SF 30 Amendment 0001 to NEARFP12-17 QUESTIONS ANSWERS

54OMB Approval 2700-0042

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1 4

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

Amendment 0001 08/23/12

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

National Endowment for the Arts, Grants & Contracts, Rm 618, 1100 Pa. Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20506

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No. Street, county, State and ZIP: Code) (�) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

Prospective Offerors X NEARFP12-17

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

X 08/14/12

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X 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 one (1) copy of the 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 OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATA SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you 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 data specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

(�) 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 required to sign this document and return 1 copy to the issuing office.

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

The purpose of SF 30 Amendment 0001 to Solicitation Request for Proposal NEARFP12-17 Validating Arts and Livability Indicators in Selected Communities and Developing a User's Guide is to incorporate pages 2 through 4 Questions and Answers (Q & A’s).

All other terms and conditions remain the same and unchanged.

Except at 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)

Latonca M. Harris Contracting Officer

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 16C. DATE SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

BY Latonca M. Harris (Signature of Contracting Officer)

08/23/12

NSN 7540-01-152-8070 30-105 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE Computer Generated Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

AMENDMENT 0001, QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS (Q & A’S)

To Solicitation NEARFP12-17 Validating Arts and Livability Indicators in Selected Communities and Developing a User's Guide

Please acknowledge receipt of the Amendment 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 at the time proposals are due.

Q1: Does the government estimate of $ 250,000 include travel?

A1: Yes, all proposals should include estimates for travel costs as part of the total program cost.

Q2: Is on-site presence necessary for all of the locations requiring interviews or data collection?

Q3: For budgeting purposes, will the criteria for sampling communities be geographic locations?

Q4: In costing out the project, if the option is between having experienced researchers who would have to travel long distances to research communities or local researchers who would be trained to conduct indicator validation, which would the NEA prefer.

A2/3/4: The NEA anticipates that the locations for the validation task will be selected to ensure representation of communities with and without significant creative placemaking investments and representation of communities of different sizes and types (e.g., urban / rural / suburban). The NEA also expects the sample to include communities from several different geographic regions of the country, though the limited sample size means that not all geographic regions will necessarily be represented.

The NEA anticipates that it will be necessary for researchers to be present at all locations selected for validation. However, the NEA is open to considering proposals that achieve the RFP's objectives in different ways. This could include experienced researchers traveling to different communities or local researchers who have been given proper training, thus expanding the scope of the inquiry.

It should also be noted that the NEA expects to work with the contractor to identify the sample of communities for validation, including the final count of communities in which the validation will be conducted. This is why the RFP states that the validation will take place in approximately 20 communities.

Q5: How many Our Town communities will be included in the sampling frame?

Q6: Can some of the sites selected for the sample of approximately 20 communities mentioned on

p. 6 of the solicitation be drawn from 2011 Our Town grantees as well as 2012 grantees? Can some sites be drawn from MICD25 grantees?

A5/6: While the RFP does not specify the exact number of Our Town communities in the sample, it is expected that approximately half of the communities in the sample will be locations with significant creative placemaking investments. These can include Our Town communities from 2011 or 2012 as well as MICD25 grantees. They could also include some communities with no NEA-related creative placemaking investments, though the NEA relationships in Our Town and MICD25 communities may make fieldwork in such locations less difficult.

Q7: Is the contractor that developed the indicators eligible to validate the indicators?

Q8: Does the NEA prefer to have someone on the validation team who was involved in developing the original indicators?

A7/8: Having worked on the candidate indicators, either previously or at the outset of the contract, does not restrict eligibility to validate those indicators. The NEA has no preference regarding whether validation team members were involved in developing the original indicators. All information relevant to the contract and that was available to the contractor who developed the indicators has been included within the scope of this solicitation or is otherwise publicly available.

Q9: For the validation activities, is it the contractor’s role to collect and synthesize the data associated with each indicator…or is that the responsibility of the contractor that developed the indicator system?

Q10: Does the validation include an assessment of trend changes at local sites?

A9/10: The indicators that will be validated are being developed primarily by the NEA based on the set of candidate indicators included as Appendix A in the RFP. The NEA is open to working with the contractor to finalize the set of indicators to be validated. The NEA will then, in advance of the validation fieldwork, collect and synthesize the data associated with each indicator for the communities selected for validation. Where possible, this synthesis will include historical data and trend information. Thus the validation methodology should include plans for validating both current and historical data.

Q11: For the directory of local data sources, is the intent to find sources that could measure the indicators or, more broadly, the dimensions?

A11: The directory of local data sources should focus on data that could measure the four key dimensions of livability.

Q12: Does the NEA anticipate or want the public information tasks to include continuing education for professionals and community members who would use the data?

A12: No, the NEA does not anticipate "continuing education" opportunities for now. However, the NEA does want the data validation methods and findings, as well as the documentation of the local data sources, to be presented so that they can be understood and used by professionals and community members who would use the data. Thus the emphasis on a “user’s guide”.

Q13: Please clarify the intention for Past Performance as distinct from Organizational Experience.

Is it simply references or description?

A13: Organizational Experience is intended to capture the capacity of the organization to complete the project, including, for example, the organization’s technical and organizational infrastructure.

Past Performance is intended to capture examples of work the organization or the team members have recently completed that would illustrate their ability to complete a project of this scope, dimension, and focus.

Q14: Is the “research write-up” the same as the “public users guide”?

A14: The information contained in the public user’s guide should be a subset of the full research write-up. As described in the RFP, the contractor’s contribution to the public user’s guide will include “case examples or scenarios of each indicator's appropriate use in specific types of communities. The guide will thus provide a typology of communities for which a subset of the national indicators (including metrics and data sources) are most applicable, where they might be less applicable, and where they might be modified to be more applicable.” The full research write-up will include information on the full scope of the project, including the sampling, the details of the methodology, all protocols used, and, possibly, a more detailed interpretation of the findings.

Q15: There are 17 indicators listed in Appendix A. Does NEA know how many more indicators could be added to the list?

A15: The NEA estimates that approximately 20-30 indicators will be in the final list of those to be validated. Note that not all of the 17 that are part of the candidate list will be part of the final list.

Q16: Have 2011 or 2012 Our Town grantees collected indicator data, and if so, will the selected contractor be provided access to them? Similarly, will the contractor access to any MICD25 data?

A16: Some Our Town and MICD25 grantees have collected local indicators data, though the NEA has not required that these grantees submit their data. However, note that for Task 1, the NEA will be primarily responsible for collecting and synthesizing the indicators to be validated, and for Task 2, no collection of actual datasets is required.

Q17: Given the page limitations, does the budget account for one page?

Q18: Should the pricing table, breakdown of costs by personnel and past performance information be provided as a separate business proposal or should they be part of the 15-page proposal?

Q19: Do tables or figures (such as time allocation of personnel) count toward the 15 page limit, or can they be provided in an Appendix?

A17/18/19: The past performance information, any tables or figures, and the budget, including pricing breakdown of costs, can be included separate from the page restrictions for the other parts of the proposal.

Q20: Does the NEA want the vendor to do a large-scale print run of any published materials (directory, user guide, etc.)?

A20: No.