Qualitative Analysis
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
September 28, 2015
KEY DATES
Request for Proposal Released
September 28, 2015
Deadline for Questions
October 12, 2015
Deadline for Proposals
October 23, 2015
Projected Award Date
November 23, 2015
Projected Start Date
November 30, 2015
About PCORI
PCORI was authorized by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 as a non-profit,
nongovernmental organization and is charged with helping patients, clinicians, purchasers, and policy
makers make better-informed health decisions by “advancing the quality and relevance of evidence
about how to prevent, diagnose, treat, monitor, and manage diseases, disorders, and other health
conditions.” It does this by producing and promoting high-integrity, evidence-based information that
comes from research guided by patients, caregivers, and the broader healthcare community.
PCORI’s strong patient-centered orientation directs attention to individual and system differences that
may influence research strategies and outcomes. PCORI is charged with producing useful, relevant
clinical evidence through the support of new research and the analysis and synthesis of existing
research.
PCORI is committed to transparency and a rigorous stakeholder-driven process that emphasizes patient
engagement. PCORI uses a variety of forums and public comment periods to obtain public input to
enhance its work.
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
1828 L St., NW, Suite 900
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 827-7700
Fax: (202) 355-9558
Email: [email protected]
Follow us on Twitter: @PCORI
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
ii
Opportunity Snapshot
PCORI requests assistance from an outside contractor to develop and implement a qualitative analysis of
information collected by PCORI during its Merit Review process. The majority of this work will be for
programmatic qualitative analysis needs. The types of qualitative data for this analysis will include free
text about the strengths and weaknesses of applications submitted in response to PCORI funding
announcements from merit reviewer written critiques and summaries of in-person reviewer discussions,
where applicable.
PCORI expects to make one award under this RFP. The period of performance is November 30, 2015
through March 30, 2016. The anticipated contract award date is approximately November 23, 2015.
This will be a cost reimbursable contract. The budget for this contract is estimated at $155,000.00. The
Contractor will operate at the direction of and receive scientific guidance from PCORI.
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
iii
How to Proceed
1. Review the Requirements
Examine all sections of the RFP and learn about what makes PCORI’s research different. 1
2. Consider the Evaluation Criteria
Consider the organization eligibility requirements and PCORI’s specific requirements to see whether
your organization, your interests, and your capabilities fit this program. Check the PCORI website for
any modifications or amendments up to the submission deadline.
3. Develop Your Proposal
Develop your response to accomplish the Scope of Work (SOW).
4. Follow Submission Guidelines
See the Submission Guidelines section of this document.
5. Submit Your Proposal
Proposals are due by 5 pm (ET) on October 23, 2015.
1
Available at pcori.org/research-we-support/pcor
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
iv
Contents
About PCORI ......................................................................................................................... ii
Opportunity Snapshot .......................................................................................................... iii
Acronyms .............................................................................................................................. 1
Background ........................................................................................................................... 1
Project Requirements ............................................................................................................ 4
Scope of Work ............................................................................................................................................... 4
Key Deliverables ............................................................................................................................................ 6
Period of Performance .................................................................................................................................. 7
Other Requirements ...................................................................................................................................... 7
Proposal Evaluation Criteria .................................................................................................. 9
Submission Guidelines ......................................................................................................... 10
Volume I: Technical Proposal ...................................................................................................................... 10
Volume II: Cost Proposal ............................................................................................................................. 12
Submission Deadline ................................................................................................................................... 12
Post-Submission Information............................................................................................... 13
Withdrawal or Modification of Proposals ................................................................................................... 13
Late Submissions ......................................................................................................................................... 13
Best and Final Offers ................................................................................................................................... 13
Retention of Proposals ................................................................................................................................ 13
Protests ....................................................................................................................................................... 14
Post-Award Information ...................................................................................................... 15
Anticipated Award Date .............................................................................................................................. 15
Post-Award Conference/Kick-off Meeting .................................................................................................. 15
Notice to Proceed ........................................................................................................................................ 15
Period of Performance ................................................................................................................................ 15
Documentation Requirements .................................................................................................................... 15
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
v
Basis of Compensation to the Contractor ................................................................................................... 15
Billing and Payment Procedures ................................................................................................................. 16
Debrief – Post-Award .................................................................................................................................. 16
Appendix A: Past Performance Table ................................................................................... 17
Appendix B: Submission Checklist ........................................................................................ 18
Appendix C: Performance Monitoring .................................................................................. 19
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
vi
Acronyms
BAFO
Best and final offer
CAA
Cross-Awardee Activities
CER
Comparative effectiveness research
LOE
Level of effort
LOI
Letter of Intent
NDA
Non-Disclosure Agreement
PCOR
Patient-centered outcomes research
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
PCORI
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Institute
PCS
Pragmatic Clinical Studies
PFA
PCORI Funding Announcement
POC
Point of contact
RFP
Request for Proposals
SOW
Scope of Work
1
Background
The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) was created to conduct research to provide
information about the best available evidence to help patients, those who care for them, payers, policy
makers, and others make better informed decisions. PCORI’s research is intended to give patients and
their caregivers a better understanding of the prevention, treatment, and care options available and the
science that supports those options.
