MODIFICATION
B -- AMENDMENT #5 RFQ-2011-Q-13507 EVALUATION TOOL KIT
- Notice Date
- 8/12/2011
- Notice Type
- Modification/Amendment
- NAICS
- 541690
— Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services
- Contracting Office
- Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Procurement and Grants Office (Atlanta), 2920 Brandywine Road, Room 3000, Atlanta, Georgia, 30341-4146
- ZIP Code
- 30341-4146
- Solicitation Number
- 2011-Q-13507
- Archive Date
- 9/8/2011
- Point of Contact
- Maria D Nichols, Phone: 770-488-2627
- E-Mail Address
-
mkn2@cdc.gov
(mkn2@cdc.gov)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Total Small Business
- Description
- The purpose of this amendment is to revise the RFQ as stated below. As a result of this amendment, the Offerors are encourage to submit revised proposals to reflect the below changes. The new date for RFQ is August 24, 2011 by 12:00pm EST. No additional questions will be accepted. Quotations must be submitted via electronic mail to the attention of Maria Nichols at mkn2@cdc.gov. All submissions must reference RFQ 2011-Q-13507 Amendment 5. A Firm Fixed Price contract will be awarded. 1) Revise Task 1.1 as follows: Task 1.1: Kick-off Meeting Within 1 week of award, the contractor and key personnel shall meet with the Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR) at CDC offices to discuss the administration and performance of the contract. The purpose of this meeting is to review the goals, objectives, and anticipated outcomes of the contract activities. During the kick-off meeting, the COTR will provide the contractor with: -- Contact information for potential candidates for the key informant interviews; -- Grantee Documents in electronic format or on a CD, in.pdf or Word format. 2) Revise Task 1.2, change title and content as follows: Task 1.2: Summary Meeting Minutes Within 2 weeks following the kick-off meeting, the contractor shall prepare and submit the summary meeting minutes. These minutes shall contain the salient discussion points along with decisions reached, any outstanding issues along with the name of the party responsible for follow up and a record of the mutually agreed upon schedule for subsequent biweekly conference calls. 3) Revise Task 4 as follows: Task 4: Systematic Review of NPAO Programs The contractor shall conduct a systematic review of funded programs to identify case examples of NPAO projects that have demonstrated best practices in policy evaluation. In addition, challenges and barriers to evaluating policy shall also be identified. The review shall include an assessment of existing grantee documents (including applications, evaluation plans and reports), and key informant interviews (e.g. local project staff, evaluators and CDC project officers) to learn of current or past policy evaluation efforts, challenges and to identify case examples. Within 10 weeks of award, the contractor shall submit a report that succinctly summarizes the review of NPAO programs. Key informant interviews shall be conducted with 9 persons. A selection of state applications and evaluation documents will be provided to the contractor at the kick off meeting. These documents will be from funded states and territories that are implementing relevant policies and have conducted sound evaluations of these policy interventions. Documents from a total of 4-6 funded programs will be provided for review, and will consist of program applications, relevant work plans, evaluation plans and evaluation reports. Documents will be selected that provide information most relevant for the development of the policy evaluation toolkit. Approximate number of document pages per state is 100. 4) Revise Task 5.1 as follows: Task 5.1: Outline Within 12 weeks of award, the contractor shall submit for review, an outline of the comprehensive policy evaluation toolkit. The toolkit shall be a step by step guide for evaluating NPAO policy and will specifically provide guidance on: • Assessing the impact of NPAO policy • Selecting and implementing models for evaluating NPAO policy • Determining and assessing appropriate policy indicators and milestones • Data collection • Data analysis • Interpretation of findings • Reporting and dissemination In addition, the toolkit shall incorporate case examples (see Task 4), and shall include tools and resources to aid grantees in their efforts to evaluate NPAO policy. Examples of tools and resources include: logic model templates, data collection instruments, a glossary of terms, references and report templates. The contractor shall suggest additional content and resources where appropriate. The format and content of the toolkit shall be determined by the contractor. The COTR will provide review comments to the contractor within 5 business days. 5) Update Deliverable Table as follows: Task No. Description Due Date 1.2 Kickoff Meeting summary notes Within 2 weeks after award 1.3 Bi-weekly project meetings and summary notes Within 1 week of each meeting 2 Monthly Progress Reports By 10th of each month and ongoing 3 Literature review summary Within 8 weeks of award 4 Summary: review of policy evaluation Within 10 weeks of award efforts conducted by DNPAO and CPPW states 5.1 Toolkit Outline Within 12 weeks of award 5.2 Draft Toolkit Within 24 weeks of award 5.3 Submit Final Toolkit Within 36 weeks of award 6 Two Webinar(s) for Grantees Within 39 weeks of award 7.1 Draft Policy Evaluation Toolkit Within 42 weeks of award Manuscript 7.2 Final Manuscript Within 50 weeks of award 6) Delete all reference contact information for Contracting Officer Technical Representative (COTR) 7) Revise Technical Evaluation criteria as follows: Technical Approach: The Offeror shall provide a detailed technical approach containing the plan for completing all requirements, including policy evaluation methods, under the RFQ. The technical approach shall address potential challenges and problems that may be encountered during the performance of the work and shall offer sound and effective solutions for each. The Offeror must provide a detailed work plan and timeline for each task and explain how these tasks will be managed to produce the desired outcomes. Where sub-contractors, consultants or other entities will be used to perform substantial portions of the work or contribute substantially to producing deliverables, sufficient detail regarding work plans and timelines for these entities must be provided to judge the soundness of the total technical approach
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/HHS/CDCP/PGOA/2011-Q-13507/listing.html)
- Place of Performance
- Address: Primary Place of Performance shall be at the Contractor's Facility, unless otherwise noted in the Statement of Work, United States
- Record
- SN02532670-W 20110814/110812235938-32a6c4374f0b4c518a2f5e53987f8863 (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 |