Chesapeake Bay Program GIT Project Idea Submission Table 2
Contact Information
 

Chesapeake Bay Program GIT Project Idea Submission Table 2

 
  
   
Table 2: Defining Project Scope of Work
 

The purpose of this table is to define the project's scope of work in detail. This table will be used to solicit bids from qualified contractors through a Request for Proposals (RFP) process.

Place yourself in the mindset of a consultant bidding on this work. In order to get the best possible responses, be cognizant of using technical jargon, define acronyms, and use succinct language. It is very important to distill scopes of work down to concise, clear language that makes bidder/contractor expectations very clear.

This table should be a refinement to information found in Table 1 (Please take into account information garnered by project idea review and feedback).

This form will pre-populate with your submission from Table 1. Please revise and delete, as necessary.

 
   
Preparer Name(s)
 

*Lead Preparer
The lead preparer will be the point of contact for questions/clarification.

 
   
 
 
First Name

 		Mark
 
Last Name

 		Bennett
 
 
E-mail

 		mrbennet@usgs.gov
 
Other Preparers
List names of all parties who have been a part of developing the content of this table. Preparers of this scope of work will not be allowed to bid on the scope of work during the RFP stage.
 

 		Jeremy Hanson
Virginia Tech | Chesapeake Bay Program
jchanson@vt.edu

 
GIT Technical Project Lead
 

The person identified as the GIT Technical Project Lead will be responsible for reviewing and recommending the selected contractor. This person will also review and approve the selected contractor's work for the duration of the project. GIT technical leads cannot be a part of the bidding team or financially be involved in the project.

 
   
 
 
First and Last Name

 		Mark Bennett
 
 
E-mail

 		mrbennet@usgs.gov
Project Information
Project Information
 
Goal Implementation Team (GIT)
As determined by the Chesapeake Bay Program.
 

 		Climate Resiliency Workgroup
 
 
Project Priority #
List the rank of this project in relation to other projects being submitted by the same GIT.
Teams may submit up to four project ideas, each with a rank of 1-4.
 

 		1
 
 
Project Title
10 words or less.
 

 		Building a Baywide Scorecard to Track Climate Resilience for Watershed Communities
 
 
Maximum Bid Amount
As generated in Table 1 during the project idea selection process, modified by any provided feedback during the review.
 

 		75000
 
 
Project Outcomes
Outcomes are the changes you expect to see as a result of the work being completed. Examples of outcomes could be increased knowledge around how fish are changing habits/will change habits due to climate change; future fish ladders will be more successful due to readily available improved design standards; future fish passage policies will be reflective of resulting research.
 

 		The Scorecard will provide a comparable method to track climate resilient conditions across the watershed. It will allow jurisdictions to compare progress toward implementing climate adaption and the success of those efforts and bring awareness of management actions they can implement. Outcomes include: improved understanding of what makes communities climate resilient; ability to track climate resiliency over time and compare between geographies; identification of opportunities to improve resilience in communities; future local policies can incorporate resilient measures.
 
 
Stakeholder Participants
List all stakeholders that will be consulted during each phase of the project.
 

 		Phase 1: Jurisdictional and Bay Program representation, scientists and engineers, managers, and other active stakeholders. Steering committee will include CBP creative team members to help guide end or future product development. Additional steering committee candidates may include members from the STAC workshop “Monitoring and Assessing Impacts of Changes in Weather Patterns and Extreme Events on BMP siting and design,” along with individuals from the steering committees of the Chesapeake Bay Landscape Professionals and the Urban Stormwater Stakeholder Group, and leaders from Local Government Advisory Committee or steering committees from Local Leadership WorkGroup.
Phase 2: elected officials, community leaders, and citizens from both coastal and inland communities who will collaborate to develop the scorecard and participate in the workshop.
Phase 3: CRWG members, continued engagement with workshop participants and the steering committee when needed

 
 
Deliverables
List all deliverables to be derived from the successful bidder’s work. Deliverables are the tools/information/workshops/tangible items/etc. that are created to achieve your outcomes. Examples of deliverables include fish ladder design standards, a workshop for a targeted audience to disseminate key findings; a white paper about fish ladder project case studies; analyzed results from a fish ladder public opinion survey; an educational curriculum; etc. Make sure to include a final report as a separate deliverable.
 

 		Report of recommended scorecard adapted from scorecard of VA coastal communities, the associated methodology to track relevant indexes of improved climate resilience resulting from implementation of policies or management actions for inland and coastal localities, and master plan for implementation and distribution across the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
- - The bidder will convene a project steering committee; lead the committee in defining principles of climate resilient adaptation for the purpose of the project based upon available literature and existing partnership documents when possible; work with the steering committee to define inland and coastal localities for the targeted audience; plan and coordinate a workshop to work with participants to establish potential indexes related to jurisdictional actions that could increase the climate resiliency and that are feasible to measure.
-- A 2-day workshop to create outline for scorecard including agenda and all materials based on user research conducted by contractor at direction of the steering committee.
-- An approach for an inland community scorecard and a coastal community scorecard with consistent methodology, and the opportunity for the bidder to establish consistent methodology between both approaches. Scorecard methodology will include recommended geographic scope, metrics, and methods implementation including potential weighting of metrics.
-- A final project report that (1) recommends a scorecard with its component metrics, and (2) lays out a roadmap for implementation of the proposed scorecard and methodology (3) includes summary of efforts from the project steering committee and survey, workshop report and additional materials as supplemental information

 
 
QAPP Requirement
What environmental data will be generated? Will a quality assurance plan be required? Visit the Chesapeake Bay Quality Assurance Program website for more QMP and QAPP details at http://www.chesapeakebay.net/about/programs/qa
 

 		No environmental data will be generated. No quality assurance plan needed.
 
 
Qualifications of Bidder
List skills and experience required of a qualified bidder. Be specific here - ask for expertise in applicable knowledge areas, familiarity with specific software, and experience with certain project types. Examples of qualifications include demonstrating experience of completing three fish ladder design projects in the past five years or demonstrating experience of creating two advanced educational curriculums in past five years.
 

 		Have experiences in engaging diverse community stakeholder groups on climate resiliency; Have experiences in scorecard, index, or metric development, including comparing or weighting different factors; Have experience working with local and regional stakeholders, including local officials and/or senior staff. Have experience reviewing state and local government policy; Have experience in convening diverse stakeholder groups during meetings or workshops; Have experience across jurisdictions; Have experience of state and local level of adoption of climate resilient actions and implementation of climate adaptation planning principles.
 
 
Bidders List
Due to federal procurement guidelines, project ideas MUST be open to competitive bidding. List at least three entities (with contract information) to include in the RFPs. These bidders must not have been involved in the development of the project idea or scope of work. The Trust will then provide the RFP to these groups as well as other bidders per the federal procurement guidelines. GIT leads should also send the RFP, when open for bids, to their networks and specific entities they think would be a good fit for their scope of work.
 

 		UMCES IAN Office: Dr. Heath Kelsey (Program Director University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, hkelsey@umces.edu); PO Box 775 2020 Horns Point Rd Cambridge, MD 21613, USA; Phone: (410) 221 - 2045
RAFT: Elizabeth Andrews (eaandrews@wm.edu); P.O. Box 400179 Charlottesville, VA 22904; Phone: (757) 221-1078
Eastern Research Group: Chris Lamie (Chris.Lamie@erg.com); 2300 Wilson Blvd, Suite 350 Arlington, VA 22201; Phone: (703) 841-0500
MARISA: Krista Romita Grocholski (Project Manager, kristarg@rand.org)
ICF International: info@email.icf.com; 7125 Thomas Edison Drive Suite 100, Columbia, MD 21046 USA; Phone: (443) 718-4900
Georgetown Climate Center: climate@law.georgetown.edu; Hall of States, Suite 422, 444 N. Capitol Street, Washington DC 20001; Phone: (202) 661-6566

 
 
Reviewers List
Provide contact information (at minimum the name, organization, and email address) for at least three (3) potential reviewers beyond the GIT Technical Lead. These reviewers should be experts in the field. In addition, these reviewers should not have a conflict of interest with the potential bidders, such as a financial stake in the potential bidder company, be on the staff of a potential bidder, or assist the potential bidders with their proposal. The Trust will reach out to the reviewers to complete reviews in order to select the most qualified bidder and report the results to CBPO.
 

 		Zoe Johnson (Community Planning Liaison at Naval Facilities Engineering Command, zoe.johnson1@navy.mil)
Kate McClure (Maryland Sea Grant, mcclure@umd.edu)
Dave Flores (The Center for Progressive Reform, dflores@progressivereform.org)
Nicole Carlozo (Maryland Department of Natural Resources, nicole.carlozo@maryland.gov)

 
Project Steps and Timeline
 

List all of the steps required to accomplish the project goals. Make sure to include any meetings with GIT teams and other relevant stakeholders (try to quantify meetings; a step to review draft deliverables by relevant stakeholders; and a step for the contractor to refine the deliverables after draft review. Indicate whether the methods by which a contractor will be expected to undertake the work are well known or whether you intend for the bidders to propose the methodology. Assume that work will start March 1, 2020.

 
   
 
 
Step 1 Description

 		The project contractor will:
• convene a project steering committee;
• lead the committee in defining principles of climate resilient adaptation for the purpose of the project based upon available literature and existing partnership documents when possible;
• develop and implement a work plan to identify potential and viable indexes for climate resilient adaptation, building from the framework recommended by ERG, Inc. (2018) and Chesapeake Bay Program goals such as aligning climate adaptation strategies with the WIPs and capitalizing on “co-benefits” of management practices.
The steering committee will be formed with Jurisdictional and Bay Program representation, scientists and engineers, managers, and other active stakeholders. Candidates for the steering committee include CBP creative team members. Additional candidates may include RAFT team members, members from the STAC workshop “Monitoring and Assessing Impacts of Changes in Weather Patterns and Extreme Events on BMP siting and design,” along with individuals from the steering committees of the Chesapeake Bay Landscape Professionals, the Urban Stormwater Stakeholder Group, and leaders from Local Government Advisory Committee or steering committees from Local Leadership WorkGroup.
The Steering Committee will:
• work along with the contractor to define inland and coastal localities for the targeted audience whose perceptions and insight could significantly impact the adoption of the scorecard.
• direct the contractor to conduct audience research to understand the users’ demographic characteristics, perceptions, and priorities for measuring resilience and identify existing resources to support development of potential set of indexes.

This information will be used as background for a workshop with the ultimate project goal of designing an attainable scorecard and methodology (about $40k).

 
Step 1 Start Date

 		3/2/2020
 
 
Step 1 End Date

 		8/7/2020
 
 
Step 2 Description

 		In consultation with the Steering Committee, the project contractor will:
• plan for and coordinate a two-day workshop focused on creating an outline for an attainable scorecard and associated component indexes.
• create the workshop agenda and materials based on the audience research to develop potential indexes related to jurisdictional actions (policies, standards, practices) that could increase the climate resiliency and that are feasible to measure.
• conduct targeted stakeholder engagement to recruit a diverse set of workshop participants (from both coastal and noncoastal communities) including elected officials, community leaders, and citizens who will collaborate to develop the scorecard.

The workshop will take place in the second half of 2020 or early 2021 (approximately 5 – 9 months after the award) and will be led by a qualified facilitator.
• It will consider and recommend appropriate geographic scale(s) for scoring policies or practices that improve climate resiliency at a local scale.
• Workshop participants will identify and discuss potential climate resilient restoration index options and associated weight of each index. They will consider how to approach the scoring of management actions, programmatic elements or policies that could be factored into the scoring methodology with a focused mindset on climate resiliency.
• The indexes will not be based solely on the location of one community so that the scorecard may be comparable among localities. Examples of potential indexes the steering committee and workshop participants might choose for the scorecard include identified climate resilient leaders with determined roles, installation of stormwater BMPs, encouragement of private property owners to install management actions, green infrastructure plans, implementation of native trees/living shorelines/rain gardens, and many other options.
• As stated by the Climate Resiliency Workgroup and approved by the Management Board, there is not enough science to understand BMP effectiveness on climate change and this will be addressed by multiyear prototype science and technical program which run until 2025,For the purpose of this project, it should be mentioned as a potential index during the workshop and a method for easy inclusion into the scorecard once the science is available should be identified.
• The workshop will consider a master plan or a road map on how to implement the scorecard to localities throughout the watershed with distinct steps to reach different jurisdictions such as identifying trusted sources to bring forth the outlined scorecard to their elected officials. The desired recommendations will include specific priorities and methods that can be readily acted upon by the CBPO or its partners following completion of this project. Over the longer term, the metric data and scorecard could be analyzed by interested partners to understand the effectiveness of their efforts to promote climate resilience over time. (about $10k)

 
Step 2 Start Date

 		8/8/2020
 
 
Step 2 End Date

 		11/4/2020
 
 
Step 3 Description

 		The project contractor will:
• continue engagement with workshop participants and the steering committee to address outstanding questions and concerns through follow-up discussion and partnership feedback.
• Based on the workshop results, subsequent research on needs identified at the workshop, and results of follow-up discussions with stakeholders, the contractor will produce a final project report that (1) recommends a scorecard with its component metrics, and (2) lays out a roadmap for implementation of the proposed scorecard and methodology (3) includes summary of efforts from the project steering committee and survey, workshop summary and additional materials as supplemental information.
• Provide contact information for participating localities interested in implementing the use of the scorecard in the future, outside this project.
• The report and subsequent revisions will be produced in partnership with steering committee members, workshop participants, and other key stakeholders. (about $25K)

 
Step 3 Start Date

 		11/5/2020
 
 
Step 3 End Date

 		3/4/2021
 
 
Step 4 Description

 
 
Step 4 Start Date

 
 
 
Step 4 End Date

 
 
 
Step 5 Description

 
 
Step 5 Start Date

 
 
 
Step 5 End Date

 
 
 
Step 6 Description

 
 
Step 6 Start Date

 
 
 
Step 6 End Date

 
 
 
Step 7 Description

 
 
Step 7 Start Date

 
 
 
Step 7 End Date

 
 
 
Step 8 Description

 
 
Step 8 Start Date

 
 
 
Step 8 End Date

 
Submission Directions
 

Once you have completed your application, scroll to the bottom of the page and click "Review & Submit". This page provides you with a review of your application. If all sections are completed, you MUST then click "Submit" to complete the submission process. After clicking "Submit", you should be taken immediately to a confirmation screen. Print or save this screen for your records. If you do not see the confirmation screen, contact the Trust immediately at 410-974-2941. If you see the confirmation screen but do not receive a confirmation email within 24 hours, please (a) check your spam or junk email box to ensure you have not received the email, (b) have a copy of your confirmation screen handy, and (c) contact the Trust at 410-974-2941 within 3 business days.