Draft CISS QCC SSN SOW.pdf

CISS Quality Control Center Operation- Draft SOW

SECTI ON C – DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT OF WORK (SOW,

Draft)

C.1 BACKGROUND

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is responsible for reducing the personal injury and property losses resulting from motor vehicle crashes. NHTSA relies on many sources of internal information to adequately measure the characteristics and needs of the highway safety environment. Data derived NHTSA’s data collection systems are essential to reducing the human and economic cost of motor vehicle crashes. NHTSA’s various data systems are the only source of real-world crash data for conducting basic research, identifying problem areas, developing effective countermeasures, identifying program and rulemaking needs, developing, and evaluating programs, creating rules and standards, evaluating new technologies and providing information to accurately assess and allocate grants for reducing crashes.

In the late 1970s, NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA) devised a multidisciplinary approach to meet the data needs of its end users that utilized an efficient combination of census, sample-based and state-data files to provide nationally representative traffic crash data on a timely basis. NCSA operated data programs consisting of records-based systems (crash records recoded for uniformity) which included the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and the National Automotive Sampling System General Estimates System (NASS-GES), and detailed crash investigation-based systems which included the National Automotive Sampling System Crashworthiness Data System (NASS-CDS) and the Special Crash Investigations (SCI) program.

The Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) was established in 1975 and is a data collection system that provides a census of all fatal traffic crashes in the United States. FARS data provides support for most of the traffic and highway safety programs aimed at reducing the number of fatalities on the nation’s highways and are extensively cited in legislative, enforcement and educational programs. These data are collected on a purely voluntary basis through cooperative agreements between NHTSA and each of the fifty (50) States, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.

The National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) commenced in 1977 with ten (10) initial contract awards to Primary Sampling Units (PSU) research teams and two (2) quality control Zone Centers. The system grew to fifty (50) PSUs and four (4) Zone Centers in 1981. The program underwent a review by NHTSA and other organizations in 1986 to assess its usefulness, efficiency, and statistical precision. NHTSA determined from that review that modifications were needed in case selection, data set definition and PSU strata distribution. As a result, NASS was divided into two (2) systems in 1988: Crashworthiness Data System (NASS-CDS) and General Estimates System (NASS-GES). NASS-CDS focused on the crashworthiness of passenger cars, light trucks and vans involved in crashes and damaged enough to be towed. NASS-GES collected limited data on other highway crashes to produce general estimates.

NASS-CDS was originally conceived to operate seventy-five (75) data collection sites; however, it was never fully funded to collect data from the originally planned seventy-five (75) sites, capping out at twenty-four (24) sites beginning in 1991. These twenty-four (24) data collection sites, known as PSUs, resided in seventeen (17) states, and were supported by two (2) quality control Zone Centers.

The NASS-CDS obtained PCRs that included passenger vehicles that were towed due to the severity of the damage and had a high potential for major injury. These crashes were systematically selected for a full investigation if certain conditions were met. Once selected for further investigation, the process included interviewing drivers and occupants, inspecting scenes and vehicles, reviewing official medical reports, and reconstructing crash dynamics.

NASS-GES consisted of thirty-six (36) PSUs located in nine (9) states. Each GES PSU collected certain information from PCRs, which were used to generate estimates of the nation's highway crash experience. The PCRs were the only source of information and certain variables were completed using data obtained from the PCR. The NASS-GES became the sole source of national estimates statistics on police-reported injuries other than fatalities.

To combine the strengths of the NASS system while addressing its limitations and the desires of the transportation community, NHTSA undertook a modernization effort to upgrade its data systems by improving the information technology infrastructure, updating the data collected and reexamining the geographical sampling sites (PSUs). The goal of this overall modernization effort was to develop a new crash data system that met the current and future data needs of all parties, while being flexible enough to adapt to the changing priorities of the agency and its partners going forward. NASS-CDS and GES were therefore phased out in 2015 and replaced by the Crash Investigation Sampling System (CISS) and Crash Report Sampling System (CRSS), respectively. The data collection sites (PSUs) for both were selected independently, meaning that the CISS PSU sites were not a subsample of the CRSS PSU sites or vice versa. By chance, it was possible that some of the new CISS sites and new CRSS sites were located at or near the same location. CISS and CRSS are collectively referred to as the Crash Data Acquisition Network (CDAN).

CISS is comprised of up to seventy-three (73) CISS PSUs that are directly managed by a PSU Operations Center. Cases produced by the PSUs need a thorough quality control data review and this work is completed by a Quality Control Center (QCC). The injury data produced by PSUs receives specialized quality control reviews that is completed by an Injury Coding Center (ICC).

This Statement of Work applies only to the CISS Quality Control Center. This procurement will provide for the quality control, training, and technical guidance for up to seventy-three (73) CISS sites listed in Table 2. The contract consists of nine (9) core tasks. Proposals should reflect these tasks overall and by individual task with the understanding that all nine (9) may not be exercised.

NHTSA has a separate contract for CISS PSU Operations, and the same contractor cannot hold both the PSU Operations Center and Quality Control Center contracts.

C.1.1 STAFFING REQUIREMENTS

Maintaining the quality coding of CISS cases and personnel working on the Quality Control Center contract is paramount. The contractor shall abide by minimum Engineering Technician category floors determined by the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division’s for the Program Manager, Senior Team Coordinator, Team Coordinator, and Sampling Reviewer positions as outlined in Table 1 and Sections C.4.1.5 and C.4.1.6 herein. Contractors are expected to maintain minimum personnel (Senior Team Coordinator/Team Coordinator) to PSU ratio of one (1) to every five (5) PSUs.

Table 1

Engineering Technician VI

(Program Manager)

Engineering Technician V (Senior Team Coordinator)

Engineering Technician IV (Team Coordinator)

Engineering Technician III

(Sampling Reviewer)

1 8 8 3 All Staff is full-time Labor categories are wage determinations under the Service Contract Act by direction of the U.S.

Department of Labor.

C.1.2 Primary Sampling Unit Numbers and Locations

Table 2 PSU Number Location of PSU

1 Comal County, Texas 2 Henry and Rock Island Counties, Illinois 3 Carter County, Oklahoma 4 Monterey County, California 5 Berkshire County, Massachusetts 6 Atlantic County, New Jersey 7 Gallatin, Hardin, and White Counties, Illinois

8 Latah and Nez Perce Counties, Idaho Asotin and Whitman Counties, Washington

9 Butte County, California 10 Etowah County, Alabama 11 Chippewa and Eau Claire Counties, Wisconsin 12 Hamilton County, Ohio 13 Cameron, Potter, and Tioga Counties, Pennsylvania 14 Maricopa County, Arizona 15 Dallas County, Texas 16 Cumberland County, Maine 17 San Bernardino County, California

18 Bristol County, Massachusetts Newport County, Rhode Island

19 Delaware and Morrow Counties, Ohio 20 Nassau County, New York 21 Montgomery and Preble Counties, Ohio 22 Tarrant County, Texas 23 Sacramento County, California

24 Chesterfield County, Virginia Hopewell City, Virginia

25 Carbon and Yellowstone Counties, Montana 26 Delaware and Greene Counties, New York 27 Dade and Lawrence Counties, Missouri

28 Vermillion and Vigo Counties, Indiana 29 Box Elder County, Utah 30 Franklin County, Alabama 31 Piscataquis and Somerset Counties, Maine

32 Albemarle and Greene Counties, Virginia Charlottesville, Virginia

33 Passaic County, New Jersey 34 Mobile County, Alabama 35 Collin County, Texas 36 Fairfield County, Connecticut 37 Sebastian County, Arkansas 38 Spartanburg County, South Carolina 39 Davidson County, Tennessee 40 Haralson and Polk Counties, Georgia 41 Wayne County, Michigan 42 Broward County, Florida 43 Storey and Washoe Counties, Nevada 44 Cuyahoga County, Ohio 45 Harvey and Sedgwick Counties, Kansas 46 Los Angeles County, California 47 Cook County, Illinois 48 Jefferson County, Alabama 49 Bernalillo County, New Mexico 50 Tulsa County, Oklahoma 51 Dekalb County, Georgia 52 Hancock and Marion Counties, Indiana 53 Queens County, New York 54 Blount County, Alabama 55 Middlesex County, Massachusetts 56 Contra Costa County, California 57 Island and Snohomish Counties, Washington 58 Harris County, Texas 59 Vernon County, Louisiana 60 Genesee and Orleans Counties, New York 61 Jefferson and Leavenworth Counties, Kansas 62 Ramsey County, Minnesota 63 Clark County, Nevada 64 Allegany County, Maryland; Mineral County, West Virginia 65 Galveston County, Texas 66 Bibb and Chilton Counties, Alabama 67 Saint Charles County, Missouri 68 Christian and Macon Counties, Illinois 69 Clay, Lincoln, Turner, Union, and Yankton Counties, South Dakota 70 Jefferson and Wheeler Counties, Oregon 71 Lebanon County, Pennsylvania 72 Cowlitz and Lewis Counties, Washington

73 Blair County, Pennsylvania

C.1.3 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

Table 3

Abbreviation Definition AIS Abbreviated Injury Scale CAP Contractor Acquired Property CDAN Crash Data Acquisition Network CDR Crash Data Retrieval CID Crash Investigation Division CISS Crash Investigation Sampling System

CO Contracting Officer COR Contracting Officer’s Representative CRSS Crash Report Sampling System DMV Department of Motor Vehicles DOT Department of Transportation FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation FARS Fatality Analysis Reporting System GES General Estimates System GFE Government Furnished Equipment MY Model Year NASS National Automotive Sampling System NASS-GES National Automotive Sampling System - General Estimates System NASS-CDS National Automotive Sampling System - Crashworthiness Data System NCSA National Center for Statistics and Analysis NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NiTS Not-in-Traffic-Surveillance PARSE Police Accident Report Sampling Engine PCR Police Crash Report PSU Primary Sampling Unit SCI Special Crash Investigations SME Subject Matter Experts

C.2 OBJECTIVES

The objective of this Contract is to provide timely, efficient, and effective support to NHTSA and its partners in the quality control of the data in the NHTSA Crash Data Acquisition Network (CDAN). This Statement of Work describes the responsibilities for the Quality Control Center (QCC) for NHTSA’s Crash Investigation Sampling System (CISS). The activities include:

• Establishment and operation of a data and performance quality control center;

• Quality control review of CISS cases generated for up to seventy-three (73) CISS PSUs consisting of sixty-five (65) that are already operational and eight (8) to be added during this contract.

• Sampling review of PCRs entered weekly by PSUs into the PARSE program;

• Participation in and delivery of training, technical meetings, and workshops;

• Quality control site visits to the CISS PSUs at the locations listed in Table 2.

C.3 PURPOSE

The purpose of this Contract is to acquire services to enhance and execute a cohesive program of continuing evaluation and quality control of data collection and coding, technical support for all data collection PSUs, and training resource development and maintenance.

1. To ensure accuracy, quality, completeness, and consistency in data collection and coding generated by the CISS PSUs into CDAN programs,

2. To ensure the reliability of data produced by data collection tools used by PSU crash technicians,

3. To maintain the standardization of data among CISS programs.

C.4 SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS

The Specific Requirements listed below are provided for communication of the specific items that are required under this contract.

1. Establish CISS Quality Control Center;

2. CISS Case Review and Quality Control;

3. Site Visitation;

4. Reporting Procedures;

5. Workshops and Meetings;

6. Special Studies;

7. Training Requirements;

8. CISS Support, Resource Materials, Forms, and Manuals;

9. Transition

C.4.1 Task 1 CISS Quality Control Center

C.4.1.1 Establish CISS Quality Control Center Facilities Within four (4) weeks of contract award, the contractor shall establish a CISS Quality Control Center (QCC) facility or schema to support QCC activities.

The CISS QCC facility or group of facilities shall be sufficient to accommodate all staff members. The Contractor can use innovative solutions to meet this requirement including satellite offices in multiple geographic locations. QCC personnel does not need to all be located in one facility. The office space shall be secure and include a climate-controlled area for computers and other environmentally sensitive hardware, which may be used in the future. A dedicated computer line shall be provided for computer communications. The contractor is responsible for installation of communication lines (if not already installed) to connect to the wide area network used for the electronic data collection system. The contractor is responsible for installation of communication lines to connect to the wide area network used for the electronic data collection system and high-speed internet and (backup) mobile connectivity as specified in Attachment J.4, Crash Data Acquisition Network Site Setup Requirements.

All computer equipment and software required for work under this contract (whether furnished by the government or purchased by the contractor using contract funds) will remain government-owned equipment. The contractor shall be responsible for maintaining and accounting for all equipment acquired under this contract (either as (GFE) or contractor Acquired Property (CAP)). Within six (6) months of contract award, the contractor shall prepare a Form HS 324 and HS 145 listing all property valued over $1,000 acquired for use under this contract and submit that form to NHTSA.

The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) shall be consulted before major equipment is acquired to ensure its suitability and best source for supplies. Prior to making any additional major equipment acquisitions (over $1,000), the contractor shall request and receive approval from the Contracting Officer (CO).

C.4.1.2 Establish CISS Quality Control Center Staff Within four (4) weeks of contract award, the contractor shall have staff in place for the CISS QCC Facility.

The contractor shall appoint a CISS QCC Project Manager (PM). The PM, who is identified as key personnel in G.6, shall have experience in the management of in-depth crash studies or have an educational background in the fields of engineering, behavioral or physical science or business (systems) management. The PM should also have a crash reconstruction and investigation background.

The contractor shall also obtain CISS technical personnel to serve as team coordinators and sampling reviewers (Section C.1.4.5 and C.1.4.6). These individuals should have experience in CISS or other in-depth crash reconstruction programs. The contractor shall make its best effort to staff the QCC with personnel already certified through training (Section C.4.7.1) at the NHTSA Crash Investigation Training Academy located on the campus of the Transportation Safety Institute (TSI) in Oklahoma City, OK.

The CISS team coordinators shall have extensive experience in analyzing crash avoidance and crashworthiness aspects of in-depth crash investigation, reconstruction, and clinical evaluation. Collectively, they should demonstrate a cross section of expertise in mechanics, damage analysis, crash dynamics, occupant kinematics, mechanism of injury and Crash Data Retrieval (CDR) software and event data recorder (EDR) interpretation. Additionally, they shall collectively demonstrate comprehensive experience in vehicle structures, human anatomy, the mechanics of physics as applied to determining delta V results, the application of the latest computer algorithms for delta V determination as well as the theory behind calculations.

The proposed PM and coordinators shall have the ability to conduct case reviews and be thoroughly familiar with coding conventions, case review processes, field procedures, PSU procedures, crash technician performance measures, computer applications and the case management and communications processes used within CISS. Case reviews consist of reviewing the quality of coded data submitted by PSUs located throughout the country and listed in Table 2. These processes are detailed later in this RFP.

The PM and technical staff shall have demonstrated capability to technically manage geographically scattered operations and to effectively administer complex crash data collection systems. They shall have experience in various performance evaluation systems for such diverse operations.

C.4.1.3 Qualifying QCC Personnel and Policy Compliance All contractor personnel shall be subject to a Department of Transportation (DOT) Federal Government Public Trust background investigation consistent with DOT Order 1630.2C, Personnel Security Management. All contractor personnel shall obtain and maintain a government Personal Identity Verification (PIV) card. Any individual who fails to pass the DOT background investigation will be unable to perform under this contract. The DOT Background investigations will be performed at no cost to the contractor. PIV cards must be returned upon employee departure and/or the expiration of the contract.

All staff shall comply with Federal and DOT cybersecurity policy and training requirements.

This includes Annual Security Awareness Training, the use of government furnished equipment to enter data and the proper securing of all personal identifiable information (PII).1 Personnel hired for this contract shall pass a local Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) driver record check as well as a Department of Transportation (DOT) background check because of access to sensitive data.

C.4.1.4 Assist CISS Cooperation of Local Officials A key responsibility for the QCC is the establishment and maintenance of community cooperation. The contractor, on an on-going basis, shall assist the PSU Operations Center with the determination of which area police agencies report traffic crashes; the tow yards, police impounds or private towing services and garages that are authorized to receive vehicles; the hospitals and clinics that treat crash victims; and any boards or associations that may be helpful in fostering community support. The information shall be maintained in cooperation with the PSU Operations Center with copies available to NHTSA on the CDAN Shared Space. State and local statutes shall also be documented when they relate to highway safety or privacy issues. The contractor should recognize when periodic modifications to sampling protocol might require substitutions in the specific agencies that are included in data collection activities. New agreements, therefore, shall be negotiated within ninety (90) days after such changes.

C.4.1.5 CISS Team Coordinators Team Coordinators are considered key personnel (section G.6). Team Coordinators should be assigned no more than six (6) PSUs to oversee unless the COR approves. The coordinators shall work collaboratively with the PSUs and serve as the main contact between the QCC and PSUs. Team coordinators shall provide the technical direction to the PSUs and be responsible for reviewing submitted electronic cases and monitoring trends in performance, as outlined in Section C.4.2. The coordinators shall also conduct most technical site visits to the CISS PSU as outlined in Section C.4.3.

C.4.1.6 CISS Sampling Reviewers

1 PII is information that can be used to distinguish or trace an individual’s identity, such as their name, Social Security number, biometric records, etc., alone, or when combined with other personal or identifying information which is linked or linkable to a specific individual, such as date and place of birth, mother’s maiden name, etc.

Sampling consists of personnel from PSUs either visiting NHTSA-specified, randomly selected police jurisdictions weekly, or receiving electronic file transfers and logging their PCRs according to a prescribed stratification schema (Attachments J.12 and J.13). Details on these crash reports are entered into the program for logging the crash reports – the Police Accident Report Sampling Engine (PARSE) – which contains the algorithm to randomly select cases. After cases are selected, PSUs will code data collected from PCRs, interviews, medical records, scene inspections, and vehicle inspections into CISSWeb.

The QCC shall have up to three (3) sampling reviewers on staff that are certified at a 95-percent or greater aptitude on PCR coding schemas for the seventy-three PSUs and to monitor the sampling process on a weekly basis (Section C.4.2.1.1).

C.4.2 Task 2 – CISS Case Review and Quality Control

C.4.2.1 CISS Case Review and Quality Control Activities The success of quality data coding, case review and team performance are strongly dependent upon the proper interpretation of data and establishment a formal case review and performance analysis process. The QCC staff shall be thoroughly familiar with CISS sampling, case data review processes and coding conventions, levels of case review, reinvestigation procedures, previous special studies, submission schedules and the edit check system. Specific aspects of case review activities and quality control activities are included in Sections C.4.2.1.1 to C.4.2.10.

C.4.2.1.1 CISS Sampling Review Process shall begin with tracking the automated case selection at the PSUs. QCC staff shall review case listings from the electronic PARSE program for consistency and accuracy, including assigned Category and applicability to CISS. Sampling accuracy at all PSUs shall be at a 95% level or greater. Those ensuring the quality and accuracy of weekly PCR sampling shall be proficient in the coding schemas of all police jurisdictions within the sample. All sampling-related materials shall be retained at the QCC facility for one year or until authorized for destruction by the COR.

C.4.2.1.2 CISS Data Quality Control Review A formal case review process shall begin after the release of CISS cases from the PSU.

Cases are the work product submitted by PSUs completed by fully trained investigators that are assigned cases on a weekly basis to investigate. Investigations involve inspections of vehicles (exterior, interior & safety systems) that have been involved in crashes, the scenes where the crash occurred, the interviewing of crash victims, and the collection of supporting materials to generate thorough reconstructions of the events. Cases provide detailed information concerning the performance of vehicles involved across a range of different crash types (Section C.4.2.1.6) and are housed in the CISSWeb database within CDAN.

CDAN is the primary repository of data from all CISS-related programs and contains programs to list police crash reports and data from crash investigations. The sampling category shall be confirmed, the case structure examined to determine if the appropriate electronic screens and tabs within CISSWeb have been completed and the correct damage sketches and electronic files included, scaled scene diagrams completed, vehicle inspections and interviews conducted, electronic crash reconstruction tools used properly, crash reconstruction(s) performed, images and other pertinent information scanned, categorized, and sanitized, medical records received and a determination if any updates are needed. When case updates are received from the PSU, they shall be reviewed and coded at the QCC in concert with the entire case. If ambiguity exists with the update, the case is then returned to the PSU for clarification.

C.4.2.1.3 CISS Data Coding The technical responsibility for the final determination of crash circumstances and accuracy of CISS cases shall be completed at the QCC level. The entire review and coding process shall be completed within four (4) weeks from the date the case was released to the QCC.

Upon completion of the review, the QCC staff shall provide an electronic case review feedback to the crash technicians along with noted changes made in the electronic CDAN system and prepare the cases for approval for submission to the data file. NHTSA will conduct random checks on the automated file on a regular basis. These checks may require the QCC staff to reexamine specific cases to verify or correct questionable or incorrect coding.

C.4.2.1.4 Quality PSU Performance The contractor shall use NHTSA’s CDAN system for PSU quality performance assessment.

The CDS electronic data collection system shall be used to document data quality and crash technician data quality and adherence to CISS protocols. The contractor shall use computer systems as specified by NHTSA. This includes any hardware and software that may be required to support the quality review process. The Data Quality Log System in CISSWeb is the mechanism used to document crash technician case quality standards.

QCC should work with PSU OPS to provide technical assistance to any crash technician or PSU that is below minimum performance standards for two consecutive quarters. Targeted technical assistance shall be provided to the Crash Technician or PSU until the team has improved beyond minimum standards, or the crash technician(s) was/were released by PSU Operations Center. Minimum performance standards are determined by a range of factors including historical acquisition rates and PSU performance metrics.

To adequately evaluate CISS PSU performance, it is vital that QCC staff members working in concert be kept informed of all phases of CISS PSU performance. When consistent errors are noted, QCC review staff shall be notified so that errors in those specific data items can be monitored among all staff members. Likewise, when error trends become apparent during case review and case listing, the team coordinators shall be informed so that they can concentrate on enhancing specific PSU skills during future interaction.

The PM shall develop a quality assurance plan twelve (12) weeks after contract award and submit to the COR. After the plan has been approved by the COR, the PM shall implement the quality assurance plan. Any substantive changes to this plan by the contractor throughout the contract shall be submitted in writing and approved by the COR prior to implementation.

C.4.2.1.5 Level of Case Review and Crash Types All-variable reviews by CISS QCC staff shall be performed on all cases submitted during the first six (6) weeks following substantial changes to data collection variables or the introduction of new crash types. All-variable reviews shall also be performed on the first twenty (20) cases for novice crash technicians (less than one-year service) and on cases submitted by crash technicians on probation. For all other CISS cases, an algorithmic random sample of twenty-five (25) percent of their cases shall receive an all-variable review.

The remaining seventy-five (75) percent of cases shall receive a cursory review. A cursory review consists of a brief examination of the vehicle CDCs, crash reconstructions, event data recorder sanitization, vehicle crush profiles and scene diagram quality in comparison with photographic images, interior contact point(s) and intrusion(s), required file inclusion, completeness check, level one (1) edit review and a determination of the quality and sanitization of images. Quality control of cases produced by crash technicians exceeding a 95-percent standard quality rating shall receive only cursory reviews unless randomly selected for an all-variable review. Upon completion of the review, the QCC coordinator shall provide any case review feedback to the CISS PSUs, along with changes indicated in the electronic CDAN system, and where appropriate, prepare the cases for approval for submission to the data file.

Personnel completing quality control reviews on CISS cases shall be trained according to NHTSA protocols and approved by the COR. A coordinator shall not review more than fifty

(50) percent of the cases from the same PSU and edit and completeness checks shall be completed on all cases. QCC staff shall also assist the automated quality assurance process by recommending any additional edit checks and reviewing proposed edit checks present already.

C.4.2.1.6 Crash Types CISS previously only selected passenger vehicles involved in crashes weighing less than 10,000 pounds for investigation. Vehicles such as coupes, sedans, pickup trucks, vans, and sports utility vehicles were the focus. Non-motorist (pedestrians, bicycles, etc.) crashes were added in 2024, motorcycle crashes in 2025, and large vehicles in 2026. Cases sampled weekly at PSUs will contain a variety of these crash types. Manuals providing further details on these crash types will be provided upon award.

C.4.2.1.7 CISS Reinvestigation Activities A major component of the case review process is the evaluation and observation of investigatory skills and data acquisition tendencies the CISS crash technicians. The quality of case documentation is critical, but in some cases an accurate assessment of field performance can only be conducted through a reinvestigation process. This process includes but is not limited to confirming that the correct vehicles and scenes were inspected, the interviews obtained, and the reasons for missed documentation are valid. CISS QCC staff shall make unannounced visits to CISS PSUs one or more times annually at the direction of the COR. During these visits, QCC staff shall independently locate and measure scenes and vehicles and reinterview crash victims to confirm the reported in the activities of the past indeterminate period for accuracy and completeness. A site visit report shall be submitted in conformance with C.4.4.4. This task is not required if the COR directs the Contractor to suspend unannounced site visits for a period.

C.4.2.1.8 CISS General Sanitization Requirements Case sanitization is completed the PSU level and verified during the quality control review.

Sanitization is the masking of information that could identify crash victims and/or the locations of crashes. The specifics of this process are detailed in the Photography Protocols document available to vendors post-award. Sanitization occurs at the PSU level, but verification of sanitization is the responsibility of the QCC. This activity includes, but is not limited to, the review of photographic and scanned digital images for personal identifiers and documents with personally identifiable information (PII) to ensure cases to do not contain PII and that identifiers are filed in appropriate folders within the case to avoid accidental release.

C.4.2.1.9 Special Crash Investigations Collaboration The Special Crash Investigations (SCI) program is responsible for conducting detailed investigations on specific types of crashes to support agency missions. QCC staff may conduct or assist in four (4) to six (6) on-site special crash investigations per year as directed by the COR. QCC staff will be responsible for collaborating with the SCI contractor and collecting data on the scene, vehicle and occupants adhering to CISS and SCI data collection protocols. Information regarding this collaboration will be discussed with the QCC at least one (1) week prior to work being performed.

C.4.2.1.10 Protection of Privacy The QCC will have access to personal and sensitive information of people involved in CISS cases under this contract. This includes the personal information of crash victims, their medical records, investigating agencies, and other sensitive information. It is essential that the privacy of this information be maintained. Only contractor personnel and individuals authorized by NHTSA shall be permitted access to case information. Police crash reports, medical records and other sensitive information shall be strictly protected and not left in unsecured areas where it can be viewed by unauthorized personnel. Sensitive information shall be secured in filing cabinets or secure parts of the CISS QCC facility when not in use.

Disposition of CISS records at the QCC facility shall be done in accordance with NHTSA policy outlined in Section H of this RFP. All requests for case information from outside CISS shall be referred to the CO.

C.4.3 Task 3 – Site Visitation

C.4.3.1 Site Visitation The QCC staff shall conduct quarterly visits to all CISS PSUs. The scheduling of site visits and duration are generally left to the discretion of the PM in consultation with the COR. The coordinators shall conduct most of these visits to the site unless otherwise stipulated. When necessary, a subject matter expert may assist with any current issues the PSU is experiencing.

The site visitor shall be thoroughly familiar with all aspects of past and present team activities and review past site visit reports, quality control reviews and confer with other staff members and run various quality and acquisition reports prior to their visits. An agenda shall be sent prior to the visit outlining the objectives of the trip and solicit additional topics from the PSU staff.

The emphasis of site visits should be to diagnose and correct problems in PSU performance and to teach better data gathering, interpretation, and reconstruction skills. The COR reserves the right to alter site visit schedules in consultation with the PM or waive this requirement outright. A site visit report (as outlined in C.4.4.4 – Site Visit Reports) shall be submitted within one (1) week of the completed trip to the COR, PSU Operations Manager, and the

PSU. Site visit protocol may be modified at the direction of NHTSA.

The CISS QCC staff shall conduct two (2) visits during the first six (6) months of operations of newly established PSUs or when crash technicians are novices. A novice crash technician has less than one (1) year experience at a CISS PSU. During site visits, QCC staff shall conduct quality control activities, specific special study review or cover directives issued by the COR. QCC personnel shall accompany crash technicians in all phases of their work as deemed necessary by NHTSA to offer guidance, answer questions and to continually evaluate the performance capabilities of the team. It is crucial that investigative procedures at the team be not only correct, but also uniform with protocols used by CISS/SCI. Because the circumstances of each crash are unique, it is important for the QCC staff to assist the teams in learning how to interpret different crash scenarios. The PSUs should be able to understand the concepts behind gathering specific kinds of data so that valid interpretations can be made in a consistent manner.

As problems are discovered in team skills and/or interpretation, the PM, with the approval of the COR, shall plan an additional visit to provide specialized training to the team. If the problem appears to be common to several teams, the PM shall recommend specific topics for refresher training or changes in quality control protocols to the COR.

C.4.4 Task 4 – CISS Reporting Procedures

C.4.4.1 Monthly Progress Reports The Contractor shall provide information in the monthly progress reports that describe key metrics of cases reviewed monthly itemized by the level of the case review and delineated by the goals versus percentage met. Metrics for timeliness and data quality for crash technicians shall be reported in comparison to the minimum performance standards and historical acquisition rates of the PSU. A NHTSA-supplied Tableau report shall be used to document data completion rates for vehicle inspections, occupant interviews, medical records, timeliness of submitted cases and data quality constitute the components for performance standards. Minimum performance standards for crash technicians and performance goals for each CISS PSU shall be established annually in consultation with the PSU staff and COR based on unique characteristics and, if available, historical data collection experience at PSUs.

The reports shall also note recent accomplishments, upcoming activities, site visits completed with dates, site visits scheduled with dates, sampling accuracy, sampling problems, and the current PIV card status of each contractor including the card number, the date received, and the expiration date.

C.4.4.2 CISS Semi-Annual Performance Reports The Contractor shall provide information in the semi-annual progress reports detailing the key metrics regarding PSU data quality, successes and shortcomings, the status of submissions, modifications, procedures, personnel status, and any other items requested by the COR. It is important that case statistics are supported by sufficient narrative and graphics that allow the reader to assess the PSU performance and pertinent facts in a snapshot rather than a thorough understanding of the metrics used in the analysis. Where appropriate, the PM shall recommend corrective actions and implement these actions in consultation with the

COR.

Semi-annual reports shall be provided to the COR with the understanding that the contents of the report, but not the report itself, will be shared with the PSU Operations Center and potentially individual PSUs.

C.4.4.3 CISS Annual Performance Reports The Contractor shall be responsible for an annual evaluation of QCC and PSU performance. The report shall summarize the information in the semi-annual reports and provide detailed evaluations of CISS PSU data quality, successes, and shortcomings and over the past year. This includes a discussion of any positive and negative actions, improved performance metrics as well as an overall summary of QCC activities for the year.

Semi-annual reports shall be provided to the COR with the understanding that the contents of the report, but not the report itself, will be shared with the PSU Operations Center and potentially individual PSUs.

C.4.4.4 CISS Site Vis it Reports The contractor shall prepare and submit site visit reports to the COR, PSU Operations Center, and the PSU within one (1) week after each site visit as outlined in C.4.3 – Site Visitation. This requirement applies to routine site visits and audits conducted under the reinvestigation program. The report shall list the agenda followed during the visit, problems noted, instructions left with the team, QCC site visitor assessments and any recommendations for the team. The report shall be thorough and objective providing commentary on both strengths and weaknesses with specific recommendations. Detailed plans to resolve any issue with special attention to milestones and schedules shall be included in the site visit report. The PM shall recommend corrective actions where appropriate and implement these actions in consultation with the COR. If serious performance problems are identified at a PSU, the PM shall document these problems in a separate email to the COR.

C.4.4.5 CISS Trainee Performance Reports Following basic training for new crash technicians, the contractor shall be responsible for reviewing the competency of performance during the six-month post-basic training probationary period. Based on site visits conducted by QCC staff following basic training, the contractor shall monitor the performance of the new crash technicians and shall observe and evaluate them in specific basic competencies. Lessons learned from these observations shall validate competencies of trainees or provide the approach the contractor and PSU Operations Center shall employ regarding either retraining or removing the trainee from the CISS program. The PM shall provide the COR, NHTSA Training Coordinator, and CISS PSU Operations contractor the results of its observations, suggested actions, and applicable justification. The COR and the NHTSA Training Coordinator will discuss the results with the CISS PSU Operations contractor to determine the course of action for retaining or removal of the trainee. The contractor shall follow the directions within Attachment J11 – CISS Post Basic Training Evaluation report for this aspect of the contract.

C.4.5 Task 5 – CISS Workshops and Meetings

C.4.5.1 CISS Project “Kick-Off” Meeting A two-day meeting for senior contractor personnel shall be held within four (4) weeks after contract award virtually or at a location determined by NHTSA. The Contractor shall present an overview of their management plan, program objectives and quality control procedures to NHTSA personnel.

C.4.5.2 NHTSA Works hops The QCC staff is responsible for performing technical guidance and quality assurance of all data submitted by the PSUs. The Contractor shall plan to attend an annual training workshop at a location to be determined by NHTSA. The training will focus on new data elements, changes in field procedures, investigation techniques, case review, quality control and problematic areas. The contractor shall submit topics for an agenda to the COR one (1) month prior to the workshop. This five-day workshop will be administered by NHTSA. The contractor may be called upon to assist in the scheduling of travel to and from the designated location, hotel accommodations, and presenting training material at various sessions at the request of the COR.

C.4.5.3 CISS Quality Control Center Workshop A two-day "reverse site visit" for QCC personnel may be conducted by the contractor each year virtually or at their QCC facility with approval by the COR. The meeting shall involve, but not be limited to, a review of QCC operations and CISS PSU performance expectations.

When NHTSA conducts specialized training (i.e., event data recorder training, new crash types), the contractor shall plan to have up to six (6) representatives travel to the location specified by NHTSA. Details of the meeting times and agendas shall be provided by the

COR.

C.4.6 Task 6 – CISS Special Studies

C.4.6.1 Special Study Development The data modernization concept may include data collection on a specific subset of data for a limited period. This activity is known as Special Studies. Previous special studies have focused on heavy truck underride, side intrusion, rollovers, center high mounted stop lamps, anti-lacerative windshields, pole impacts, crash cushions, longitudinal barriers, tire pressure, large vehicle crashes, crash avoidance and severe injury crashes. The contractor should anticipate that special studies will be conducted throughout this contract period. The number and duration will be based on the complexity of each special study, the size of the sample needed and the system capacity at the time. The QCC staff shall be responsible for the technical support and review of proposed special study data collection forms, protocols, and coding manuals. The QCC Manager shall plan for two (2) persons to attend a two-day meeting in Washington, DC twice throughout the period of performance for the development and review of data collection activities for special studies.

