Amendment_0001_Responses_to_Questions_ED-NAG-16-R-0001_FormSF30_FINAL.pdf

NSN 7540-01-152-8070 STANDARD FORM 30. (Rev. 10-83) Previous Edition unusable Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Page of Pages AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. Contract ID Code

2. AMENDMENT MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (if applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6) CODE

(x) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (NO., Street, Country, State and ZIP Code)

CODE FACILITY CODE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of offers is extended, is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning __ __ copies of amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OR OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment your desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

Check One A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return _______ copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

The purpose of this amendment is to respond to clarification questions. Responses to questions are detailed in Attachment A to the amendment.

All other RFP terms and conditions remain unchanged.

End of amendment 0001.

1 10

0001 MAY 24, 2016 EDNAGB-16-900004

NAGB

National Assessment Governing Board 800 North Capitol Street NW, Suite 825 Washington DC 20002-4233

See Block 6

ED-NAG-16-R-0001

APR 29, 2016

See Schedule

X

Attachment Page

PAGE 2 OF 10 ED-NAG-16-R-0001/0001

Responses to Questions: ED-NAG-16-R-0001

RESPONSES TO CLARIFICATION QUESTIONS

ED-NAG-16-R-0001

May 24, 2016

Focused Reporting with data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

PAGE 3 OF 10 ED-NAG-16-R-0001/0001

Responses to Questions: ED-NAG-16-R-0001

The following responses to clarification questions are provided as an amendment to the Request for Proposals (RFP).

General Questions:

1. Can font size of text within tables be smaller than 12 point font? Can Arial 10 point font be used for charts and tables?

A 10 point font is acceptable for graphics and tables only.

2. What is the estimated level of effort for this contract?

The current estimated level of effort is the equivalent of one FTE per year including all labor categories. However, offerors are free to propose a level of effort that is commensurate with the proposed technical plan.

3. What is the anticipated award date?

The current planned award date is no later than August 1, 2016.

4. Will offeror be expected to work on-site with NAGB and NCES?

No, work will be off-site unless merited. The kickoff meeting shall be in-person.

5. Are there limitations on subcontractors? Do they have to be a small business or is there room for other entities?

Please see solicitation provision FAR 52.219-14(c)(1) – Limitations on Subcontracting

(NOV 2011).

Statement of Work Questions:

1. Could NAGB clarify the number of analyses required under each of the tasks (Tasks 2- 5)?

The four deliverables under each task require analysis, the scope which is dependent on the technical approach proposed and could be revised based on preliminary findings. An analyst understands that a good analytic plan may lead to just one analysis, but in most cases multiple analyses are required to review and refine work.

2. Could NAGB please clarify the number and type of products required under each of the tasks (2-5)?

See Section 6 – Deliverables and Due Dates in Attachment A, Statement of Work. If a given analysis produces findings that require further research or additional artifacts, the cost assumptions and contract budget will be revised accordingly by a contract modification.

PAGE 4 OF 10 ED-NAG-16-R-0001/0001

Responses to Questions: ED-NAG-16-R-0001

3. On page 6 of the RFP it states that for each task there will be an artifact for presentation and dissemination – visual representations of the findings. Can NAGB provide more guidance on the approximate number of artifacts that are expected for each task and the expected size (length) of each artifact?

Please see response to question 2. The number of artifacts will depend on the results of the analysis conducted, with at least one infographic per task required. If a given analysis produces findings of great interest, relevance, and value, then additional artifacts, such as an infographic, shall be produced. Length is not of utmost importance here. The quality – concise, attractive, accurate, informative, and noteworthy – is of preeminent importance, much more so than the length, or quantity of words and pictures in an artifact.

4. The Scope of Work asks for: “two page briefs featuring concise text with dynamic graphs and charts, maps and other visual representation of information,” Do you intend these artifacts to be interactive in a web based environment?

The content of the artifacts will govern the decision on whether to make the artifacts interactive. If the best way to visually present the data is a “two-page brief featuring concise text with dynamic graphs and charts…” – an example given in a list of what can be considered an artifact by this Scope of Work – and not an infographic, then yes, this brief should be interactive for a web-based environment and web-based audiences.

5. We read the requirements as at least 6 reporting products with accompanying deliverables (analytic plan, reporting plan, product and methodology report, and visual presentation) for the duration of the contract period, at least 2 reporting products for each task, is there an anticipated number of total products to be completed?

See page 7 of the Statement of Work which specifies there are 4 critical deliverables within each analytic task.

6. The RFP states under Task 2, “The contractor shall analyze state-level data by region.” Is this in addition to reporting individual state-level findings?

The work scope for Task 2 is specifically related to a geographic regional analysis. The products shall be focused on the regional findings. However, if individual state-level findings are to be analyzed, the scope and cost assumptions will be revised by contract modification if needed.

7. The RFP notes that for Geographic/Regional Analysis that “at least two analyses on topical areas to be provided by the COR of the most recent publically available NAEP data in reading, mathematics, U.S. History, civics, geography and science by geographic region.”

a. Does “two analyses” mean that the COR will select two of the subject areas above for the artifacts? If “two analyses” has a different meaning, please explain what is meant by “two analyses.”

PAGE 5 OF 10 ED-NAG-16-R-0001/0001

Responses to Questions: ED-NAG-16-R-0001

The COR will consult with the Governing Board members on the Reporting and Dissemination Committee to determine which topic in which of those subject areas are of priority to explore and analyze. The COR then will share the results of this consultation with the contractor to guide the work.

b. What is meant by “two analyses on topical areas provided by COR under Task 3?

The scope of work for Task 3 is limited only to districts that participated in the TUDA program. (See also response to the COR consultation with the R&D Committee to question 7a as described above).

c. How many subject areas are included under tasks 2, 4, and 5?

For each of these tasks, the subject areas as currently planned will not exceed three.

d. How many grades should each artifact include?

The grade levels for each artifact are based on what is available via the NAEP data explorer and NAEP release sites.

8. Tasks 2-5 suggested that the contractor may be required to house restricted use NCES data.

Please provide additional information about the nature of these data.

The primary source of data will be the publicly available NAEP Data Explorer and data on NAEP release sites. In the event that the analysis will require restricted use NAEP data, all access to the data will need to comply with NCES access requirements.

9. Will there be access to embargoed NDE data?

No, only released NAEP data will be utilized for this work. See response to question 8.

10. The scope of work alludes to multiple to-be-determined topics in tasks 2-5; may the contractor engage additional subject matter experts (employees, consultants, and/or subcontractors) once topics are determined? If yes, what FAR clauses are applicable?

If and when additional topics are discussed and additional task requirements are identified, a separate budget for further research tasks will be required. Additional analyses and research (if required) will be done as a supplemental agreement to the contract. All contract changes within scope to the contract during the period of performance are governed by FAR 52.243-1 Changes – Fixed Price.

11. Please clarify whether your plan is to reach all 3 key audiences you identified in NAGB’s Communications Plan (parents; teachers and administrators; and policy makers) for each reporting and dissemination activity outlined in Tasks 2-5 or whether you intend to customize your dissemination efforts to reach a specific audience group with each reporting activity?

PAGE 6 OF 10 ED-NAG-16-R-0001/0001

Responses to Questions: ED-NAG-16-R-0001

The Governing Board intends to customize dissemination efforts to reach a specific audience group with each reporting activity which may include the audiences specified in NAGB’s communications plan.

12. Is NAGB interested in having different products for distinct stakeholder groups or products that will serve the needs of all stakeholders?

Please see response to question 11.

13. We understand that one of the main objectives of the procurement is to produce ancillary materials that would be disseminated via social media. Could you confirm that the only dissemination and outreach strategy for which offerors should prepare reporting and visual presentations is a social media one?

All deliverables will be posted on the Governing Board website (www.NAGB.gov) and will be disseminated through social media primarily. Content must be designed in a format that shall make it readily accessible through multiple social media tools in order to expand and facilitate communication.

14. To what extent will the contractor be involved in public dissemination of findings of analyses through social media?

The contractor shall not be involved in dissemination efforts.

15. Will the visual presentation/collateral materials exclusively reside on the Governing Board website, or will the materials have their own web presence for targeted dissemination?

Materials will be posted to www.NAGB.gov as well as through NAGB social media outlets.

The social media outreach will direct traffic to the NAGB website. The Governing Board is in the midst of redesigning the organization website. It is anticipated that the new website will integrate social media communication for easy access to products. However, at this time, offerors do not need to budget for separate web page development.

16. In addition to downloadable materials (i.e. two-page briefs), shall the visual presentation/collateral materials be developed to offer web-based reporting.

Yes.

17. Is offeror responsible for developing digital presentations of data?

Yes. See page 6 of the Statement of Work and response to question 13.

18. The RFP refers to the dissemination of the visual presentation/collateral materials via Governing Board social media outlets. Should the development of a dissemination strategy, or execution of a social media dissemination strategy, be considered as a part of this proposal?

PAGE 7 OF 10 ED-NAG-16-R-0001/0001

Responses to Questions: ED-NAG-16-R-0001

No. See response to question 14.

19. Will final products associated with this contract be housed on the NAGB website or is the contractor expected to provide a hosting environment for the public’s access?

The contractor will not be required to provide web hosting for all final products.

20. Is the contractor expected to obtain an ATO for an agency-provided or its hosted environment? If yes, what is the anticipated FISMA level?

No.

21. How many drafts of each deliverable (e.g., analytic plan, reporting plan, product and methodology report, and visual presentation) will NAGB require prior to final approval?

Up to two rounds of reviews are acceptable, as stated in the QASP (Attachment B).

22. Could you elaborate on the review process that is required for all deliverables? What is the anticipated review time offerors should build in their timelines and is the expectation that the offerors coordinate review meetings with NCES?

As stated in the Statement of Work on page 5, all deliverables must pass review by Governing Board staff and NCES staff. This internal review process will take approximately four weeks. The outcome of which may require iterative revisions and adjustments to the project timeline. In addition, please see deliverable due dates specified for each task in Section 6. There is no expectation that offerors will coordinate review meetings with NCES.

23. Can you clarify the nature of “review by both the Governing Board and NCES staff to ensure adherence to rigorous NCES and NAEP statistical standard”? Does this include a formal review by IES?

NCES will be requested to provide feedback on project deliverables to ensure the analyses was conducted correctly and to ensure that the analyses adhere to NCES statistical standards. However, this does not include a formal review by IES.

24. Should draft pre-release products be vetted by NAGB's R&D team from the NAGB website, a secure password protected contractor hosted environment, or via email correspondence (including hyperlinks to documents)?

The COR will coordinate all R&D Committee reviews. All feedback will be shared with the contractor by the COR.

25. Are non-public draft or interim deliverables required to be 508 compliant?

No. Only final deliverables are required to be 508 compliant.

PAGE 8 OF 10 ED-NAG-16-R-0001/0001

Responses to Questions: ED-NAG-16-R-0001

26. We know from past experience that it takes several months after a major NAEP release for NCES to release restricted use data to licensees and supporting technical documentation for any major Report Card. How will this potential constraint factor into the deliverable schedule? If this challenge arises, will NAGB coordinate with NCES to allow offeror to have embargoed access to the unpublished restricted use data if necessary?

Analyses will primarily use the most recent data available on the NAEP Data Explorer or on the Report Card websites. The deliverables outlined in this Statement of Work do not require restricted-use data. Please see the response to question 8.

27. What foreseeable limitations exist for this work?

Attachment B – Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan specifies quality metrics and performance standards which include identifying potential areas of concern with contingency plans. If offerors foresee additional challenges or limitations, those should be submitted with their proposal and revised QASP. As part of the Management Plan section of the proposal, NAGB would like offerors to reveal what limitations they anticipate and how these will be overcome. For example, if the project timeline changes as a result of the review process, the changes will be addressed by the Contracting Officer.

Instructions to Offerors Questions:

1. Sections 4 and 6 each ask for an organization chart. Do you expect the same organizational chart to be submitted in both sections of the response? If not, can you provide details as to how the two charts differ? Under Attachment C, No. 4 (page 5) and No. 6 (page 6), the contractor is expected to provide organizational charts to show management structure, lines of authority, and responsibility for all person and organizations involved. Is the contractor expected to provide one chart or two charts? If organizational charts are to be provided in both sections, can ED provide clearer distinction between the two? Please confirm that the organizational chart required under Organizational Capabilities and Experience refers to the offeror's overall corporate structure.

The chart required in section 4 is project specific and includes key staff assigned to task activities and key project milestones. The organizational chart required in section 6 is more specific to your corporate organization and capabilities to demonstrate organizational capabilities and experience in undertaking this work.

2. Does the government want a Past Performance Volume that is separate from the three Contractor Past Performance Information forms (Attachment E) that must be submitted by the contractor’s references?

Yes, the past performance volume is prepared by offerors and is separate from the past performance information forms to be submitted by the offeror’s references directly to the NAGB Contracting Officer.

PAGE 9 OF 10 ED-NAG-16-R-0001/0001

Responses to Questions: ED-NAG-16-R-0001

Budgetary Questions:

1. Is there an estimated value for the contract?

The level of effort is provided in our response to general question 2.

2. In the business proposal, if we provide adequate justification of all proposed costs, does that equate to government approval of our accounting, estimating and purchasing systems?

Reviewing the validity of proposed costs does not equate to Government approval of accounting and estimating systems. If accounting systems have not been reviewed and approved by a Government agency, offerors must state so and provide justification for all proposed costs. The Government reserves the right to not award a contract to a company that does not have an approved accounting, estimating, and purchasing system. See section 3 of the Business Proposal instructions in Attachment C (page 8).

3. Task 5 as outlined in the Statement of Work takes us 14 months into the project. Please clarify the budget timeline that is to be submitted in the business proposal.

The Analytic Plan is due 14 months after the kickoff meeting. The performance period for Task 5 is approximately 6 months following receipt of the analytic plan. This should be reflected in the Gantt chart timeline in the technical proposal. Offerors have been requested to submit a proposed payment schedule that should be tied to progress or submission of project deliverables.

4. One page 4-5 of the RFP, it states that additional tasks may be issued during the contract period of performance as Governing Board requirements change. In terms of budget, how will this be handled?

Changes to contract tasks within scope during the contract period of performance will be made via modification and should not be budget at this time. See also response to Statement of Work question 2.

5. The government states that “the richness of the findings should drive what products result from the analysis” (pg. 5 of Attachment A). Is there any additional guidance you can provide to help with budgeting, such as the number of past products produced or the budget available?

This is a new requirement, past product information is not available. Therefore, it is important to provide cost assumptions in the budget proposal.

6. Will contractor products (artifacts, briefs, and/or ancillary materials) include printed documents that will be disseminated broadly (including to the public)? If yes, please provide more detailed budgetary assumptions for the volume of printed documents expected?

PAGE 10 OF 10 ED-NAG-16-R-0001/0001

Responses to Questions: ED-NAG-16-R-0001

One hard copy of each deliverable shall be submitted together with an electronic copy. The contractor will not be required to handle high volume printing and/or hard-copy production of materials.