MTSSR_Instructions_to_Offerors_RFI_Draft_4.13.18.pdf

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

IMPACT EVALUATION OF TRAINING IN MULTI-TIERED SYSTEMS OF

SUPPORT FOR READING IN EARLY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

RFP #IESE180056AP

The outside of the proposal packaging, the cover of each proposal, and the header of each proposal page should contain the title "Impact Evaluation of Training in Multi-Tiered

Systems of Support for Reading in Early Elementary School.” The Government will evaluate proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria set forth in the Technical

Evaluation Criteria of this request for proposals. It is understood that the proposal will become a part of the official contract file. The Government reserves the right to award the contract without discussions, per FAR 15.306(a)(3).

This Request for Proposal (RFP) does not commit the Government to pay any cost for the preparation and submission of a proposal. In addition, the Contracting Officer is the only individual who can legally commit the Government to the expenditure of public funds in connection with this acquisition.

Offerors should prepare separate technical and business/cost proposals for the project.

Each proposal should be separate and complete in itself so that evaluation of one may be accomplished independently of the other. Cost information should be restricted to the business proposal, and the technical proposal must not contain reference to specific costs

(although resource information may be included so that the offeror’s understanding of the scope of the work may be evaluated). Past performance information should be included in the technical proposal.

An official authorized to bind your organization must sign the proposal. Offerors must submit the technical proposal electronically in WORD and PDF format and the cost proposal (including a narrative description of costs) electronically in WORD and

PDF format. The offeror must also electronically submit an EXCEL WORKBOOK version of the cost proposal. In addition, 3 hard copies of the technical proposal and

1 hard copy of the business proposal must be submitted.

Proposals are due, via email, by 12:00 PM (Eastern Standard Time) on Month Day, 2018. Proposals shall be emailed to the primary and secondary contacts listed below:

Primary Point of Contact:

Sara Steinberger

Contract Specialist

Sara.Steinberger@ed.gov

Secondary Point of Contact:

Ryan Battad

Contracting Officer mailto:Sara.Steinberger@ed.gov

Ryan.Battad@ed.gov

NOTE: If an email’s attachment size exceeds 20MB, it is recommended that the offeror break up the proposal into smaller attachments in separate emails. If the submission exceeds 20MB, the Department may not receive the proposal.

Hard copy proposals shall be delivered to:

U.S. Department of Education

Contracts and Acquisitions Management

550 12th Street, S.W.

7th Floor, Room 7161

Washington, D.C. 20202-4230

Attn: Sara Steinberger, Contract Specialist

Telephone Number: (202) 245-8061

Hand-carried proposals must be delivered by entering through the building and stopping at the Guard's Desk. Offerors are directed to call the security desk at 202-245-6687.

Offerors should indicate for which RFP they are submitting a proposal and should have proper identification. Offerors will be required to sign in and be escorted to Contracts and

Acquisitions Management or wait for someone to come down to the guards’ desk, at which point the proposal will be officially received. Offerors should consider this delay in meeting the time specified for proposal receipt.

Clarification Questions

The Department will accept clarification questions from potential offerors. Clarification questions must be submitted, via email, to: Sara.Steinberger@ed.gov with a cc to

Ryan.Battad@ed.gov, no later than 12:00 PM (Eastern Standard Time) on Month

Day, 2018. The Department does not guarantee that a response will be given to clarification questions submitted after the due date. Offerors will not receive a response until all questions have been received by the due date.

Any information given to a prospective offeror concerning a solicitation will be furnished promptly to all other prospective offerors if that information is necessary in submitting offers or if a lack of information would be prejudicial to any other prospective offerors.

This information will be sent to all offerors that respond to the RFP.

General Instructions for the Technical Proposal (Volume I)

Through the technical proposal, the offeror must show a thorough understanding of the goals and activities of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and demonstrate that proposed staff have the necessary experience and expertise to meet task objectives. While the intent of each task is spelled out in the PWS, this should be considered a starting point, and technical proposals must include detailed work plans and illustrative examples to fully describe the offeror’s plans to accomplish each task and the relevant deliverables.

mailto:Ryan.Battad@ed.gov mailto:Sara.Steinberger@ed.gov mailto:Ryan.Battad@ed.gov

A proposal that simply repeats the language of the PWS without providing details about how the offeror will carry out the activities will not be considered eligible for award.

