Phase IA- 91990026R0003 Final.docx

U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences

SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH (SBIR) PROGRAM

PHASE IA

2026 Phase IA ED/IES SBIR Solicitation

PROGRAM SOLICITATION FOR FY 2026 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Page | 2

PHASE IA

RFP Number: 91990026R0003

Issue Date: April 30, 2026

Closing Date: June 29, 2026

11:00 a.m., Eastern Time (ET)

PHASE IA PRIORITY AREA (1)

Prototypes of Novel Education Technology Products for Use by Learners, Educators or Administrators (or Other School Personnel) for which No or Limited Prior Research and Development Has Already Occurred

Table of Contents

PHASE IA SOLICITATION OVERVIEW

The U.S. Department of Education’s (ED) Small Business Innovation Research Program (SBIR), administered by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), provides awards for the research and development of new, commercially viable education technology products (“products”). The goal of the program is to grow a portfolio of research-based products that are widely deployed to address pressing needs across education.

Solicitation #91990026R0003 invites eligible for-profit small business firms and partners to submit “Phase IA” proposals for $250,000 contracts over a period of nine (9) months to research and develop a prototype of a novel education technology product for which no (or limited) previous development has occurred. Awardees who successfully complete a Phase IA project under this solicitation will be eligible to submit a proposal in 2027 for a $1,000,000 Phase II award to fully develop the new education technology product over a period of two (2) years and to prepare for commercialization.

ED/IES SBIR is a highly competitive program – historically between 5 and 7% of submitted proposals result in a Phase I award, and about 50% of Phase I awardees receive a Phase II award the following year.

A. ED/IES SBIR: Two Program Tracks The 2026 ED/IES SBIR program is divided into two tracks, each with its own solicitation.

· The current solicitation (“Phase IA”) requests proposals for Phase I projects for the development of a prototype of a novel (i.e., first of its kind, not successfully tried before) education technology product for which no or limited previous technological development has occurred. The goal of the Phase IA track is to solicit proposals for ground-breaking high-risk high-reward approaches to solve pressing problems in education. See Section II “Phase IA Solicitation Details” for more information on the background and specifications for this Phase IA track.

· The other solicitation (“Phase IB”) requests proposals for Phase I projects for the development of a prototype for a new component (or multiple new components) to be integrated into an existing education technology prototype or product. The goal of the Phase IB track is to strengthen existing research-based prototypes or products in addressing pressing problems in education. See solicitation #91990026R0004 for more information on the Phase IB program. The submission due date for Phase IB proposals under these solicitations is the same date as under this Phase IA solicitation, June 29, 2026.

ED/IES SBIR anticipates that up to a total of 16 Phase I awards will be made in 2026, eight under each of its respective Phase I solicitations.

Offerors are not permitted to submit the same or similar proposals under the 2026 Phase IA, IB, or Direct to Phase II solicitations. Any duplicate or similar proposals that are submitted under more than one of these 2026 solicitations will be rejected without review.

Offerors are permitted to submit multiple proposals under either or both solicitations provided the proposals have different foci.

B. Additional 2026 ED/IES SBIR Solicitation for Direct to Phase II Projects In addition to the Phase IA and IB solicitations, ED/IES SBIR has released a “Direct to Phase II” solicitation #91990026R0005, requesting proposals for awards of $1,000,000 over a period of 2 years, with a submission due date of June 29, 2026, at 2 p.m. ET.

The Direct to Phase II program requests proposals for the development of new education technology products to ready existing evidence-based innovations for use at scale.

To be eligible for the Direct to Phase II solicitation, projects are required to adhere to the below specifications:

· Projects must focus on readying existing evidence-based innovations for use at scale. Projects that focus on advancing innovations that are not evidence-based are not eligible for the Direct to Phase II program.

· The existing evidence-based innovation is required to have originally been conceptualized and developed by an academic researcher while at an academic institution or by a researcher at a non-profit education research organization.

· Innovations that were originally conceptualized and with development that was led by a small business or by an entrepreneurial developer outside of an academic institution or at a non-profit education research organization are not eligible for the Direct to Phase II program. Such projects may be appropriate for submission under ED/IES SBIR’s 2026 Phase IB solicitation #91990026R0004.

