SBIR 2023 Direct To Phase II Solicitation 91990023R0012.pdf

U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences

SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH PROGRAM

DIRECT TO PHASE II

PROGRAM SOLICITATION FOR FY 2023

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

RFP Number: #91990023R0012

DIRECT TO PHASE II PRIORITY AREA (1)

• Projects to Develop New Education Technology Products to Ready Existing Evidence-Based Innovations for Use at Scale in Education Settings, and to Plan for Commercialization

IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THIS SOLICITATION FOR OFFERORS

CONSIDERING A DIRECT TO PHASE II PROPOSAL

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 this program.

• The existing evidence-based innovation is required to have originally been conceptualized and developed by an academic researcher while at a university (or academic institution) or by a researcher at a non-profit education research organization. Technology-based innovations that were originally conceptualized and developed by a small business or by an entrepreneurial developer outside of an academic institution or non-profit education research organization are not eligible for the Phase II program. Such projects may be appropriate for submission under ED/IES SBIR’s 2023 Phase IB solicitation #91990023R0011.

• One (or more) of the researchers who originally conceptualized and developed the innovation must be part of the team in the proposed ED/IES SBIR project, whether as an employee/owner of the small business or as a consultant to the small business that receives the SBIR award.

• Offerors are not permitted to submit similar proposals under a 2023 Phase I solicitation and also under the Direct to Phase II solicitation. In such cases, both or all proposals will be rejected without review.

Offerors should fully review the whole of this solicitation for additional specifications.

https://sam.gov/opp/b0c5cbd4e06d4ce292d97512523b3ee1/view

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 2

ISSUE DATE: January 12, 2023

CLOSING DATE: March 13, 2023 11:00 AM, Eastern Standard Time

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

I. Direct to Phase II Solicitation Overview…………………………………………………..3

II. Direct to Phase II Priority Area (1) ……………………………………………………….…5

III. Direct to Phase II Proposal Contents (Sections A through J below make up the body of the proposal to be submitted) A. Cover Pages………………………………………………………………………………………12 B. Proposal Narrative (15-pages maximum)………………………………………….17 C. Project Team & Company Information……………………………………………..28 D. Direct to Phase II Budget…………………………………………………………………..30 E. Letter of Agreement for School Participation (Maximum 1 letter)…….33 F. Letters of Commercial Support (Maximum 5 letters)………………………..34 G. Information on Previous EdTech-Related SBIR Awards…………………..…36 H. Disclosure of Similar or Related Awards or Proposals……………………….39 I. Technical Assistance Plan (TABA) ……………………………………………………..40 J. Required Certifications to include in the Proposal…………………………….41 K. Foreign Influence Disclosure and Certification……………….…………………….47

IV. Proposal Submittal Information……………………………………………………………….54

V. Method of Selection and Evaluation Criteria……………………………………………57

VI. Additional Information

A. SBIR Program Information and Eligibility…………………………………………….62 B. Considerations for Offerors Who Win Contracts…………………………………67 C. Definitions………………………………………………………………………………………….78 D. Contracts and Management Clauses…………………………………………………..81 E. Scientific and Technical Information Sources……………………………………..82 F. Proposal Checklist……………………………………………………………………………...83 G. Contracts Acquisition Management Clauses……………….….………………….84

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 3

I. SOLICITATION OVERVIEW

The 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.

Known as “ED/IES SBIR,” the program’s goal is to grow a portfolio of products that are based in research and widely deployed to address pressing needs across topic areas in education and special education.

The 2020 SBIR Policy Directive provides authorization to three agencies to make Direct to Phase II awards, including the Department of Education. As the name implies, Direct to Phase II awards bypass the requirement that offerors receive a Phase I award for project to develop and test a prototype of a new education technology product. This ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II program solicitation #91990023R0012 invites eligible small businesses to submit a Direct to Phase II proposal for projects to ready existing evidence-based innovations (products, programs, or practices) for use at scale in education settings, and to plan for commercialization. The projects funded through this solicitation are intended to result in the successful transition of existing evidence-based innovations to education practice through the distribution of scalable new education technology products that are sustainable over time.

