National Disability Performance Indicators and Data
Program Solicitation
NCD 06-01
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. offeror's local time):
April 17, 2006
SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
General Information
Program Title:
National Disability Performance Indicators and Data
Synopsis of Program:
This solicitation is for proposals that addresses NCD’s primary interest in undertaking this research is to ensure that the Federal Government is in a position to effectively monitor and eventually evaluate programs and supports for people with disabilities, but not duplicate other work. A secondary interest is that the Federal Government contribute to the improvement of performance reporting for its major social programs for Americans with disabilities and their families. One of the chief mechanisms has been through the use of indicator systems. Few of this nation’s national indicator systems, however, are populated with meaningful (outcome) data related to people with disabilities. Additionally, the majority of indicator systems are not holistic addressing the whole of people's lives but, rather, are domain-specific (e.g., health). In an effort to identify valid federal indicators and data and to describe the status of the U.S. population of Americans with disabilities, the National Council on Disability will conduct research that results in a product entitled Americans with Disabilities: Key Indicators of Quality Lives.
Designated Project Officer(s):
Martin Gould, Ed.D., Director of Research and Technology, National Council on Disability,
1331 F. St., NW, Washington, D.C. 20004, telephone: 202-272-2112, email: mgould@ncd.gov
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
Not applicable
Eligibility Information
Organization Limit: None Specified.
PI Eligibility Limit: None Specified.
Limit on Number of Proposals: None Specified.
Award Information
Anticipated Type of Award: Cooperative Agreement
Estimated Number of Awards: 1
Anticipated Funding Amount: $150,000 floor, $175,000 ceiling from FY 2006 award
Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: This solicitation contains complete information.
Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
B. Budgetary Information
Cost Sharing Requirements: Cost Sharing is not required by NCD.
Indirect Cost Limitations: Not Applicable.
Other Budgetary Limitations: Other budgetary limitations do not apply.
C. Due Dates
Full Proposal Deadline Date(s) (due by 5 p.m. offeror's local time):
April 17, 2006
Proposal Review Information
Review Criteria: National Council on Disability approved criteria. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Award Administration Information
Award Conditions: No additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this
solicitation for further information.
Reporting Requirements: Additional reporting requirements apply. Please see the full text
of this solicitation for further information.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary of Program Requirements
I. Introduction
II. Program Description
III. Eligibility Information
IV. Award Information
V. Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
VI. Proposal Review Information
VII. Award Administration Information
VIII.Contacts for Additional Information
IX. About the National Council on Disability
I. INTRODUCTION
The National Council on Disability (NCD) is interested in the overall performance of the national statistical system. Over the years, NCD has repeatedly included discussion of issues regarding federal statistics and data collection efforts in its National Disability Progress reports. As evidenced by these reports, NCD has determined that: (a) policy issues regarding Americans with disabilities have grown increasingly complex and interrelated, and (b) this nation's statistical research capacity has not kept up with the need for more or better data, information, analyses and knowledge. NCD has noted that this nation has yet to develop a national indicator system that is comprehensive, representing the whole of peoples' lives. The indicator systems that have been developed, by and large, are domain-based (e.g., for health, for education).
II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This research project will be based on secondary analyses of extant indicator systems, statistics and data collections. This project is not intended to undertake primary or newstatistical or data collection activities related to Americans with disabilities.
Background
Data and statistics related to people with disabilities have increasingly attracted the interest of policy makers, the disability community, and researchers over the past decade. In recent years, government officials, policy analysts and others have agreed that focusing attention on outcomes is an important way of ensuring that programs and policies are having desired results. Policy issues on the forefront of the disability agenda, such as employment, long-term services and supports, to name a few, require relevant measures, accurate data, routinely repeated measures, sophisticated analysis, and well-targeted dissemination.
