Incorporating Technologies into Airport In-Terminal Concession Programs Tender, USA - 76333653

Procurement Summary

Country : USA

Summary : Incorporating Technologies into Airport In-Terminal Concession Programs

Deadline : 12 Jan 2023

Other Information

Notice Type : Tender

TOT Ref.No.: 76333653

Document Ref. No. : ACRP 03-70

Competition : ICB

Financier : Self Financed

Purchaser Ownership : Public

Tender Value : Refer Document

Purchaser's Detail

Name :Login to see tender_details

Address : Login to see tender_details

Email : Login to see tender_details

Login to see details

Tender Details

Request for proposals are invited for Incorporating Technologies into Airport In-Terminal Concession Programs.


ACRP 03-70 [RFP]

Incorporating Technologies into Airport In-Terminal Concession Programs

Posted Date: 11/21/2022

Project Data

Funds:

$500, 000

Contract Time:

18 months

(includes 2 months for ACRP review and approval of the interim report and 3 months for ACRP review and for contractor revision of the final report)

Authorization to Begin Work:

5/12/2023 -- estimated

Staff Responsibility:

Joseph D. Navarrete
Phone: 202/334-1649
Email: jnavarrete@nas.edu

RFP Close Date:

1/12/2023

Fiscal Year:

2023

BACKGROUND

The pandemic has accelerated the adoption of technologies in consumer purchase behavior and concessionaire operations. This is being reflected in airport in-terminal concessions. For example, e-commerce is often preferred to in-store purchasing of retail goods and food services, and some airports have started to implement omnichannel e-commerce platforms to deliver an advanced retail experience for passengers. The success of airport in-terminal concession programs will rely on much more than simply rolling out new technologies. Airports need to understand the challenges and opportunities these technologies might offer, how they would meet customer needs, and their impact on airport and concessions operations. However, there is little information and few resources available for airport operators to make informed decisions as they consider the incorporation of technologies into their in-terminal concessions programs.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this research is to develop a primer, framework, tools (e.g., flowchart, decision tree, checklist), and case studies to help airports identify, evaluate, select, and incorporate appropriate technologies into their in-terminal concessions programs.

The primer should define and describe relevant current and emerging technologies and document the role of technology in airport in-terminal concessions programs, with an emphasis on developments since 2019.

The framework and tools should be practical, scalable, and adaptable to specific airport characteristics (e.g., size, governance) and needs. They should address, at a minimum, the following topics relative to airport concessions and technology:

Assessing consumer buying habits;
Evaluating the impacts of existing and emerging technology on internal (back-of-the-house) and external (passenger-facing) concessions processes;
Determining technology preferences of various customer demographics;
Identifying potential risks (e.g., data privacy, operations, security);
Defining capital expenditure (e.g., hardware) and ongoing operating (e.g., software, personnel) costs;
Developing revenue projections/business cases (return on investment);
Defining key performance indicators and success measures (e.g., revenue and operational metrics, customer experience);
Identifying operational efficiencies and challenges;
Use and stewardship (e.g., transparency, privacy, accountability) of data;
Interoperability and compatibility with other technology infrastructure;
Developing a cross-functional team within the airport-s organization to launch technology-related initiatives;
Considering challenges and opportunities for local and/or small-business concessions;
How an airport-s concessions business model impacts the identification and adoption of new technologies;
How new technologies can impact existing and/or foster new business agreements;
Identifying relevant external stakeholders for coordination/buy-in; and
Potential impact of technology on concessions workforce (e.g., staffing level, skillsets, training, employee well-being, retention).
The case studies should be used to both inform the research and provide lessons learned and examples of a variety of successful uses of technology in airport in-terminal concessions and relevant non-airport concessions programs.

RESEARCH PLAN

The ACRP is seeking the insights of proposers on how best to achieve the research objective. Proposers are asked to provide a detailed research plan for accomplishing the project objective. Proposers are expected to describe research plans that can realistically be accomplished within the constraints of available funds and contract time. Proposals must present the proposers' current thinking in sufficient detail to demonstrate their understanding of the issues and the soundness of their approach to meeting the research objective. The work proposed must be divided into tasks and proposers must describe the work proposed in each task in detail.

The research plan should include, at a minimum, the following interim deliverables:

Case study plan of technology initiatives in airport and relevant non-airport concessions programs. The plan should describe data gathering methods (e.g., interviews, focus groups, surveys), key stakeholders (e.g., concessionaires, variously sized U.S. and international airports, relevant non-airport examples, and technology vendors), and technology researchers and developers. Include a rationale for the proposed approach.
Draft primer.
Initial outline, format, and description of framework and tools.
Interim Report documenting the research effort and results of the project to date, including the results of the case studies, revised primer, revised outline of framework and tools, and recommended next steps to complete the research.
The research plan should also include, at a minimum, the following checkpoints with the ACRP project panel: (1) kickoff web meeting to be held within 1 month of notice to proceed, (2) web meeting to review and approve case study plan, (3) web meeting to review draft primer and outline and description of framework and tools, and (4) face-to-face interim report review meeting.