Section II Priority Area (1) below provides more information on the background and specifications for this Direct to Phase II solicitation. Offerors are reminded that ED/IES SBIR has also released two general Phase I solicitations, Phase IA solicitation #91990023R0001 and Phase IB solicitation #91990022R0011. Proposals to conduct projects to develop the same or a similar version of a new education technology product under either Phase I solicitation and the Direct to Phase II solicitation are not permitted. In such cases, any Phase I proposals and the Direct to Phase II proposal that are submitted will be rejected without review.

https://www.sbir.gov/sites/default/files/SBA_SBIR_STTR_POLICY_DIRECTIVE_OCT_2020_0.pdf https://sam.gov/opp/c80ca3dcf22a442487cf6b09505d7f5c/view https://sam.gov/opp/c80ca3dcf22a442487cf6b09505d7f5c/view

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 4

Key Dates

January 12, 2023 Solicitation release date.

February 10, 2023 Final day to submit questions in writing about this solicitation to Contract Specialist Tracey.Perry@ed.gov. Note: All responses will be posted publicly as an amendment on this page in a respective timeframe according to complexity and quantity of questions received.

March 13, 2023 Proposal submission deadline is 11AM eastern time. (The time is recorded as the time received not sent, there will be no exceptions to the deadline.)

June 9, 2023 On or before this date, ED will email an official notification to all offerors with reviewer evaluations. (This e-mail will be sent to the identified contract person listed on proposal)

June 19, 2023 The Department anticipates this as the start date and the first billable date.

mailto:Tracey.Perry@ed.gov https://sam.gov/opp/32da6e97dad64e8ab4921660c318b062/view

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 5

II. DIRECT TO PHASE II PRIORITY AREA

Projects to Develop New Education Technology Products to Ready Existing Evidence-Based Innovations for Use at Scale in Education, and to Plan for Commercialization

Background:

In recent decades, funders in and outside of government have made a significant investment in the development of new innovations, including products, programs, or practices that have been created by researchers at universities (or other academic institutions) or non-profit education research organizations, and in evaluations of their efficacy. Examples of innovations include technology- or non-technology-based interventions, apps, assessments, tools, professional development materials or manuals, or educator delivered approaches. Awards to researchers at universities and non-profit organizations have yielded an array of evidence demonstrating that use of the innovation improves outcomes when implemented in education. These findings may come from one or more well-designed and well-implemented randomized control experimental or quasi-experimental studies to evaluate the innovation, including controlled laboratory studies, researcher implemented school pilots, or efficacy trials.

Despite compelling research evidence for many innovations, few researcher-developed innovations have successfully transferred into practice and are used at scale. This means that learners, educators, and administrators ultimately have not been able to benefit from many evidence-based innovations.

Barriers to wide-scale replication, adoption, and sustainability of researcher-developed and evidence-based innovations in education are well documented, and include lack of:

access to the needed technology infrastructure for scalable deployment, feasibility to implement at scale, appropriate market-fit, and researchers’ capacity to commercialize the innovation. Examples may include:

• Technology-based innovations that were built on outdated or obsolete back-end software systems

• Innovations that rely on one-on-one researcher-delivered trainings, professional development, or coaching, rendering implementation challenging, or

• Older innovations that lack sufficient current product-market fit with respect to interface or delivery system

Planning for commercialization is an additional challenge for researcher-developed innovations to be used at scale in practice. Many researchers, whether at universities or non-profit education research organizations, lack the experience to support commercialization including capacity to license, market, distribute, sell, or maintain and update interventions. Researchers may not have the capacity to provide support to schools that would be willing to use the innovations, or to connect to local school

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 6 systems or school administrators and teachers to provide information that the innovation is available.

A successful model to address these challenges effectively and efficiently is for university and non-profit education researchers to leverage partnerships with or launch small business technology firms, and/or to partner with industry organizations staffed with individuals who possess the technological and commercialization expertise to develop, distribute, and sustain updated and more robust versions of the existing evidence-based innovations established by the researcher(s).

This approach is the focus of the current Direct to Phase II solicitation. Examples of this model include:

• University researchers initially created a non-technology delivered innovation to apply growth mindset to instruction and learning. However, the innovation’s scalability was limited because it relied on face-to-face teacher training and static paper-and-pencil learner activities. To develop a scalable model, a small business partnered with the researchers to create an education technology platform with automated training modules and animated lessons to deploy this instructional approach, permitting the existing innovation to be implemented at scale and to be more engaging and interactive for participants.

