DRAFT FDPIR PCPO Study PWS.pdf

Food and Nutrition Service (FNS)

Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) Participant Characteristics and Program Operations (PCPO) Study

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

I. INTRODUCTION

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) seeks to award this task order to a single qualified Contractor to design and implement a study to understand participant characteristics and program operations of the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR). This study will replicate and expand upon the 2016 FDPIR study0F

1 conducted by FNS and include an evaluation of the self-determination demonstration projects, which allow Tribes administering FDPIR to directly purchase food for the FDPIR food packages distributed to their Tribe.1F

2 Based on a representative sample of Tribes and participants, the study will leverage administrative data, case studies, and other mixed method data collection approaches to understand who is participating in the program, how the program is operated, and successes and challenges in implementing the self-determination demonstration projects (SDDP).

II. BACKGROUND

The Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) provides USDA Foods to income-eligible households living on Indian reservations and to American Indians residing in designated areas near reservations or in Oklahoma. FDPIR is administered at the Federal level by FNS and at the local level by 105 Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs) and 3 State agencies (9 programs are under the State accounting to a total of 117 programs). FDPIR provides benefits and nutrition education services to approximately 278 Federally recognized Tribes across the United States. Many households participate in FDPIR as an alternative to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) when they have limited access to SNAP offices and food stores. In fiscal year (FY) 2022, $127 million was appropriated for the program.

FDPIR provides monthly supplemental food packages to income-eligible American Indian and non-Indian households residing on or near reservations or in Oklahoma. Income standards for FDPIR eligibility are set by the Federal government and generally correspond to the requirements used in SNAP. Eligible households may not participate in FDPIR and SNAP in the same month. Each month, participants may select from over 100 products in their food package2F to help them maintain a nutritious diet. USDA purchases and ships foods to the ITOs and State agencies in accordance with their orders of items available from USDA inventory. The standard

1 USDA Food and Nutrition Service. (2016). Study of the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR). Retrieved from: https://www.fns.usda.gov/fdpir/study-fdpir-8.

2 USDA Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Self-Determination Demonstration Projects. Retrieved from:

https://www.fns.usda.gov/fdpir/self-determination.

3 USDA Food and Nutrition Service. (2022) USDA Foods Available List for FDPIR. Retrieved from:

https://www.fns.usda.gov/fdpir/usda-foods-available-list-fdpir.

https://www.fns.usda.gov/fdpir/study-fdpir-8 https://www.fns.usda.gov/fdpir/self-determination https://www.fns.usda.gov/fdpir/usda-foods-available-list-fdpir food package issued to participants varies slightly by household size and contains items from different food categories. The FNS Monthly Distribution Guide Rates by Household Size instruct program managers on the number of items per month and the USDA Foods options in each food category that go into a food package for households of different sizes.3F

4 The FDPIR administering agencies determine applicant eligibility, store, and distribute the foods, and provide nutrition education to participants. The main delivery modes for food packages are pickups at the main or satellite warehouses, grocery store models, and vehicle distribution points including home delivery. The types and variety of delivery modes offered is generally linked to the size of the program and service area.

In recent years, there have been many changes in FDPIR including eligibility, warehouse operations and distribution, customer service, and improvements in the types and variety of products offered in the food package. These changes are summarized below.

• Increased Food and Other Assistance During COVID-19: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, States and ITOs operating FDPIR temporarily supplemented the monthly food package to allow distribution of a larger quantity and variety of food items. FDPIR agencies also received grant funds for facility improvements and equipment upgrades.

• Food Package Revisions: In recent years, FNS has made several revisions to the FDPIR food packages and guide rates to include culturally appropriate foods and allow for selection of additional units of vegetables, protein (meat, poultry, and fish), and eggs.

• Self-Determination Demonstration Projects: In FY 2021, USDA established a demonstration project for participating ITOs to enter into self-determination contracts to purchase USDA Foods for their FDPIR program. These projects aim to further self-governance for ITOs in procuring and distributing local, regional, and/or Tribal foods for FDPIR. As of FY 2023, FNS will have awarded two rounds of demonstration projects.

• Increased Investment in Nutrition Education: FNS has increased its investment in Nutrition Education funding over the past several years from $250K annually to $4.0M annually.

• Changes to Administrative Grants: Revisions to the administrative grant allow State agencies and Tribes up to two years to use FDPIR administrative funds. Changes were also implemented to reduce the administrative match requirement and waiver options. These changes provide Tribes with more stability and autonomy over how they administer FDPIR and enable longer term planning.

Need for the Study

USDA has only conducted a few studies on FDPIR to-date, including two studies that provide representative data on FDPIR participants and program operations since 1990. As a result, historical information on FDPIR administration and the characteristics of participants is limited.

At the national level, data are available on the monthly count of participants by administering agencies, as well as the Federal dollars spent on food items issued to those agencies and related

4 USDA Food and Nutrition Service. (2022). FDPIR Monthly Distribution Guide Rates By Household Size.

Retrieved from: https://fns.staging.platform.usda.gov/fdpir/fdpir-monthly-distribution-guide-rates.

https://fns.staging.platform.usda.gov/fdpir/fdpir-monthly-distribution-guide-rates program administration. Information on racial and ethnic data are also collected once a year.

The primary source of detailed information has been special studies conducted by FNS.

The Evaluation of the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservation conducted by FNS in 1990 was the first study4F

5 to provide representative profiles of FDPIR participants and program characteristics. At that time, the program was just over 10 years old, served 138,000 persons through 105 local programs and offered a food package based on a limited list of canned and packaged foods. This study formed the basis for how FNS has conducted FDPIR studies over the years.

In 2013, FNS conducted the second study of FDPIR 1. The study provided an update of FDPIR participant characteristics and program operations, based on a representative sample of 23 FDPIR programs. The study found that the child participation in FDPIR had declined, adult participation remained constant, and elderly participation had increased. FDPIR participants reported a very low income (monthly average of $1,144) and an estimated 34 percent of households experienced low food security. Although FDPIR is intended to be a supplemental food package program, the study findings indicated that it was the sole or primary source of food for 38 percent of households. An estimated 52 percent reported making changes to their cooking practices or eating habits as a result of receiving nutrition education.

Since the 2013 FDPIR study, there has been a significant drop in national program participation.

FDPIR participation data indicate that a significant proportion of low-income American Indians continue to receive FDPIR benefits, but that participation has significantly declined for the past two years. The average monthly participation rate in FY 2019 was 83,811 whereas in FY 2021 and FY 2022 the numbers decreased to an average of 47,983 and 44,808, respectively.Error!

Bookmark not defined.

FNS seeks a Contractor to conduct a new study to provide an updated understanding of FDPIR participant characteristics and program operations, including reasons for recent declines in participation. This study is intended to build on the FNS study completed in 2016 to allow FNS to better target food/nutrition education efforts, funding, and potential policy changes. The study will also include a new component: evaluation of the Round 1 and 2 self-determination demonstration projects. FNS seeks to understand key successes, challenges, and lessons learned in the implementation of these projects and recommendations for improvement in future contracts in the self-determination and self-governance sphere.

III. Scope

5 Usher, C. L. (Charles Lynn), Research Triangle Institute, R. Triangle Institute, United States, U. States, & Food and Nutrition Service, F. and Nutrition Service. (1990). Evaluation of the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR).

https://naldc.nal.usda.gov/catalog/46399 https://naldc.nal.usda.gov/catalog/46399

This task order covers all work necessary to complete the FDPIR participant characteristics and program operations (PCPO) study, including:

• communicating regularly and clearly with FNS throughout the study;

• preparing a comprehensive plan for collecting and analyzing data, including a quick turnaround approach for synthesizing information on the Round 1 self-determination demonstration projects;

• developing the Information Collection Request (ICR) package and preparation of Institutional Review Board (IRB) applications, as needed;

• collecting the study data;

• cleaning, analyzing, and managing the study data;

• producing data files, tabulations, reports, and visuals representing the data and variables of interest;

• disseminating and communicating the data and information; and

• conducting other research and evaluation activities, as determined.

IV. OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this procurement is to design and conduct a representative study examining the FDPIR participant characteristics and program operations, including implementation of the self-determination demonstration projects. The evaluation will focus on the following research objectives and related research questions. At a minimum, the contractor shall aim to complete a study that addresses the following objectives and research questions. Contractors may propose additional research questions to address each objective.

FDPIR Participant Characteristics:

Objective 1: Provide a demographic profile of households and individuals that currently participate in FDPIR, including their participation in other assistance programs.

1. What are the demographic characteristics and composition of participant households nationwide and across different size local programs? What are the characteristics and composition of major subgroups such as households with elderly members, households with children headed by single or married parents, and households of different sizes?

2. What are the characteristics of individuals who participate in FDPIR? What are their ages, gender, Tribal affiliation, marital status, student status, levels of educational attainment, disability status, and employment circumstances?

3. What are participant households’ sources of earned and unearned income? Is there a worker in the household? How many hours a week is the worker employed?

4. What kind of medical insurance do participants have? Are they covered by Medicaid or Medicare? Do FDPIR participants receive health services on the reservation, and if yes, from what source?

6. What rate of households are using a designated representative to apply for FDPIR or pick up their food packages?

7. What means of transportation do participants use to apply for FDPIR or SNAP benefits and travel to food retail stores? What are the travel distances from home to the FDPIR certification site, the food distribution point, the nearest SNAP office, to the nearest food retail grocery store that sells fresh produce, to the nearest full-service authorized SNAP retailer (i.e., supermarket), and to the nearest authorized SNAP retailer that is not a supermarket (i.e., convenience store, trading post, farmer’s market, etc.)? To what extent are FDPIR foods delivered directly to the homes of participating households?

