Summary
The Association of Public Health Laboratories (APHL) is seeking proposals from qualified applicants for the design, development, implementation and administration of a new Biosafety Professional Microcredential Program in partnership with APHL. Biosafety and biosecurity are an integral part of a quality laboratory system. There is a recognized need for trained and experienced biosafety professionals to ensure safe laboratory practices, adherence to safety requirements and to prepare for emerging biological threats. APHL aims to strengthen biosafety and biosecurity programs through initiatives which result in enhancing laboratory biosafety and biosecurity practices and systems, training biosafety professionals and increasing an overall culture of laboratory safety. The Biosafety Professional Microcredential Program will train and further prepare biosafety professionals for ensuring quality laboratory safety practices. The intended goals of the Biosafety Professional Microcredential Program are to:
- Develop a Biosafety Microcredential Program to increase the number of trained laboratory biosafety professionals.
- Provide quality laboratory biosafety and biosecurity training to increase the knowledge, skills and abilities of biosafety professionals.
- Strengthen overall laboratory safety programs and practices, promote a culture of safety and the biosafety professional identity
Eligibility
Interested parties must submit a proposal to APHL that provides all the information specified in the Proposal Submission section below. To be considered for funding, an applicant must ensure APHL has its complete proposal by no later than the Proposal Due Date specified in the Anticipated RFP Schedule section below. Applicants will find proposal submission information in the Response Submittal section below.
Anticipated RFP Schedule
Applications are due to the individual(s) specified in the Final Response section of this Request for Proposals (RFP) by 5:00 pm Eastern Standard Time (EST) on the due date. APHL anticipates the following schedule for the entire competitive bidding process:
April 15, 2025: APHL issues RFP
April 28, 2025: Letter of Intent due to APHL by 5:00 pm EST
May 1, 2025: Last day to submit questions (exceptions may be granted at APHL’s sole discretion)
May 28, 2025:Complete RFP responses due to APHL by 5:00 pm EST
May 28 - June 13, 2025: Proposal review
June 16 - 18, 2025: Anticipated RFP award announcement and start date of Biosafety Professional Microcredential Program Development
October 31, 2025: Instructional design, program framework and content outline completed
November 3 – December 31, 2025: Review framework and outline
January 2 – April 15, 2026: Content development
April 15, 2026: Program course content completely developed and delivered to APHL
April 16 – May 29, 2026: Content review and branding
July 6, 2026: Launch program, begin enrollment
Final Response
APHL must receive a complete proposal by no later than 5:00 PM EST on the date indicated in the schedule. Applicants may send proposals by the following methods:
Via email to
Robert.Nickla@aphl.org; or via certified, registered or express mail through the postal service or via trackable mail delivery services provided by DHL, FedEx and UPS, addressed to:
C / O Robert Nickla
The Association of Public Health Laboratories, Inc.
7700 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1000
Bethesda, MD 20814
APHL will send an email acknowledging the receipt of your application. If you do not receive an acknowledgement within 48 hours, please email the points of contact below to confirm receipt. Regardless of the delivery method, APHL must receive all responses by 5:00 PM EST. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that the proposal is received at APHL by this deadline. APHL may terminate or modify the RFP process at any time during the response period.
RFP Materials
The Official RFP Document will provide detailed information. APHL will post all RFP-related documents, current schedule information, and answers to submitted questions and clarifications on APHL's procurement site, www.aphl.org/rfp.
Questions and Answers
What information is required for the Letter of Intent?
A:Please submit a letter stating intent to submit a response to the Request for Proposals. No additional information is required for the Letter of Intent.
In the section "Description of Intended Funding Allocations" the RFP lists estimated costs of resources. Will there be any flexibility in these rates for roles as long as the respondent meets the overall funding allocation cap?
A: There can be flexibility provided by sufficient justification and as long as the respondent meets and does not exceed the overall funding allocation cap.
How many users are expected to access the program per month once the system goes live?
A: Uncertain at this time.
What percentage of the training content materials would you estimate are already available in some form?
A: We estimate the majority of the training content (e.g., more than 75%) is already available in some form.
What kind of SME support will the vendor receive from the APHL Biosafety Professional Microcredential Advisory Committee? Are they providing training content, or just overall guidance?
A:The Advisory Committee will be able to provide overall guidance as well as guidance for some technical content and questions but will not serve as primary content developers.
Is Articulate Rise an acceptable tool for course development?
Are there any plans to pilot the program prior to launch?
Will vendor be responsible for maintenance and operation of the training site after the final deliverable (final deliverable currently due by April 15, 2026)?
What is the structure of this contract (e.g., firm fixed price or time and materials)?
A: Firm on the total sum of money available for the overall project flexible for time and material costs.
For the Description of Intended Funding Allocations, are the $100 per hour estimated costs assumed to be bare (direct costs only) or fully burdened (sum of direct and indirect costs) rates?
