SNAP_SOW.docx

DEMOGRAPHIC SUBGROUPS IN SNAP MICROSIMULATION MODELS

DOCUMENT #

1. BACKGROUND

The U. S. Census Bureau is the primary source of basic statistics about the population and economy of the Nation. These statistics assist the Congress, the executive branch of the Federal Government, state and local governments, the public, and the private sector in the development and evaluation of social and economic activities. Our major programs are the periodic censuses, current surveys, and a wide range of reimbursable work for other agencies. The programs cover a broad spectrum of demographic and economic statistics.

The Center for Administrative Records Research and Applications (CARRA) conducts research and production work using administrative records data to enhance numerous programs and products. The Census Bureau enters into agreements with data providers, including federal, state, and private entities, to acquire data files. These data are used to support planning and conducting future decennial censuses, current surveys such as the American Community Survey (ACS), and other Census Bureau demographic and economic research and production work.

CARRA is supporting the Economic Research Service (ERS) and the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), both of the Department of Agriculture (USDA), in improving estimates of who is eligible for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). CARRA needs research services on microsimulation models which capture eligibility for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Research is needed to identify if certain microsimulation models capture subgroups that are difficult to identify. The USDA has been using Microsimulation models to estimate SNAP participation rates, defined as the number of participants divided by the number of eligible persons. In addition, the models are used to assess the impact of changes to program rules on SNAP participation levels and costs.

However, because the participation rates are derived from different sources for the number of participants (SNAP administrative data) and the number of eligible participants (surveys), participation rates are implausible for certain subgroups. In particular, for certain key subgroups, Census data show fewer individuals who are eligible for SNAP than administrative data show as participating.

The USDA hopes that with the increased prevalence of linked State SNAP administrative data with survey data, analyzing these data can help improve the modeling of eligibility and thus improve the participation rates estimates.

2. CONTRACT TYPE

This is a fixed price contract for Research Services.

3. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

The period of performance of this contract is from the Date of Award through 2 years.

4. PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

The work required shall be performed either at the Census Bureau Headquarters or at a Federal Statistical Research Data Center to be arranged after contract award.

5. PRICE

The fixed price of the contract is not to exceed $150,000. The prices set forth shall apply for payment purposes for all items acquired under this contract.

6. CONTRACT LINE ITEMS

Contracts and Options may be awarded for:

Table 1: Private School Facility Commercial Data Pricing Options

7. SCOPE OF WORK

7.1 Objectives

This Request for Proposal seeks to establish an onsite vendor to provide research on specific topics in the area of demographic subgroups in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) microsimulation models.

7.2 Research Background

The microsimulation models MATH and TRIM, developed and used by Mathematica and the Urban Institute, respectively, use different survey data and methodologies, resulting in differences in which demographic subgroups are deemed problematic. One model may be relatively weak at capturing eligibility of one demographic subgroups, while the other model’s weakness lies in capturing eligibility of another subgroup. The possibility of using administrative and linked data provides new opportunities for assessing these models and identifying problematic subgroups—subgroups for which the number estimated to be eligible through microsimulation is less than the number receiving SNAP according to administrative records.

Specific subgroups of interest that could be investigated include: Households with children; Single parents, with and without TANF; Nonelderly, nondisabled adults without dependents; Elderly, both living alone and with others; Working families; Single-person households; Households with zero income and those with income below 50 percent of poverty; Child-only TANF cases (often children whose parents are ineligible immigrants; may also be foster care children); and Disabled, possibly with and without DI and SSI. The last two groups may be difficult to identify in either the survey or administrative data, but are likely to be important for policy reasons. There are potential policy issues regarding each of the other groups as well.

7.3 Research Questions

Foundational research should consider:

· Is a sub-group problematic for one model and not another? If so, the difference may be accounted for by a methodological difference between the models.

· Is a sub-group problematic for all models but just one survey? If so, then the issue could be further investigated by considering common methodological challenges faced by all the models and by conducting linked data analysis on the survey in question.

· Is a sub-group problematic across all models and all surveys? If so, then the focus could be on broader questions, such as:

o Is there consistent under-or over-coverage of the subgroup in survey data?

o Does the SNAP QC data file under- or over-represent the subgroup relative to the administrative data?

· What might be explainable by: some SNAP households not reporting changes of income, (which may or may not be in compliance with program rules); client or agency error at initial certification or recertification; unreported changes in expenses or household composition; or difficulties in simulating ineligible nonparticipating household members (such as undocumented immigrant parents with US-born children) resulting in an out-of-date measure of monthly income in the official SNAP file?

The accuracy of different simulation models and how each model captures the distributions of a (discrete or continuous) characteristic for both the SNAP participants and eligible non-participants should include a cross-tabulation of the full table of joint frequencies or joint probabilities. Greater information is provided by a cell-by-cell analysis than the marginal distributions, which in turn are more informative than weighted totals.

