Project Opportunities:

Through a Cooperative Agreement with the National Park Service, we occasionally have need to seek experienced professionals to complete historic preservation research and other projects.  Below are current Requests for Proposals, or Expressions of Interest.

Questions submitted on these projects are answered in their respective section below. However, a few questions have been submitted more generally about the contracting process which applies to all projects. They are answered here:

• The DOI link for standard terms and conditions houses 3 links of the same name with different version dates. Upon clicking the links, we noted the most recent document version had a different name on the document from the previous versions. Which of these would be applicable to a new awardee? The most recent terms and conditions would apply to this agreement as it was awarded in July 2023.

• Can the government provide the intended agreement and contract types? The agreement is already in place with NCSHPO. The contractor(s)/organization(s) selected to carry out the work described in these RFPs will have an Independent Contractor Agreement with NCSHPO, not the NPS.

• Upon examination of the RFP and the subsequent DOI Terms & Conditions, it is not clear to us if the government intends to make the contractor a federal grant recipient or if the contract will be procured underneath the auspices of the Federal Acquisition Regulations. We see many references to U.S Code, so we were trying to ascertain if that or the FAR is applicable for this acquisition. The recipient would be a subcontractor to NCSHPO under Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) and not a grant recipient.

• We understand that NCSHPO has a relationship with NPS via a Cooperative Agreement and Grant. Per the “Financial Assistance” definition at eCFR :: 2 CFR Part 200 — Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards ; can you advise if winning this award will make the winning bidder a cooperative agreement holder as well, and a recipient of Federal Financial Assistance? The winning recipient would not be a cooperative agreement holder. They would be a subcontractor under NCSHPO, the Cooperative Agreement holder.

Deadline: October 6, 2023

The National Park Service (NPS) is seeking the services of a qualified individual, firm, or organization (contractor) through a cooperative agreement with the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO) to evaluate and make recommendations to adapt, customize, and/or supplement the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Plan framework for use by organizations/agencies with a primary goal of cultural resource stewardship.

The RFP can be downloaded here:  RFP FEMA Hazard Mitigation Planning (.pdf)

Interested consultants should submit a proposal and cost estimate in response to this RFP no later than 5:00 p.m. EST on October 6, 2023.

Questions submitted and answers (Posted as received and answered):

• Are there project budgets you could share? Contractors should provide their best estimate for the cost of completing the work described in the RFPs. If NPS budgets do not accommodate the cost of the work, the project scale(s) may be reduced and/or adjusted in collaboration with the selected cooperator upon project award.
• Do you have an anticipated / desired schedule for the project? Anticipated project completion is early to mid FY25 (i.e. winter/spring 2025), and the schedule/final completion is negotiable.
• Will this be a Firm Fixed Price or a Time & Materials (Not to Exceed) contract? All projects will be Firm Fixed Price contracts/agreements.

Deadline: September 15, 2023 – EXTENDED to September 21, 2023

The National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO) and the National Park Service (NPS) seek the services of a qualified individual, firm, or organization (contractor) to develop an Inventory and Monitoring program that will inform decision-making for climate change response and/or adaptation of cultural resources. The goal of the project is to (a) ensure inventory efforts collect the minimum necessary data needed for future monitoring and treatment decisions, (b) identify when, where, and what type of monitoring is needed for minimum necessary data and (c) establish methodical protocols for resource analysis that will lead to phased treatments, where needed.

The RFP can be downloaded here:  RFP Inventory and Monitoring (.pdf)

Interested consultants should submit a proposal and cost estimate in response to this RFP no later than 5:00 p.m. EST on September 15, 2023.

Questions submitted and answers (Posted as received and answered):