The final deliverables will include:

Final report consisting of the primer, framework, tools, and case studies;
Technical report documenting the entire research effort and results;
Technical memo titled, “Implementation of Research Findings and Products” (see Special Note I);
Summary of Key Findings (see Special Note J); and
Further Recommended Research Memo (see Special Note K).
Note: Following receipt of the draft final deliverables, there should be 3 months for ACRP review and comments and for contractor preparation of the final deliverables. For budgeting purposes, proposers should assume that ACRP will provide access to web-enabled teleconference services. ACRP will pay panel members- travel costs for the face-to-face interim meeting. Proposers should assume that the meeting will be held in Washington, DC.

SPECIAL NOTES

A. At a minimum, the research should include the following technology and technology concepts: mobile, online, and at-table ordering and pre-ordering; robots; artificial intelligence; mobile delivery; ghost kitchens; point-of-sale management systems; walkout purchase technology; self-service kiosks; inventory and staff management systems; and security systems. Proposers are encouraged to identify additional technology/concession concepts.

B. In-terminal concessions are considered to typically include food and beverage, retail, duty free, advertising, amenities, services, and lounges.

C. Proposers should describe in their proposals how they would consider ACRP and non-ACRP research and publications related to use of technology in airport in-terminal concessions programs.

D. Proposers are encouraged to include in their proposals their initial thinking on their vision for the primer, framework, tools, and case studies.

E. Proposers should include on their team individuals with expertise, at a minimum, in the following: airports, concessions, technology management, data security, digital transformation, customer experience.

F. The Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board-s Cooperative Research Programs were revised in May 2022. Please take note of the new and revised text which is highlighted in yellow.

G. Proposals must be submitted as a single PDF file with a maximum file size of 10 MB. The PDF must be formatted for standard 8½” x 11” paper, and the entire proposal must not exceed 60 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.

H. 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.

I. Proposals will be rejected if any of the proposed research team members work for organizations represented on the project panel. The panel roster for this project can be found at https://www.mytrb.org/OnlineDirectory/Committee/Details/6809. Proposers may not contact panel members directly; this roster is provided solely for the purpose of avoiding potential conflicts of interest.

J. 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.

K. 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 Item 11 of the proposal.

L. 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.

M. 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. 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.

N. The technical memorandum titled, “Implementation of Research Findings and Products” should provide: (a) recommended tactics to facilitate implementation; (b) possible institutions/partners and their potential implementation role; (c) potential impediments to successful implementation; (d) metrics to measure extent of product use and benefit; (e) related FAA guidance; and (f) appendices as needed. An annotated template for the memorandum is found here: https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/acrp/ACRP_Implementation_TechMemo_Template_2019.pdf.

O. The Summary of Key Findings will be a stand-alone document. It should: (a) convey the most pertinent and applicable results of the project-s research; (b) be geared toward the airport industry practitioner while minimizing technical language; (c) present results using text and graphics as appropriate; and (d) encourage readers to explore the primary project deliverables. The Summary of Key Findings should be limited to no more than 4 pages.

P. The Further Recommended Research Memo will be a stand-alone document. It should: (a) identify logical follow-on research that would benefit the industry yet was beyond the original scope and budget of the project; (b) describe how the proposed follow-on research relates to ACRP-s research roadmaps, if applicable; and (c) for the highest priority research needs, include research ideas and/or problem statements to be added to ACRP-s IdeaHub, the program-s online repository of research needs.

Q. 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.

R. 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.

Proposals must be uploaded via this link: https://www.dropbox.com/request/i6TPbtOfFxEskN99oZqS
Proposals are due not later than 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on 1/12/2023.


This is a firm deadline, and extensions are not granted. In order to be considered for award, the agency's proposal accompanied by the executed, unmodified Liability Statement must be in our offices not later than the deadline shown, or the proposal will be rejected.

Liability Statement


The signature of an authorized representative of the proposing agency is required on the unaltered statement in order for TRB to accept the agency's proposal for consideration. Proposals submitted without this executed and unaltered statement by the proposal deadline will be summarily rejected. An executed, unaltered statement indicates the agency's intent and ability to execute a contract that includes the provisions in the statement.

Here is a fillable PDF version of the Liability Statement. A free copy of the Adobe Acrobat PDF reader is available at https://www.adobe.com.



General Notes

1. According to the provisions of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, which relates to nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs, all parties are hereby notified that the contract entered into pursuant to this announcement will be awarded without discrimination on the grounds of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or disability.

2. The essential features required in a proposal for research are detailed in the current brochure entitled "Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals". Proposals must be prepared according to this document, and attention is directed specifically to Section V for mandatory requirements. Proposals that do not conform with these requirements will be rejected.

3. The total funds available are made known in the project statement, and line items of the budget are examined to determine the reasonableness of the allocation of funds to the various tasks. If the proposed total cost exceeds the funds available, the proposal is rejected.

4. All proposals become the property of the Transportation Research Board. Final disposition will be made according to the policies thereof, including the right to reject all proposals.

5. Potential proposers should understand that follow-on activities for this project may be carried out through either a contract amendment modifying the scope of work with additional time and funds, or through a new contract (via sole source, full, or restrictive competition).

Documents

 Tender Notice