BACKGROUND

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine provide independent, objective analysis and advice to inform policy with evidence, spark progress and innovation, and confront challenging issues for the benefit of society. The Transportation Research Board (TRB) is one of seven program units within the National Academies. Under TRB, there are four Cooperative Research Programs, one of which is the Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP). Via applied research projects, ACRP generates products that address public-sector airport issues and support the development and operation of the U.S. airport industry. 

Recognizing the dynamic nature of the industry, a key goal of ACRP is to ensure the products continue to be relevant and are updated as needed. As ACRP matured and the library of products grew, the need for a systematic method for identifying the products with the greatest need for updating became apparent. To meet a key goal of the ACRP Strategic Plan, the ACRP oversight committee approved and funded the development of a systematic method to identify and prioritize research products in need of an update. A methodology (https://www.nationalacademies.org/webdocs/acrp_product_update_review_methodology_may_2024/ACRP_Product_Update_Review_Methodology_May_2024.pdf?channelToken=b9515dcea9b44b1caeec286a25accf32&download=false&tStamp=1716321441525) for reviewing the products in each of the 10 research fields was developed in 2020 and has been refined.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this request for proposal (RFP) is to apply the methodology (https://www.nationalacademies.org/webdocs/acrp_product_update_review_methodology_may_2024/ACRP_Product_Update_Review_Methodology_May_2024.pdf?channelToken=b9515dcea9b44b1caeec286a25accf32&download=false&tStamp=1716321441525) to review and recommend an initial set of products for updating within Research Field 7: Design and Research Field 8: Construction.

Interim deliverables should include (1) the initial draft of the research products spreadsheet by research field (see Step 2.1 in the Product Update Review Process Methodology); (2) a list of the industry stakeholder review group; and (3) any recommended changes to the methodology. 

The final deliverables will be a technical memo with recommendations for the products to be updated within Research Field 7: Design and Research Field 8: Construction. The memo should include, at minimum, a rationale for each recommendation and final prioritization, and an explanation of how the prioritization process was applied by research field. 

A research plan shall be provided as part of the proposal. If selected, the panel will provide comments on this research plan and an amplified research plan should be developed for review and approval by the panel. The research plan should also include checkpoints with the ACRP panel, including at a minimum (1) a kick-off web-enabled meeting to be held within 1 month of the Notice to Proceed; (2) a meeting following the delivery of the interim deliverables; and (3) an in-person final deliverable review meeting. The contractor will present the technical memo and incorporate final feedback from the panel into the final recommendations.

Note: Following receipt of the draft final deliverables, there should be 2 months for ACRP review and comments and for contractor preparation of the final deliverables. ACRP will provide access to web-enabled teleconference services.

HOW TO PROPOSE

Proposers with expertise in the ACRP research process and/or U.S. airport design and construction are invited to express their interest in conducting ACRP Project 08-05. 

Proposals should include (see Special Notes C and D): 

• A brief statement expressing the proposers’ understanding of the problem, need for the project, and ultimate use of the published results;
• A brief statement of experience with the following research fields---Research Field 7: Design and Research Field 8: Construction;
• Examples of experience with projects of a similar scope and objective;
• A resume for each member of the research team;
• A work plan listing and describing the tasks needed to undertake this research, including, at a minimum, separate tasks for developing a work plan;
• A signed, unaltered Liability Statement;
• A budget by task; and
• A diversity and inclusion plan.

Proposers are required to include contract documents with their submittal to expedite the contracting process. Please submit separately from the proposal the following:

• A completed Subaward certification form; and
• A schedule of Delivery and Payments based on the deliverables in the table below.

SPECIAL NOTES

A. This process has been utilized in ACRP Project 03-65 Phase I, the resulting outcome of that effort can be found at https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/27230/acrp-product-update-prioritization-of-policy-and-planning-products. It is currently being utilized under ACRP Project 01-53 to prioritize the products in Research Field 1: Administration and Field 6: Human Resources and ACRP Project 10-36 to prioritize the products in Research Field 10: Operations. 

B. ACRP will be forming a panel to assist ACRP staff and the research contractor in conducting the research and reviewing draft deliverables; proposers should provide their initial thinking on how they would work with staff and the panel in their work plan.

C. Please review the Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Programs document, which was revised in May 2024. Proposals should follow this guidance but only include the sections that have been called for under the How to Propose section. 

D. Proposals must be submitted as a single PDF file with a maximum file size of 10 MB. The PDF must be formatted for standard 8 ½” X 11” paper, and the entire proposal must not exceed 50 pages (according to the page count displayed in the PDF). Proposals that do not meet these requirements will be rejected. For other requirements, refer to chapter V of the instructions.