America is entering an exciting stage of its social and economic development. We need all areas of American society to come together to ensure that persons with disabilities can participate fully in society and to build a country that demonstrates respect for all
its citizens. It is estimated that some 54 million Americans- 1 in 5 people - have a disability.
All Americans, including persons with disabilities, have rights and responsibilities under the U.S. Constitution. The policies and programs of the Federal Government of the United States make an important contribution to ensuring that Americans with disabilities can exercise these rights and responsibilities. The disability community has argued that fragmentation of government services, both within and across government jurisdictions, is one of the most important obstacles preventing persons with disabilities from participating fully in society.
Over the past four decades, Americans have come to understand that all areas of society share responsibility for making America fully inclusive. Governments, communities, families, volunteer organizations, learning institutions, the private sector and labor
are all important partners in making progress on disability issues. And while the Federal Government invests in many disability-related programs, and states and localities deliver most of the programs and services that support Americans with disabilities.
Indicator Systems
It is federal government policy to periodically evaluate the relevance, success and cost-effectiveness (program performance) of the federal programs and policies and use that information to reconfirm, improve or discontinue programs and policies. The objective is to ensure that federal departments and agencies have relevant, credible and objective information available on the performance of their programs, and that they use that information for the cost-effective and accountable management of programs.
NCD’s primary concern in undertaking this research is to ensure that the Federal Government is in a position to effectively monitor and eventually evaluate these programs and supports for people with disabilities, but not duplicate other work. A secondary concern is that the Federal Government contributes to the improvement of performance reporting for its major social programs for Americans with disabilities and their families. One of the chief mechanisms has been through the use of indicator systems. Unfortunately, few of this nation’s national indicator systems are populated with meaningful (outcome) data related to people with disabilities.
The development of social indicators is of recent origin. It emerged with the revival of interest in the measurement of social change and social policy in international organizations in the fifties and in the United States in the sixties. In the United States, interest in social indicators and related concepts, such as social reporting, arose from the need to consider social change as a totality and the awareness that nothing existed on the social side to correspond to the well-developed System of National Accounts for economic reporting. Subsequently, there was a decrease in activity in this field in the late seventies and early eighties, with a later revival of interest in the later part of the eighties.
There is no universally accepted meaning of social indicators to distinguish them from the economic or other kinds of indicators, and there are many competing definitions. The tendency of some has been to define social as a residual category, or everything that is not economic. This residual category has come to include health, education, housing, and employment, although they all have very important economic dimensions. For many, economic status is an essential component in any broad measure of whether people's lives are improving.
The definitions may be broad, such as the quality of life of the people of the United States. Or they may be narrow, such as the educational attainment levels of the different states or of subgroups within the population. There may be conventional indicators, such as health and education, or non-traditional indicators such as quality-of-life. Since the latter field cannot be measured directly, they are examined indirectly through selected indicators (e.g., access to personal assistance, access to affordable housing, etc.).
Social indicators are normally directed toward a wider and more integrated area of social concern than traditional statistical data collection. Over time there has been a shift in conceptualization toward a system of broader concerns.
Improving Our Knowledge Base on Disability
Developing policy to improve the lives of Americans with disabilities in society requires knowledge of their current situation, the issues they face and the successes and limitations of existing policy. In recent years, however, the limitations of current information have hampered progress in this area. Several challenges must be addressed if our public policies are to have any real affect on the lives of millions of people with disabilities, including the: (a) range of different definitions and multiple uses of the term ‘disability’ in laws, policies, programs, and research; (b) near absence of data on outcomes as a result of disability laws, policies and programs; and (c) a general lack of informed funding, policy making and decision making by government bodies as a result of the dearth of data.
Challenge #1. Defining disability is not an easy task, and it is becoming clear that no single definition can cover all disabilities. Over the past century, however, the concept of disability has evolved significantly. For many decades, disability was seen as a set of characteristics of the individual- a person was disabled or had a disability. As such, government's and society's interventions involved protecting the individual and the community, or treating and fixing the impairment. But in the past two decades, as the disability rights movement has emerged, the concept of disability has shifted from individual impairment to a more social phenomenon. In this social view, persons with disabilities are seen as being restricted in performing daily activities because of a complex set of interrelating factors, some pertaining to the person and some pertaining to the person's immediate environment and social/political arrangements.