· One (or more) of the researchers who originally created and established evidence for the innovation is required to be part of the team in the proposed ED/IES SBIR project, whether as an employee of the small business or as a consultant to the small business that receives the SBIR award.

· Offerors are not permitted to submit the same or similar proposals under the 2026 Phase IA, IB, or Direct to Phase II solicitations. Any duplicate or similar proposals that are submitted under more than one of these 2026 solicitations will be rejected without review.

View this page for a link to the 2026 ED/IES SBIR solicitations on SAM.gov

PHASE IA SOLICITATION DETAILS

A. Key Dates

Visit the ED/IES SBIR FAQ page to view frequently asked questions.

B. Phase IA or IB Program Track: Selecting the Correct Solicitation The information presented below is designed to assist an offeror in deciding whether to submit a proposal for an intended project under the purview of the Phase IA #91990026R0003(novel prototype) or Phase IB #91990026R0004 (integrating a new component with an existing prototype/product) solicitations.

· Offerors must determine whether to prepare a proposal under the Phase IA or IB solicitations. Once the solicitation is open, ED/IES SBIR program officials are unable to provide guidance regarding whether a proposal is a better fit for the Phase IA or IB track.

· Offerors are not permitted to submit the same or similar proposals under the 2026 Phase IA, IB, or Direct to Phase II solicitations. Any duplicate or similar proposals that are submitted under more than one of these 2026 solicitations will be rejected without review. (Offerors are permitted to submit multiple proposals under either or both solicitations provided the proposals have different foci.)

Phase IA projects are required to propose the development of a novel education technology product for which no (or limited) previous technological development has occurred.

What is “Limited” Previous Technological Development

For projects with some limited previous technological development, offerors should consider the nature and amount of the prior development in determining the goodness of fit for a proposal under the Phase IA versus Phase IB program tracks.

In cases where “limited” technological development has already occurred, the prototype should not yet be usable by end-users (e.g., learners, educators, administrators) without the assistance of the developer. This may include cases where an early prototype (such as a wireframe or clickable prototype) functions only when handled by a developer in a laboratory setting but not by an end-user in an education setting without developer assistance. Phase IA would also be appropriate if a prototype was developed that never functioned in or outside of a laboratory setting because the initial technological development failed, and a complete reconceptualization of the technological approach is required.

If limited previous development has already occurred, offerors are required to describe the initial prototype that was developed and how and under what conditions it functions (or does not function), and present research findings that demonstrate the merit of the approach and insights gained which inform the current proposed project and the new technological approach. If a prototype functions when used by end-users outside of a laboratory setting without a developer assistance, such as for testing or research purposes, but there is a need to develop additional components to enhance the prototype’s performance as an education technology product, the project would be appropriate for the Phase IB track under solicitation #91990026R0004.

How Similar is Too Similar?

In cases where the small business (or a member of the project team) has previously developed other education technology prototypes or products that end-users can utilize without developer assistance, the novel education technology product that is proposed under the Phase IA solicitation is required:

· To be independent from (will not be integrated with) the existing prototype or product. For example, if a company (or members of the project team) previously developed an algebra learning game for middle school, a proposal to create a new AI-based algebra assessment that could be integrated with the existing algebra game would not be considered an independent product. In such cases, offerors could prepare a Phase IB proposal, for a project to add a new component to an existing product.

· To employ a different technological approach from the existing prototype or product. If a company (or members of the project team) previously developed eight chapters of a virtual science textbook, a proposal to add four more chapters on different science topics following the same template would not be considered a different approach from the existing product. Similarly, if a company had previously developed a story-based cartoon to enhance grade school reading and wished to develop a similarly structured story-based cartoon to facilitate pre-reading skills in pre-K, that would not be considered an independent product.

Alternatively, if a company previously developed a virtual reality-based chemistry laboratory intervention, a proposal to develop a novel augmented reality-based physics game would be considered an independent product and therefore would likely be an appropriate fit for the Phase IA track.

The Timing of the Development Cycle in Relation to Submitting a Phase IA Proposal

For projects where limited development of a prototype has already occurred and will be ongoing, offerors must also consider the timing of development cycle in relation to preparing and submitting a Phase IA proposal to the ED/IES SBIR program.