Overview
PCORI requests assistance from an outside vendor to develop and implement a qualitative analysis of
information collected by PCORI during its Merit Review process with a focus on analysis of summary
statements, which include critiques written by merit reviewers, and where applicable, summaries of the
in-person discussions assembled by PCORI Merit Review Officers. PCORI’s review process is unique from
that of other funders due to its involvement of scientists, patients, and other healthcare stakeholders in
the assessment of application merit, as well as PCORI’s review criteria, with a focus on clinical impact,
patient-centeredness, and stakeholder engagement. A qualitative analysis of Merit Review summary
statements will inform programmatic needs as well as the broader field of engaged research. Findings
may be used to improve the PCORI application process by identifying gaps in communication between
PCORI and applicants and between PCORI and merit reviewers, and findings should inform training and
resources to support PCORI applicants and merit reviewers.
The types of qualitative data for this analysis will include free text from merit reviewer written critiques
and summaries of in-person reviewer discussions, where applicable, about the strengths and
weaknesses of applications submitted in response to PCORI funding announcements. There are three
main objectives for this analysis:
(1) Synthesize evidence on the strengths and weaknesses of funded and unfunded applications;
(2) Assess the unique perspectives contributed by reviewers of different backgrounds (scientists,
patients, and stakeholders); and
(3) Evaluate the adoption of reviewer feedback into resubmitted applications to support
examination of the relationship between feedback adoption and subsequent funding status.
Merit Review Process
PCORI has five National Priorities for supporting patient-centered comparative effectiveness research
(CER). Each of these priority areas is represented by a Program within PCORI. To date, PCORI Programs
have solicited applications for CER through three types of PCORI Funding Announcements (PFAs): Broad,
Targeted, and Pragmatic Clinical Studies (PCS). PFAs are released in funding cycles several times per
year. In each cycle, scientists, patients, and stakeholders conduct a rigorous merit review of responsive
applications. Reviewers are trained by PCORI staff to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of an
application based on five funding criteria. Scientists review applications against all five funding criteria,
but depending on the PFA type, patients and stakeholders provide comments on a subset of the criteria.
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
1
The number and type of reviewers assigned to assess each application also varies by PFA type. For
instance, applications submitted in response to Broad funding announcements are reviewed by 2
scientists, 1 patient, and 1 stakeholder reviewer, while applications submitted for Pragmatic Clinical
Studies funding incorporate the review of an additional methodologist. In each funding cycle, one
individual will typically review approximately 6-8 applications.
Reviewers assess application merit by completing a written critique and assigning a numeric review
score to each criteria, as well all the overall application (preliminary review), before discussing the most
meritorious applications at an in-person review meeting. Summary Statements containing the written
critique comments and in-person discussion notes are compiled at the conclusion of the review process.
Following the in-person review, PCORI staff recommends a slate of funded applications for approval by
PCORI’s Board of Governors.
