Q&A.docx

Is there an incumbent for this project?

Answer - No

Does NIDDK have an existing contractual relationship with a qualifying research firm that is conducting related work?

Answer – No, the Office of Minority Health Research Coordination of NIDDK does not have an existing contractual relationship with a qualifying research firm that is conducting related work.

Does NIDDK have contact information from all past Step Up participants? If not, what is the approximate percentage of participants for whom contact information is available?

Answer: NIDDK has contact information for past STEP-UP participants however all the contact information is not up to date. Approximately 50% of the contact information would be considered up-to-date.

Are past performance examples limited to federal clients, or can we include state, city, and private sector clients for whom relevant work was conducted?

Answer: Alternative client work in terms of past performance is acceptable.

There seems to be some discrepancy between the past performance requirements. On page 18 of the RFQ the past performances are limited to 3 years, but 12 months on page 43. Can you provide some clarity the format and restrictions for the past performance examples?

Answer: This has been addressed in the revised solicitation

Can we assume that this is a small business set-aside under the simplified acquisition designation?

Answer: Yes

Would NIDDK consider a firm fixed price contract as opposed to a time and materials?

Answer: No

We would like to request clarification on page 40/45 of the RFQ for solicitation number NIH-NICHD-16-081. Is the chart provided, for each Task Area, an example of the format our budget should be in? Are the staff and hours limited to what is in the chart? Or, can we list staff and their hours as needed for each Task Area?

Answer: The business proposal instructions are provided as a guide, but the offeror is free to list staffing needs as necessary. Vendors (the offerors) are reminded to propose level of effort based on the level of experience and expertise of the individual representing the labor category.

Can the government confirm that past performance information (with detailed descriptions of the work and contract info, etc.) are limited to no more than 2 pages per reference and are counted towards the 24 folio limit of the technical proposal, as described under Section G-B, on page 39? Section G-E states that Past Performance information should be submitted as an attachment to the Technical Proposal.

Answer: This has been addressed in the revised solicitation

Also regarding Section G-E, can the government clarify the number of past performance references included either in the technical volume or as a separate attachment? This section states that “The Offeror shall provide a list of all Federal contracts that it currently has: (1) ongoing and, (2) completed within the past 12 months.” Providing a full list of all federal contracts, in addition to all the detail described under this section could be quite extensive.

Answer: This has been addressed in the revised solicitation Concerning the previous point, can the government clarify if past performance examples are to be from the previous 12 months (as noted above in Section G-E) or from the previous 3 years, as discussed in Section C.7.1.1, “Past performance citations must be included in the proposal and have been completed within the past three (3) years or currently in progress for services similar to the requirements specified in the Statement of Work.”

Answer: This has been addressed in the revised solicitation

Question: Can the government clarify the statement at the bottom of the page 18, under section C.7.1.1, Past Performance, “Past performance will not be scored, but the Government's conclusions about overall quality of the offeror's past performance will be influential in determining the merits of the offeror's proposal and in selecting the offeror whose proposal is considered most advantageous to the Government.” Previously it states that Past Performance is worth 35 points of the technical criteria.

Answer: This has been addressed in the revised solicitation.

Do the hours listed under Section G-C for each project task represent the government’s estimate of the required LOE for each task or should the contractor propose our own estimate of hours, based on our proposed technical approach?

Answer: The hours and task our listed as a guide, the contractor may propose their own estimate of hours based on their technical approach.

Can the government provide the number of participants in the Step-Up program for each year it has been administered?

Answer: Approximately 700 undergraduate students and over 1200 high school students have participated in the STEP-UP program since its inception. On a yearly basis ~69 undergraduates and ~92 high school students participate in STEP-UP.

Can the government estimate the number of valid email addresses (or other contact information) that they have for Step Up participants? How often does the government conduct a review of these contact information to ensure that they are valid and up-to-date?

Answer: Approximately 700 undergraduate students and over 1200 high school students have participated in the STEP-UP program since its inception. Many of these students, there is considerable follow-up information including email, phone number and physical address that are up to date for the more recent cohorts.

If award, will we be allowed to negotiate the terms of the contract?

Answer: Yes

If more time is required, are the hours listed in the notice negotiable?