In the Overall Description, the scope is described as primarily system development, and the detail regarding APHL’s role suggests that subject matter experts will be selected outside of this contract.
a. Is this a separate scope of work or will the committee simply approve the subject matter experts included within this proposal? i. No, not a separate scope of work. SMEs are expected to be identified by the vendor (RFP awardee), and additional SMEs can be identified and recommended as needed through the APHL Biosafety Professional Microcredential Advisory Committee. Cost of SMEs should be included in the proposal. b. Will the awardee be directed to use specified SMEs or is there any opportunity to identify and assign its own in-house or subconsultant SMEs to work on course development? i. There will be an opportunity to identify and assign your own SMEs. c. Will the awardee be responsible for paying APHL-selected SMEs within the awarded budget? i. Awardee will be paying the SMEs.
In the Program Assumptions, it is assumed that the program host site will be able to sustain the microcredential program, including all necessary routine SME review of content and support for participants.
a. Is it assumed that the awardee would continue to sustain and support the microcredential program beyond the June 30, 2026, period of performance end date? i. Yes b. Is additional funding anticipated to sustain program support beyond June 30, 2026? i. Project continuation is contingent upon available funding.
In the Program Assumptions, it is assumed that the program will not be cost prohibited for participants to enroll and complete the entire program.
a. Will fees associated with program enrollment be used to sustain the program on an ongoing basis? i. Yes b. What proportion of enrollment fees will go to the awardee vs. APHL? i. 100% to Awardee
The microcredential programs mention the experience level of intended learners. Is the host site expected to verify learners’ professional experience?
No, professional experience of the program participant will not need to be officially verified.
The RFP states that learners should complete the program “on time”. Is there an expectation that learners complete all course modules in a set timeframe?
Yes, there is an expectation that learners will complete all the modules they register for within a set timeframe.
Must students attain a score of 80% on their first attempt in order to pass and receive the credential, or are up to 3 attempts allowed?
This should be determined in coordination with the host site, APHL and the Advisory Committee.
Is there an expectation that learners have access to SMEs to ask questions?
Yes. Please refer to page 9 of the RFP.
Who will be responsible for developing marketing materials? APHL or the host site?
Please refer to pages 9, 10 and 13 of the RFP.
What are the expectations of the host-site for marketing post-launch?
The expectation is that both APHL and host site will continue to market and promote the program post-launch.
What ongoing evaluation reporting does APHL expect to receive after 6/30/2026?
Routine evaluation reported is expected to occur between APHL and host site after 6/30/2026.
Are there requirements or specifications for where the digital badge should be displayed (e.g. is integration with external systems required)?
This should be determined in coordination with the host site, APHL and the Advisory Committee.
What is the estimated expected number of new enrollees from the public health laboratory community?
(APHL requested clarification on this question.) CLARIFICATION PROVIDED: We are trying to assess the estimated number of learners (e.g. number of enrollees per year) from within the public health (non-clinical) laboratory community. Does APHL have an estimate of the number of learners we could anticipate from state and local public health laboratories (perhaps based on comparable educational programs offered by APHL in the past)?
APHL anticipates the average number of learners will vary by year. Based on estimates from relative public health laboratory positions that have a role providing biosafety related training or oversight, plus an estimate of membership interest with a consideration for staff turnover, we currently estimate about 200–250 public health laboratory community members annually.
The final invoice is due to APHL on 5/22/2026 but funding is available through 6/30/2026. How will expenses during this window be reconciled?
We will be able to accept invoices after 6/30/2026 and can accept until 7/31/2026.
How long is the host site expected to sustain the program and its associated services?
We intend for the host site to be able to sustain the program and its associated services long term.
Does APHL envision an ongoing funding mechanism to support future development, maintenance and support costs, or is the host site expected to absorb all future costs indefinitely?
What are the expectations around participant enrollment fees? Does APHL or the Advisory Committee have any role in establishing or reviewing rate? Is the price of the participant enrollment fee considered in APHL's evaluation of proposals?
Please refer to page 10 of the RFP.
Is the host site allowed to offer their members a discount on the learner enrollment fee?
Yes, and this level of detail can be included in a host site RFP proposal.
The RFP mentions that a decision regarding requirements for participation in a credential maintenance program will be made in consultation with the Advisory Committee at a later date. May applicants include a contingency in their proposed budgets to reflect this uncertainty?
Yes, however the expectation and determination about any credential maintenance program alignment is expected to be made with the RFP awardee / host site and the Advisory Committee during the program development phase and before the launch of the program for enrollment.
The RFP mentions licensing and support costs. Can budgets include services contracts with terms that extend beyond 6/30/2026? If so, by what date must obligations be liquidated?
What are APHL’s expectations for data sharing?
APHL expects that complex data sharing integration will not be expected and ‘flat files’ on a regular basis will be sufficient.
Is this grant from a governmental or non-governmental agency?
This grant is from a governmental agency.
May our budget include fringe costs separate from the $100/hour limit per staff person?
May our budget include indirect costs (approved federal rate)?
If yes, is there a limit? (our negotiated rate is 37%)
Please feel free to include your negotiated rate within your proposal.