MODIFICATION
B -- Regional Innovation Program Evaluation (Economic Impacts)
- Notice Date
- 2/21/2018
- Notice Type
- Modification/Amendment
- NAICS
- 541618
— Other Management Consulting Services
- Contracting Office
- Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Acquisition Management Division, 100 Bureau Drive, Building 301, Room B130, Gaithersburg, Maryland, 20899-1410, United States
- ZIP Code
- 20899-1410
- Solicitation Number
- SB1325-18-00538
- Archive Date
- 3/23/2018
- Point of Contact
- Stephanie Kelly, Phone: 2024827876
- E-Mail Address
-
stephanie.kelly@nist.gov
(stephanie.kelly@nist.gov)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- The answers to the questions are as follows: Place of Performance 1. Can the place of performance be the contractor site or a combination of Government work space and contractor facilities? EDA expects that an onsite project kick-off and close-out at the Department of Commerce should suffice for purposes of this project, and the remainder of the work can be done remotely. Video and teleconferences, and other onsite work can be coordinated on an ad hoc, as needed basis. Contractors will have full access to the documents required to conduct this evaluation, and will be able to access those documents remotely. EDA estimates the project kick-off to take no more than 2-3 business days, and the project close-out should take no more than 1-2 business days. 2. The solicitation indicates that the place of performance is at the Department of Commerce in D.C. Should I interpret this to mean that the contractor must complete all work on-site at this location? See above. 3. Is there a requirement to locate on site at the EDA's offices? See above. 4. The place of performance is listed as follows: Department of Commerce, Herbert C. Hoover Building 1401 Constitute Ave NW, Washington, District of Columbia 20230, United States. a. Does the Government intend for the solicited Contractor(s) to work exclusively at the Place of Performance (and/or the Department of Commerce (DOC) Herbert C. Hoover Building Economic Development Administration offices)? i. If the Contractor may perform tasks outside the Place of Performance, approximately what percent of the Period of Performance (16 weeks total) may the Contractor do so? See above. 5. After initial kick-off meeting we do not believe that the contractor will need nor require continuous access to the Department of Commerce (DOC) Herbert C. Hoover Building Economic Development Administration offices and/or systems (Except for a few meetings). Will the contractor be allowed to work remotely rather than use the government's facility? See above. 6. Section 8 Government indicates that the government will provide workspace to enable the contractor to work on this evaluation. Do program records have to remain at EDA's office, or can portions of the records be copied and sent to the contractor as confidential data? See above. Security Is it necessary to have badged contractors for a 16-week effort, or can a government representative provide escort when visitation is necessitated by meetings? An escort will be provided for all onsite meetings, a badge will not be issued. Incumbent Has a contractor performed similar work to this for the government in the past? If available, please provide the incumbent contract number. No. Is there an incumbent? No. If there is an incumbent? Will they be allowed to bid on the recomplete? If not., Why not? See above. Has this type of project been awarded before? If so, who was the incumbent? No. Socio-Economic Concern Will small Veteran Owned startup companies be considered since past performance will be based on previous employers and personal professional experience? Yes, all proposals will be considered. Funding Is there a budget range or cap for the project? $40,000 - $70,000 What is the available budget for this study? See above. Is there an expected level of effort (i.e., days), or budget for this work? Please review the program webpage and full list of grant investments below to determine the level of effort required to conduct this evaluation. Webpage links include: https://www.eda.gov/oie/ris/ https://www.eda.gov/oie/ris/grantees.htm We are uncertain what level of effort is expected for this project. As you know, some aspects (e.g., investigating economic impacts) can be done at various levels of detail, accuracy, and defensibility. Is there a notional budget attached to this work? (I can't find anything online.) See above. Period of Performance What is the anticipated start date for the project? Please see part 5. SCHEDULE AND DELIVERABLES Deliverables Can EDA provide any similar past reports that may serve as models for the deliverables associated with this RFP? No Is there a range of FTE-equivalent hours EDA expects proposals to fall within? No Will EDA consider proposals based on part-time staffing, extending the deliverable deadlines but not increasing the number of total hours dedicated to the project? Yes, please see the schedule and deliverables details for specific requirements on deadlines and deliverables. Please explain what is expected for the deliverable "Documented Current Grant Impact Evaluation Framework"? Is this a deliverable that should include the economic impact evaluation? In the solicitation, for the Final Report to OIE deliverable, it states it should include evaluation of program effectiveness, potential improvements, and a recommendation whether to continue. There is no mention of the economic impact. Documenting the program's current grant impact evaluation framework is a step toward conducting the required evaluation. This includes compiling information on grant performance metrics, evaluation frameworks, the grantee reporting process, and related documentation. The final report should be an evaluation based upon these materials. Is the evaluation of the program solely based on whether or not the program is achieving its goals or are there other identified evaluation factors that the government has already developed or can the Vendor develop and propose evaluation factors for innovation programs? Please review the following objectives listed in the solicitation: • evaluate the impacts of the Program and the grants made thereunder; • evaluate OIE's and EDA's self-evaluation methodology and, if necessary, recommend improved methodologies to self-evaluate the Program's impacts in light of its goals; • make recommendations for potential improvements to the Program We would like to confirm the FFP tied to contract line items/deliverables with the below being the contract line items/deliverables (total of 7): a. Kick-off meeting b. Project plan c. Documented current grant impact evaluation framework and process d. Review of program effectiveness e. Final report to OIE on program effectiveness, potential improvements and recommendations to continue or terminate the program f. Submission to OIE of all supporting documentation, data, etc. g. Bi-weekly status report Please review SCHEDULE AND DELIVERABLES in the solicitation. Is it advisable to provide a timeline for this 16 weeks assignment? At your discretion. Past Performance Past projects in the area of assessment and evaluation are sometimes funded as grants. These will not have CPARs. We intend to provide descriptions, and signed acknowledgements for satisfactory performance, from clients in such cases. Is this acceptable? Yes, it is acceptable. Can I submit a brief list of references? Yes, you may submit a brief list of references. Task Could you please explain the chain of command for the contractors in the program? This will be discussed during the kick off meeting Could you please provide the contract number or solicitation number of the last annual report performed for Regional Innovation (RI) Program Evaluation? One does not exist, this is the first program evaluation conducted. What is the "metric" being utilized to evaluate and measure success in the Regional Innovation (RI) Program? Please review prior notice of funding opportunities (NOFA) for the RI program. Example metrics include but are not limited to; jobs created, investment dollars raised, patents filed, and businesses formed. https://www.eda.gov/oie/ris/ How much money did the Regional Innovation (RI) Program Evaluation Program award to all customers during FY14, FY15, FY 16 & FY17? please direct us to where we can find the information. Please review the program webpage. https://www.eda.gov/oie/ris/ What is the period for the evaluation of the economic impact? Is it FY2014 through FY 2016 grants, or does it also include FY 2017 grants? If it does include the FY 2017 grants, will all the data be available by the contract award date? Data from all fiscal years will be available, and the evaluation should include all information provided. In its existing history how much money has the program awarded since inception (Creation)? Please review BACKGROUND in solicitation. And to how many entities? Please review program webpage. When was the Program activated, what date and year? Please review BACKGROUND in solicitation. How much money did the program award last year? Please review program webpage. How many staff / personnel did the last annual evaluation of The Regional Innovation (RI) Program Evaluation Program require? This is not an annual evaluation, it is the first program evaluation conducted. How many man hours did the last annual evaluation of The Regional Innovation (RI) Program Evaluation Program require? See above. How many government financial appropriations will the contractor be evaluating? Four fiscal years of grant awards, please see program webpage for background. How many programs are included in the 140 grants (Does each grant represent a single program)? Yes, for purposes of this grant program, one grant represents a unique, individual program, however, the evaluation is not on the 140 individual programs, it is to evaluate the RI program as a whole. Will the contractor be required to evaluate all programs or just a percentage/sample group? EDA encourages proposals to consider the best strategies to evaluate this type of program. If so how large is the data sample group (e. g. Grant # 101 Innovation Project represents 10 Programs)? Each grant represents one program. What Fiscal Appropriations are associated with the Program? Please review BACKGROUND in solicitation. What financial system do you use track The Regional Innovation (RI) Program? This is not a financial audit or evaluation. How many man hours do you estimate the evaluation will require? See above. What other databases are associated with The Regional Innovation (RI)? Most of the data is managed in GrantsOnline and Excel. Would the contractor awarded under this solicitation be allowed to execute an electronic survey (web-based survey) of the current and past customer of the program? Not likely, depending the scope and content of the survey. Would the contractor awarded under this solicitation be allowed to execute a telephonic survey of the current and past customer of the program? Likely, yes. Would the contractor awarded under this solicitation be allowed to execute some personal interviews of the current and past customer of the program? Yes. Will the Program pay for TDY travel to conduct some personal interviews? Not likely, a small travel budget may be allotted for travel for kick-off and close-out meetings in Washington D.C., but not for personal interviews of customers. These should be conducted by phone or video conference. Will the contractor be required to travel outside of the Washington, DC area to perform program evaluations? Not likely. Could you please provide a copy of last year's / prior year's annual evaluation report of the program? This is the first program evaluation. Is this the first annual evaluation report? Why? This is not an annual evaluation. A program evaluation could not be conducted earlier because the grant investments were not far enough along in their project periods with enough outcomes to report on and evaluate. Has this program been evaluated before? If so, when? No. Section 2 Objective starts by noting that EDA has a statutory obligation to evaluate its program and the preceding paragraph notes that the program has been around since 2014. Is this the first time that outside evaluation is being done? Yes Do you have a specific framework in mind for evaluating the program? No. What kind of documentation is the awarded entity required to keep on file? Is there a government regulation which governs the program? Please review solicitation BACKGROUND. Do all recipients of the award maintain their information in a uniform manner? Uniform template? Most grant recipients report on similar performance metrics in Microsoft excel format, while also providing more qualitative, narrative updates in Microsoft word or PDF format. This is done twice a year. Given the variance in program types, some metrics are not relevant to every program, and thus, reporting is not entirely uniform, but is generally consistent. Do all recipients of the award maintain their information in a uniform database.? See above. Do all recipients of the award maintain their information in a uniform template? See above. Do grant recipients use a standard electronic format, provided by EDA, for their required financial, performance, and impact reporting? If so, what format are these reports submitted in (Microsoft Excel, Word, pdf. etc.)? See above. Is all information available in a uniform electronic format? See above. Is there economic impact data, provided by the grant recipients, in Microsoft Excel or another database? See above. Is the data submitted by the grantees consolidated into one database, or will the contractor have to obtain the data from the EDA Program Officer or regions? Data files are managed by the program office at EDA HQ, the Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Will the contractor awarded under this solicitation need to request documentation from the States and Territories to complete and evaluate the program? No. Will additional requests for information from the States and Territories delay the evaluation? No. Is all data for the Program evaluation in a single location geography, office, computer system, data base? In a single source. Be it paper or electronic? All data is electronic. How will the government distribute the requisite data (e.g. data inputs, outputs) will the government provide a flash drive or CDs, or hard copes (word/pfd files)? Data will be distributed in electronic format in Microsoft word, excel, and pdf documents. Will the data for analysis be provided by the Government and grant awardees? See above. Does The Regional Innovation (RI) Program have its own "Fiscal Code"? This is not a financial audit. Does the Fiscal Code provide adequate auditing information to evaluate the program? See above. Do you have any standard operating procedures (SOP) for the program? Could you provide us a copy of the SOP's? Please review the program webpage and notice of funding opportunities. Could you provide a personnel or office organigram, for The Regional Innovation (RI) Program? Please see solicitation BACKGROUND for office details and program origination. Are contractors expected to engage directly with EDA award recipients for qualitative insights or to complete the analysis using data only? Both options are Will the final report evaluate the RIS Program as a whole or will there be separate evaluations for the two grant programs i6 and Seed Fund Support? This evaluation should include all grants managed under the RI program. Evaluation strategies are at the discretion of the proposers. Is