Draft 2027 REL PWS.docx

Regional Educational Laboratory Program: 2027 – 2031 Cycle Draft Performance Work Statement

I. Procurement Purpose and Authorizing Legislation The U.S. Department of Education (the Department) intends to award ten 60-month contracts to qualified entities to serve as Regional Educational Laboratories. See Appendix A for the constituent jurisdictions.

The REL program is authorized under the Education Sciences Reform Act (ESRA) of 2002, Part D, Section 174 (20 U.S.C. 9564). The REL Program is administered by the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE) at the Institute of Education Sciences (IES).

II. Introduction to the 2027 REL Cycle A REL’s purpose is to support education stakeholders within their assigned region in the use of data and evidence to improve the outcomes of schooling, from early childhood to adulthood. Stakeholders include State educational agencies, local educational agencies, school boards, State boards of education, schools funded by the Bureau of Indian Education (as appropriate), institutions of higher education, educators (including school officials and librarians), policymakers, business leaders, and parents. Supporting work in rural areas is a specific statutory goal: the program’s authorizing statute requires that 25 percent of REL funds be used to support work in rural areas (ESRA Sec. 194 (b)).

To achieve that purpose and consistent with the program’s authorizing language, RELs will: (1) conduct applied research and development; (2) design and implement training, coaching, and technical support activities that emphasize building capacity to use data and information to drive change; and (3) disseminate scientifically valid research, evidence-based practices, and supporting materials that allow stakeholders to apply this knowledge to their own practice. These activities should be coordinated with other federally-funded technical assistance entities serving their assigned region, such as the Comprehensive Centers.

Each REL has a Governing Board (ESRA Sec. 174(h)) that it establishes at the inception of a REL cycle. Boards are comprised of chief State school officers from their region, as well as representatives from other regional education stakeholders. As described in statue, Governing Boards are expected to serve as regional “agenda setters” for the work of each individual REL. Governing Boards must affirmatively recommend all REL activities (or set of relative activities) to IES for its consideration. To ensure appropriate oversight of federal resources and contracts, IES reserves the right to approve or disapprove of all REL activities All REL work must be responsive to needs identified by Governing Boards and their members. It must also meet IES quality standards. IES requires that all activities “... conform to high standards of quality, integrity, and accuracy; and are objective, secular, neutral, and nonideological and free of partisan political influence and racial, cultural, gender, or regional bias” (ESRA, Sec. 111(b)(2)).

Additionally, IES expects that:

· REL work will be done in partnership with key stakeholders, with the structure and features of that partnership driven by partners’ goals, needs, and timelines.

· RELs will form partnerships with each SEA, or equivalent, in their region. If an SEA declines to form a partnership, the REL shall seek guidance from their Governing Board on engaging one or more LEAs in that state.

· Each REL activity (or set of related activities) will:

· Be driven by a clearly stated problem of education policy or practice;

· Have one or more measurable, partner-identified goals, at least one of which must serve as an indicator of an activity’s success; and

· Include a clear “theory of action” that describes how REL activities, in whole or in part, are purposefully designed to achieve the outcomes identified by its partners.

· REL work will draw on rigorous, scientifically-valid research—particularly that developed by IES and its partners.

III. Program Logic Model

IES has identified a REL program logic model (see Figure 1). It depicts how IES believes the REL program contributes to improving regionally-identified outcomes of schooling, forming the basis for programmatic guidance and decision-making. It also forms the basis of REL performance monitoring at the program level, the level of the individual RELs, and REL’s individual activities. Specifically:

Long-Term Outcomes (LTOs) reflect partners’ publicly stated goals about education or related outcomes. For example, a partner might set a goal of increasing the districtwide proficiency rate to 95% by 2035 for grade 3 standardized test scores in mathematics. Partners’ LTOs should serve as the “north star” for REL work but typically depend on the work of other system actors to be realized. As such, they are not included in the performance framework for the REL program or individual RELs.

Medium-Term Outcomes (MTOs) reflect changes in educator practice, education or related policy, or equivalent that can reasonably influenced by REL activities. MTOs must be measurable and achievable during the period of performance of REL contracts, as they serve as terminal outcomes of interest for characterizing the success of REL activities, RELs, and the REL program.