Offerors are encouraged to suggest improvements to the approaches detailed in the PWS, along with a justification of the merits of these alternative approaches. Offerors may find it necessary to make adjustments to the schedule provided in the PWS, in accordance with the newly proposed strategies and/or procedures. In this case, offerors shall clearly identify any changes in the schedule and explain their rationale, keeping in mind the

Department’s objective of completing the requirement within the stated time frame.

Technical proposals must not exceed 75 double-spaced pages with a 12-point font size and margins of at least 1 inch. The page limit includes the narrative and corresponding tables/graphics, abstracts of selected relevant corporate work, and lists of the current contractual commitments of proposed staff. The page limit does not include the appendix containing any relevant letters of commitment and résumés for key project staff. However, résumés must be no more than 3 pages each. The Department will not review any pages that exceed the maximum page limit.

All pages should be numbered consecutively, including appendices. Offerors shall use the format and content requirements detailed below in preparing their technical proposals.

Bulleted and numbered lists within the regular text of the proposal shall be double-spaced. They are not required to be indented, however. Footnotes may be single spaced and 10-point font. However, inserting frequent and/or lengthy footnotes that contain substantive information as a strategy to convey more content in the same number of pages is strongly discouraged. Overuse of footnotes is distracting to a reader and can make the proposal more disjointed or disorganized. Figures, tables, and graphics may be single spaced and 10-point font. However, offerors are strongly discouraged from converting substantial blocks of text into tables, figures, or graphics as a strategy to convey more content in the same number of pages. For example, offerors shall not convert a bulleted or numbered list into a table simply to save space. Figures, tables, and graphics shall only be used if they substantially improve the organization and presentation of material. Figures, tables, and graphics with a large amount of text are typically ineffective ways to present information.

Technical Proposal Format and Contents

Proposals must include, but are not limited to, each of the following sections:

A cover sheet with the name and address of the firm and signed by an officer of the firm. (Does not count toward the page limit.)

Abstract. A one-page summary is to be provided abstracting the proposal contents in language understandable to an informed layperson. The abstract shall indicate full acceptance of the solicitation requirements or note any exceptions justified in the text. (Does not count toward the page limit.)

Table of Contents. The Table of Contents must provide a means of quickly accessing important points of discussion in the proposal. The table of contents must also provide the name of the senior author (and coauthors, if applicable) of each section. (Does not count toward the page limit.)

Introduction. The offeror must provide an overview that demonstrates knowledge of: (a) issues relevant to the purpose of the procurement; and (b) design and analysis issues relevant to the study as described within the performance work statement. In addition, the introduction shall also briefly describe the proposal, provide a rationale for why the proposed approach will best meet the intent and requirements of the contract, and describe the ways in which the proposed approach is unique, insightful, or particularly comprehensive.

Technical Approach (Task Descriptions). This section shall completely and concisely explain the strategies, operations, and procedures the offeror proposes to achieve the contract’s objectives, addressing each subtask, in the order presented in the PWS. This section should include a discussion of any potential issues that might arise and the proposed solutions to address them. Offerors are encouraged to suggest technical improvements to the work, so long as the suggestions are justified and feasible.

Proposed Personnel. This section shall provide the names of the proposed project director, other key personnel, subcontractors, and consultants. Offerors should indicate the total number of proposed hours for each staff person

(including subcontractors and consultants), and proposed hours by task. This section should describe the specific responsibilities of each proposed staff person and shall include an organizational chart to illustrate management roles and responsibilities.

A narrative description that clearly describes how staff qualifications and experience relate to the requirements of the performance work statement and proposed task assignments must be included. For staff charged with project management, experience monitoring project costs and carrying out quality control activities shall be described.

To indicate the availability of staff persons to work on this contract, offerors should also indicate the proportion of each staff person’s time (including subcontractors and consultants) that is committed to current and pending federal and non-federal projects from October 2018 through February 2024. The offeror shall also indicate the proposed proportion of each staff person’s time that would be committed to the current contract during this time frame (by year and total).

Any sub-contractual arrangements shall be described thoroughly, and it must be clear which tasks will be completed by subcontractors and the role that they will play. The offeror shall assure that proposed subcontractors/consultants are free of conflicts of interest that might bias their approach to this work. Letter(s) by proposed subcontractors/consultants indicating willingness to serve, if the offeror is selected, shall be included with the offeror's proposal as an appendix.

