MCC Data and Documentation Management Services.pdf

MCC Data and Documentation Management Services Making learning and data sharing more efficient and effective

December 18, 2019

Disclaimers

• Information provided in these slides and in the corresponding webinar is for the purpose of enhancing industry’s understanding of MCC’s requirement and shall not be considered or interpreted as changing the terms and conditions of the solicitation. The RFQ and any subsequent amendments will be the governing documents and communications for this procurement.

• This event is being recorded. However, the recording will not be shared/posted publicly.

• Webinar attendee list, with contact information, will be posted to beta.SAM.gov.**

Team Introductions

CGM

• Jacqueline Naranjo – Contracting Officer

• Walt Pemberton (remote) – Contract Specialist

Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

• Jack Molyneaux (not present) – Director, Evaluations

• Jennifer Sturdy (remote) – PSC, Evaluations

• Patrick McWeeny – Open Data Analyst

OCIO

• My Le – Associate Director, Product Manager

Housekeeping Items

• Please mute your phones while MCC is presenting.

Unmute yourself to ask a question.

• Hold questions until the end of the presentation.

• MCC will not transcribe the content of this webinar.

However, a copy of the PowerPoint presentation will be posted to beta.SAM.gov.

• It is the offeror’s responsibility to monitor the beta.SAM Contract Opportunities site for amendments and other communications regarding this solicitation.

Objectives of Solicitation

• Existing platform requires improved functionality

• Platform requires a function for differential data access – public and restricted-access

• MCC requires additional technical services for review and preparation of data packages to be transparent, reproducible, and ethical

Let’s start with some definitions

• Data package

– Data files (.dta if STATA); De-Identification

Worksheet; Analysis Code; Transparency Statement (https://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog/8 6/get_microdata)

• Documentation

– All reports, questionnaires of a study

– (https://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog/8

6/related_materials) https://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog/86/get_microdata https://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog/86/related_materials

Task 1.1: Tools and Training

• Base Year & Option Year 1 – T&M

– Review and provide input into TREDD Guidance documents and annexes (updated version January 2020)

• Option Years – Fixed Price per unit of service provided

– Training – 1 in-person training in DC OR 1-2 webinars

– Record all – goal is to share with new staff; field staff as necessary

– Brief and accessible – no more than 3 hours

Task 2.1: New Platform

• Base Year – T&M

– Development, testing, launch of replacement to existing platform

• Options Years – Fixed Price per unit of service delivered

– Maintenance and hosting

– IT Security Plan

Task 2.1: New Platform

• What problems do we aim to solve?

https://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog

1. Searchability/Filterability – on factors we care about at the STUDY level (by evaluations) and at the DOCUMENT level (by reports)

2. Standardized citation

3. Shareability – share individual documents

4. Accessibility – metadata; documents 508-compliant

5. Measurement/Tracking – MCC wants access to analytics on use

6. Compatibility – Must be able to hold all data types

7. Differential Data Access – public and/or restricted https://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog

Task 2.2: Restricted Data

• Fixed price for the virtual data enclave based on estimated number of data packages

• Base Year – Fixed Price per unit

– 15 restricted-access data packages already cleared by MCC DRB ready for posting

• Option Years – Fixed Price per unit

– No more than 3 annually

Task 2.2: Restricted Data

• Function to obtain restricted data (protocols and mechanism for approved researchers to download and use)

• Function to access restricted data (protocols and mechanism for approved researchers to conduct analysis in VDE)

• Protocols need to consider Paperwork Reduction Act and require monitoring/tracking system

Task 2.3: Data Transfer/Upload

• Base Year – Fixed Price

– 50% transfer of all existing data/documentation to new platform

• Option Year 1 – Fixed Price

– 50% transfer of all existing data/documentation to new platform

• Option Years – T&M

– Data Upload and Maintenance

Task 3.1: Data Review/Preparation

• Base Year – T&M

– Participate in technical review of data packages with MCC DRB

• Option Years – T&M

– Participate in technical review of data packages with MCC DRB

– Prepare/finalize data packages for MCC DRB review

Evaluation Criteria

• Staffing: Who are we looking for?

– Experience working in social science research, in particularly knowledge dissemination, data preparation and dissemination, particularly for open data and open government initiatives

– Strong understanding of US regulation on protection of human subjects and data privacy

– Strong understanding of data de-identification techniques for protection of human subjects

– Strong understanding of US government requirements under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and appropriate exemptions to maintain privacy protection

– Strong understanding and experience with producing technology solutions that adhere to CIPSEA and NIST 800-171 based confidentiality and security requirements for CUI in a Non Federal System.

• Technical Approach/Methodology: What are we looking for?

– The offeror's proposed work plan will be evaluated for the extent to which it meets the Government's needs and demonstrates an understanding of the requirements.

– The offeror's protocols for preparing, managing, and monitoring restricted-access data and protocols for breach/disclosure risk management and reporting will be evaluated for the extent to which they protect the security and integrity of MCC's data. (Overlaps Tasks

1.1 and 2.2)

– The Data Preparation and/or Review approach will be evaluated for understanding of data de-identification techniques, re-identification risk, and protection of human subjects.

• Technical Approach/Methodology: What are we looking for?

– The Platform Design and Implementation approach will be evaluated based on response to the requirements detailed in Section C Task 2.1 to make the platform more user-friendly and effective.

– The Platform Hosting and Maintenance approach will be evaluated on the proposed system availability (i.e., uptime); user support (i.e., proposed speed of resolution of user requests); and approach to conformance with patching and other security requirements. All things equal, solutions that require MCC to host portions of the proposed platform will be considered less favorable than those where the offeror hosts the complete solution. Further, quotations that clearly demonstrate existing platforms already deployed for US Federal Government agencies that will meet MCC's requirements with limited modifications and which have received an Authority to Operate (ATO) will be considered more favorable than Quotations for platforms that need to be developed and have not yet been successfully deployed. 16

Funding

• Tasks 1.1 & 2.1 – Administrative Funding

– Firm budget of $528K over 5 yrs

– Expect peak in Base and First Option

– CLINs: 0001, 0002, 1001, 1002, 2001, 3001, 4001

• Tasks 2.2, 2.3 & 3.1 – Due Diligence Funding

– Budget of $1.4 million over 5 yrs +15%

– Expect even distribution across years

– CLINs: 0003, 0004, 1003, 1004, 2002, 2003, 3002, 3003, 4002, 4003

Questions?