Academic Detailing RFP 5 17 10.doc

PART I - THE SCHEDULE

Request for Proposal SECTION A - SOLICITATION FORM No. AHRQ-10-10011 Date Issued: May 17, 2010 Date Questions Due: May 27, 2010 12:00 PM ET Date Notice of Intent Due: June 16, 2010

Date Past Performance Questionnaires Due:

June 23, 2010, 12:00 PM ET

Date Proposals Due: June 24, 2010 12:00 PM ET RECOVERY – This contract will be funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act, P.L. 111-5). Please review the required ARRA reporting requirements in Section H and I of this solicitation.

You are invited to submit a proposal to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) for Request for Proposal (RFP) No. AHRQ-10-10011, entitled “Academic Detailing.” Your proposal must be developed and submitted in accordance with the requirements and instructions of this RFP.

A firm, fixed-priced contract is contemplated for a period of three years.

The Government anticipates awarding one contract from this solicitation.

The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code that best describes the requirement is 541820.

For this particular acquisition, the 2010 AHRQ recommended goal (as a percentage of total contract value for the base period) is 28% for Small Businesses, which shall include at least 5% (as a percentage of total planned subcontract dollars for the base period) for Small Disadvantaged Businesses, at least 5% (as a percentage of total planned subcontract dollars total planned subcontract dollars for the base period) for Women-Owned Small Businesses, and at least 3% (as a percentage of total planned subcontract dollars for the base period) for HUBZone Small Businesses and at least 3% (as a percentage of total planned subcontract dollars for the base period) for Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses. These goals represent AHRQ’s expectations of the minimum level for subcontracting with small business at the prime contract level. Any goal stated less than the AHRQ recommended goal shall be justified and is subject to negotiation.

Offerors shall submit the following:

A.

Technical Proposal (See Section L.10) (Original and 11 copies)

B.

Past Performance Information (See Section L.11) (Original and 3 copies) C, Small Disadvantaged Business Participation Plan (See Section L.12) (Original and 2 copies) C.

Business Proposal (See Section L.13) (Includes Small Business Subcontracting Plan, Section K clauses, and completed Invoice Schedule – Attachment 6) (Original and 5 copies) Your technical proposal must be concisely written and should be limited to 80 typewritten pages (double-spaced), not including resumes or bibliographies, with no less than 11 point, double-spaced text (lists of deliverables, person loading charts, and similar materials need not be double-spaced so long as they are legible). See Section L.10 for additional details. This limitation is for administrative purposes only and exceeding the limitation shall not, of itself, be considered a basis for rejection of your proposal.

As part of the business proposal, offerors shall provide an original and five (5) copies of their cost/price proposal and the completed Invoice Schedule, see Section L.13 and Attachment 6.

Your proposal must provide the full name of your company, the address, including county, Tax Identification Number (TIN), DUN and Bradstreet No., and if different, the address to which payment should be mailed.

YOUR ATTENTION IS CALLED TO THE LATE PROPOSAL PROVISIONS PROVIDED IN SECTION L.3 OF THIS RFP. YOUR ATTENTION IS ALSO DIRECTED TO THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS PROVIDED IN SECTION L.10 OF THE SOLICITATION.

If you intend to submit a proposal in response to this solicitation, please inform the Contracting Officer of your intent by completing the Proposal Intent Response Form (Attachment 3 to this solicitation) and send it to the Contracting Officer no later than the date and time indicated above. You may send it to the address below or fax it to 301-427-1740, Attention: Gayle Sunde, Contracting Officer.

Questions regarding this solicitation shall be received in this office no later than the date and time indicated above (See Section L.7). All questions shall be submitted electronically by e-mail to Gayle Sunde, Contracting Officer at the following email address: gayle.sunde@ahrq.

Subject line shall read: “Proposal Questions RFP No. AHRQ-10-10011.”

Answers to questions will be provided in the form of an Amendment to this solicitation and will be posted on the Federal Business Opportunities web page: www.fedbizopps.gov. It is your responsibility to monitor the web site to learn about any amendments to the solicitation.

Discussions with any other individual outside the Division of Contracts Management, may result in rejection of the potential offeror’s proposal.

The proposal shall be signed by an authorized official to bind your organization and must be received in our Contracts Office no later than the date and time indicated above. Your proposal must be mailed to the following address:

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

Division of Contracts Management

540 Gaither Road

Rockville, Maryland 20850

Hand carried proposals may be dropped off at the above location. However, please allow ample time as proposals cannot be accepted until they have gone through security. We will not be held responsible for any delays that may be incurred getting your proposal through security.

NOTE:

The U.S. Postal Service’s “Express Mail” does not deliver to our Rockville, Maryland address. Packages delivered via this service will be held at a local post office for pick-up. The Government will not be responsible for picking up any mail at a local post office. If a proposal is not received at the place, date, and time specified herein, it will be considered a “late proposal.”