• Researchers initially developed an online literacy program for early readers that personalized instruction through formative feedback to educators. However, the backend of the technology system could not process large amounts of learner data and implementation required significant researcher involvement and tailored adaptation across schools. To ready the innovation for use in schools at scale, a small business upgraded the underlying data architecture and created automated support and adaptation functionalities in consultation with the researchers.

• A university researcher created an evidence-based intervention that employed hand-held puppet characters to teach learners about different emotions to promote social and emotional development. The intervention was delivered by individual educators and was therefore not scalable model. The researcher launched a small business and in 2022 won a Direct to Phase II award from ED/IES SBIR to develop a new digital version of the intervention and to plan for commercialization.

This Direct to Phase II solicitation requests proposals for projects to include: (1) full-scale development of a new education technology product to ready an existing evidence-based innovation (originally developed by researchers at universities or non-profit education research organizations) for use at scale in education settings; (2) pilot research to demonstrate the promise of the new education technology product to be https://ies.ed.gov/blogs/research/post/a-growing-body-of-research-on-growth-mindset https://ies.ed.gov/blogs/research/post/ies-supported-technology-to-be-used-in-hundreds-of-schools https://ies.ed.gov/funding/grantsearch/details.asp?ID=5735

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 7 readied for use at scale; and (3) preparation for the commercialization of the new education technology product to be distributed at scale and sustained over time through revenue or some other funding source.

Because the focus of the Phase II project is to ready existing innovations already demonstrated to be evidence-based, projects supported through this solicitation will be funded without a prior Phase I award.

Specifications:

Evidence-Base for the Existing Innovation

• The evidence-base for the existing innovation that was originally conceptualized and developed by a researcher at a university (or other academic institution) or a non-profit education research organization must include research findings supported by one or more well-designed and well-implemented randomized control experimental or quasi-experimental studies.

Areas of Focus

• Technology products can be for use at any level from prekindergarten to Grade 16, or for adult education. Products for adult education populations must address basic or secondary reading, writing, or mathematics skills, or other skills needed for an occupational certificate or degree. Products for learning may be for use in schools or remote settings to replace, supplement, or enable the delivery of curricula or instruction OR to 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 focusing on engaging parents or caregivers are permitted for learners in pre-K to grade 12, provided the intended outcomes for the product are to support learning or promote relevant outcomes listed above.

Project Scope

• Projects funded through this Direct to Phase II solicitation must preserve the nature and essential functionality of an existing evidence-based innovation, while adding a new technology component, or adapting or upgrading the technology to enable the new product to be used at scale.

• Proposed activities in response to this solicitation must be of sufficient scope in terms of the technological development to justify the award and the amount of funding provided.

• The existing evidence-based innovation that was conceptualized and developed by a researcher may or may not currently be technology-based. For example, some proposed innovations may be adaptations of paper-based workbooks or interventions, instructional approaches delivered by educators, or a training delivered by coaches.

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 8

• The technological development proposed by offerors in response to this solicitation may take a variety of forms including projects to upgrade an innovation or to integrate the innovation with an already established product.

Examples may include projects to:

o upgrade the backend structure of an existing technological innovation with modern software standards so that the new product can function or be usable at scale o develop a website to enable or streamline professional development, and support feasible delivery and implementation of an existing evidence-based innovation o improve a component of the evidence-based innovation to achieve a product-to-market fit, such as converting a paper-based workbook to a technology-delivered intervention, redesigning of a student user-interface, or developing an educator data dashboard to inform decision making o combine or integrate an existing evidence-based innovation (which may be too narrow in scope by itself to allow for a commercially viable product that would be broadly adopted) with another product, such as merging an evidence-based assessment battery with an existing product

• The Direct to Phase II program is not intended to support projects with the main purpose of developing additional content to be added to an existing partially completed intervention. For example, a proposal to develop four new chapters to add an existing evidence-based online textbook in order to complete the full year of content is not an appropriate fit for this program.