Although projects with limited prior development will be considered for Phase IA, offerors who plan to continue development of a limited prototype to the point of a functioning prototype after submission and before the project start date of October 5, 2026, should not submit a proposal under the 2026 Phase I solicitation. Such offerors may wish to consider deferring their proposal until the following year and apply under the Phase IB program.

Proposals that do not clearly adhere to the above Phase IA solicitation requirements will likely be triaged and will not proceed to a review by a full panel. (See Section V. “Method of Selection and Evaluation Criteria” for more information on the Triage Round of the review.)

C. Priority Area A Prototype of a Novel Education Technology Product for Use by Learners, or Educators or Administrators for which No or Limited Prior Research and Development had Already Occurred Phase IA projects are to develop a prototype of a novel education technology product for which no or limited previous development has occurred. The goal of projects funded in Phase IA is ground-breaking high-risk high-reward approaches to solve pressing problems in education.

Novel education technology products for learners are intended to improve learning or promote relevant outcomes in one or more of the following areas: early childhood learning and school readiness; English language arts; civics education and social studies; foreign language or English language learning; STEM (science, technology, engineering [including cyber security], math, and data science); social and behavioral skills to support academic and other relevant school and career-related outcomes; the arts; and technical or vocational career readiness skills.

Novel education technology products for educator or administrator use (or other school personnel use) must be intended to either: (a) facilitate instruction; (b) improve the efficiency or accuracy of day-to-day administrative tasks or responsibilities; or (c) support decision making on the selection, implementation, or evaluation of interventions including practices, programs, or policies.

Additional Specifications

· Products may be for use at any level from prekindergarten to Grade 16, or for adult education. Products for adult education programs must address basic or secondary reading, writing, or mathematics skills, or other skills needed for an occupational certificate or degree.

· Products for learners may be for use in education settings, which can include schools or remote locations to replace, supplement, or enable the delivery of curricula or instruction or that facilitate out- of-school learning opportunities (e.g., after-school or summer programs, distance learning programs, on-line programs, enrichment programs, self-directed learning).

· Products that focus on novel education technology products for learners may include elements engaging parents or caregivers for learners in pre-K to grade 12, provided the intended outcomes support learning or promote outcomes in one of the topic areas listed in the paragraph regarding “novel education technology products for learners” above.

· Proposals for novel education technology products in other areas not specified above will be considered based on the relevance and significance of the need in the field of education.

PROPOSAL CONTENTS (SECTIONS A-N)

Content and Formatting Requirements

To ensure that the text of the proposal is well-organized for reviewers and that all offerors have the same amount of available space in which to describe their projects, offerors must adhere to the below page, font size, and format specifications for Section III. PROPOSAL CONTENTS (A – N)

· For the purpose of proposals submitted under this solicitation, a page is 8.5 inches x 11 inches, with 1-inch margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.

· Single space text in the project narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, and graphs.

· Type must conform to the following requirements:

· The height of the letters must not be smaller than 12 point using Microsoft Word.

· Type density, including characters and spaces, should be no more than 15 characters per inch (cpi).

· For proportional spacing, the average for any representative section of text should not exceed 15 cpi.

· Type size must yield no more than 6 lines of type within a vertical inch. Standard black type must be used for text.

· Offerors must check the type size using a standard device for measuring type size, rather than relying on the font selected for a particular word processing/printer combination.

· Figures, charts, graphs, tables, or screen shots (outside of what is requested in other sections) must be included within the 10-page limit for “SECTION B. Project Narrative.”

· Offerors are strongly encouraged to follow the outline with the exact sections and headers in the same order as presented in the Technical Narrative Section. Offerors are also advised to adhere to the guidelines for page length for each section.

· Proposals may not be resubmitted with or without revision after the submission deadline under this program solicitation.

SECTION A: Cover Pages Guidance for “SECTION A. COVER PAGES”

· All items in the “SECTION A. COVER PAGES” are required to be inserted as the opening pages of a Phase IA proposal. To structure Part I of a proposal, offerors must follow the exact format as the items below. Offerors should cut and paste the below table directly into the body of the proposal.

· Proposals shall not include any other cover pages beyond what is specified below.

· Do not include page numbers on the Cover Pages. Numbering should begin with “1” on the first page of the “SECTION B. Project Narrative.”

SOLICITATION Phase IA: #91990026R0003

A) Cover Page Certification: Offerors are not permitted to submit the same or similar proposals under the 2026 Phase IA, IB, or Direct to Phase II solicitations. Any duplicate or similar proposals that are submitted under more than one of these 2026 solicitations will be rejected without review.

Offerors are permitted to submit multiple proposals under either or both solicitations provided the proposals have different foci.

Did this offeror submit a similar proposal under either the 2026 ED/IES SBIR Phase IB or Direct to Phase II solicitation?

Note: the UEI is now required at the time of submission of the proposal. Proposals without a UEI will be rejected without review. If you do not already have a UEI registered on SAM.com please be advised, registration can take several weeks.

Click or tap here to enter text.

F) Contact Person: For the representative authorized to represent the small business concern in negotiations, fill in the information below:

a. Contact Name:

c. Contact Phone (format 555-555-1212)

Click or tap here to enter text.

G) Project Director: For the Project Director, fill in the information below:

a. Project Director Name:

Click or tap here to enter text.

H) HUBZone-owned SBC Certification:

Does the offeror qualify as a HUBZone-owned SBC and meet the definition as stated in this solicitation as defined by SBA?

The website listed below contains information about the SBA’s HUBZone program:

HUBZone program | U.S. Small Business Administration

The website listed below contains information about the SBA’s Woman-Owned program:

Women-Owned Small Business Federal Contract program | U.S. Small Business Administration

Does the offeror qualify as a socially and economically disadvantaged SBC and meet the definition as stated in this program solicitation as defined by SBA?

The website listed below contains information about the SBA’s Disadvantaged program:

Small Disadvantaged Business | U.S. Small Business Administration

Does the offeror qualify as a Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business as defined by SBA?

The website listed below contains information about the SBA’s Veteran program:

Veteran contracting assistance programs | U.S. Small Business Administration

a. Street Address:

Click or tap here to enter text.

d. State: Enter the state’s current postal abbreviation designated by the U.S. Postal Service.

The website listed below contains information about postal abbreviations for U.S. states and territories:

USPS State Abbreviations Click or tap here to enter text.

O) YouTube Video Demonstration in Support of the Proposal (Optional for Phase IA proposals): May include a URL (Uniform Resource Locator) link to a three-minute or shorter video demonstration of the proposed project.

INSERT YouTube URL to video demonstration here:

Click or tap here to enter text.

Video Demonstration Requirements

· If a video is included, reviewers will be required to watch and evaluate the video as a component of the proposal.

· Videos may be a maximum of 3 minutes. Reviewers will be instructed to stop watching a video at the end of minute 3.

· Offerors must ensure that a reviewer will be able to click on a “live” URL on YouTube to watch the video. URLs that are scanned and not clickable may not be able to be viewed by the reviewers.

· There is no sample of a successful video for the Phase IA program. Offerors must determine the appropriate video content to assist reviewers in understanding the nature and value of the novel product concept being proposed.

· For projects where no development has occurred, offerors are encouraged to provide a video presenting mockups or plans for the development of the proposed novel product to give reviewers context for project.

· For projects to develop a new prototype where limited development has already occurred, offerors are encouraged to include a video that presents the limited prototype that has been developed and how it is functioning, while highlighting the goal for the novel product concept.

· All video demonstrations must be posted to YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/) prior to the submission deadline and must remain available during the 90-day review period following submission. If the video demonstration is posted on a website other than YouTube, it is possible reviewers will not be able to watch the video. Videos can be posted as “public” or “private,” with private viewers only able to access the video with the URL link.

· Videos may not be updated after submission. If the posting date on YouTube for the video is later than the submission date on June 29, 2026, at 11 a.m. Eastern Time (ET), the video will be deemed ineligible for inclusion in the review process.

P) For every member of the project team, fill in the below table.

· At a minimum, each project must list two team members, including a Project Director and a Contractor Security Liaison.