• Are there project budgets you could share? Contractors should provide their best estimate for the cost of completing the work described in the RFPs. If NPS budgets do not accommodate the cost of the work, the project scale(s) may be reduced and/or adjusted in collaboration with the selected cooperator upon project award.
• What is the anticipated performance period? The performance period is negotiable, however, the NPS expects this project to likely complete in late FY25 or FY26 assuming project kickoff occurs in October/November 2023.
• Will this be a Firm Fixed Price or a Time & Materials (Not to Exceed) contract? All projects will be Firm Fixed Price contracts/agreements.
• Are there any tech expectations, such as GIS compatibility, etc.? Yes. Part of the project analysis will include evaluation of existing databases and systems, including GIS. Final project recommendations must address and fit into existing NPS information systems. The project team must include at least one member with data management, geospatial information systems, and information science expertise. Technological expectations for the project primarily fall in the realm of recommendations for expanded/modified capacity and/or new systems (i.e. best practice recommendations.) Implementation of such recommendations is outside the scope of this project.
• If my firm does not include the required expertise, can I create a team with other professionals specifically for these proposals? Yes. Proposals may be submitted by single firms/organizations or collaborative teams consisting of individuals from different firms/organizations as long as a Principal Investigator is identified and will be the responsible party.
• Please describe the intent of the monitoring portion of the project. Anticipated NPS needs relative to monitoring for climate change are at two different scales. On one end is a monitoring protocol for the general state/condition of a resource under changing climatic conditions. At the other end is more focused material or feature monitoring to better identify hidden issues, answer questions, and focus adaptation/treatment plans. Both scales of monitoring should be included in proposals.
• Does the NPS anticipate that the three (3) case studies will be the same shared sites for all 4 resource types? Yes, the preference is to select three (3) case study parks that will work for all 4 resource types.
• Should separate contractors be selected to complete the scope of work for one of the four resource types, does the NPS anticipate that contractors will complete work on each resource type independently, or will selected a contractor work collaboratively with other investigators for all four resource types? The preference is to award a single contract to address all four resource types. However, if separate contractors/organizations are selected there will be some measure of collaboration across the separate projects, but contractors will primarily work independently of one another. Details about the amount of collaboration and what form that may take can be negotiated after contractor selections are made.
• Can we assume that appropriate Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) at each case study park will have capacity and availability to participate with the consultant team during Phase II? The existence/availability of SMEs at each case study park will vary by design. Not all parks employ cultural resource staff. Contractors will have access to key personnel at case study and pilot parks for interviews, data access, and information gathering. Cultural resource staff in regional offices associated with the case study parks and CR staff in the Washington Office will also be accessible through virtual meetings.
• Is there an assumed length of the project, namely Phase I, since we need to estimate regular calls for that length of time? Based on our experience we are currently thinking it’s at least 6 months, likely 9, but could be up to 12 months for the first phase. Your suggested benchmarks are in line with our expectations for the project as a whole. Nine months for Phase 1 seems reasonable, and schedules may be adjusted depending on the project team size/capacity and the overall scope of the project awarded to any one contractor/organization.
• We are assuming that “bi-weekly” means two calls per month or calls every other week, but please clarify if that assumption is incorrect? Yes. “bi-weekly” meetings means calls/virtual meetings every other week.
• Can you provide more clarity regarding the different roles the case study parks/sites will have from the pilot parks? We understand that the three case study parks will be used to test the Phase 1 Program Design. Are the pilot parks intended to be longer range tests of the program design over time? The case study parks are intended to develop the project and guide the program design. The pilot parks are to test the design ideas. Implementation should occur at case study parks ahead of or at the same time as testing at the pilot parks. The implementation phase at both case study and pilot parks will depend on the inventory and monitoring design and is not intended to extend beyond 12-18 months.
• Do you have an anticipated / desired schedule for the historic structures contract and for the cultural landscapes contract? This portion of the project should fit within the broader timeline, which is negotiable. Current expectations are that the project will be concluded in late FY25 or early FY26 (i.e. later part of 2025.)
• Can you share your budget, or a budget range for the historic structures contract and for the cultural landscapes contract? No, there is not a set budget (which should not be interpreted as an unlimited budget.) Cost is one of several factors that will be considered in proposal evaluations. Please refer to the “Selection Criteria” section of the RFP for additional factors. Proposals should include your best estimate based on the RFP. Adjustments and revisions can be considered once the selection(s) has been made and/or in response to a reduced scope of work, if necessary.
