SOW for Safety Symbol Research Jul 2020 - beta.SAM Solicitation.docx

Statement of Work for Warning Label Safety Symbol Research

1. Description of Services: The Contractor must (1) revise existing safety symbols, based on the results of prior comprehension testing and focus group findings, and (2) gather consumer feedback and conduct comprehensibility testing on those revised safety symbols, using focus groups and ANSI Z535.3-based protocol, respectively. The purpose is to develop safety symbols that effectively communicate safety messages that are common to multiple consumer products, or are otherwise of particular interest to the Government.

2. Contract Type: This procurement is a Firm-Fixed Price, non-personal services contact.

3. Background: Research shows that well-designed graphics can be useful to increase the noticeability of warnings by capturing and maintaining user’s attention and by increasing comprehension (e.g., Young and Wogalter, 1990; Laughery et al., 1993; Hammond et al., 2007.) Safety symbols are also helpful for users with limited or no English literacy, particularly if the warning does not include warn. ANSI Z535.3, Criteria for Safety Symbols, provides general criteria for the design, evaluation, and use of safety symbols to identify and warn against specific hazards, and provides a procedure for evaluating symbol effectiveness in communicating the intended message. The purpose of this contract is to develop safety symbols that effectively communicate safety messages that are common to multiple consumer products, or are otherwise of particular interest to the Government. If these symbols can effectively communicate the intended message to the target user population, CPSC staff may recommend using these safety symbols in existing or future warning labels for voluntary and mandatory product safety standards.

4. Description of Work: Independently, and not as an agent of the Government, the Contractor must furnish all necessary personnel, materials, services, and facilities to perform the work set forth below. The Contractor must furnish all necessary resources to perform the work set forth below:

a) The Contractor must review the prior contractor-performed safety symbol research report, with particular focus on the research results related to the five topics identified in 4.b, below.[footnoteRef:1] [1: Report can be found here: https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/CPSC%20Gather%20Consumer%20Feedback%20-%20Final%20Report%20with%20CPSC%20Staff%20Statement%20-%20REDACTED%20and%20CLEARED.pdf]

b) The Contractor must develop at least 10 new safety symbols, based on the results of the prior contractor-performed safety symbol research and feedback from CPSC staff. These safety symbols must consist of at least two new symbols for each of the following five topics, or safety messages, as described in the prior contractor research report:

a. Stay within arm’s reach

b. Never add soft bedding

c. Place baby on back to sleep

d. Magnet ingestion hazard

e. Furniture tip-over hazard

c) The Contractor must apply for and obtain the Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval for the study where necessary.

d) The Contractor must prepare all necessary paperwork for Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) approval, based on CPSC’s generic clearance for focus group studies. The Contractor must adjust the materials based on CPSC's 6b6 clearance process, any comments received through the PRA requirement fulfillments, and OMB approval process.

e) The Contractor must secure an appropriate facility, moderate the study using prepared documentation, and collect the data including video recordings and written materials. De-identified transcripts shall be provided to CPSC.

f) The Contractor must perform comprehensibility testing, including open-ended comprehension testing, on all safety symbols developed in 4.b, in a manner consistent with the General Procedures for Evaluating Candidate Safety Symbols specified in Annex B of ANSI Z535.3. The Contractor must also conduct one or more focus groups to gather further feedback related to the comprehensibility of these safety symbols, including possible revisions to the symbols that could improve comprehension.

g) The Contractor must prepare a written technical report that discusses the development of the safety symbols described in 4.b (e.g., the bases for various revisions or design choices), and the results, findings, and conclusions of the comprehensibility testing and focus groups. The report shall be in the format of a technical report including sections for background, methods, participants, results, and discussion. The discussion shall include the Contractor’s recommendations for future research and possible revisions to the tested symbols to improve their comprehensibility. A draft report shall be submitted at least 4 weeks prior to the end of the period of performance, to allow for 2 weeks for government review and feedback, and 2 weeks for Contractor preparation of a final report that incorporates government feedback.

5. Period of Performance: The performance period shall begin on the effective date of the Contract and shall not extend beyond 12 months.

