Attachment J.3.1 TASK ORDER NO.1 .docx

Performance Work Statement Development of Training on Fostering a Collaborative Safety Dynamic

1.0 Overview: The Applied Research Division of Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) requires the development of a virtually delivered training course for field staff with enforcement and oversight duties (e.g., Safety Investigators, Safety Auditors, etc.) on the topic of effective strategies and use of communication to foster a “collaborative safety dynamic” between FMCSA and motor carriers (e.g., management, drivers, etc.).

In brief, this requirement includes the following general components:

1. A literature review primarily focused on summarizing past research on strategies (including communications) to develop a collaborative safety dynamic between governmental regulatory agencies and regulated entities in private industry.

At a minimum, the literature review should cover research which has examined the relationship and interactions between a) government inspectors, investigators, auditors, or equivalent enforcement officials, and b) representatives of regulated entities, such as executives, management, or employees, during c) investigations, audits, inspections, or other regulatory/oversight activities which assess the regulated entity’s compliance with regulations or laws.

2. A report summarizing the findings of the literature review, including a discussion of strategies and communications techniques which are supported/unsupported by the literature as applicable, as well as recommendations to FMCSA regarding which such strategies should be adapted (for inclusion in the training course) to the context of its investigations, audits, inspections, and related oversight of motor carriers and commercial motor vehicle operators.

3. Development of materials for a training course for FMCSA field staff with enforcement duties, particularly those related to the investigation, audit, and inspection of motor carriers and commercial motor vehicle operators. The materials should cover the strategies and techniques recommended by the Contractor in its report summarizing the literature review. To the extent practicable, those strategies and techniques will be adapted in such a manner that they can be applied by FMCSA field staff during investigations, audit, inspections, and other oversight of motor carriers and commercial motor vehicle operators.

4. Delivery of a self-paced, virtual training course implementing the training materials. This includes ensuring that at the time of delivery, FMCSA’s field staff can access and complete the training without encountering errors which prevent either step.

2.0 Background: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is responsible for oversight of regulated entities’ compliance with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations and applicable portions of the Hazardous Materials Regulations. As part of its approach to fulfilling these responsibilities, FMCSA employs a variety of staff who carry out enforcement and oversight duties, including, but not limited to:

1) Safety investigators, whose duties include performing investigations of motor carriers’ compliance with the regulations and preparing enforcement cases pursuant to those investigations. They also include several types of investigative specialists, including border investigators, hazardous materials specialists, household goods specialists, and investigators with specialized training in assessing compliance with regulations pertaining to the transportation of passengers and associated Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements.

2) Safety auditors, whose duties include performing audits of new entrant motor carriers’ compliance with the regulations and providing compliance-related education to motor carriers. They include the agency’s border auditors, who specialize in conducting audits of motor carriers located in Mexico and Canada.

3) Border inspectors, whose duties include performing inspections of commercial motor vehicles, drivers, and cargo (e.g., inspection of hazardous materials packages), particularly at border crossings, as well as preparing enforcement cases pursuant to those inspections.

4) Staff responsible for other activities, such as those who support enforcement actions (e.g., enforcement specialists), conduct oversight of grantees (e.g., state program and commercial driver’s license program specialists), manage division-level activities (e.g., federal program specialists and division administrators), as well as many other roles not enumerated here.

These roles require frequent interaction with regulated entities, including motor carriers and their representatives, commercial motor vehicle operators, grantees (e.g., state driver’s licensing agencies), medical examiners, drug and alcohol testing service providers, and more.

There are many potential benefits to an agency’s safety mission which may result from the ability of government oversight personnel to establish “buy-in” among regulated entities, provide education to prevent regulatory violations, collaborate to self-diagnose breakdowns in compliance and safety, and effectively communicate in a manner that encourages regulated entities to recognize their role in contributing to a safe system for all users.