Eligibility:

• The existing education innovation is required to have originally been conceptualized and developed by a researcher or team of researchers at either a university (or other academic institution) or non-profit education research organization.

o Cases where an academic researcher directed a project that included a sub-award to a for-profit firm to assist in the technological development of the innovation are also eligible under this solicitation.

• The proposing small businesses must fit the following eligibility requirements described in this solicitation.

o In all cases, a small business must lead the proposal for all submissions (a requirement of the SBIR program).

o The Principal Investigator must be an employee of the small business.

o One or more of the researchers that created the innovation is required to be a member of the team for the proposed SBIR project, whether as an employee at the small business or as a consultant.

o Projects to ready existing evidence-based technology-based innovations for use at scale that were originally conceptualized and developed at a small business are not permitted through this competition. Under limited

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 9 circumstances, such projects may be appropriate for submission under ED/IES SBIR’s 2023 Phase IB solicitation #919900230011.

• The small business could follow different models for submission to the Direct to Phase II program:

o One possible model is that an existing small business partners with one or more of the university/non-profit researchers who developed the existing evidence-based product or practice. In such cases, the small business (the prime for the contract) would subcontract to the researchers to collaborate on the work of the project.

o Another possible model is that the academic or non-profit researcher who was the original creator of the innovation could launch their own small business. In such cases, the small business would add team members or sub-contract with experts in key project areas to support development, research, and commercialization.

• In all cases, the proposal must present a plan stipulating who among researchers, universities, or the small business will hold the intellectual property, and specify plans for what entity will commercialize the product. Such plans should be provided in the technical narrative of proposals.

Prior Research

• Proposals must present results from prior research on the existing evidence-based innovation, including: (1) data demonstrating the usability, feasibility, and fidelity of implementation; and (2) the evidence-base for improving outcomes.

The evidence base should include data that is presented in peer-reviewed publications.

Rationale and Need for Additional Development to Support Scaling

• Proposals must present information on why the existing innovation is not yet ready for use at scale, and must provide results from concept testing through focus groups with a small number of intended users and decision makers (e.g., superintendents, district administrators, principals, educators, learners, parents) who have viewed plans and mock-ups, provided feedback, and believe the new education technology product would be usable, feasible, and meet current need(s).

Commercially Deployed Innovations

• Existing evidence-based innovations that are or have been commercially deployed and available in education at a smaller scale (e.g., a few schools) are eligible to be the focus of a proposal under this solicitation. However, such proposals must justify why additional funding would be required to further ready the innovation to be used at a greater scale, and indicate how the scope of the proposed new technological development and planning for commercialization is commensurate with the amount of funding requested.

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 10

• Evidenced-based innovations that are already commercially deployed at a larger scale (e.g., 50 schools or more) outside of research studies, and that are generating revenue through the sale of the innovation are not eligible to submit proposal through this program, as this program intends to support innovations that have not been implemented in schools at a large scale. Such innovations may be more appropriately considered as candidates for the development of a new component to be added to their product through the 2023 Phase IB solicitation 919900230011.

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 11

III. PROPOSAL CONTENTS (SECTIONS A - J)

Content and Formatting Requirements To ensure that the text of the proposal is organized for reviewers to read 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 – J)

• 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 proposal 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 15-page limit for SECTION B. PROJECT

NARRATIVE.

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

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 12

SECTION A. COVER PAGES

Guidance for “SECTION A. COVER PAGES”

• All of the items in the “SECTION A. COVER PAGES” are required to be inserted as the opening pages of a Direct to Phase II 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.

a) CERTIFICATION Proposals in response to this Direct to Phase II solicitation are only permitted for projects that focus on readying existing evidence-based innovations for scale that were originally conceptualized and developed by researchers at universities (or academic institution) or researchers at non-profit education research organizations, NOT by a for-profit small business.

Was the evidence-based innovation originally conceptualized and developed by researchers at a university (or academic institutions) or researchers at non-profit education research organizations?

YES or NO

b) Project Title:

c) Name of the Small Business:

d) UEI as registered on SAM: If you do not a

UEI registered on SAM.com please be advised, registration can take several weeks.

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

i) Contact Name:

ii) Contact Title:

iii) Contact Phone: in format 999-

999-9999

iv) Contact Email:

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 13

c) Principal Investigator (PI): For the PI, fill in the information below:

i) PI Name:

ii) PI Title:

iii) PI Phone: in format 999-999-

iv) PI Email:

d) 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? Enter YES or

NO

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

http://www.sba.gov/hubzone/

e) Woman-owned SBC Certification:

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

Enter YES or NO

f) Socially and Economically Disadvantaged SBC Certification:

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? Enter YES or

NO

g) Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business Certification:

Does the offeror qualify as a Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business, as defined by SBA? Enter YES or NO

h) Small Business Address: For the address of the small business, fill in the information below: (Please do not enter address information in ALL CAPS)

i) Street Address:

ii) Address Line 2: Enter apartment, suite, or floor (optional).

iii) City:

iv) State: Enter the state’s current postal abbreviation http://www.sba.gov/hubzone/

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 14 designated by the U.S. Postal Service.

The website listed below contains information about postal abbreviations for U.S.

states and territories:

https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/postal-history/state-abbreviations.htm

v) ZIP Code:

i) Small Business Phone: in format 999-999-

j) Company Website URL:

k) For every member of the project team, fill in the below table, adhering to the following:

• At a minimum, each project requires a Principal Investigator from the Small Business, a Researcher who originally created or was part of the team that created the existing innovation, and a Data Security Liaison, who should not be the Principal Investigator.

• See Section C and Clause H.13 3452.204-72 for more information on Contractor Security Vetting Processes and the role of the Data Security Liaison. The Data Security Liaison is permitted to serve in more than one role, and other roles can be added as such in the same box.

• As many lines can be added with additional Project Roles as needed.

Name Professional Affiliation (list only one affiliation, whether at the small business or another organization, or as an independent consultant)

Project Role Email

Principal Investigator who is employed by the small business (required)

Researcher at a university (or academic institution) or a non-profit education research organization who originally created or was part of the project team that created the existing innovation.

https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/postal-history/state-abbreviations.htm

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 15

Data Security Liaison (required)

(Add additional lines for more team members)

l) Video Demonstration in Support of the Proposal (Optional)

Insert a URL to a video demonstration here:

Offerors are encouraged to provide a URL (Uniform Resource Locator) link to a video demonstration. The video would highlight (a) the existing evidence-based innovation originally conceptualized and developed by a researcher and (b) the proposed project to develop a new education technology product to ready the innovation for use at scale and to plan for commercialization.

• The videos should be posted to the YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/) platform during the whole period of the review from the submission date on or before March 13 through June 8, 2023.

• If the video is posted on a website other than YouTube, it is possible reviewers will not be able to watch the video.

• If the posting date on the YouTube video is after the submission date, the video will be deemed ineligible.

• Videos may be no longer than 4-minutes in duration. Reviewers will be instructed to stop viewing at 4 minutes.

• Videos cannot be altered in any way after the submission deadline.

m) Project Abstract:

Describe the evidence-based innovation that was initially conceptualized and developed by a researcher at a university (or academic institution) or non-profit education organization. Describe the new education technology product that would be developed to ready an existing evidence-based innovation for use at scale if an award is provided in the Direct to Phase II project from the ED/IES SBIR program (200 word maximum).

n) Signatures for the Authorized Representative and the Principal Investigator

Provide the authorized signature for the representative authorized to represent the small business concern in negotiations in the below box:

http://www.youtube.com/

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 16

X

Authorized Signature

Provide the authorized signature for the Principal Investigator in the below box:

X

Authorized Signature

o) SBA Company Registry:

All offerors to the SBIR program are required to register at the SBA Company Registry (http://sbir.gov/registration) prior to proposal submission. Below this paragraph, 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.

http://sbir.gov/registration

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 17

SECTION B. PROPOSAL NARRATIVE

Guidance for Section B. PROPOSAL NARRATIVE

• All contents that make up “SECTION B. PROPOSAL NARRATIVE” must be fifteen

(15) pages or less. Any content in this section beyond fifteen (15) 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.

I. SIGNIFICANCE

a. Problem Statement and Best Current Practices Describe the problem that the new education technology product will address, and how the proposed product uniquely addresses the problem relative to existing approaches in the field. Cite the most recent data detailing the scope and nature of the problem to support the significance of the proposal.

b. The Existing Evidence-Based Innovation, and the New Education Technology Product to Be Developed

i. Describe the existing evidence-based innovation that was initially created by a researcher at a university or at a non-profit education research organization.