• Related to required consultation qualifications, page 3, item d, can you clarify the desired information necessary to address “evidence of tailoring data gathering to the future usefulness of the information”? Examples of past projects that might have developed an inventory, survey, or similar data-gathering project that was more customized for specific use than a standard form or process. Projects that were customized and designed to use gathered data/information for a particular practical purpose are the most relevant. An example could be designing and implementing a rapid response survey to create condition assessments after a natural disaster to inform emergency stabilization efforts and future recovery.
• Does NCSHPO and NPS have a preference for information developed for each project to be integrated into the others and if so, is it desired that the proposals include collaboration across the projects related to content and schedules? While there is some general overlap and relationship between projects described in the three RFPs, the projects are distinct and proposals do not need to include or anticipate specific collaboration or scheduling requirements to sequence projects or project phases. NPS anticipates coordinating the results of the three projects at their conclusion.
• Does NCSHPO and NPS anticipate work on each of these projects to occur sequentially so they build on each other, or is the preferred approach to address them all concurrently? The NPS anticipates these separate projects will be undertaken concurrently. If a single contractor/organization has a successful proposal for more than one project, then the scheduling might be adjusted for specific projects to occur sequentially if there are compelling reasons to do so.
• Can you provide more information about the level of expertise necessary and anticipated deliverables related to data management and information science? Can you indicate rough anticipated proportion of work requiring these skills? For the proposals related to vulnerability assessment protocols and adaptation strategies the level of expertise related to data management and information science is a working knowledge and understanding of the applicability and use of databases, GIS, and similar technology within the scope of each project. No specialized related education or degree is required. Evidence of on-the-job application and knowledge of such systems is sufficient. For proposals related to the inventory and monitoring project, specialized experience and a related educational background in information science or a related field is highly preferred.
• Can you clarify if the conservation scientist role is related to cultural resource materials conservation or ecological conservation, and the anticipated type of expertise desired? The conservation scientist expertise desired is related to cultural resource materials conservation. Understanding of such materials, their sensitivities and vulnerabilities – particularly as related to climate change impacts – will be key to the success of these projects.
• As there is some overlap between these projects, could a single proposal and budget combine these scopes of work and deliverables, or are separate proposals and budgets required? Separate proposals and budgets are required to respond to each RFP. However, if part of the proposals includes potential economies of time and/or budget should multiple proposals be awarded to the same contractor/organization, then such information may be included for consideration.
• Is there a 10th page that should be included in this RFP? The last page of the version we have is “9 of 10.” No, there are 9 total pages in the RFP. The final section is “Questions.”
• When will Case Study Sites be identified? NPS anticipates identifying case study parks early in the project if not before project kickoff.
• Will contractors be able to amend pricing once the Case Study Sites are identified? Yes, if adjustments to costs are necessary as more information becomes available such alterations can be made.
• When will “1 or 2 additional park units” (i.e., pilot parks) be identified? NPS anticipates identifying pilot parks at the same time that case study parks are identified (i.e., early in the project.)
• Will contractors be able to amend pricing once the “1 or 2 additional park units” (i.e., pilot parks) are identified? Yes, if adjustments to costs are necessary as more information becomes available such alterations can be made.
• For the Inventory & Monitoring Cultural Resources Impacted by Climate Change proposal. Data collection and management is a key component of the proposal. Would you have personnel available that can be trained for a handover of the assembled and structured datasets we can bring together?  The intention is for a contractor to firstly work with data already on file within existing NPS databases and structures. Additional data assembled outside of NPS systems should be delivered to the NPS in a way that it can be integrated into existing databases/structures and ready to use with limited to no formal training. Where there are gaps or deficiencies in existing NPS data management systems, recommendations are expected to be provided as part of the project which should include sample/pilot datasets and training protocols. Key personnel would be available for such limited training. Service-wide implementation of new systems is beyond the scope of this project.
• Is there a page limit to the application? There is no page limit, but interested parties are strongly encouraged to use straightforward, plain language in concise descriptions.