In implementing these tools, staff who perform investigations, audits, inspections, and other oversight activities work with regulated entities to foster a collaborative safety dynamic, which may help to promote long-term compliance, even in absence of further intervention by the government. In the case of FMCSA’s activities, implementing effective strategies and communications to achieve a collaborative investigator-motor-carrier (or auditor-new-entrant, inspector-driver, etc.) dynamic during enforcement and oversight activities could potentially enhance the effectiveness of its safety programs, thereby reducing crashes involving large trucks and buses.

3.0 Overall Objective: The aim of this project is to develop and deliver a training course designed for the agency’s staff in enforcement and oversight roles (particularly those who conduct investigations and audits) which provides practical education on the use of literature-supported, evidence-based strategies and effective communications to foster a collaborative safety dynamic during official interactions with regulated entities, such as motor carriers and commercial motor vehicle drivers.

4.0 Scope: The Contractor shall provide all personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities, transportation, tools, materials, supervision, and other items and non-personal services necessary to conduct this project, excepting that Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is offering the Contractor the option to develop the required training course for delivery through Department of Transportation’s Learning Management System (LMS), DOT Learns, at no additional cost. See Task 6 for further information.

The Contractor may, but is not required to, propose a work plan involving the collection of information from subject matter experts (e.g., authors of papers covered in the Contractor’s literature review, employees of FMCSA, etc.) in support of conducting the literature review and/or developing the training materials. If the Contractor elects to collect such information, prior to doing so, it will work with the Government to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act. Please note that the period of performance for this requirement (12 months) is insufficient to support obtaining approval of an Information Collection Request (ICR). A work plan which includes an approach requiring an approved ICR is therefore not acceptable for the purposes of this requirement.

The Contractor is also responsible for all tasks and deliverables described in this statement of work/performance work plan (SOW/PWS).

5.0 General Acceptance Criteria: This project, as described, involves performing a literature review, developing a report, and developing and delivering a self-paced, virtual training course. In general, acceptance will be based on the extent to which the deliverables meet the requirements listed in the corresponding tasks descriptions which appear in the following section of this statement of work/performance work statement (SOW/PWS).

TASK DESCRIPTIONS

Task 1: Post-Award Orientation Conference The Contractor and FMCSA will hold a virtual post-award orientation conference with a scheduled duration of 30 minutes (0.5 hours) within one week of bilateral execution of this Agreement. Microsoft Teams or Zoom are acceptable mediums for holding this meeting. FMCSA’s Contracting Officer’s Representative will host the meeting.

The post-award orientation conference will involve the key research team partners from each organization, and, at a minimum, the Contractor’s project lead will attend. The primary purpose is to accomplish the necessary tasks laid out in the Federal Acquisition Regulation concerning post-award orientation. The Contractor will be provided with notes from the meeting by FMCSA’s Contracting Officer’s Representative.

A more in-depth meeting regarding the work plan will be held separately as described in the Task 4 subsection.

Task 2: Regular Progress Meetings Beginning one month (4 weeks) post-award, and at a frequency of once every two weeks thereafter, regular progress meetings with a scheduled/anticipated duration of 60 minutes (1.0 hours) each will be held between the Contractor and FMCSA. Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) and other stakeholders may participate as needed.

Progress meetings shall be held virtually via Microsoft Teams or Zoom. During the meetings, the Contractor shall deliver a PowerPoint presentation which covers the following items, at a minimum:

· Task accomplishments made during the past two weeks.

· Plans for task accomplishments for the next two weeks.

· A timeline of completed tasks and projected completion dates for future tasks.

· Problems, delays, or concerns encountered while performing work during the reporting period.

· Specific actions that will be taken to resolve problems or delays.

· Any actions FMCSA needs to undertake, including actions needed to resolve problems or delays.

The Contractor shall submit a copy of the bi-weekly PowerPoint file to FMCSA’s Contracting Officer’s Representative on the same calendar date of the meeting during which it was presented.