6. Reporting Requirements: The Contractor must submit all reports to the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR).

a) The Contractor must provide a written status report every other week during the performance period, to be submitted to the CPSC COR as stated below.

i. Format: The report shall be provided in Microsoft Word (PC-compatible) or Adobe Acrobat format and must be e-mailed to the CPSC COR.

ii. Content: The report must contain the following:

1. Status of project, including accomplishments and milestones during the reporting period, ongoing tasks and progress towards upcoming milestones and deliverables, and new developments

2. Problems, including anticipated problems, and proposed responses or solutions to those problems

3. Changes in schedule, if applicable

b) The Contractor must provide all necessary documents needed for OMB Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) approval.

c) The Contractor must provide a draft final report and at least two separate image files for each symbol generated.

i. Format: The draft final report shall be provided in Microsoft Word (PC-compatible) and Adobe Acrobat formats, and must be provided by e-mail. Image files shall be high-resolution JPEG/JPG and TIFF/TIF files.

ii. Content: The final written report must address all of the issues and objectives set forth in the Statement of Work, as well as comments received from the CPSC staff. The report must contain the following sections, at a minimum:

1. Executive Summary

2. Background

3. Methods

4. Participants

5. Results

6. Discussion

7. Deliverable: The following deliverable items must be performed or delivered in accordance with the following schedule:

8. Travel for Contractor: Travel to meet with the CPSC staff at the beginning of the contract is permitted.

9. Contractor Qualifications:

Principal investigator must have the following qualifications:

a) At least 10 years of experience in warning label research and development.

b) Experience working with ANSI Z535.3, American National Standard Criteria for Safety Symbols.

c) Peer-reviewed publications in the area of warnings or hazard communications.

10. Performance Measures:

Successful performance will be measured by the following performance measures:

References:

Hammond, D., Fong, G. T., & Borland, R. (2007).Text and Graphic Warnings on Cigarette Packages: Findings from the International Tobacco Control Four Country Study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 32, 202–209.

Laughery, K. R., Vaubel, K. P., Young, S. L., Brelsford, Jr., J. W., & Rowe, A. L. (1993). Explicitness of Consequence Information in Warnings. Safety Science, 16(5), 597–613.

Young, S. L & Wogalter, M. S. (1990). Comprehension and Memory of Instruction Manual Warnings: Conspicuous Print and Pictorial Icons. Human Factors, 32(6), 637–649

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO OFFERORS

Basis for award:

This is a best value procurement. Award will be made subject to available funding and offeror responsibility, to that acceptable quote, the price or cost of which is not necessarily the lowest, but which is assessed by the Government to be most advantageous to achieving the goals and objectives identified in the SOW. The criteria for evaluation of best value follows below. Active registration in www.SAM.gov is mandatory for award.

The Government can, and will, reject any quote that does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

Quotes and any supporting documentation shall be received no later than September 3, 2020 at 12pm EST. All questions in response to the Request for Quotation shall be emailed to dbraswell@cpsc.gov no later than August 19, 2020 at 12pm EST. No telephone calls please.

Format and information for submitting an offer:

Submit the entire quote via email in three (3) separate attachments as follows, using the below titles to name the 3 attachments for easier identification of the contents of each attachment, and to assist the Government in assessing the contents of each attachment without consideration of the contents of the other attachments.

VOLUME 1: CONTRACT AND PRICING DOCUMENTS

Offeror must complete the Standard Form 1449 (cover sheet). Insert the offeror’s full name, address and telephone number in Block 17a – Please note that this information must match Systems for Award Management (SAM). Sign SF 1449 and complete blocks 30a, 30b and 30c. Provide pricing in accordance with page 2 of the Quotation and sign all amendments (if any). Pricing should include sufficient evidence of the price elements associated with each deliverable to determine the associated level of effort. The quote must include a proposed payment schedule on a firm fixed-price basis for all deliverables.

VOLUME 2: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Technical Capability (includes subfactors A and B, which are of equal importance)

The offeror shall submit evidence in their technical quote that illustrates their ability to meet the requirements of the SOW and their technical capability to perform the required services:

Subfactor A: Proposed Methodology and Demonstrated Understanding of the Work The quote will be evaluated for its demonstrated understanding of the required tasks and the methodology to be employed to perform the tasks of the SOW.