The offeror shall present a proposed timeline that includes start and end dates for each project task and activity. It should be clear when work related to each subtask, deliverable, and data collection activity will be accomplished, the key staff responsible for the work, and how time for Department approval of deliverables has been budgeted. This section should also discuss how the offeror will assign staff and oversee their work (including subcontractors and consultants), resolve problems, and ensure work quality, timeliness, and cost control.

This section should be accompanied by an appendix that includes résumés of no more than 3 pages each for key staff members. The resumes should include educational and professional background and should only highlight experience relevant to the contract. The narrative and/or resumes should provide sufficient detail about prior projects for reviewers to assess relevance to the performance work statement.

Relevant Corporate Experience. This section shall discuss prior corporate experience similar to the current project. For all projects cited in the proposal as relevant corporate or staff experience, offerors shall list identifying information including the title, contract number, award date, end date, project director, key personnel, subcontractors, dollar amount, and client contact information. Offerors must also include a list of all contracts (including contract number and client contact information) with the National Center for Education Evaluation in the

Institute of Education Sciences for which the offeror or its proposed subcontractors served as prime contractor (currently active as well as active at any time during the past seven years). This information shall be provided for any proposed subcontractors and consultants as well as for the proposed prime contractor. Offerors should provide sufficient detail about these projects for reviewers to assess their relevance to the current project in terms of the specific tasks to be performed, content, methodology, complexity, scope, sample size, and data collection modes.

Past Performance. To support the review of past performance, the Source

Selection Official/Contracting Officer will obtain past performance information from services such as CPARS and FAPIIS for all projects identified in the

Relevant Corporate Experience section of the technical proposal. The

Government also reserves the right to obtain past performance information from other sources, such as contacting identified clients. Consideration of the offeror’s reputation in terms of quality, problem resolution, cost control, timeliness, business relations, and customer service will be evaluated.

In addition, offerors may submit information about three contracts, completed after September, 2013 or currently in process but beyond the first year of the contract, which are of similar content, methodology, complexity, scope, sample size, and data collection modes to this solicitation. The "Contractor Performance

Information” form (Attachment X) should be used to collect this information from references. The three contracts may include those entered into with the Federal

Government, agencies of State and local governments, and commercial customers. Contracts with the parent or an affiliate of the offeror may not be used.

Each reference is to complete the form and return it to the Contract Specialist, as prescribed on the form. Completed forms from references are due on the same day as Technical & Business Proposals under this solicitation. Request that the reference please return the completed form via email to the following individuals:

to: Sara.Steinberger@ed.gov and a cc to: Ryan.Battad@ed.gov

Small Business Participation and Plan. The Department values an approach where substantive work in a meaningful capacity is performed by capable small businesses more highly than an approach where only menial work is performed by small businesses. A meaningful capacity for substantive work includes work other than courier services, office supplies, or travel services. Therefore, a valued approach for the anticipated contract will be one where technical, analytical, data collection, or other significant services are performed by a small business that is capable of doing this work.

Offerors shall state the work to be performed by a small business(es), the name of the small business(es), the socioeconomic status of each small business concern, and the percentage of work proposed to be performed by each small business concern (by and for each performance period, inclusive of option periods), but

NO COST INFORMATION SHALL BE PROVIDED. If the Large Business offeror provides a small business subcontracting plan that does not or cannot meet the Department’s stated goals in the solicitation, the plan should provide enough information detailing the rationale to not do so.

All offerors who are not designated as a small business in the stated NAICS Code for this requirement must submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan for review, to satisfy the applicable requirements of 48 CFR 52.219-9 II. A template

(Attachment X) has been provided to facilitate this process. Offerors must submit the template and a small business subcontracting plan that contains all information and elements required by FAR 19.7.

The subcontracting agreements that shall be included in the appendix of the technical proposal are distinct from Attachment X. The agreements are typically letters from the proposed subcontractor to the prime contractor indicating agreement to serve as a subcontractor and a brief description of the services to be provided by the subcontractor. No cost information shall be included in these letters, and these letters shall not count toward the 75-page limit for the technical proposal. The small business information that shall be included in the body of the technical proposal are: the work to be performed by the small business(es), the name of the small business(es), the socioeconomic status of each small business concern, and the percentage of work proposed to be performed by each small business concern. Other than the percentage of work proposed, no cost information on these small businesses shall be provided in this section or in any other part of the technical proposal. Attachment X does include cost information and shall be included in the business proposal only.