Short-Term Outcomes (STOs) reflect changes in educator or policymaker knowledge of, or capacity to use, scientifically-valid research or practice. STOs must be measurable, as they serve as intermediate outcomes of interest for characterizing the success of REL activities, RELs, and the REL program.

Activities include (1) applied research and development; (2) training, coaching, and technical support; and (3) dissemination of scientifically-valid research and their observable Outputs.

Inputs include specific REL (and sometimes external) resources brought to bear to design and implement effective activities. They include, but are not limited to, the (1) experience and expertise in research, policy, and practice that RELs and their partners bring to a project; (2) connections partners have to other key stakeholders and their contextual knowledge; (3) buy-in of partners partner buy-in and resources.

Figure 1. REL Program Logic Model Problem statement: Many states and districts are interested in, or are required to, implement evidence-based policies and practices as a way of reaching their goals for improving student outcomes. However, SEA and LEA staff may need support to identify evidence-based policies and practices, understand the research behind them, or effectively monitor or evaluate their success. RELs partner with these stakeholders to support them in identifying and implementing evidence-informed actions that ultimately support the improvement of student outcomes.

IV. Program Performance Measurement Section 174(e)(4) of ESRA requires the IES Director to “design specific objectives and measurable indicators to be used to assess … the regional educational laboratories, in order to ensure that the educational needs of the region are being met and that the latest and best research and proven practices are being carried out as part of school improvement efforts” before entering into REL contracts. Specifically:

Activity level performance measures.

· Short term outcome—Knowledge: The degree to which participants report their knowledge of data or scientifically-valid research to inform decision-making has improved. (1-4 scale)

· Short term outcome—Capacity: The degree to which participants report their capacity to use data and research to inform decision-making has improved. (1-4 scale)

· Medium term outcome—Planned Use: The degree to which participants report they plan to use, are in the process of using, or have used data or research to inform decision-making. (1-4 scale) REL-level performance measures.

· Short term outcome—Knowledge: The percentage of activities where 50 percent or more of participants report their knowledge of data or scientifically-valid research to inform decision-making has improved. (That is, a 3 or 4 on the 4-point scale.)

· Short term outcome—Capacity: The percentage of activities where 50 percent or more of participants report their capacity to use data and research to inform decision-making has improved. (That is, a 3 or 4 on the 4-point scale.)

· Medium term outcome—Planned Use: The percentage of activities where 50 percent or more of participants report they plan to use, are in the process of using, or have used data or research to inform decision-making. (That is, a 3 or 4 on the 4-point scale.)

Performance measure targets. IES expects that performance across these metrics will improve across the life of the REL contract. Specifically:

Measure

V. General Information

Period of Performance. The period of performance for this contract is one 12-month base period followed by four 12-month option periods, for a total of five years. The initial base period is anticipated to begin on January 1, 2027.

Contract Type. This is a hybrid contract. Travel expenses are cost reimbursable. All other activities are firm fixed price.

Place of Performance. Performance will occur entirely at the contractor’s place(s) of business. No access will be provided to ED facilities.

VI. Scope of work and requirements

Task 1: REL Management and Reporting

Subtask 1.1 Participate in a virtual kickoff with ED Within one week after the effective date of the contract, the REL shall schedule a virtual kickoff with IES’s Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and ED’s Contracting Officer (CO) and Contract Specialist (CS) to introduce all key personnel, discuss expectations, and raise emergent concerns requiring resolution. Within two weeks after the meeting, the REL shall submit a summary of the meeting discussions, including any outstanding issues raised and plans to address these issues.

Deliverable(s):

Subtask 1.2 Communicate regularly with IES.

The REL – at a minimum, the Director and Deputy Director – shall participate in regularly scheduled monthly meetings with the COR to discuss issues related to the REL contract, including any anticipated problems and proposed solutions to those problems, and update the COR on key milestones for REL projects. The REL shall send an agenda for the call at least two working days before each call so that both the REL and COR are aware of the main issues that will be addressed during the call. Within five working days following each meeting, the REL shall prepare a memo summarizing the key issues and concerns raised at the meeting and how each will be addressed.

