Draft PWS.docx

ATTACHMENT A

DRAFT PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS(NAEP)

2013-2017

ED-IES-12-R-0021

March 23, 2012

Procurement Overview The U.S. Department of Education intends to enter into 5-year contracts with qualified entities to establish an Alliance/team of contractors to carry out the design, item development, sampling, materials preparation and distribution, data collection, scoring, analysis, and reporting of one of its flagship programs, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). NAEP is approaching its 45th anniversary as a mature program in a rapidly changing environment. It is incumbent on the program to maintain its historical role of reporting educational progress while at the same time accommodating and taking advantage of unprecedented changes in education, in education assessment, and in the learning sciences, as well as rapid advances in technology.

There are numerous environmental factors that will influence NAEP during this period, many of which will be referenced throughout this Performance Work Statement (PWS). Examples include:

transition from a paper-and-pencil to technology-based assessment, the emerging interest in international comparisons for states and districts, advances in test development and new item types, development of measures of preparedness for post-secondary education and work, adoption of common content standards by most states that may or may not align with NAEP content frameworks, development of two separate common state-developed assessments based on the common core standards, inclusion of more contextual information in reports, growth of virtual schools and out-of-school and technology-based learning by students, and budget reductions throughout the education and assessment enterprises.

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) envisions this procurement period both as vital to maintaining a quality assessment and as a transition to the future. There will have to be balance between the requirements specified herein and the on-going planning for the future of NAEP. NCES has undertaken several ongoing activities to develop a vision for NAEP 2020 and beyond; those activities are documented at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/future.

Purpose of NAEP The purpose of NAEP is to provide periodic, fair and accurate measurement of educational achievement in reading, mathematics, science and writing – the core assessments – as well as other content areas including United States history, geography, civics, economics, foreign languages, technology and engineering literacy, and the arts. The assessment results are representative of the nation, regions of the country, and where appropriate, states and selected urban districts at grades 4, 8 and 12. NAEP also reports on national long term trend assessments in reading and mathematics for students at ages 9, 13, and 17 in order to measure educational progress since the 1970’s.

Legislative Authority for NAEP The Amendment to the National Education Statistics Act of 1994 in the No Child Left Behind legislation of 2001 included the following provisions:

Assessments in reading and mathematics at 4th and 8th grades every other year and 12th grade assessments in reading and mathematics administered at least every four years.

States and school districts receiving Title I funds are required to participate in the 4th and 8th grade reading and mathematics assessments.

The National Assessment of Educational Progress Improvement Act, Part C of the Public Law 100-297, which is now part of U.S. Code (20 U.S.C. 9010 and 9011), legislatively defines the purpose of the NAEP “to improve the effectiveness of our nation's schools by making objective information about student performance in selected learning areas available to policymakers at the national, state and local levels. To enhance its utility, such information should be both representative and comparable, and should be maintained in a manner that ensures the privacy of individual students and their families.” A critical aspect of NAEP is the reporting of trends in student performance over time.

Administration The Commissioner of Education Statistics (Commissioner) in NCES develops, administers, and reports NAEP while the National Assessment Governing Board (Governing Board) , appointed by the Secretary of Education but independent of the Department, sets policy for NAEP.

Main NAEP assessments are made up of the following operational components:

National assessments include mathematics, reading, science, writing, the arts, civics, economics, geography, U.S. history and the technology and engineering literacy assessment (TEL). These assessments follow the content frameworks developed by the Governing Board and use the latest advances in assessment research. Most subjects are assessed at grades 4, 8, and 12—although not all grades are assessed each time. Students in public and private schools are assessed.

State assessments are administered in four subjects (mathematics, reading, science, and writing). Only public schools are included in state-level assessments.

The trial urban district assessment (TUDA) is a multiyear study of the feasibility of a district-level NAEP. Twenty-one districts currently participate in TUDA.

The NAEP High School Transcript Study (HSTS) is conducted in high schools selected for NAEP mathematics and science assessments. Results are reported primarily at the national level.

The National Indian Education Survey (NIES) is conducted in schools with American Indian/Alaska Native students. Results are reported at the national level and for states with large samples of AI/AN students. (OPTION) While Main NAEP comprises the bulk of the program, NAEP is a system of assessments that seeks to provide a comprehensive measure of educational progress in the country. Other major components are the long-term trend assessments, special studies and studies for insuring the validity of NAEP items. They are as follows:

Long-term trend assessments (LTT) are given at the national level only, and are administered in a different manner from that used for main NAEP assessments. LTT reports results in mathematics and reading that represent trends since the 1970s. LTT assessments are currently administered every four years.

Special studies are periodically conducted to answer a variety of questions. Examples of special study topics include the following:

· Inclusion and accommodations in NAEP,

· Math Accessibility Study,

· NAEP-TIMSS Link,

· Knowledge and Skills Appropriate study,

· Socioeconomic Status, and

· Various technology-based assessment studies.

Additional information on NAEP special studies may be found at on the bidders’ page (http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/bidders13-17).

Pilot studies are conducted on all items prior to their use in NAEP assessments. All items are reviewed and go through several improvement activities. Cognitive labs and small-scale tryouts are conducted as needed on new and complex item types.

The NAEP Alliance Concept All NAEP assessments have critical path processes that are dependent upon one another. Broadly, these processes are as follows:

assessment design, item development, sampling, weighting and data collection, materials, distribution and scoring, scaling, estimation and analyses, and reporting Further, all of the processes include the following:

state involvement to ensure participation of schools and the quality of the sampling and data collection processes, the use of the technology either in various administrative functions and in the administration of technology-based assessments, and planning and coordination to ensure that the various processes are aligned and coordinated with one another and the schedule is maintained for the required six-(6-) and 12-month reporting.

Current Operating Practices NAEP instruments generally have a common block/booklet structure. Booklets consist of two separately timed 25-minute cognitive blocks followed by separately timed background questions. NAEP subjects using the common block structure and assessed in the same testing period are spiraled together and administered in the same session.

Reading and mathematics assessments have the highest priority of all assessments for support and scheduling with item development occurring at least three years before an operational assessment. These items are pilot tested up to two years in advance as part of an operational assessment.

NAEP operates on a general principle that pilot tested items are not changed prior to use in an operational assessment. Pilot tested items that are of high quality but not used in the upcoming operational assessment are banked for future use. Pilot test data are not publicly released nor used to provide performance estimates.

Main NAEP assessments are administered during a six-week window beginning the last week of January and concluding the first week of March. In extreme cases, such as a natural disaster or major snowstorm, the second week in March may be used for make-up assessments. Assessments within states and large urban districts are spread across the entire assessment window.

States and districts are required to participate in grade 4 and 8 reading and mathematics assessments every two years (i.e., mandatory assessments). All other assessments are voluntary for states.

NAEP samples are geographically representative of the reporting jurisdictions and subgroups. Schools and students are chosen with a measurable probability of selection.

In a state-level assessment, the national sample is composed of the aggregate of state samples. However, when a state elects not to have the state-representative samples needed to report at the state level, some students in that state may be included to ensure representativeness of the national sample.

Long-term trend assessments are administered: in the fall to 13-year-olds, in the winter to 9-year-olds, and in the spring to 17-year-olds.

Testing accommodations are provided to special-needs students to remove barriers to their participation, as long as the constructs tested are not altered by the accommodations. For example, the reading assessment cannot be read aloud to students or translated to another language, as the NAEP reading framework defines the construct to include reading printed text in English. Data released from the assessments must report on students with a disability (SD) and English language learners (ELL) as a percentage of all students who completed the assessment. Within those two populations, the percent excluded, the percent tested with accommodations, and the percent tested without accommodations are reported.

The Governing Board plans and executes the initial release of reports of assessments after approval by the Commissioner. The primary means currently for releasing the initial 4th and 8th grade reading and mathematics results is a summary report intended for a general public audience. However, NAEP is challenged to develop other means of disseminating results for a wider audience and in more interactive methods. National and state reading and mathematics reports at grades 4 and 8 are required to be available for release within 6 months after the completion of data collection. All other NAEP initial data releases must be available within 12 months after the completion of data collection, or on a different release schedule by the Governing Board. Releases include both printed and electronic materials. NAEP is moving to more electronic materials and to greater use of the Web and social media for release activities.

Reports and data products from assessments on the Governing Board schedule where data are being released for the first time are identified as “initial release” and are differentiated from other NCES reports and products in the review process. “Initial release” products are reviewed by the Assessment Division (AD), at the NCES center-wide level for signoff by the Chief Statistician, by the NCES Commissioner, and by the Director of the Institute of Education Sciences (IES). Other products, in addition to the reviews by the Assessment Division, the Chief Statistician, and the NCES Commissioner, undergo a peer review (either internal or external) organized by the IES.

To the extent possible, NAEP designs, samples and analyses are conducted to maintain trend over time.

Aspects of the NAEP design may change during this procurement period (FY2013 – FY2017). Inclusion policy and an improved measure of socioeconomic status are some of the practices that are under review for possible changes. Another possible change includes increasing the precision of measurement particularly at the lower and upper ends of the student ability distribution. In addition, as outlined below, there are a number of challenges that will need to be addressed during the procurement period. Consequently, there will be the need for flexible approaches to design modifications as NAEP’s role continues to evolve either through changes in legislation, Governing Board and Department of Education policies or changes in the fields of educational measurement, education, or schooling.

Current Operating Cycle The project consists of preparing for and conducting parallel assessments in different stages.[footnoteRef:1] In addition to at least four overlapping assessment cycles progressing at the same time, the NAEP project also alternates every other year in terms of size of the data collection. During odd-numbered years (2013, 2015, and 2017), the NAEP data contractors will collect, score, analyze and report information representative of not only the nation and geographic regions, but also all states and selected large urban districts in reading and mathematics and alternately science or writing. In even-numbered years (2014 and 2016), NAEP conducts assessments with samples large enough to provide national and regional ability estimates only. Special studies and pilot testing are integrated into the operational assessments, as needed. [1: When there is a new framework being created by the Governing Board, the cycle takes five or more years. No new frameworks are scheduled for this procurement cycle.]

All Alliance contractors are actively involved at all times during the calendar year and activities are often completed on tight timelines. The following paragraphs provide a sampling of the scheduling complexities.

The contractor responsible for the design of the assessment must a preliminary design up to four years in advance of the assessment so that all other contractors can prepare. The sampling contractor, for example, must begin the sample selection process in January the year before the assessment so states can be notified in May for the subsequent school year.

The item development contractor will be writing, reviewing and pilot testing items for four to six content areas across grades 4, 8 and 12 each year. Items are reviewed by NCES, a standing committee of content experts, the Governing Board and the states throughout the year.

For the data collection contractor, the peak period is January to March, when substantial numbers of additional people are employed to collect data from students. But other times of the year, staff will be involved in developing training for data collectors, identifying schools to be sampled in the next year’s assessment, creating sampling weights, conducting the high school transcript study, and working with private schools.

The reporting contractor must meet a tight six-month or twelve-month deadline for all initial report releases. In addition, the contractor analyzes and drafts other reports and conducts other studies or analyses throughout the year.

The materials and distribution contractor begins their process of compiling materials in the late spring for distribution during the following winter based on sample schools identified in early May and sample students identified in the October – November period. The contractor is responsible for 24-hour turn-around of additional materials during the data collection in the January – March period. During some cycles, printing may involve over a 1000 different forms, each with different print amounts ranging from several hundred to thousands.

The contractor supporting the 50 state and 21 district coordinators for their various activities throughout the sampling, data collection, and reporting processes maintain weekly contact via electronic media, conduct three (3) to six (6) in-person workshops each year, and provide orientation to NAEP for the 20-25 percent of new coordinators each year.

The web contractor supports the release of reports, new items for the item tools, the latest data for the NAEP Data Explorer, as well as updating the online technical documentation for the assessment process. This contractor periodically updates the Alliance’s intranet site, as well as the web page review site.

Challenges NAEP’s primary purpose is to provide a fair and accurate measure of student achievement in various content areas and to report trends over time. At the same time, NAEP has to be responsive to environmental and policy changes and to the emerging needs of national and state policymakers. On the one hand, NCES and the Alliance contractors have to administer required assessments based an established schedule and with designated populations. On the other hand, NCES and the Alliance contractors have to respond to changes, some of which cannot be anticipated.

For example, innovations in better and cheaper technology and their integration into the classroom and out-of-school learning experiences of the country’s students dictate that NAEP must move expeditiously from its traditional paper-and-pencil to technology-based tests. Developing a prototype for both national and state assessments must be a forward-thinking, creative development that takes into consideration cutting-edge technology, equity and fairness for the student, ease of use, timeliness of administration, flexibility of the jurisdiction environment and facility, and enhance the previous experiences of state and former NAEP studies.

Technology questions center on how to transition from paper-and-pencil assessments to technology-based assessments. The intent is not just to transpose existing items into an electronic format but also to assess what we currently measure better and while assessing knowledge and skills that cannot be easily tested using a paper-and-pencil test. Other challenges include how to measure progress by maintaining a link to previous paper-and-pencil assessments and how to make reports and results more accessible to all stakeholders.

Further, NAEP will be challenged to identify the type of infrastructure that will be necessary to maintain a standard, unbiased administration while maintaining high levels of item security, and low operational burden and cost. The test administration software must allow seamless transition from assessing any of the NAEP technology-based assessments to allowing these technology-based items to function in the NAEP Questions Tool.

In addition to delivering assessments via appropriate technology, it will become increasingly more important that the application of technology to all parts of the NAEP system is updated to keep pace with the latest industry advances in a pragmatic and cost-effective manner. Many of NAEP’s administrative processes can be paperless.

Whenever commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) software is appropriate and available, it should be given strong consideration in the evaluation of solutions. In addition some custom systems may also be developed. All these systems will have to be maintained and enhanced so that NAEP can easily incorporate new innovations in hardware and software with minimal impact on operations and/or budget.

Other challenges that will have to be addressed during this procurement period include the following:

International comparisons. There is a growing demand by national, state and local policy makers and the general public to know how their schools compare not only to the nation and states but to other countries. There is a recognition that our students will be competing with students from this country, as well as students worldwide. NAEP, the only state-representative assessment, is in an excellent position to serve as the link with international assessments to provide state and district estimates for comparison with other countries. NAEP implemented a comprehensive study in 2011 to link NAEP with the Trend in Mathematics and Science Survey (TIMSS). However, there are calls to link NAEP with other international assessments.

Preparedness for Post-Secondary Education and Work. A different type of challenge arises from the call for the use of the 12th grade NAEP reading and mathematics assessments in a way that captures and measures preparedness for participation in post-secondary education, the military, and/or the workplace.

Universal Design. NAEP assessments should be developed to maximize accessibility for all students to the test items.

Adaptive testing. Adapting which test blocks are administered to an examinee holds the promise of providing better measurement of students across the full range of student performance.

Changing state content (common core) standards. The National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) have coordinated to create a state-led effort entitled the Common Core State Standards Initiative. Teachers, school administrators, and experts collaborated to develop the mathematics and English language arts standards in order to provide a clear and consistent framework to prepare students for college and the workforce.

Trend. Critical to NAEP’s mission of reporting on the progress of education is maintaining trend. However, to remain relevant NAEP has to respond to changing environments. NAEP routinely faces this challenge through bridge studies that provide statistical evidence for continuing trend lines. However, with the major shifts in what and how NAEP assesses student performance, there may be other more efficient and cost-effective methods that can be used.

Race/ethnicity reporting. Adoption of new race/ethnicity categories and their transition by states will affect NAEP’s long term practice of reporting trends by race/ethnicity. A solution is required to mitigate problems in reporting this important, policy-relevant information.

Procurement Principles There are six primary principles the Alliance contracts shall adhere to in this procurement:

NAEP data must be accurate, of high quality and on time.

NAEP must continue to be a leader in large-scale assessment especially in meeting the upcoming challenges.

NAEP must adapt to rapidly changing environmental factors.

NAEP must be designed in a way that maintains reporting trends over time.

NAEP must improve efficiencies in both costs and burden on participants.

NAEP must ensure that the diversity of a workforce that characterizes the full range of NAEP stake-holders is represented at every level of NAEP operations. To do so NAEP must make sure that every attempt possible is made to incorporate professional staff who represent that diversity and that each of the NAEP contractors increase the participation of small and minority-owned businesses within each contract.

Procurement Components As seen in the following organizational chart (Exhibit A), the new NAEP Alliance Procurements will consist of eight critical path components with each component a separate contract award. Eight of the components are described in chapters 1 through 8 in this PWS, with each chapter corresponding to a separate contract. Chapter 9 describes activities common to all contractors and that shall be included in each offerors proposal.

The components are as follows:

1. Planning and Coordination (PC) – CPAF and Fixed Price

2. Design, Analysis and Reporting (DAR) – CPAF and Fixed Price

3. Item Development (ID) – CPAF and Fixed Price

4. Sampling and Data Collection (SDC) – CPAF and Fixed Price

5. NAEP Support and Services Center (NSSC) – CPAF and Fixed Price

6. Materials, Distribution, Processing and Scoring (MDPS) – CPAF and Fixed Price

7. Web/Technology Maintenance and Support (Web/Technology) – CPAF and Fixed – Small Business Set Aside

8. NAEP Scheduling (NS) – Fixed Price – Small Business Set Aside The shading, or groupings, in Exhibit A indicate relationships that NCES believes provide the best quality and greatest cost and time efficiencies for the government. For example, The Design, Analysis and Reporting contract (DAR) develops the design for each assessment including specifications for framework coverage and number of items and content blocks that are to be developed for each assessment and passes that information to the Item Development contractor (ID). ID develops the items using content specialists that are then available to DAR for use in the design phase, thus eliminating the need for staffing duplication. DAR conducts the item analysis after pilot testing and works with ID to determine, based on the item data, which items are suitable for inclusion in the assessment. They work together to identify items that need additional work and re-pilot testing. The sharing of DAR analysts for this specific portion of the development process eliminates the need for ID to have analysts on staff. Close proximity of the two teams makes it easier to share staff at time-critical junctures in the program.

Having the Planning and Coordination contractor (PC) located with DAR provides similar time and cost efficiencies. PC is responsible for overall strategic planning for NAEP, coordinating the implementation plan for individual assessments built on the DAR design document, and for planning and managing NAEP’s research agenda. These functions require technical and psychometric expertise which can be matrix from the DAR analysts.

Similarly, the hand-in-glove relationship between the Sampling and Data Collection contract (SDC) and the NAEP Support Services Center contract (NSSC) eliminate the need for staffing and resource duplication. SDC selects the sample based on a sampling frame that has been reviewed by the states under the supervision of the NSSC making the initial samples more accurate and representative. After the samples are selected and forwarded to the states, the NSSC works with the NAEP state and district coordinators to add/eliminate schools that have opened/closed or are otherwise unavailable for the assessment. The NSSC trains and supervises the state and district NAEP coordinators in the processes and quality standards necessary for a high quality NAEP and in the recruitment of schools and ensures that they know the procedures and have the materials needed to participate in the assessment including the legislatively required parental notification. The NSSC does not need to employ sampling statisticians to develop training for the states and the SDC does not need to employ, train, and maintain state-based personnel to recruit and work with schools.

The eight critical path components shall be bid as an alliance, with contractors working together to submit a unified group of proposals that will be accepted or rejected in their entirety. NCES will award eight contracts, one for each component with more than one contract being awarded to a single organization as appropriate.

Exhibit A. The NAEP Alliance

1. Alliance Planning and Coordination

6. Materials, Distribution, Processing, and Scoring

7. **Web/Technology Development, Operations and Maintenance

3. Item Development

2. Design, Analysis and Reporting

5. State Service Center

4. Sampling and Data Collection National Center for Education Statistics

8. **NAEP Scheduling*

NAEP Contracts not Included in the Alliance

· NAEP Validity Studies Panel

· Publications, Outreach and Dissemination Support (PODS) National Indian Education Support

· Education Statistics Support Institution Network

· NAEP State Analysis

· NAEP-State Technical and Operations Cooperative

The alliance components, described in Exhibit B, represent all of the NAEP assessments and special studies. The Alliance contractors shall work together as a team, with each team member responsible for processes and products that interface with the processes and products of one or more of the other team members. A failure by one contractor may well affect the performance of all. Therefore, all components are included in one consolidated PWS, and proposals must be in the form of a team bid that covers the alliance in its entirety. Any organization interested in making an offer on one or more components shall seek out other organizations that are recognized for complementary expertise to collaborate on a team proposal.

Any single organization can be included as part of multiple Alliance teams, and the role of the organization can vary across different team offers. For example, Organization X may make an offer on the Alliance Coordination and the Design, Analysis, and Reporting functions on one team proposal; in a second team proposal, Organization X might make an offer on Item Development and Web/Technology, Development, Operations and Maintenance.

In any configuration of bids, each team proposal must cover all parts of the PWS, and create a team approach that plays to the strengths of each participating organization. The individual proposals and the team proposal shall describe and document how transitions shall be accomplished. The clarity of approach to how work shall flow across contractors will be an important factor in the selection of a team of contractors. The contracts will be awarded on the basis of the best overall team approach.

The functions as defined in each component should be situated in the organization with the most expertise and talent related to that function. However, wherever subcontracting does occur small and minority-owned businesses utilization shall be maximized with the ideal goal of achieving approximately 23% of the award going to small businesses.

Exhibit B: NAEP Alliance Components

Overview of the Work Independently and not as an agent of the United States Government, the Contractor shall provide all personnel, materials, services, and facilities necessary for the project and perform the tasks as described below. The work to be covered under this PWS begins with the award of the contracts in 2012 with implementation of the 2013 assessment, and ends in September 2017 with development work for the 2020 assessments. Each assessment cycle includes field/pilot tests, and the operational assessments.

In December, 2011, the Governing Board set the current schedule of assessments as presented in Exhibit C:

Exhibit C: NAEP Schedule of Assessments

Mathematics Reading (4, 8,12) Math (4, 8,12)

Civics Geography

TECHNOLOGY & ENGINEERING LITERACY (8)**

Mathematics Science ** High School Transcript Study Reading (4, 8,12) Math (4, 8,12) Science (4, 8,12)

Long-Term Trend

Mathematics Writing** Reading (4, 8, 12) Math (4, 8, 12) Writing (4, 8, 12)

Notes:

**Assessments involving test administration by computer.

(1) Grades tested are 4, 8, and 12 unless otherwise indicated, except that long-term trend assessments sample students at ages 9, 13, and 17 and are conducted in reading and mathematics.

(2) Subjects in BOLD ALL CAPS indicate the years in which a new framework is planned for implementation.

(3) In 2009, 12th grade assessments in reading and mathematics at the state level were conducted as a pilot in 11 volunteering states.

(4) The Governing Board intends to conduct assessments at the 12th grade in World History and Foreign Language during the assessment period 2018-2022.

Assessments to be Implemented The full NAEP assessment schedule adopted by the Governing Board, shown in Exhibit C above, outlines the range of activities that are planned during this contract period. However, the current appropriations do not cover the full range of work implied by that schedule. As a consequence, the schedule is subject to change.

As depicted in Exhibit D, the flow of work in NAEP begins long before the assessment year. This chart reflects a sample of a schedule of assessments and indicates when development work must begin. There are a few implicit assumptions associated with the operational assessments. With each new framework or move to a technology-based format, NCES will conduct a bridge study to determine whether that trend can be maintained. Therefore, in 2015 there will be a linking study in mathematics and science with TIMSS.

Beyond the scope of work described above, several special study options as outlined in Chapter 9 are under consideration. Additionally, World History and Foreign Language assessments may be considered at some time within the cycle.

Exhibit D: NAEP Assessment Development Activities: Sample

About the Performance Work Statement The next part of the PWS is organized into nine chapters. The first eight correspond to each of the Alliance contracts. While each contract will have specific responsibilities, there is a set of more general activities and associated tasks that are common to all the contracts described once in Chapter 9. Each general activity and the associated tasks are relevant to each contract and shall be included in each contract offer.

Planning and Coordination (PC) Planning and Coordination shall support NCES in strategic and operational planning activities aimed at ensuring that NAEP’s program objectives and general activities are aligned with NAEP’s focus on identified major issues, and with major shifts in the large-scale assessment environment. The contract shall provide contract staff and consultants with proven experience developing and implementing various industry-recognized models of strategic planning. In support of operational planning, the contractor shall lead the Alliance in making recommendations to NCES for ensuring that NAEP’s program objectives, and general activities are aligned with NAEP’s overall goals, and major relevant shifts in the large-scale assessment environment. The contractor therefore, must maintain an in-depth understanding of the technological, educational, policy, and legislative contexts of NAEP.

Planning and Coordination shall support NCES in coordinating all aspects of assessment and research and development. The contractor shall demonstrate a firm understanding of NAEP operations, and of the possible impact of innovations, special studies, or unforeseen circumstances on the overall NAEP program. An important aspect of coordination is successful initiation of open discussions of how change might be incorporated into the system while respecting the operational constraints inherent in each individual contract. The contractors comprising the NAEP Alliance are collectively responsible for implementing the assessments from design, through implementation, to reporting. The delivery of a high quality, timely assessment process that includes reports, special studies, and research and development activities, requires continuous communication among contractors and with NCES, and coordination across all phases of the assessments. The success of each individual contractor is dependent on the quality and timeliness of all others in the Alliance. Every task must be synchronized with every other task, either directly or indirectly. Not only must the core operations functions of NAEP represented by the Alliance work together, the Alliance members must interconnect and coordinate with non-Alliance NCES contractors as appropriate.

Scope The scope of this contract is to provide NCES with support to:

Conduct strategic and operational planning (Task 1.1).

Coordinate and implement of assessment tasks across multiple contractors and NCES (Task 1.2).

Coordinate NAEP R&D activities (Task 1.3).

Conduct Strategic and operational planning As described in the Overview, NAEP is facing major challenges that are both conceptual and operational. Throughout this procurement cycle, NAEP must maintain its high quality assessment while making strategic decisions that will influence the program for decades. NCES views this cycle as a transition period, positioning the program for 2020 and beyond.

Strategic planning began early in 2011 and is continuing with the activities documented in the Future of NAEP Website (WWW.xxx). A high level of planning has to continue addressing known challenges while identifying and addressing emerging issues. As such, strategic planning shall go beyond the NAEP family to include leaders not just limited to education and technology. The purpose of this task is to provide NCES with ongoing leadership and support in planning for the future, and for ongoing operational activities.