In accordance with the Government-wide Procurement Preference Goaling

Program, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) negotiates with the U.S. Small

Business Administration to develop annual small business procurement goals for both prime contracts and subcontracts.

The Department’s small business goals for Fiscal Year 2018 (FY2018) are shown below. All subcontracting small business goal figures are Percentage of Total

Subcontract Dollars.

Prime Contract Small Business Goals

All prime contract small business goal figures are Percentage of Total Prime

Contract Dollars.

FY 2018 Prime Contract Small Business Goals (The Department FY18 Goals are still being negotiated)

Small Business Category Goal

Small Business 22.5%

Other Small Disadvantaged Business 5%

Women-Owned Small Business 5%

HUBZone Small Business 3%

Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business 3%

Subcontract Small Business Goals

All subcontracting small business goal figures are Percentage of Total

Subcontract Dollars.

FY 2018 Subcontract Small Business Goals

Small Business Category Goal

Small Business 31.00%

Small Disadvantaged Business 5%

Women-Owned Small Business 5%

HUBZone Small Business 3%

Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small

Business 3%

Protection of Human Subjects. Since the anticipated contract involves the collection of data, offerors must be cognizant of the requirements of the

Department’s regulation on protection of human subjects of research. This regulation was published in The Federal Register on June 18, 1991, as The

Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects: Notices and Rules. The regulation is under Title 34, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 97, 350 and 356.

Include in the proposal a statement that your company is cognizant of this requirement and shall comply with it as necessary.

Business Proposal (Volume II)

The Department anticipates awarding a Cost Reimbursement Plus Fixed Fee contract following a full and open competitive process. There is no page limit to the business proposal. The offeror shall submit proposed costs for each task and subtask and for the project overall. The proposed budget for each task and subtask (total, by contract period, and by contract year) shall include the number of hours each staff person is expected to commit, the labor category, and the hourly labor rate.

It is required that business proposals contain sufficient information for a cost analysis determination to be made and a fair and reasonable determination. The offeror is expected to use their best business judgment in submitting the necessary information.

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.404-1 states “cost realism means the costs in an offeror’s proposal are a) realistic for the work to be performed; b) reflect a clear understanding of the requirements, and c) are consistent with the various elements of the offeror’s technical proposal.” As such, offerors’ proposals should contain data other than certified cost or pricing data, and an explanation of the estimating process, as required by

FAR 15.403-3. When applicable, the following items must be specifically identified; e.g., Other Administrative Data (Refer to FAR 15.408, Table 15-2 I.C.). Please verify that the contents of the business proposal are mathematically accurate and the supporting data reconcile in the proposal.

Where applicable, Offerors must ensure that its company, and its proposed sub-contractor and consultants follow the General Services Administration’s (GSA) Federal Travel

Regulations (FTR). Please provide a statement saying that the offeror will comply with the

FTR.

Business Proposal Contents

The Business Proposal must include each of the following:

A cover sheet with the name, address, and DUNS number of the firm and signed by an officer of the firm.

Abstract. A one-page summary is to be provided abstracting the proposal contents in language understandable to an informed layperson. The abstract shall indicate full acceptance of the solicitation requirements or note any offeror or assumptions justified. A summary chart showing the proposed Cost

Reimbursement costs for the full performance period shall be included.

Cost Accounting, Estimating, and Purchasing System Information. The offeror shall include information on the status of your accounting system, estimating system, and purchasing system. If these systems have been reviewed and approved by a

Government Agency, include a copy of the approval letter.

Labor Rates. Offerors shall submit their labor rates broken out, not fully loaded.

Offerors are encouraged to propose discounted rates to improve the competitiveness of their proposal. The labor mix and labor categories proposed should be consistent with the personnel proposed in the technical proposal. Any rate higher than $800 per day for any proposed consultant requires justification.

