SOLICITATION NOTICE
A -- Development of Improved Economic Analysis Tools Based on Recommendations from Project C03
- Notice Date
- 3/9/2010
- Notice Type
- Combined Synopsis/Solicitation
- NAICS
- 541712
— Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
- Contracting Office
- The National Academies, Transportation Research Board, SHRP2, 500 Fifth Street NW, Washington, District of Columbia, 20001, United States
- ZIP Code
- 20001
- Solicitation Number
- SHRP2_C11
- Archive Date
- 5/5/2010
- Point of Contact
- David Plazak, Phone: 202-334-1834, Linda Mason, Phone: 202-334-3241
- E-Mail Address
-
dplazak@nas.edu, lmason@nas.edu
(dplazak@nas.edu, lmason@nas.edu)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- SHRP 2 Request for Proposals Focus Area: Capacity Project Number: C11 Project Title: Development of Improved Economic Analysis Tools Based on Recommendations from Project C03 Date Posted: March 9, 2010 Background To address the challenges of moving people and goods efficiently and safely on the nation's highways, Congress has created the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2). SHRP 2 is a targeted, short-term research program carried out through competitively awarded contracts to qualified researchers in the academic, private, and public sectors. SHRP 2 addresses four strategic focus areas: the role of human behavior in highway safety (Safety); rapid highway renewal (Renewal); congestion reduction through improved travel time reliability (Reliability); and transportation planning that better integrates community, economic, and environmental considerations into new highway capacity (Capacity). Under current legislative provisions, SHRP 2 will receive approximately $150 million with total program duration of seven years. Additional information about SHRP 2 can be found on the program's web site at www.trb.org/shrp2. Capacity Focus Area The overall Capacity program goal is to develop approaches for systematically integrating environmental, economic, and community requirements into the analysis, planning, and design of new highway capacity. The scope of the SHRP 2 Capacity program extends from the early stages of the transportation planning process, when many potential alternatives are being considered, through project development. When decisions include a major highway component, further development of the highway option is within the scope of the program. When decisions are made that lead to non-highway options, further development of the non-highway component is outside the scope. Project Background Strengthening the economic vitality of a region (jobs and income) is one of the primary reasons for investing in highway capacity. Elements of improving economic vitality include better access to markets and labor force, reduced congestion and cost of delay, improved safety, reduced pollution, and a better quality of life. However, the ways in which new and improved highway capacity influences economic vitality are complex and often indirect in nature. History is clear that improving transportation alone will not improve the economic vitality of a region unless other positive factors are present. This implies that the impacts of capacity enhancement will vary with the region of the country, type of area (urban-rural), political attitudes, supportiveness of policies affecting infrastructure and development/land use, major economic drivers, economic growth forces, the nature of capacity problems, and the solutions proposed. Investments in capacity are often necessary but they may not create conditions sufficient for economic growth. In addition to primary impacts, we must also consider secondary and cumulative economic impacts and environmental justice factors in order to address the net impact on regional economic vitality. What is the value of environmental resources lost or the cost of economically degrading areas bypassed by a new transportation facility? The ultimate question for governments and taxpayers is if a transportation investment achieves the desired economic effect. Will the region be better off economically? A convincing economic assessment methodology should include both anticipated gains and losses. Many analytical tools exist for estimating economic impacts, but there is a general sense of dissatisfaction among decision makers and the public with the tools' complexity and lack of transparency. There is also an impression that the public does not appreciate or understand the critical role of highway capacity in sustaining the economy, enabling economic growth, and improving economic efficiency. Finally, planning processes do not generally reflect the economic effects of highway capacity on land use, and the economic effects are not well integrated into the highway capacity decision-making process. Project C11: Development of Improved Economic Analysis Tools Based on Recommendations from Project C03, will strive to resolve these issues by building on the work of ongoing SHRP 2 Project C03, which has developed a case study-based economic impacts estimation web tool called T-PICS. T-PICS is a web-based sketch planning tool that allows state departments of transportation (DOTs), metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), and other agencies involved in highway capacity planning to quickly estimate the likely range of impacts of proposed projects. Project C11 is intended to build on the foundation that has been laid with T-PICS and its detailed case studies. The products of C11 will support the Collaborative Decision-Making Framework developed in SHRP 2 Project C01. That Framework will provide the forum for balancing transportation, economic impact, community needs and desires, and environmental concerns. Objectives There are several objectives for Capacity Project C11. The main objective will