The social concept of disability introduces the notion that society has erected barriers, physical or attitudinal, that affect persons with disabilities. Consequently, government programs and policies have evolved to include fixing the environment (e.g., making buildings barrier-free) and providing income assistance or work-related supports to help persons with disabilities participate more fully in the community and the workplace.
In November 2001 the World Health Organization (WHO) released a new framework, the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). The ICF was a seven-year effort involving some 65 countries. This new framework goes beyond a medical approach to take a much broader view of disability. The ICF looks at the body, individual activities, social participation and social environments. Instead of a negative description of disability, the ICF provides a neutral description of body structure, function, activities and participation. It also recognizes the role of environmental factors in either facilitating functioning (body functions, activities and participation) or raising barriers. Under the framework, the term "disability" refers to externally imposed impairments, activity limitations or participation restrictions.
Besides the complexity involved in defining disability, it is important to distinguish between definitions and eligibility criteria for specific government programs. The government programs described in this report may have very different objectives and
eligibility criteria.
Challenge #2. Outcomes, or results, are the best measure of success for government policies and programs. For example, in the area of disability supports, a positive outcome would be that persons with disabilities have the services and personal supports they need to participate in such everyday activities as going to work or school.
Measuring progress toward that outcome means looking at how many people have all the help they need, then measuring trends in future reports. If more and more people have all the help they need, it is a sign that the programs may be producing results. Careful research is also important to evaluate and explain the reasons for progress or setbacks. Unfortunately, it is difficult to report on our progress in this critical area as well as on a number of other outcomes because timely data is not available.
As mentioned earlier, there are still information gaps and incomplete, outdated data. For example, information about persons with disabilities from diverse cultural or linguistic backgrounds is especially limited. There are also significant gaps in information about children with disabilities and their families.
Nevertheless, this research project should make the best use of available information. As reporting on government programs improves, as new survey results become available and as more comprehensive indicators are developed, Americans will be able to assess how public programs and services for people with disabilities are helping to build a more livable society.
Challenge #3 . Federal agencies have created various disability data collection efforts to focus on different aspects of people’s lives. None have collaborated to create a comprehensive set of quality-of-life indicators that can be followed over time. By following these holistic data trends, more accessible information could be available to target efforts that can improve the lives of Americans with disabilities.
Suggested Project Approach
In an effort to identify valid federal indicators and data and to describe the status of the U.S. population of Americans with disabilities, the National Council on Disability will conduct research that results in a product entitled Americans with Disabilities: Key Indicators of Quality Lives. The research and resultant report will focuses on several important areas in the lives of people with disabilities - population, economics, education, employment, housing, health status and health care, to name a few areas.
There are five (5) major activities and related deliverables in this project.
Activity #1: Researchers will need to consult representatives from disability organizations and civil rights groups to further develop the research framework for this report, including outcomes and indicators. To address progress on the America disability agenda as well as the performance of the Government's disability-related programs and services, the research will need to be structured around outcomes identified by focus-group participants, for example, as key areas to measure - e.g., disability supports; skills development, learning and employment; - income and asset development; health promotion and well-being; homeownership; educational attainment and lifelong learning; and, livability of communities. The deliverable would be a report of the activity and its findings, and implications for the other major activities of this project.
Activity #2: Researchers will need to take a broad look at disability issues in America. It will involve an effort to identify a profile of disability in this country, describe America's knowledge base on disabilities and review how we measure progress toward national laws, goals or objectives, and values. A second level part of the project will deal with the key areas in which we can measure progress toward improving the quality of people’s lives; it describes America's progress to date as well as the Government's contribution to that progress. This will involve identifying national indicator systems and key data items or measures that directly relate to people with disabilities. The deliverable would be a report of the activity which includes the results of both levels of efforts, and At the conclusion of project, there could be a summary of key public initiatives and notes of critical issues to be covered in future research.
