TSL__-_Questions_and_Answers.pdf

TSL Questions and Answers

1. In Task 2.2, the PWS states that “For TSL schools, the contractor shall use common core data and school achievement data” (p.7). Can ED clarify the purposes of collecting achievement data for TSL schools?

The mandate requires the evaluation to measure three things: i) effectiveness of the program in improving student academic achievement; ii) the satisfaction of the participating teachers, principals, or other school leaders; and iii) the extent to which the program assisted the eligible entities in recruiting and retaining high-quality teachers, principals, or other school leaders. The impacts will be measured as part of the impact evaluation component (nonTSL) sample.

However, in order to meet the spirit of the mandate, the evaluation needs to connect these impacts to the outcomes of the TSL grantees. This data collection is intended in part to meet that aspect of the mandate.

2. In section D of Part I of the PWS, page 35, (Evaluation Approach and Teacher Leader

Role), some text appears to be omitted from the following passage: “In addition, the contractor shall provide implementation support consistent with how TSL grant implementation.”

The word “how” should be deleted from the sentence. The PWS has been updated.

3. Page 70 of the Instructions to Offerors says, “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.” Does “these projects” in this sentence refer (a) only to the projects referenced in the immediately preceding two sentences—that is, all those conducted under contract with NCEE in the last 5 years, (b) only to the projects mentioned in the paragraph’s second sentence—that is, “all projects cited in the proposal as relevant corporate or staff experience,” or (c) to both sets of projects?

NCEE needs to assess corporate capability and its relevance to this procurement. The offeror should provide sufficient detail to facilitate this assessment. It’s likely that recent prior work for

NCEE will vary in terms of its relevance. For that reason, each offeror may wish to strategize how best to respond in this section. However, offerors are encouraged to provide enough detail about all projects so that a reader unfamiliar with NCEE projects can determine the nature of the project beyond simply its title.

4. Page 70 of the Instructions to Offerors says, “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.” Should this information be provided for every project mentioned in the section where we describe the qualifications of our proposed personnel?

Yes.

5. The instructions to offerors state that “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.” Would the Department consider revising these instructions to the following (from the draft instructions to offerors for the Impact Evaluation of Training in Multi-Tiered Systems of Support For Reading In

Early Elementary School”)?

“Offerors must submit the technical proposal electronically in WORD and PDF format.

Offerors must also submit the narrative portion of the cost proposal (description of costs) electronically in WORD and PDF.”

Word versions of the business proposal can be very difficult for offerors to prepare and result in very large files that are difficult to manage and submit to IES.

The revised wording is acceptable and the instructions to offerors have been updated to include the proposed new language to be consistent with the to-be-released MTSS-R solicitation.

6. Is there is a specific template that ED would like us to use for the 3 references. Should the references be submitted to the Contract Specialist listed for the proposal? Finally, are the past performance references due on July 12th?

Past performance references are due on July 12 and submitted to the contract specialist, Joseph

Gibbs. Please use the attached reference form.

7. Page 9 in instruction to offerors indicates: “For budgeting purposes, the contractor shall assume that teachers will receive an additional $10,000 during the 2020-21 school year if they are selected and perform duties as a teacher leader.” Is this $10,000 per teacher or

$10,000 total across all teacher leaders?

Each teacher leader shall be paid up to $10,000. The contractor shall assume an additional

$10,000 per teacher selected to perform teacher leader activities in the conduct of the evaluation study.

8. Would the Department please clarify how much discretion the contractor would have in terms of designing the teacher leader role intervention? For example, if the contractor determines that TSL grantees are implementing training for teacher leaders that is more time intensive than the half-day orientation and ongoing monitoring described under Task

5.1, how much discretion does the contractor have in developing a teacher leader training program that (1) resembles teacher leader programs in TSL districts and (2) includes an ongoing coaching component?

For purposes of responding to the PWS, offerors shall use the assumptions included in the PWS

(and instruction to offerors). It is possible that the plans could be revised within the conduct of the evaluation based on a review of what TSL grantees are actually implementing (task 2.1).