The Director or Deputy Director shall communicate with the COR on a regular basis, such as by phone or email, to discuss urgent points and follow-up as needed.

Deliverable(s):

Subtask 1.3 Attend biannual REL Program meetings.

The REL Director and one other key REL personnel shall participate in 2 all-day REL Program Meetings annually. The first REL Program meeting each year will be held in-person at IES’s Washington, DC office. The second will be virtual. The purpose of these meetings is to discuss issues and accomplishments related to the REL and the REL Program and consider ways to improve the functioning or outcomes of the REL Program. IES will coordinate the logistics for this REL Program meeting.

Deliverable(s):

Note: This task may include cost-reimbursable travel costs.

Subtask 1.4 Identify, establish, maintain, and convene the Governing Board.

The REL shall convene a Governing Board as specified in Section 174(h) of ESRA. The primary purpose of the Board shall be to determine the regional agenda of the REL—that is, to identify for the REL the key problems of educational policy and practice that are of mutual interest to the jurisdictions it comprises (n.b., Subtask 3.1). Secondarily, Governing Boards shall:

· Articulate a mission statement for their REL, in consultation with the NCEE Commissioner;

· Share regular feedback with the NCEE Commissioner on the quality of their REL’s activities;

· Provide insights to REL and IES staff on how the REL might best carry out its activities such that State education goals, and other goals identified by REL partners, are achieved; and

· Develop a plan for regularly identifying regional needs, including through the solicitation of feedback from schools and teachers, to inform their own deliberations.

The REL shall appoint members to the REL Governing Board to meet the following requirements:

· The REL shall offer every chief State school officer in the region the opportunity to serve on the REL Governing Board, or to designate another senior officer as their representative.

· The composition of the REL Governing Board shall represent the interests of all states and other appropriate constituencies in the region (see Section 174(h) of ESRA for additional information on the composition of the Governing Board.)

· The REL Governing Board shall be separate from the REL’s corporate board and shall meet on a different day from any corporate board meeting.

· The REL Governing Board shall convene at least two times each year, with at least one in-person meeting. In-person meetings shall be at least one full day to allow ample time for the board to fulfill its duties. All in-person meetings shall be held at a location within the region.

· The REL shall ensure that members clearly understand the roles, responsibilities, and the procedures of the REL Governing Board. This includes ensuring that all REL Governing Board members are onboarded, and are kept informed of the work of the REL between meetings so that the REL Governing Board may maximize the time available during Board meetings to fulfill their responsibilities.

RELs must provide Governing Board members the opportunity to provide meaningful and regular input and guidance on projects that impact the constituency they represent, both as those projects are being proposed and executed. Because the work of the REL will be proposed, approved, and executed on a rolling basis, Governing Board meetings must not be the only opportunity Governing Board members have to provide such input and guidance. RELs are expected to communicate with their Governing Board members on a consistent basis to provide them the information they need to fulfill their duties in a timely manner.

The first REL Governing Board meeting shall be held within the first 8 weeks of the contract effective date. After the initial meeting, meeting agendas shall be created in consultation with the Governing Board members at least 6 weeks before the Governing Board meeting occurs. The meeting agenda shall reflect a commitment by the REL to engage the Governing Board members actively in the decision-making of the REL. The agenda and meeting materials shall be submitted for approval by IES at least three weeks before each meeting. The REL shall submit to IES minutes, actions, and a discussion of how the REL will use Governing Board feedback to adjust their proposed or ongoing work within two weeks after each meeting.

Within 5 weeks of the effective date of the contract, the REL shall submit to IES a report on the establishment of the REL Governing Board, board procedures, a list of members, and analysis of how the Governing Board meets the representational requirements. RELs shall submit quarterly reports of communication with the Governing Board, with the first quarterly report due within two weeks of establishing the Board.

RELs shall also keep their COR informed of potential additions to or resignations from their Governing Board. While the addition of new Governing Board members must be approved by current Governing Board members, RELs shall propose new Governing Board members to the COR in advance of proposing members to the Governing Board, and provide the COR with a justification as to why a potential Governing Board member is well situated to further the work of the REL.