· See “Section C. Project Team and Company, Résumés, and Certifications” and the Security Requirements for Contractors Doing Business with the Department of Education for more information on contractor security vetting processes and the role of the Contractor Security Liaison.

· Only one individual may serve as the Project Director. Co-Project Director are not permitted.

· The Contractor Security Liaison is permitted to serve in more than one role, and other roles may be added in the same box.

· The individual who is listed as the Project Director is not permitted to also be listed as the CSL.

· As many lines as needed may be added, to reflect additional members of the project team and the Project Roles. While there is no requirement for a proposal to list the names or qualifications of a subcontractor organization or individuals in key project roles – providing the names and qualifications of individuals and organizations will assist reviewers in determining if the project personnel have the relevant expertise and appropriate effort to conduct the work proposed.

· All work must be conducted by individuals who are located within the United States who are either citizens or hold a green card. Individuals who are in the United States without citizenship, visa, or green card, and U.S. citizens working outside the U.S. are not eligible to conduct work on the contract.

· A determination will be made at the beginning of the contract by ED regarding which project teams members will be required to proceed through the data security moderate risk/public trust clearance process (to include non-U.S. citizen waivers as applicable). Project team members who have contact with students (whether in person or through remote interactions) or who have access to data or networks that include personally identifiable information will be required to undergo the data security moderate risk/public trust process prior to initiating such tasks on the contract. Refer to “Section C: Project Team and Company Résumés” for more details.

Project Director (required)

Contractor Security Liaison (required)

(Add additional lines for more team members)

Q) Certifications for Phase IA Projects If responses to any of the following questions are “No”, the proposal does not meet the requirements for a Phase IA proposal. The offeror may consider submitting a proposal to the Phase IB solicitation.

R) Project Abstract:

· Describe the novel education technology product that would be fully developed if awards were provided in Phase I and II from the ED/IES SBIR program (200 word maximum).

S) Signatures for the Authorized Representative and the Project Director

Provide the authorized signature for the representative authorized to represent the small business concern in negotiations in the above box.

Provide the authorized signature for the Project Director in the above box.

T) SBA Company Registry:

All offerors to the SBIR program are required to register at the SBA Company Registry (https://www.sbir.gov/) prior to proposal submission. Offerors are required to attach a .pdf FILE of the SBIR.gov SBC Registration Control ID Form as proof of registration in this section of the proposal. Proposals that do not include the .pdf file will be returned without review. See below an image of a blank SBIR.gov Registration Control ID Form that offerors will complete, save as a .pdf FILE, and include within the proposal.

· All contents that make up “SECTION B. Project Narrative” must total ten (10) pages or less. Any content in this section beyond ten (10) pages will not be reviewed.

· Numbering should begin on the first page of the "SECTION B. Project Narrative” with “1” in the top right-hand corner.

· Offerors are required to follow the exact format specified in the items below to structure the proposal.

1. Significance A. Problem Statement and Best Current Practices (About 1 page is recommended for this section)

(1) Succinctly describe the problem that the proposed novel education technology product is intended to address.

· To support the significance of the proposed novel education technology product, cite the most recent data establishing the scope and nature of the problem in education.

· Describe why this problem persists.

B. Novel Product to be Developed if Phase I and II Funds Were Provided (About 2 pages are recommended for this section)

(1) Describe the novel education technology product that would be fully developed, following completion of the Phase IA and Phase II projects.

(2) In this description:

· List and briefly describe the key components of the proposed product and any additional materials required to support implementation. Indicate the hardware on which this product will operate (e.g., desktop computer, tablet, smart phone, Virtual Reality headset).

· Specify the intended user(s) of the product and grade level being addressed.

· Indicate whether the product would replace, supplement, or be integrated within existing education practice(s). Describe whether the product will be used for formal or informal learning, for in-class or remote learning, or some combination of the above.

· Briefly discuss how the product will engage universal design principles and address the needs of all potential users for which the product is intended. Include whether and how the product addresses accessibility to users with various needs, consistent with new guidance under Title II of the American s with Disabilities Act (ADA) (e.g. a student with visual impairment using a screen reader to access a mobile science app or an administrator who is deaf using closed captions to navigate training modules in a web-based continuing education application). See relevant resources below.