Breakdowns for Other Direct Costs and Other Resources. Offerors shall submit proposed costs itemized for each task/subtask, as well as a total proposed cost for the entire work to be performed under the contract. The proposed budget for each task and subtask should indicate the number of hours being proposed for each staff person and breakdowns of direct charges for materials, supplies, consultants, equipment, telephone, copying, travel, and any other major budget items, as well as indirect cost rates used in preparing the cost estimate. Indirect rates shall be in accordance with your current provisional billing rate agreements.

A copy of current indirect rate agreements shall be included with the business proposal. The business proposal shall also include costs itemized by project year.

Breakdowns for Individual Student Testing. Offerors shall provide separate costs for individual student testing by grade-level within each data collection task.

In Task 17 (Option II), offers shall submit proposed costs itemized for each administration of individual student testing (Fall 2020-2021 and Spring 2020-

2021) by student grade level (grade 1 and grade 2). In Task 27 (Option III), offeror shall submit proposed costs itemized for the one administration of individual student testing (Spring 2021-2022) by student grade level (grade 1 and grade 2).

Subcontractor Cost(s). Offerors must submit its price/cost analyses of all subcontractors proposed whose costs exceeds the threshold for certified cost or pricing data (as applicable). The following information must be addressed

(as applicable):

o If a subcontract proposal exceeds the threshold for certified cost or pricing data (FAR 15.403-4(a)) and is not otherwise exempt from other exceptions in accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b), please include the prime contractor’s price/cost analyses establishing the reasonableness of each subcontract price.

o In accordance with the thresholds in FAR 15.404-3(c) and FAR 15.408, Table 15-2 II.A.(2), Cost and Pricing data, a copy of each subcontractor’s proposal must be provided.

o Identify in the proposal the degree of competition and the basis for establishing the source and reasonableness of price for each subcontract priced on a competitive basis (FAR 15.408, Table 15-2 II. A. (1)) exceeding the threshold at FAR 15.403-4(a).

o Additionally, in accordance with FAR 52.215-22 Limitations on Pass-through Charges – Identification of Subcontract Effort, if applicable, if the offeror intends to subcontract more than 70% of the total cost of work to be performed, the proposal must identify (i) the amount of the offeror’s indirect costs and profit applicable to the work to be performed by the subcontractor(s) and (ii) a description of the added value provided by the offeror as related to the work to be performed by the subcontractor(s).

Assumptions - For budgeting purposes, the contractor shall assume that the cost of the SWPBS training will be $25,000 per year for each treatment school. The

Department expects that the training might include 1 day of support during readiness activities, 3 to 5 days of summer training, and 3 to 4 site visits as part of on-going support, in addition to technical support and other interactions (e.g.

webinars), each year.

The Offeror’s business proposal must also contain the following information:

Authorized Negotiators. The Business Proposal shall list the names and telephones numbers of persons authorized to conduct negotiations and a statement to the effect that the proposal submitted is firm for a period of at least 90 business days from the due date for proposals specified by the Government.

Contract Administrator. The Business Proposal shall list the name, email, and the telephone number of the offerors proposed Contract Administrator if the award is made to the contractor.

Conflict of Interest Plan and Certificate. The offeror shall submit a Conflict of

Interest Plan, providing details on its policies and procedures to identify and avoid potential actual or apparent organizational or personnel conflicts of interest. The

Plan should also address procedures taken to neutralize or mitigate such conflicts if they have not been or cannot be avoided. The Plan should indicate that such policies and procedures are operative throughout the period of outside activities financial interests, or other significant connections or identifications that would establish, or give the appearance of establishing, a conflict of interest. A method for periodically reviewing financial interests of employees, subcontractors, and consultants, and their immediate families, in order to assess actual or apparent conflicts of interest, should be included in the plan. The term “potential conflict” means a reasonably foreseeable conflict of interest.

The thoroughness, completeness, and effectiveness of the Plan shall be evaluated as part of the Offeror’s overall proposal. The Plan will be incorporated into the contract awarded to the successful Offeror.

Small Business Subcontracting Plan. The Department's goal for small business subcontracting is that 31% of all subcontracting be subcontracted to small businesses. Below are the Department’s individual subcontracting goals for the following categories:

Women-owned small business concerns (5%);

Small disadvantaged business concerns (5%);

HUB Zone small business concerns (3%); and

Service Disabled, Veteran-Owned small business concerns (3%)

Note: the categories listed above imply no order of preference.