More specifically, the second level of research for this project should include, but not be limited to: (a) identifying existing and emerging federal disability data collection efforts; (b) reviewing and evaluating data efforts identified in item ‘a’ for validity, reliability, and utility by various stakeholders; (c) identifying and, to the extent feasible, examining emerging federal disability data collection systems for validity, reliability, and potential utility to various stakeholders; (d) defining the features and key components of a federal disability data indicator system; (e) identifying and describing the availability/unavailability of existing federal disability data to populate that indicator; and (f) future steps needed to create and implement such an indicator system for the federal government.
Activity #3: Researchers should aim to present a rough set of what a U.S. indicator set or system might look like for Americans with disabilities. NCD expects that this indicator set or system will be used to stimulate discussions by policymakers and the public, encourage exchanges between the data and policy communities, and foster improvements in Federal data collection on Americans with disabilities. By examining a broad range of indicators, researchers, policymakers, service providers, and the Federal government can better understand the quality-of-life areas that are improving for Americans with disabilities and the areas that require more attention and effort.
Activity #4: The major deliverable for this research project will be a report. Each section of the report will include a brief subsection on each societal indicator. Every subsection could begin by summarizing what we know about that particular indicator, then reviews important America initiatives in that area. Wherever possible, the subsections include unique information about Americans with disabilities from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds.
Activity #5: The final deliverable will involve follow-up efforts that ensure the highest probability of implementation of the final report's recommendations. These efforts will likely take several forms and will be designed in conjunction with the relevant NCD Board Members' Team and NCD Project Staff.
III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION
The categories of proposers identified at grants.gov Guide are eligible to submit proposals under this project announcement/solicitation. This project is open to all potential bidders.
IV. AWARD INFORMATION
Pending the availability of funds, NCD expects to make 1 award with an anticipated funding floor amount of $150,000 and ceiling of $200,000 from FY 2006 funds which will be available for this project.
V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS
Due Dates
Proposals must be submitted by the following date(s):
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):
April 17, 2006
The proposal must be prepared in two parts: A Technical Proposal and a Business Proposal. Each of the parts shall be separate and complete in itself so that evaluation of one may be accomplished independently of evaluation of the other. The technical proposal must not contain reference to cost; however, resource information, such as data concerning labor hours and categories, materials, subcontracts, etc., must be contained in the technical proposal so that your understanding of the scope of the work may be evaluated. It must disclose your technical approach in sufficient detail to provide a clear and concise presentation that includes, but is not limited to, the requirements of the technical proposal instructions.
The proposal must be signed by an official authorized to bind your organization. You must submit an original and 8 copies of your technical proposal and an original and 4 copies of your business proposal, including an electronic file copy of the technical and business proposal, to:
National Council on Disability
1331 F Street, N.W., Suite 850
Washington, DC 20004-1107
You may, at your discretion, submit alternate proposals, or proposals which deviate from the requirements; PROVIDED, that you also submit a proposal for performance of the work, as specified in the statement of work. These proposals may be considered if overall performance would be improved or not compromised and if they are in the best interest of the Government. Alternate proposals, or deviations from any requirements of this RFP, must be clearly identified.
The Government will evaluate proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria set forth in Section M of this request for proposals.
It is understood that your proposal will become part of the official contract file.
The solicitation does not commit the Government to pay any cost for the preparation and submission of a proposal.
To assist you in the preparation of your proposal, the Government estimates the effort to perform this contract to be as stated below. These numbers are furnished for the offeror’s information only and are not considered restrictive for proposal purposes.
Labor Category Staff Hours
1. PROFESSIONAL 1800
2. CLERICAL 500
Proposals which merely offer to conduct a program in accordance with the requirements of the Government’s scope of work will not be eligible for award. You must submit an explanation of the proposed technical approach in conjunction with the tasks to be performed in achieving the project objectives.
A detailed work plan must be submitted indicating how each aspect of the statement of work is to be accomplished. Your technical approach should be in as much detail as your consider necessary to fully explain your proposed technical approach or method. The technical proposal should reflect a clear understanding of the nature of the work being undertaken.
The technical proposal must include information on how the project is to be organized, staffed, and managed. Information should be provided which will demonstrate your understanding and management of important events or tasks. You must explain how the management and coordination of consultant and/or subcontractor efforts will be accomplished.
The technical proposal must include a list of names and proposed duties of the professional personnel, consultants, and key subcontractor employees assigned to the project. Their resumes should be included and should contain information on education, background, recent experience, and specific requirement related or technical accomplishments. The approximate percentage of time each individual will be available for this project must be included. The proposed staff hours for each of the above individuals should be allocated against each task or subtask for the project.
The technical proposal must provide the general background, experience, and qualifications of the organization. Similar or related contracts, subcontracts, or grants should be included and contain the name of the customer, contract or grant number, dollar amount, time of performance, and the names and telephone numbers of the contracting officer’s technical representative or project officer and contracting/grants officer.
The technical proposal must contain a discussion of present or proposed facilities and equipment which will be used in the performance of the contract.
The technical proposal must be prepared and submitted in the following format::
1. Abstract (no more than 2 pages)
A two-page summary shall be provided abstracting the proposal contents (e.g., objectives, activities, expected outcomes) in language understandable to an informed layperson. The narrative should be limited to no more than 250 words.
2. Table of Contents
3. Introduction (no more than 20 pages)
Offerors shall summarize, in their own words, the purposes and objectives of the project to demonstrate their complete understanding of NCD’s intent and requirements. This section also should contain a specific statement of any interpretations, questions, qualifications, limitations, deviations, or exceptions to the Solicitation's scope of work and the extent to which the offeror’s proposal can be expected to meet the requirements set forth in the scope of work.
4. Procedural Plan (no more than 40 pages)
This section shall fully describe the theoretical and technical approaches the offeror will employ in complying with each task in the scope of work. While a general statement of strategy is appropriate, the offeror shall be specific in describing the manner in which the overall review will be conducted, and the intended approach to the design.
5. Management Plan and Schedule (no more than 15 pages)
The management plan shall show the feasibility of implementing the offeror’s resources. The offeror shall present a time chart that specifies the amount of time (in person days) each staff member will commit to implementing each task. The plan shall present a clear description of the working relationships among personnel. Finally, the plan shall contain a method for insuring the timely and successful completion of each work task.
6. Personnel
Personnel with major responsibilities shall be listed by name, title, position, academic background, relevant experience, responsibilities with the project, and the extent to which this commitment is assured. This section should include specific time commitments of staff to other projects, both Federal and non-Federal. Consultants who have agreed to serve on the project should be similarly identified and assurances of their commitment included. The Project Director shall be committed for no less than approximately 60 percent of the contract. Vitae for all principal personnel, including consultants, should be appended to the proposal. Each vitae should be limited to not more than two (2) pages and should emphasize areas of experience directly relevant to this work statement.
7. Organization Experience
This section shall describe the offeror’s pertinent experience and qualification in conducting work of a similar nature. Offerors shall offer evidence of not more than 5 previous related assignments, including the names and telephone numbers of client project offices who would be able to comment on the offeror’s performance of those assignments. Summaries (not to exceed one page) of related work shall be included. References to products resulting from these related activities shall also be included.
8. Resources/Facilities/Equipment
This section shall identify those resources (other than personnel), facilities, and equipment (e.g., library holdings, computer hardware, and software) available for use in conducting this project. Offeror should address accessibility for persons with disabilities.