E. The Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Programs have been modified to include a revised policy and instructions for disclosing Investigator Conflict of Interest. For more information, refer to chapter IV of the instructions. A detailed definition and examples can be found in the CRP Conflict of Interest Policy for Contractors. The proposer recommended by the project panel will be required to submit an Investigator Conflict of Interest and Disclosure Form as a prerequisite for contract negotiations.

F. Proprietary Products - If any proprietary products are to be used or tested in the project, please refer to Item 6 in the Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Programs.

G. Proposals are evaluated by the ACRP staff and project panels consisting of individuals collectively knowledgeable in the problem area. The project panel will recommend their first choice proposal considering the following factors: (1) the proposer's demonstrated understanding of the problem; (2) the merit of the proposed research approach and experiment design; (3) the experience, qualifications, and objectivity of the research team in the same or closely related problem area; (4) the plan for ensuring application of results; (5) how the proposer approaches inclusion and diversity in the composition of their team and research approach, including participation by certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprises; and, if relevant, (6) the adequacy of the facilities. A recommendation by the project panel is not a guarantee of a contract. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS - the contracting authority for the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine) will conduct an internal due diligence review and risk assessment of the panel’s recommended proposal before contract negotiations continue. 

Note: The proposer's approach to inclusion and diversity as well as participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises should be incorporated in the proposal.

H. Copyrights - All data, written materials, computer software, graphic and photographic images, and other information prepared under the contract and the copyrights therein shall be owned by the National Academy of Sciences. The contractor and subcontractors will be able to publish this material for non-commercial purposes, for internal use, or to further academic research or studies with permission from TRB Cooperative Research Programs. The contractor and subcontractors will not be allowed to sell the project material without prior approval by the National Academy of Sciences. By signing a contract with the National Academy of Sciences, contractors accept legal responsibility for any copyright infringement that may exist in work done for TRB. Contractors are therefore responsible for obtaining all necessary permissions for use of copyrighted material in TRB's Cooperative Research Programs publications. For guidance on TRB's policies on using copyrighted material please consult Section 5.4, "Use of Copyrighted Material," in the Procedural Manual for Contractors.

I. The text of the final deliverable is expected to be publication ready when it is submitted.  It is strongly recommended that the research team include the expertise of a technical editor as early in the project timeline as possible.  See Appendix F of the Procedural Manual for Contractors Conducting Research in the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Program for technical editing standards expected in final deliverables.

J. Proposals should include a task-by-task breakdown of labor hours for each staff member as shown in Figure 4 in the Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Programs. Proposals also should include a breakdown of all costs (e.g., wages, indirect costs, travel, materials, and total) for each task using Figures 5 and 6 in the brochure. Please note that TRB Cooperative Research Program subawards (selected proposers are considered subawards to the National Academy of Sciences, the parent organization of TRB) must comply with 2 CFR 200 – Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. These requirements include a provision that proposers without a "federally" Negotiated Indirect Costs Rate Agreement (NICRA) shall be subject to a maximum allowable indirect rate of 10% of Modified Total Direct Costs. Modified Total Direct Costs include all salaries and wages, applicable fringe benefits, materials and supplies, services, travel, and up to the first $25,000 of each lower tier subaward and subcontract. Modified Total Direct Costs exclude equipment, capital expenditures, charges for patient care, rental costs, tuition remission, scholarships and fellowships, participant support costs and the portion of each lower tier subaward and subcontract in excess of $25,000.

K. If the team proposes a Principal Investigator who is not an employee of the Prime Contractor, or if the Prime Contractor is proposed to conduct less than 50% of the total effort (by time or budget), then section five of the proposal should include: (1) a justification of why this approach is appropriate, and (2) a description of how the Prime Contractor will ensure adequate communication and coordination with their Subcontractors throughout the project.

L. All budget information should be suitable for printing on 8½″ x 11″ paper. If a budget page cannot fit on a single 8½″ x 11″ page, it should be split over multiple pages. Proposers must use the Excel templates provided in the Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Programs. 

M. The National Academies have an ethical and legal obligation to provide proper attribution whenever material from other sources is included in its reports, online postings, and other publications and products. TRB will review all Cooperative Research Programs draft final deliverables using the software iThenticate for potential plagiarism. If plagiarized text appears in the draft final deliverable, the research team will be required to make revisions and the opportunity to submit future proposals may be affected.