Deadline: September 15, 2023 – EXTENDED to September 21, 2023

The National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO) and the National Park Service (NPS) seek the services of a qualified individual, firm, or organization (contractor) to develop protocols for assessing climate change vulnerability for cultural resources to inform decisions. The vulnerability assessment protocol developed should integrate, consider, and align with existing vulnerability assessment protocols used by the National Park Service’s natural resources and facilities directorates as a critical component of adaptation planning as indicated within Step 2, “Assess climate vulnerabilities and risks,” in Planning for a Changing Climate: Climate-Smart Planning and Management in the National Park Service (NPS 2021).

The RFP can be downloaded here:  RFP Vulnerability Assessment (.pdf)

Interested consultants should submit a proposal and cost estimate in response to this RFP no later than 5:00 p.m. EST on September 15, 2023.

Questions submitted and answers (Posted as received and answered):

• Can you share your budget, or a budget range for the project? No, there is not a set budget (which should not be interpreted as an unlimited budget.) Cost is one of several factors that will be considered in proposal evaluations. Please refer to the “Selection Criteria” section of the RFP for additional factors. Proposals should include your best estimate based on the RFP. Adjustments and revisions can be considered once the selection(s) has been made and/or in response to a reduced scope of work, if necessary.
• Do you have an anticipated / desired schedule for the project? Anticipated project completion is early to mid FY25 (i.e. winter/spring 2025), and the schedule/final completion is negotiable.
• Will this be a Firm Fixed Price or a Time & Materials (Not to Exceed) contract? All projects will be Firm Fixed Price contracts/agreements.
• Is the focus of this project anticipated to be mostly on vulnerability assessment protocols for historic structures? Can you indicate rough anticipated proportion of work requiring expertise in addressing cultural landscapes, archeological resources, and museum collections? No, the focus is anticipated to be balanced evenly between historic structures, archeological resources, and cultural landscapes. To a lesser degree but still a significant portion of the project should address other types of cultural resources not included in the categories listed above, namely objects and ethnographic resources. For additional context on this project, please refer to the report, “Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments in the National Park Service” available online at http://npshistory.com/publications/climate-change/nrr-2022-2404.pdf. Chapter 4 beginning on page 94 addresses cultural resources vulnerability assessments.
• Are there any tech expectations, such as GIS compatibility, etc.? Not for this project.
• If my firm does not include the required expertise, can I create a team with other professionals specifically for these proposals? Yes. Proposals may be submitted by single firms/organizations or collaborative teams consisting of individuals from different firms/organizations as long as a Principal Investigator is identified and will be the responsible party.
• Does NCSHPO and NPS anticipate work on each of these projects to occur sequentially so they build on each other, or is the preferred approach to address them all concurrently? The NPS anticipates these separate projects will be undertaken concurrently. If a single contractor/organization has a successful proposal for more than one project, then the scheduling might be adjusted for specific projects to occur sequentially if there are compelling reasons to do so.
• Can you provide more information about the level of expertise necessary and anticipated deliverables related to data management and information science? Can you indicate rough anticipated proportion of work requiring these skills? For the proposals related to vulnerability assessment protocols and adaptation strategies the level of expertise related to data management and information science is a working knowledge and understanding of the applicability and use of databases, GIS, and similar technology within the scope of each project. No specialized related education or degree is required. Evidence of on-the-job application and knowledge of such systems is sufficient. For proposals related to the inventory and monitoring project, specialized experience and a related educational background in information science or a related field is highly preferred.
• Can you clarify if the conservation scientist role is related to cultural resource materials conservation or ecological conservation, and the anticipated type of expertise desired? The conservation scientist expertise desired is related to cultural resource materials conservation. Understanding of such materials, their sensitivities and vulnerabilities – particularly as related to climate change impacts – will be key to the success of these projects.
• As there is some overlap between these projects, could a single proposal and budget combine these scopes of work and deliverables, or are separate proposals and budgets required? Separate proposals and budgets are required to respond to each RFP. However, if part of the proposals includes potential economies of time and/or budget should multiple proposals be awarded to the same contractor/organization, then such information may be included for consideration.
• Would Task 3, Pilot cultural resource vulnerability assessment protocol, require any site visits? Yes, the optional Task 3 would likely require a site visit to each location included as a pilot. For estimating purposes, please assume only one site would be used in the pilot and it would be located in the lower 48 contiguous states with reasonable access to a major airport.
• If so, when will the “limited, defined segment of the National Park System” be identified? Answer: If the NPS decides to include Task 3 within the initial scope of the project, the pilot locations will be identified early in the project.
• Will contractors be able to amend pricing for Task 3 once the “limited, defined segment of the National Park System” is identified? Yes, if the pilot location(s) require adjustments to pricing, the selected contractor/organization will have the opportunity to amend the agreement.

