participation of Board members in communications, outreach, media, and stakeholder engagement activities under this contract? | Outreach efforts for members are based on the role they serve on the Board, their professional role and expertise, and availability, so there are no set number of hours or occassions for their particpation in communications efforts. But vendors should assume Board members will be actively invovled in different levels of outreach. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 3 | To what extent does the Governing Board anticipate leveraging existing stakeholder and partner relationships versus developing new engagement pathways and partnerships under this contract? | The Board anticipates more time dedicated to leveraging existing stakeholder and partner relationships but there should still be significant effort devoted in developing new outreach pathways and partnerships. |
| Business | Attachment A - SOW | 4 | What is the Department’s budget for this procurement? Or, if a specific budget is not available, is a budget range or "do not exceed" available? | The Department's Acquistion Forecast has this procurement listed as >$350 and <$1M per year, and overall value >$1M and <$5M. This award is estimated below the high end of those ranges. |
| Business | Attachment A - SOW | 4 | The SOW identifies six tasks but does not provide estimated annual labor hours, task percentages, or anticipated level of effort. Can NAGB provide historical labor allocations by task area or anticipated workload distribution to support realistic staffing and pricing assumptions? | Quoters are advised to base their labor assumptions on what is written in the current Statement of Work, and not historical information. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 4 | Subtask 1.1 requires kick-off within 5 business days of contract award. Please confirm (a) the anticipated award date so the contractor can stage staff and resources, (b) whether the kick-off is virtual, in-person at NAGB (Washington, DC), or contractor's choice, and (c) the maximum participant count from the contractor side. | Award date is expected to be made sometime in August. The kick-off will be conducted in person but there will be a virtual component for any staff member not in the DC area. There is no maximimum count but the meeting should invovle only staff who will be performing work on the contract. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 4 | The SOW requires the contractor to attend the kick-off meeting within 5 business days of contract award and submit a draft Strategic Communications Plan within 5 business days of that meeting. Given the compressed timeline, will the Government provide any existing communications materials, brand guidelines, or prior strategic plans to the awardee upon contract award to support this rapid onboarding? | The Board can provide materials necessary to facilitate transition and onboarding. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 4 | The SOW requires weekly check-in calls with the COR and a follow-up summary email after each call. Can the Government confirm the expected format and approximate length of these weekly calls, and whether the contractor is expected to prepare a standing agenda or status report in advance of each call? | Calls should be assumed to be virtual (Teams or Zoom) and last an hour on average. The contractor is expected to develop an agenda in consultation with the COR and other Board staff. |
| Business | Attachment A - SOW | 5 | For Board meeting attendance, how many in-person meetings in Washington, D.C. should quoters assume per contract year for pricing purposes? | Assume three DC meetings per contract year. |
| Business | Attachment A - SOW | 5 | For the required out-of-D.C. Board meeting, should quoters assume one trip per contract year or one trip during the base year only? | Assume one trip per contract year. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 5 | The SOW requires the contractor to develop a Strategic Communications Work Plan within 5 business days of the kick-off meeting. Will the Government provide the contractor with NAGB's current strategic vision documents, existing audience research, and prior NAEP release communications materials to inform the plan, or is the contractor expected to develop the plan based solely on publicly available information? | The Board can provide relevant exisiting materials to the contractor to facilitate development of a work plan. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 7 | Can the Department clarify whether examples of strategic communications work in higher education may be considered relevant if the work involved public-facing education data, policy messaging, stakeholder communications, or audience education? | Because the focus of the Board and NAEP falls wihtin K-12 education, work in hgiher education would not be considered especially relevant given the different issues and stakehodlers involved. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 7 | The contractor is required to submit a draft strategic communications plan within five business days of the kick-off meeting. Will NAGB provide existing communications plans, audience analyses, messaging frameworks, stakeholder inventories, and performance reports upon award to support development of the required plan within this timeframe? | The Board can provide relevant exisiting materials to the contractor to facilitate development of a work plan. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 7 | The SOW estimates an average of 2-3 op-eds per month. Can the Government clarify whether this figure represents op-eds drafted and pitched, op-eds accepted and published, or both? Additionally, does the Board have existing relationships with specific high-profile education media outlets that the contractor will be expected to maintain and expand? | The figure represents the average numebr of op-eds drafted and pitched. The Board does have existing relationships with high-profile media outlets and the awarded contractor will have to assist the Board in expanding relationships to outlets. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 7 | Could the Governing Board clarify whether the initial Strategic Communications Work Plan draft (Task 2) to be submitted within five days of the kickoff meeting is intended to function mainly as a high level strategic road map, including preliminary timelines, milestones, and communications sequencing, with refinement and adjustments taking place throughout each contract year? With regards to the timelines and annual calendars, are these implementation details anticipated to be developed iteratively throughout each contract year? | The work plan draft should be seen as a high-level strategic roadmap that can be refined and adjusted during the contract year. For the start of eeach option year, the contractor will develop an updated communications plan that reflects planned efforts and needs for the next contract year. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 8 | Does the Department expect the contractor to already possess existing NAEP-specific media lists, or may the contractor develop, validate, and refine those lists during the base year after gaining access to current Board communications resources? | The Board can provide existing media lists but the contractor is expected to not just update exsiting lists but also provide additional outlet names and contacts. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 8 | For the estimate of authoring and editing 2–3 op-eds per month, should quoters assume responsibility for drafting and editing only, or should the quoted scope include pitching, follow-up, placement tracking, and media reporting? | Quoters should assume the main repsonsibility of drafting and editing, but assist staff in the other areas as needed. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 8 | Can NAGB can confirm that it requires the contractor to develop an average of 2-3 op eds per month? | Yes, that is correct. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 8 | Beyond the estimate of 2-3 op-eds per month, can NAGB provide historical metrics regarding media outreach activities, including the number of media inquiries, interviews, media placements, and outreach campaigns conducted annually under the incumbent contract? | The Board cannot provide exact metrics for those areas. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 8 | Does NAGB maintain existing media databases and journalist contact lists that will be transferred to the successful contractor, or is the contractor expected to build these resources from the ground up? | The Board can provide existing media lists but the contractor is expected to not just update exsiting lists but also provide additional outlet names and contacts. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 8 | For Task 6 (Content and Graphic Design), what are the expected volume and complexity of graphic design requests (e.g., social graphics, slide decks, infographics for releases)? Will the contractor have access to any Government-provided design templates or assets? | Contractors will have access to templates and assets for design. The volume and complexity of design requests vary depending on communications efforts and needs in any given year. However, the vendors should assume at least a few requests per month for some type of visual and design need. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 8 | The SOW estimates "2–3 op-eds per month on average." Please confirm (a) whether this rate applies in all contract years including option years, (b) whether op-ed volume reduces during the August nominations campaign or release event windows, and (c) the average op-ed word count assumed for pricing. | That rate applies in all contact years, and volume actually increases around release event windows. Word counts vary depending on the preferred outlet and their guidelines but pieces have typically ranged from 750-1,200 words. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 8 | The SOW references a state recruitment effort for voluntary NAEP assessments with formal commitments required from states by the end of 2026. Will the Board provide the contractor with an existing list of targeted state contacts and prior outreach history, or is the contractor expected to build this outreach list from scratch? | The awarded contractor will be informed on status of this effort and prior outreach history. Board and NCES staff will be the key contacts with state leaders but the contractor should assume assistance with strategies to reach out to states and ideally suggest stakeholders for outreach. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 9 | Is e-mail campaign management (frequency, volume, platform) expected as part of this SOW? | Yes. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 9 | Subtask 3.4 is written conditionally: "If the Board approves a charge at its quarterly May 2026 meeting..." — the May 2026 meeting has now passed. Did the Board approve the charge to update the NAEP Civics Framework? If yes, what is the anticipated communications timeline, and should offerors price this as a fully-scoped task? | The Board approved the charge in May. Details can be found here: https://www.nagb.gov/news-and-events/news-releases/2026/release-board-meeting-actions-051526.html. The updated framework is scheduled to be approved in August 2027, so communications efforts will be needed through Fall 2027. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 9 | In Task 3.3 (State Recruitment) and similar outreach, what level of direct support (e.g., drafting for Governor/Chief State School Officer meetings, one-on-one calls) is expected from the contractor versus Board staff? | For Task 3.3, the contractor is expected to develop and/or maintain outreach strategies and draft talking points and messaging for Board members and staff to use in meetings and presentations with state leaders. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 9 | Subtask 3.4 references a Civics Framework update contingent on Board approval at its May 2026 quarterly meeting. Has the Board approved this charge? If so, does the Government anticipate this work beginning in the base year, and can any timeline milestones for the framework review process be shared with offerors? | The Board approved the charge in May. Details can be found here: https://www.nagb.gov/news-and-events/news-releases/2026/release-board-meeting-actions-051526.html. The updated framework is scheduled to be approved in August 2027, so communications efforts will be needed through Fall 2027. Iterative process milestones are not yet available. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 9 | For the state recruitment efforts tied to voluntary NAEP participation, could the Governing Board clarify whether existing outreach relationships, stakeholder databases, and engagement materials will be provided to the contractor at contract start? | Materials, outreach history and status, and contacts relavant to this effort can be provided to the contractor. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 10 | Can NAGB provide historical workload information from the incumbent contract, including the approximate annual volume of op-eds, media pitches, press releases, talking points, stakeholder presentations, website updates, newsletters, and social media content developed? | Talking points, presentations, pitches, and other similar materials are internal documents and strategies that would not be appropriate to share externally in developing a response to this scope. However, you can visit the Board's social channels on X, LinkedIn and Facebook to see a recent history of social media posts. The Board's website has recent op-eds from members here: https://www.nagb.gov/news-and-events/commentaries.html; and recent press releases and announcements here: https://www.nagb.gov/news-and-events/news-releases.html |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 10 | Can NAGB identify the stakeholder audiences considered highest priority for this contract (e.g., Governors, Chief State School Officers, state legislators, district leaders, education associations, researchers, advocacy organizations, business leaders, etc.)? | The scope clarifies that priority stakeholders are leaders who have the capacity to direct and change policy to improve student achievement, so that would include governors, chief state school officers, state legislators, and education associations that represent those leaders. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 10 | Can the Government provide historical data on the average annual volume of deliverables under the incumbent contract (e.g., number of op-eds actually placed per year, media inquiries handled, social media posts drafted, presentations supported, etc.) to better calibrate level-of-effort estimates for Tasks 3–6? | Historical data are not available. The volume of those deliverables has varied based on release activities, ongoing work developments, and other factors. Level of effort should be determined based on vendor responses to the tasks. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 10 | Several subtasks reference “ongoing” or “as needed” work (e.g., Next Gen NAEP, Framework Updates, State Recruitment, Nominations Campaign). Are there anticipated peak periods or fixed deliverables with hard deadlines beyond those listed in the tables? | Two subtasks have relatively fixed timelines. The Board's annual nominations campaign is typically open from September through November of any given year, and states must sign a letter of commitment for participation in voluntary assessments by January 2027. Work for other activities in Task 3 is still being developed so peak periods and fixed deliverables cannot yet be provided. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 10 | Subtask 3.4 is contingent on the Board approving a Civics Framework update charge at its May 2026 meeting. Please confirm (a) whether the May 2026 charge has been approved (as the meeting predates RFQ award), (b) the scope and timeline if approved, and (c) any other frameworks (reading, mathematics, science, U.S. history) that may be updated during the PoP. | The Board approved the charge in May. Details can be found here: https://www.nagb.gov/news-and-events/news-releases/2026/release-board-meeting-actions-051526.html. The updated framework is scheduled to be approved in August 2027, so communications efforts will be needed through Fall 2027. Iterative process milestones are not yet available. No other subjects are currently planned for a framework update. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 10 | For 2027 appointments, seven Board categories are open (curriculum specialist, local superintendent, general public representative, chief state school officer, grade 12 teacher, business representative, testing and measurement expert). Please confirm (a) the typical category mix for option years, and (b) the expected number of nominees to recruit per category. | The category mix varies each year as well as the number of nominees as some categories have historically netted more nominees than others. On average, a minimum of 10-15 high-quality nominees per category is the outreach goal. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 11 | To support continuous improvement from the current contract into the new period of performance, what communications workstreams does the Department most want the next contractor to strengthen, modernize, or make more measurable? | All workstreams detailed in the scope should be strengthened, modernized, and made more measureable. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 11 | Will NAEP Report Card Release Activities include proactive outreach to media ahead of releases and managing embargoed access to NAEP results? | Yes. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 11 | Should offerors have demonstrated corporate expertise in managing the release of federal statistical data like the NAEP results? | Expertise in being able to effectively communicate and release national or federal statisitical data in K-12 education is important expertise contractors are expected to have. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 11 | Task 4 references two NAEP Report Card releases in the base year: Reading/Math (Winter 2027) and Civics/U.S. History (Spring/Summer 2027). Can the Government provide more specific anticipated release dates so offerors can accurately plan staffing and resource allocation for these high-intensity periods? | Release dates have not yet been determined. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 11 | Task 4 references media training and interview preparation for Board members 2-3 weeks before each release. Approximately how many Board members typically require media training per release cycle, and does the Board expect training to be conducted in-person in Washington, DC or virtually? | Media training is done virtually. Anticipate an average of 10-12 members and select alumni chosen for this preparation. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 11 | Could the Governing Board elaborate on the current communications priorities and anticipated stakeholder engagement needs related to the Next Gen NAEP initiative over the base contract year? We would like to understand how this specific initiative sits within the broader scope during its initial phase planned to be concluded in 2027. | This initiative relates to the overarching quality and longevity of the NAEP program as a whole, with the goal of modernizing NAEP, while maintaining its gold standard reputation and prioritizing its three-decade trendline of student learning in math and reading. Stakeholder engagement should target stakeholders tasked with making important decisions which shape students’ educational experiences; members of the media who use NAEP in their reporting; researchers who use NAEP to answer important questions about student learning; and members of the general public who want to have a broad understanding of U.S. achievement. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 12 | For NAEP Report Card release activities, will the Department provide prior release templates, messaging frameworks, embargo protocols, and examples of approved release content after award? | The Board will provide necessary materials to the contractor after award. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 12 | For Task 4, please confirm (a) the planned number of Report Card release events per contract year for the base year and each option year, (b) whether media training requires in-person delivery in DC or virtual delivery, and (c) whether the contractor is expected to produce the "brief videos on the results" in-house or only develop the script/concept. | Two release events are planned for the base year. Option year release activities have not yet been planned or scheduled but the Board's assessment scheudule will be the best guide: https://www.nagb.gov/naep/assessment-schedule.html. The 2028-2029 contract year will likely see the release of 2028 Reading, Math, and Civics, the 2029-2030 contract year will likely see the release of 2029 Science, and the 2030-2031 contract year, the release of 2030 Reading, Math, and Civics. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 12 | Task 5 requires archiving social media postings in accordance with the Federal Records Act (44 USC 31). Will the contractor be required to use a specific government-approved archiving platform already in use by NAGB, or is the contractor expected to propose and implement an archiving solution as part of its technical approach? | The Board does not currently utilize a platform but vendors are free to propose any solution that is federally-approved. As of now, Social media managers must maintain a log (spreadsheet) organized by Fiscal Year, of all posts made to each social media site. The log must be provided to the Department's Office of Communications and Outreach (OCO) annually. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 13 | Will the Department provide access after award to existing Governing Board communications calendars, editorial calendars, social media performance data, media lists, and prior outreach reports to support continuity and avoid duplication of effort? | After contract award, the Board can supply materials needed for transition. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 13 | Can the Department clarify the current approval workflow and expected turnaround time for LinkedIn, X, and Facebook content, including urgent or time-sensitive posts related to report releases? | Workflow and turnaround time for social content vary, but vendors should expect on occassion a post has to be created and posted on the same day. Content is developed by the contractor and reviewied by Board staff before it is posted. Ideally, content and social strategy should be developed in advance in concert with Board staff. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 13 | When thinking of content development, which specific website properties and URLs fall within scope for this contract? | The Board has a separate contract for web development and posting. The COR will ensure communication occurs between the web and communications contractors so any content posted on the website meets relevant guidelines and fits within the designs, templates and overall architecture of the website, which will be redesigned during the base year. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 13 | Task 5 requires social media archiving "in accordance with federal regulations" (Federal Records Act, 44 USC 31). Please confirm (a) whether the contractor must furnish archival tooling, (b) whether the Government's existing archive system will be made available, and (c) the records retention period required. | The Board does not currently utilize a platform but vendors are free to propose any solution that is federally-approved. As of now, Social media managers must maintain a log (spreadsheet) organized by Fiscal Year, of all posts made to each social media site. The log must be provided to the Department's Office of Communications and Outreach (OCO) annually. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 13 | This section, and various other portions of the website, discuss the website and various platforms. Can the government confirm whether this is inclusive of nces.ed.gov, nagb.gov, nationsreportcard.gov and/or other domains? Can the government provide information on the content management systems and databases supporting each platform? | The Board's website is nagb.gov and the only one it manages. The site currently uses Adobe Experience Manager (AEM) as its content management system. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 13 | Please clarify whether NAGB expects the contractor to provide any specific platforms, subscriptions, or tools, such as media databases, media monitoring, social listening, analytics dashboards, CRM/stakeholder management, design, or project-management tools. | The Board would be open to any and all platforms or tools to manage and monitor those work areas. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 13 | What level of social media management is expected? Is the contractor expected to directly publish and manage Governing Board social media accounts, or develop content for review and posting by Board staff? | The contractor will be required to develop social media content as well as publish and manage accounts. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 13 | Will the contractor be provided with existing messaging frameworks, brand guidance, style standards, or audience segmentation materials at contract start? | The contractor can be furnished with existing materials relevant and necessary for communications work. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 14 | Will the Department provide required nondisclosure agreement templates and embargoed-data handling procedures at award, or should quoters include proposed internal confidentiality controls in the technical approach? | The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) manages the data embargo process and creates nondisclosure agreements. The contractor role would be assisting Board staff if needed to track NDA submissions by journalists related to access to embargoed data for NAEP report releases. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 14 | Can the Government provide historical travel data, including the number of trips and associated travel costs incurred annually under the incumbent contract? | Each contract year requires one staff member (at minimum) travel/transportation to the Board’s three quarterly meetings in the Washington, DC area, travel/transportation for one staff member (maximum) to the fourth meeting in the CONUS, as well as travel to release events or other major gatherings, typically held in the Washington, DC area. The incumbent is located in Washington, DC, so it has mostly been local travel. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 14 | How far in advance of public release are contractors typically granted access to embargoed NAEP data and supporting materials for communications planning and content development? | The timeframe varies depending on availability of the data and the ultimate release date. But typically, thre contractor will have access an average of 6-8 weeks in advance. The Board works closely with the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) to ensure a timeframe that will allow ample planning. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 14 | The contractor will receive embargoed NAEP data and sign confidentiality agreements. Are there any additional security, data handling, storage, or system requirements beyond the nondisclosure requirements described in the SOW? | There are no other requirements for the communciations contractor. |