This research should identify problematic subgroups through its analysis of results from the microsimulation models. It should make use of Census survey data such as the Survey of Income and Program Participation, the Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement, and the American Community Survey (linked to SNAP administrative receipt as warranted), as well as SNAP administrative files from States, and SNAP QC data. The research should make use of other research that has investigated data quality of QC data and of survey data. The unique contribution of this project is its integration of the microsimulation models. The models are the touchstones for identifying problematic subgroups and downstream beneficiaries of the SNAP eligibility modeling research.

7.4 Tasks

Step 1: Analyze Data Identify methods to answers research questions identified in section 7.3 Work with/analyze data provided which was derived from models Create and develop tabulations -- compute standardized metrics for demographic and geographic categories in a format suitable for SNAP planning applications Step 2: Present Research to date at a Workshop Coordinated by Census Summarize project findings to date in a draft PowerPoint presentation and draft interim report Submit draft presentation and draft interim report in electronic form for CARRA and the Census Disclosure Review Board (DRB) review at least 3 weeks in advance of the workshop Revise the draft presentation and draft interim report according to CARRA and DRB recommendations Present approved presentation to a workshop (in Washington DC) of researchers in the field coordinated by Census Answer questions presented at the workshop Incorporate relevant suggestions presented at the workshop into a final report.

Step 3: Create a Final Report Identify required sections Write components that answer research questions identified in section 7.3 Create a draft final report in a concise and straightforward style Submit draft final report in electronic form for CARRA and DRB review Revise the draft final report according to CARRA and DRB recommendations Ensure that the approved final report is stored in standard, accessible locations identified by CARRA

7.5 Intended Data Uses

The research produced will meet Census Bureau Disclosure Avoidance standards before it may be released publicly. The Census Bureau will not use the research for marketing or compliance purposes, nor will they resell the results.

The Census Bureau Disclosure Avoidance Methodology and Standards can be found at http://www.census.gov/econ/census/help/methodology_disclosure/disclosure.html

7.6 Data Usage Rights Comment by Denise M Flanagan Doyle (CENSUS/ERD FED): Question for Acquisitions, are these sections necessary and do they cover our needs?

The contractor shall provide the Census Bureau the unlimited rights to retain and use the purchased research files as well as any technical data indefinitely, with all financial consideration proposed as part of the initial pricing.

7.7 Data Retention

The Census Bureau will retain the research and technical data under this contract indefinitely. By delivering the research after contract award, the contractor gives the Census Bureau the right to retain and use the results of the research indefinitely, with all financial consideration proposed as part of the initial pricing.

7.8 Deliverables

Deliverables for this contract must meet specifications detailed in Section 8. Contractor must deliver:

· Research Workshop Presentation

· Final Research Report

· All code and supporting documentation used in research.

8. DELIVERY AND ACCEPTANCE

8.1 Delivery Dates:

The period of performance of this contract is from the Date of Award through 24 months past this date.

Items acquired under this contract shall be delivered in accordance with the following schedule:

Table 2: Contract Delivery Dates

8.2 Delivery Format:

All written deliverables shall be delivered via e-mail in Microsoft format. Presentations will be in Microsoft PowerPoint. Reports will be in Microsoft Word. Tables may be either embedded in either Microsoft Word or PowerPoint or separately in Microsoft Excel. Code will be documented in either SAS or Stata.

8.3 Quality Standards

The Contractor shall provide products and deliverables that meet the following criteria:

· Quality Assurance/Acceptance – Quality measures, as set forth below, will be applied to each Work Product and Deliverable:

· Accuracy – Work products and deliverables shall be accurate in presentation and technical content and be developed in accordance with “Census Bureau Statistical Quality Standard B2: Acquiring and Using Administrative Records” found at http://www.census.gov/quality/standards/standardb2.html.

· Completeness – Work products and deliverables shall be comprehensive and entirely developed.

· Clarity – Work products and deliverables shall be clear and concise.

· Timeliness – Work products and deliverables shall be generated on or before specified and/or mutually agreed to due dates or in accordance with a later scheduled date, should a later scheduled date be mutually agreed to by the Contractor and the Contracting Officer’ Technical Representative (COTR) and/or Task Manager.

· Format – Work products and deliverables shall be submitted in the format specified in the contract.

· Inspection and Acceptance Criteria – Final inspection and acceptance of all work products will be performed on-site. Final inspection and acceptance of all work performed and deliverables will occur upon CO signature.

8.4 Performance Measures and Reporting

The Contractor shall meet or exceed the requirements stated above. The COR will measure performance through close monitoring. The Contractor must fully document and explain any deviations from the stated objectives. The Contractor’s services shall be considered successful if performance provides the expected outcomes within the performance standards:

Table 3: Performance Measures

Final report incorporates suggestions of Census researchers as well as those who attended the workshop.

Final report is of sufficient quality to meet the “Census Bureau Statistical Quality Standards.”

COR will direct contractor specifications and continually review on-going project activities and results.

9. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

Overview of Process

All questions, must be delivered, via email to the point of contact designated within the solicitation. The Offerors shall submit a copy of their written proposals using electronic media in the appropriate MS Word, Excel, and PowerPoint formats. These documents may be submitted in PDF format if desired.

FAR Provision 52.212-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JUNE 2008), applies to this acquisition, as tailored below:

(a) North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code and small business size standard.

(b) Submission of Offers

Submit signed and dated offers to the office specified in this solicitation at or before the exact time specified in this solicitation. Offers shall be submitted on the SF 1449, letterhead stationery, or as otherwise specified in the solicitation. At a minimum, offers must show—

(1) The solicitation number;

(2) The time specified in the solicitation for receipt of offers;

(3) The name, address, and telephone number of the Offeror;

(4) Acknowledgment of Solicitation Amendments;

(5) “Remit to” address, if different than mailing address;

(6) A completed copy of the representations and certifications at FAR 52.212-3 (see FAR 52.212-3(b) for those representations and certifications that the Offeror shall complete electronically);

(7) A technical description of the research proposal(s) being offered in sufficient detail to evaluate - compliance with all requirements identified in Sections 6 through 7.

The Offeror may include product literature, or other documents, if deemed appropriate;

(8) Sample Published Research Papers, (see specific instructions in Section (k) below);

(9) Complete Pricing Options inclusive of any discount terms.

Please note that all pricing information shall be submitted as a separate document, although it may be included in the same transmittal e-mail.

(10) The Offeror shall provide Past Performance references from a minimum of three (3) previous or current customers who have extensive experience with the data provided by the Offeror. The customers should have received related services within the past five (5) years. Include references contact information (Name, Business/Agency, telephone # and email address) and type of data used.

References should be able to speak to the following qualifications:

· A minimum of 10 years experience as a published academic researcher in the field of public policy or economics.

· Experience in data linkage.

· Able to receive or maintain Special Sworn Status with the U.S. Census Bureau.

· Solid background in using microsimulation models to analyze large datasets.

· Independent project management and quality control.

· Understanding and knowledge of Census Bureau programs, especially those dealing with administrative records.

· Understanding and knowledge of Federal entitlements programs, especially those dealing with SNAP benefits.

(11) A Staffing and Management Plan.

(c) Period for acceptance of offers

The Offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 120 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers.

(d) Multiple offers

Offerors are encouraged to submit multiple offers presenting alternative terms and conditions or commercial items for satisfying the requirements of this solicitation. Each offer submitted will be evaluated separately.

(e) Late submissions, modifications, revisions, and withdrawals of offers

(1) Offerors are responsible for submitting offers, and any modifications, revisions, or withdrawals, so as to reach the Government office designated in the solicitation by the time specified in the solicitation. If no time is specified in the solicitation, the time for receipt is 4:30 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, for the designated Government office on the date that offers or revisions are due.

(2) (i) Any offer, modification, revision, or withdrawal of an offer received at the Government office designated in the solicitation after the exact time specified for receipt of offers is “late” and will not be considered unless it is received before award is made, the Contracting Officer determines that accepting the late offer would not unduly delay the acquisition; and—

(A) If it was transmitted through an electronic commerce method authorized by the solicitation, it was received at the initial point of entry to the Government infrastructure not later than 5:00 p.m. One working day prior to the date specified for receipt of offers; or

(B) There is acceptable evidence to establish that it was received at the Government installation designated for receipt of offers and was under the Government’s control prior to the time set for receipt of offers; or

(C) If this solicitation is a request for proposals, it was the only proposal received.

(ii) However, a late modification of an otherwise successful offer, that makes its terms more favorable to the Government, will be considered at any time it is received and may be accepted.

(3) If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that offers cannot be received at the Government office designated for receipt of offers by the exact time specified in the solicitation, and urgent Government requirements preclude amendment of the solicitation or other notice of an extension of the closing date, the time specified for receipt of offers will be deemed to be extended to the same time of day specified in the solicitation on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.

(4) Offers may be withdrawn by written notice received at any time before the exact time set for receipt of offers. Oral offers in response to oral solicitations may be withdrawn orally. An offer may be withdrawn in person by an Offeror or its authorized representative if, before the exact time set for receipt of offers, the identity of the person requesting withdrawal is established and the person signs a receipt for the offer.

(f) Contract Award

The Government intends to evaluate offers and award a contract, or contracts, without discussions with Offerors. Therefore, the Offeror’s initial offer should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if later determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary. The Government may reject any or all offers if such action is in the public interest; accept other than the lowest offer; and waive informalities and minor irregularities in offers received.

(g) Multiple Awards

The Government may accept any item or group of items of an offer, unless the Offeror qualifies the offer by specific limitations. Unless otherwise provided in the Schedule, offers may not be submitted for quantities less than those specified. The Government reserves the right to make an award on any item for a quantity less than the quantity offered, at the unit prices offered, unless the Offeror specifies otherwise in the offer. The Government reserves the right to make multiple awards if it is in the Government’s best interest to do so.

(h) Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number.

(Applies to all offers exceeding $3,000, and offers of $3,000 or less if the solicitation requires the Contractor to be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database.) The offeror shall enter, in the block with its name and address on the cover page of its offer, the annotation “DUNS” or “DUNS+4” followed by the DUNS or DUNS+4 number that identifies the offeror’s name and address. The DUNS+4 is the DUNS number plus a 4-character suffix that may be assigned at the discretion of the offeror to establish additional SAM records for identifying alternative Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) accounts (see FAR Subpart 32.11) for the same concern. If the offeror does not have a DUNS number, it should contact Dun and Bradstreet directly to obtain one. An offeror within the United States may contact Dun and Bradstreet by calling 1-866-705-5711 or via the internet at http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform. An offeror located outside the United States must contact the local Dun and Bradstreet office for a DUNS number. The offeror should indicate that it is an offeror for a Government contract when contacting the local Dun and Bradstreet office.

(i) System for Award Management

Unless exempted by an addendum to this solicitation, by submission of an offer, the offeror acknowledges the requirement that a prospective awardee shall be registered in the SAM database prior to award, during performance and through final payment of any contract resulting from this solicitation. If the Offeror does not become registered in the SAM database in the time prescribed by the Contracting Officer, the Contracting Officer will proceed to award to the next otherwise successful registered Offeror. Offerors may obtain information on registration and annual confirmation requirements via the SAM database accessed through https://www.acquisition.gov.

(j) Debriefing

If a post-award debriefing is given to requesting Offerors, the Government shall disclose the following information, if applicable:

(1) The agency’s evaluation of the significant weak or deficient factors in the debriefed Offeror’s offer.

(2) The overall evaluated cost or price and technical rating of the successful and the debriefed Offeror.

(3) The overall ranking of all Offerors, when any ranking was developed by the agency during source selection.

(4) A summary of the rationale for award.

(5) For acquisitions of commercial items, the make and model of the item to be delivered by the successful Offeror.

(5) Reasonable responses to relevant questions posed by the debriefed Offeror as to whether source-selection procedures set forth in the solicitation, applicable regulations, and other applicable authorities were followed by the agency.

(k) Sample Research Papers

The offeror may include product literature, or other documents if deemed appropriate. This may include a sample of previously published research on related subjects described in section 7.

1. For evaluation purposes, the Offeror can submit sample published research or working papers.

2. The Offeror shall submit the sample published or working research papers by end of the solicitation by email with the offer submission.

3. The sample published research shall be submitted at no expense to the Government. By submitting the sample published research in response to this solicitation, the Offeror gives the Government the right to retain and use the published research.

10. EVALUATION

FAR Provision 52.212-2, EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JUNE 2008), applies to this acquisition, as tailored below:

Factors 1 and 2 are Technical Factors. Factor 1 (Technical Capability) is more important than Factor 2 (Past Performance). Factor 3 (Price) will be evaluated separately. Factors 1 and 2, when combined, are significantly more important than price. This will be a best value determination.

Factor 1: Technical Capability of the item offered to meet all Government requirements;

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed technical approach to assess their capability to comply with all requirements defined in Sections 6 and 7.

For the technical evaluation, we will also review submitted sample published research files. Research papers will be evaluated to see how relevant and timely both the research topic and methods are to the research questions in section 7.3.

For the technical evaluation, we will also review submitted Staffing and Management Plan to ensure that the Offeror has proposed staff with the requisite expertise and allocated sufficient labor hours for the work.

Factor 2: Past Performance Evaluation of past performance will allow the Government to determine whether the Offeror consistently delivered quality services in a timely manner. Past performance will be evaluated for data sold by the Offeror during the last three (3) years consistent with the size, scope and complexity of this solicitation. The Government may contact references provided as well as other relevant individuals.

Factor 3: Price

The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

11. BEST VALUE EVALUATION

The Census Bureau’s award determination will be based on best value principles. Accordingly, an award will be made to the responsible and technically acceptable Offeror whose proposal provides the greatest overall value to the Government, price and other factors considered. This best value determination will be accomplished by comparing the value of the differences in the technical factors for competing offers, based on their strengths, weaknesses, and risks, with differences in their price to the Government. If making this comparison, the Government is more concerned with obtaining superior technical and management capabilities than with making an award at the lowest overall cost to the Government. However, the Government will not make an award at a significantly higher overall price to the Government to achieve slightly superior technical skills.