DTFH6116R00004_05.09.2016_complete.pdf

DTFH6116R00004

SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD

4. TYPE OF SOLICITATION2. CONTRACT NUMBER 3. SOLICITATION NUMBER

7. ISSUED BY CODE 8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If other than Item 7)

ORDER UNDER DPAS (15 CFR 700)

6. REQUISITION/PURCHASE NUMBER

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

NEGOTIATED (RFP)

SEALED BID (IFB)

5. DATE ISSUED

1. THIS CONTRACT IS A RATED RATING PAGE OF PAGES

1 80

C. E-MAIL ADDRESS

EXT.NUMBERAREA CODE

B. TELEPHONE (NO COLLECT CALLS)A. NAME

10. FOR

INFORMATION

CALL:

CAUTION: LATE Submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals: See Section L, Provision No. 52.214-7 or 52.215-1. All offers are subject to all terms and conditions contained in this solicitation.

(Date)(Hour) local timeuntildepository located in copies for furnishing the supplies or services in the Schedule will be received at the place specified in Item 8, or if hand carried, in the

SOLICITATION

9. Sealed offers in original and

PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

INSTRS., CONDS., AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

CONTRACT CLAUSES

PART III - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACH.

I

J

K

L

M SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

PACKAGING AND MARKING

DESCRIPTION/SPECS./WORK STATEMENT

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

PART II - CONTRACT CLAUSESPART I - THE SCHEDULE

H

G

F

E

D

C

B

A

SEC. DESCRIPTION PAGE(S) (X) DESCRIPTION SEC. (X)

11. TABLE OF CONTENTS

18. OFFER DATE17. SIGNATURE

SUCH ADDRESS IN SCHEDULE.

IS DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE - ENTER

15C. CHECK IF REMITTANCE ADDRESS

EXT.NUMBERAREA CODE

15B. TELEPHONE NUMBER

(Type or print)AND

ADDRESS

OF

OFFEROR

CODE FACILITY

16. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN OFFER15A. NAME

DATEAMENDMENT NO.DATEAMENDMENT NO.

and related documents numbered and dated):

amendments to the SOLICITATION for offerors

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of

14. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF AMENDMENTS

CALENDAR DAYS (%)30 CALENDAR DAYS (%)20 CALENDAR DAYS (%)10 CALENDAR DAYS (%)

(See Section I, Clause No. 52.232.8)

13. DISCOUNT FOR PROMPT PAYMENT

designated point(s), within the time specified in the schedule.

by the offeror) from the date for receipt of offers specified above, to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item, delivered at the

12. In compliance with the above, the undersigned agrees, if this offer is accepted within ______________ calendar days (60 calendar days unless a different period is inserted

NOTE: Item 12 does not apply if the solicitation includes the provisions at 52.214-16, Minimum Bid Acceptance Period.

OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror)

IMPORTANT - Award will be made on this Form, or on Standard Form 26, or by other authorized official written notice.

28. AWARD DATE

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

27. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

25. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY

26. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

CODE 24. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 7)

ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

23. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN

41 U.S.C. 253 (c) ( 10 U.S.C. 2304 (c) (

22. AUTHORITY FOR USING OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION:

21. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION20. AMOUNT19. ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS NUMBERED

AWARD (To be completed by government)

CODE

04/22/2016 HOIT212116126

X

HCFA

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

OFFICE OF ACQUISITION & GRANTS MGMT

1200 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, SE

Location: E62-204

WASHINGTON DC 20590

1600 ES 05/23/2016

Sarah H. Khan 202 Sarah.Khan@dot.gov

366-0220

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

PAGE(S)

Joseph A. Fusari

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION

Previous edition is unusable

STANDARD FORM 33 (Rev. 9-97)

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.214(c)

Sarah.Khan Typewritten Text FHWAContractingOperations@dot.gov

Sarah.Khan Typewritten Text Block 7 above

SECTION B - Supplies or Services/Prices

B. 1 ID/IQ MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM CONTRACT AMOUNTS

During the term of the contract, the Government shall place orders totaling a minimum of $2,000,000. The maximum amount of all task orders issued against all contracts awarded as a result of this acquisition shall not exceed a ceiling of $10,750,000.

The task orders placed under the contract will be Firm-Fixed Price (FFP), Time-and-Materials (T&M), or a hybrid of the two types based on a determination by the Contracting Officer (CO) at the task order level.

B. 2 SCHEDULE OF RATES

Labor skill sets and rate ceilings governing this contract shall conform to the descriptions found in Attachment No. J.2 and shall be listed in the Microsoft Excel format found at Attachment No.

J.3 and apply for each of the described categories for each of the contract year(s). The unit of issue (rates) is the fully burdened fixed price hourly rate. Please see 52.216-29(c)(2).

The maximum amount of the contract listed in Section B.1 includes travel and materials. Travel and materials will be reimbursed at cost. Inclusion of indirect burden amounts or fee on material costs, including travel expenses, is not allowable.

SECTION C - Description/Specifications

C.1 BACKGROUND

The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) connected vehicle research program is a multimodal initiative that aims to enable safe, interoperable networked wireless communications among vehicles, the infrastructure, and travelers' personal communications devices. Connected vehicle research is being sponsored by the USDOT and others to leverage the potentially transformative capabilities of wireless technology to make surface transportation safer, smarter, and greener. Concurrent federal research efforts have developed critical cross-cutting technologies and other enabling capabilities required to integrate and deploy applications. Descriptions of the relevant research products, developed by the component connected vehicle research programs, can be found at www.its.dot.gov/pilots. These programs seek to identify, develop, and deploy applications that leverage the full potential of trusted communications among connected vehicles, travelers, and infrastructure to better inform travelers, enhance current operational practices, and transform surface transportation systems management.

In 2012-2013, the connected vehicle research program conducted the Safety Pilot Model Deployment in Ann Arbor, Michigan to assess the potential of vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) (and other) safety applications to reduce crashes and improve roadway system safety. On 14 September 2015, the Connected Vehicle Pilots (CV Pilots) Deployment Program initiated the pilot deployments of connected vehicle applications that synergistically capture and utilize new forms of connected vehicle, mobile device, and infrastructure data to improve multimodal surface transportation system performance and enable enhanced performance-based systems management. The focus for improved performance is not only in the area of safety but also in the areas of mobility, environment, and public agency efficiency.

The three selected sites (ICF/Wyoming, New York City DOT, and Tampa Hillsborough Expressway Authority (THEA)) are in the Concept Development Phase (Phase 1). Upon successful completion of the Concept Development Phase, USDOT anticipates issuance of site-specific Cooperative Agreement covering the second and third phases of the effort, namely a Design/Build/Test (Phase 2) and Maintain/Operate Phase (Phase 3). The life cycle of Connected Vehicle Pilot Deployment is illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1. The Three Phases of a Connected Vehicle Pilot Deployment

The CV Pilots Program seeks to spur innovation among early adopters of connected vehicle http://www.its.dot.gov/pilots application concepts. The pilot deployments are expected to integrate connected vehicle research concepts into practical and effective elements, enhancing existing operational capabilities. The pilot deployments are expected to include site-tailored collections of applications that address specific local needs while laying a foundation for additional local/regional deployment, and provide transferable lessons learned for other prospective deployers across the nation. The intent of these pilot deployments is to encourage partnerships of multiple stakeholders (e.g., private companies, state and local agencies, transit agencies, commercial vehicle operators, and freight shippers) to deploy applications utilizing data captured from multiple sources (e.g. vehicles, mobile devices, and infrastructure) across all elements of the surface transportation system (i.e., transit, freeway, arterial, parking facilities, and tolled roadways). The sites are expected to demonstrate improved performance in one or more of the following areas: improved safety, mobility, or public agency efficiency; or reduced negative environmental impact. Pilot deployers are expected to identify a set of key quantitative performance measures and develop a deployed system that supports continuous monitoring of observed data capable of quantifying these measures. Pilot deployments are expected to become part of a permanent connected vehicle capability that is fully integrated into routine operational practice in the pilot site – and create a foundation for expanded and enhanced deployments. Pilot deployers are expected to identify and implement institutional and financial models that will enable long-term sustainment of successful elements of their deployments without dedicated federal funding. Ultimately, this program will improve traveler mobility and system productivity while reducing environmental impacts and enhancing safety. Finally, pilot deployment sites are also expected to support an independent evaluation effort, which is described in this work statement.

C. 2 CONTRACT SCOPE

The overall purpose of the CV Pilot Deployment Sites evaluation is to:

(1) Inform prospective deployers of CV-enabled applications of likely Safety, Mobility, Environmental, and Public agency efficiency (SMEP) impacts; quantify costs; and identify practical institutional and financial models for long-term deployment.

(2) Inform the USDOT on the effectiveness of the CV Pilots Program in creating proven and transferable deployment concepts demonstrating measureable short-term SMEP impacts and longer-term transformational changes, overcoming deployment challenges, documenting lessons learned, and accelerating deployment of successful and sustainable connected vehicle applications.

C. 3 OBJECTIVE

The objective of this contract is to support the Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office (ITS-JPO) and its partner agencies on a task order basis to:

(1) Conduct comprehensive assessment of SMEP impacts of individual CV Pilot Deployment sites;

(2) Conduct national-level evaluation of CV Pilots Deployments;

(3) Evaluate the CV Pilots Deployment Program; and

(4) Support evaluation of other deployment programs, including the Beyond Traffic: The

Smart City Challenge and the Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management

Technologies Deployment Initiative included in the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act; apply quantitative and qualitative evaluation methodologies to conduct cost-benefit assessments of these deployment programs; assess user acceptance/satisfaction of deployment programs; document lessons learned, challenges and approaches for overcoming them; develop guidance document on evaluation;

estimate total impacts, costs, and Return On Investment (ROI) of the deployment programs; and assess if the deployment programs achieved their vision cost-effectively.

C.4 DETAILED REQUIREMENT

Specific work to be performed will be set forth under individual task orders. Task orders under this IDIQ contract will be determined and issued on an as needed basis by the FHWA and will generally consist of work in the areas outlined below. When ordered, the Contractor shall provide the necessary personnel, material, equipment, services and facilities to perform the requirements.

The following descriptions define the broad work areas anticipated in the contract and describe the associated qualifications required. Although some work areas reflect areas of continuing activity, many are short term and will change with the activity on the ITS program.

C.4.1 Task Area A – Task Portfolio Management

The Contractor shall effectively manage the set of task orders issued to the Contractor under this contract. The Contractor’s teams working on Task Areas B-F shall coordinate amongst themselves to ensure that there is cross-pollination of information, results, and lessons learned across the five task areas. The specific coordination activities are identified in the descriptions for each task area.

This Task Area A is intended to provide a specific work area for overarching Project Management activities that cross numerous or all task orders and cannot be directly attributed to one task order. Under this Task Area, the Contractor shall:

• Establish and operate a system of contract administration and management that is adequate for supporting the execution and performance of the contract and each task order subsequently issued by the Government. Examples of such activities include:

o Attend administrative meeting(s) requested by the Government, including kick-off meeting(s) and progress meetings;

o Refine and implement a task order process and procedure;

o Negotiate and award subcontracts;

o Coordinate and negotiate work by others such as partners in the task;

o Inform the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) as soon as possible of any problems encountered or anticipated that might affect successful completion of a deliverable or task order;

o Deliver monthly progress reports as described in Section C.5;

o Deliver other program status reports and briefings, as required; and o Ensure that necessary facilities, equipment, and management tools needed to carry out the contract and task orders are on-hand.

• Develop, maintain and conduct Institutional Review Board (IRB) and Safety Reviews for all awarded task orders for use of humans by the Contractor.

The deliverables from this task area may include, but are not limited to, monthly status reports, quarterly status briefings on tasks, meeting reports, IRB and Safety Review summaries, and liaison activities as directed by the COR.

C.4.2 Task Area B – CV Pilot Deployment Sites Safety, Mobility, Environmental and Public Agency Efficiency (SMEP) Evaluations

The objectives of this Task Area are to conduct comprehensive assessment of SMEP impacts of individual CV Pilot Deployment sites; incorporate results from site-specific safety evaluations to be conducted by Volpe into the overall site-specific safety, mobility, environmental, and public agency (SMEP) cost-benefit analysis; assess user acceptance/satisfaction of CV Pilot Deployment sites; and document lessons learned from each pilot deployment.

In this Task Area, the Contractor shall conduct site-specific SMEP cost-benefit evaluation against a no-pilot baseline using safety cost-benefit estimates from Volpe and SMEP cost-benefit estimates that the Contractor determines for the site. For this, the Contractor shall execute against government-furnished evaluation design plan for site-specific independent evaluations of the SMEP impacts of CV Pilot Deployments. NOTE: The deployed Pilot Site System will generate data suitable for many but not all needed evaluation efforts. In this Task Area, the Contractor shall deploy supporting technologies, as required, or conduct additional experiments (e.g., simulator or test track) to collect or generate data above and beyond data from the Pilot System to conduct needed safety, mobility, and environmental evaluations.

General activities for each site under this Task Area may include, but are not limited to:

i. Refining the government-furnished evaluation design plan for SMEP impacts

ii. Analyzing Site-provided data and performance measures estimates

iii. Deploying, maintaining and removing ancillary data collection technologies/applications in mobile devices, vehicles or the infrastructure

iv. Conducting field data collection experiments, per government-furnished protocols, if data provided by sites is not sufficient for SMEP and safety evaluations

v. Performing data Quality Assurance/ Quality Control (QA/QC) of collected data

vi. Conducting data fusion, aggregation, storage and management of Site-provided data and collected data

vii. Developing and/or refining innovative methodologies and tools for conducting site-specific evaluations

viii. Building and calibrating supporting analysis, modeling, and simulation (AMS) models

ix. Analyzing field data and outputs from analytical tools and AMS models

x. Monetizing SMEP impacts

xi. Gathering costs data and conducting cost analyses

xii. Designing or refining government-furnished surveys/interview questions to gather feedback from site-specific decision makers, pilot deployment managers, operators, and partner agencies to determine if the site pilot deployment was able to achieve the vision/goals/SMEP impacts that were laid out at the onset of the deployment, technical challenges and adopted solutions; conducting surveys and interviews; and analyzing findings

xiii. Designing or refining government-furnished survey/interview questions to gather user acceptance/ satisfaction of the site pilot deployment; conducting surveys and interviews;

and analyzing findings

xiv. Conducting site-specific SMEP cost-benefit evaluation against a no-pilot baseline using safety cost-benefit estimates from Volpe and SMEP cost-benefit estimates from items x and xi:

a. for current time and projected over time; and

b. at current scale and in a larger deployment at the site.

xv. Identifying and documenting technical deployment challenges and solutions; best practices; and lessons learned for the site

xvi. Coordinating frequently with the Site Pilot Deployer, Site Safety Evaluation Designer and Evaluator (Volpe), Survey Instrument Designer (Volpe), Independent Evaluator’s Site Financial and Institutional Evaluation team (see Task Area C), Independent Evaluator’s National-Level Evaluation team (see Task Area D), Independent Evaluator’s Program Evaluation team (see Task Area E), the USDOT, and the SMEP Evaluation Designer working at USDOT direction

xvii. Conducting stakeholder engagement and outreach activities; and collecting and analyzing stakeholder feedback

xviii. Developing briefings, papers, articles, publications, brochures, electronic media such as computer usable products, videos, etc., that deliver findings from the site evaluation

NOTE: For items xii and xiii, the government may provide either: (1) a detailed description of the needed survey OR (2) a preliminary approach and design of the survey. If a preliminary approach and design are provide, the Contractor may be asked to refine the approach and survey.

However, if only a detailed description is provided, the Contractor shall develop the approach and design the survey.

C.4.3 Task Area C – CV Pilot Deployment Sites Financial and Institutional Assessments

The objectives of this Task Area are to assess efficacy of deployed institutional and financial frameworks and models for each site; assess user acceptance/satisfaction of deployed financial models; and document lessons learned from each pilot deployment.

The Contractor shall assess the effectiveness of financial and institutional models deployed at sites.

General activities for each site under this Task Area may include, but are not limited to:

i. Designing or refining government-furnished surveys/interview questions to gather feedback on strengths and limitations of deployed financial and institutional models from site-specific decision makers, pilot deployment managers, operators, and partner agencies; conducting surveys and interviews; and analyzing findings

ii. Designing or refining government-furnished surveys/interview questions to assess site-specific traveling public and other stakeholders’ acceptance/satisfaction of deployed financial models; conducting surveys and interviews; and analyzing findings

iii. Utilizing analytical techniques (e.g., Organizational Network Analysis (ONA)) and quantitative methods to assess the efficacy of institutional and financial models deployed at the site; evaluating the change from a no-pilot baseline case, and inferring long-term impacts of the deployed institutional and financial models

iv. Determining whether a Pilot’s approach will result in financial sustainability without additional federal funds

v. Identifying and documenting institutional and financial deployment challenges and solutions; best practices; and lessons learned for the site

vi. Coordinating frequently with the Site Pilot Deployer, Independent Evaluator’s Site SMEP Evaluation team (see Task Area B), Site Safety Evaluation Designer and Evaluator (Volpe), Survey Instrument Designer (Volpe), Independent Evaluator’s National-Level Evaluation team (see Task Area D), Independent Evaluator’s Program Evaluation team (see Task Area E), the USDOT, and the MEP Evaluation Designer working at USDOT direction

vii. Conducting stakeholder engagement and outreach activities; and collecting and analyzing stakeholder feedback

viii. Developing briefings, papers, articles, publications, brochures, electronic media such as

NOTE: For items i and ii, the government may provide either: (1) a detailed description of the needed survey OR (2) a preliminary approach and design of the survey. If a preliminary approach and design are provide, the Contractor may be asked to refine the approach and survey.

However, if only a detailed description is provided, the Contractor shall develop the approach and design the survey.

C.4.4 Task Area D – CV Pilot Deployment National-Level Evaluation

The objectives of this Task Area are to conduct national-level evaluation of CV Pilots Deployments; calculate national-level short-term and long-term MEP impacts of CV-enabled applications; incorporate results from the national-level safety evaluation to be conducted by Volpe into the overall national-level SMEP impacts assessment of CV-enabled applications;

infer practical institutional and financial frameworks and models for short-term and long-term deployment; and document lessons learned, challenges and approaches for overcoming them, and approaches for accelerating deployment of connected vehicle applications.

The Contractor shall conduct a national-level evaluation of CV Pilot Deployments. The Contractor shall infer SMEP cost-benefit assessment of national-level deployment from sites-specific short-term and long-term SMEP cost-benefit assessments. The Contractor shall infer practical institutional and financial models for short-term and long-term deployment of CV-enabled applications across the nation.

General activities for each site under this Task Area may include, but are not limited to:

i. Designing of technical approach for national-level SMEP evaluations, and incorporating national-level safety evaluation results to be conducted by Volpe

ii. Developing and/or refining innovative framework, methodologies and tools for conducting national-level evaluation

iii. Building supporting analytical models

iv. Analyzing site-specific SMEP evaluations and outputs from analytical models

v. Analyzing national-level safety evaluations from Volpe

vi. Assessing effectiveness of financial and institutional models across all pilot deployment sites

vii. Conducting national-level evaluation of CV Pilot Deployments against a no-pilot baseline

a. for current time and projected over time; and

b. extrapolated from sites to national level.

viii. Synthesizing findings, challenges and solutions; best practices and lessons learned across all sites to describe potential of the CV technologies and applications in the short, medium and long-term; and recommending approaches for accelerating deployment

ix. Coordinating frequently with the Site Pilot Deployers, Independent Evaluator’s Site SMEP Evaluation team (see Task Area B), Site Safety Evaluation Designer and Evaluator (Volpe), Survey Instrument Designer (Volpe), Independent Evaluator’s Site Financial and Institutional Evaluation team (see Task Area C), Independent Evaluator’s National-Level Evaluation team (see Task Area D), Independent Evaluator’s Program Evaluation team (see Task Area E), the USDOT, and the MEP Evaluation Designer working at USDOT direction

x. Conducting stakeholder engagement and outreach activities; and collecting and analyzing stakeholder feedback

xi. Developing briefings, papers, articles, publications, brochures, electronic media such as

C.4.5 Task Area E –CV Pilots Program Evaluation

The objectives of this Task Area are to evaluate the CV Pilots Deployment Program; assess whether performance-management focus of pilot deployments was beneficial; estimate the total impacts, costs, and ROI of the CV Pilots Program; and assess if the CV Pilots Program achieved its vision cost-effectively.

The Contractor shall evaluate the CV Pilots Deployment Program. The Contractor shall assess whether performance-management focus of pilot deployments was beneficial and if the CV Pilots Program was able to achieve its vision cost-effectively.

General activities for each site under this Task Area may include, but not be limited to:

i. Designing program evaluation plan

ii. Analyzing site-specific SMEP evaluations, site-specific institutional and financial model evaluations, and national-level evaluations

iii. Estimating total impacts, Discounted Net Present Value, and ROI of the program versus a no-pilot program case

iv. Assessing ONA across all sites

v. Designing or refining government-furnished surveys/interview questions to gather feedback on the CV Pilots Program, its vision, outputs, and outcomes from the CV Pilots Program Manager, CV Pilots USDOT Team, Site Deployers, Safety Evaluator (Volpe), Independent Evaluator’s teams engaged in SMEP evaluations, Financial and Institutional evaluations, and National-Level evaluations, and other stakeholders; conducting surveys and interviews; and analyzing findings

vi. Synthesizing total impact; Discounted Net Present Value; ROI; challenges and solutions;

best practices; and lessons learned

vii. Coordinating frequently with the Site Pilot Deployers, Independent Evaluator’s Site SMEP Evaluation team (see Task Area B), Site Safety Evaluation Designer and Evaluator (Volpe), Survey Instrument Designer (Volpe), Independent Evaluator’s Site Financial and Institutional Evaluation team (see Task Area C), Independent Evaluator’s National-Level Evaluation team (see Task Area D), the USDOT, and the MEP Evaluation Designer working at USDOT direction

viii. Conducting stakeholder engagement and outreach activities; and collecting and analyzing stakeholder feedback

ix. Developing briefings, papers, articles, publications, brochures, electronic media such as computer usable products, videos, etc. that deliver findings from the site evaluation

NOTE: For item v, the government may provide either: (1) a detailed description of the needed survey OR (2) a preliminary approach and design of the survey. If a preliminary approach and design are provided, the Contractor may be asked to refine the approach and survey. However, if only a detailed description is provided, the Contractor shall develop the approach and design the survey.

C.4.6 Task Area F – Integration with and Support of other Deployment Programs

The objectives of this Task Area are to support evaluation of other deployment programs, including the Beyond Traffic: The Smart City Challenge and the Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment Initiative included in the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act; apply quantitative and qualitative evaluation methodologies to conduct cost-benefit assessments of these deployment programs; assess user acceptance/satisfaction of deployment programs; document lessons learned, challenges and approaches for overcoming them; develop guidance document on evaluation; estimate total impacts, costs, and ROI of the deployment programs; and assess if the deployment programs achieved their vision cost-effectively.

The Contractor shall refine and apply quantitative and qualitative evaluation methodologies developed to evaluate CV Pilots Deployments in Task Areas B-E, to conduct an evaluation of other deployment programs, including the Beyond Traffic: The Smart City Challenge and the Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment Initiative.

Beyond Traffic: The Smart City Challenge: This effort is concentrating federal resources into one medium-sized city, selected through a nationwide competition. The vision of the Smart City Challenge is to demonstrate and evaluate a holistic, integrated approach to improving surface transportation performance within a city and integrate this approach with other smart city domains such as public safety, public services, and energy. A Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) was issued by the USDOT on 7 December 2015 that encourages cities to put forward their best and most creative ideas for innovatively addressing the challenges they are facing.

The USDOT will commit significant financial resources for one medium-sized city that can demonstrate how advanced data and ITS technologies and applications can be used to reduce congestion, keep travelers safe, protect the environment, respond to climate change, connect underserved communities, and support economic vitality. The Smart City Challenge includes two solicitations. Under the first solicitation, the USDOT is requesting applications for assistance to result in awards to selected “Smart City Finalists.” The USDOT estimates selection of an estimated five Finalists to receive fixed priced cooperative agreement awards of Federal funding in the amount of $100,000 each. Under the second follow-on solicitation, the USDOT intends to solicit applications for assistance to result in one award of up to $50 Million (over a four year period) to provide funding support for the implementation of a Smart City Demonstration.

NOTE: The Smart City Demonstration site will be responsible for identifying a set of targeted performance measures that relate to the primary impact of their proposed deployment. The system deployed must be capable of generating the data needed to calculate these measures over time – that is, to show how well the system is performing with respect to these target measures.

Independent evaluation will also be required to validate site system performance with respect to the targeted measures, to collect or infer contextual data that allows for the isolation and mitigation of confounding factors, and to provide supplementary evaluation with respect to a broader set of safety, environmental, mobility and public agency efficiency measures of interest to USDOT. The site will be responsible for supporting the independent evaluator’s access to the site and to site staff to conduct evaluation-related experiments, interviews, and surveys.

Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment Initiative (included in the FAST Act): This initiative allows for the Secretary of the USDOT to provide grants to eligible entities to develop model deployment sites for large scale installation and operation of advanced transportation technologies to improve safety, efficiency, system performance, and infrastructure ROI. Grant recipients may use funds to deploy advanced transportation and congestion management technologies, including advanced traveler information systems; advanced transportation management technologies; infrastructure maintenance, monitoring, and condition assessment; advanced public transportation systems;

transportation system performance data collection, analysis, and dissemination systems;

advanced safety systems, including vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communications, technologies associated with autonomous vehicles, and other collision avoidance technologies, including systems using cellular technology; integration of intelligent transportation systems with the Smart Grid and advanced mobility and access technologies, such as dynamic ridesharing other energy distribution and charging systems; electronic pricing and payment systems; or and information systems to support human services for elderly and disabled individuals.

For each entity that receives a grant for the Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment Initiative, not later than 1 year after the entity receives the grant, and each year thereafter, the entity shall submit a report to the Secretary that describes:

(i) Deployment and operational costs of the project compared to the benefits and savings the project provides; and (ii) How the project has met the original expectations projected in the deployment plan submitted with the application. Not later than 3 years after the date that the first grant is awarded, and each year thereafter, USDOT will make available to the public on an Internet website a report that describes the effectiveness of grant recipients in meeting their projected deployment plans, including data on how the program has reduced traffic-related fatalities and injuries; reduced traffic congestion and improved travel time reliability; reduced transportation-related emissions; optimized multimodal system performance; improved access to transportation alternatives; provided the public with access to real-time integrated traffic, transit, and multimodal transportation information to make informed travel decisions; provided cost savings to transportation agencies, businesses, and the traveling public; or provided other benefits to transportation users and the general public.

The Contractor shall provide the USDOT with data and information used to support the development of reports that describe the effectiveness of the Beyond Traffic: The Smart City Challenge effort and the Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment Initiative.

General activities under this Task Area may include, but not be limited to:

i. Designing evaluation design plans, building on lessons learned from Tasks B-E

ii. Analyzing deployment program-provided data and performance measures estimates

iii. Deploying, maintaining and removing ancillary data collection technologies/applications, as needed

iv. Conducting field data collection experiments, if data provided by deployment programs are not sufficient for independent evaluations

v. Performing data Quality Assurance/ Quality Control (QA/QC) of collected data

vi. Conducting data fusion, aggregation, storage and management of data for the purpose of evaluation

vii. Refining and applying methodologies and tools identified in Task Areas B-E (as applicable) to evaluate and understand potential impacts of the deployments. Impact assessments will be used to understand:

a. Deployment and operational costs of the project compared to the benefits and savings the project provides

b. How the demonstration project met the original expectations projected in the deployment plan submitted with the site’s application, including data to support:

i. How the project helped reduce congestion, keep travelers safe, protect the environment, respond to climate change, connect underserved communities, reduce costs, and support economic vitality.

ii. The effect of measuring and improving transportation system performance through the deployment of advanced technologies;

iii. The effectiveness of providing real-time integrated traffic, transit, and multimodal transportation information to the public to make informed travel decisions; and

iv. Lessons learned and recommendations for future deployment strategies to optimize transportation efficiency and multimodal system performance.

viii. Developing guidance document on evaluation, including data collection, and evaluation methodologies.

C.5 PROGRESS REPORTS

The Contractor shall submit a monthly progress report by the 5th of the month following the reporting period. The report shall provide at a minimum the following:

(a) Clear and complete account of the work performed under each task order during the reporting period.

(b) An outline of the work to be accomplished during the next reporting period.

(c) A description of any problem encountered or anticipated that will affect the completion of any individual task order within the time and fiscal constraints as set forth in the task orders, together with recommended solutions to such problems; or, a statement that no problems were encountered.

(d) A tabulation of the planned, actual and cumulative person-hours expended by the personnel identified in each task order (applies to Time & Material task orders only).

(e) A chart showing current and cumulative expenditures versus planned expenditures for each task order (applies to Time & Material task orders only).

(f) Deliverables submitted, date due, and date submitted.

(g) Risk Monitoring/Risk Register – the Contractor shall document risks that might affect the project and the characteristics of the risk defined by the ITS JPO. The COR will provide a Microsoft Excel-based Risk Register template for the Contractor to populate and update as necessary. Each risk shall have a unique number, probability of occurrence and impact of occurrence rating. The risk log shall be updated monthly and submitted with monthly progress reports.

(h) Project Schedule – (task order specific) The Contractor shall submit, to the Government, an initial project schedule in Microsoft Project format within sixty (60) days after the effective date of the contract and updates showing the percent complete of major deliverables every thirty (30) days thereafter. The schedule shall include at a minimum, the major deliverables and milestones and adhere to the Microsoft Project template structure provided by the COR.

Any changes to due dates after the initial project schedule baseline must be approved by the Government. The Contractor shall support the identification of schedule dependencies related to the project and in accordance with the Government defined process.

The Contractor shall furnish an electronic copy of the monthly progress report to the CO and

COR.

A separate monthly progress report shall be sent via e-mail to each Government Task Manager (GTM) covering the task order(s) under their purview. In addition, the corresponding invoice (covering the same period as the Monthly Progress Report) shall be provided to the GTM at the same time that the Monthly Progress Report is delivered and not before that time.

C.6 MINIMUM STANDARDS AND CAPABILITY

The Contractor shall be capable of performing the following:

1. Responding to a minimum of 100% of all Task Order Procurement Requests (TOPRs);

2. Providing technical support on a short notice (within 3 days) for sensitive timelines; and,

3. Providing technical support for all task areas as described above.

C.7 ANNUAL REPORT

The contractor shall furnish 1 electronic copy (in Microsoft Office 2010 or equivalent) of a letter-type annual report to the Contracting Officer (CO) and to the COR on or before 30 calendar days before the end of each contract year. The annual report shall contain the following:

(a) A brief narrative commenting on performance during the reporting period for each of the following areas:

(1) Quality of Product/Service

(2) Schedule

(3) Cost Control

(4) Business Relations

(5) Management of Key Personnel

(6) Utilization of Small Businesses

(7) Other

The annual report will be used by the COR as part of the annual performance review.

SECTION D - Packaging and Marking

D.1 PACKAGING

Preservation, packing, and packaging of items for shipment shall be in accordance with best commercial practices and adequate for acceptance by common carrier for safe transportation at the most economical rates.

The contractor shall clearly mark each shipment with the company name, the contract number, task order number (if applicable), and as appropriate the item identification, quantity of items, and notice of partial or final delivery.

Ship to: Federal Highway Administration

Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590

Marked for: COR

SECTION E - Inspection and Acceptance

E.1 ACCEPTANCE

All work hereunder shall be subject to review by the Government. The COR specified in the COR appointment letter(s) is responsible for inspection and acceptance of all incoming shipments, documents, and services.

E. 2 GOVERNMENT ACCEPTANCE PERIOD

Unless stated elsewhere in each task order, the COR will have 30 calendar days to review draft deliverables and make comments. The Contractor shall have five workdays to make corrections and return the corrected deliverable to the Government.

Upon receipt of the final deliverables, the COR will have 10 workdays for final review prior to acceptance or providing documented reasons for non-acceptance. Upon receipt of the final deliverables, the COR will have 30 calendar days for final review prior to acceptance or to provide documented reasons for non-acceptance to the Contractor.

52.246-4 INSPECTION OF SERVICES - FIXED-PRICE. (AUG 1996)

52.246-6 INSPECTION - TIME-AND-MATERIAL AND LABOR-HOUR. (MAY 2001)

SECTION F - Deliveries or Performance

F. 1 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

The period of performance under this contract is five years, beginning on the effective date of the contract. In no event shall the total contract performance period exceed five years without written authorization from the CO.

F. 2 PLACE OF DELIVERY

The Contractor shall submit interim and final deliverables concurrently to the COR, the Government Task Manager (GTM) (if applicable) and to ITSProjects@dot.gov once these deliverables have been accepted by the Government. The Contractor shall include the contract number (and task order number if appropriate) in the email for each deliverable. The Government may request the Contractor to include specified keywords in the subject line of emails containing deliverables. Additionally, the Government may request the Contractor to submit deliverables to an electronic repository as specified by the COR.

The annual and monthly progress reports shall be delivered to COR, Contract Specialist (CS), and applicable GTM.

F. 3 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE (TASK ORDER SPECIFIC)

The location of work performed under this contract will be specified in each task order. It is expected that nearly all work will be performed at the Contractor’s facility or their provided work space/office space.

F. 4 DELIVERABLE/DELIVERY SUMMARY (IDIQ)

For task order issued under this contract, specific deliverables and due dates will be specified in the task order documents. Below is a general guide for the anticipated deliverables.

Deliverable Frequency Number of

Copies Medium/Format Submit

To Progress Reports Section C.5

Monthly, submitted by the 5th of the month following the reporting reported.

One (1) electronic copy

Electronic copy in either MS Word or Adobe Acrobat formats.

COR,

CS, and

GTM

Annual Reports Section C.7

Annually, on or before 30 calendar days before the end of each contract year.

One (1) electronic copy

Electronic copy in either MS Word or Adobe Acrobat formats.

COR,

CS, and

GTM

F.5 TASK ORDER DELIVERABLES

Task orders will identify specific deliverables and performance standards required in the performance of each order.

F.6 EDITORIAL REQUIREMENT FOR ALL DELIVERABLES

All drafts submissions and the final must be reviewed by an editor on the Contractor’s staff before being sent to the COR for review. This is not a technical editor, but someone familiar with the Government Printing Office (GPO) Style Manual to eliminate redundancy and ensure that proper grammar and punctuation, as well as flow, is incorporated into any product before submission. The FHWA must share documents for review with technical experts, as such, the product—draft as well as final—is a representation of FHWA and the Contractor. Submissions with grammatical errors will be returned to the Contractor. Submission of draft or final documents that fail Government review will not be accepted as meeting the deliverable requirements of the task order.

F.7 MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR MATERIALS TO BE POSTED ON FHWA

WEBSITES

All web-based deliverables shall conform to the Minimum Requirements for FHWA Web Pages and be compatible with the current FHWA web platform of Adobe ColdFusion (version 10 compatible) and Microsoft SQL (server 2012 or higher compatible). Deliverables will be evaluated for Section 508 compliance, including graceful degradation when JavaScript is disabled and color contrast tests. Deliverables shall meet W3C coding standards (http://www.w3.org/), FHWA coding standards, and conform to DOT Secure Web Application standards to prevent cross-site scripting (XSS) and SQL Injection.

F.8 CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.242-15 STOP-WORK ORDER. (AUG 1989)

52.242-17 GOVERNMENT DELAY OF WORK. (APR 1984)

52.247-34 F.O.B. DESTINATION. (NOV 1991)

SECTION G - Contract Administration Data

G. 1 PAYMENT

For each Firm Fixed Price (FFP) task order, the Government shall pay the Contractor for the prices delineated in each task order. Payment shall be made upon review and written acceptance of the FFP deliverable(s) by the Government.

For each Time & Material (T&M) task order, the Contractor may request payment no more than monthly, for work performed during the preceding reporting period. The Contractor shall provide sufficient detail, including fully burdened labor rates and hours worked, to support the invoice.

The Contractor shall not accrue costs in excess of the amount funded under a T&M task order.

Any work performed in excess of the amount funded is at the Contractor’s own risk.

NOTE: For each T&M task order, allowable materials costs, including travel expenses shall be reimbursed at cost. Inclusion of indirect burden amounts or fee on material costs, including travel expenses, is not allowable.

G.2 NOTIFICATION OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS

The Contractor shall notify the CS and COR in writing, within 5 calendar days, when costs incurred reach 75% of the obligated funds.

G. 3 TRAVEL AND PER DIEM

Travel (other than local) may be expected to occur throughout the duration of the contract. The COR will issue the written request for travel if required (excluding local travel).

The Contractor shall invoice in accordance with FAR 31.205-46, Travel Costs, and Federal Travel Regulations, and must submit documentation of all travel costs.

Travel requirements under this contract shall be met using the most economical form of transportation available. All travel shall be scheduled sufficiently in advance to take advantage of offered discount rates, unless authorized by the CO.

The following web site provides information on current Per Diem rates:

http://www.gsa.gov/portal/category/100120 https://aoprals.state.gov/web920/per_diem.asp http://www.gsa.gov/portal/category/100120 https://aoprals.state.gov/web920/per_diem.asp

G. 4 SUBCONTRACTS – ADVANCE NOTIFICATION AND CONSENT

Under this contract, the requirement of FAR 44.2, Consent to Subcontracts, has been fulfilled for the following subcontracts:

(a) [APPROVED SUBCONTRACTOR NAME]

Any future change or revision to the Statement of Work or other applicable aspects of this contract shall include the subcontract(s) only to the extent that performance of the subcontract(s) is directly affected by the change or revision.

G. 5 INVOICES

All invoices shall not be sent prior to acceptance of the deliverable or monthly progress report for services being billed.

Submit all invoices and required supporting documents shall be sent via e-mail to the following e-mail addresses: 9-AMC-AMZ-FHWA-Invoices@faa.gov, ITSProjects@dot.gov, and other recipient(s) (if applicable) as directed by the COR.

(a) Include the invoice as an attached PDF document

(b) Include in the e-mail subject line the following:

(1) Invoice No.

(2) Contract Number/Task Order Number

(3) Name of your Company/Organization

(4) Attention: Contract Specialist

Example: Invoice No. 35 – DTFH6116D00033 – Contractor Name – Attention: CS

If the invoice and supporting documents exceed 8 MB as an e-mail attachment, the Contractor must select one of the other submission options presented below:

Invoices submitted via an overnight service must use the following physical address:

MMAC

FHWA/AMZ-150

6500 S. MacArthur Blvd Oklahoma City, OK 73169 Attention: CS Express Delivery Point of Contact: Accounting Technician mailto:9-AMC-AMZ-FHWA-Invoices@faa.gov mailto:ITSProjects@dot.gov

Invoices may be submitted via regular U.S. Postal Service to the following address:

Federal Highway Administration Markview Processing P.O. Box 268865 Oklahoma City OK 73126-8865 Attention: CS

An invoice submitted to an address other than those identified will be returned to the vendor as non-conforming.

An electronic copy of the invoice shall be sent by email to the CO and the COR.

G. 6 TECHNICAL DIRECTION

Performance of the work under this contract is subject to the Technical Direction of the COR.

The term “Technical Direction” is defined to include, without limitation, the following:

(a) Direction to the Contractor which redirects the efforts, shifts work emphasis between work areas, requires pursuit of certain lines of inquiry, fills in details or otherwise serves to accomplish the statement of work;

(b) Provision of information to the Contractor that assists in the interpretation of drawings, specifications or technical portions of the work description; and,

(c) Review and approval/rejection of technical reports, drawings, specifications and technical information to be delivered by the Contractor.

All Technical Direction must be within the general scope of work stated in the contract. The COR does not have the authority to and may not issue any Technical Direction that:

(a) constitutes an assignment of additional work outside the general scope of the base contract;

(b) constitutes a change as defined in the base contract clause entitled “Changes”;

(c) in any manner causes an increase or decrease in prices set forth in…