8. How many and what kinds of food retail stores (e.g., supermarkets, convenience stores, and trading posts) exist within or near the reservation, how far are they from residences of reservation members, and to what extent are they used by FDPIR and SNAP participants?

9. Where do FDPIR households live and what are their shelter expenses (including utilities)? Do households own the home or rent? What are the household’s utility costs? What do the utility costs include (e.g., heating, cooling, electricity, gas, telephone)?

10. What are households’ food storage and preparation facilities? What proportion lack food storage or preparation resources?

11. What types of health issues are FDPIR participants currently experiencing?

Objective 2: Assess FDPIR’s contribution to participants’ food supply.

1. Is FDPIR the only or primary source of food for the participant household?

2. Are there other nutrition assistance programs that are used by FDPIR participants, in addition to FDPIR, such as WIC, CSFP, Tribal Farmers’ Markets, National School Lunch Program and National School Breakfast? Are any of these programs or other programs provided by a Tribal agency on the reservation? Are there any food pantries or Meals on Wheels program that contribute to food supply? How big of a role do they play in ensuring adequate food supplies for low-income residents?

3. If FDPIR is not the primary source of food, approximately what proportion of the participants’ food needs are fulfilled by FDPIR?

Objective 3: Quantify the extent to which FDPIR participants switch between FDPIR and SNAP in the prior year and determine the main reasons for movement between the two programs.

1. What proportion of FDPIR participants also received SNAP benefits in the last year?

2. How many months a year do these households participate in FDPIR vs. SNAP? Are there gaps in participation as a result of transitions from one program to the other and back?

3. What household circumstances and reasons are there for movement between the two programs?

Objective 4: Explore the reasons why participation in FDPIR has been variable in recent years.

1. Are there any factors that might affect the number of individuals who are eligible for

FDPIR?

2. Have preferences for food packages declined in favor of SNAP benefits or other nutrition assistance? If so, what are the reasons for the change in preferences? For example, is the perceived comparative value of benefits a reason for the participation decline in FDPIR? Did the COVID era SNAP benefit increases encourage more households to prefer SNAP over FDPIR? How has this changed since the SNAP benefit increase expiration in 2023? Has the flexibility offered by SNAP benefits in terms of foods which may be obtained contributed to the decline in FDPIR participation?

3. Is FDPIR used more by a particular subgroup that may be declining nationwide such as persons of a particular age and older?

4. Are there significant barriers that affect participation in FDPIR? How do they affect access or continued participation? Do they pertain to any specific FDPIR policy or local operation? Do they pertain to a specific subgroup of eligible households? Do known barriers differ across local FDPIR programs and if so, how?

5. Have barriers to SNAP or other nutrition assistance diminished over time, making these alternatives to FDPIR more appealing to customers?

6. What are the characteristics of households who recently started participating/discontinued participation in FDPIR in the last year? What are their reasons for participating/discontinuing in FDPIR?

7. Do participants think they can get more/more preferred types of food from participation in FDPIR or SNAP?

FDPIR Program Operations:

Objective 5: Provide descriptive information on key aspects of FDPIR operations.

1. What kinds of outreach activities are conducted?

2. How is the need for expedited service determined and then provided?

3. What proportion of certifications is conducted in the office, over the phone, or at remote locations such as vehicle delivery points (sometimes called tailgating)? If certifications are conducted in these remote locations, describe the accommodations for clients.

4. How and to what extent are computers used to screen households for eligibility, initiate an application, collect client information, validate information, and check against dual participation in SNAP?

5. Are any other types of programs or services such as job training or cooking classes conducted in the same locations as FDPIR?

Objective 6: Describe the resources devoted to nutrition education and the format of the information provided directly to FDPIR participants.

1. How much in funding is spent on FDPIR nutrition education? How much funding is from FDPIR versus other sources? What are the levels of staff support for this function?

2. What approaches are used to provide nutrition education? What kinds of information about the use of FDPIR foods are provided?

3. How often are nutrition education classes typically offered?

4. Approximately what proportion of FDPIR participants receives nutrition education?

5. Are there any cooking demonstrations and recipe tastings offered along with nutrition education? Are nutrition education classes adapted to the distribution model (e.g., warehouse, grocery store, home delivery, tailgate). How does nutrition education and the dose vary among different models?

Objective 7: Identify the factors that affect program managers’ decisions on which FDPIR foods are ordered from FNS.

1. Are there limitations in program storage or distribution that affect the selection of foods by the ITO? If so, what is needed to address these limitations?

2. Are there seasonal preferences or other factors related to acceptability or household preferences that affect the order?

Objective 8: Describe the approaches used to distribute food packages to participants and why they are selected.

1. What FDPIR distribution modes (pickups at central or satellite warehouses, grocery store settings, deliveries to homes or to remote satellite points) are used by the ITO or State agency? What proportion of participants is served by these approaches?

2. How many deliveries are made to FDPIR participants each month, by distribution mode?

3. How are distributions scheduled? How are packages distributed to customers who are unable to travel to the pickup site because of illness, transportation problems or other circumstances?

4. If distributions are directly from warehouses, are there other satellite warehouses? Do they have the same storage capacity (e.g., refrigeration, freezers)? Do these satellite warehouses operate on the same schedule as the main warehouse and if not, how do they differ?

5. If vehicle distributions to remote sites are necessary, what are the reasons why clients cannot access central warehouses?

6. If vehicle distributions to remote sites are used, do the vehicles have refrigeration and freezers?

7. Does the distribution method affect the composition of the package? If so, how?

8. What, if any, other services are provided at the time of distribution to participants?

Objective 9: Ascertain participant satisfaction with administrative practices and the food package.

1. How satisfied are FDPIR participants with each of the following program elements?

a. FDPIR application process

b. Location and attributes of the facility where packages are distributed.

c. Frequency of distribution and satisfaction with various distribution models.

d. Interaction with program staff

e. Nutrition education

f. Other

2. How satisfied are FDPIR participants with the food package contents?

a. What do participants think of quality and types of foods offered in FDPIR?

b. Are FDPIR participants satisfied with the current food package offerings?

c. Which FDPIR foods do participants tend to leave behind at the distribution site?

d. What would FDPIR participants like more/less of?

e. What new foods/types of food would FDPIR participants like to see in the food package?

f. Do the foods fit with participants’ cultural and health needs?

g. What proportion of FDPIR food do participants eat themselves, share with others, throw away?

h. Do FDPIR participants have difficulties with cooking the foods offered? Are difficulties due to disability, cooking knowledge, lack of supplies or equipment, and/or limitations on food storage?

FDPIR Self-Determination Demonstration Projects:

Objective 10: Conduct a process evaluation of the self-determination demonstration projects, comparing implementation to the original plan and schedule.

1. Was the Tribally procured food available to FDPIR participants as expected?

2. If foods were not available as expected, why and what was done?

3. What challenges did Tribes encounter during implementation? Specifically, did they have any challenges with:

a. Executing a vendor(s) contract?

b. Maintaining inventory to meet demand?

c. Food delivery?

d. Food storage?

e. Food issuance?

f. Food packaging?

g. Food labels?

h. Supplanting of existing USDA Food(s)?

i. Number of distribution months?

j. Tracking and reporting on FNS-152?

4. How were challenges addressed?

5. What are implementers’ perspectives on how those challenges could be minimized or better addressed in the future?

Objective 11: Describe the take rate patterns of items provided through the self-determination demonstration project.

1. What changes do we see in take rates in the category where the self-determination demonstration food(s) are included?

2. What changes do we see in take rates between the new and old food items?

3. Are there any other noticeable trends in take rates that are not directly related to the food item or category? (Integrated Food Management System -IFMS ITOs)

4. Are take rate changes detectable at the individual or household level? (IFMS ITOs)

Objective 12: Compare the trends in overall participation rate with self-determination demonstration project participation.

1. Do we see changes in FDPIR participation in Tribes with a project that differs from overall participation trends?

Objective 13: Assess the economic impact on local Tribes due to the participation in self-

1. Were there any economic impacts of the self-determination demonstration project in local Tribal economies that participated? (The contractor shall work with FNS to further define this question after award.)

a. Did participating Tribal organizations work with Tribal vendors?

b. Did participating Tribal organizations work with local vendors?

Objective 14: Examine the perceived impacts of the self-determination demonstration projects on the provision of nutrition education as well as food sovereignty and health disparities.

1. What are the perceived impacts of the self-determination demonstration projects on the provision of nutrition education?

a. Were there changes in the frequency and/or amount of nutrition education provided as a result of self-determination demonstration project implementation?

b. Were any complementary materials provided to help participants make the most of the self-determination demonstration items (i.e., recipe cards)?

c. Was there any increased emphasis on indigenous food ways in nutrition education (e.g., preparation and cooking methods that embrace traditional practices)?

2. What are the perceived impacts of the self-determination demonstration projects on food sovereignty among the Tribes?

3. What are the perceived impacts of the self-determination demonstration projects on the prevention and reduction of health disparities among the Tribes?

Objective 15: Describe the Tribes’ greatest successes and challenges in implementing the self-determination demonstration projects.

1. What did the Tribes perceive as their greatest successes and challenges in implementing the self-determination demonstration projects? Examine viewpoints of:

a. Agricultural producers,

b. FDPIR program staff, including nutritionists and/or health educators,

c. FDPIR program participants (e.g., satisfaction with new food options),

d. Tribal leaders, and

e. Other stakeholders

Objective 16: Examine the Funding Allocation/Budget processes of the self-determination demonstration projects.

1. Was self-determination demonstration project funding managed successfully?

a. Was initial funding sufficient for awardees to achieve contract terms?

b. Did ITOs need frequent budget modifications?

c. Did any funding lapse? If so, why?

d. What other types of funding allocations could have been utilized (e.g., opt out v.

opt in models)?

Objective 17: Examine the contract and administrative processes of the self-determination demonstration project.

1. In what areas were USDA and/or DOI successful in terms of contract award? In what areas can USDA/DOI improve their work in this area?

2. How well did USDA’s administrative process work and were there any areas that could be improved upon?

3. How well did DOI’s administrative process work and were there any areas that could be improved upon?

Objective 18: Summarize recommendations, lessons learned and best practices of the self-

1. What are the main lessons learned from the self-determination demonstration project in each of the evaluation areas?

2. What are the main recommendations for strengthening the self-determination demonstration project in each of the evaluation areas?

3. How should FNS adjust processes if the self-determination demonstration project is expanded or made permanent?

V. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

The period of performance will be five years (60 months) from the date of contract award.

VI. LOCATION OF WORK

Some tasks may include a requirement or budget for travel.

VII. REQUIREMENTS COMMON TO ALL TASKS

General operating constraints across all tasks under this contract include:

• The Contractor must maintain regular and open communication with FNS as part of project management and shall consult with FNS on all major aspects of the study.

• Each deliverable submitted to FNS should be in near-final form. Drafts shall not be submitted for FNS review without implementation of the Contractor’s quality control plan as described in the Contractor’s proposal. Deliverables that have not undergone editing for clarity, format, spelling, and grammar, are missing required sections, or do not adhere to the FNS-accepted evaluation plan may be rejected without further review.

• All deliverables and materials produced by the Contractor shall demonstrate substantial expertise in the operation and administration of FDPIR, including program legislative and regulatory requirements, guidance, research, and program data.

• Final products for public dissemination provided by the Contractor shall be compliant with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794d) as amended by the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (P.L. 105-220). Before acceptance, the Contractor will provide a completed USDA 508 Acceptance Checklist5F

6 for each public-facing document (generally, those included in the project’s communication and dissemination plan).

• All contact with FNS Regional Offices, State agencies or ITOs, FDPIR participants and any other program representatives or stakeholders must be approved by FNS prior to the attempted contact.

VIII. TASKS AND DELIVERABLES

Task 1: Project Management Orientation Meeting Within two weeks after contract award, the Contractor shall provide a draft agenda to FNS and work with FNS to schedule the orientation meeting. The purpose of this meeting is to refine expectations for the project, discuss and address potential challenges and concerns, and review the schedule of deliverables. Example of specific topics to be addressed at this meeting shall include, but not be limited to:

• mutual understanding of project objectives and priorities;

• overview of the methodology, data collection activities and data sources;

• contract schedule, including milestones, dates for submission of deliverables, and required timeframes for clearance activities (data collection and reports);

• formats for reporting data collection and general project progress;

• protocols for all communications between the Contracting Officer’s Representative

(COR), headquarters and regional FNS staff;

• confirmation of staffing; and

• potential challenges and possible strategies to successfully address them.

Within one week after the orientation meeting, the Contractor shall submit to FNS an electronic copy of the draft Summary Memorandum documenting the discussion. It shall summarize the meeting, including an elaboration of project objectives, decisions reached, and identification of any outstanding issues and strategies for resolving them. The final meeting summary (in

6 USDA, Office of the Chief Information Officer (2023). Section 508 Checklists. Retrieved from:

https://www.usda.gov/ocio/guidelines-and-compliance-resources/section-508-accessibility-compliance/section-508-checklists.

https://www.usda.gov/ocio/guidelines-and-compliance-resources/section-508-accessibility-compliance/section-508-checklists https://www.usda.gov/ocio/guidelines-and-compliance-resources/section-508-accessibility-compliance/section-508-checklists electronic form) shall incorporate FNS’s comments and be provided to FNS within one week of receiving FNS feedback.

Ongoing Communication Ongoing communication is necessary to ensure successful completion of this service component, and should be both verbal (e.g., regularly scheduled conference calls) and written (e.g., biweekly progress reports). For this task order, the Contractor will propose a schedule for biweekly conference calls to update Federal staff on progress and issues. Key Contractor staff, sub- Contractor staff, and/or consultants will participate as needed to address progress and issues for discussion. The schedule for these conference calls may be changed as agreed upon by the COR.

The Contractor will submit a proposed agenda for each call at least one (1) working day in advance of the scheduled date; this includes any materials that Federal staff will need to review prior to the call. The Contractor will submit meeting notes to the COR no later than three (3) working days after each regular conference call.

Monthly Progress Reports By the fifteenth of every other month, the Contractor shall submit electronic copies of progress reports covering work accomplished during each month of contract performance to the FNS Contracting Officer (CO) and to the COR. The progress reports shall be brief and factual and shall be prepared in accordance with the following format:

1. Section I: An introduction covering the purpose and scope of the contract effort. This shall be limited to one paragraph in all but the first and final month’s report.

2. Section II: A description of overall progress plus a separate description of each task or other logical segment of work on which effort was expended during the reporting period.

The description shall include pertinent data and/or graphs in sufficient detail to explain any significant results achieved.

3. Section III: A description of current technical or substantive performance, and any problems which may impede performance along with proposed corrective action.

4. Section IV: A planning schedule shall be included with the first progress report for all tasks required under the contract, along with the estimated starting and completion dates for each task. The planning schedule shall be updated and submitted with each subsequent technical progress report and shall include explanation of any difference between actual and planned progress, why the differences have occurred, and what corrective steps are planned if behind in progress.

Deliverable 1.1 Orientation Meeting Agenda Deliverable 1.2 Orientation Meeting Summary Memorandum Deliverable 1.3 Biweekly Meeting Agendas and Summaries Deliverable 1.4 Monthly Progress Reports

Task 2: Technical Working Group

The Contractor shall convene a technical working group (TWG) that will provide expert review and input throughout the study. The TWG may consist of members who, collectively, have a broad depth of expertise in FDPIR and the methods used for this study, including FNS National and Regional Office staff, and researchers with experience conducting FDPIR studies. The TWG membership shall also include FDPIR participants, Tribal leaders or their representatives, and ITO or State agency staff to capture the lived experience of those receiving and operating the program. The Contractor shall place an emphasis on diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility in the TWG member selection process.

The purpose of the TWG is to provide guidance on all aspects of the study (including Tribal engagement, design, analysis, interpretation, and reporting) and to ensure the study is appropriate for the lived experience of FDPIR participants and staff and avoids biases resulting from the researchers’ or members’ own backgrounds. TWG members will be engaged in reviewing deliverables as appropriate, given their expertise. At a minimum, the TWG will meet to review and discuss the following: 1) the Tribal outreach and engagement plan 2) the draft study plan, and 3) the communication and dissemination plan. The timing of these meetings and topics of discussion shall be coordinated with FNS. The Contractor shall use fair compensation for TWG members’ time, within the limits of Federal and State rules regarding travel and honoraria.

Expected deliverables for this task include TWG meeting agendas and minutes as well as summaries of recommended changes to the study plan, communication and dissemination plan, and reporting products.

Deliverables for this task include TWG meeting agendas and minutes and summaries of guidance, decisions, or edits made by the TWG. The meeting agendas shall be provided to FNS for review at least two weeks before each TWG meeting, and the meeting minutes shall be provided to FNS no more than one week after each meeting. The Contractor shall submit to FNS, at a minimum, summary of guidance memoranda after TWG reviews of the following: the Tribal outreach and engagement plan, the study plan, the communication and dissemination plan, and reporting materials (e.g., revised final report).

Deliverable 2.1 TWG Meeting Agendas Deliverable 2.2 TWG Meeting Minutes Deliverable 2.3 TWG Summary of Guidance Memoranda

Task 3: Study Planning and Tribal Engagement

Tribal engagement is an important part of the research process when conducting a study that involves ITOs and Tribal communities to ensure their perspectives and buy-in are obtained before data collection begins. The Contractor shall develop draft and final versions of a Tribal outreach and engagement plan that informs the strategies used to communicate with and engage Tribal leaders and members about the study and gain their input on the methods that will be used.

FNS will participate in Tribal consultations using the materials provided by the Contractor. The specific timeline for consultation will be discussed with the Contractor after award.

To facilitate the Tribal consultation process and other efforts to communicate the study with FDPIR officials and Tribal leaders, the Contractor shall prepare a presentation that describes the purpose, methods, study schedule, and questions to solicit information on key matters relating to sampling, data collection, and reporting of key findings. The Contractor shall submit draft and final versions of the PowerPoint presentation for review and approval by FNS.

The Contractor, using their proposal and previous FDPIR study materials as the conceptual framework for this study, shall provide draft, revised, and final versions of a study plan for FNS review and approval. The study plan must be designed to address the objectives and research questions specified in this task order and include a detailed description of the study approach and design, sampling plan, TWG engagement, data collection plan, analysis plan, and study timelines. The study plan must consider that evaluation of the Round 1 and 2 self-determination demonstration projects is a priority and must occur on a faster timeline from the characteristics and operations aspects of the study. The Round 1 projects began implementation in October 2021 and FNS anticipates awarding the Round 2 demonstration projects awards in summer 2023.

FNS needs timely information about their implementation progress and successes and challenges so the Contractor shall plan for self-determination demonstration project evaluation instrument development, data collection, analysis, and reporting to begin immediately following completion of the study plan. Data collection and analysis for Round 1 must begin within the first year of the contract.

The study plan shall include the following components:

• study methods and design;

• planned development of the TWG and milestones for TWG activity;

• description of the sampling plans for collecting participant/household and program-level information;

• description of the data collection and analysis plan, including a quick turnaround approach for synthesizing information on the Round 1 self-determination demonstration projects;

• a detailed description of the data collection instruments;

• a matrix that identifies the research questions, the data element(s) each question requires, the respondent category or other data source for each question, and the means by which the information shall be gathered;

• proposed handling on incentive payments;

• description of how and when training of field staff shall be conducted;

• procedures for monitoring the quality of the data collection process;

• proposed schedule for data collection;

• all planned analyses, the rational for the analyses, and the link between the proposed analyses and the study objectives;

• tasks to organize and structure the work in this task order including the proposed scheduling and sequencing of tasks and the identification of any key non-deliverable dates; and

• the process by which the Contractor will address any challenges associated with data collection.

The Contractor shall prepare and submit a revised study plan that that resolves outstanding questions and/or addresses concerns raised in the discussion with Tribal leaders and the TWG.

FNS comments on the draft and revised study plan shall be incorporated before delivery of the final study plan. Edits or updates made in revising the study plan shall not change the scope of work specified in the contract. The study plan shall include an updated schedule of deliverables if any changes to deliverable dates (but not payments) within the period of performance are deemed necessary by mutual agreement of the Contractor and FNS.

Deliverable 3.1 Draft Tribal Outreach and Engagement Plan Deliverable 3.2 Final Tribal Outreach and Engagement Plan Deliverable 3.3 Draft Tribal Outreach Presentation Materials Deliverable 3.4 Final Tribal Outreach Presentation Materials Deliverable 3.5 Draft Study Plan Deliverable 3.6 Revised Study Plan Deliverable 3.7 Final Study Plan

Task 4: Develop Data Collection Instruments

The Contractor shall develop and pretest data collection instruments and recruitment materials to enable a study that assesses FDPIR participant characteristics and program operations according to the research objectives and questions. Respondents for all instruments may include program participants, ITOs/State agency FDPIR staff, and other project personnel or implementing partners. The data collection instruments may include surveys, focus group protocols, interview protocols, and/or observation and assessment tools, as appropriate, to answer the objectives and research questions. The Contractor shall submit draft, revised, and final versions of all data collection instruments and recruitment materials to FNS.

Data collection instruments for evaluation of the Round 1 and 2 self-determination demonstration projects shall be compiled and implemented separately from the other study focus areas. To facilitate timely data collection with the Round 1 and 2 self-determination demonstration project awardees, FNS will develop and provide an in-depth interview guide for data collection from the States and ITOs, vendors, and self-determination project coordinators.

The Contractor shall work with FNS to finalize this interview guide and conduct interviews immediately following contract award.

With the exception of those instruments developed for evaluation of the Round 1 and 2 self-determination demonstration projects, the Contractor shall pretest any new instruments prior to data collection. Pretests will include no more than nine respondents per instrument, and findings from the pretest will inform the final version of the instruments. The Contractor shall pretest a version of the instruments that takes into account the first round of suggested revisions from FNS. The Contractor shall provide a brief memorandum describing how the pretest was conducted, the results of the pretest (including how long it took to administer each instrument), and any changes made to the instruments as a result of the pretests.

The Contractor shall also develop all recruitment materials needed to field the data collection instruments. These materials include letters to be sent to FNS Regional Offices and FDPIR ITOs and State agencies announcing the study, the data collection period, and a brief description of the data collection request. Recruitment materials may also include emails, phone scripts, or flyers informing potential respondents of the study and requesting their participation, reminder email or phone call scripts, and any other communications necessary to recruit and follow-up with all study respondents.

Deliverable 4.1 Revised Instruments and Recruitment Materials for SDDPs Collection Deliverable 4.2 Final Instruments and Recruitment Materials for SDDPs Collection Deliverable 4.3 Draft Instruments and Recruitment Materials for PCPO Collection Deliverable 4.4 Revised Instruments and Recruitment Materials for PCPO Collection Deliverable 4.5 Pretest Memorandum Deliverable 4.6 Final Instruments and Recruitment Materials for PCPO Collection

Task 5: 60-day Federal Register Notice, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Clearance, and IRB Approval

The data collection instruments, and recruitment materials prepared under Task 4 will be submitted for Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) clearance, as applicable, when the same instrument is applied to more than nine respondents. There are eight Round 1 self-determination demonstration projects. Data collection for this group will not need PRA clearance because there are fewer than nine. For planning purposes, the Contractor shall ensure no instrument is used with more than nine respondents when gathering data on the demonstration projects.

The Contractor shall prepare and submit the Federal Register 60 Day Notice for publication that meets all the requirements of the Office of the Federal Register Document Drafting Handbook.6F

The Contractor shall summarize all public comments received in response to the published Federal Register Notice and draft responses to each comment to be sent by FNS, as needed. The summary of comments will include a summary of the actions taken to address the comments.