be to statistically examine the relationships among variables in the C03/T-PICs case study dataset and to develop a suite of straightforward, transparent, and useful open source statistical forecasting models/tools that function at a level between the C03 case study-based web tool (which is essentially descriptive in nature) and more complex, economic impact assessment models/tools such as IMPLAN and REMI. This new suite of models and tools should use parameters gleaned from the full complement of C03 case studies and other readily available data sources. Inputs for the suite of forecasting tools should include characteristics of project and characteristics of setting. Outputs should mainly provide the range of reasonable expectations for a proposed project by major economic impact/economic development performance measures. The suite could represent a series of models, from very simple to moderately complex, but will certainly provide outputs beyond the meta-analysis of the case study data being done as part of ongoing SHRP 2 Capacity project C03. Principal users of the suite of tools/models are expected to be state DOT and MPO planners/technicians in support of decision makers; users typically will not be economists and probably will not have extensive economics training. Other objectives of C11 include: •Providing economic development performance measurement/impacts guidance. What things should transportation agencies look at after the fact as they evaluate projects and measure success? Where should they look for economic impacts? What data are likely to be available? What other data would need to be collected and how? •Providing protocols on how to conduct better economic development impact studies in the future, e.g. improving the collection of baseline data and other empirical data to facilitate future "before and after" project comparisons. •Providing guidance on how best to account for economic impacts while avoiding problems with double-counting as well as limiting analyses to true generative effects. (This objective might be termed developing an improved, simplified accounting framework for assessing the economic impacts of highway capacity projects.) •Providing guidance for improved benefit/cost analysis for proposed highway capacity projects. •Providing guidance on incorporating/considering distributional impacts in economic impact assessments, such as affordable housing, housing/jobs mismatch, and relocations of activity. •Providing guidance on how to use GIS/geospatial data and other related tools to assess the economic development impacts of highway investments in conjunction with the statistical models and tools. •Laying the groundwork for making explicit linkages/connections to other SHRP 2 Capacity and Reliability project concerns such as carbon footprint, environmental impact/external costs, and improved travel-time reliability. Tasks Task descriptions are intended to provide a framework for conducting the research. SHRP 2 is seeking the insights of proposers on how best to achieve the research objective. Proposers are expected to describe research plans that can realistically be accomplished within the constraints of available funds and contract time. Proposals must present the proposers' current thinking in sufficient detail to demonstrate their understanding of the issues and the soundness of their approach to meet the research objective(s). 1. Review Capacity Project C03 deliverables to date to ensure that the C03 work is used as a foundation for C11 tasks and deliverables. Provide a task report in the form of a Technical Memorandum. 2. Identify potential linkages with other relevant SHRP 2 projects, especially in the Capacity, Reliability, and Renewal focus areas. Prepare a matrix of key linkages to other projects where input from Project C11 would be useful. 3. Develop an improved, simplified accounting framework for highway capacity project economic impact analysis that articulates issues such as types and timing of impacts, distributional issues, regional scale of impacts, changes in travel reliability, and external/environmental impacts so that practitioners can appreciate how economic analysis of such issues could be conducted for projects. Provide practitioner guidance on the limitations of such analysis and common errors made in highway capacity project economic impact studies. A broad range of analyses is possible, all the way from very simple "back of the envelope" to very thorough; different levels may be appropriate given the level of capacity planning being conducted and guidance should also be provided regarding appropriate level of detail. Develop a portion of a draft User Guide based on this task. This draft User Guide (further discussed in Task 6) should be written for capacity planning practitioners and should not assume that users will have a great depth of economics/economic impact estimation training. 4. Develop a suite of analytical tools/statistical models to support the Task 3 Draft User Guide. These tools should be in the form of predictive tools/models that will be useful for state DOTs and MPOs. Project C03 conducted primarily descriptive analysis based on the case study data that were collected. The C03 case studies/descriptive statistics-based meta analysis (to be contained in the C03 Final Report) should be the starting point for C11 Task 4, but the contractor is expected to add value and data from other public data sources that are immediately and widely available. As these tools and statistical models are developed, it will be very important to maintain transparency. No proprietary tools or suite of tools should be created; the National Academies should be given a non-exclusive license for any object code and analytical tools developed to facilitate open use of the technology. Detailed documentation should be provided for any tools and models that are developed. Tools and models should be useful for a range of capacity projects and settings, as indicated by the 100 case studies that will ultimately be included in the C03 T-PICS case study database. Tools and models should address access and connectivity impacts of highway capacity projects. They should also address the performance measurement needs of highway agencies such as state DOTs and MPOs. The limitations of the analytic tools/equations should be made very clear in documentation, e.g., numbers of observations utilized and standard deviations/errors should be provided for any predictive models produced. 