• Specify the intended user(s) of the existing innovation, including the age group or grade levels. Indicate whether the existing innovation was designed to be replicated across settings or cultural context, or if components can be adapted or changed depending on the needs of users a particular setting or cultural context.

• List and briefly describe the key components of the existing innovation. If a component of the existing innovation is technology-based, indicate the hardware on which it operates (e.g., a desktop computer, a tablet, smart phone).

• Indicate whether the existing innovation was designed to be replicated across settings or cultural context, or if components can be adapted or changed depending on a particular setting or cultural context.

• Indicate whether the existing innovation was designed to replace, supplement, or be integrated within existing education practice(s).

• Briefly list the outcomes that result from using the existing innovation. (More detailed description of the research evidence demonstrating these outcomes should appear in Section II Information on the Existing Innovation rather than in this section).

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 18

ii. Describe the new education technology product that would be developed with the Direct to Phase II award to ready the existing evidence-based innovation for use at scale.

• List each of the components of the existing innovation that will remain the same during the development of the new education technology product. Describe the new component(s) of the new education technology product to be developed and/or the components that will be adapted/updated from the existing innovation.

• Describe how the new education technology product will ready the existing innovation to be used at scale.

o For existing evidence-based innovations originally created without the use of technology, explain how the core components of the innovation will be preserved in the new education technology product and explain why further developing the existing innovation as a new education technology product will lead to successful scaling.

• Indicate how the new technology product will be designed or adapted to be delivered successfully across settings and cultural contexts.

• Indicate the expected cost to schools to purchase the new education technology product overall, the per learner cost, and the level of resources (e.g., time, schedules, equipment) needed to implement and use the product.

• Beyond what is provided in the description of the existing innovation in the section above, list additional outcomes, if any, that are intended to result from the use of the new education technology product by learners, educators, or administrators.

II. INFORMATION ON THE EXISTING EVIDENCE-BASED INNOVATION & JUSTIFICATION

OF THE NEED FOR THE NEW EDUCATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT

This section describes the creation of and the prior research-base for the existing evidence-based innovation that is the focus of this proposal, and provides information to justify the need for a new education technology product and plan to ready the innovation for use at scale in education and special education settings.

a. Development of the Existing Innovation

• Provide a concise summary of the R/R&D procedures through which the existing innovation was initially created by researchers at a university or at a non-profit education research organization. Provide a timeline for when key milestones occurred.

b. Theoretical support

• Explain the theory of change underlying the research supporting the initial development of the existing evidence-based innovation and to justifying why the

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 19 new education technology product is expected to produce the intended results.

Include relevant references to the scientific literature.

c. Prior Research on the Existing Evidence-Based Innovation

• Describe the research demonstrating that the existing innovation leads to the intended outcome. Include citations to peer-reviewed published works supporting the evidence base for the outcomes.

• Provide a summary of research on the usability, feasibility, and fidelity of implementation for the existing innovation. If applicable, present research on the validity of assessment components.

• Discuss research findings that demonstrate challenges with usability, feasibility, and fidelity of implementation that justify the need to propose further development of the new education technology product.

• Include information on the sample size and characteristics, design, measures, procedures, and analyses for the above studies.

d. Research to Support the Proposed New Education Technology Product

• Describe procedures and findings from user-concept or focus-group testing, where a small group of intended end-users and school decision makers were presented plans or mock-ups for the proposed new education technology product. Describe sample characteristics, what feedback was gathered, and whether the groups of individuals were supportive of the proposed new education technology product.

e. Previous Initiatives to Distribute the Existing Innovation This section requests information on any prior initiatives by the researcher (or partners) to distribute the existing innovation to schools or districts outside of research studies, whether for free or for a fee. Offerors should select “a.” or “b.” to respond to, based on whether the innovation has already been distributed.

a. If distribution has occurred outside of research studies, indicate the number of users (learners, educators) and schools that used or are using the existing innovation, and whether the existing innovation was available for free or for a fee.

Describe the strategy that was used to distribute the existing innovation. Describe why the existing innovation has not been distributed to a larger number of settings.

Describe successes and problems that occurred during these distribution and implementation efforts.

b. If there have been no users or schools that have used the existing innovation outside of research, indicate if any initiatives were attempted to distribute the existing innovation. If not, offerors should describe why no initiatives were attempted.

III. PHASE II WORKPLAN

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 20

a. Full-scale Development of the New Education Technology Product

• Describe the R/R&D procedures that will be employed to iteratively develop the new education technology product so that it can function at scale (usability), and can be implemented and used flexibly across different settings and with diverse populations (feasibility and fidelity of implementation). Describe how the development work will support the delivery of or be integrated with the components of the existing innovation that are preserved through the development process.

• Provide a timeline presenting the ordering of the steps in the iterative development process. This plan may entail separate small-scale studies of multiple independent components. Such activity should be conducted with the targeted user audience (e.g., educators, learners, preschoolers with or at risk for disabilities). If the new education technology product includes an assessment as a component, offerors must also provide a plan to establish the validity of the assessment and its connection to education outcomes.

b. Pilot Study

• Present a plan for a pilot study after the new education technology product is fully developed.

The goals of the Direct to Phase II pilot study are to (i) demonstrate the promise of the new education technology product to be ready for scale (e.g., to be usable and feasible, and able to be implemented with fidelity) and (ii) to demonstrate that the outcomes that result from using the new product are consistent with (or similar to) the outcomes from prior studies that establishing the evidence-based for the outcomes of the innovation.

The design and scope of the pilot study in a Direct to Phase II proposal are expected to vary from project to project, depending upon the costs and timing required to accommodate the unique focus and characteristics of the new education technology product and its implementation context (e.g., learner, classroom, school). As a result, it is expected that pilot studies may vary in the number of districts, schools, classrooms, educators, or learners. Depending on budget and timing considerations, offerors may propose to include a larger (and more representative and diverse) sample of end-users for some parts of the Pilot Study to measure the promise of the new education technology product to be ready for use at scale. However, offerors are not expected or advised to propose a full research study at a large scale (e.g., 10 districts, 100 schools).

i. Measuring the Promise of the Product to Be Used at Scale

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 21

• To measure the promise of the new education technology product to be ready for use at scale, researchers may compare the implementation of the new product to the implementation of the existing innovation that occurred during prior research studies. This solicitation does not require offerors to propose pilot studies that include a business-as-usual control group or comparison group.

• The primary question of interest in measuring whether the new product is ready for use at scale is “Are end-users able to more successfully implement the new product compared to implementation that occurred during prior research studies?" Such proposals must compare measures of usability, feasibility, and fidelity of implementation to those from the prior research. The pilot study may also include new measures to understand the promise of the new education technology product to be used at scale.

ii. Measuring Outcomes Resulting from the Use of the New Education Technology

• To measure outcomes resulting from the use the new education technology, researchers may compare performance on the same (or similar) intended outcomes between individuals using the new education technology product and retrospectively, to performance using the existing innovation in prior research studies.

For new education technology products to be used by learners, a primary question of interest in measuring whether the new product achieves the intended outcomes is "Does this new product improve outcomes for to the same or greater extent as the existing innovation during prior research studies conducted with similar learners?" Such proposals must include the same or equivalent learner/child outcome data (e.g., test scores or other assessment data; completion of academic courses; measures of behavior) as the previous research studies that used the existing innovation.

For new education technology products to be used by educators/administrators that are designed to show promise for improving educator/administrator and learner or child outcomes, a primary question of interest in testing the promise of the product should be "Does this new product improve outcomes for educator/administrator and learner/child outcomes to the same or greater extent as the existing innovation during prior research studies conducted with similar learners and educators/administrators?" Such proposals should demonstrate that, when educators/administrators use the proposed technology, their own performance as well as child performance would be consistent (or improved) relative to that in previous research using the existing innovation. Such proposals must include outcome data from

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 22 educators/administrators and learners/children.

For new education technology products used by educators/administrators that are designed to show promise for improving educator/administrator (and not learner outcomes), a primary question of interest in testing the promise of the product should be "Does this new product improve educator/administrator outcomes to the same or greater extent as the existing innovation during prior research studies conducted with similar educators/administrators?” Such proposals should evaluate whether the product shows equal or greater promise for improving educators' ability to carry out their job in the area proposed relative to research on the existing innovation, and need not include learner level outcome data.

