REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Program Evaluation Services: The Wealth Accelerator\

The Connecticut Community Outreach Revitalization Program (ConnCORP) is focused on economic development in New Haven. ConnCORP aims to create a community where all citizens are thriving economically and socially. The organization exists to drive economic development and economic justice in impoverished communities, including efforts to bridge the racial wealth gap. ConnCORP serves as a key partner and fiduciary for the Wealth Accelerator. 

INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS:
Please review all sections carefully and follow all specific instructions.

This Request for Proposals (RFP) is not a commitment or contract of any kind. The Wealth Accelerator Steering Committee (herein referred to as ​“SteerCo”) reserves the right to pursue any and/or all ideas generated by this request. Costs for developing the Proposals are entirely the responsibility of the proposers and shall not be reimbursed. The Wealth Accelerator Steering Committee reserves the right to reject any and all Proposals. The Wealth Accelerator Steering Committee reserves the right to waive any requirements of this RFP when it determines that waiving a requirement is in the best interest of the Steering Committee. The work described in this RFP is subject to the availability of funding.

Please submit all questions and proposals to Yaw Owusu-Boahen ([email protected]) and CC Stephanie Barnes ([email protected]).

DEADLINE:

June 2, 2025

I. Introduction:

The purpose of this RFP is to solicit proposals for the evaluation of the Wealth Accelerator’s direct capital injection pilot. The Accelerator has prioritized the building of financial assets for Low to Moderate Income (LMI) households in Connecticut by providing ​“next generation” financial products and services, financial coaching, and direct capital earmarked for financial investments. The direct capital injection pilot is a research project to inform the efficacy of large-scale cash-injection programs. The Accelerator aims to pilot a direct capital injection program that will identify a cohort of young adults, ages 18 – 30, who are graduates of a workforce development program and provide them with a lump-sum of cash that they can use for to fund retirement savings, start a business, support a down-payment for home ownership or any purpose related to wealth creation. In addition to the lump sum ear-marked for building financial assets, they will receive a smaller amount of cash to address immediate debt mitigation. Capital will be paired with access to tailored financial education and coaching; access to digital financial planning providers; and technical assistance related to homeownership, entrepreneurship, life insurance and other supports for economic stability and upward mobility. 

This pilot will include an evaluation to better understand: 1.) how young adults perceive wealth and make financial decisions; 2.) what priorities will they have for this capital; 3) and how does this capital impact other aspects of economic wellbeing such as, employment decisions, debt mitigation, or the ability to save. The aim is to provide the State of Connecticut and other cash-injections programs with best-practices for program implementation. 

II. Background:

1. The Wealth Accelerator, a partnership of seven organizations including ConnCORP, promotes accessible financial inclusion strategies to build and retain wealth. It is seeking funding for a New Haven-based wealth-building program, which addresses Connecticut’s growing wealth gap. The project will also help identify critical components, such as scalable financial education and wraparound supports, for scaling Connecticut’s Baby Bonds program and expanding pathways to wealth building. 

In partnership with ConnCAT, the Accelerator’s first wealth-building program aims to provide up to $20,000 in flexible wealth-building capital to young adults, aged 18 – 30, in New Haven’s Dixwell / Newhallville neighborhoods who have graduated from ConnCAT’s training programs. Participants receiving the capital will have the option to use these funds to purchase or repair their first home, start a business, pursue secondary education, or save for retirement. This wealth-building solution is designed to enhance ConnCAT’s first-in-class workforce training programs, affording young people the opportunity not only to increase their income but also to build lasting wealth for themselves and their families. 

1. Assumptions: Theory of Change

A significant wealth gap exists between white households and households of color, which in part reflects differences in intergenerational wealth transfers. The Wealth Accelerator seeks to help close the wealth gap driven by disparities in inheritances. The program will model baby bonds programs by providing participants with a sum of funds that can ultimately be invested to build wealth. Given the importance of having a healthy balance sheet before accessing wealth-building financial products, program funds will support young people in achieving a healthy balance sheet to ensure preparedness for future wealth-building. The funds will be complemented by app-based financial education services and, potentially, individual financial advisors. 

Using comparative analysis as part of the evaluation, the Steering Committee would like to test the impact of these elements:

The priorities and reasoning behind the choices young adults make when given the capital to invest. These insights could be valuable assets to the states running similar programs, such as baby bonds or guaranteed basic income pilots

• Identifying the key types of financial services that are most impactful for LMI communities

III. Scope of Work

1. Responsibilities:

Applicants will be expected to work in partnership with the Wealth Accelerator Steering Committee to ensure that the proposed methodologies fit within the strategic goals of the model. The evaluator will be expected to perform the following: 

• Establish methodology that will be used to guide data collection. 
• Collect applicable quantitative and qualitative data from the initial cohort and perform limited data analysis. 
• Identify performance measures and outcomes of interest. 
• Develop survey/interview instruments and protocols for participating cohort. 
• Prepare and present reports for the Steering Committee: 
  • Baseline report of participating cohort
  • Mid-term implementation report 
  • Final report
  • Present reports/overviews and discuss results with Wealth Accelerator Steering Committee and organizational staff
  • Provide reports for private usage (by teams and staff) and for public use (website).
• Assess and refine data collection methods as needed. 

1. Priorities

• Applicants are asked to provide a menu of evaluation choices informed by the Steering Committee’s priorities identified here. The Steering Committee is interested in allocating funding towards homeownership, entrepreneurship, financial investments, and transportation
• The Steering Committee will work with the evaluation vendor to assess the impact of the funding and services provided to educate and promote the retention of the investment. 
• The desired long-term outcome will likely be increases in wealth
• The desired short- and medium-term outcomes are indicators such as:
  • increases in financial agency
  • increases in credit scores
  • decreases in debt

C. Potential Questions for Investigation 

The above assumptions lend themselves to a set of possible questions to guide evaluation activity including, but not limited to, the following: 

• What can we say about the effectiveness of the financial education design? How might it be improved going forward? How can we scale the design up to a statewide model? 
• Has the initiative increased participant wealth and ability to:
  • Engage in wealth building activities?
  • Find/maintain employment?
  • Pay down excess/high-interest debt?
  • Contribute to savings account?
• How do young adults perceive wealth and make financial decisions?
• what priorities do young adults have for spending this capital?

IV. Proposal Contents: 

The proposal shall include: 

1. Cover Page: Including name of firm, contact information, and name of individuals to provide services offered in the proposal. 

1. Qualifications Summary: Provide a sufficient level of detail to illustrate the qualifications of the applicant, both the firm and staff that would work on this evaluation. Include in this section whether you have experience:
   1. working on evaluations focused on Low – and Moderate-Income communities, 
   2. experience evaluating initiatives related to financial resiliency and economic security
   3. experience conducting developmental, formative, and summative evaluations. 
2. References: Include a minimum of two references recently familiar with the quality and reliability of the applicant’s work. For each reference, include: 

• • Contact information: name, mailing address, email address, contact person and phone number. 
  • A brief description of the services provided and the time frame in which services were provided. 
  • Applicants are welcome to provide additional supporting documentation to demonstrate qualifications.
• Proposal: Please be sure to address the elements listed in the Scope of Work and provide a detailed description of the proposed evaluation strategy; research design, and methods that include research questions, hypotheses, analysis plan, likely data collection methods, etc., and timeline and core deliverables. 
  1. Please be specific in the evaluation-design discussion about how you would consider the desired focus on designing services to support young workers in building financial resilience early on
  2. Please be specific in the evaluation design discussion about how you would explore what the next generation of financial education could be, including tech-enabled efforts to provide financial advisory services to LMI households at scale.
• Budget: Provide a project fiscal budget to support the applicant’s description of proposed project narrative and total quotation amount, as well as budget narratives.
  1. Please provide a per hour and/or per day rate for additional work in the event that additional services are required during the engagement. 
• Sample Evaluation Report: Please attach a copy of a completed evaluation report for a similar effort that represents your communication style and finished product. If completed reports are not public, the evaluator should submit a redacted copy or other relevant writing sample.

V. Proposal Selection Process and Evaluation: 

1. Final Filing Date: June 9, 2025

1. The Wealth Accelerator Steering Committee may determine that additional information is needed. If that is the case, proposers shall be invited to make presentations and/or attend interviews with Steering and relevant partners. 
2. Rejection of Proposals for Evaluation: 

1. The Wealth Accelerator Steering Committee may reject any Proposal not meeting the minimum requirements of this RFP. 

1. The Wealth Accelerator Steering Committee reserves the right to reject any and all Proposals. 

1. The Wealth Accelerator Steering Committee has the right to waive any requirements of this RFP when it determines that waiving a requirement is in the best interest of the Wealth Accelerator Steering Committee. The Wealth Accelerator Steering Committee waiving of an immaterial requirement shall not excuse the proposer from full compliance with remaining requirements and the contents of its proposal in the event it is awarded the contract.

G. Evaluation Process: 

The following are the selection criteria, which will be assessed principally by the Wealth Accelerator Steering Committee with the help of select partner staff members as needed: 

• Capability and experience, including education and training as well as professional experience. 
• History of providing high quality evaluations 
• Knowledge and documented expertise in community level initiatives involving cross-sector collaboration
• Knowledge and documented expertise in evaluating Low- and Moderate-Income (LMI) communities.
• Knowledge and documented expertise in providing summative and formative evaluation. 
• Clarity and quality of proposed project description and process to accomplish the scope of work within the established time frame
• Quality of references and their similarity in project scope
• Cost proposal and hourly cost for additional work

Please submit all questions and proposals to Yaw Owusu-Boahen ([email protected]) and CC Stephanie Barnes ([email protected]).