Assessment of Planned Interconnection Services

New applications are no longer being accepted. Check this page for updates about this initiative.



Any qualified person or entity may apply.


February 27, 2015

Request for Proposals

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) seeks the services of a consultant(s) ("Consultant") who possesses expertise in evaluating satellite and fiber interconnection services for television and/or radio networks and the ability to provide a financial, business and engineering analysis of a proposed plan for future delivery of interconnection services to the public broadcasting system. Knowledge of the public broadcasting system is preferred. Interconnection is the use of public broadcasting facilities, including the Next Generation Interconnection System (v6) for television, proposed by the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), and the Public Radio Satellite System (PRSS) operated by NPR, for the purpose of distributing programming and related data in support of the varied missions of public broadcasting. The selected Consultant will provide a written analysis of the plans for the future provision of interconnection services and make recommendations for changes or alternative strategies for improving the efficiency (technical, managerial, financial, etc.) and effectiveness of the delivery of interconnection services to the public broadcasting system. The initial term of the agreement is expected to be for approximately six (6) months, beginning on or before March 20, 2015, and will be renewable for a 6-month period at CPB's discretion, during which the Consultant would provide consulting services related to the project on an as-needed basis.
Please download the Request for Proposals below for detailed information, including application requirements.
PDF icon Request for Proposals159.27 KB

Questions from Potential Respondents, with CPB Answers:

FAQ Topic: 

I don't see a specific date for overall questions. Is there a plan to entertain such questions and share responses?

Questions that CPB receives from potential respondents will be posted in this FAQ, which will be updated whenever new questions are received.

For the technical review, to what depth is CPB expecting an analysis - for instance, a mid-level analysis of the overall conceptual architecture and the component level (e.g., a review of the viability of the components, which would likely comprise the technical architecture and how well they would interconnect with each other), or a deeper analysis that gets into actual design of the systems, prototypes, and systems testing (e.g., connectivity loading, performance testing, etc.)?

CPB requires a mid-level type analysis.

Should the financial analysis include vendor estimates obtained through an RFQ process or high-level industry benchmark estimates?

Since PBS has completed the RFQ process and obtained competitive quotes, the Consultant would need only to compare the quotes against industry benchmark estimates.

Should we assume that local station interviews will also be included in the interview set to help address the local station deliverables?

CPB will provide the Consultant with a list of local stations (approximately a dozen) to interview.

Which organizations/groups/departments within CPB, PBS, and NPR are within the scope of work and are ones with which the respondent should plan to interact?

The Consultant should plan to interact with the following individuals at the specified organizations:

  • CPB: the Executive Office and the SVPs of Media Strategy and Radio;
  • PBS: the Executive Office, Chief Technology Officer (and members of his team), Chief Financial Officer, and members of the Interconnection Committee; and
  • NPR: the Executive Office, Vice President of Technology Operations, Distribution and Broadcast Engineering, and members of the Distribution/Interconnection Committee.

A number of requirements for analysis are called out - technical, financial, user (e.g., local stations), benchmarking, operating model and collaboration (NPR and PBS), etc. It is understood that all are in scope? And, we are interested to know if there is a relative weighting of these dimensions we should be aware of. Is any one of these items of greater importance within the scope?

Below is the analysis in order of importance:

  1. technical;
  2. financial;
  3. operating model/collaborations; and
  4. station business models.

We do not see viewer impact, so we assume that is not a part of the scope?

Correct; viewer impact is not included in the scope of work.