Pilot Study Specifications

Design. The offeror should describe the design of the pilot study and provide a rationale for why this is the most appropriate design to demonstrate the promise of the new education technology be ready for use at scale, and to demonstrate that the intended outcomes from using the new education technology product are equivalent (or improved) when retrospectively compared to similar groups that used the existing innovation in prior research.

Research Questions. Offerors should pose clear, concise hypotheses or research questions that address the new product’s usability, feasibility, the users’ fidelity of implementation, the promise of impact on outcomes, and the cost.

Usability: Does the new product function as intended? Do users understand how to easily navigate the various components of the new product?

Feasibility: Are learners engaged in the material when using the new education technology product? Do educators find the new product to be useful as an instructional tool for their course? Can the educator implement the new product during regular instruction, whether in a physical classroom or through remote learning?

Fidelity of Implementation: Are educators/administrators able to implement the new education technology product in a school or classroom or through remote learning, and easily able to integrate within existing practice in the manner in which the developer intended?

Validity of Assessments (if included as a component of the new education technology product): What is the extent to which the assessment adequately measures the

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 23 intended constructs, and generates results that are meaningful and that are as intended, or statistically valid?

Promise of Readiness to Use at Scale: Is the new education technology product usable, feasible, and able to be integrated into existing practice in the manner in which the developer intended, across a representative sample of settings?

Impact on Outcomes: Does implementation of the new education technology product yield similar to outcomes to those using the existing innovation in past research studies?

Sample. Direct to Phase II studies should include a 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, remote setting) for the studies to inform iterative refinements and to test the feasibility, usability, and promise of the product. Provide information on the number and demographic characteristics of the participants who will participate in research. Wherever appropriate, offerors are encouraged to conduct research with samples of underserved learners. Offerors must include a letter from one school that has agreed to participate in the Direct to Phase II research, should the proposal be awarded. This letter should be no longer than one (1) page and is to be included in SECTION E. Letters are not needed from multiple schools or settings, even if more than one school or setting has agreed to participate in the research.

Instruments. Describe the instruments that will be used to measure whether the new education technology product is ready for use at scale, including the usability, feasibility, and fidelity of implementation measures. Researchers may propose to use existing instruments to determine readiness to scale or create new instruments.

Describe the instruments that will be used to measure the intended outcomes for the end-users from the new education technology product. Researchers should propose to use the same measures as were used in prior studies of the existing innovation in order to compare outcomes of the innovation between the current and prior studies. Offerors should also discuss the psychometric properties (e.g., reliability and validity) of the learner outcome measures. Offerors should identify all instruments to be used to measure proximal and distal outcomes.

Offerors should discuss how usability, feasibility, and fidelity of implementation measures were selected or will be developed and used, including information about reliability and validity of the instruments where relevant. Offerors should assess scalability and examine contextual factors that may amplify or inhibit scale-up, using established instruments from the literature on scaling evidence-based interventions or develop new measures.

2023 ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II Program Solicitation 24

If new instruments will be developed, offerors should describe what will be developed, why it is necessary, how it will be developed, and, as appropriate, the process for assessing its reliability and validity.

Procedures. Clearly describe what data will be collected, how and when it will be collected, and how the data will be analyzed. Include a clear and detailed description of the data analysis procedures. For quantitative data, specific statistical procedures should be described. The relation between hypotheses and the independent and dependent variables should be clear. For qualitative data, the specific methods used to index, summarize, and interpret data should be delineated.

Cost: All proposals must provide plans for measuring the cost of the new education technology product and the cost to implement the product. A cost analysis can help schools, districts, and states understand both total and per student monetary costs of implementing any given product (e.g., expenditures for personnel, facilities, equipment, materials, training, and other relevant inputs). Resources on developing and conducting a cost analysis are available as part of the Standards for Excellence in Education Research principles on the IES website. See https://ies.ed.gov/seer/cost_analysis.asp for more information.

c. Potential problems

• Describe any potential challenges or problem areas in completion of the proposed plan, and provide alternative strategies that would be considered in such circumstances.

Key Terms

Usability: The extent to which the product functions as intended, and the extent to which the intended user…