Subfactor B: Qualifications of Personnel and Demonstrated Ability to Perform the Work The offeror shall provide the experience (titles, degrees, years of experience, etc.) and qualifications for all key personnel who shall participate in the performance of this contract. One key personnel shall be categorized as Principal Investigator. The offeror shall demonstrate that the principal investigator for this offer has at least ten years of experience in conducting warning label research, developing warning labels, and working with ANSI Z535.3 American National Standard Criteria for Safety Symbols. The principle investigator shall have published peer-reviewed articles in the area of hazard communication. The principle investigator or at least one other key personnel shall have graphic design experience, and shall have experience designing pictograms or symbols. If additional personnel are required, the offeror shall submit titles and experience for those personnel.

VOLUME 3: EXPERIENCE AND PAST PERFORMANCE

Past Performance Quotes will be evaluated based on demonstrated performance in previous, similar projects. The offeror shall provide information concerning all related or similar contracts and subcontracts that have been completed in the last three (3) years that pertain to the same or similar services. The offeror shall provide a minimum of three (3) references from whom they have provided the same or similar services.

This information shall include:

· The organization name

· Address

· Point of contact, email address, telephone number

· The contract value for which these services were performed

Offerors with no relevant past performance shall be evaluated neither favorably nor unfavorably. The Government reserves the right to obtain information for use in the evaluation of past performance from any and all sources including sources outside of the Government. Past performance information will be utilized to determine the quality of the contractor's past performance as it relates to the probability of success for the required effort.

EVALUATION PROCESS:

The government will award a contract resulting from this quotation to the responsible Quoter whose quote conforms to the request for quotation and which will be the most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate the prospective contractors:

· Factor 1 - Technical Capability (includes sub-factors A and B; Volume 2).

· Factor 2 - Experience and Past Performance (Volume 3)

· Factor 3 – Price

Technical factors are more important than price.

PRICE WILL BE EVALUATED SEPARATELY FROM THE TECHNICAL SUB-FACTORS AND PAST PERFORMANCE.

Price will be evaluated for price reasonableness through cost and price analysis techniques.

Pricing will not be scored. In the event that the Quoters' technical factors are evaluated the same, award will be made based on the lowest overall price offered.

Written proposals will be evaluated by technical evaluators. Proposals will be adjectively evaluated and placed into one of the following categories: Outstanding, Acceptable, Susceptible to being made acceptable, or Unacceptable.

The definitions for these categories are as follows:

Outstanding - A unique approach which satisfies all of the Government's requirements with extensive detail to indicate how the approach is innovative and not only feasible but desirable, and which is well supported by experience and quantifiable evidence that it will be successful. A quotation which offers significant advantages to the Government in meeting all requirements.

Acceptable - An approach which satisfies all of the Government's requirements with adequate detail to indicate the feasibility of the approach and an understanding of the Government's need.

Susceptible to being made acceptable - An approach which, as initially proposed, cannot be rated acceptable because of minor errors or omissions which are capable of being corrected without a major rewrite or revision of the proposal. This proposal does not clearly meet the Government's requirements. (Quoters will only be given an opportunity to correct this rating if the Government enters into negotiations. Otherwise, such proposals will be determined to be unacceptable. Therefore, Quoters are encouraged to provide complete and thorough explanatory technical proposals with their initial submission.)

Unacceptable - The proposal fails to meet or to address the technical factors of the solicitation, contains major errors, omissions, or deficiencies, or indicates a lack of understanding of the Government's need. The proposed approach is based on unproven techniques or is inadequately supported with evidence that it will be successful, or the approach cannot be expected to meet the Government's requirements without a major rewrite or revision of the proposal.

The Contracting Officer's determination for technical acceptability will be based only on the technical evaluation from technical evaluators. Negotiations may be conducted whenever the Contracting Officer deems it appropriate.

FINAL PROPOSAL REVISIONS

The government reserves the right to award based on the initial quotations received. Negotiations may be held and Final Proposal Revisions may be requested as deemed necessary by the government. Offerors should be aware that a complete understanding as to pricing, technical and other terms and conditions of the proposed contract must exist between the offeror and the contract terms and conditions submitted. If negotiations are conducted and Final Proposal Revisions are requested, the Final Proposal Revisions shall not be subject to further discussions or negotiations, and may render the offer unacceptable to the government.

DISPOSAL OF QUOTATIONS

After selection and contract award, unsuccessful proposals shall be disposed of as follows: one (I) copy of each proposal will be retained by the Contracting Officer and the remainder will be destroyed. No destruction certification will be furnished.