If the Large Business offeror provides a small business subcontracting plan that does not or cannot meet the Department’s stated goals, the plan should provide enough information detailing the rationale to not do so. Other than small businesses shall submit a plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 (Alternate II). Consultants’ agreements should be included in the subcontracting plan. Small business prime contractors are not required to submit a subcontracting plan.

Evaluation for Award

The adjectival rating scale for the technical evaluation criteria listed on the attached

Technical Proposal Evaluation Forms is defined below. The numerical values that correlate with these adjectival ratings are listed on the Technical Proposal Evaluation

Form for each technical evaluation criterion. Panel Members shall cite specific proposal references and page numbers to support comments listed under the strength, weakness, significant weakness, or deficiency categories. The following adjectival ratings shall be applied for the Soundness of the Technical Approach, Quality of Staffing and

Management Plan, and Substantive Small Business Participation evaluation factors, in tandem with the numerical ratings:

Excellent – Exceeds the requirements in a way which yields significant benefits to the Government; weaknesses, if any, are collectively of small impact (NO significant weaknesses or deficiencies are present).

Adequate – Meets the minimum requirements and offers some benefits to the

Government; weaknesses are collectively of small to moderate impact and correctable without a major revision of the proposal (NO deficiencies are present).

Fair – Fails to meet the minimum requirements because weaknesses are collectively of significant impact (one or more significant weaknesses is present or the combination of some identified weaknesses rises to the level of a significant weakness); NO deficiencies are present and some weaknesses may be correctable without a major revision of the proposal.

Poor – Fails to meet the minimum requirements; one or more deficiencies are present for which correction would require a major revision or redirection of the proposal to correct.

The following adjectival ratings shall be applied for the Relevant Corporate Experience evaluation factor, in tandem with the numerical ratings:

Excellent – Corporate experience includes multiple projects that are highly relevant to the procurement on the factors listed in the criterion; weaknesses, if any, are collectively of small impact (for example, corporate experience less highly relevant to one of the factors listed in the criterion).

Adequate – Corporate experience includes a single project that is highly relevant to the procurement or multiple projects that are collectively highly relevant to the procurement across most of the factors listed in the criterion; weaknesses are collectively of small to moderate impact.

Fair – Corporate experience is only minimally to moderately relevant to the procurement on the factors listed in the criterion; weaknesses are collectively of significant impact.

Poor – Corporate experience across all proposed partners is deficient because demonstrated experience is not relevant to the procurement on any of the factors listed in the criterion.

There is a variation to the definitions that will be used when evaluating Past Performance to account for a neutral rating. The following adjectival ratings shall be applied when evaluating Past Performance:

Adequate – Performance ratings demonstrate a trend of “fair/satisfactory” or better for any experience that is at least minimally relevant to the procurement

(more weight given to more relevant experience); any noted weaknesses in the narrative are of small to moderate impact which may not have required customer input.

Neutral – No performance ratings are available for any experience that is at least minimally relevant to the procurement (any available performance ratings are for experiences not relevant to the procurement).

Poor – Performance ratings demonstrate a trend of “poor/marginal” or

“unsatisfactory” performance for any experience that is at least minimally relevant to the procurement (more weight given to more relevant experience);

weaknesses cited in the rating narratives are of significant impact and/or required significant customer input to mitigate.

The following definitions shall be applied appropriately by Panel Members when evaluating a proposal and documenting technical evaluation findings:

Strength – An attribute in the proposal that is beneficial and increases the probability of successful contract performance.

Weakness – An attribute in the proposal that is a flaw and increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness – An attribute in the proposal, or a combination of weaknesses in a proposal, that is a flaw and appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Deficiency – A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement, or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal, that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Evaluators shall assign an overall Risk Level to each offeror’s proposal, as it corresponds to the documented strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies noted in each proposal.

High Risk – The proposal contains risks that are considered to be likely to cause significant and serious disruptions in the schedule, increases in cost, and/or degradation in performance or quality; even with special attention from the contractor and close Government monitoring.

Moderate Risk – The proposal contains risks that may cause some disruption in the schedule, increases in cost, and/or degradation in performance or quality but special attention from the contractor and close Government monitoring could possibly overcome the difficulties.

Low Risk – The proposal contains risks that have little potential for causing disruption in the schedule, increases in cost, and/or degradation performance or quality; normal effort from the contractor and normal Government monitoring can probably overcome any difficulties.