OIE's and EDA's self-evaluation methodology an Excel tool or other database? If not, what format is the methodology? This is a standard set of metrics, usually reported in excel (see above). As part of the Vendor recommendations, would the government be looking for additional avenues to fund the program, not just how to improve current operations? EDA welcomes any and all recommendations after the evaluation is conducted that will improve program outcomes to reach stated goals. What types of data inputs, outputs, and outcomes does OIE currently track for the RI program? Jobs created, patents filed, business starts, venture capital dollars raised, partnerships formed, mentorship sessions held, and other activities and outcomes that lead to entrepreneurship- and innovation-based economic development. What are the specific goals of the RI program? Please review the solicitation and program webpage. What is the region of impact for this study? The United States or some sub-national level of geography (e.g., states, regions)? National and territories, but the work can be done mostly remote. Section 3 Scope asks for an evaluation of EDA's own "self-evaluation methodology." Is something EDA has done in the past, which has documentation available somewhere? The self-evaluation methodology Do all the individual i6 Challenge and See Fund projects have email addresses for the companies they assist, and are these potentially available to the evaluation contractor? No, but if deemed necessary, a small sample of client companies may be contacted to conduct interviews and/or research on program efficacy. Do all projects report the same KPIs, and provide reports in the same format? o Are soft copies available? o Is it expected that physical access to the Department of Commerce (DOC) Herbert C. Hoover Building will be required (e.g., for document review)? Is the next year's RIP funding already allocated, or will renewal depend on the findings of this study? See above. 2018 RI funding will not depend on the findings of this study. General Q. Why are you using NAICS CODE 541618? "Establishments providing telecommunications or utilities management consulting services are included in this industry." A. The primary reason this code was chosen the U.S. industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in providing management consulting services. Telecommunications and utilities management consulting services just so happen to be included in this industry Q. Are you looking for a utility /telecommunications experience GC company to execute the evaluation? A. No, not looking for a utility/telecommunication only experienced company to execute the evaluation Q. Are you using NAICS 541618 because a large quantity of grants goes to infrastructure and utilities? Are you seeking utility and engineering experience in the evaluating GC staff? A. No, the use of the code has no correlation to the type of grants awarded. No, not seeking vendors with only utility and engineering experience. Q. Will you consider changing your NAICS CODE to 541611? A. That is a perfectly acceptable code Can you please clarify - ((6) FOB Destination based on a firm-fixed-price for each contract line item number, and any discount terms for those prices;) (FOB) Free on Board Destination buyer takes delivery of goods seller pays the firm fixed price freight charges or any discount of that price for each line item that requires shipping. Can you please clarify - (7) Include a statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation) by following the items listed in section III. The solicitation on FBO does not specify a page limit; is there a page limit? No page limit, submit as many pages your proposal requires. Do you want resumes or any other kind of information about our proposed personnel? Yes, you may submit resumes Can I submit my proposal as a private consultant for this bid? Yes, you may Is there any particular format for this proposal? Yes, submit under one cover your technical/business proposal and under another cover your price proposal Is the Project Authority open to considering a core proposal (i.e., based on the Statement of Work), with an optional value-add component (i.e., going a bit beyond the basics asked for in the SoW)? If you have a proposal with a solution that addresses the solicitation as posted please submit it Exactly who will be the final client for the project - The Program itself (i.e., mainly for internal "lessons learned") EDA (for review at a very high level?) SBIR (i.e., to ensure the program is working and should be continued)? All of the above? We like to tailor our work to the intended users. Vendors should consider strategies that will produce an evaluation and recommendations valuable for both internal and external stakeholders.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DOC/NIST/AcAsD/SB1325-18-00538/listing.html)
- Place of Performance
- Address: Department of Commerce, Herbert C. Hoover Building 1401 Constitute Ave NW, Washington, District of Columbia, 20230, United States
- Zip Code: 20230
- Zip Code: 20230
- Record
- SN04830103-W 20180223/180221231723-5d05e2204f248cca513117b85049b452 (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 |