Scope of Analysis
This qualitative analysis will include a sample of summary statements drawn from multiple PCORI
funding cycles (Broad and PCS Funding Announcements, August 2013-Spring 2015). Table 1 provides an
overview of the number of applications/Merit Review Summary Statements available for analysis by
funding cycle. Applications submitted to PCORI’s CER Methods and Infrastructure program have been
excluded from the scope of this analysis.
Table 1. Number of Applications Reviewed per Funding Cycle by Application Status
Application
Status
August
2013
(Broads)
Winter
2014
(Broads)
Spring
2014
(Broads)
Spring
2014
(PCS)
Fall
2014
(Broads)
Fall
2014
(PCS)
Winter
2015
(PCS)
Spring
2015
(Broads)
Spring
2015
(PCS)
Preliminary
381
275
362
36
165
16
25
148
TBD
Discussed
235
162
247
36
114
16
24
102
TBD
Funded
53
33
45
5
29
4
2
TBD
TBD
Resubmission
55
55
80
0
43
0
0
25
TBD
Table 2 provides an overview of the number of unique reviewers by type (Scientist, Stakeholder, and
Patient) participating in each review cycle.
Table 2. Number of Reviewers per Funding Cycle by Reviewer Type
Reviewer
Type
Scientist
Stakeholder
Patient
August
2013
(Broads)
108
59
62
Winter
2014
(Broads)
84
47
37
Spring
2014
(Broads)
121
69
62
Spring
2014
(PCS)
21
7
8
Fall
2014
(Broads)
64
33
33
Fall
2014
(PCS)
12
4
5
Winter
2015
(PCS)
18
6
6
Spring
2015
(Broads)
60
33
31
Spring
2015
(PCS)
TBD
TBD
TBD
See Table 3 for some potential factors to address in creation of a sampling plan and a subsequent
analysis plan.
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
2
Table 3. Factors to Consider for Sampling and Analysis Plans
Cycle
PCORI Funding Announcement (PFA) Type
Scientific Program Area for Applications to
Broad PFAs
Reviewer Type
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Reviewer Experience
Funding Criteria
•
•
•
•
Application Merit Review Score
Application Status
*Additional Considerations
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
August 2013
Winter 2014
Spring 2014
Fall 2014
Winter 2015
Spring 2015
Broad
Pragmatic Clinical Studies
Addressing Disparities
Clinical Effectiveness Research
Communication and Dissemination Research
Improving Healthcare Systems
Scientist (Generalist, Content-expert, Methodologist)
Patient (Patients, Caregivers, Patient/Caregiver
Advocacy Organization Representative)
Stakeholder (Clinician, Clinic/ Hospital/ Health System
Representative, Purchaser, Payer, Industry, Policy
Maker, Training Institution)
New vs. returning
Patient/Stakeholder Reviewer Mentor
Criterion 1: Impact of the condition on the health of
individuals and populations or extent to which the
proposed study addresses evidence gaps
Criterion 2: Potential for the study to improve
healthcare and outcomes or to improve patientcentered research methods
Criterion 3: Technical merit
Criterion 4: Patient-centeredness
Criterion 5: Patient and stakeholder engagement
Preliminary overall score
Final overall score
Discussed vs. not discussed
Funded vs. not funded
New vs. resubmission
Merit Review Officer evaluation of reviewer
performance
Self-rated reviewer expertise match (high, medium,
low)
Reasons for funding decisions (e.g., programmatic fit)
Changes to review process (e.g., new Letter of Intent
(LOI) review process)
3
Project Requirements
Scope of Work
The Contractor selected will provide support for qualitative analysis needs. The qualitative data include
free text from summary statements about the strengths and weaknesses of applications submitted in
response to PCORI funding announcements (PFAs), which include merit reviewer critiques written in
advance of the in-person panel meeting, and where applicable, summaries of the in-person discussions
created following panel meetings. The analysis will address three evaluation questions, and findings will
be presented in a written report to PCORI.
Duties and Responsibilities
In collaboration with PCORI Staff:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Finalize proposed timeline to encompass the full scope of work.
Submit a data privacy plan describing the controls in place to maintain the privacy and security
of the merit review data as well as procedures for establishing firewalls within the contractor
organization to limit access to the data to only those key personnel with a need to access it for
purposes of the project.
Maintain appropriate documentation of qualitative analysis protocols and code books.
Design and execute sampling and analysis plans:
o Sampling plan(s) should prioritize data from more recent review cycles, but should
consider the range of reviews needed to address evaluation questions about the
influence of merit review on resubmitted applications.
o Analysis plans should address creating summaries of the qualitative data as well as
synthesis of thematic analyses.
Develop and discuss initial coding memos to document and share analytic strategies and initial
learnings.
Prepare reports based on analyses and memos conducted, including detailed explanation of
methods used and clear summary of findings. All tables and figures need to easily be imported
into PCORI reports/slide sets.
Required Skills
•
•
•
•
•
Demonstrated expertise and ability to analyze data about each of the 5 PCORI funding criteria,
including study design and engaged approaches to research.
Familiarity with peer review of research proposals, particularly PCORI’s processes.
Strong research methods skills with knowledge of a wide range of qualitative data analysis
techniques.
Demonstrated experience analyzing open-text data.
Ability to synthesize and translate complicated qualitative analysis results into clear and simple
language.
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
4
Evaluation Objectives
I. Identify the strengths and weaknesses of funded versus unfunded applications.
PCORI has an interest in understanding the types of strengths and weaknesses identified by
reviewers for funded and unfunded applications. Reviewer comments will highlight the common
challenges for patient-centered comparative effectiveness researchers that lead to a lack of
success in our funding process, as well as the unique strengths of our funded applications. We
are particularly interested in understanding the top challenges identified by reviewers in the
proposals that PCORI does not fund, as well as a classification of these reasons. For example,
factors may include composition of research team, project scope, inadequate power, or low
feasibility data collection plans. Results may further enable analysis of the relationship between
application scores and content of summary statements. Findings from this analysis may be used
to improve the PCORI application process by identifying gaps in communication and highlighting
opportunities for additional training and resources to support PCORI applicants.
II. Assess the unique perspectives contributed by reviewers of different backgrounds.
One of the guiding questions in PCORI’s evaluation framework is: What is the effect of PCORI's
approach to Merit Review on how perspectives are incorporated into the review? And relatedly:
How do these perspectives influence the selection of research projects for funding? PCORI uses
multiple approaches to answering these questions including surveys of reviewers and
quantitative analyses of reviewer scores. To supplement these efforts, we seek to analyze Merit
Review Summary Statements to better understand the ways in which different reviewer
perspectives are reflected in the assessment of application merit. We are interested in
understanding both the unique and common nature of the comments generated by reviewers
serving in different roles (scientist, patient, and stakeholder), and from different backgrounds
(clinician, payer, etc.). This information will contribute to the evaluation of PCORI’s unique
approach to Merit Review, and it may also be used to inform the broader field of engaged
research.
III. Evaluate the adoption of reviewer feedback into resubmitted applications.
PCORI seeks to foster the resubmission of high-quality applications for future funding
opportunities. Through a matched analysis of reviewer feedback on initial and resubmitted
applications, we want to understand the ways in which our Merit Review process may influence
the quality of resubmitted applications. This evaluation should include an analysis of:
1. The responsiveness of applications to prior Merit Review comments for funded versus
unfunded resubmissions;
2. Differences in the adoption of past feedback from different types of reviewers (scientist,
patient, stakeholder) and on different criteria (Criteria 1-5); and
3. Differences in the strengths and weaknesses identified by Merit Reviewers on the
resubmitted application versus the initial application.
This information will assess the consistency between Merit Reviewers over different cycles, and
will inform PCORI’s strategy for working with applicants to revise and resubmit high-quality
applications.
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
5
Key Deliverables
The Contractor shall provide the following deliverables provided in the table below.
Deliverables
Deliverables Due
(from project start date)
Status report with services completed and hours worked by labor category
Weekly
Project Timeline and Data Privacy Plan
Within 1 week
Data analysis plan (i.e., protocol)
Within 2 weeks
Dataset file with all reviewer critique comments for analysis
Within 2 weeks
Hierarchical codebook for the qualitative dataset to include codes or themes
that emerge from reading the text
Draft: Within 2 weeks
Final: Within 3 weeks
Coding memos
Through analytic period for each
objective, frequency and quantity
dependent on analysis plan
Reporting:
Objective 1:
• Draft: Within 6 weeks
1. Written report including evaluation objectives, a detailed explanation of
• Final: Within 8 weeks
methods used, a clear summary of findings with illustrative quotes that
demonstrate themes and graphical summaries as appropriate, and
Objective 2:
conclusions
• Draft: Within 10 weeks
• Final: Within 12 weeks
2. PowerPoint file summarizing objectives, methods, results, and
conclusions
Objective 3:
• Draft: Within 14 weeks
• Final: Within 16 weeks
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
6
Period of Performance
The period of performance for the project is November 30, 2015 through March 30, 2016.
Other Requirements
Furnishing of Equipment/Property
The Contractor shall furnish its own office, equipment, personnel, and technology.
Required Federal Citations
None.
Place of Performance
With the exception of travel to a kick-off meeting, the Contractor is required to provide the facilities
necessary to execute the SOW. The Contractor shall choose its staff or acquire the necessary personnel
support and provide suitable work facilities.
Hours of Service
The Contractor shall be available Monday through Friday, between 8:30 am and 5:30 pm (ET). PCORI
has regular observance of federal holidays: New Year’s Day; Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr.;
Washington’s Birthday; Memorial Day; Independence Day; Labor Day; Veterans Day; Thanksgiving Day;
Day after Thanksgiving; and Christmas Day.
Insurance
Contractor will at its own cost and expense obtain and maintain in full force and effect during the term
of any resultant Agreement and for two (2) years thereafter: a) general liability and professional liability
insurance with coverage for any of Services rendered by Contractor with policy limits of at least $1
million per occurrence and $3 million in the aggregate; and b) any such other insurance coverage that is
appropriate for Contractor’s field and adequate to meet Contractor’s obligations under this Agreement.
The Contractor assumes absolute responsibility and liability for any and all personal injuries or death
and/or property damage or losses suffered due to negligence of the Contractor's personnel in the
performance of the services required under any resultant contract. The Contractor shall provide proof of
insurance (i.e., Certificates of Insurance) upon award of the contract.
Non-Disclosure Agreement
The Contractor must not release any sensitive, confidential, or proprietary information without prior
written approval from PCORI. At the time of award, the awardee must sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement
(NDA), and at each subsequent option year, if exercised.
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
7
Organizational Conflict of Interest
The Contractor agrees to disclose any conflicts of interest on the part of Contractor that has the
potential to bias or has the appearance of biasing its obligations under this RFP. Contractor warrants
that there is no undisclosed conflict of interest in Contractor’s other contracts or agreements or other
employment or in the operation of Contractor’s business with the proposed services to be performed
under this RFP.
Data Security
The Contractor will be expected to comply with PCORI’s information security policies and requirements
for accessing the merit review data.
Compliance
The Contractor must comply with PCORI’s Rules and Regulations, all required forms, and any
changes in procedures. The Contractor will remain informed of any such changes and updates, as
necessary, by the PCORI Procurement Office. Upon the request of employees or other persons with
disabilities participating in official business, the Contractor must arrange necessary and reasonable
accommodations for the impaired individual(s) per Section 508 Compliance.
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
8
Proposal Evaluation Criteria
PCORI will evaluate proposals in compliance with the Scope of Work and requirements stated in this
RFP. An award will be made to the Offeror who proposes the best value, with the technical
solution being most important. PCORI will consider the evaluation factors indicated below. See the
Submission Guidelines (below) for a description of the categories.
PCORI reserves the right to reject proposals that are unreasonably low or high in price. The price
will be determined with regard to the fulfillment of the requirements listed in the Scope of Work.
Category
Weight of Rating Factor
Technical Solution
50%
Management Approach
15%
Past Performance
15%
Cost
20%
PCORI will assign the following evaluation scores:
•
Outstanding – The Offeror has demonstrated that there is a high probability of success in a
combination of past results, low risk, and professional distribution of services.
•
Good – The Offeror has demonstrated that there is a good probability of success in a
combination of past results, moderate risk, and professional distribution of services.
•
Fair – The Offeror has demonstrated that there is marginal probability of success in a
combination of past results, marginal risk, and professional distribution of services.
•
Poor – The Offeror has not demonstrated that there is a reasonable probability of success in this
services-based effort.
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
9
Submission Guidelines
Submissions should be organized into two separate volumes, sent as separate files. All text should be
Arial or Times New Roman font, no less than 11 point with one-inch margins and single spaced. Graphics
and tables may be included. We accept MS Word, MS Excel, or Adobe PDF formats. To ensure
completeness, please refer to the Submission Checklist (Appendix B). Each submission must include a
cover letter with following information:
•
Offeror’s name and mailing address
•
Reference to the solicitation (RFP) number (PCO-QAEA2015)
•
Technical and contract points of contact (name, phone number, and e‐mail address)
•
Business size (large, small, state/federal certifications – MBE, 8(a), HUBZone, etc.)
•
Dunn & Bradstreet Number (DUNS)
•
Federal Tax ID (EIN, TIN, SS)
•
Affirmation that the quote is valid for at least 30 days
•
A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions
included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are
offered at the price set opposite each item
•
Acknowledgement of any amendments by reference
Questions must be submitted to [email protected] referencing RFP # PCO-QAEA2015 in the subject line, no
later than 5:00 pm (ET) on October 12, 2015.
Volume I: Technical Proposal
Describe a plan to provide, prioritize, and manage the tasks included in the Scope of Work (page 4).
Describe the knowledge, experience, and capabilities related to provision of the range of support needs
described. Such expertise may be provided either by CC employees or through subcontracts for professional
services. The Technical Proposal including the Statement of Understanding, Technical Solution,
Management Solution, Subcontracting Plans (if any), Corporate Qualifications, and Past Performance may
not exceed 25 pages.
1. Statement of Understanding
•
State a clear understanding of the mission of PCORI and this project.
2. Technical Solution
•
Describe your proposed approach to each requirement included in the Scope of Work.
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
10
3. Management Approach
Describe a plan to manage the operation to ensure successful program support, including
program management, financial resources or ability to obtain them, equipment and facilities,
quality assurance, internal controls, and staffing.
3.1 Management Plan
•
Describe the overall plan for organizing, staffing, and managing the tasks required by
the SOW. The plan shall describe organizational oversight; indicate how roles and
responsibilities will be divided, decisions made, work monitored, and quality and
timeliness assured.
•
Explain how this management and staffing plan will enable the Offeror to start projects
quickly, conduct multiple projects concurrently, complete complex tasks within narrow
time periods, and assure quality of products.
3.2 Proposed Project Team Members
•
List proposed project team staff, subcontractors, and consultants. Identify all key
personnel and the project manager. For key personnel, state of level of effort.
•
Provide résumés for all proposed team members. Include proposed job title and a brief
description of qualifications, including education and experience. Résumés should be no
longer than two pages.
•
Describe how the individual expertise of each proposed team member and the
combined, complementary expertise of the project team are appropriate for supporting
each of the requirement sections of the RFP.
3.3 Subcontracting plans
•
If the proposal includes subcontractors, we encourage large businesses to meet federal
small business, labor surplus area, and minority business requirements.
4. Corporate Qualifications
The work described in this RFP must be performed quickly and meet exceptionally high quality
standards. It is essential that the Offeror demonstrate the technical and subject matter expertise
to design and conduct the activities described in the Scope of Work and to put qualified staff in
place to begin work rapidly. The Offeror must also have the ability to organize and manage
resources and personnel effectively.
•
Describe projects that are currently being managed.
•
Provide a discussion of directly relevant technical and substantive experience, including a
list of prior, similar projects and an annotated list of pertinent papers and reports.
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
11
•
Describe experience related to large data infrastructure projects, to patient and stakeholder
engagement, and to the conduct or support of CER and explain how the experience is
relevant to fulfilling the requirements of this proposed contract.