Deadline: September 15, 2023 – EXTENDED to September 21, 2023

The National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO) and the National Park Service (NPS) seek the services of a qualified individual, firm, or organization (contractor) to develop menus of adaptation strategies to mitigate the impacts of climate changes to cultural resources. These strategies should align with historic preservation requirements and best practices and consider and/or integrate with natural resource and facilities approaches as a critical component of adaptation planning as indicated within Step 4, “Identify potential adaptation strategies,” in Planning for a Changing Climate: Climate-Smart Planning and Management in the National Park Service (2021).

The RFP can be downloaded here:  RFP Adaptation Strategies (.pdf)

Interested consultants should submit a proposal and cost estimate in response to this RFP no later than 5:00 p.m. EST on September 15, 2023.

Questions submitted and answers (Posted as received and answered):

• Can you share your budget, or a budget range for the project? No, there is not a set budget (which should not be interpreted as an unlimited budget.) Cost is one of several factors that will be considered in proposal evaluations. Please refer to the “Selection Criteria” section of the RFP for additional factors. Proposals should include your best estimate based on the RFP. Adjustments and revisions can be considered once the selection(s) has been made and/or in response to a reduced scope of work, if necessary.
• Do you have an anticipated / desired schedule for the project? Anticipated project completion is early to mid FY25 (i.e. winter/spring 2025), and the schedule/final completion is negotiable.
• Will this be a Firm Fixed Price or a Time & Materials (Not to Exceed) contract? All projects will be Firm Fixed Price contracts/agreements.
• Are there any tech expectations, such as GIS compatibility, etc.? Not for this project.
• If my firm does not include the required expertise, can I create a team with other professionals specifically for these proposals? Yes. Proposals may be submitted by single firms/organizations or collaborative teams consisting of individuals from different firms/organizations as long as a Principal Investigator is identified and will be the responsible party.
• Does NCSHPO and NPS anticipate work on each of these projects to occur sequentially so they build on each other, or is the preferred approach to address them all concurrently? The NPS anticipates these separate projects will be undertaken concurrently. If a single contractor/organization has a successful proposal for more than one project, then the scheduling might be adjusted for specific projects to occur sequentially if there are compelling reasons to do so.
• Can you provide more information about the level of expertise necessary and anticipated deliverables related to data management and information science? Can you indicate rough anticipated proportion of work requiring these skills? For the proposals related to vulnerability assessment protocols and adaptation strategies the level of expertise related to data management and information science is a working knowledge and understanding of the applicability and use of databases, GIS, and similar technology within the scope of each project. No specialized related education or degree is required. Evidence of on-the-job application and knowledge of such systems is sufficient. For proposals related to the inventory and monitoring project, specialized experience and a related educational background in information science or a related field is highly preferred.
• Can you clarify if the conservation scientist role is related to cultural resource materials conservation or ecological conservation, and the anticipated type of expertise desired? The conservation scientist expertise desired is related to cultural resource materials conservation. Understanding of such materials, their sensitivities and vulnerabilities – particularly as related to climate change impacts – will be key to the success of these projects.
• As there is some overlap between these projects, could a single proposal and budget combine these scopes of work and deliverables, or are separate proposals and budgets required? Separate proposals and budgets are required to respond to each RFP. However, if part of the proposals includes potential economies of time and/or budget should multiple proposals be awarded to the same contractor/organization, then such information may be included for consideration.
• Is the focus of this project anticipated to be mostly on adaptation strategies for historic structures? Can you indicate rough anticipated proportion of work requiring expertise in addressing cultural landscapes, archeological resources, and museum collections? No, adaptation strategies for non-structural cultural resources located along coastlines are of particular interest in this project. Historic structures including forts and lighthouses will comprise a significant portion of the project. Equally or perhaps to a greater extent the NPS, and the cultural resources field in general, are in need of strategies for archeological sites, landscapes, objects, and ethnographic resources. The final report may include more information for structures due to a wider range of adaptation options available. However, the focus of work should be evenly balanced between historic structures, archeological resources, and cultural landscapes. Objects, museum collections, and ethnographic resources will comprise a smaller portion of the overall effort.
• Will contractors be able to amend pricing for Task 3, Workshop cultural resource adaptation strategy development, if travel is required once the workshop location(s) have been identified? Travel is not anticipated to be necessary for this task, but if it is determined to be necessary, a reasonable adjustment to the agreement can be made.