PWS_(April_15 _2016).docx

Performance Work Statement Version Date: April 15, 2016 iese160198ap U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance

Performance Work Statement for the contract titled

WHAT WORKS CLEARINGHOUSE:

POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION AND POSTSECONDARY PREPARATION EVIDENCE REPORTING (WWC-PEPPER)

Introduction

The U.S. Department of Education, via the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE) of the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), has the need for a What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) contractor that will lead reviews in the areas of postsecondary education, the transition to college, and programs that take place in middle and high school with the long-term goal of impacting postsecondary attainment. The Postsecondary Education and Postsecondary Preparation Evidence Reporting (PEPPER) contract will continue the work started through the previous Postsecondary contract for the WWC (Evidence Review and Support, ED-IES-12-C-0084). Within the postsecondary and related content areas described above, this contract will primarily conduct comprehensive reviews for WWC intervention reports, develop practice guides, produce products based on quick reviews and individual study reviews, and create new products to disseminate the findings of the WWC. The period of performance for this contract is five years and includes optional tasks that can be exercised at the discretion of IES, pending available funds.

Authorizing Legislation Section 171(b) of the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 states that the mission of the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance in the Institute of Education Sciences shall be to provide technical assistance, and to encourage the use of scientifically valid education research and evaluation throughout the United States. The WWC encourages the use of scientifically valid education research by serving as the public’s central and trusted source on what works in education, providing accessible information on study quality.

Background

The WWC was established in 2002 by the Department/IES to provide educators, policymakers, researchers, and the public with a transparent way to determine whether there is evidence of effectiveness behind a program or practice and the extent to which those findings can be trusted. The WWC was charged to develop and establish WWC Study Evidence Standards and a systematic review system. The goal was to promote better informed education decision-making through a web-based dissemination system that features comprehensive, systematic, high-quality reviews[footnoteRef:1] of studies on the effectiveness of educational interventions (i.e., programs, products, practices, and policies). The website, whatworks.ed.gov is the primary “face” of the WWC, displaying the results of the systematic review process. [1: A systematic review is a review of the evidence on a clearly formulated question that uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select and critically appraise relevant primary research, and to extract and analyze data from the studies that are included in the review. For further information about the WWC Systematic Review Process, refer to www.whatworks.ed.gov/reviewprocess/review.html.]

Nearly 15 years after the WWC was first authorized, the mission for promoting informed decision-making has continued. At this time, the WWC is focused on providing timely, comprehensive reviews of interventions, establishing and refining state of the art evidence standards for the field of education, providing data to a wide-range of stakeholders as part of the government’s Open Data Initiative, and disseminating information to the public.

Current WWC Contract Mechanisms The WWC investment currently operates through five distinct contract vehicles:

· ED-IES-13-C-0010: What Works Clearinghouse Content

· ED-IES-13-C-0013: What Works Clearinghouse Website

· ED-IES-12-C-0084: Evidence Review and Support for the What Works Clearinghouse (herein referred to as the WWC Postsecondary Contract)

· ED-IES-15-D-0003: What Works Clearinghouse Reviews, Reporting, Dissemination, & Development

· ED-IES-15-C-0054: What Works Clearinghouse Dropout Prevention Practice Guide

It is expected that these contracts work in a coordinated fashion (at the direction of IES as specified later in this PWS) to support the work of the entire WWC investment. The “WWC Pre-K to 12 Content Contract” (ED-IES-13-C-0010) focuses on reviews covering pre-kindergarten through 12th grade. The current “WWC Evidence Review and Support Contract” (ED-IES-12-C-0084) focuses on reviews in the area of postsecondary access and success. Tasks in both contracts focus on generating comprehensive reviews of existing effectiveness studies. These two contractors each maintain a WWC Statistical and Technical Analysis Team (STAT), produce key products (listed below), and manage inquiries that arise in response to reviews. It is imperative that the new postsecondary contractor (PEPPER) work in a coordinated manner with the “WWC Pre-K to 12 Content” contractor in order for IES to carry out an investment-wide plan for prioritizing topic areas and studies for review; creating and updating review protocols; conducting communication and dissemination activities; and other cross-investment work. The details of this coordinated work are described in Task 2.

The “WWC Website Contract” (ED-IES-13-C-0013) supports the production and implementation of all WWC materials posted on the WWC website as well as the infrastructure of the WWC website itself. IES expects that the PEPPER contractor will work in coordination with the website contractor by submitting materials that will be posted by the web contractor, using established procedures.

The purpose of the Reviews, Reporting, Dissemination, and Development Contract (R2D2) (ED-IES-15-D-0003) is to conduct timely reviews of studies submitted as part of the Department’s evidence-based grant competitions. In addition, there are tasks in this contract for creating and updating Intervention reports; creating Single Study Reviews for a subset of studies reviewed for grant competitions; and identifying innovative ways to further develop the WWC as a recognizable brand to the public.

Finally, the purpose of the WWC Dropout Prevention Practice Guide Contract (ED-IES-15-C-0054) is to work in consultation with an expert panel to develop and publish an IES practice guide with recommendations for practitioners about how to prevent students from dropping out of high school. The PEPPER contractor will need to coordinate with the Dropout Prevention contractor to ensure alignment on any Dropout Prevention protocols and to understand the status of dropout prevention studies that may be considered for work under the PEPPER contract.

All WWC contracts must continue to work in a cohesive, coordinated manner to represent the entire WWC investment, at the direction of IES.

Current WWC Products Each of the WWC contracts is responsible for creating or featuring products that translate study reviews into findings that are accessible to the public. To develop these products, the WWC uses objective and transparent standards and procedures to assess the scientific merit of studies of the effectiveness of education interventions. Underlying each of these reviews is a Study Review Guide (SRG), which is completed by WWC certified reviewers to assess the quality of the research according to established WWC standards (access the current SRG template here: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/StudyReviewGuide.aspx). Below are the central WWC products:

· Intervention Reports. Intervention reports are a summary of all studies published during a specific time period that examine the effectiveness of an intervention. Using its objective and transparent standards, the WWC rates the quality of the evidence in each study. For studies that meet WWC evidence standards (with or without reservations), the WWC combines the findings to generate overall estimates of the size of effects for the intervention. The WWC also provides a rating of the level of evidence on the intervention’s effectiveness, taking into consideration the number of studies, the sample sizes, and the magnitude and statistical significance of the estimates of effectiveness.

· Practice Guides. Practice guides contain practical recommendations that educators can use to address specific challenges in their classrooms and schools. The recommendations are based on reviews of research as well as the expertise and professional judgments of a panel of nationally recognized experts that includes both researchers and educators.

· Reports on Individual Studies. The WWC conducts reviews of individual studies that are published as Single Study Reviews or are added without reports to the WWC reviewed database http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/ReviewedStudies.aspx.

More details on the current products can be found in Appendix A. IES continues to be interested in creating new product lines for the WWC investment that are: consistent with the mission of the WWC; creative and engaging; and provide systematic information on a topic or content area that are understudied or lack rigorous research.

Prior to 2012, IES directed the WWC investment to review interventions and practices that directly affect K-12 educational outcomes. Since the award of the first postsecondary WWC contract in 2012, nearly 150 studies related to postsecondary education research have been added to the Database of Reviewed Studies to date new systematic review topic areas have been opened, such as the Transition to College and Developmental Education, and new review protocols for postsecondary education research studies have been developed that lay the foundation for future reviews in this area. The PEPPER contractor will be responsible for continuing the review of studies in the postsecondary area.

Purpose

The main purpose of this contract is to conduct reviews and develop products that will continue to expand the content of the topic areas within postsecondary education, including the transition to college. Student achievement will remain the primary outcome focus of the WWC; however the WWC also seeks to review studies that examine other relevant education outcomes for students, such as persistence, attainment of credentials (certificates and degrees), mental health and anxiety as they approach and progress through their education, and labor market outcomes.

A secondary goal of this contract is to introduce new products that enhance and expand the content and reach of the WWC while also reflecting a commitment to the rigorous research standards that are the foundation of the WWC. Therefore, new products developed under this award shall be clearly applicable and useful to a variety of relevant audiences (e.g., postsecondary practitioners, decision-makers, and researchers). Ideas are invited for new products that improve and expand the content, reach, and usefulness of the WWC while also maintaining or enhancing the WWC commitment to rigorous standards and high quality research. Developing new products that rely on the systematic review process and represent a defined, transparent procedure has been a challenge. In this contract, it is expected that offerors will propose innovative new product lines and consider proposing a team with experience developing and disseminative creative work. For the duration of this contract, these new products shall be limited to content area covered by this contract. Other topic areas may be proposed if the optional tasks are exercised.

Period of Performance

This contract contains a 12-month base period and four 12-month option periods, with periods of performance as follows:

· Base Period (September 30, 2016-September 29, 2017)

· Option Period 1 (September 30, 2017-September 29, 2018)

· Option Period 2 (September 30, 2018-September 29, 2019)

· Option Period 3 (September 30, 2019- September 29, 2020)

· Option Period 4 (September 30, 2020- September 29, 2021) Scope of Work

This section specifies the tasks and subtasks that the contractor shall perform. Offerors shall propose interim deliverables and a payment schedule for all tasks and subtasks according to the cost-reimbursement or fixed price designation. All deliverables shall be submitted to ED’s Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and ED’s Contracting Specialist (CS) electronically unless otherwise noted.