5. Explore how the usefulness of the Task 4 statistical tools could be improved and leveraged through the use of geographic information systems (GIS)/geospatial data and tools. Both the visualization and spatial analysis/modeling aspects of GIS should be considered in this analysis. Examples and illustrations using the C03/T-PICS case study database should be provided where possible. Explore the types of integration of GIS and economic impact analysis tools that might be possible within the next decade given likely developments in these subject areas. Explore open source versus proprietary implications of integration with geospatial technologies. Provide a white paper for review. This white paper will be an input for Task 6. 6. Develop a draft User Guide section based on the results from Tasks 1 through 5. The User Guide should concentrate on documenting the improved, simplified accounting framework (Task 3) and the suite of analytical tools/statistical models developed in Task 4. 7. Provide for a review and vetting process for the User Guide. A group of potential practitioner/users of the guide should be assembled for this purpose. Compile the results of this review and vetting process for use in Task 8. 8. Integration task. Apply the results of Tasks 1 through 7 to explain the relationship between economic development impact measurement and economic benefit measurement (as defined for highway capacity project benefit-cost analysis). Provide guidance as to how the results of economic development impact assessment can be used to broaden benefit-cost analysis without leading to issues such as double-counting of benefits or costs. Explain how the inclusion of these wider economic benefits can be made consistent with benefit-cost analysis procedures now being adopted by agencies in the U.S. and abroad. Demonstrate how economic impacts should be considered at relevant key decision points in the Project C01 TCAPP Decision Guide. Task 8 work will need to be captured both in the final research report and in the final User Guide; drafts of these sections should be prepared as interim work products. 9. Coordinate with the project C01/C07 contractor team and the project C03 contractor team to link the results of project C11 to the C03 web tool (T-PICS) and to the C01 Decision Guide (TCAPP). It is important that all the results from C11 (including the suite of models/tools and its documentation) be available on-line through the T-PICS web site. Work to provide for appropriate linkages to www.data.gov and other web portals where potential users might go to find economic impact data and tools. 10. Prepare a final research report for the C11 project and a consolidated, final User Guide. Deliverables: 1.Technical Memorandum for Task 1 2.Matrix of key linkages to other relevant SHRP 2 projects and products 3.Portion of the Draft User Guide focusing on accounting framework (Task 3) 4.Draft suite of statistical models/tools 5.White paper on GIS/geospatial data integration for analysis and visualization 6.Draft User Guide revised to encompass work from Tasks 1-5 7.Compilation of review and vetting process results 8.Updates to the T-PICS and TCAPP web tools, including integration of the statistical models/tools suite and other Capacity Project C11 products. 9.Draft final research report 10.Revised final research report 11.Final User Guide Special Notes Note 1: Proposers' teams should include professionals with experience in: •Regional economic analysis of infrastructure investments, especially for transportation investments •Development of statistical models and tools for economic impact analysis, including econometrics and geospatial tools and data •Creating effective user documentation •Creating interactive, web-based tools •Implementation of case-based reasoning or similar knowledge extraction approaches in an interactive environment Note 2: In order to prepare the most responsive proposals possible, bidders will have access to the draft C03 T-PICS web tool, 60 or more existing C03 case studies via the web tool, knowledge of what the 40 new C03 case studies will be, and detailed documentation of what has been done so far through Project C03, including available draft research reports; bidders should refer to http://stage.shrp.icfi.com/t-pics/#. Proposers should also refer to the Transportation Research Board TED Committee web site for information about the state of the practice in economic impact assessment: http://sites.google.com/site/tedcommittee/ Note 3: It will be critically important that proposers become familiar with other related SHRP 2 research projects (beyond Project C03) and be prepared to coordinate with other SHRP 2 projects and contractor teams. The most critical linkages are likely to be with projects: •C01/C07 (developing the Transportation for Communities.com web resource (TCAPP).). A draft web site is available and a report is being reviewed. For more information, bidders should refer to: http://transportationforcommunities.com/ •C02 (performance measurement)-This project is completed; a Final Report is available for this project along with a web site: http://shrp2webtool.camsys.com/ •C04 (roadway pricing and capacity). This project is nearing completion. •C16 ("smart growth" and capacity)-some of the 60 new C03 case studies involve transit-oriented development (TOD). This project is not yet under way. •C22 (decision makers guide). This project is not yet under way. •L11 (looking at the valuation of travel time reliability). This project is nearing completion. •L14 (looking at the value of providing travel time reliability information). This project is partially completed. General Notes 1. Proposals will be evaluated by SHRP 2 staff and Expert Task Groups (ETGs) consisting of individuals collectively very knowledgeable in the problem area. Selection of an agency is made by the SHRP 2 Oversight Committee, based on the recommendation from SHRP 2 staff and the ETG. The following factors are considered: (1) the proposer's demonstrated understanding of the problem; (2) the merit of the proposed research approach and experimental design; (3) the experience, qualifications, and objectivity of the research team in the same or closely related problem area; (4) the proposer's plan for participation by disadvantaged business enterprises-small firms owned and controlled by minorities or women; and (5) the adequacy of facilities. TRB and the SHRP 2 Oversight Committee strongly encourage the significant participation of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in SHRP 2 research contracts. Although no quota is specified nor is DBE participation mandated, the proposer's plan for involvement of DBEs is a factor in selection of the research contractor, and the contractor's adherence to its DBE plan will be monitored during the contract period. Contractors are required to submit periodic reports comparing actual with proposed payments to DBEs. The "Research Team Builder" section of the SHRP 2 web site (http://www.trb.org/StrategicHighwayResearchProgram2SHRP2/Public/Pages/Research_Team_Builder_177.aspx) is a resource for proposers interested in participating on research teams. 2. Any clarifications regarding this RFP will be posted on the SHRP 2 Web site (www.TRB.org/SHRP2). Announcements of such clarifications will be posted on the front page and, when possible, will be noted in the TRB e-newsletter. Proposers are advised to check the Web site frequently until April 9, 2010, after which no further comments will be posted. 3. According to the provisions of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, which relates to nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs, all parties are hereby notified that the contract entered into pursuant to this announcement will be awarded without discrimination on the grounds of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or disability. 4. The essential features required in a proposal for research are detailed in the Manual for Conducting Research and Preparing Proposals for SHRP 2 (http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/PreparingSHRP2Reports.pdf). Proposals must be prepared according to this document, and attention is directed specifically to Section IV for mandatory requirements. Proposals that do not conform to these requirements will be rejected. 5. The total funds available are made known in the project statement and line items of the budget are examined to determine the reasonableness of the allocation of funds to the various tasks. If the proposed total cost exceeds the funds available, the proposal is rejected. 6. All proposals become the property of the Transportation Research Board. Final disposition will be made according to the policies thereof, including the right to reject all proposals. Funds Available: The total project budget is $600,000. Contract Time: Total Project time: 18 months Responsible Staff: David J. Plazak, dplazak@nas.edu, 202-334-1834 Authorization to Begin Work: September 1, 2010, expected Proposals (20 single-bound copies) are due not later than 4:30 p.m. on April 20, 2010 This is a firm deadline, and extensions simply are not granted. In order to be considered, all 20 copies of the agency's proposal, accompanied by the executed, unmodified Liability Statement must be in our offices not later than the deadline shown, or they will be rejected. Delivery Address: PROPOSAL-SHRP 2 ATTN: Neil F. Hawks Director, Strategic Highway Research Program 2 Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 Phone: 202-334-1430 Liability Statement The signature of an authorized representative of the proposing agency is required on the unaltered statement in order for SHRP 2 to accept the agency's proposal for consideration. Proposals submitted without this executed and unaltered statement by the proposal deadline will be rejected. An executed, unaltered statement indicates the agency's intent and ability to execute a contract that includes the provisions in the statement. Here is a printable version of the Liability Statement (http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/LiabilityStatement.pdf). A free copy of the Adobe Acrobat PDF reader is available at http://www.adobe.com. IMPORTANT NOTICE Potential proposers should understand that the research project described herein is tentative. The final content of the program depends on the level of funding made available. Nevertheless, to be prepared to execute research contracts as soon as possible after sponsors' approvals, the Strategic Highway Research Program is assuming that the tentative program will become official in its entirety and is proceeding with requests for proposals and selections of research agencies.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/NationalAcademies/NATRB/TRBSHRP2/SHRP2_C11/listing.html)
- Record
- SN02086934-W 20100311/100309234919-c18754c3dda691da94ea5e217969d941 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |