Request for Clarification Responses_Impact Ev.pdf

Request for Clarifications Responses

IMPACT EVALUATION RFP # CABEZARST09272024

All Requests for Clarifications (RFC) were due in writing to Ben Cabeza at bcabeza@kippatl.org by October 2, 2024 at 12 pm.

We received questions from two organizations; please see the responses below.

1. Question Received: Your website shows that an Offerer’s Conference will be held via Zoom on October 2nd at 8

am. How can register to attend it?

o Answer: I’m still working on the details for this and will circle back to you and let you know. [Updated]

We decided not to hold an offeror’s conference for any potential bidders and have prioritized answering all requests for clarifications via email.

2. Question Received: Your website shows October 11, 2024 as the end date and the RFP states October 7th as the due date. Can you clarify the date and time when proposals are due?

o Answer: Great point, my finance team updated it to 10/11 and we missed updating the RFP document.

10/11 at noon is the correct time.

3. Question Received: Can you clarify the type of data that will be available to the vendor (Page 18 under Scope)?

For example, is it all quantitative data (e.g., student assessments, performance, demographics, etc) or have you also collected qualitative data such as observations, focus groups/interviews? Do you have survey data that measures student and family perceptions and satisfaction with school programming and quality of education?

o Answer: We are mostly thinking about quantitative achievement outcome data, but we also have tons of survey and perception data from students, families, and staff going back 10+ years.

4. Question Received: How many years of similar data does the organization have that may allow for a longitudinal research design?

o Answer: Depending on the data set, we have data going back to 2003 (enrollment, demographic, etc.)

For impact data like test scores, we have data going back at least 10 years. I think a longitudinal study is very doable based on data availability and this is what we are hoping for.

5. Question Received: Does the organization have any interest in community-facing reports such as infographics or videos to tell the story of success?

o Answer: We have a MarComm team that can take the findings and create community-facing reports for us, but thanks for asking.

6. Question Received: Who is the audience for the report?

o Answer: The primary audience will be our internal team and our Board of Directors; we will adapt to other audiences as mentioned above. The idea is to have like a “white paper” for us to internally learn from.

7. Question Received: Do you have a preference for virtual or onsite meetings?

o Answer: Either is fine, but I imagine virtual is easiest.

8. Question Received: Is there a set budget range for the evaluation?

o Answer: We are hopeful for this to come in at $250k or less.

9. Question Received: On page 26, the RFP requests 3 references from underwriters. Can you clarify who you are looking for? Someone from a client fiscal office?

o Answer: Great question! For this, please provide 3 client references from prior work.

10. Question Received: Could you please confirm the due date for proposals regarding the Impact Evaluation? On the procurement page it lists October 11; however, the RFP has the due date as October 7.

o Answer: Thank you for this question – it’s the October 11 by 12:00pm that is listed on the site. The deadline was changed at the time of posting but was not updated in the document itself.

12. Question Received: Has KIPP Atlanta identified an alternative date for a potential presentation from bidders?

The proposal currently references October 11, 2024.

o Answer: Thank you for your question. We decided not to host the offeror’s conference, but the mailto:bcabeza@kippatl.org presentation from bidders will be an optional interview that we might invite certain bidders to if we have additional questions about proposals. Given the shift in deadline for proposals, this will be anytime between 8am and 5pm on Friday, Oct. 18.

13. Question Received: Are there sample national studies on the network-wide impact of attending KIPP schools that would serve good examples of the desired scope and/or design of this study?

o Answer: Yes, there have been two such studies conducted by Mathematica that you may reference.

14. Question Received: Will KIPP Atlanta provide the de-identified data from partner districts?

o Answer: Yes, we will work with our district partners to secure this data.

15. Question Received: Other than NSC data, what types of external data sources does KIPP Atlanta anticipate may be used for this study?

o Answer: State test scores, ACT scores, etc.

16. Question Received: Who is the intended audience for the “white paper” study reports? Will the reports primarily be used with funders?

o Answer: The primary audience of the white paper will be our internal team. We will also plan to share headlines with our Board of Directors, funders, partners, and current and prospective families.

17. Question Received: Is there a target date for study report completion?

o Answer: We anticipate this work to take approximately a year to complete, so early- to mid-Fall of

2025 would be ideal.

18. Question Received: What is the allocated budget for this work?

o Answer: We encourage you to include in your proposal what is market value for this work. However, we are hopeful for this to come in at $250k or less.

19. Question Received: Please clarify the extent to which we should respond to this question. We are a large firm that serves thousands of clients annually. We understand question 2.2 refers to any district that terminated a contract with PCG. How does 2.3 differ? [2.3. During the last five years has your company lost a contract from a district that had previously been served by your company? If so, give complete details, including the school district name.] o Answer: 2.3 refers to losing out on a contract bid with a district that had previously worked with your company.

20. Question Received: Please clarify what is meant by underwriters in the reference section? [7.1. Provide reference contact information from (3) three comparable education clients and (3) three underwriters KMAS may contact.] o Answer: The three comparable education clients is sufficient here.

21. Question Received: The RFP indicates that the time period is from July 2024 - June 2025. Does this time frame still apply?

o Answer: Thank you for this question; given our adjusted timeline, this has been updated to November

2024 to November 2025.

22. Question Received: Was there another Contractor on this project? If so, can you provide details on the reason for separation?

o Answer: There has not been a selected contractor for this project yet; we will select one through this

RFP process and begin the work at that time.

23. Question Received: The RFP will be open for approximately 8 days. Is there a specific reason for the short timeframe?

o Answer: The RFP indicates that the time period is from July 2024 - June 2025. Does this time frame still apply? Thank you for this question; given our adjusted timeline, this has been updated to November 2024 to November 2025.

24. Question Received: We are a small minority owned business. How important is the financial stability portion that is indicated in this RFP? What is the current ratio? Is there any other form of documentation that would be acceptable such as a P/L statement?

o Answer: There is no defined ratio. Yes, presenting a P/L statement is acceptable with rationale.

25. Question Received: May we provide names and addresses of potential insurance companies?

o Answer: KIPP will not provide the insurance companies. The vendor can provide a list of insurance companies.

26. Question Received: Is it acceptable to list one insurance company if that company can provide coverage for each policy listed in the RFP?

o Answer: Yes, this is acceptable.

27. Question Received: May we provide names of suggested underwriters if one insurance company is listed?

o Answer: For this question, the 3 client references is sufficient.

28. Question Received: Lastly, please clarify the type of impact your organization is seeking (number graduated from college, career choice, impact in the local area, etc.).

o Answer: We are looking for K-12 outcomes based on common assessment and achievement measures as well as alumni college outcomes such as attendance, matriculation, graduation, degree types, etc.

29. Question Received: Is this RFP for substitute teaching or special education services? I am trying to figure out what the RFP entails. Thank you for letting me know.

o Answer: Those topics are not directly included in this RFP. Let me know if you have any further questions.

30. Question Received: Do you know if you will have RFPs for Special Education Services in the future?

o Answer: We launched an RFP in that area last year and have completed the majority of the work we sought out to do. At this time, I don’t believe we have any plans for additional contracted work for the time being.

31. Question Received: Can you clarify what you mean by "underwriters" (in the references section)?

o Answer: For this question, the 3 client references is sufficient.

32. Question Received: Is there a page limit or other formatting guidelines for the executive summary?

o Answer: No limit or formatting guidelines.

33. Question Received: Do you all have a budget in mind, or a "not to exceed" cost?

o Answer: We encourage you to include in your proposal what is market value for this work. However, we are hopeful for this to come in at $250k or less.

34. Question Received: We notice in the proposal that the period of performance runs through June 30, 2025. Is there flexibility on the start time?

o Answer: Thank you for this question; given our adjusted timeline, this has been updated to November

2024 to November 2025.

35. Question Received: Are you interested only in quantitative impact analyses, or would you be interested in qualitative data collection to understand stakeholder perception of impact?

o Answer: For our impact, we are mostly focused on quantitative analyses; however, qualitative data could be part of the inputs for that.

36. Question Received: Do you want the "white paper" to be formatted for a public audience?

o Answer: Ideally it would be formatted for both internal and external audiences; however, we plan to leverage our MarComm department to support with sharing relevant findings and headlines with our stakeholders in more accessible ways.

37. Question Received: The RFP states that there are 11 schools in metro Atlanta but lists only eight (8) in the chart on page 18/19. Please clarify which schools are in the evaluation.

o Answer: Apologies for the confusion. We have several campuses that are made up by a primary school and a middle school. See the complete list of 11 schools below:

KIPP Atlanta Collegiate KIPP Soul Academy KIPP Soul Primary KIPP South Fulton Academy KIPP STRIVE Academy KIPP STRIVE Primary KIPP Vision Academy KIPP Vision Primary KIPP WAYS Academy KIPP WAYS Primary KIPP Woodson Park Academy

38. Question Received: There are no specific research questions or parameters about the evaluation. There is a complete list of questions about compliance, but nothing regarding the evaluation. Is there additional information to guide the development of a research plan?

o Answer: We would partner with the proposed team selected to determine the impact questions to measure the impact of KIPP Atlanta Schools on K-12 and alumni performance.

39. Question Received: What is the budget parameter or HR burden for this project? This is potentially a very large project. Some guidance would be helpful.

o Answer: We encourage you to include in your proposal what is market value for this work. However, we are hopeful for this to come in at $250k or less.

40. Question Received: The RFP mentions that national studies have been done and KIPP ATL would like to “articulate a similar data narrative for our specific, local impact in metro Atlanta.” Can you point us to the national study that the RFP is specifically referring to?

o Answer: Yes, there have been two such studies conducted by Mathematica that you may reference.

41. Question Received: The RFP states that the contract is to begin July 1, 2024. Can you clarify the actual time for this contract and the timeline for the project, while also answering whether this project is being rebid? If so, why?

o Answer: Thank you for this question; given our adjusted timeline, this has been updated to November 2024 to November 2025. This project is not being rebid.

42. Question Received: The RFP states that the contract may be renewed for two additional years. What is the purpose of the renewal? To conduct longitudinal research? To do the same level of research in out years? Please specify.

o Answer: This is our standard contract language. I don’t anticipate needing to renew the contract.

43. Question Received: Is there an expectation or preference for site visits to the schools or is this simply a data analytical project?

o Answer: This is simply a data analytical project, but we would be open to school/site visits if relevant.

44. Question Received: Can you clarify what you mean by "underwriters" (in the references section)?

o Answer: For this question, the 3 client references is sufficient.

45. Question Received: Is there a page limit or other formatting guidelines for the executive summary?

o Answer: No limit or formatting guidelines.

46. Question Received: Do you all have a budget in mind, or a "not to exceed" cost?

o Answer: We encourage you to include in your proposal what is market value for this work. However, we are hopeful for this to come in at $250k or less.

47. Question Received: We notice in the proposal that the period of performance runs through June 30, 2025. Is there flexibility on the start time?

o Answer: Thank you for this question; given our adjusted timeline, this has been updated to November

2024 to November 2025.

48. Question Received: Are you interested only in quantitative impact analyses, or would you be interested in qualitative data collection to understand stakeholder perception of impact?

o Answer: For our impact, we are mostly focused on quantitative analyses; however, qualitative data could be part of the inputs for that.

49. Question Received: Do you want the "white paper" to be formatted for a public audience?

o Answer: Ideally it would be formatted for both internal and external audiences; however, we plan to leverage our MarComm department to support with sharing relevant findings and headlines with our stakeholders in more accessible ways.