The meetings will also provide an opportunity to discuss the project, including the items covered during the Contractor’s presentation, as necessary to facilitate task completion.

The first progress meeting shall be scheduled to coincide with the Contractor’s delivery of the draft work plan for Task 3.

At the discretion of FMCSA’s Contracting Officer’s Representative, the kick-off meeting described in Task 4 may serve as/replace the second regular progress meeting.

Task 3: Draft Project Work Plan The Contractor will draft a work plan which includes basic descriptions of the tasks, procedures, and timelines for this project. The draft work plan must also include the following details, at a minimum:

· Plan for conducting the literature review (e.g., projected number of sources, databases to be reviewed, industries to be targeted, plan for assessing the literature to identify the most appropriate recommendations, number and type of personnel responsible, etc.).

· Plan for preparing the literature review summary report (e.g., sections/issues to be covered, number and type of personnel responsible, plans for editing, etc.).

· Plan for developing the training material (e.g., length of course, type of content (slides, videos, etc.), whether knowledge checks will be incorporated and what type, method for validating content, number and type of personnel responsible, etc.).

· Plan for delivering the training the course, which must include a declaration of the content platform the Contractor will use (such as DOT Learns, LinkedIn Learning, etc.), any aspects of implementation that require additional action on the part of FMCSA and its staff to access/complete the training (e.g., account registration, etc.), and plan for implementing the capability for FMCSA to modify the content in the future as procedures/needs/etc. change.

The Contractor will deliver the draft work plan for FMCSA review within one month of project award.

The Contractor will be considered to have completed this task upon FMCSA’s acceptance of the electronic delivery of the draft.

FMCSA will provide the Contractor with written feedback on the draft plan within 5 business days. Any edits to the draft work plan in response to the feedback are to be incorporated in the Contractor’s briefing at the kick-off meeting for Task 4, are to be delivered as part of that task.

Task 4: Kick-Off Meeting The Contractor and FMCSA will hold a kick-off meeting either virtually or at FMCSA headquarters in Washington, D.C. within six weeks (1.5 months) of bilateral execution of this Agreement. The meeting will be scheduled for a duration of 60 minutes (1.0 hours). The Contractor will present a briefing at the meeting detailing the draft work plan, incorporating any feedback from Task 3.

The kick-off meeting will involve the key project team partners from each organization, and, at a minimum, the Contractor’s project lead will attend the kick-off (whether virtually or in-person). The meeting will provide an opportunity for these key staff to meet and discuss project details.

Upon request by the Contractor, FMCSA will provide the Contractor with a briefing on report-formatting and Section 508 compliance for reference.

The Contractor will be considered to have completed this task upon close of the kick-off meeting.

FMCSA will provide the Contractor with feedback on the project plan, as presented at the kick-off meeting, within 5 business days. This feedback should be incorporated in the finalized work plan delivered as part of the requirements for Task 5 below.

Task 5: Finalized Work Plan After the kick-off meeting, the Contractor will finalize the work plan by making any necessary updates, including the incorporation of feedback from FMCSA. The Contractor will submit the written, finalized work plan to the Contracting Officer’s Representative for FMCSA by two months post-award.

The work plan should be updated as appropriate (e.g., in response to feedback) throughout the period of performance. The Contractor will deliver subsequent edits of the work plan to FMCSA for review throughout the period of performance.

Task 6: Literature Review and Summary Report After the work plan has been finalized, the Contractor shall perform a literature review and summarize its findings and recommendations in a written summary report.

The literature review shall be primarily focused on scholarly sources (e.g., journal articles) which examine strategies for, and effective communications during, government interactions with regulated entities, particularly those which occur during enforcement and oversight activities such as investigations, inspections, and audits.

It is acknowledged that the literature on this topic overwhelmingly originates from contexts outside of motor carrier safety regulation compliance. It is therefore encouraged to review research from other industries and disciplines, provided that the findings can be reasonably adapted to the context of FMCSA enforcement and oversight activities.