The summary of public comments will be included in the ICR Supporting Statement and each public comment along with the individual responses will be provided as appendices within the OMB package. The complete OMB package must be received by OMB within a year from the date the 60 Day Notice was posted on the Federal Register.

The Contractor shall compile a clearance package requesting OMB approval for all information collection activities associated with this study, including copies of the recruiting materials and data collection instruments and a supporting statement as set forth in 5 CFR 1320, Controlling

7 National Archives and Records Administration, Office of the Federal Register (2022). Document Drafting Handbook. Retrieved from: https://www.archives.gov/files/federal-register/write/handbook/ddh.pdf.

https://www.archives.gov/files/federal-register/write/handbook/ddh.pdf

Paperwork Burdens on the Public, the USDA Information Collection Package Submission Guidelines.7F

Deliverables under this task include a Federal Register 60 Day Notice and clearance package that provides a narrative addressing each of the supporting statements (Parts A and B), a burden table, and appropriate appendices that include all recruitment and data collection instruments.

The Contractor shall keep in mind that Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval may be required prior to submitting the clearance package for studies involving participants/households and shall plan for this process to take place concurrently with the OMB approval process.

For purposes of calculating response burden, the time required in communications with respondents and separately for non-respondents contacted in the project must be included in the burden table. The OMB package shall be submitted in MS Word format. The burden table shall be submitted in MS Excel as an appendix.

Offerors should anticipate the need to make revisions after each level of review. The Information Collection Request package will be reviewed by the FNS Office of Policy Support (OPS), the FNS Planning and Regulatory Affairs Office (PRAO), USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), and USDA’s Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) prior to being submitted to OMB for review and approval. The Contractor shall participate in a conference call presentation of the study to OMB and/or draft responses to questions from OMB, as requested.

The contractor shall allow, at a minimum, 52 weeks for OMB’s final approval from the publication of the 60-day notice. The approval process may take more or less than this amount of time; Contractors are advised that the amount of time for clearance is directly related to the quality of the initial OMB package materials submitted to FNS. For planning purposes, Contractors shall note that once the complete OMB package is cleared through FNS, Contractors should allow, at a minimum, five months for OMB response. This response may include comments requesting additional changes or approval.

In addition to obtaining clearance from OMB, the Contractor shall also ensure that approval for human subjects testing is obtained from all applicable State and/or Tribal Internal Review Boards (IRBs).

Deliverable 5.1 Draft 60-Day Notice Deliverable 5.2 Final 60-Day Notice Deliverable 5.3 Draft OMB Information Collection Request (Supporting Statement and burden table) Deliverable 5.4 Revised OMB Information Collection Request (Supporting Statement, burden table, and supplemental appendices)

8 USDA, Office of the Chief Information Officer (2023). Information Collection Package. Retrieved from:

https://www.usda.gov/ocio/guidelines-and-compliance-resources/information-collection/information-collection-package.

https://www.usda.gov/ocio/guidelines-and-compliance-resources/information-collection/information-collection-package https://www.usda.gov/ocio/guidelines-and-compliance-resources/information-collection/information-collection-package

Deliverable 5.5 Final OMB Information Collection Request (All required components, includes cover pages for each appendix labeled to align with table of contents)

Deliverable 5.6 IRB Approval Memorandum

Task 6: Data Collection

Recruit and Train Field Data Collectors The Contractor shall prepare a comprehensive and detailed recruitment and training package (or packages if functions are conducted by different teams) that includes:

• Description of data collectors and how they will be recruited;

• Schedule for data collection;

• Description of purpose, methods and schedule of study including glossary of terms:

• If appropriate, instructions on sample selection of FDPIR households;

• Instructions for locating and extracting case records;

• Instructions for locating or contacting survey subjects and conducting the interviews;

• Instructions for structured interviews of FDPIR staff and other sources of program information;

• Formats of case records and instrument for abstracting data;

• Answers to questions that respondents are likely to ask;

• Description of likely data collection challenges and recommendations for avoiding or resolving them;

• Procedures for resolving problems, including the identification of key contacts; and

• Procedures for logging completed interviews, observations, and record extractions;

• Procedures for maximizing response rates, including contact strategies for households without current contact information and methods to convert nonresponses.

Prior to receipt of OMB approval, the Contractor shall recruit and train data collectors to implement the data collection approach described in the final study plan.

Data Collection The Contractor shall work with FNS to notify the FDPIR ITOs and State agencies about the purpose, methods, and schedule for the study. The notification process will follow the recommendations provided by FNS Tribal liaisons and Tribal leaders consulted in Task 3. The Contractor shall work with all ITO’s and State agencies implementing the FDPIR and self-determination demonstration projects to collect data in accordance with the final, approved study plan.