5. Past Performance
It is essential that the Offeror demonstrate the previous experience required to design and
conduct the various activities described in the Scope of Work. Of particular interest is
experience in responding to similar requests from other clients or customers.
•
For the Offeror and each proposed major subcontractor, identify up to three existing
projects or projects completed within the last five years that are consistent in scope, nature,
and effort for commercial customers, non-profit clients, or local, state, or federal
governments.
•
Complete table in Appendix A.
•
For each selected project, submit a synopsis of work performed (no longer than two pages).
Provide information on problems encountered on the contracts and subcontracts and
corrective actions taken to resolve those problems. Do not provide general information on
performance on the contracts because we will obtain that information from the references.
Volume II: Cost Proposal
Volume II: Cost Proposal should be distinct and separate from Volume I: Technical Proposal. Given that
the award is expected to be a cost reimbursable contract with a cap, all costs and fees should be
included.
•
If needed, a brief budget narrative (no more than two pages) may be included to clarify unusual
budget items or calculations.
•
The proposed budget should include the organization’s regular, approved salary and fringe
rates.
•
Any and all indirect fees must be fully supported with applicable documentation (e.g., copies of
federally negotiated indirect cost rate agreements) and are subject to verification and audit.
Submission Deadline
All proposals should be sent no later than 5 pm (ET) on October 23, 2015 to [email protected] with RFP #
PCO-QAEA2015 in the subject line.
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
12
Post-Submission Information
Withdrawal or Modification of Proposals
An Offeror may modify or withdraw its proposal upon written, electronic, or facsimile notice if received
at the location designated in the solicitation for submission of proposals not later than the closing date
and time for receipt of proposals.
Late Submissions
Late proposals, requests for modification, or requests for withdrawal shall not be considered, unless a
late modification of a successful proposal makes terms more favorable for PCORI.
Best and Final Offers
Subsequent to receiving the original proposals, PCORI reserves the right to notify all technically
acceptable Offerors within the competitive range and to provide them an opportunity to submit written
best and final offers (BAFOs) at the designated date and time.
BAFOs shall be subject to the late submissions, late modifications, and late withdrawals of proposals
provision of this RFP. After receipt of a BAFO, no discussions shall be reopened unless PCORI determines
that it is clearly in PCORI’s best interest to do so (e.g., it is clear that information available at that time is
inadequate to reasonably justify Contractor selection and award based on the BAFOs received). If
discussions are reopened, PCORI shall issue an additional request for BAFOs to all technically acceptable
Offerors still within the competitive range.
At its discretion, PCORI reserves the right to also invite Offerors who are technically acceptable to make
a presentation to PCORI on the proposed effort for technical and management approaches identified in
the submission. PCORI will notify vendors who meet the qualifications and provide the date, time, and
format for the presentation.
This RFP does not commit PCORI to engage in any business transactions or enter into any contractual
obligations with Offerors.
Retention of Proposals
All proposal documents shall be the property of PCORI, retained by PCORI, and not returned to the
Offerors.
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
13
Protests
Any actual or prospective Contractor who is aggrieved in connection with the solicitation or award of a
contract must file a protest with PCORI no later than 10 business days after the basis of protest is known
or should have been known, whichever is earlier. A protest based on alleged improprieties in a
solicitation that are apparent prior to proposal opening or the time set for receipt of initial proposals
shall be filed with PCORI prior to proposal opening or the time set for receipt of initial proposals. For
procurements in which proposals are requested, alleged improprieties that do not exist in the initial
solicitation, but which are subsequently incorporated into the solicitation, must be protested no later
than the closing time for receipt of proposals. The protest shall be filed in writing. Protests should be
submitted to [email protected] mailed to:
PCORI
Attn: Procurement Department
1828 L Street, NW, Suite 900
Washington, DC 20036
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
14
Post-Award Information
Anticipated Award Date
The anticipated notice of award date is November 23, 2015.
Post-Award Conference/Kick-off Meeting
Upon notice of award, PCORI will coordinate an award kick-off meeting within 14 days with the
Contractor. Date, time, and location will be provided at the time of the award.