Answer: Yes, however there is no guarantee that additional funds or hours will be added.

What is the expectation as to the start of any data collection given that OMB approval appears to be required?

Answer: Data collection will now be done cooperatively with NIDDK program office to expedite collection.

Is there assurance that this work qualifies for FASTRAK – our understanding of the OMB language would suggest that this work would NOT qualify and thus would require the full OMB posting periods.

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question

Question: Given that STEP-UP is a high school program in part, are we expected to interact with anyone under 18? Minors are a vulnerable population and will most likely require specific measures and consent from both child and legal guardian to include them. However, the mention of entrance surveys and other process evaluation measures indicates, to me, that interacting with minors may be unavoidable. Is consent for evaluation of the program already established within the STEP-UP program participant inclusion?

Answer: For the retrospective analysis and for the undergraduate program all participants are over 18 years old. For pre and post evaluation measures with high school students measures will be implemented in coordination with the program with consent from Parents/legal guardians.

As this is a T&M contract – are other materials allowed under the contract – for e.g. travel and other direct costs?

Answer: Yes

The scope of work indicates cooperatively working with NIDDK staff in a multidisciplinary team setting. What is there experience and how much of it can we leverage? E.g., can some of their staff facilitate focus groups, interviews, or survey implementation?

Answer: NIDDK staff will assist in survey implementation. Changes in the solicitation address the remainder of the inquiry.

Do you have publicly available copies of “previous related evaluation reports”?

Answer: No

How does NIDDK expect FastTrack OMB clearance to be approved? As defined from https://www.usability.gov/how-to-and-tools/guidance/fast-track-clearance-process.html, activities not covered includes “Collections that will be used for program evaluations and performance measurement purposes,” and the nature of the RFP is a program evaluation of the STEP-UP program.

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question

Are we expecting employees from a predecessor contract? If so, they have a first right of refusal as per the RFP.

Answer: No

C.8.1.1 – What are the security classification and expectations for data storage for the development, implementation, collection, analysis, and retention of information collected during focus groups, interviews, and surveys?

Answer: The security classification and expectation for the solicitation is low.

Page 2, par 1 – Is this effort a small business set aside as the business size standard listed is 6.5M?

Answer: Yes

Appendix A, pg 45 – Deliverables table includes ‘airs’ of ‘Healthy Moments’ which is not mentioned in body of the RFQ – please clarify.

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question Is the contractor expected to reside or maintain an office in the DC/Northern Virginia area?

Answer: No.

Section C.4.1 “Meet with COR on a twice a bi-weekly basis via teleconference…”Please clarify the above typo. Should this read “Twice a week”, “Twice a month”, something else?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question

Evaluation Criteria, Could you please clarify the Past Performance criteria? Thirty-five (35) points are allocated to past performance, but the “Past Performance” section states, “Past performance will not be scored,…” Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question

What rubric(s) will be used to allocate the 35 points?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question

Option Periods 1-4 and Business Proposal Instructions (Section G.C.)

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question

What are the expectations of duties and performance for Option Periods 1-4?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question along with answers to questions provided.

Could you please reconcile a potential conflict in the RFQ regarding option periods and providing costs for option years/periods? (referenced Sections A.2 and G.C.)

The sections referenced below appear to be in conflict. Funding the optional periods is at the discretion of NIDDK (Section A.2), which suggests there may or may not be tasks to be completed in the option years. In the Business Proposal Instructions (Section G. C.), there is a requirement that “Costs must be proposed separately for the base year and each option year.”

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question

What is the expectation of NIDDK for cost proposals in the option years when no specific tasks have been outlined for those years? (Section G.C.)

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question

Two-part question

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question

Is the NIH/NIDDK asking for a cost proposal for the entire project?

Answer: Yes What are the specific deliverables at the end of the Base Period?

Completion of a comprehensive analysis of outcomes of STEP-UP?

A framework for the continued evaluation of STEP-UP?

Both?

Additional items?

Answer: Instruments for reaching out to the retrospective cohort and outreach to past participants, as well as the framework and initial implementation of the ongoing evaluation. At the end of option year 1 the retrospective analysis should be complete as well as the implementation of the ongoing framework, the remaining option years the offeror will refine and edit the ongoing evaluation framework as necessary.

Because no specific tasks or deliverables are identified for the option years, should we assume that if decisions regarding the awarding of the contract come down to cost (due to 2 or more potential contractors being scored similarly), that only the cost of the base period will be used? (With no specific tasks defined, different contractors might be submitting costs based on different assumptions for option years – see text from Section A.2 below).

Section A.2 states, “There will be a 12-month Base Period; plus four (4) twelve-month option periods that the government (NIDDK) shall have the unilateral right to exercise upon its determination of need and availability of funds. It shall also be understood that in accordance with federal appropriations that in the event that adequate funding to support an entire 12-month contract period that the contractor/vendor and government shall bilaterally modify the subsequent period of performance prior to the government unilaterally exercising the option period.”

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question along with answers from potential contractors.

Should the costs for each Task Area be based solely on the hours indicated for each Task Area in the RFP?

Answer: The business proposal instructions are provided as a guide, but the offeror is free to list staffing needs as necessary. Vendors (the offerors) are reminded to propose level of effort based on the level of experience and expertise of the individual representing the labor category.

Should we assume the Program Director II/Project Manager would work 100 hours for Task Area 1 (as indicated in the “Base Period” table), and use that for the cost basis of Task Area 1 for the Base Period?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question Approximately how many stakeholders have participated in the program 2002 – 2016?

Answer: Over 2000 stakeholders have either participated in the program as coordinators, students or mentors.

What is the estimated number of student participants in the program?

By year - On a yearly basis ~69 undergraduates and ~92 high school students participate in STEP-UP.

How many universities have been part of the program?

Answer: As coordinating centers for the program there have been 13 institutions.

Does the table in Appendix A (Deliverables Table) have relevance to this RFQ?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question Can the government provide some information concerning what proportion of program participants are high school students and what percent are in college?

Answer: Approximately 700 undergraduate students and over 1200 high school students have participated in the STEP-UP program since its inception. On a yearly basis ~69 undergraduates and ~92 high school students participate in STEP-UP.

How many total awards have been made by the STEP-UP program? How many awards are typically made per year?

Answer: Approximately 700 undergraduate students and over 1200 high school students have participated in the STEP-UP program since its inception. On a yearly basis ~69 undergraduates and ~92 high school students participate in STEP-UP.

Does NIDDK maintain updated contact information for both current and prior awardees?

Answer: NIDDK maintains a list of contact information for past and current awardees. The contact information for past participants has not been maintained over the intervening years.

What does NIDDK consider to be an acceptable response rate for the survey of alumni?

Answer: NIDDK considers an acceptable response rate for the survey in the area of 20 to 35%.

What types of tools does NIDDK consider to be acceptable for administering the survey? Would web-based tools such as Survey Monkey be acceptable?

Answer: NIDDK currently uses Survey Monkey for administering surveys and intends to continue using this web based tool.

In section C.4.2, under Task 2a (Evaluation Research Design), the RFQ refers to previous evaluation reports and existing logic models for STEP-UP; could these reports and logic models be shared prior to the proposal due date? Similarly, could NIDDK share any survey instruments or interview protocols that have been used in prior evaluations (if applicable)? If these instruments currently exist, to what extent is NIDDK expecting the evaluator to design/develop new items as opposed to working primarily to administer instruments that are similar to those already used?

Answer: There are no publicly available evaluation reports or logic models. Current instruments have focused primarily on review of the end of the summer symposium without questions or information related to how the STEP-UP influenced career trajectories. The Solicitation is requesting expertise and insight in how to best measure outcomes for the retrospective cohort and ongoing evaluation

Under the Business Proposal Instructions, the RFQ states that “the chart below provides a breakdown by hours per performance period”; should we determine and provide estimated hours for option years 1-4 (i.e., which may be different from those specified in the RFQ for the base period)?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question

Similarly, to what extent does NIDDK expect the budget/level of effort to be the same each year in option years 1-4?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised to address this question

Does NIDDK expect transition services to be provided both in year 1 and at the end of the option year period?

Answer: Transition services should be budgeted for year 1 and each of the option years.