9. Current Contractual Obligations
Each offeror will be required to outline both Federal and non-Federal contractual obligations existing during the course of his award for all projects involving personnel who will be assigned to this project. Such organizations/agencies must be identified by name and the percentage of work time allotted to these projects by personnel committed to the proposed project must be provided.
10. Issues and Associated Data Items
When responding to the Tasks, when identifying what should receive emphasis, careful consideration should be given to the issues identified, their associated data items, and the statement of products desired in the Final Report.
All information provided by NCD must be returned to NCD upon completion of the analysis and no later than 10 working days after the completion of the contract. The information may not be reproduced or released without the prior written permission of the NCD contracting officer.
11. Rights in Data, Copyright, and Disclosure
a. Data – The term “data” as used here includes written reports (progress, draft, and final), electronic format and work of any similar nature that is required under this contract. It does not include the contractor’s financial reports, or other information incidental to contractor administration. Data submitted to and accepted by the NCD under this contract shall be the property of the NCD, and NCD shall have full and unlimited rights to use such data for any purpose in whatever manner deemed desirable and appropriate, including making it available to the general public. Such use shall be without any additional payment to the contractor. Data may be published as the property of NCD without giving authorship to the contractor.
b. Copyright – The contractor relinquishes any and all copyrights and/or privileges developed under this contract. The contractor shall not include in the data any copyrightable matter without the written approval of NCD, unless the contractor provides the NCD with the written permission of the copyright owner for the NCD to use the matter.
c. Disclosure – The contractor agrees not to divulge or release any information, reports or recommendations developed or obtained in connection with the performance of this contract, and not otherwise available to the public, without the prior approval of the NCD.
The Government will make award to the responsible offeror(s) whose offer conforms to the solicitation and is most advantageous to the Government, cost or price and other factors considered. For this solicitation, technical quality is more important than cost or price. As proposals become more equal in their technical merit, the evaluated cost or price becomes more important. As the technical merit and the evaluated cost or price become essentially equal, other factors may become a determining factor.
Technical Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation criteria will score proposals with a maximum of 100 points, divided as follows:
1. A clear understanding of the nature of the work (20 points)
The proposal presents a clear understanding of the importance of national disability performance indicators and data relating to people with disabilities. The proposal will present the rationale/interpretation of the project approach.
2. Procedural Plan (30 points)
The proposal contains evidence of a fully described technical approach to comply with each of the tasks in the scope of work. The proposal is consistent with the goals, objectives, compliance requirements, and is practical in terms of producing needed information, analysis and recommendations on how implementation of the relevant laws may be improved through better legal enforcement and increased public information.
3. Management Plan and Schedule (20 points)
The degree to which the project team, including any use of consultants, is organized, managed, and motivated to accomplish effective and efficient implementation of all tasks to be completed. The proposal budget is appropriate to the administration of the project. The time frame is realistic. Plans and schedules to assure smooth cooperation with the NCD staff involved are evident. The proposal clearly identifies who will be key personnel and includes a table showing the number of person-days by tasks for each of the key personnel.
4. Personnel (15 points)
The proposal provides evidence of the specific qualifications and skills of staff and consultants to be assigned to this project, and their experience and familiarity with the topic, including relevant laws, regulations, procedures and practices in the Federal Government. Skills in writing, and conducting research should also be demonstrated clearly.
5. Organizational Experience (15 points)
The degree to which the overall experience and past performance of the offeror in executing similar projects should be described. Evidence of related assignments should be detailed. Offeror shall present evidence of related assignments, including the names and telephone numbers of previous project officers who would be able to comment on the offeror’s performance of those assignments.
Project Start Date
The projected start of the contract is May 1, 2006. The first complete draft of the report is due to NCD by April 1, 2007. The final draft of the report is due to NCD by April 30, 2007.
In addition, the vendor will be expected to conduct monthly teleconference calls with NCD staff and board members, will provide monthly progress reports to NCD staff, and will also be expected to meet with select NCD staff and board members upon the awarding of the contract.
Finally, the vendor is expected to develop and submit a “timeline and deliverables and payment schedule” chart which will be used to guide the conduct of the research.
Formatting Requirements for NCD Reports
If you are drafting a written report for the National Council on Disability (NCD), you must submit your material in hard copy and WordPerfect. In addition, you must adhere to NCD's format standards. They are:
FONTS
Use Times New Roman, 12 points.
MARGINS
Use standard one inch (1") margins on all sides.
PARAGRAPHS
Begin paragraphs with a 5-space margin tab from the left margin (use the tab key rather than the indent function key). Text should be in single column format with the copy justified left. Leave a double space between paragraphs.
PARAGRAPH HEADERS
Paragraph headers between major subject areas are encouraged. Headers should be bold, but not underlined. Headers may be all caps, if desired. Double space between headers and text.
Subparagraph Headers
To set off material within a paragraph, please use “bullets” rather than dashes. Bullets should be two spaces from the margin, with text material following indented five spaces from
the margin. To indent text, please use the indent function key. DO NOT use the space bar to indent text as this causes problems when material is merged by computer into a single document.
LINE SPACING
Set line spacing to 1.5. Reference sections should be single spaced.
FOOTNOTES
Use footnotes, not endnotes.
EDITING TIPS
Comma Use the serial comma before the conjunction in a series. A comma should always be used before “and” or “but” in a compound sentence. Use commas to set off nonrestrictive clauses beginning with “which.”
Indents/Tabs If indenting the first word in a paragraph, use the margin tab key. If indenting lines of text, e.g., text following a “bullet,” use the indent function key. DO NOT SPACE-IN TO INDENT TEXT, this causes problems if the format is subsequently changed.
Federal Government Use initial caps in “Federal Government.” Use lower case for “federal” and “state.”
Disability When referring to disability, use “disability,” not “disabled” or “handicapped.” When referring to a specific disability, refer to the person first, the disability second, such as “a person who is blind,” not “a blind person.”
Abbreviations Use abbreviations after the first use, such as “National Council on Disability (NCD).” Thereafter, use “NCD,” not “the NCD.”
Em-dash Use an em-dash instead of double hyphens, with no space separating the words.
SAMPLE REPORT FORMAT
An example of the organization and format that should be used by the contractor in preparing and transmitting the final copy of the report is NCD’s Reconstructing Fair Housing which was issued on November, 2001.
VI. PROPOSAL REVIEW INFORMATION
Reviews of proposals submitted to NCD are solicited from peers with expertise in the substantive area of the proposed project. These reviewers are selected by NCD Staff charged with the oversight of the review process. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts with the proposer. Special efforts are made to recruit reviewers from non-academic institutions, minority-serving institutions, or adjacent disciplines to that principally addressed in the proposal.
In addition to external peer review, proposals will be evaluated both for their contribution to a systems level understanding of national indicator systems and statistics and data collection programs related to people with disabilities.
All proposals are carefully reviewed by at least three other persons outside NCD who are experts in the particular field represented by the proposal. Proposals submitted in response to this announcement/solicitation will be reviewed by Ad Hoc and/or panel review.
Reviewers will be asked to formulate a recommendation to either support or decline each proposal. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.
A summary rating and accompanying narrative will be completed and submitted by each reviewer. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. The proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.
VII. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION
Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by the designated NCD Project Officer Officer. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible. Verbatim copies of reviews, not included identifying names or information about proposal reviewers, will be made available upon request to the designated NCD Project Officer.
VIII. CONTACTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
General inquiries regarding this program should be made to the designated NCD Project Officer:
Martin Gould, Ed.D. telephone: 202-272-2112 email: mgould@ncd.gov
IX. ABOUT THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON DISABILITY
Overview and Purpose
The National Council on Disability (NCD) is an independent federal agency with 15 members appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. The purpose of NCD is to promote policies, programs, practices, and procedures that guarantee equal opportunity for all individuals with disabilities regardless of the nature or significance of the disability and to empower individuals with disabilities to achieve economic self-sufficiency, independent living, and inclusion and integration into all aspects of society.
Specific Duties
The current statutory mandate of NCD includes the following:
• Reviewing and evaluating, on a continuing basis, policies, programs, practices, and procedures concerning individuals with disabilities conducted or assisted by federal departments and agencies, including programs established or assisted under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, or under the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act, as well as all statutes and regulations pertaining to federal programs that assist such individuals with disabilities, to assess the effectiveness of such policies, programs, practices, procedures, statutes, and regulations in meeting the needs of individuals with disabilities.
• Reviewing and evaluating, on a continuing basis, new and emerging disability policy issues affecting individuals with disabilities in the Federal Government, at the state and local government levels, and in the private sector, including the need for and coordination of adult services, access to personal assistance services, school reform efforts and the impact of such efforts on individuals with disabilities, access to health care, and policies that act as disincentives for individuals to seek and retain employment.
• Making recommendations to the President, Congress, the Secretary of Education, the director of the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, and other officials of federal agencies about ways to better promote equal opportunity, economic self-sufficiency, independent living, and inclusion and integration into all aspects of society for Americans with disabilities.
• Providing Congress, on a continuing basis, with advice, recommendations, legislative proposals, and any additional information that NCD or Congress deems appropriate.
• Gathering information about the implementation, effectiveness, and impact of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) (42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.).
• Advising the President, Congress, the commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration, the assistant secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services within the Department of Education, and the director of the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research on the development of the programs to be carried out under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.
• Providing advice to the commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration with respect to the policies and conduct of the administration.
• Making recommendations to the director of the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research on ways to improve research, service, administration, and the collection, dissemination, and implementation of research findings affecting people with disabilities.
• Providing advice regarding priorities for the activities of the Interagency Disability Coordinating Council and reviewing the recommendations of this council for legislative and administrative changes to ensure that such recommendations are consistent with NCD’s purpose of promoting the full integration, independence, and productivity of individuals with disabilities.
• Preparing and submitting to the President and Congress an annual report titled National Disability Policy: A Progress Report.
International
In 1995, NCD was designated by the Department of State to be the U.S. government’s official contact point for disability issues. Specifically, NCD interacts with the special rapporteur of the United Nations Commission for Social Development on disability matters.
Consumers Served and Current Activities
Although many government agencies deal with issues and programs affecting people with disabilities, NCD is the only federal agency charged with addressing, analyzing, and making recommendations on issues of public policy that affect people with disabilities regardless of age, disability type, perceived employment potential, economic need, specific functional ability, veteran status, or other individual circumstance. NCD recognizes its unique opportunity to facilitate independent living, community integration, and employment opportunities for people with disabilities by ensuring an informed and coordinated approach to addressing the concerns of people with disabilities and eliminating barriers to their active participation in community and family life.
NCD plays a major role in developing disability policy in America. In fact, NCD originally proposed what eventually became the ADA. NCD’s present list of key issues includes improving personal assistance services, promoting health care reform, including students with disabilities in high-quality programs in typical neighborhood schools, promoting equal employment and community housing opportunities, monitoring the implementation of the ADA, improving assistive technology, and ensuring that people with disabilities who are members of diverse cultures fully participate in society.
Statutory History
NCD was established in 1978 as an advisory board within the Department of Education (P.L. 95-602). The Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1984 (P.L. 98-221) transformed NCD into an independent agency.
Location:
National Council on Disability
1331 F Street, NW,
Suite 850
Washington, DC 20004
For General Information:
202-272-2004 Voice
202-272-2074 TTY
202-272-2022 Fax
www.ncd.gov
|