C.4.6.2 Review of Special Study Cases The QCC shall be required to review special study cases as specified by NHTSA. Case submissions for special studies may be similar to those of the investigation-based case protocol. Specific quality review requirements may differ and shall be specified by NHTSA in such occurrences. Procedures for Special Study review will be similar to those used in CISS cases unless specified by the COR. Specific performance metrics, review timelines, reports, etc. will be defined in the special study requirements document, relative to the specific study being conducted.

C.4.7 Task 7 – CISS Training Requirements

C.4.7.1 CISS Basic Training Basic training for new or replacement crash technicians will be provided by NHTSA at a location specified by NHTSA. The NHTSA Crash Investigation Training Academy, located on the campus of the Transportation Safety Institute (TSI) in Oklahoma City, OK., is the facility currently used for this purpose. Unless otherwise specified by the COR, this facility will remain the training facility for the duration of this contract. The training shall consist of self-paced, computer-based lessons at the PSU and three (3) one (1) week in-person classroom sessions at TSI. This is considered a full training cycle and lasts approximately six (6) months. Each training cycle can accommodate up to thirty (30) crash technicians, but this limit can be amended at NHTSA’s discretion.

The contractor shall provide four (4) instructors for one (1) week for each basic training cycle. NHTSA averages two (2) full training cycles each year, although this may vary. The instructors shall have demonstrated experience in teaching the basic and advanced subject matter in the CISS training curricula. Proposed instructors shall be approved by the COR.

The NHTSA Training Coordinator will be responsible for coordinating training assignments and schedules with the QCC PM if needed. The PM shall be responsible for notifying the NHTSA Training Coordinator of training needs, if any.

C.4.7.2 CISS Advanced Training Advanced training may be necessary to offer special skills training should the need arise.

Advanced training courses may be conducted during the contract performance period at a location specified by NHTSA. The contractor shall provide the QCC manager and two (2) instructors from the CISS QCC for a one-week period for each of the advanced training courses as needed. All technical QCC staff shall attend the NHTSA advanced training courses.

Webinar courses may be offered by NHTSA periodically for QCC personnel. Workloads may be adjusted to accommodate training requirements. Travel is not required for this type of training.

C.4.7.3 Special Studies Training In addition to collecting routine crash data, NHTSA may require that the contractor conduct special studies of limited durations. These studies will include the collection of additional data on certain types of crashes or the investigation of several kinds of crashes. In support of these data collection efforts, special studies training may be required. The contractor shall provide two (2) instructors from the QCC for a one-week period for each training at a location specified by NHTSA. The contractor should estimate that this would be needed twice throughout the period of performance. Occasionally, training for field teams may be conducted by the QCC during a site visit.

C.4.7.4 Annual Field Crash Investigator Training At the end of each calendar year, Field Crash Investigator Training (FCIT) course will be conducted for five (5) days. All QCC members shall attend this training at a location specified by NHTSA with personnel receiving and assisting in training. FCIT will offer training on new data elements, changes in field procedures, investigation techniques, or other NHTSA-designated areas.

C.4.8 Task 8 – CISS Support, Resource Materials, Forms and Manuals

C.4.8.1 CISS PSU Support and Guidance The QCC shall collaborate with the PSU Operations Center to provide oversight and technical guidance to PSUs on their cases. The contractor shall assist in the establishment of internal office procedures for case control, in-house quality review and effective communications. They shall work with NHTSA and other affiliated parties to maintain the proper equipment for field investigations and ensuring that the PSUs can comply with case reduction and submission processes. The contractor shall maintain a thorough understanding of CISS data elements in compliance of established NHTSA resources. The QCC shall regularly provide guidance to PSUs in sampling of police reports, obtaining medical records, documenting scene evidence, inspecting vehicles, obtaining interviews, interpreting kinematics, conducting special studies, entering data via CISSWeb, and transmitting electronic cases. The contractor shall also assist the PSU Operations Center in maintaining and enhancing local agency cooperation required to acquire PCRs and other case related data.

Any recommended changes in CISS PSU procedures or clarifications of data items shall be brought to the attention NHTSA. Upon NHTSA’s approval, changes to data elements, policies or procedures will then be distributed by NHTSA. Any changes in sampling procedures or data element definitions shall be approved by NHTSA.

C.4.8.2 Distribution of CISS Resource Materials Access to the resource manuals and reference documents will be electronically supplied by NHTSA to the CISS. The contractor shall monitor the resource documents available to PSUs through CDAN Shared Space and provide guidance to crash technicians on how to access and interpret the required documents when necessary. Supporting materials and updates will be supplied periodically by NHTSA to the CISS for distribution to the PSUs.

C.4.8.3 Revision of CISS Forms and Manuals The technical expertise of the contractor shall be called upon in the annual selection and development of data elements.