| Technical | Attachment A - SOW | 14 | Section 5 states the contractor must sign nondisclosure agreements to access embargoed NAEP data. Can the Government confirm how far in advance of a scheduled release the contractor will typically receive access to embargoed data, so that adequate time for messaging and content development can be planned and priced? | The timeframe varies depending on availability of the data and the ultimate release date. But typically, thre contractor will have access an average of 6-8 weeks in advance. The Board works closely with the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) to ensure a timeframe that will allow ample planning. |
| Technical | Attachment B - QASP | 14 | Are there current communications activities—such as op-ed placement, social media engagement, stakeholder tracking, report release amplification, or plain-language data translation—that the Department views as priority improvement areas for the next contract period? | The Board sees all those areas as priority activities critical to effective communications work. |
| Technical | Attachment B – QASP | 2 | Beyond the provided QASP, could the Governing Board provide additional detail regarding any existing reporting frameworks or dashboards currently used as part of the evaluation process? | The Board continuosly monitors work and deliverable quality, ensuring contractors adhere to the QASP. Annual evaluations on contractor performance are uplaoded to CPARS where the contractor can review and respond. The QASP pertains to post-award evaluation. |
| Business | Attachment B – QASP | 3 | The QASP uses five adjectival ratings (Exceptional/Very Good/Satisfactory/Marginal/Unsatisfactory) for CPARS, while Attachment D uses a three-tier confidence rating (High/Some/Low) for source selection. Please confirm whether both rating systems will be used post-award and how they reconcile in performance management. | The QASP elements are tied to the CPARS ratings, and shall be used for post-award evaluation of the contractor. The confidence ratings in Attachment D are used for quote evaluation pre-award. Only the CPARS ratings apply to post-award. |
| Technical | Attachment B – QASP | 5 | The QASP Quality Determinant table addresses Contract Management, Ongoing Outreach and Communications, NAEP Report Card Release Events, Social Media Posting and Management, and Content Development, but does NOT include a Quality Determinant for Task 2 (Strategic Communications Plan). Please confirm whether Task 2 is intentionally excluded from QASP surveillance or whether an additional Quality Determinant row will be added prior to award. | The quoter may choose to elaborate on the attached QASP or agree to the terms as they are provided. It is to be noted that the final QASP will be mutually agreed with the contractor. |
| Technical | Attachment B – QASP | 5 | Could the Governing Board provide additional detail regarding the anticipated review and approval process and hierarchy for messaging, social media content, op-eds, and all materials intended for public release? | Contractors develop content with input from the COR and key Board staff and drafts are reviewed and ultimately approved by that key staff before it is finalized and/or posted. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 1 | Can the Government clarify whether external links to previous work (beyond appendices) are permitted? And if so, will they be evaluated? | All information shall be included in the 15-page technical propsal. Hyperlinks will not be evaluated. |
| Business | Attachment C - Instructions | 3 | The incumbent contract value is provided. Can the Government provide annual obligated funding by contract year to better understand the anticipated level of effort? | The current total amount to date is $1,778,956.02 over three years. Quoters are advised to base their labor assumptions on what is written in the current Statement of Work, and not historical information. |
| Business | Attachment C - Instructions | 3 | Attachment C states the contract "is anticipated to be Firm Fixed Price," yet ODCs are to be "awarded on a cost reimbursement basis." Please confirm whether the resulting contract will be a hybrid FFP (Labor)/Cost-Reimbursable (ODC) instrument and, if so, whether ODC CLINs (0002, 0004, 0006, 0008, 0010 on the SF1449) will be issued as separate cost-reimbursable line items with NTE caps. Can you also provide the government estimated budget for ODC (the not to exceed - NTE) amount? | The contract is anticipated to be Hybrid (Firm Fixed Price (FFP) for Labor, and Other Direct Costs shall be Cost Reimbursement (CR)). The even number CLINS shall be CR/NTE as they are potentially travel-related, and may include other proposed costs. This award will be predominantly FFP, as ODCs are estimated at less than 1% of the total cost if they are only for travel, and minor proposed costs. Historically, ODCs have been very low. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 4 | Would the government consider allowing 10-point font for graphics included in offerors' proposals? | 10 point font and single spacing for tables and graphics is permitted. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 4 | Does the Table of Contents count against the technical response 15-page limit? | Yes. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 4 | Does the Executive Summary count against the technical response 15-page limit? | Yes. |
| Business | Attachment C - Instructions | 4 | Should the business proposal price the work by the six SOW task areas, by labor category, or both if the Attachment E budget template allows for both views? | Attachment E requires a full breakdown of proposed personnel on each row and hours per task. It will total rows and columns for each contract year and should populate the summary tab. Please confirm the accuracy of all formulas rows and columns. |