The RFP does not commit the Government to pay any cost for the preparation and submission of a proposal. It is also brought to your attention that the Contracting Officer is the only individual who can legally commit the Government to the expenditure of public funds in connection with the proposed acquisition.

In accordance with Federal Acquisition Circular (FAC) 2001-16, all contractors must be registered in the central contractor registration (CCR) database in order to conduct business with the government [See Section I - FAR clause 52.204-7 Central Contractor Registration (OCT 2003), Alternate 1 (Oct 2003)]. As stated in paragraph (h) of this clause, additional information can be obtained at http://www.ccr.gov or by calling 1-888-227-2423, or 269-961-5757.

Requests for any information concerning this RFP should be referred to Gayle Sunde, gayle.sunde@ahrq.hhs.gov .

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I

Pages Section A Solicitation 1-3

Table of Contents

Section B Supplies or Services & Prices/Costs 5

Section C Description/Specification/Work Statement 6-26

Section D Packaging and Marking 27

Section E Inspection and Acceptance 27

Section F Deliveries or Performance 28-30 Section G Contract Administration Data 31-32

Section H Special Contract Requirements

33-39

PART II

Section I Contract Clauses 40-44

PART III

Section J List of Attachments

PART IV

Section K Representations and Instructions 46-55

Section L Instructions, Conditions & Notices to Offerors 56-78 Section M Evaluation Factors for Award

79-81

Attachments 1.

Past Performance Questionnaire and Contractor Performance Form 82-87

2. Proposal Intent Response Sheet

3.

Small Business Subcontracting Plan

89-97 4.

Breakdown of Proposed Fixed Price and Labor Hours/Rates

98-99 5.

Invoice Schedule

100-107

SECTION B-SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

B.1

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF SUPPLIES OR SERVICES

“Academic Detailing” – The purpose of this solicitation is to contract with an organization to conduct activities related to academic detailing so that selected target audiences put AHRQ’s comparative effectiveness products, tools and research into practice.

See Section C for a complete description.

B.2

FIRM FIXED PRICE

The firm fixed price of this contract is as follows:

Total Amount for Contract:

Please complete the Invoice Schedule - Attachment 6 by entering your proposed prices for each deliverable/task. Include the completed Invoice Schedule in your Business Proposal.

SECTION C- DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATION/WORK STATEMENT

I.

BACKGROUND

A.

AGENCY FOR HEALTHCARE RESEARCH AND QUALITY, OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS AND KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER, AND THE COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH MISSION The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) is the lead Federal agency charged with improving the quality, safety, effectiveness, and efficiency of health care for all Americans. As part of AHRQ’s mandate, the Agency conducts and supports a broad base of scientific research and promotion focusing on comparative effectiveness of different clinical treatments and services, as authorized by Section 1013 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act (MMA), Pub. L. 108-173. The essential goals of the law are to develop valid evidence and make it easily accessible to decisionmakers about the comparative effectiveness of different treatments and appropriate clinical approaches to difficult health problems. AHRQ has a strong focus on the conduct, synthesis, evaluation, and implementation of research findings and their translation into practical tools and strategies. Research projects are informed by the information needs and inputs from various stakeholders (e.g., policymakers, clinicians, and consumers/patients) to help match the best science to individual needs and preferences for a wide array of target audiences.

Comparative effectiveness research provides information that allows people and their doctors to work together to choose the best possible treatment for an illness or condition. It provides comparisons of drugs, medical devices, tests, surgeries, or ways to deliver health care. This information helps consumers/patients and their families understand what treatments work best and how their risks compare, while allowing for choices for each individual patient.

AHRQ is committed to translating and disseminating comparative effectiveness concepts and content to its target audiences, including consumers/patients, health care providers, and policymakers. The Office of Communications and Knowledge Transfer (OCKT) manages and coordinates the Agency’s publishing, marketing, dissemination, and implementation activities to ensure significant findings from comparative effectiveness research are available to a broad audience and implemented in the health care system. OCKT writes, edits, and designs materials that help our key target audiences understand how to put products, tools, and research findings into practice. AHRQ supports initiatives that market, disseminate, translate, and help move research into practice. As a result, health care decisionmakers, including consumers/patients, are able to make informed decisions that improve the quality of health care services.

B. AHRQ TARGET AUDIENCES

AHRQ’s target audiences include:

1.

Clinical decisionmakers: The evidence developed through AHRQ-sponsored comparative effectiveness research and analysis helps clinicians and other health care professionals make informed decisions about what treatments work best, for whom, when, and at what cost. Clinical decisionmakers include doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and other allied health professional organizations.

2.

Health care system decisionmakers: Health plan and delivery system administrators use the findings and tools developed through AHRQ-sponsored comparative effectiveness research to make choices on how to improve the health care system's ability to provide, access, and deliver high-quality, high-value care. These decisionmakers include health plans, integrated health systems, insurance companies, hospitals, group practices, and long-term care institutions. Other decisionmakers are pharmaceutical and other health product firms that are developing new drugs, medical devices, tests, or ways to deliver health care.

3.

Purchasers/business decisionmakers/vendors of health information technology: Purchasers use the tools and products of AHRQ-sponsored comparative effectiveness research to improve the quality of their health care services. These decisionmakers include employers, corporations, business coalitions, unions, and vendors of health information technology focused on clinical decision support.

4.

Public policy decisionmakers: Public policymakers use the information produced by AHRQ to expand their capability to monitor and evaluate changes in the health care system and to devise policies designed to improve its performance. These decisionmakers include Federal and State policymakers such as Medicare and Medicaid, as well as policy expert panels such as the Institute of Medicine, professional societies, health care associations, and Quality Improvement Organizations.

5.

Consumers/patients: Tools and products developed through AHRQ-sponsored comparative effectiveness research can help consumers/patients make informed decisions about what treatments are best for them and when. This research also helps consumers/patients understand how the health care system works so that they are able to obtain the best quality of care. Patient advocacy groups also are included in this group of decision makers.

C.

Overview of AHRQ’s comparative effectiveness

RESEARCH

The Institute of Medicine of the National Academies’ report on “Initial Priorities for Comparative Effectiveness Research” (released on June 30, 2009) and mandated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, defines comparative effectiveness research as the generation and syntheses of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition or to improve the delivery of care. The purpose of comparative effectiveness research is to assist consumers/patients, clinicians, purchasers, and policymakers to make informed decisions that will improve health care at both the individual and population levels.

However, significant barriers limit the dissemination of current, evidence-based patient-centered information to the target audiences. This contract seeks to bring innovative, effective, and user-friendly methods to advance the dissemination of comparative effectiveness concepts and content to specific target audiences. This contract would examine and implement methods that extend beyond the academic setting to engage the target audiences in the environment where decisions are typically made. Using marketing, dissemination, and implementation tools, this effort will utilize methods from within health care or other industries to expand information dissemination to improve physician and patient decisionmaking.

Specifically, this contract will conduct academic detailing to specific target audiences, especially clinicians, in both large and small group practices; nurses; health plan formularies; benefits managers; and others who are responsible for using information generated by AHRQ’s comparative effective research activities. The process would include an environmental scan, detailed literature review, consultation with an expert panel, testing of different approaches, training of detailers, and roll out. These academic detailers would be health care professionals who would conduct in-person meetings around the country (across the continental United States) with the target audiences to provide the latest comparative effectiveness research information. See Attachment B for the current and upcoming reports that will be available.

This contract will span a 3-year period and will reflect the mission and policy emphases of AHRQ. The complexity of the health issues to be addressed will be based on the comparative effectiveness research products developed for dissemination and will directly impact project strategies, tactics, and timelines.

D.

Goals and Focus of AHRQ’s Comparative Effectiveness

RESEARCH

The overall goal for AHRQ’s comparative effectiveness research is to promote high-quality care through broad availability of information that helps clinicians and consumers/patients match the best science to individual needs and preferences. In addition, the program will provide a sustainable foundation for comparative effectiveness research so that it will enable—now and in the future—the United States health care system to deliver the highest quality and best value care to all Americans.

AHRQ, along with several other Federal agencies, engages in dissemination and translation activities. Innovative methods and strategies for these activities are therefore essential, both for consumers/patients and providers. The specific goals of this contract are to support both dissemination- and translation-focused projects:

· Dissemination-focused activities support projects targeting dissemination of comparative effectiveness research findings to providers or consumers/patients.

· Translation-focused activities support projects targeting translation or implementation of comparative effectiveness research findings into clinical practice.

E.

Additional Information and resources AHRQ’s comparative effectiveness research (also referred to as Effective Health Care Program) has been underway since 2003. Consumers/patients, health care providers (including nurses, doctors, and other clinicians), and policymakers all share an interest in making the best health care decisions. One of the greatest challenges is finding reliable and practical data that can inform these decisions. AHRQ is dedicated to fulfilling this need through high-quality research and getting the information out to those who need to make health care decisions. AHRQ uses these three approaches to provide current, unbiased evidence on health care interventions:

· Review and synthesize published and unpublished scientific evidence.

· Promote and generate new scientific evidence and analytic tools in an accelerated and practical format.

· Compile the findings and translate them into a variety of useful formats for stakeholders.

For additional information about the various aspects of AHRQ’s comparative effectiveness research and for additional resources, please go to the AHRQ Web site at http://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/index.cfm.

AHRQ wishes to further its mission, continuing to reach its audiences in new and different ways by conducting face-to-face visits with key target audiences and then to followup with these audiences. We propose using academic detailing efforts to reach clinicians and related groups, offering assistance to help them understand the findings, and encouraging them to apply the findings contained in particular comparative effectiveness research reports. Combining AHRQ's comparative effectiveness research products with an academic detailing program approach is a strategic way to meet the dissemination goals of the Agency.

Academic detailing provides an educational service desired by physicians in particular. Physicians have reacted quite favorably to this more time-efficient approach to keeping them abreast of new information on prescription drugs. Focusing on individual outreach to physicians within the setting of their practice is a proven technique for effective continuing education. Academic detailing provides physicians with unbiased, balanced, evidence-based information regarding the safety and efficacy of drugs. This promotes appropriate prescribing habits, including the cost-effective use of drugs which can help increase access to health care.

An increasing number of States are using and exploring academic detailing as a mechanism for reducing prescription drug cost, improving the quality of care, and increasing the value derived from drug coverage programs. Academic detailing programs currently exist in Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and the District of Columbia. Pilots are underway in Idaho and Oregon. An example of a State experience includes the Pennsylvania Academic Detailing program. The State launched a plan with a module on pain management in the wake of emerging safety concerns surrounding COX II inhibitors, and was able to provide a timely and important service to physicians who had questions about which analgesic regimens were most effective with the least risk to patients. In addition to pain management, topics that the Pennsylvania and Vermont program have addressed to date include: the management of upper gastrointestinal symptoms (heartburn), type 2 diabetes management, managing hypertension, depression, and elevated cholesterol.

This initiative will provide a new and different approach in achieving educational outreach of AHRQ comparative effectiveness research products. In one study on academic detailing, two brief visits to physicians by clinical pharmacists trained in effective techniques of communication and persuasion were found to reduce inappropriate prescribing behavior. (1) While physician characteristics such as age, board certification, and specialty did not affect response to the site visit, a second reinforcement visit substantially increased compliance with prescribing recommendations. (2) Other controlled studies also have documented the effectiveness and receptivity of physicians to face-to-face counseling. (3, 4, 5) Because of the noted success of site visits to influence physician and clinician behavior, AHRQ wishes to use a similar technique to promote actual use of comparative effectiveness research products and findings.

1 Avorn, J, Soumerai SB. Improving Drug-Therapy Decisions through Educational Outreach: a Randomized Controlled Trial of Academically Based “Detailing.” New England Journal of Medicine. 1983; 308: 1457-1463.

2 Soumerai SB, Avorn J. Predictors of Physician Prescribing Change in an Educational Experiment to Improve Medication Use. Medical Care. 1987; 25:210-221.

3 Soumerai, SB, Improving the Quality and Economy of In-Hospital Prescribing: Getting More for Less. Medical Journal of Australia. 1988;149: 574-576.

4 Schffner W, Ray WA, Federspiel CF. Improving Antibiotic Prescribing in Office Practice: A Controlled Trial of Three Educational Methods. JAMA. 1988; 250: 1728-1732.

5 Soumerai, SB, McLaughlin T, Avorn J. Improving Drug Prescribing in Primary Care: A Critical Analysis of the Experimental Literature. Milbank Quarterly. In press.

II.

STATEMENT OF WORK

A.

GOAL AND PERFORMANCE PERIOD OF CONTRACT

This contract is part of a 3-year project in which five complementary but separate contracts will be awarded. Four of the contracts are dissemination focused and have the specific goal of creating awareness of comparative effectiveness research and changing clinician behavior, and the fifth contract (the Evaluation Contractor) will evaluate the impact of those four contracts. Specifically, the Evaluation Contractor will determine the level of increased awareness, understanding, use, and benefits of comparative effectiveness research among clinicians and consumers/patients targeted. (Note: This contract will also assess the retention of information by the target audiences). The outcome of evaluating the effectiveness of each of the different methods is to inform current and future dissemination of EHC. We will be evaluating the efforts and impact of these contracts using metrics that are collected throughout the 3-year duration of each contract. They will be evaluated at midpoint so that corrective action can be taken if necessary. And they will be evaluated again at the end the contract period. Five separate contracts are being selected to gain the specific expertise necessary to reach the goals of each contract.

The contracts are:

· Continuing Education

· Academic Detailing

· Publicity Center with Comparative Effectiveness Virtual Centers

· Regional Offices

· Evaluation

Each contractor shall be aware of the other four contracts and to collaborate with the other contractors when appropriate. For example, the Continuing Education contractor is expected to keep the contractors of the Publicity Center and Academic Detailing contracts informed of upcoming continuing education units that will be coming available. Each contractor will be responsible for coordinating with the Evaluation Contractor to collect the metrics most suitable for this type of evaluation.