Because the language for communicating these concepts varies across disciplines, industries, countries, etc., the Contractor is also encouraged to seek sources that communicate similar ideas even when applied or discussed using different terminologies.

It is appropriate for the Contractor’s review and recommendations to cover both strategies which are supported by the literature and are not supported by the literature. The latter includes any examples of research which discuss weaknesses of the approach of using cooperation to gain compliance.

To the extent practicable, sources should primarily focus on the relationship and interactions between individual investigators/inspectors/auditors and representatives of regulated entities. Examinations of more abstract relationships, e.g., between the “agency” as an organization and regulated entities, may be appropriate in certain contexts, but note that the purpose of the literature review is to develop training on strategies and tools that can be employed by FMCSA’s individual investigators, auditors, and inspectors.

As FMCSA’s oversight responsibilities encompass a broad scope of regulated entities (motor carriers, commercial motor vehicle drivers, substance abuse professionals, medical examiners, recipients of grant funding, driver training schools, etc.), it is also appropriate to include relevant content related to contexts outside those of the work of FMCSA’s safety investigators, safety auditors, and safety inspectors.

The following page contains a list of examples of sources which might be appropriate for such a literature review. Note that the list has been provided for the sake of providing additional clarity of the requirements of this Task and does not constitute an obligation for the Contractor to review them or discuss them in the written summary report, nor an endorsement of the content by FMCSA.

ATTACHMENT J.3.1

Example Sources

Earnhart, D. H., & Glicksman, R. L. (2015). Coercive vs. cooperative enforcement: Effect of enforcement approach on environmental management. International review of law and economics, 42, 135-146.

Etienne, J. (2013). Ambiguity and relational signals in regulator–regulatee relationships. Regulation & governance, 7(1), 30-47.

Fairman, R., & Yapp, C. (2005). Enforced self‐regulation, prescription, and conceptions of compliance within small businesses: The impact of enforcement. Law & policy, 27(4), 491-519.

Frank, N., & Lombness, M. (1988). Gaining regulatory compliance: Law enforcement and power in an interactionist perspective. Administration & society, 20(1), 71-91.

Grace, S. (2020). Policing social distancing: gaining and maintaining compliance in the age of coronavirus. Policing: a journal of policy and practice, 14(4), 1034-1053.

Harrison, K. (1995). Is cooperation the answer? Canadian environmental enforcement in comparative context. Journal of policy analysis and management, 221-244.

May, P., & Winter, S. (1999). Regulatory enforcement and compliance: Examining Danish agro‐environmental policy. Journal of policy analysis and management: the journal of the association for public policy analysis and management, 18(4), 625-651.

May, P. J., & Wood, R. S. (2003). At the regulatory front lines: Inspectors' enforcement styles and regulatory compliance. Journal of public administration research and theory, 13(2), 117-139.

McLean, W. P. (2004). Inspector discretion and industry compliance in the street-level implementation of building codes. Dissertation. University of New Orleans.

Muhammad, I. (2013). An exploratory study of Malaysian tax auditors’ enforcement regulatory styles. Procedia economics and finance, 7, 188-196.

Pires, R. (2008). Promoting sustainable compliance: Styles of labour inspection and compliance outcomes in Brazil. International labour review, 147(2‐3), 199-229.

Tyler, T. R., & Jackson, J. (2014). Popular legitimacy and the exercise of legal authority: Motivating compliance, cooperation, and engagement. Psychology, public policy, and law, 20(1), 78.

Note: This Page is for Reference Only Deliverable: Literature Review Summary Report After completing the literature review, the Contractor shall prepare and deliver a written report summarizing its findings. The summary report is primarily intended to serve three purposes:

1. To inform the development of the training materials for Task 7.

2. To document the review and the evidence supporting the approaches covered in the training.

3. To ensure that the approaches are generalizable to the duties of FMCSA’s staff.

The report should be prepared using FMCSA’s research report template, a copy of which will be provided to the Contractor by FMCSA upon request. In addition, the report must be Section 508 compliant. Although there is no minimum or maximum page count requirement for the report, FMCSA anticipates that a report containing main body content (i.e., exclusive of cover sheet, table of contents, references, etc.) between 10 and 25 pages in length would be sufficient to provide satisfactory coverage of the literature. The Contractor may vary from this estimate as necessary/sufficient to fulfill the requirements of this Task.

In terms of content, the summary report should describe the literature in terms of the strategies, tools, and concepts introduced, empirical support demonstrated by approach if any, weaknesses/limitations discussed, and the applicability to the work performed by FMCSA’s staff with enforcement/oversight duties. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of the overall findings (e.g., number of sources presenting data that support the implementation of the approach, etc.).

In addition, the report should present the Contractor’s recommendations resulting from the literature review. Specifically, the contractor must list the approaches it recommends for inclusion in/exclusion from the training materials it will develop for Task 7 and provide a narrative justifying each recommendation. The justifications must include a discussion of any modifications/adaptations necessary to apply the strategies/tools/etc. to the duties of FMCSA staff.

Because the literature discusses approaches/strategies on a broad spectrum, e.g., from individual behaviors exhibited by inspecting officials during inspections, to enforcement policy philosophies employed by government agencies, it is acceptable to arrange the recommendations in whatever form necessary to best communicate the conclusions (e.g., combining multiple approaches under a single recommendation, separating them by function/duty, classifying them by scope, etc.).

A Microsoft Word file (e.g., .docx) containing the draft literature review summary report shall be delivered by e-mail to FMCSA’s Contracting Officer’s Representative. FMCSA will provide the Contractor with written feedback within 10 days of receiving the draft summary report. The Contractor shall incorporate the feedback and deliver the final literature review summary report by e-mail to FMCSA’s Contracting Officer’s Representative no later than four months post-award.

Task 7: Development of Training Materials Upon FMCSA’s acceptance of the final literature review summary report, the Contractor shall implement the recommendations made in the report by incorporating them into the materials for the training course.

The materials shall be developed by the Contractor in the format necessary for implementation in the virtual content delivery platform described in the Contractor’s approved, finalized work plan (e.g., DOT Learns, LinkedIn Learning, etc.) and to be used in delivery of the content for Task 10.

In addition to reflecting any design characteristics described in the approved, finalized work plan, the training materials must:

1) Reflect the Contractor’s recommendations from the final literature review summary report.

2) Present the recommended approaches in a manner that adapts them to the enforcement/oversight responsibilities of applicable FMCSA staff. For example:

a. Training on techniques appropriate for conducting investigations and audits of motor carriers should be presented in the context of an FMCSA compliance investigation or safety audit.

b. Training on the appropriate communication and use of enforcement techniques should be described in the context of the corresponding steps in FMCSA staffs’ duties.

c. Training on effective communication for gaining collaborative compliance should be presented in the context of interactions with the motor carrier before, during, and/or after intervention/contact by FMCSA.

3) Present and teach the approaches as practical skills, techniques, and tools (rather than just theories/concepts) that the trainee can immediately use in their interactions with regulated entities after completing the training.

4) Assess whether trainees accurately understand and appropriately apply the material in hypothetical contexts related to their duties.

5) Be Section 508 compliant.

6) The following additional requirements apply only if the Contractor will use DOT Learns to Deliver the Training Course:

a. The content must conform to any applicable requirements and specifications of the DOT Learns/eLMS platforms utilized by FMCSA/DOT. Content development references will be provided to the Contractor upon award if the Contractor will use DOT Learns to deliver the training course.

b. The content must be either a) SCORM 1.2-compliant, b) SCORM 2004-compliant or c) AICC-compliant.

i. In addition, the content must implement only those functions which are supported by the eLMS for the given standard implemented by the contractor. A list will be provided upon award if the Contractor will use DOT Learns to deliver the training course.

ii. If the Contractor will use the SCORM 1.2 option: Metadata must use the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Learning Object Metadata (LOM) model.

c. The content must be packaged/delivered in HTML5 format.

d. The content files must be created for handling case sensitivity by using all lowercase.

e. The content must be developed based on the requirements for staging and production using Windows Server 2008 based servers.

f. The content must be formatted as a series of slides.

g. The slides must be grouped as a series of modules, as applicable.

h. The last slide in each module must implement a ‘Verify Completion’ button that sends a successful completion “score” to the user’s profile in the Learning Management System before closing the module training window.

i. The slides in each module must implement a “skin”/“playbar” allowing the training course to be completed asynchronously.

j. The “skin”/“playbar” described in the previous item (“e”) must be hidden when a user reaches a slide containing a knowledge check question, forcing the user to attempt an answer before moving forward

k. Knowledge check questions must be based on the training content and created by the Contractor.

l. Knowledge checks formatted as “true/false” questions, if used, must provide only one attempt before displaying the correct answer.

m. Knowledge checks formatted as multiple-choice questions, if used, must provide two attempts before displaying the correct answer.

n. Requirements “g” – “i” above apply only to knowledge check question slides, not, e.g., slides for a final exam.

o. The package provides accessibility options on each slide for supplementing users with a vision impairment.

p. FMCSA discourages the use of videos to the extent practicable. Videos, if used, must have a resolution of 720p/1280x720. In any case, the Contractor must agree to segment into separate SCOs any videos deemed by the Department of Transportation to be too large for serviceable performance given bandwidth limitations.

q. Video, if applicable, must use one of the following codecs: .mp4, .avi, .flv, .swf, mov.

r. Audio, if applicable, must use one of the following codecs: .mp3, .swf, .wav

s. Graphics, if applicable must use one of the following codecs: .png, .tif, .jpg, .gif, .wmf The training materials should be designed such that the training course will have a duration of not less than 30 minutes but not more than 60 minutes.

Delivery (if the Contractor will use DOT Learns):

Delivery of the training materials will be considered as the delivery of complete training materials complying with the requirements of this SOW/PWS which contain compliant content packaged in HTML5 format to the Contracting Officer’s representative for FMCSA via e-mail. The next task will begin when the contractor is notified that the content is ready for user testing.

Delivery (if the Contractor will use a platform other than DOT Learns):

Delivery of the training materials will be considered as the deployment of the content on the virtual content delivery platform. Deployment means that the training course is available in draft form in its entirety on the platform and is ready for user testing.

Delivery Deadline Regardless of whether the contractor will use DOT Learns to deliver the content (or another platform), the contractor must complete delivery not later than six months post-award.

Task 8: User Testing and Report After delivery for Task 7, the contractor will engage in user testing of the training course. If the contractor will use DOT Learns to deliver the content, the testing must include the Department of Transportation’s basic required testing for eLMS/DOT Learns deployment (which ensures that the content objects operate properly). FMCSA will provide users for testing (from among the intended audience for the training).

All user testing must be completed, and a brief summary of the results delivered to the COR, no later than eight months post-award.

Task 9: Bug Fixes and Feedback Implementation Following user testing, the contractor will implement any feedback, besides thematic recommendations (e.g., suggestions that content cover other topics), and fix any known bugs whether discovered during user testing or otherwise. The revised content will be delivered to FMCSA for final review and feedback, as applicable, not later than ten months post award.

Task 10: Final Delivery Delivery of the finalized content, along with access to the raw content for future modifications, edits, and updates, shall be made no later than twelve months post award.

6.0 Project Timeline and Deliverables: The following deliverables shall be included:

Task

7.0 Period and Place of Performance: The period of performance for this work will be twelve (12) months.