Deliverable(s):

Subtask 1.5 Annual Work Plan Annually, RELs shall submit an Annual Work Plan (AWP). The AWP shall be organized by partnership (n.b., Task 3) and include their (a) description and composition (including REL staff supporting the partnership), (b) updated logic model; (c) updated measurement plans and accompanying metrics; (d) updated project proposals, including budgets and schedules, for all previously approved work; (e) anticipated projects, including preliminary fixed-price budgets, cost reimbursable travel, and schedules; and (f) most significant success and most pressing challenge. Note that RELs may continue to propose projects even if a given year’s AWP has already been submitted. Anticipated projects and budgets identified in Part E of the plan will serve as justification for the following year’s incremental funding request.

RELs shall submit an AWP describing any approved work and all planned work for Year 1 by April 1, 2027.

AWPs describing work for Years 2, 3, 4, and 5 shall be submitted by September 1st in each of the years 2027, 2028, 2029, and 2030, respectively. That is, on September 1, 2027, RELs will submit their AWP for their Year 2 work beginning January 1, 2028 and ending December 31, 2028.

Deliverable(s):

Subtask 1.6 Prepare and submit Monthly Progress Reports The REL shall submit a Monthly Progress Report, due within 10 working days after the end of each month. The Monthly Progress Report shall include the following summaries:

· Major activities under each task and accomplishments—including any relevant data on progress towards partnerships’ targets.

· Needs related to applied research or training, coaching, or technical support that have been identified by the REL through its interactions with regional stakeholders.

· Participation in cross-REL coordination activities.

· Coordination and collaboration with Comprehensive Centers, other Technical Assistance Providers, and other IES investments as well as referrals to other Department resources the REL has provided to stakeholders.

· Budget and expenditures for the period and cumulatively by Subtask, and by project under Tasks 4 and 5, with a clear identification of the extent of budget devoted to and resources spent on activities in rural areas. The budget and expenditure documents shall clearly indicate the labor hours spent on each Task and Subtask during the prior month and cumulatively since the project began by individual staff. In addition, under Tasks 4 and 5, the budget documents shall indicate the expenditures and labor hours spent for each project by individual staff during the prior month and cumulatively since the project began.

· Unexpected challenges, delays, or other issues that need to be addressed. If these delays result in revisions to the project timeline, RELs shall include a complete timeline for remaining project activities in the Monthly Progress Report.

· Major activities planned for the next month, including a schedule of deliverable submissions.

Deliverable(s):

Subtask 1.7 Comply with Personnel Security Requirements All REL positions will be designated as either a no-risk, low-risk or moderate-risk level. Within the first week of the contract start date the REL shall appoint a security liaison who shall submit a list of all staff on the contract with the appropriate position risk level designation. The REL security liaison shall submit the required documentation for all REL staff assigned a low or moderate risk to the IES security team within two weeks of contract start date, and as needed for REL staff added over the life of the contract. The security liaison shall be responsible for submitting the required documentation for staff from the prime contractor and any subcontractors. The REL shall submit an update monthly on the status of security risk processing following directions provided by the COR at the contract kickoff. Additionally, REL staff shall complete periodic cybersecurity and records management training provided by IES. The cost proposal should include time for relevant staff to complete these trainings. Estimate based on 3 Cybersecurity trainings per year and one records management training per year, each taking approximately one hour to complete. See Appendix D: Records Management Obligations for more information.

Deliverable(s):

Subtask 1.8 Participate in REL Program Evaluation.

IES intends to conduct an independent evaluation of each REL and the REL Program itself. The REL shall cooperate with IES’ requests for information and other types of assistance needed to conduct the evaluation. Information requests and assistance may include, for example, providing details about upcoming and past TCTS activities or facilitating the evaluation contractor’s collection of data from REL partners. In addition, the REL shall plan to participate in two-day site visits from REL evaluation contractor staff in both Years 2 and 3 of the REL contract. Three REL staff shall participate in the two-day site visit, including both the Director and Deputy Director as well as one additional person to be determined in Year 1. The REL shall also be prepared to discuss with the REL evaluation contractor the feasibility of conducting a random controlled trial (RCT) or quasi- experimental design (QED) study of one of the REL’s partnerships or projects. This discussion would occur in Year 1 of the REL contract and the RCT or QED would begin in Year 2 or Year 3 of the REL contract. The REL shall cooperate with the REL evaluation contractor in the implementation of this RCT or QED if such a study is deemed feasible.

Deliverable(s):

Task 2: Coordination and Collaboration

Subtask 2.1 Coordinate and collaborate with regional Comprehensive Centers, other Department technical assistance providers, and IES investments.

The REL shall identify opportunities for coordination, collaboration, and dissemination with other IES funded activities and other federal and local technical assistance providers. The REL shall not duplicate the information gathered or services provided by other federal or non-federal technical assistance providers. The REL shall refer stakeholders to other available resources when the stakeholders’ needs are outside the scope of REL Program or when the needs can be more effectively met by others.

Regional Comprehensive Centers REL shall coordinate and collaborate with each of their regional Comprehensive Center counterpart(s) in their region to disseminate knowledge widely within their region, avoid duplicating efforts across programs, and streamlines and simplifies the process of receiving federal technical support from the stakeholder perspective.

RELs and their Comprehensive Center counterpart(s) shall establish regular meetings, to occur at least monthly across the entirety of the contract period, to ensure continuous coordination and potential collaboration. Discussions in these meetings shall address topics such as any new needs that arise, any changes occurring within a state (e.g., new leadership or new policies), updates on ongoing or potential projects, and identifying any collaboration opportunities. These regular meetings can also cover planning for any collaborative projects, which shall be proposed under the associated REL task.

Other Technical Assistance Providers and IES Investments The REL shall establish formal or informal structures to maintain a clear, thorough, and up-to-date knowledge of the work occurring in the network of organizations that provide different forms of research assistance to stakeholders. This network shall include other IES investments such as the WWC, research projects funded by the National Center for Education Research (NCER) and the National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER), National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) programs, such as the National Forum on Education Statistics, as well as other federal, local, and professional organizations that provide educational services to state, local education, and postsecondary agencies that align with the outcomes of REL partnerships.

Structures can include informal or formal meetings with other providers, IES contractors, or grantees in order to discuss any relevant needs-sensing, any research or activities occurring in each respective program, and any coordinated dissemination opportunities. At a minimum, internal structures shall be developed by the REL to allow the REL to identify research or other products and supports developed by all relevant networks. Strategies shall be developed for helping stakeholders make effective connections with these other services to avoid duplicative efforts.

RELs shall develop a summary of their collaboration activities, as well as any referrals that have been made each month. This summary shall be included as an appendix to the Monthly Report (n.b., Subtask 1.6).

Deliverable(s):

Task 3: Working in Partnership with Stakeholders Subtask 3.1 Conduct needs‐sensing and develop partnerships.

Throughout the duration of the contract, the REL shall engage in needs-sensing through communication with stakeholders in its region, in particular its Governing Board (both as a whole and its individual members), as well as via and secondary information sources such as state or district websites. As noted in Introduction to the REL Cycle, REL work addressing those needs should be done “in partnership” with key stakeholders and decisionmakers.

For any need or partner where more than one Task 4, 5, or 6 project is planned, the REL shall submit a partnership proposal alongside the concept paper for the first project with this partnership. The partnership proposal will:

· describe the specific high-leverage need the work will address,

· provide an overview of how the need will be addressed through the REL’s support,

· detail relevant context such as existing efforts outside the REL to address the need,

· list the individual members (“named partners”) that will participate, and

· include a letter of support from each organization that will participate to indicate that the approach is feasible and will meet their needs.

Deliverable(s):

Subtask 3.2 Maintain partnerships Once approved, RELs shall begin work within a partnership.

A key task at the inception of a partnership is co-development of a partnership logic model (see Figure 1). The model will outline how the proposed activities done in partnership will lead to the attainment of partners’ intended outcomes. Each logic model shall describe each of the applied research, training, coaching, and technical support projects the REL intends to undertake in partnership; the intended outputs; short-, medium-, and long-term outcomes of the work; and the intended, measurable, time-bound targets for each outcome. To monitor the REL’s progress toward the outcomes identified in the logic models and their associated targets, the REL shall also develop a measurement plan to determine progress toward and achievement of each target associated with a logic model outcome. It must be clear how each measure aligns with and is a true measure of the associated outcome. IES expects that RELs will collect data related to measuring progress towards specific targets as often as is needed to determine whether they are being met. The logic models and associated measurement plans developed under Subtask 3.1 are to be considered living documents that change as conditions warrant. RELs should use these logic models as one tool to keep their current and future work focused on the outcomes, or to document new outcomes as necessary. The logic models and measurement plans shall be reviewed with partners, updated, and submitted to the COR annually as part of the AWP.

RELs must also maintain partnerships once formed. This includes regularly communicating with partners about the status of ongoing work as well as conducting ongoing needs-sensing to initiate new activities.

To monitor the outcomes associated with partnership participation, RELs shall administer the IES-provided Stakeholder Feedback Survey to named partnership members on an annual basis.

Deliverable(s):

Task 4: Training, Coaching, and Technical Support (TCTS)

The REL Program’s training, coaching, and technical support (TCTS) projects leverage RELs’ unique expertise in designing and interpreting rigorous research, as well as the identification and application of evidence-based practices. Under this task, RELs shall identify, develop, and implement TCTS projects and activities that incorporate, build, and support partners’ individual and organizational knowledge and capacities in service of addressing high leverage issues within the REL region. TCTS projects and activities shall be co-developed with partners, be more intensive than activities under other tasks such as Dissemination, and incorporate partners’ specific contexts within their design. To the greatest degree possible, TCTS should be embedded within recipients’ settings and their existing structures for determining and implementing policies or practices.

IES expects RELs to use TCTS projects to supplement and support projects under the Applied Research and Peer Reviewed Research-based Development Projects Task (Task 5) where appropriate. For example, TCTS projects can occur before or during an applied research project to help partners understand existing evidence or collect more detailed, local data to support a research project on the high leverage topic of interest. TCTS projects may also occur after an applied research project is completed with the goal of exploring implications of the research and potential next steps towards meeting partners intended outcomes.

Subtask 4.1 TCTS Projects Training Training activities involve hands-on, direct guidance or instruction from experts in research or practice. Examples of training activities include, but are not limited to, virtual trainings for administrators or teacher leaders on applying recommendations from a WWC Practice Guide or other rigorous extant research to professional development, in-person trainings for state-level staff on promising school turnaround practices, or training staff from partner organizations in the effective distillation and communication of research evidence on a specific high leverage topic.

Coaching Coaching in this context is akin to being a “thought partner” or “critical friend” to individual partner organizations or a small group of individuals representing multiple partner organizations during the process of making decisions related to policy or practice. For example, coaching support can entail co-developing materials or other outputs with partners to encourage and support evidence- informed, partner- driven changes to policy or practice. Coaching supports partners’ decision-making through ongoing sessions covering research evidence or current practice related to a specific topic.

Technical Support Technical support builds partners’ capacities to perform research-related activities such as identifying, collecting, analyzing and visualizing data. Examples might include, but are not limited to (1) providing support to a research office within a partner SEA or LEA to help that office identify existing data and/or collect new data necessary for an evaluation of an existing program, (2) providing support to a research office within a partner SEA or LEA to help that office perform data analyses on a topic, or (3) supporting a partner LEA or SEA in designing a study to inform or support its implementation or a local adaptation of a evidence-based practice or policy.

TCTS Proposals and Projects As needed, the REL shall develop concept papers and proposals, and once approved, conduct TCTS activities. TCTS activities may be proposed on a rolling basis throughout the contract. All concept papers and proposals will be reviewed and approved by the COR. Concept papers and proposals for TCTS activities shall identify partners by organization/office (if applicable), and the nature of their participation shall be described. When proposing a TCTS project, RELs shall describe how the activity or activities that comprise the project will help facilitate partners’ desired short-, medium-, and long-term outcomes. Projects whose content and design is not anchored by partners’ outcomes are unlikely to meet the criteria of high leverage. As part of a project’s design, RELs shall collect or help partners identify and collect information necessary to determine whether the outcomes and associated targets for the project were met. All TCTS project proposals shall include a realistic and feasible timeline for completion within the contract period. TCTS proposals shall also include the proposed labor hours and costs for the project.

TCTS activities and related materials shall be informed by the highest quality, most rigorous available research. RELs should draw on research on effective professional development, capacity-building support, and adult learning theory as well as develop and assess new structures of support in order to meet their partner’s needs For example, if a goal of the project is for recipients of TCTS to apply knowledge learned to their practice, RELs should seek to embed their support in TCTS recipients’ actual setting or a similar context and provide critical thinking opportunities.

RELs should evaluate the extent to which TCTS materials may be actionable by stakeholders beyond those for which they were originally developed and discuss their potential dissemination with IES. In the instance IES concurs, IES expects that RELs will adapt materials to a more general context prior to posting to the REL website.

For the purposes of the firm fixed price payment menu of activities, the Contractor shall price 6 types of TCTS activities based on the length of time of engagement (contractor labor hours) and level of expertise needed (hourly labor costs or consultant costs related to the work needed). Include assumptions that go into the pricing of the different deliverables.

· Short engagement, low-moderate level of expertise Activity

· Short engagement, high level of expertise Activity

· Medium engagement, low-moderate level of expertise Activity

· Medium engagement, high level of expertise Activity

· Long engagement, low-moderate level of expertise Activity

· Long engagement, high level of expertise Activity To monitor the outcomes associated with participation in Task 4 activities, RELs shall administer the IES-provided Stakeholder Feedback Survey to participants within 2 weeks of a project’s conclusion, unless otherwise specified by the COR.

Deliverable(s):

Note: This task may include cost-reimbursable travel costs for all Task 4 TCTS Activities.

Subtask 4.2 “Ask an Expert” Service RELs shall develop and implement an “Ask an Expert” service to provide real-time methodological expertise and evidence-based thought partnering to key stakeholders within their region. “Ask an Expert” services should be limited to addressing questions that can be answered succinctly using evidence-based subject matter expertise, or expertise in designing and performing research studies. Requests related to interpretation or implementation of a policy or practice, requests where there is no directly relevant extant research to guide expert responses, or requests that would require more than two meetings with the requestor to fulfill the request may not be addressed through this service and may be better fulfilled through a different REL task, or outside of the REL Program. RELs may not use the “Ask an Expert” service to produce products typically developed under another task.

Within four weeks of the effective date of the contract, the REL shall submit a memo to IES that outlines how the “Ask an Expert” service will be implemented. This memo must be approved by IES in advance of the REL implementing the “Ask an Expert” service. This memo should outline several aspects of their “Ask an Expert” service, including:

· A systematic internal process for determining if a request is best addressed through the “Ask an Expert” service, another REL task, or via referral to another federal service provider.

· A process for “Ask an Expert” requests to be received and responded to on a rolling basis.

· A process for identifying an appropriate respondent to “Ask an Expert” requests, including the use of non-REL consultants as needed.

· An “Ask an Expert” proposal template.

· A close-out process for “Ask an Expert” requests. This should include:

· development of a short summary memo of each meeting with an “Ask an Expert” requestor, to be shared with both the requestor and IES within five working days of the meeting; and

· a process to determine whether follow-up supports are necessary, including additional REL activities or referrals to other organizations.

Note: Travel costs may not be included for the Ask an Expert activities.

Task 5: Applied Research and Peer Reviewed Research‐based Development Projects

The purpose of the Applied Research and Development task is to (1) conduct applied research and report relevant findings, and (2) to develop products, subject to peer review, that are based in rigorous REL (or extant) research. For the purposes of this task, “products” include reports, PowerPoint presentations under Subtasks 5.1 and 5.6 (not required), toolkits that support the instantiation of existing evidence-based practice under Subtask 5.2, documentation and materials for the design and testing of new programs under Subtask 5.3 (not required), and additional tools under Subtask 5.4 (also not required). At state and local partners’ request, products may also include any materials that result from conducting assessments of research study quality under Subtask 5.5.

All REL work under this task shall be co-developed with partners to address identified needs. RELs shall describe in concept papers (when required) and project proposals how all Task 5 projects will help facilitate the key partners’ desired short-, medium-, and long-term outcomes.

As a reminder, IES encourages RELs to consider pairing Task 5 work with other activities designed to enhance its impact. For example, the publication of a research report should rarely (if ever) be a standalone event. Applied research, combined with dissemination and TCTS supports before, during, and after report publication are more likely to lead to a partner achieving their goals than is a single applied research report without accompanying activities.

Subtask 5.1 Conduct original applied research and report findings.

All research projects undertaken by RELs shall include a strong justification for the relevance and rigor of the proposed work. Applied research shall be designed to both inform decisions of policy and practice and to help build generalizable knowledge.

Develop Research Proposals Applied research may be proposed on a rolling basis throughout the contract, provided there is sufficient time to complete the work before the end of the contract period of performance.

Proposals for research studies shall:

· identify partners by organization/office and their involvement through the project lifecycle;

· identify the problem of policy or practice partners have identified that motivates the work;

· identify the key audience(s) for the proposed research;

· describe the extant literature;

· list the proposed research questions;

· describe the data sources and sample;

· outline how the team will manage study data, ensure data security, and follow applicable privacy laws;

· describe the research design and proposed method for each research question; and

· discuss any challenges or limitations for the proposed research.

All research projects shall also include a realistic and feasible timeline for completion within the contract period. All applied research projects shall be completed in time to allow RELs to support partners’ and stakeholders’ understanding and application of findings by providing at least one briefing for key stakeholders. The briefing should be included as a Task 5 milestone. IES encourages RELs to propose a separate TCTS project if partners and key stakeholders need additional support related to the research project.

Applied research proposals shall also include the proposed labor hours and costs for the project.

The REL shall develop concept papers and proposals, and once approved, conduct research projects leading to published products. All proposals will be reviewed by the COR, peer reviewed by the REL peer-review contractor, and approved by NCEE leadership.

Documentation for Applied Research Projects REL research projects are subject to the IES Public Access Policy. Causal studies that collect original outcome data are required to have Data Management Plans that must be submitted once IES approves the project proposal. Once this type of applied research proposal is approved by IES, it must be registered in the Registry of Efficacy and Effectiveness Studies. Causal studies that are expected to result in a licensable Restricted Use Data file (RUD) must produce a Disclosure Avoidance Plan to protect the confidentiality of individual respondents, and then implement that Plan once approved by IES prior to developing the final RUD.

Additionally, the REL is responsible for ensuring that each study has the appropriate Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval. The REL shall submit documentation of IRB approval to IES as soon as possible after IES has conditionally approved the study proposal. The REL shall not begin data collection or analysis until IES confirms with the REL that all IRB requirements have been met.

In any case in which the REL plans to recruit or collect the same data from more than 9 sources, the REL shall prepare a clearance package for IES and OMB Information Collection Review that lists the potential study participants, describes the study design and data collection instruments, and includes the necessary forms required for OMB approval. The REL shall submit the OMB clearance package to IES within one week after IES has approved the study proposal. The REL may not begin recruitment or data collection until OMB has approved the package.

RELs shall submit all documentation for applied research projects to their COR for approval.

Reporting Applied Research Findings RELs shall propose a reporting format that will best meet the needs of stakeholders and partners. RELs may propose a traditional report format. In this case, RELs shall prepare a report of up to 15 pages and either a one- page or a four-page summary. Traditional research reports shall meet the description, requirements, and formats described in the REL Program Writers and Style Guide. Appendices shall be published in a separate document that will not count towards the 15- page limit. Research reports must be clear and engaging, with appropriate brevity.

Alternatively, RELs and their partners may propose a slide deck, a single or series of infographics, or other non-traditional format for sharing study results with partners and decisionmakers. In this instance, RELs shall submit the final product along with a supporting memo that provides detailed documentation of the research study’s methodology, including data and limitations.

All research products will be reviewed by the COR, peer reviewed by the REL peer-review contractor (RPR), and approved by NCEE leadership. All products will be submitted to the Office of the Secretary and then posted on the IES website as 508-compliant files.

Optional White Paper Publications. In the event partners or key stakeholders need to use research study findings before a report can be published by IES through the typical publication process, RELs may seek permission to publish an interim report, or “white paper.” White papers must…