· Fact Sheet: New Rule on the Accessibility of Web Content and Mobile Apps Provided by State and Local Governments | ADA.gov

· Federal Register: Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Accessibility of Web Information and Services of State and Local Government Entities

· Describe how the product would function and how it would be implemented.

· Indicate the expected cost to schools overall and per student to purchase the product, and the level of resources (e.g., time, schedules, equipment) needed to implement and use the product.

· Present a concise user case or hypothetical example to further detail the implementation and user experience when engaging with the novel product that would be developed in Phase IA and a subsequent Phase II project.

C. Prior Existing Research that Relates to the Novel Product to be Developed, and any Prior Related R&D (if applicable).

(About 1 page is recommended for this section)

· Detail prior research conducted by the project team related to the current project and how this previous research guides and provides a foundation for the novel product. Offerors are strongly encouraged to include results from concept testing research in which users (e.g., learners, educators, administrators) provided feedback after viewing mock-ups detailing the proposed novel product and its intended implementation.

· Required only for projects where some limited previous development has already occurred. For projects that propose to develop a prototype of a novel education technology product for which some limited previous development has already occurred, describe the initial prototype that was developed in its’ current state and describe how and under what conditions it functions. Detail findings from research that tested the initial prototype, and that demonstrate the merit of approach and insights gained to inform the technological approach. (Indicate the sample of beta-testers, the sample size, and the measures that were used in this research).

D. Theoretical and empirical support (About 1 page is recommended for this section)

Describe the underlying theoretical framework and provide any data from relevant studies in the extant scientific literature to show that the novel version of the education technology product, and its components, can be expected to produce the intended results. Relevant references to the scientific literature should be included.

E. Market Competitors and Potential Commercial Application (About 1 page is recommended for this section)

Describe the most commonly used products and practices that are currently being used in this area of education. Describe the shortcomings of the current products or practices. Explain why the proposed novel education technology product will have a competitive advantage in the marketplace relative to other products or practices.

After the novel version of the education technology product is fully developed through Phase IA and Phase II R/R&D, describe how it will be commercialized (disseminated to potential end-users and revenue strategies to sustain the product over time) in the private sector marketplace. To support this commercialization plan, offerors must indicate how the letters included in “SECTION F. Letters of Support For Potential Pathways To Commercialize The New Proposed Education Technology Product” (described below) establish that pathways would be available toward the eventual commercial dissemination and sustainability of the proposed product in the private marketplace.

2. Phase IA Work Plan The purpose of the Phase IA project is to develop a functioning prototype (or initial version) of a novel education technology product, and to conduct a pilot study to test the prototype with end users. Offerors must indicate the appropriate focus and scope of the prototype to be developed, identifying the part of the project that is most important to develop and evaluate in Phase I, as a proof of concept to demonstrate that the full-scale development is viable and warranted in Phase II.

A. Development of the Prototype (About 2 pages are recommended for this section)

· Describe the prototype of the novel education technology product that will be developed in Phase I into a functioning prototype and describe how it will be functioning by the end of the Phase I project.

· Describe the R/R&D procedures through which the prototype will be developed and will be functioning by the end of Phase I. The development plan should include a description of the research procedures that will be used to iteratively test and refine the new prototype as development occurs. For this research, offerors should describe how and when data will be collected, the characteristics of the sample participating in the research, and the procedures for analyzing and drawing conclusions from the data.

B. Pilot Research at the End of Phase IA (About 2 pages are recommended for this section)

Describe the pilot study that will be conducted near the end of the Phase IA period, after the prototype is developed and functioning. The pilot study should both (1) test the usability (or functioning) and feasibility of the prototype when it is used by the anticipated end user, and (2) provide results from concept testing, in which users provide feedback following a presentation of the plans or mock-ups for the new education technology product that would be developed by the end of Phase II. This pilot test should include hands-on interaction with the prototype by representative intended users.

When describing the pilot study, offerors should include the following details:

Research questions. Pose clear, concise research questions. For example:

To test usability: Does the prototype function as intended? Are users able to physically use the prototype? Are users able to easily follow the instructions to learn to use the prototype? Does the prototype generate and present data to the end-user as intended?

To test feasibility of the prototype: Are users engaged while using the prototype? Were educators able to implement the prototype within standard practice (or a simulated version thereof) as intended by the developer? Do users report that the prototype showed promise for leading to the intended outcomes (e.g., improved student learning from pre- to post-test, improved student attitudes about learning in the target area, educators persuaded that a more efficient process is possible)?

Concept testing: After using the prototype and seeing plans or mock-ups for the full development of the novel education technology product, do users believe the fully-developed product (after Phase II) could be successfully implemented in the intended setting? Do users believe that the product has the potential to improve user outcomes if implemented as envisioned? Do users have feedback for improving or changing the prototype or the concept during subsequent product development?

Sample. Phase IA studies should include a small sample of individuals who resemble the intended user population. For these studies, describe the population (e.g., learners, educators, administrators) and the setting (e.g., school, early intervention setting, remote setting) for the studies to inform iterative refinements to the prototype and to test the feasibility and usability of the prototype at the end of Phase I. Provide information on the number and demographic characteristics of the participants who will participate in research. Wherever appropriate, offerors are encouraged to include underserved learners in their samples. Offerors must include one letter of agreement for participation in research from a representative of an education setting, should the proposal be awarded. This letter should be no longer than one (1) page and is to be included in “SECTION E. Letter of Agreement to Participate in The Phase IA R/R&D.”

Instruments. Describe the instruments that will be used to measure usability and feasibility of the prototype as well as concept testing of the fully-developed novel product. Include information on reliability and validity of the instruments that will be employed, if available.

Procedures. Describe how and when data will be collected to determine usability and feasibility, and to conduct concept testing of the fully-developed novel product.

Data Analysis. Include a clear and detailed description of the data analysis procedures, including the hypotheses to be tested and the outcome measures to be used. For quantitative data, specific statistical procedures must be described. For qualitative data, the specific methods used to index, summarize, and interpret data must be delineated.

Foundations for Phase II. In concluding this section, briefly discuss how the Phase IA R/R&D will provide a foundation for the Phase II R/R&D effort. Briefly describe any potential problem areas that are anticipated in Phase IA and provide alternative strategies that would be considered in such circumstances to address these problems.

Key Terms for the Phase IA Workplan

Education Settings: Education settings refers to the location where the product is used, whether in a physical school (e.g., in a class), from a remote setting (e.g., a home), or an out-of-school setting (e.g., summer program).

Usability of the Prototype: The extent to which the prototype developed during Phase I functions as intended, can collect data, or generate results as intended, can be understood and/or easily used and learned by the intended user, and functions effectively and efficiently.

Feasibility of the Prototype: The extent to which the prototype can be used in the intended education setting for pilot testing within the requirements and constraints; evidence that users are engaged while using the prototype, that the prototype can be used as a standard education practice for formal or informal learning, instruction, or administration, and that the prototype shows promise for improving outcomes of interest.

Concept Testing the Full Product Concept: After using a prototype and seeing mock-ups or plans for the full concept of the completely new education technology product, the extent to which users believe that the full product would be a good fit to replace or supplement currently utilized content, could be implemented within the requirements and constraints of the targeted education setting, would engage learners or would be a product educators would want to use, and would be likely to improve the outcomes of interest for end-users.

Fidelity of Implementation: The extent to which the prototype is able to be delivered and used as it was designed to be by end users in an education setting.

Promise of Education Outcomes: The extent to which the pilot research shows improvement in education outcomes of interest.

3. CITATIONS

All citations should be included on page 11 (and beyond if needed), or the page immediately following the project narrative. Offerors are encouraged to use the formatting citation style of the American Psychological Association (APA).

SECTION C: Project Team and Company, Résumés, and Certifications Project Team and Company (This section should be a maximum of 1 page) Describe the company and the key partner organizations. Provide an overview of the project team and the roles of the individuals that make up the team.

· The project team must demonstrate expertise in the following areas: the design and development of new education technology products; education theory and practice; education research for the development and evaluation of education technology (including research experience in school settings), and in the commercialization of education technology-related products. In addition, the team must have expertise with the current innovation and in the targeted content domain (e.g., history pedagogy, reading, English Learning, STEM).

· One member of the project team must be designated as the “Contractor Security Liaison” (CSL) to lead the Contractor Vetting Security Process for each contract. See the information below and Security Requirements for Contractors Doing Business with the Department of Education for more information on contractor security vetting processes and ED information security and privacy requirements.

· The CSL may be an employee at the company or a consultant from outside of the company.

· The CSL’s role is to manage the post-award data security clearance process and support all members of the project team in the contractor security vetting process until completion.

· The individual who is listed as the Project Director is not permitted to also be listed as the CSL.

· The CSL may serve in other project roles.

· The individual who is assigned to be the CSL should possess strong administrative skills and attention to detail, to ensure compliance with data security requirements.

· The exact number of hours that a CSL will work on an ED/IES SBIR contract can vary from project to project and depends on many factors including the number of personnel involved. At a minimum, the role will require daily administrative work for several months of the Phase I project. More information about the precise tasks of the role will be provided upon award.

· ED will provide training for the CSL at the beginning of the contract.

· A determination will be made at the beginning of the contract by ED regarding which project teams members will be required to proceed through the data security moderate risk/public trust clearance process. Project team members who have contact with students (whether in person or through remote interactions) or who have access to data or networks that include personally identifiable information will be required to undergo the data security moderate risk/public trust process prior to initiating such tasks on the contract.

· Background investigations are conducted by the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency on behalf of ED in accordance with 5 C.F.R. § 731.104 and HSPD-12 requirements.

· Data Security moderate risk/public trust requirements include:

· Initiation and scheduling of the appropriate investigation;

· A favorable review of the: electronic security questionnaire (e-App), FBI fingerprint results, the Declaration of Federal Employment (OF-306), and the National Student Loan Data Base system (NSLDS) check;

· Cyber Security Training Certificate;

· Fair Credit Release Form and

· Non-U.S. Citizen Waiver (as applicable). Note: individuals that have received an approved waiver from ED in the past are not eligible for another waiver.

· See “Security Requirements for Contractors Doing Business with the Department of Education for more information on contractor security vetting processes and ED information security and privacy requirements.

· Offerors may determine how to structure the role of the CSL in the project budget.

Résumés and Résumé Certifications Each named individual on the project team must include a résumé (one (1) page maximum) including educational qualifications, experience, and bibliographic information most relevant to the project activities, including pertinent peer-reviewed publications when relevant.

· In the Project Director’s résumé, describe the expertise, educational qualifications, and experiences that are most relevant to the proposed project and address why this individual is well-qualified to manage the proposed project.

On the page following each résumé, project team members must provide a Certification by providing the information below:

"I hereby certify that my information in the resume section C, and as relevant, section K, L, M, and N, is accurate to the best of knowledge and belief."

Individual’s Name (TYPED): Click or tap here to enter text.

Individual’s Email: Click or tap here to enter text.

Electronic Signature:

Date:

An employee of the offeror with the authority to bind the offeror must certify the following statement by providing the information below:

"I hereby certify that (FILL IN THE COMPANY NAME) has verified the foregoing information that is accurate to the best of our knowledge and belief." Individual’s Name (TYPED): Click or tap here to enter text.

Individual’s Email: Click or tap here to enter text.

Electronic Signature:

Date:

SECTION D: Phase IA Budget Offerors shall provide a budget spreadsheet for the Phase IA period using the below template and a one (1) page maximum narrative budget justification.

For the narrative budget justification, the offeror should provide a justification for all pricing associated with the proposed project and describe why the pricing is within the scope of the proposed activities. Expenses that are allowable include all costs for research and development of the education technology product, including direct and indirect costs. For the budget spreadsheet:

· information should be displayed in a spreadsheet (SAMPLE BUDGET is below),

· all personnel should be listed by name,

· the number of hours assigned to the project for all personnel should be included,

· hourly rates for personnel should be included,

· labor costs per person should be included,

· funds for travel must be justified and related to the needs of the project,

· funds may be allocated to provide an incentive to a school or participants in a study for R&D purposes.

· for offerors who do not have an in-house Institutional Review Board (IRB), funds must be allocated to support a third-party review of human subjects’ involvement in the pilot study (see IRB section for more information), and

· cost sharing should not be included.

Use of funds to support a Technical…