Notice to Proceed
Immediately upon receipt of notice of award, the Contractor shall take all necessary steps to prepare for
performance of the services required hereunder. The Contractor shall have a maximum of 8 calendar
days to complete these steps.
Following receipt from the Contractor of acceptable evidence that the Contractor has obtained all
required licenses, permits, and insurance and is otherwise prepared to commence providing the
services, PCORI shall issue a Notice to Proceed.
On the date established in the Notice to Proceed (this notice will allow a minimum of seven calendar
days from the date of the Notice to Proceed, unless the Contractor agrees to an earlier date), the
Contractor shall start work.
Period of Performance
The performance period of this contract is from the start date established in the Notice to Proceed and
continuing for a one-time project-based effort, for the time period of November 23, 2015 through
March 30, 2016. The initial period of performance includes any transition period authorized under the
contract.
Documentation Requirements
The Contractor may be required to provide documentation to support its legal ability to operate
facilities in the United States.
Basis of Compensation to the Contractor
PCORI expects to award a Cost Reimbursable contract for the SOW and budget that is proposed,
negotiated with PCORI during the Best and Final Offer process, and listed in the agreement executed
between the organizations. Any Contractor quality issues that result in the re-drafting of work or
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
15
increased labor required to meet deliverables during the performance of the contract are the financial
responsibility of the Contractor, and re-work will be done at the Contractor’s expense.
Billing and Payment Procedures
PCORI prefers electronic invoicing. Invoices shall be provided to the Finance Department on a monthly
basis.
Billing address:
PCORI
Attn: Finance Department
1828 L St., NW, Suite 900
Washington, DC 20036
E-mail: [email protected]
Debrief – Post-Award
Offeror shall receive a post-award debriefing provided a written request is submitted to [email protected]
within three calendar days from the notice of an award. At PCORI’s sole discretion, the debriefing will
be provided in writing or verbally.
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
16
Appendix A: Past Performance Table
Offeror shall submit the following information as part of the proposal for both the Offeror and proposed
major subcontractors. Provide a list of three contracts completed during the past five years, or currently
in process. Contracts listed may include those entered into by the federal government, agencies of state
and local governments, and commercial clients. Include the following information for each contract and
subcontract:
Contract 1
Contract 2
Contract 3
Name of contract
Name of client or customer
Contract type
Dates of performance
Total contract value
Program manager and
telephone number
Contracting officer and
telephone number
Administrative contracting
officer, if different from
contracting officer, and
telephone number
List of major subcontracts
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
17
Appendix B: Submission Checklist
Cover Letter
□
Cover Letter (see page 10)
Volume I: Technical Proposal
□
□
□
□
□
□
As needed
Length
Statement of Understanding (see page 10)
Technical Solution (see page 10)
25 pages maximum
Management Approach (see page 11)
Past Performance (see page 12)
Appendix A: Résumés of Key Personnel (see page 11)
Appendix B: Past Performance Table (see page 17)
Volume II: Cost Proposal
□
□
Length
Budget (see page 12)
Budget Narrative (Optional) (see page 12)
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
2 pages per résumé
maximum
As needed
Length
As needed
2 pages maximum
18
Appendix C: Performance Monitoring
PCORI will assess the performance of the Contractor according to the criteria in the table below.
Quality
Measurement/Component
Quality/Performance Level
Exceeds
Acceptable
Unacceptable
Responsiveness
Responds same day
Responds within 24 hours
Responds in more than
24 hours
Routine Deliverables
Plain language, readable,
well-organized,
comprehensive capture
of all themes, and
informed prioritizing of
issues
Plain language,
comprehensive capture of
key themes, no
prioritization of issues
Language inaccessible to
target audiences,
omission of key themes
Program Evaluation Plans
Clear, submitted ahead
of schedule, executable
Clear, submitted on time,
and executable
Not concise; not
submitted; not
executable
Program Evaluation Reports
Plain language, readable,
well-organized,
comprehensive capture
of all themes, and
informed prioritizing of
issues
Plain language,
comprehensive capture of
key themes, no
prioritization of issues
Language inaccessible to
target audiences,
omission of key themes
PCORI RFP # PCO-QAEA2015
19