Each Contractor will work with the Evaluation Contractor to gather data and metrics in order to determine the change of awareness, understanding, use, and benefits related to comparative effectiveness research and effective health care among the specific AHRQ target audiences in the five dissemination contracts identified above and discussed in the SOW. Each Contract will collect baseline data, as well as data at 6- month intervals over a 3-year period. The metrics collected from this collaborative effort will be given to the Evaluation Contractor who will analyze this information and create a cumulative evaluation of the impact of AHRQ’s comparative effectiveness research dissemination and education activity. This evaluation will help further inform and design the Agency’s future methods of dissemination and education. Each contract will be responsible for coordinating with the Evaluation Contractor to collect the metrics most suitable for this type of evaluation.

Data may also potentially be shared with the other dissemination contractors to help refine dissemination techniques to maximize the effectiveness of the dissemination efforts. Collaboratively, this information will inform AHRQ’s dissemination strategy for effectiveness research.

As much scientific rigor as possible is required for evaluation. To accurately evaluate the impact of AHRQ’s comparative effectiveness research, the contractor must remain a constant factor throughout the duration of the contract. The Contractor will coordinate efforts with the Evaluation Contractor and awardees of the other dissemination contracts to determine what information needs to be collected and measured for reporting behavioral change.

The overall goal of the Academic Detailing initiative is to contract with an organization to conduct activities related to academic detailing so that selected target audiences put AHRQ’s comparative effectiveness products, tools, and research into practice. Building relationships with clinician groups and organizations that can use comparative effectiveness reports to make decisions takes time and involves multiple visits and follow up through additional dissemination and marketing techniques. Communication to these target audiences must be consistent with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) policies. The three year duration ensures that these relationships will be built in a way that only encourages these groups and organizations to use the comparative effectiveness research products, but that also has them seek out these products once this contract ends. The duration of the contract is also pivotal to the collection of meaningful metrics. Having 3 years of data will allow AHRQ to understand the impact of the academic detailing process, the development of partnerships, and what types of outcomes AHRQ can expect during different phases of the project, and what detailing methods are most effective in fostering impact.

The Contractor shall fully perform all of the tasks specified in this Statement of Work (SOW). Full performance of support services shall be provided for a 36 month period beginning from the date of the contract award.

The Contractor will attend a project orientation meeting at AHRQ or via teleconference within 2 weeks of the contract award and a coordination meeting with all of the contractors on or before October 29, 2010.

PROJECT TASKS

The Contractor shall perform the following Statement of Work (SOW) tasks:

Task 1 – Participate in Project Orientation and Coordination Meetings

Task 2 - Finalize Work Plan (inclusive of cost proposal) Task 3 - Perform Project Management Task 4 - Perform a Range of Research and Coordination Steps in Planning and

Developing Strategies and Tactics Task 5 - Conduct Academic Detailing to Clinicians and Other Significant

Target Audiences.

5a. Evaluate the retention of information at the one year timeframe of clinicians and other significant target audiences

Task 6 – Develop Impact Case Studies Task 7 – Final Report A description of each task follows.

Task 1 – Participate in project orientation and Coordination Meetings

Subtask 1.1 – Participate in Project Orientation Meeting

The Contractor shall participate either in person or via audio conference call with AHRQ COTR (Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative) and other relevant AHRQ staff in a project orientation meeting within 2 weeks following the contract award. At the direction of the COTR, the Contractor shall meet at AHRQ headquarters or via teleconference with the COTR and other AHRQ staff to refine the understanding of the purpose and scope of the contract; major deliverables; and current AHRQ research priorities, policy issues, and academic detailing goals. Key Government and Contractor staff will be introduced, and communication channels will be discussed. The Contractor shall hold followup discussions by phone or e-mail, as necessary, to clarify key points.

Subtask 1.2 - Attend Coordination Meeting To facilitate coordination between the four Dissemination Contractors and the Evaluation Contractor on Task 5 below, all of the contractors shall meet at AHRQ on or before October 29, 2010. The specific date for the meeting will be provided after contract award. The five dissemination contractors and the Evaluation Contractor are expected to establish working relationships, discuss phase in activities related to data collection and metrics, and undertake other related coordination activities. We anticipate that the Evaluation Contractor will function as a discussion leader or present preliminary ideas regarding data collection and coordination with the other contractors.

TASK 2 - FINALIZE WORK PLAN AND COST PROPOSAL

The Contractor shall do the following:

Subtask 2.1 - Finalize Project Work Plan

The Contractor shall develop a detailed work plan and cost proposal. The Contractor shall also perform the following administrative, personnel, and recruitment activities:

· Provide the COTR with existing contractor administrative procedures related to tracking hours on projects, gathering and reporting cost data, and personnel procedures to meet the requirements of AHRQ. Discussions after contract award with the COTR will follow.

· With the approval of the COTR, the work plan and timelines will be developed and finalized by the Contractor.

· Keep the COTR well-informed on the status of on-board staff, planned hiring procedures, and all issues that directly or indirectly impact the operations of OCKT, AHRQ, and its target audiences.

· Each ongoing project that is assigned must be staffed within 30 days of contract award. Subsequent projects that are assigned should be staffed within 2 weeks. This includes hiring expert consultant(s) to work on each project as appropriate See Attachment B for the comparative effectiveness research reviews that are or will be available for academic detailing during the contract period.

In finalizing the work plan, the Contractor will perform the following:

· Identify the appropriate target audiences; and assess the needs, readiness, and receptivity of the target audiences. Provide a document incorporating the results.

· Develop a proposed mix of particular academic detailing activities for the project, including the rationale for selection.

· Develop the sequence and schedule for the project activities.

· Develop a training plan which includes products, scheduling, and training activities. Include role playing techniques as appropriate.

· Develop an out-placement plan, listing home base of detailers and location of the out-station offices. Specify out-placed detailers, include travel plans and costs as necessary. Updates may be required as requested by the COTR.

The final work plan and cost proposal shall include the following:

· Understanding of project requirements. This should address the understanding of the target audience, and the rationale for selection of the specific mix of activities.

· List of and technical approach to project activities.

· Sequence and schedule of project activities.

· List and description of project deliverables.

· Develop a matrix on the out-placement plan, which includes number of visits, travel costs, home base of detailers, number of repeat visits, number of personal contacts, phone, mail, and e-mail follow up, etc. These metrics must be documented and reported to the COTR and Evaluation Contractor every quarter starting October 1, 2010.

· Develop a matrix that shows the expected number of visits, approximate location (states, SMSAs, etc.) for each of the three years of the contract duration. The totals should be consistent with Attachment C. See Subtask 2.2 for more details.

· Develop a plan to measure retention of information at the one year timeframe by clinicians and other significant target audiences.

· The contractor is responsible for preparing an OMB approval package for such data collection.

· Provide a report elaborating on the testing of detailing methods. What type of detailing is effective and what is not effective in achieving implementation?

· Organization and staffing of project team--names, qualifications, and roles and responsibilities of all project staff, including expert consultant(s) to be hired.

· Describe how the organization’s staff and consultants will interact with AHRQ staff, including OCKT staff, program staff, and Eisenberg Center staff.

· Organization of extension offices in specific geographic area and staffing plan.

· Project costs by major activity. It is expected that this would include (1) labor hours by staff category; (2) direct labor costs; (3) indirect costs; (4) breakdown of other direct costs, including consultants; and (5) fee. The Contractor is expected to create the budget based on the availability of reports in Attachment B. Reports currently available would be available for academic detailing in years 1 and 2 and reports completed in year 2 would be available in years 2 and 3.

The Contractor shall finalize the work plan submitted with the proposal within 30 days of the orientation meeting or the coordination meeting, whichever occurs later. The final work plan (including all tasks listed in Subtask 2.1) should include any changes to the plan submitted with the proposal as a result of discussions with the COTR between the time of contract award and the project orientation meeting or coordination meeting. As activities get underway, AHRQ will provide the Contractor with parameters to finalize the work plan. The Contractor will refine these plans and implement strategies and tactics with AHRQ’s approval.

Subtask 2.2 - Report metrics.

Dissemination contractors will provide data to the Evaluation Contractor, the Task Order Officer, and the COTR each quarter of the contracting year. The first assessment period will begin on January 1, 2011. Reports will be submitted to the Evaluation Contractor 2 weeks following the end of each quarter. It is expected that there may be little or no activity to report in the first reporting period.

Metrics shall include but are not limited to the following: overall number of visits to the target audiences, number of members contacted by each of these organizations, number of repeat visits, number of personal contacts, phone, mail, and e-mail follow up, number of connections likely achieved, number of sites willing to implement products, etc. It is essential to show follow up visits and techniques used for following up with contacts (repeat visits). These metrics must be documented and reported to the COTR and the Evaluation Contractor (see Attachment C).

Overall coverage through academic detailing may be difficult to estimate the number of visits, since densely populated urban areas require less “drive time” than larger rural states. Nonetheless, based on available evidence and figures from States that are doing this work, we project approximately 9,000 visits in a 3-year period.

The Contractor shall concentrate on a broad range of visits, but at least 85 percent of the visits should be focused on clinical decision makers. Based on available evidence, detailers should make more than one visit, since one of the issues in implementation involves the trust between detailers and clinicians over time. Detailers should make more than one visit at each location. In addition, the coverage of visits must be spread across the United States.

The contractor will measure retention of information by the target audiences approximately one year after the information is detailed to them and report such data to the evaluation Contractor.

Within 90 days of the project coordination meeting, the Contractor shall submit to the COTR a detailed plan to provide measures for the effectiveness of this dissemination method among AHRQ target audiences. The Contractor will coordinate efforts with the Evaluation Contractor and awardees of the other dissemination contracts to determine what information needs to be collected and measured for reporting behavioral change.

The Contractor will collect additional metrics or other information beyond what is explicitly specified in this SOW on behalf of the evaluation contractor described in Subtask 3.2* to facilitate that contractor’s analysis of awareness, understanding, use, and benefits of the dissemination methods that are the subject of this and other dissemination contractors

*NOTE: See Attachment A, Evaluation Contract Subtask 3.2.

Subtask 2.3 - Select and Assign Project Staff

In staffing individual projects, the Contractor shall meet the following requirements:

· Based on the topic assigned, the Contractor shall assign staff who are knowledgeable and have technical expertise in that particular topic area. For instance, if the project is dealing with the implementation of an AHRQ product or suite of products to be used by clinicians, the Contractor shall assign staff that has a strong working understanding of clinical settings, including how to disseminate and implement projects within a clinical setting.

· Again, using the example of clinicians, it is expected that the Contractor would have access to expertise and knowledge of working with clinical practices and how they function. The expert(s) would supplement the Contractor staff that may have a more generalized understanding of clinical settings and their inner workings. This consultant should be knowledgeable about the specific kinds of comparative effectiveness products that are suitable to particular target audiences.

· The Contractor shall assign staff to a project on a full-time basis instead of assigning four different staff members to each work 25 percent of their time. This staffing decision should be discussed with the COTR. This staff should oversee the work of the extension (out-placed) offices/staff.

TASK 3 - PERFORM PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The Contractor shall provide the following ongoing project management activities in support of the contract:

· Manage individual project task assignments to meet AHRQ demands within an acceptable timeframe.

· Provide a final staffing chart within 30 days after the contract award, including the number of qualified personnel to support multiple projects that will occur concurrently and the resume of each new staff person who is assigned to any project and discuss the qualifications of this person before staffer is officially assigned to the project. The resume should highlight the relevant experience/training that shows his or her knowledge of AHRQ, project management (MS Office Project 2007), and Section 508 compliance policies.

· Provide a Monthly Activities Report Summary and Monthly Budget Report to the COTR in a standard format to be determined by the COTR.

· Indicate, in concise form, via the Activities Report Summary the activities performed and deliverables submitted during past month, stage of completion, any issues or problem areas, and activities and deliverables planned for future months. For many projects, the above information would be broken down by major activity under the project.

· Indicate, in concise form, via the cost proposal the budget for various activities, expenditures in the past month, cumulative expenditures, and the amount remaining. For many projects, the above information would be broken down by major activity under the project. In some cases, projected expenditures would be provided, at the request of the COTR.

· Provide semi-annual summary progress report six months after the contract award for each project in a standard format to be determined by the COTR. It is expected that this report would summarize the accomplishments of the project in the period and any issues or problem areas.

· Prepare for regular status update meetings (via conference calls) with the COTR and other OCKT staff (submit agenda and minutes and any additional documents necessary for the call).

· Provide trained staff in the areas stated by the scope of work. In addition to the substantive content areas, the Contractor shall provide staff that are already trained in project management (including the use of MS Project), and Section 508 compliance. It is also expected that the Contractor will have the MS Project 2007 software at the beginning of the contract.

· Regardless of format, the Contractor shall ensure all Web content or communications materials produced for publication or delivery via HHS Web sites-- including text, audio, or video--must conform to applicable Section 508 standards to allow Federal employees and members of the public with disabilities to access information that is comparable to information provided to persons without disabilities. All contractors (including subcontractors) or consultants responsible for preparing or posting content intended for use on an HHS-funded or HHS-managed Web site must comply with applicable Section 508 accessibility standards as codified in 36 CFR Part 1194, and where applicable, those set forth in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and the HHS Acquisition Regulation (HHSAR). Remediation of any materials that do not comply with all necessary accessibility standards shall be the responsibility of the Contractor or consultant retained to produce the Web-suitable content or communications material.

· Within 2 weeks after the final work plan is approved, the Contractor shall provide the COTR with a final Project Management plan showing the scheduled milestones (events, activities, and deliverables) for the project. The Contractor shall provide this information using Microsoft Office Project 2007. The work breakdown structure (WBS) shall include a minimum of three levels of detail with unique numbering, deliverables, milestones, and Gantt chart. Also, the Contractor shall deliver a hierarchical-type Project Organizational Chart and a Responsibility Assignment Matrix (RAM).

· Ensure that all staff thoroughly understands that when they are working on any AHRQ project they represent themselves as working under contract for AHRQ, not the corporate entity who actually employs them. This would include all contacts with target audiences, including speeches and/or presentations.

· Notify the COTR promptly of any problems that would impact the successful completion of the overall contract.

· Adjust technical approaches and staffing arrangements, as appropriate, to respond to changes in requirements or problems that occur.

· Respond promptly to COTR written and verbal communications with respect to (1) requested changes in draft and final products; (2) adjustments in technical approaches based on new or changed requirements; and (3) requests for meetings or other discussions. The Contractor shall respond to all phone calls and e-mails within 1 business day.

· Be proactive in presenting options with the associated advantages and disadvantages, where a range of viable approaches is available.

· Practice inclusiveness and collaboration with respect to (1) keeping COTR and other AHRQ staff informed of project progress and methodological and other issues and problems; and (2) providing the COTR and other AHRQ staff the opportunity to brainstorm with them on technical options and complex issues, as appropriate.

· Provide an effective quality control system, as demonstrated by (1) ongoing documentation and review of problems that occur; (2) a process to ensure that problems are adequately addressed and resolved; and (3) sound quality control of deliverables with respect to accuracy and completeness of content, compliance with SOW and individual project requirements, and editorial accuracy.

Subtask 3.1 - Provide Interface with Other AHRQ Contractors

See Attachment A.

TASK 4 - PERFORM A RANGE OF RESEARCH AND COORDINATION STEPS IN PLANNING AND DEVELOPING COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS STRATEGIES AND TACTICS

As part of the planning and implementation of comparative effectiveness implementation strategies and tactics, the Contractor shall engage in the following steps. (Note: These would supplement the planning steps under Task 2 in developing the project work plans.)

· Participate in various comparative effectiveness meetings as requested by the COTR.

· Engage in appropriate research of tools for implementation that will meet the needs of the target audience.

· Identify how existing specific dissemination and marketing products are being used (awareness, functionality, and usefulness). If additional products are needed, specific approval of the COTR is required.

· Work collaboratively with OCKT staff, as well as key program staff and other AHRQ staff to select and develop components of implementation tactics for appropriate audience within 100 days of contract award.

Task 5 - CONDUCT ACADEMIC DETAILING TO CLINICIANS AND OTHER SIGNIFICANT TARGET AUDIENCES The assignment of specific projects to contractor will involve the following:

Subtask 5.1 – Conduct an Environmental Scan Finalize the plan for an environmental scan within 60 days of contract award. The plan will outline methods the Contractor will use to find the target audience, based on parameters outlined by AHRQ, and the associated tasks to complete the SOW. Within two weeks of receiving feedback from the COTR, the Contractor will implement the environmental scan. The plan should include:

· Conduct a detailed literature review within 60 days of contract award.

· Identify target audiences of comparative effectiveness products.

· Identify types of information needed by the target audiences and product types that would be most valued/useful.

· Develop academic detailers’ training plan for comparative effectiveness research products to be detailed/implemented to the target audiences.

· Test different approaches of academic detailing.

Subtask 5.2 – Create an Expert Panel

The Contractor will finalize an expert panel within 60 days of the contract award with the approval of the expert panel plan. The Group will be comprised of approximately 5 to 10 experts, representing the target audiences that AHRQ is interested in for implementation of EHC products. The Group will provide guidance to the Contractor, using their connections with the target audience to energize them about this project. The expert panel will meet twice a year, in person or via teleconference. A report of the meeting minutes will be distributed AHRQ.

· Finalize the expert panel. Detail tactics to recruit members, including the determination of the appropriate mix of members based on the specific needs of this project and geographic locations.

· Submit a plan detailing the components of an expert panel, including membership, qualifications, frequency of meetings, etc.

· Include in the plan the methods the Contractor will use to manage the expert panel members, including keeping the Group updated on the Contractor’s progress and any issues encountered by the Contractor during detailing visits; obtaining input from members between meetings; and keeping the members engaged throughout the duration of the project.

· Create the expert panel within 60 days of the contract award. Involve national experts, in health care academic detailing, focusing on promoting behavior change.

· The Group should have knowledge about the best detailing tactics to disseminate and implement comparative effectiveness research products to target audiences; connections to the target audience; and how to develop relationships with local, state, and regional groups and organizations.

Subtask 5.3 - Recruit and Train a Team of Detailers

· Finalize recruit plan of academic detailers within 80 days of the contract award. List criteria for hiring, skill set, technical knowledge, etc.

· Identify and build a health care academic detailing consultant pool to deliver the training/target audience visits; and identify appropriate consultants based on opportunities.

Subtask 5.4 -Training Phase

· Finalize the detailed training plan within 60 days of the contract award.

· The Contractor will train staff on the comparative effectiveness research reports. Training will include, at a minimum: product overview; target audiences; how the product will be used by the target audience; why the product is needed; strategies on detailing to implement these products; and follow up. Training will be delivered in ways that maximize trainees understanding of the products. See Attachment B for the current and upcoming reports that will be available.

· Finalize the metrics of the training plan, with a number of visits planned, number of follow up e-mails and phone calls, etc.

· Provide training for academic detailers within 125 days of contract award. Use script development, role playing, web conferences, and video recordings and other techniques recognized for effectiveness.

· Finalize an implementation plan for academic detailing visits.

Subtask 5.5 - Academic Detailing Implementation Phase

· Work with expert panel, AHRQ…