| Business | Attachment C - Instructions | 4 | The RFQ identifies the incumbent contract total amount to date. Should quoters use that historical value as a general planning reference, or should pricing be built solely from Attachment E based on the quoter’s proposed technical approach? | The current total amount to date is $1,778,956.02 over three years. Quoters are advised to base their labor assumptions on what is written in the current Statement of Work, and not historical information. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 4 | Are the cover page and Table of Contents excluded from the page count? | The cover page does not count toward the page count. The table of contents counts. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 4 | Will NAGB permit 10 pt font and single spacing for tables and graphics? | 10 point font and single spacing for tables and graphics is permitted. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 4 | Attachment C specifies "15 pages, double-spaced, in a 12-point font." Please clarify (a) the required font face(s), (b) minimum/maximum margin sizes, (c) whether tables and figures may use single-spaced text and reduced font size, and (d) whether the Cover Page, Table of Contents, headers, and footers are excluded from the page count. | (a) Arial, Times, Calibri, or similar (b) 1" margins (c)10 point font and single spacing for tables and graphics is permitted (d) The cover page does not count toward the page count. The table of contents counts. Headers and footers will count if included. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 5 | Will examples of multimedia storytelling, public engagement campaigns, and educational communications initiatives be considered responsive supporting materials as part of the technical proposal appendix? | The appendix should include the resumes of proposed staff, letters of commitment, the QASP, and 'supporting information as needed'. These items in the question can be included, but will not be evaluated. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 5 | The 15-page limit excludes the appendix. Do the Executive Summary and Table of Contents count toward the 15-page limit? | Yes. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 6 | Is the Government seeking dedicated full-time personnel for this contract, or will the use of specialized consultants/subcontractors in support of the communications strategy be acceptable? | All staff (including subcontractors and consultants as applicable) shall have qualifications appropriate for the tasks they are to perform. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 6 | For media relations and stakeholder engagement activities, does the Government anticipate national outreach efforts throughout the period of performance, or will communications efforts primarily align with major NAEP release cycles and Board initiatives? | Stakeholder and media outreach will be conducted on a national level. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 6 | Given page limitations, can the Project Staffing Section be included in the Appendix? | No. This shall be in the 15-page technical proposal so that the vendor’s understanding of the scope of the work may be evaluated by the Technical Evaluation Panel. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 6 | Given page limitations, can the Management Plan be included in the Appendix? | No. This shall be in the 15-page technical proposal so that the vendor’s understanding of the scope of the work may be evaluated by the Technical Evaluation Panel. |
| Business | Attachment C - Instructions | 6 | Project staffing and other sections of the instructions references vitae (i.e., curriculum vitae). Vitae and resumes appear to be used interchangeably, but they there are differences between the two formats. Can the government clarify which is required and/or if this differs by personnel? | Either format is appropriate depending on personnel that are proposed. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 7 | Will the Government consider communications experience supporting K–12 school districts, educational institutions, and public-facing educational initiatives as relevant past performance for this requirement? | See Attachment D for Organizational Experience evaluation. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 7 | Please confirm that resumes are only required for proposed key personnel and that offerors should not include resumes for non-key personnel proposed staff. | The appendix will include the resumes of proposed staff (not exceeding 3 pages per person), and shall include resumes for all proposed key personnel, including key personnel from subcontractors. Quoters can provide resumes for all staff proposed, but have to provide the resume for their proposed key personnel. Offerors must detail staff qualifications for all proposed staff in the Project Staffing section, so it would be prudent to also incluse resumes if available. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 7 | Will subcontractors or consultants be permitted to support education policy, assessment communications, or media relations functions if the prime retains full project management, quality control, and final responsibility for deliverables? | Yes. The prime contractor must have effective control of the subcontractor’s work. |
| Technical | Attachment C - Instructions | 7 | Given page limitations, can Organizational Experience be included in the Appendix? | No. This shall be in the 15-page technical proposal so that the vendor’s understanding of the scope of the work may be evaluated by the Technical Evaluation Panel. |
| Business | Attachment C - Instructions | 7 | Attachment C requires subcontractor Organizational Conflict of Interest documents to be included in the technical proposal (p.7) AND the business proposal (p.10). Please confirm whether OCI documents must be submitted in both volumes, in only one (and which one), or whether duplication is acceptable. | They shall be included in the Business Proposal. |
| Business | Attachment C - Instructions | 8 | Are offerors permitted to use Order Level Materials (OLMs) in the budget proposal? | OLMs are used under GSA Federal Supply Schedule orders. The resultant purchase order from this solicitation will not be a GSA order, so Other Direct Costs shall be used. |
| Business | Attachment C - Instructions | 9 | Beyond the travel outlined in the RFQ, are there any anticipated recurring in-person meeting or event support requirements that quoters should account for in pricing assumptions? | Each contract year requires one staff member (at minimum) travel/transportation to the Board’s three quarterly meetings in the Washington, DC area, travel/transportation for one staff member (maximum) to the fourth meeting in the CONUS, as well as travel to release events or other major gatherings, typically held in the Washington, DC area. |
| Business | Attachment C - Instructions | 9 | Attachment C requires "enough information for a cost realism determination to be made" with rejection rights if cost realism is negative, while Attachment D evaluates only "price reasonableness." For a FFP procurement, please clarify whether (a) cost realism is performed only on ODCs, (b) it applies to the full price, or (c) only price reasonableness will be applied. | Quoters shall submit all (if any) price assumptions, conditions, or exceptions related to any of the terms and conditions of the SOW. It is not the responsibility of the Department to seek out and identify price assumptions, conditions, or exceptions buried within the quote. Offerors are expected to use their best business judgement in submitting the necessary information. Price that does not align to the quoter’s proposed technical submission may indicate an inability to understand the requirements and therefore may be considered a high-risk approach to contract performance. A price evaluation shall be conducted to determine the best value to the government. The total evaluated price will be evaluated for price reasonableness through comparison with other proposed prices and may include other price analysis techniques. |
| Business | Attachment C - Instructions | 9 | Attachment C states a 5-year PoP (8/16/2026 – 8/15/2031). Attachment E prices an "OPTIONAL 6-MONTH EXTENSION: 8/16/2031 – 2/15/2032." FAR 52.217-9 caps total duration at 5 years. Please confirm how the 6-month extension priced in Attachment E can be exercised within the 5-year ceiling, or whether 52.217-9 is being waived/modified for this acquisition. | 52.217-9 is used to exercise options that are already named in the contract, thereby extending the PoP in an expected way. 52.217-8 gives the Government the ability to extend a service contract for up to 6 months, within the limits and at the rates specified in the contract, if something unexpected happens or more time is required. Quoters shall submit the same pricing information for OY4 for an additional 6-month extension. The 6-month extension would require the quoter to complete the same work that was completed during the first 6 months of the last year of the period of performance. |
| Business | Attachment C - Instructions | 9 | Please specify (a) the number of Board quarterly meetings per year (Attachment C says "at least three a year" while Attachment A says "quarterly," implying four), (b) the typical city/region(s) for out-of-DC Board meetings, (c) average duration (days) per meeting, and (d) the number of staff seats the contractor should budget for each. | Each contract year requires one staff member (at minimum) travel/transportation to the Board’s three quarterly meetings in the Washington, DC area, travel/transportation for one staff member (maximum) to the fourth meeting in the CONUS, as well as travel to release events or other major gatherings, typically held in the Washington, DC area. |
| Business | Attachment C - Instructions | 9 | Attachment C references travel to "release events or other major gatherings." Please define (a) typical event locations, (b) anticipated frequency per contract year, (c) typical duration, and (d) whether more than one contractor staff member is expected to attend release events. | Each contract year requires one staff member (at minimum) travel/transportation to the Board’s three quarterly meetings in the Washington, DC area, travel/transportation for one staff member (maximum) to the fourth meeting in the CONUS, as well as travel to release events or other major gatherings, typically held in the Washington, DC area. |
| Business | Attachment C - Instructions | 9 | The daily rate for consultants cannot exceed "GS-15, Step 10 per day." Please confirm (a) the specific dollar amount the Government will use for the GS-15, Step 10 cap for FY26 (DC locality), and (b) whether the cap is adjusted annually for option years per OPM tables. | The current maximum rate is $94.49 per hour in the Washington, DC area and can be adjusted in the future based on OPM pay tables. If a consulting agreement is executed, it shall be included in the Appendix. |
| Business | Attachment C - Instructions | 10 | For the purposes of both the Excel spreadsheet and the Business Proposal Narrative, should proposed consultants be detailed under Director Labor or under Subcontractors? | Consultants are Other Direct Costs. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .