Responses_to_Questions_and_Answers_7.3.18.pdf

Questions and Answers for

91990018R0021 – Assessing Evidence of Effectiveness in Adult Education

9 Jul 2018

1. Do sites/programs examined in the study – in the base period or in either of the two options – have to be receiving WIOA Title II funds? Is it permissible to involve sites/programs in the options studies that are eligible for Title II funds but are not receiving them? Can any adult education centers be included in the options studies?

ED is interested in effectiveness information for interventions relevant to federal policy. The Option Studies may include sites that are eligible for Title II funds but are not receiving them, to the extent that their inclusion would allow ED to address effectiveness questions of policy interest. The Systematic Evidence Review (Task 4) should include studies of interventions allowable under Title II, regardless of whether the studies were conducted in settings eligible for Title II funding.

2. How is IES defining a program for the options studies? Does it offer services at one particular location?

For the Option Studies, ED defines an adult education program as a course of instruction or a coordinated set of services provided to a group of adult learners. A program could entail a very specific strategy (e.g., curriculum used) or a broad approach (such as IET programs that vary in curriculum, intensity, occupational focus, etc.). Programs could be offered at multiple adult education centers and centers participating in a study could offer the program at one or more sites.

3. On page 36 (part I, section D, Option 2, anticipated sample size), the RFP estimates that the 60 sites recruited for the Option 2 study will yield a sample of 3,600 study participants (i.e., 60 sites, 2 cohorts per site, 2 classrooms per cohort, and 15 participants per classroom). Is ED assuming 3,600 to be the number of study participants at intake or the number completing the intervention?

ED is interested in each offeror’s proposed approach to this element of Option 2’s design, based on the offeror’s understanding of how adult education is provided and what is methodologically appropriate to meet ED’s objective of producing reliable and rigorous estimates of effectiveness.

4. Does the subcontract cost assumptions under 20.2 (page 57) for Option 2 include the 4 classrooms for the control sites? Under Task 20, the RFP says to assume the total cost for subcontract(s) for the computer-based tutoring interventions will be $200,000. With an estimated 1,800 learners in the 30 intervention sites, the cost is approximately $100 per learner, as indicated in subtask 20.2. However, in Task 21, the RFP states that the contractor shall commit to providing Option 2 control sites “with access to the intervention for one year, beginning twelve months following the end of the intervention implementation period.” Should the subcontract include an additional $200,000 to cover the anticipated cost of one year of access to the intervention for the control sites?

Yes, offerors should include in their budgets funds to cover the one year of access for control sites, as described in Task 21. The performance work statement has been amended to reflect that the total cost of the subcontract awarded under Task 20.2 should be $400,000.

5. On page 40, Task 3, the RFP states that the contractor will need to collect data from adult education programs in order to determine the feasibility of each of the up to seven studies selected by the COR. On page 43, in Task 5, the RFP states that the COR will review the list and select up to ten possible interventions for the contractor to further explore for feasibility (see Task 6).” Task 6 only mentions exploring “the feasibility of conducting the studies selected by the COR.” Will Task 6 explore the feasibility of impact studies and specific adult education interventions?

Task 3 includes drafting and receiving clearance from OMB on the information collection package necessary for conducting the work described in Task 6. The performance work statement has been updated so that Task 3 references ten interventions, rather than seven studies. These ten interventions are the ones that will be selected by the COR, as described under Task 5. The selected contractor will explore the feasibility of conducting impact studies of these interventions under Task 6.

6. In Task 4, what should we assume about the number and length of reports under Task 4.2? Does ED intend for three reports—a 15-pager, 4-pager, and a 1-pager—as specified for Tasks 15.2 and 26.2?

Yes, Task 4.2 will require a report that is no longer than 15 pages (plus appendices that fully document the interventions, data, analytic methods, and results), along with a four page summary and a one page summary. The performance work statement has been updated to include this detail.

7. In Tasks 15 and 26, how many drafts should we assume will be required to satisfy the

Standards and Review Office for the reports under Option 1 and Option 2? (Other Performance Work Statements from the U.S. Department of Education this season have indicated to assume three drafts before approval.)

For all reports included in this solicitation that undergo review by the Standards and Review Office (SRO), ED anticipates up to three rounds of review by SRO.

8. The RFP posted on FBO on June 27 is identified as a draft. By what date does ED plan to release a revised/final RFP?

The official solicitation is completing the last stage of the solicitation review process.

It will be posted to FBO as soon as it is completed. At this time we do not envision any substantial changes to the current draft.

9. The FedBizOpps.gov posting dated June 27, 2018 at 4:22 p.m. states “proposals are due 26 July 2018, 12:00 p.m. EST, as stated in the DRAFT RFP.” Does the government anticipate releasing a final RFP with the same proposal due date or is this the final RFP for response?

No, the proposal due date will remain the same. As stated above, we do not expect any substantial changes to the current draft. However there is a revised PWS as a result of these questions and answers.