Amendment_1_7200AA18R00001.pdf

7200AA18R00001

Child Blindness Program

Amendment No.: 1

November 20, 2017

Solicitation Number: 7200AA18R00001

Questions & Responses

1. Are all salaries checked against biodata or just key personnel?

All salaries of full time and part time staff are confirmed via the biodata form.

2. Can the awardee make suggestions/recommendations to adjust the scope of work if there are opportunities to improve upon the approach as written in the RFP. eg.

bullet 1 page 21

Section C is not anticipated to change at this time.

3. Can the duration of the partners meeting be extended to more than 2 days?

The Partners Meeting and corresponding budget must be limited to two days.

4. The final report is due 90 days before the project end date. Is there an expectation to provide additional reporting that covers the remaining 90 days?

This final report due date has been revised in Section F. The final report will be due within 60 days after the end of the contract.

5. Are the non grant award costs expected to be constant on an annual basis or can they be prorated to the grant award amounts provided in the RFP on page 130?

The costs not associated with the grants under contract should reflect the offeror’s best estimates for the budget that will be required to complete the tasks described in the SOW.

6. Are the annual grant award dollar figures on page 130 strict limits or are they absolute minimums or absolute maximums or are they recommend amounts that can be adjusted with significant input from USAID?

The figures given on pg. 130 are intended as plug figures and may not remain constant as stated here during implementation of the contract. USAID will work with the selected contractor to ensure expectations regarding the total amounts per year are clear.

7. The RFA mentions possible award to governments; are we expected to include governments in the grants solicitation?

Governments are not anticipated as grantees. The RFP Section H has been modified for clarity.

8. The RFP calls for the delivery of a Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan

(MEL). While our organization is familiar with monitoring and evaluation plans, we would like to ask for guidance regarding what is expected by the "learning" portion of this deliverable. Our understanding is lessons learned will be reported in the TAG Learning and Innovation Report. How is "learning" distinguished between these two deliverables?

“Learning” as part of the MEL plan under Component 1/Objective 1c is focused on strengthening the grants management process and grants-funded activities to complement tasks under Objectives 1a and 1b. The learning portion of MEL is a key element of the program cycle and addresses continuous assessment, adaptation, and program adjustment to inform decision-making throughout the program using collected data and to ensure effective implementation of the program. As mentioned in the solicitation (p. 17), USAID’s Collaborating, learning, and Adapting (CLA) approach is a helpful resource: https://usaidlearninglab.org/cla-toolkit. The Learning and Innovation Report deliverable under Component 2 is focused on addressing evidence gaps, knowledge sharing needs, and opportunities for innovation in the field of pediatric eye care globally.

This includes but is not limited to identifying lessons learned from previous and current CBP grantees. While the MEL plan focuses on program implementation and the Learning and Innovation Report focuses on the global evidence base, the two are not mutually exclusive and may produce similar findings and best practices.

9. Is the incumbent eligible to compete for this contract?

Any eligible 8(a) firms may compete for this contract.

10. Are there priority countries or organizations? If so, what are the countries and/or organizations?

The Child Blindness directive and program are not limited to a certain list of priority countries or organizations to implement grant-funded activities.

11. Convene CBP Capacity Building Workshops (Partners Meetings): Will the contractor be solely responsible for identifying participants and guests or will USAID provide input/suggestions?

https://usaidlearninglab.org/cla-toolkit

USAID may provide input or suggestions to identify participants for the Partners Meetings.

12. Can USAID make quarterly, annual and other reports of the current Child

Blindness Program publicly available? Only two documents for the current program appear in the Development Experience Clearinghouse.

Thank you for pointing this out. We are working with the incumbent to ensure that all of the reports are uploaded to the DEC by December 1.

13. Can USAID provide to bidders the list of CBP grantees, grant descriptions, and amounts? Attachment J.1 includes descriptions of only five of the more than fifty grants made by CBP.

This information may be provided after contract award.

14. Can USAID clarify the reference to a maximum salary included in Section H.12?

Section H.12 refers to CLOUD COMPUTING and it does not seem to have further information about salaries or annual salary increases.

This is an error and has been corrected in the revised RFP - the reference is to section H.7.

15. Is there an estimate of the number of grants or grantees that should be awarded per cycle/year?

No, the number of grants and grantees will vary each year depending on the number of successful applicants, amount of grant funds available, and individual grant activity budgets.

16. Is there an estimate of the total number of grant cycles that should be included in the program?

Per Section C, pg. 14, four cycles of grant awards are anticipated.

17. L.6, Instructions for Preparation of the Technical Proposal, (d) Content of Technical Proposal, 6 Past Performance Information states “the offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) must provide performance information for itself and each major subcontractor (one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost)” and to “List in Annex 5 to the technical proposal up to five of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar size and scope and how recently they were performed”. Does this statement require 5 past performance references from each Offeror, and 5 from each of the sub-contractors and/or does it limit the submission to only 5 total PPRs per proposal?

Five past performance references are expected total. This has been clarified in the revised

RFP.

18. L.6, states that “If an Offeror sends its proposal by multiple emails, the Offeror must indicate in the subject line of the email whether the email relates to the technical proposal or cost proposal and the desired sequence of multiple emails (if more than one is sent) and of attachments (e.g. “no. 1 of 4”, etc.). For example, if your cost proposal is being sent in two emails, the first email should have a subject line which says: “Organization name, Solicitation Number, Cost Proposal, Part 1 of 2”. Each proposal must be submitted as a single email attachment, e.g. that you consolidate the various parts of a technical proposal into a single document before sending it.” The RFP mentions that each proposal must be submitted as a single email attachment; however the RFP also mentions that offerors can submit the technical and costs in a sequence of emails. Please clarify if we can send the technical in multiple emails and business in multiple emails if labeled according to the requirements.

Offerors can send proposals in multiple emails. The RFP has been revised to clarify this point.

19. The Request for Proposal (RFP) states that the place of performance under this contract is worldwide. Should offerors propose travel funds in the cost proposal or are there any plug in numbers identified for travel? If so, what is the amount allocated for travel? If travel costs were allocated for the incumbent contract, can the government provide the current contract travel costs or the estimated cost projected for the new contract?

Offerors should budget for travel associated with monitoring and other support to the grants, the CBP Capacity Building Workshops, and other knowledge sharing activities deemed necessary under Component 2 of the SOW. There are no plug figures.

20. For the Partners Meetings, should offerors propose meeting costs for the contract?

Is it anticipated that partners will pay for travel out of their own grant funds or should offerors propose travel funds for each partner? What is the anticipated number of travelers per partner meeting? Should contractors budget for meeting costs or will USAID provide meeting space, etc.?

Offerors should propose meeting costs as part of the Cost/Price Proposal, including travel funds for grantees, meeting space, and other logistics. For the purposes of the proposed budget, Offerors may estimate 25-30 grantee representatives at each Partners Meeting, in addition to staff and other non-grantee participants.

[End of Amendment No.: 01]