RFP 10-07 Amendment 0002 Pg2 Questions Answers

Amendment 0002, Questions and Answers (Q & A’s)

Solicitation Request for Proposal (RFP 10-07) to Conduct a Planning Study for the 2012 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts

Please acknowledge receipt of the Amendments via email so that the Contracting Officer knows the paperwork was delivered and received. In accordance with the Standard Form 30 (SF30), Amendment of Solicitation the Contractor is required to sign the SF30 document and return 1 copy to the issuing office which can be submitted when prospective offerors submit their entire proposal package by 5:00 pm EST, on Thursday, April 22, 2010.

Q1: How much time should the contractor plan to obtain OMB approval? Is that time figured into the period of performance?

A1: As indicated by the list of tasks and delivery schedule on pages 6-7 in the RFP, 5 months has been included for OMB clearance.

Q2: In Section B of the RFP, the NEA list a payment schedule in three major lump sums depending on milestones. Will the NEW consider a different payment schedule such as a payment based on task completion? This will result in 10 separate payments rather than the three mentioned in the RFP. Considering that this is a small business set aside, a milestone type payment schedule spread over 15 months as specified in the RFP could create a financial hardship for such businesses.

A2: Yes, NEA will consider a payment schedule that includes more separate payments.

Q3: If we are awarded this planning contract, will that prohibit us from bidding on the national survey RFP for 2012?

A3: As indicated in the first paragraph of the statement of work (Section C, p.4),“In 2012, the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) plans to conduct its sixth Survey of Public Participation in the Arts (SPPA) in cooperation with the United States Census Bureau…. Like the 2002 and 2008 SPPAs, the 2012 survey will be conducted as a supplement to the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey (CPS).”

Q4: We read the “Arts Participation 2008: Highlights from a National Survey.” At the end of this report, the following were recognized: Tim Triplett, the Urban Institute; David Keen and Kevin Williams, BBC Research & Consulting; and Tom Smith, Emory University. Are these entities still eligible to bid on this planning contract?

A4: Bids from firms meeting the small business set aside will be accepted, and those from firms that don’t, will not.

Q5: Does NEA want us to follow the “format” of the reports they posted as attachments to the RFP?

A5: The reports posted as attachments to the RFP were provided as examples of a prior study. The formatting of the 2012 SPPA Planning study does not have to be the same.

Q6: The RFP stipulates a 15-page limit of the proposal. Should we assume that resumes and other supporting documents are not included in the 15-page limit?

A6: Yes, that is correct, resumes and other supporting documents are not included in the 15-page limit.

Q7: May we assume that because this RFP is a 100% Small Business Set-Aside, that Urban Institute and Princeton Survey Research Associates are precluded from bidding on this Planning Study for the 2012 SPPA due to their size?

A7: Bids from firms meeting the small business set aside will be accepted, and those from firms that don’t, will not.

Q8: Under C.3.4, will the working group that will be convened include the previous contractor (representatives from the Urban Institute and Princeton Survey Research Associates)?

A8: The working group members have not been identified as yet.

Q9: Under C.3.4, the contractor is responsible transcription of the working group as well as the travel and per diems for the external advisors. Please clarify this section. Is the contractor also responsible for catering lunches and breaks? Does the Government's estimate of $100,000 include the estimated expenses of the outside advisors or are these expenses reimbursed at actual cost above and outside the bid? What is the method, process, or regulation that will be used to seek reimbursement from the government? Will the Government reimburse actual expenses that exceed the Government's estimate of expenses ($1500 and $50)? What is allowable?

A9: Yes, the contractor is responsible for catering lunches and breaks. The estimate of $100,000 includes the estimated expenses of the outside advisors. An invoice itemizing expenditures on individual participants and tasks associated with the meeting is the method to be used to seek reimbursement. All fair and reasonable expenses will be reimbursed. Generally, we anticipate the expenses will be consistent with government standards for travel and per diem allowances.

Q10: In section C.1 (the second bulleted point) it says, “... while staying within the survey’s 10-minute timeframe and retaining most survey questions from the 2008 SPPA...”

What constitutes “most”? What percentage of the original questions would you consider losing?

A10: Limited, if any, changes are anticipated in the core section of the instrument.

Potentially, as much as 20-25% of the content in the module components of the instrument could be changed through either question or module modification, addition, or deletion.

Q11: Relative to the random-digit telephone survey to be conducted (the survey as well as the interviewers themselves) ... will we need to provide for any languages other than English?

A11: Some accommodation for Spanish is preferred, but not required.

Q12: Page 5, third paragraph under C.2 Scope of Work mentions that less than 10 cognitive interviews should be conducted. This requirement is not mentioned anywhere else in the RFP. It is not described under C.3 Detailed Specifications nor is it included in B.2, the cost proposal. Are additional cognitive interviews to be conducted in addition to the 300 telephone interviews? Are these interviews to be conducted with the general public 18+ or with people who have other specifications (such as arts attendees)? What is the purpose of the cognitive interviews? Should they be conducted in person or over the phone? How long are these interviews (10 minutes, 20 minutes, and 30 minutes?)?

Cognitive interviews do not appear to be mentioned in the report of the 2008 pilot survey.

Please clarify what NEA is expecting regarding cognitive interviews.

A12: Yes, cognitive interviews are to be conducted in addition to the 300 telephone interviews. To the extent that potential new questions are developed for the 2012 SPPA, a small set (less than 10) cognitive interviews will need to be conducted to test understanding of the new questions. Conducting phone interviews of approximately 10 to 15 minutes should be sufficient. Whether they are conducted with the general public or arts attenders will depend on the question being tested and its intended audience.

Q13: The cover letter with the RFP states that “the Government’s estimate is $100,000”. Is $100,000 the budget for the study? If not, what is the estimated budget for the study?

A13: Yes, $100,000 is the estimated budget for the study.

Q14: Will all the 300 telephone interviews be conducted in English?

A14: We anticipate that the vast majority will be conducted in English. Some accommodation for non-English speakers (especially Spanish) is preferred, but not required.

Q15: What is the incidence for the survey with 300 members of the public, that is, what percentage of households contacted will contain someone eligible to participate in the survey? We did not see this figure mentioned in the report of the 2008 pilot study.

A15: We anticipate survey research firms with recent survey experience can provide a fair estimate of the number households that need to be contacted in order to locate someone eligible to participate in the survey—knowing that they only need to reach an adult 18 years of age or older.

Q16: Are you satisfied with previous years' planning studies and changes to the survey? If yes, why? If not, why not?

A16: Yes, in general, we have been satisfied. Each study has involved different levels of field input and the extent changes to the survey instrument has varied to accommodate various information or research needs indentified by the field.

Q17: Is your goal for "cognitive testing" (p. 5, paragraph 3) to test for understanding of the questions and clarity of the survey?

A17: Yes, that is the goal.

Q18: How much of the process has been defined and will remain the same from past surveys? How much is open for debate or change this year? (e.g. is NEA committed to random digit dialing versus another method of sample selection?)

A18: If by “past surveys” you are referring to the SPPA, itself, the method of sampling and administration will not change from 2008. The 2012 SPPA will be conducted as a supplement to the CPS just as the 2008 SPPA was. If, instead, you are referring to the “test” survey for the instrument, we are open to suggestions on alternative approaches to fielding the test survey instrument for 2012 to the extent that they can be accommodated within the budget and prove equally or more effective in testing the instrument than the prior method.

Q19: What is the best way to demonstrate experience for the items on page 27? For which items are product samples, descriptions of similar efforts, or references preferred?

A19: The best demonstration of a firm’s knowledge and experience will vary based on the particular set of knowledge, skills, and experience possessed by that firm. That decision is best made by each individual firm that chooses to prepare a proposal.

Q20: For product samples, would it be more helpful to see surveys we've designed and our analysis of them or examples of surveys for which we've helped our client to modify their instrument or methods?

A20: Both are important, but the latter more than the former since the bulk of this project is focused on instrument modification.

Q21: Can the NEA provide greater detail regarding the cognitive tests mentioned in C.2:

Scope of Work? Any additional information they can provide on preferred methodology, ideal interviewees/respondent base, specific lines of questioning, expectations, deliverables, etc… would be helpful.

A21: See response to question #13.

Q22: Is a proposal with a budget greater than $100,000 automatically disqualified from consideration?

A22: No

Q23: Does the NEA prefer that the test survey be administered as a true random-digit dial study or as a census representative study using RDD but with quotas in place to help ensure that the completed interviews are representative of the U.S. population? In 2007, the test study was conducted as the former, but we want to make sure that is what the NEA wants this time around.

A23: We don’t have a strong preference among the 2 options mentioned. Repeating the test survey as true RDD is acceptable. A discussion of advantages and disadvantages of each options and cost implications would be useful. If a case is made for a preferred approach that is within budget, we are amenable to that.

Q24: Does the NEA anticipate the need to conduct any “higher level” statistical analysis beyond cross-tabulations (such as regression analysis, etc…) for the test study? If so, what analyses are expected?

A24: No

Q25: For both the test survey results and summary report from 2007, the focus is on instrument functionality and content recommendations. Beyond the topline question results, is there an interest in a report that contains a full crosstabular analysis of the test study data? Given the likely sample size and purpose of this endeavor, we understand that this is not essential, but we would like to know the NEA’s expectations in this regard.

A25: We have no expectation of cross tabular analysis of the test study data beyond the top line question results.

Q26: Section F.4 includes the statement, “Contractor shall provide any additional reports that may be requested by the NEA Project Director.” To clarify, please confirm our assumption that any ‘additional reports’ pertains to requests for additional supporting information pertaining to the deliverables outlined in this RFP and does not allow for the creation of new deliverables or an application of other study methods not previously mentioned.

A26: Yes, ‘additional reports’ pertains to requests for additional supporting information pertaining to the deliverables outlined in this RFP and not for the creation of new deliverables.

Q27: Are any of the following items included in the page count limitation of 15 pages as indicated in Section L? (please indicate if any apply):

a. Resumes for proposed project personnel,

b. a completed copy of Representations and Certifications,

c. Product Samples,

d. Proposal Cover Page,

e. or figures/tables to present proposal content.

A27: No

Q28: Other than the on-site working group event, does the NEA have any other requirement for on-site presence of the contractor proposed personnel? (such as presentation of draft/final report of the planning effort, orientation with Project Director or the conduct of literature search, presentation of draft/final package materials for the working group, or presentation of draft/final results of working group meeting and questions for survey instrument)

A28: No

Q29: In regards to the lists from prior literature searches (mentioned in C.3.3.b, how far back were searches performed? Would the Contractor perform searches from the original timeframe and update all existing lists or simply add additional data since the last searches were done?

A29: The principal focus of the literature search is to add additional references since the last searches were done.

Q30: When noting the “most and least widely used sections of the SPPA instrument”, what sorts of reporting instruments have been used in the past? Assuming these reports have been compiled in the past, were they simply bulleted lists of particular sections of cited materials or were they more detailed summaries of how results were used or cited?

A30: Yes they were bulleted lists of particular sections of cited materials.