The COR reserves the right to inspect the contractor’s work while in process. The contractor shall submit to the COR any progress report or other written documentation of work to date that the COR requests to facilitate that inspection, according to contract clauses Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.246-4 (fixed price) and 52.246-5 (cost-reimbursement).

This Performance Work Statement (PWS) contains both Firm Fixed Price (hereafter referred to as Fixed Price) tasks/subtasks as well as Cost Plus Fixed Fee (hereafter referred to as Cost Reimbursement) tasks/subtasks. Each type is noted below. Baseline tasks shall be performed in the base period and each exercised option period, unless otherwise noted. Optional tasks, if exercised by the Government, are available in the base period and each option period, unless otherwise noted.

Task 1 Overall Contract Management and Communication

Task 1 describes the overall contract management, communications, and transition for the contract. The contractor shall assume responsibility for ensuring that all contractor staff are in compliance with ED’s contractor security clearance process, in accordance with security-related contract clauses.

Subtask 1.1 Kickoff Meeting (Fixed Price). The contractor’s project director and key project staff (up to three) shall meet with the WWC COR and other appropriate ED staff within two weeks following the award date to discuss details regarding the tasks outlined in the proposal, scheduling activities, and other issues related to the contract. The meeting shall be at ED’s offices in Washington, D.C. The contractor shall provide an agenda for the meeting within five work days after the effective date of the contract. The contractor shall come prepared to identify any areas of concern and to suggest ways of responding to these concerns. Within two weeks following the meeting, the contractor shall prepare a memo summarizing the key issues and concerns raised at the meeting and how each will be addressed.

Subtask 1.2 Bi-weekly update conference calls (Fixed Price). The contractor’s project director shall submit bi-weekly (i.e., once every two weeks) abbreviated notes to the COR on the status of each of the tasks under the contract, including details on the status of each review underway. The contractor shall submit the notes at least one hour prior to regularly scheduled bi-weekly telephone updates. Outstanding issues or actions requiring follow up by either the COR or the contractor’s project director will be discussed in weekly conference calls between the contractor’s project director and the COR. The contractor shall update the abbreviated status report based on discussions and submit the report to the COR within one day following the call.

Subtask 1.3 Periodic meetings (Cost Reimbursement). The project director and up to two additional key staff shall meet with the COR and other appropriate ED staff in Washington, D.C. on an as needed basis, in person or by conference call, not to exceed four times per year. The purpose of the meeting is to brief ED on the progress of the contract and to discuss issues as they arise. Within two weeks following each meeting, the contractor shall prepare a memo summarizing the key issues and concerns raised at the meeting, and how each will be addressed.

Subtask 1.4 Monthly Reporting (Fixed Price). In addition to the reports that are required for each task as described, for cost reimbursable tasks, the contractor shall include discussion of progress, issues, and problems in a monthly progress report. The monthly reports shall include a budget summary of costs per task and per subtask, including expenditures in relation to progress on content development and other work streams, so that the COR can easily see how much has been spent on work in a given task/subtask. The reports shall also specify the extent to which the project is on schedule, briefly describe the activities planned for the next month, identify and discuss significant deviations from the substantive and time factors in the management plan, and identify and discuss any decisions that may be needed from ED.

Subtask 1.5 Quality Control (Cost Reimbursement). The contractor shall create procedures for collecting and analyzing data on the quality and accuracy of task order activities delivered and the products developed under this contract. These quality control measures may include tools such as internal quality checks on WWC study reviews to ensure that all reviewers are accurate and up to date on WWC procedures.

Subtask 1.6 Collaboration and Coordination with the Other WWC Contractors (Cost Reimbursement). As the WWC investment continues to grow, it is critical that all contractors operate in a coordinated, collaborative fashion. Key personnel from the PEPPER Contract shall have at least bimonthly communication with the project director of the other WWC contracts (via conference call), as requested by the COR. The content of these phone calls shall include discussion about new developments in the WWC standards, protocol requirements, methodological issues, expected volume of work, issues and challenges, any upcoming changes that may be occurring at the WWC, or other relevant topics. The COR will participate in these phone calls, as needed. The contractor shall include a memo summarizing key issues and concerns raised at the meeting and how each will be addressed as part of the monthly report. This memo shall be provided two days after the meeting.

Task 2 Develop the Annual Forecasting Work Plan (Cost Reimbursement)

In direct consultation with the COR and IES leadership, the contractor shall create an annual forecast and workplan for reviews conducted under this contract. The contractor shall discuss this workplan with both IES and other WWC contractors, as identified by IES, to ensure that the WWC uses a clear, defensible prioritization for reviewing studies and covers a wide range of non-overlapping content areas on an annual basis. The detailed Annual Work Plan shall include the topics proposed for WWC reviews, the type of reports that will be produced, and specific activities that the contractor will carry out in performance of each task and subtask.

The contractor shall include all tasks and subtasks in the Annual Work Plan, and in particular shall identify:

1. A prioritization scheme that identifies topics for review based on a clear metric

2. The review process that will be implemented

3. The type of products that the contractor will develop and produce

4. A production schedule with timelines, deliverables, and pricing for each deliverable, and

5. Proposed quality assurance procedures

The contractor shall prepare and submit to the COR semi-annual updates on the Annual Work Plans. The contractor shall apply appropriate standards and procedures provided by ED and an organizational firewall to avoid any conflict of interest problems among the principal investigators leading the reviews, the contractor’s staff and subcontract staff, and other outside experts in performing work under this contract. This plan shall be set by the summer of 2018 (Year 2) in alignment with other WWC Content Contracts.

Task 3 Identify Topics for Review and Establish Topic Area Teams (Cost Reimbursement)

Task 3 describes the topic areas that will be reviewed, the process by which topic area teams will review studies, and a requirement to summarize across an existing topic area in a user-friendly format. Since the postsecondary area includes a range of interventions, practices, and strategies that are not branded and often more difficult to identify, this task ensures that contractors will identify a broad range of new topics areas that could be covered with this contract.

Subtask 3.1 Revise the plan described in the proposal for identifying topic areas for review. After receiving feedback from the COR, the contractor shall revise the plan submitted in the proposal for reviewing the literature primarily in the area of postsecondary education and the transition to college. The purpose of this scan is to identify the key topic areas that will be reviewed. The contractor shall identify topics within the field of postsecondary education on which effectiveness research studies have been conducted, as well as where there are gaps in the research base on the effectiveness of a program, policy, or practice.

After COR review and approval, the results of this scan shall be submitted in a suitable format for publishing on the WWC website (maintained by the WWC contractor and hosted by IES) to provide information about upcoming reviews. See Appendix B for information about IES policies for web posting.

Subtask 3.2 Revise the proposed plan for topic area leadership structure and process. After receiving feedback from the COR, the contractor shall revise the plan presented in the proposal to identify content area experts, methodological experts, WWC certified reviewers, and quality assurance procedures that are aligned with the WWC streamlined review process as described in the WWC Standards and Procedures Handbook.

Task 4 Conduct WWC Reviews in a Variety of Topic Areas (Cost Reimbursement)

Task 4 describes the systematic reviews of groups studies in identified topic areas and of single studies (identified as quick reviews, single study reviews, or IES-funded studies).

Subtask 4.1 Develop and produce Intervention Reports. The contractor shall develop, at a minimum, three WWC Intervention Reports per year that result from the conduct of WWC systematic reviews under Task 3. A list of Intervention Reports and deliverables under this task shall be incorporated into the Annual Plan under Task 2.

Subtask 4.2 Conduct reviews at the request of IES. The contractor shall conduct an annual WWC Review of IES-funded research studies to assess whether study designs, or preliminary or final study results meet WWC Evidence Standards, or whether findings indicate intervention effectiveness. The COR shall identify the studies to be reviewed by the contractor and provide a template for reporting the results. At the close of the review process, the contractor shall provide to the website contractor citations for the studies reviewed so that they can be entered into the WWC reviewed studies database. The contractor shall plan to conduct up to 30 reviews at the request of IES on an annual basis.

Subtask 4.3 Conduct Single Study Reviews. The contractor shall apply WWC standards to review individual studies, as defined by the single study review protocol. Studies that receive notable media mention shall be reviewed first as Quick Review Blasts, followed by a Single Study Review. As part of the Annual work plan in Task 2, the contractor shall propose a method for conducting single study reviews and determine the amount and frequency of these reviews.

For estimation purposes, the contractor shall plan to conduct up to seven Single Study Reviews in each year of the contract. The contractor shall also consider ways to integrate these SSRs into products such as intervention reports and practice guides where possible.

Task 5 Contribute to the WWC’s Ongoing Evaluation and Refinement of WWC Standards and Procedures (Cost Reimbursement)

The contractor shall conduct an initial analysis of WWC standards at the beginning of the contract and submit a proposed plan for changes and improvements, indicating the highest priority items and plans for addressing those high-priority items during this contract period. In addition, the contractor shall contribute updates to the WWC’s investment-wide procedures at least twice per year. As part of this work, the contractor shall contribute to updates the WWC Handbook of Standards and Procedures.

Task 6 Develop and Produce New Products for Practitioners, Researchers and/or Policymakers (Cost Reimbursement)

Developing new products for a variety of audiences is the focus of Task 6.

The contractor shall propose, develop and produce new products with COR input and approval. The contractor shall incorporate the associated costs into the Annual Work Plan in Task 2.

Subtask 6.1 Prospectus for Each New Product . The contractor shall develop a prospectus for each individual new product that specifies the: 1) methods for identifying topic areas and practices within topic areas; 2) protocol development; 3) review process; 4) cost estimate; and 5) timelines and deliverables. The plan shall be incorporated into the Annual Plan under Task 2. Work will be directed by IES based on the broad WWC Annual Workplan.

Subtask 6.2 Develop and produce a new review product. The new product will review the extant evidence in a related topic area and rate the quality of the evidence and identify where there are gaps in the evidence. The contractor shall develop and carry out a production process leading to the release of the new product on the WWC website, according to the COR approved New Product Work Plan in Task 6.1. The contractor shall revise the plan submitted in the proposal that describes examples of proposed product types. The revised plan should address COR comments and feedback provided to the contractor at the startup meeting with ED no later than 4 weeks after the effective date of the contract. The COR will provide comments within 2 weeks. The contractor shall incorporate COR comments and submit a final plan for new product development within 10 weeks after the effective date of the contract. The contractor shall incorporate the associated costs into the Annual Work Plan in Task 2. The contractor shall implement the plan for new products upon COR approval.

Task 7 Conduct Technical Assistance Trainings on the WWC Review Process (Cost Reimbursement)

As determined by the COR, the contractor shall provide technical assistance on the WWC Review Process at an Department of Education location in Washington, DC no more than two times per year. The contractor shall also conduct up to two technical assistance trainings via webinar each year. Within 1 week of receiving the COR request for training, the contractor shall develop a timeline to deliver the training and training materials. The COR will comment on the timelines and training materials within 2 weeks of receipt. The contractor shall deliver final training materials within 2 weeks of COR feedback.

Task 8 Develop and Implement a Communications Plan that Contributes to the WWC Investment’s Overall Communication Plan (Cost Reimbursement)

Task 8 describes the activities associated with developing and implementing a communications plan that will contribute to the investment-wide WWC communication plan.

Subtask 8.1 Develop communications plan. The contractor shall develop a communications plan and incorporate it into the Annual Work Plan. The plan should contribute to the overall WWC-investment communications plan. The contractor shall propose a communications plan with ideas that improve and expand the content, reach, and usefulness of the WWC PEPPER contract. The contractor shall propose new supplemental products that feature the WWC review process and products in a clear, accessible manner. These products may include but are not limited to, new reports or summaries, infographics, videos, webinars, podcasts, guides, or activities, including those carried out on social media. These products will be developed in consultation with the WWC Website contractor to ensure they be posted on the website.

Subtask 8.2 Implement communications plan. The contractor shall implement the communications plan upon COR approval. The communications plan may include travel to conferences to present/disseminate WWC findings with COR approval.

Task 9 Conflict of Interest Policy (Fixed Price)

The contractor shall develop and maintain a conflict of interest policy to assure WWC work and associated personnel are separated from other contractor(s) interests, including reviews that include studies conducted by contractors and personnel or other research syntheses and dissemination projects. The draft of this policy shall be submitted 2 weeks after the kickoff meeting. The COR shall review the plan within 2 weeks. The contractor shall make revisions and submit a revised final policy within 2 weeks of receiving COR comments.

Task 10 Help Desk (Cost Reimbursement)

The WWC Help Desk is responsible for managing all communications that come in through the WWC website, email inbox, or toll-free phone line. All communications are responded to in a timely manner, and a thorough record of all communications must be kept. Statistics are maintained for monthly and annual reporting to IES to include but not limited to the number, types, and topics of inquiries received and responded to by the WWC Help Desk. The contractor shall be responsible for managing the range of inquiries related to the PEPPER contract and all products produced under this area. All Quality Review Team responses will be provided to the COR for review and approval.

Optional Task 11 Transition of Contract Materials (Fixed Price)

At the completion of the final Option Period exercised (or of the Base Period if the option(s) are not exercised), the contractor shall engage in appropriate transition activities to a new contractor.

These shall include:

· A written report detailing the key elements and processes of the project that would make a smooth transition possible completed three months before the end of the contract;

· Documentation of content meeting the definition of Federal records and a plan for transferring electronic permanent records to the COR

· Meetings and/or phone calls, as appropriate, with the new contractor; and

· One month before the end of the contract, the contractor shall be prepared to inventory and transfer to the COR, or to an ED contractor or other ED agent, all materials, including all files, software, architecture, programming, codes, analysis tools, databases, forms, reports, search engine features, and all other features and supporting documentation that were prepared or purchased by the contractor under the contract. The contractor shall provide all software, databases, interfaces, and data under a no-cost, no-strings license to another contractor, the COR, or an ED agent in case this contract is terminated. The contractor shall provide training to ED staff and others designated by the COR to facilitate a smooth transfer of operations so that ED is able to manage the operation of the database, website, and search engine after this contract ends.

Optional Task 12 Develop, Produce, and Update WWC Practice Guides (Fixed Price)

Subtask 12.1 Create a Practice Guide work plan. The contractor shall revise the draft Practice Guide work plan submitted in the proposal that specifies the: 1) methods for identifying practice guide topic areas and practices within topic areas; 2) protocol development; 3) review process, including designation of members of the expert panel, description of roles, and contractor support; 4) cost estimate; and 5) timelines and deliverables. The plan shall be incorporated into the Annual Plan under Task 2.

The contractor shall submit the revised draft Practice Guide Work Plan to the COR within 10 weeks after the exercise of this optional task. The COR will review the revised draft work and provide comments within two weeks. The contractor shall make revisions and submit the final Work Plan to the COR within 14 weeks after the exercise of this optional task. The contractor shall update the Practice Guide Work Plan semi-annually.

Subtask 12.2 Develop, produce, and update Practice Guides. The contractor shall develop and carryout a production process leading to the release of practice guides on the WWC website, according to the COR approved Practice Guide Work Plan in Subtask 12.1.

Optional Task 13 Contribute to the WWC Investment’s Statistical, Technical, and Analysis Team (STAT) for methodological advice and ideas for improvements (Cost Reimbursement)

Task 13 describes how the contractor shall contribute to the Statistical, Technical, and Analysis Team (STAT). The WWC Stat is a group of highly experienced researchers who consider issues requiring higher-level technical skills, including revising existing standards and developing new standards. Issues that arise during the review of studies are brought to the STAT for its consideration. The STAT advises IES and provides consultation.

Subtask 13.1 Identify members to serve on the STAT team. The contractor shall identify individuals with the expertise necessary to serve on the STAT and submit a justification for these selection to the COR for approval. Members of the STAT team may be employees of the contractor, subcontractors, or consultants. For estimation purposes, the contractor should expect to contribute 4-6 people to the WWC Investment’s STAT. A list of proposed individuals and a justification for their selection shall be submitted to the COR within 6 weeks of the effective award date.

Subtask 13.2 Identify topics to be addressed by the STAT team. The contractor shall identify topics that the STAT team will address during the first year of the contract, and update this list each year thereafter. Costs, topics, and products associated with the STAT team should be incorporated into the Annual Work Plan under Task 2.

Subtask 13.3 Convene STAT team and report on findings and recommendations. The contractor shall submit memos summarizing the findings and recommendations of the STAT team, according to the Annual Work Plan.

Potential Changes to the Contract

The Government anticipates the need to add additional work within scope of the contract. After contract award the Government reserves the right to engage with the contractor in negotiations to add services to the contract via bilateral modification. With regard to Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.001(c), examples of changes that shall be considered “within the scope and under the terms of an existing contract” include:

· An increase in quantity of a service already identified in a task or subtask in the PWS.

· In response to changing circumstances, a change in method to a meet a goal already identified in a task or subtask in the PWS.

· Special Work Orders (Cost Reimbursement) The Government anticipates the need to require the contractor to conduct special studies, analyses, and other reviews to supplement the tasks described above. The total value of the services is not expected to exceed $500,000 over the course of the contract. Two possible examples include, but are not limited to, the following:

A. Reviews. ED may request a review of specific topic areas or interventions not included in the topic reviews in Task 4. The contractor shall include Special Work Order A work plans in its Annual Work Plan under Task 2.

B. Convening Experts. ED may ask the contractor to organize and convene experts who are among the nation’s leading social science research methodologists having expertise in experimental and quasi-experimental study design, or conducting systematic reviews of the evidence on the effectiveness of interventions in education, special education, and related areas, or other areas of expertise. The contractor shall include Special Work Order B work plans in its Annual Work Plan under Task 2.

Compliance with ED IT Security Policy

The contractor, and all sub-contractors, shall comply with the Department of Education’s IT security policy requirements, specifically those set forth in the ‘Handbook for Information Assurance Security Policy (OCIO-01)’, and other applicable procedures and guidance. The contractor, and all sub-contractors, shall develop and implement management, operational and technical security controls to assure required levels of protection for information systems. The contractor, and all sub-contractors, shall further comply with all applicable Federal IT security requirements including, but not limited to, the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) of 2002, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-130 Appendix III, Homeland Security Presidential Directives (HSPD), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) standards and guidance, and the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP) requirements and guidance.

These security requirements include, but are not limited to, the successful Security Authorization (SA) of the system (includes commercially owned and operated systems managed by the commercial vendor and its sub-contractors, supporting Department programs, contracts, and projects); obtaining a full Authority to Operate (ATO) before being granted operational status; performance of annual self-assessments of security controls; annual Contingency Plan testing; performance of periodic vulnerability scans; updating all information system security documentation as changes occur; and other continuous monitoring activities, which may include, mapping, penetration and other intrusive scanning. Full and unfettered access for the Department’s third party Managed Security Services Provider (MSSP) must be granted to access all computers and networks used for this system. Additionally, when there is a significant change to the system’s security posture, the system (Federal and commercial prime- and sub- contractors included) must have a new SA, with all required activities to obtain a new ATO, signed by the Authorizing Official (AO).

System security controls shall be designed and implemented consistent with NIST SP 800-53 Rev 3, ‘Recommended Security Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations.’ All NIST SP 800-53 controls must be tested / assessed no less than every 3 years, according to federal and Department policy. The risk impact level of the system will be determined via the completion of the Department's inventory form and shall meet the accurate depiction of security categorization as outlined in Federal Information Publishing Standards (FIPS) 199, ‘Standards for Security Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems.’

System security documentation shall be developed to record and support the implementation of the security controls for the system. This documentation shall be maintained for the life of the system. The contractor, and all sub-contractors, shall review and update the system security documentation at least annually and after significant changes to the system, to ensure the relevance and accurate depiction of the implemented system controls and to reflect changes to the system and its environment of operation. Security documentation must be developed in accordance with the NIST 800 series and Department of Education policy and guidance.

The contractor, and all sub-contractors, shall allow Department employees (or Department designated third party contractors) access to the hosting facility to conduct SA activities to include control reviews in accordance with NIST SP 800-53, Rev. 3 and NIST SP 800-53A. The contractor, and all sub-contractors, shall be available for interviews and demonstrations of security control compliance to support the SA process and continuous monitoring of system security. In addition, if the system is rated as ‘Moderate’ or ‘High’ for FIPS 199 risk impact, vulnerability scanning and penetration testing shall be performed on the hosting facility and application as part of the SA process. Appropriate access agreements will be reviewed and signed before any scanning or testing occurs.

Identified deficiencies between required NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 3 controls and the contractor’s, and all sub-contractor’s implementation, as documented in the Risk Assessment Report, System Security Plan (SSP) and Security Assessment Report (SAR), shall be tracked for mitigation through the development of a Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M) in accordance with the ‘Handbook for Information Assurance Security Policy (OCIO-01).’ Depending on the severity of the deficiencies, the Department may require remediation before an ATO is issued.

All awarded contracts shall ensure that:

1. Their IT product/system is monitored during all hours of operations using entrusted detective/preventive systems;

2. Their IT product/system has current antiviral products installed and operational;

3. Their IT product/system is scanned on a reoccurring basis;

4. Vulnerabilities are remediated in a timely manner on their IT product/system; and

5. Access/view for cyber security situational awareness on their IT product/system is made available to the Department CIRC (cyber incident response capability).

Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) For IPv6, the contractor shall provide COTS solutions that are IPv6 capable. An IPv6 capable system or product shall be capable of receiving, processing, transmitting and forwarding IPv6 packets and/or interfacing with other systems and protocols in a manner similar to that of IPv4. Specific criteria to be deemed IPv6 capable are:

· An IPv6 capable system that meets the IPv6 base requirements defined by the USGv6 Profile (http://www.antd.nist.gov/usgv6/profile.html).

· Systems being developed, procured or acquired shall maintain interoperability with IPv4 systems/capabilities.

· Systems shall implement IPv4/IPv6 dual-stack and shall also be built to determine which protocol layer to use depending on the destination host it is attempting to communicate with or establish a socket with. If either protocol is possible, systems shall employ IPv6.

The contractor shall provide IPv6 technical support for system development, implementation and management.

Reporting of Data Security Breaches If there is a suspected or known breach/disclosure of PII due to lost, theft, intercepted transfer, or other, the contractor must ensure that this breach is reported to the agency as soon as the contractor has knowledge of it. Per Office of Management and Budget Memorandum M-06-19, Federal agencies have a requirement to report breaches of PII security to a Federal incident response center. IES must notify the department within 30 minutes of discovering the incident (and the agency should not distinguish between suspected or confirmed breaches). The data security plan must be written to reflect this requirement, and the contractor must provide sufficient notification and documentation of the suspected loss, as it is understood at the time of notification to the agency for this requirement to be met. Follow-up reports of the final status of loss events will also be prepared by the contractor within a reasonable period of time as advised by the IES COR.

System Development Standards:

Information systems shall be developed in accordance with the ED Lifecycle Management Framework (LCM), ACS-OCIO 1-106.

Contractor Employee Security Screening Requirements The Department has established policy on personnel security screening for all contractor and subcontractor employees and their field staff. The relevant Departmental Directive is OM:5-101. It was last updated in July 2010 and can be found at: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/leg/foia/acsom5101.pdf . The contractor must comply with the personnel security-screening requirements in OM:5-101 throughout the life of the contract.

All contractor and subcontractor employees must undergo personnel security screening if they will be employed for thirty (30) days or more.

The type of screening and the timing of the screening will depend upon the nature of the contractor position, the type of data the contractor employee will have access to, or the type of Departmental information technology (IT) system they will access. Personnel security screenings will be commensurate with the risk and magnitude of harm the individual could cause to the Department or the public. A position risk level will be assigned to each contractor employee position, before a solicitation is released, consistent with the descriptions in Appendix I of OM:5-101. Hence, each contractor employee working on this contract must be assigned a position risk level. Depending on the risk level assigned to each person's position, a follow-up background investigation by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) may occur.

The contractor must identify one of their employees as a security liaison for this process. This Contractor Security Liaison coordinates the distribution, collection, and dissemination of various forms required in this process. They answer general questions from their employees on completing the security screening process. And, they are the first point of contact for contractor employees in using the OPM’s Internet based security screening portal called e-QIP (http://www.opm.gov/e-qip/ ). The contractor is also responsible for ensuring that all subcontractors follow these personnel security screening procedures.

IES requires each contractor employee to have or apply for a clearance for the security level designated for the position held on a contract.

Contractor employees who have undergone appropriate personnel security screening for another Federal agency will be required to submit proof of that personnel security screening for validation. For these employees, the contractor or subcontractor must follow these required steps:

The contractor must send the COR a letter on Company letterhead that lists the full name of each employee with a pre-existing clearance, the agency that cleared the employee, the level of the clearance, and the date of the clearance. This letter must be transmitted to the COR within two (2) business days of starting work on an IES contract.

In those cases where any of the required information on level of clearance, agency that cleared the employee and date of clearance is not available, the contractor must send the COR a letter on Company letterhead that lists the full name and Social Security Number for each employee with a pre-existing clearance. This letter must be transmitted to the COR within two (2) business days of starting work on an IES contract.

The COR will transmit the letter to the IES Security Representative for processing.

The IES Security Representative reviews the letter to ensure that the required information is provided and either returns it to the contractor for completion or releases it to the Department of Education Chief of Personnel Security. The contractor must resubmit the letter to the COR within 7 business days or the contractor employee must be removed from the contract.

The IES Security Representative will notify the contractor or subcontractor if the pre-existing clearance was identified and ruled to be acceptable by the Department of Education Chief of Personnel Security.

Those employees whose pre-existing clearances are not verified and approved must follow the process outlined next to apply for a security clearance.

For contractor employees who have not undergone appropriate personnel security screening for another Federal agency, all contractors must comply with the IES Executive Office or Computer Security Officer’s pre-processing requirements for personnel security screening and granting access privileges. No contractor employees are permitted unsupervised access to unclassified sensitive information (i.e., personally identifiable information), direct access to respondents who are minors, or Department of Education IT systems until they have submitted applicable security screening documents.

For each contractor employee in a moderate risk level position the completed security screening documents must be accepted by the COR and the IES Security Representative and submitted to the Department of Education Chief of Personnel Security within 14 days of the date the contractor employee starts working on the contract. In order to meet this Departmental requirement, steps 1 through 7 must be completed within 14 days of the date the contractor employee starts working on the contract. To meet this 14 day deadline and the interim deadlines specified below, it is strongly recommended that the contractor request the account initiation three (3) weeks before the contractor employee starts contract work and encourage each contractor employee to complete all required security screening forms before starting contract work.

Contractor employees in High Risk IT (6C) Level positions require preliminary personnel security screenings before they are given access to unclassified sensitive information or Department of Education IT systems (see page 7 of OM:5-101 for more details).

The security screening of contractor and subcontractor employees not holding ED recognized security screening credentials must follow these required steps:

The contractor must provide the COR with an electronic listing of all employees on a specific contract, with the risk level associated with the position held by each employee as specified in the contract solicitation. The COR will review the electronic listing for completeness and approve. The listing will not be approved if it is found to be incomplete.

The Department of Education participates in the OPM e-QIP system to facilitate the security screening process for contractor employees. IES will initiate an e-QIP account for each contractor employee. It is advisable to request the account initiation three (3) weeks before the contractor employee starts contract work. For the initiation of these accounts, the Contractor Security Liaison must use the COR-approved list of employees and the risk levels assigned to the employees’ positions to produce and submit the following list using the attached template:

For each contractor employee provide: Social Security Number, Full Name, Date of Birth, Place…