The U.S. Department of Education will base the source selection decision for this procurement on the following evaluation criteria. Technical Merit will be determined on the basis of the following evaluation factors.

A. Soundness of the Technical Approach—40 Points

The Offeror’s technical approach demonstrates understanding of the goals and context of the procurement, and provides a sound plan for executing the procurement. More specifically, the Offeror’s technical approach demonstrates:

Capability of achieving the goals of the procurement with minimal intervention by the Department as evidenced by the clarity, rigor, policy relevance, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness of the Offeror’s plan for addressing the key questions and conducting each task; identification of potential challenges and the quality of recommended solutions; and an appropriate balance between creativity and rigor, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness

Knowledge of the context of the procurement as evidenced by attention to relevant prior evidence and content throughout the technical approach

Writing skill as evidenced in an approach that is well-organized, clear, and concise while providing an appropriate level of detail

B. Quality of Staffing and Management Plan—40 Points

The Offeror’s staffing plan demonstrates that the proposed team has combined content-area expertise, knowledge of the study methodology, and successful past experience in similar roles on projects of similar content, methodology, complexity, scope, sample size, and data collection modes to this procurement. More specifically, the Offeror’s staffing plan demonstrates:

Clarity of task and management roles for all proposed staff; proposed roles that are well-aligned to the level of effort and to clearly-identified staff experience, knowledge, and skills relevant to this procurement

The leadership team (Project Director, Deputy Project Director, and/or Principal

Investigator) -- has experience and skill in leading, managing, designing, and conducting all aspects of evaluations (preferably in education settings) that are similar to this procurement in content (e.g., early literacy instruction, supports for struggling readers, early literacy measurement, multi-tiered systems of support), methodology (e.g., randomized controlled trial), complexity (e.g., recruitment effort, competition of training provider, implementation support), scope (e.g., national), sample size, and data collection modes (e.g., study-administered, individual assessments, teacher and staff surveys).

Procedures for managing staff and controlling work performance efficiently and effectively, including clear lines of authority within and across tasks, assigning responsibilities and monitoring staff, promoting communication, resolving problems, overseeing and integrating work of subcontractors and/or consultants, and ensuring work quality and timeliness.

C. Relevant Corporate Experience—10 Points

The proposal demonstrates that the Offeror played a similar role in leading, managing, designing, and conducting previous evaluations (preferably in education settings) that are similar to this procurement in in content (e.g., early literacy instruction, supports for struggling readers, early literacy measurement, multi-tiered systems of support), methodology (e.g., randomized controlled trial), complexity (e.g., recruitment effort, competition of training provider, implementation support), scope (e.g., national), sample size, and data collection modes (e.g., study-administered individual assessments, teacher and staff surveys)

D. Vendor Past Performance—10 Points

The Offeror’s proposal demonstrates a record of positive past performance on quality, problem resolution, timeliness, cost control, and customer service without any valid negative information. The evaluation of past performance will take into consideration the extent to which the projects are similar to this procurement in content, methodology, complexity, scope, sample size, and data collection modes. Sources for the evaluation of past performance will include official CPARS ratings for relevant work, contact with clients of cited relevant work, and optional references submitted by the Offeror. If there is no past performance information available that is relevant to the procurement on any of the factors listed in the Relevant Corporate Experience criterion, the Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the basis of past performance.

E. Substantive Small Business Participation—10 Points

If the proposed prime contractor is an other than small business (large business), the

Offeror’s proposed small business subcontracting plan includes substantive work in a meaningful capacity to be subcontracted to small businesses with documented capability to complete that work. A meaningful capacity for substantive work as described here includes work other than courier services, office supplies or travel services. A meaningful capacity is one in which small businesses are performing work for which they are qualified, under a particular task that is integral to the successful completion of the respective task(s), and ultimately, to the procurement as a whole. If the Large Business offeror provides a small business subcontracting plan that does not or cannot meet the Department’s stated goals in the solicitation, the plan should provide enough information detailing the rationale to not do so.

If the proposed prime contractor is a small business, the Offeror will automatically receive 10 points under this criterion if the proposal demonstrates that the small business is capable of credibly performing at least 51 percent of the budgeted work.

TOTAL POINTS = 110