RFP_7200AA18R00008_IHS_IDIQ_Amendment_No._2.pdf

Solicitation No: 7200AA18R00008

Amendment No. 2

USAID IHS IDIQ

RFP No. 7200AA18R00008, USAID Integrated Health Systems

Questions and Answers

General

1. Given the 15-day turnaround for the task order response, can USAID provide the anticipated award date of the overall IDIQ?

Answer: We anticipate awarding the IDIQ contracts in the fourth quarter of fiscal year

2018. (Note: similar/identical questions are addressed through this response.)

2. Does USAID have any additional information on the content and release date of future task orders it can share at this time?

Answer: USAID does not currently have any additional information on future task orders.

3. How does USAID anticipate to address funding high cost consultants that USAID may want?

Answer: Section B.7(a) of the solicitation provides detailed information regarding rates.

4. For planning purposes in this IDIQ, it would help if you please indicate if the Government will include requests for task order proposal for small businesses in the Business Forecast.

If not, when awarded, how will small businesses know about upcoming requests?

Answer: RFTOPs will be posted in the Business Forecast. All IDIQ holders will be notified by the Contracting Officer.

5. Would the Government please clarify what the purpose of Attachment 9 is and whether it wants offerors to refer to it in the technical approach?

Answer: See section L.4 (a) of the draft RFTOP. The IDIQ solicitation instructions do not contain a requirement for referencing information in the RFTOP. The information pertaining to potential future services should, however, inform Offerors’ understanding of

USAID’s requirements.

6. Noting the historically low utilization of small businesses as primes on global health

IDIQs, we respectfully request a higher and more meaningful threshold of $10 million for the small business reserve. This request is made because it may make it easier to use small businesses through the IDIQ. A higher threshold would also allow for roping off certain activities for SBs such as activities focused primarily institutional support, such as MEL, Knowledge Management , or Organizational Development. The 2013 USAID Request for

Proposals (RFP) Number SOL-OAA-13-000033 Water and Development is an example that incorporates these features successfully; key excerpts from that IDIQ include:

C.2 OBJECTIVE (RFP p. 14)

WADI consist of two award categories: 1) unrestricted and 2) total small or small disadvantaged business aside. The unrestricted category is intended to provide the broad range of services and tasks outlined in Section C below with the exception of two technical areas which have been reserved for small businesses. The provision of services and tasks in sections C.3.9 “Knowledge Management, Information Sharing, Cooperation and

Coordination” and C.3.10 “Performance Monitoring and Evaluation” have been set aside for small businesses with specific expertise in these two technical areas as they relate to the implementation of the Water and Development strategy. Small businesses primes must be capable of providing all of the services outlined in Section C and not just the two technical areas discussed above.

C.3 CROSS-CUTTING SERVICES (RFP p. 21)

Task orders primarily in the technical areas of Knowledge Management and Monitoring and Evaluation are set aside for small business (see C.2). The provision of services and tasks in sections C.3.9 “Knowledge Management, Information Sharing, Cooperation and

Coordination” and C.3.10 “Performance Monitoring and Evaluation” have been set aside for small businesses with specific expertise in these two technical areas as they relate to the implementation of the Water and Development strategy. Small businesses primes must be capable of providing all of the services outlined in Section C and not just the two technical areas discussed above.

Answer: USAID believes the current threshold is appropriate for our program design.

7. Does a fully staffed diagnostic laboratory with certified technologists and a nurse practitioner qualify for this type of solicitation?

Answer: Private for-profit firms, not-for-profit organizations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) including universities, research organizations, professional associations, and relevant special interest organizations are eligible under the authorized geographic code of 935.

8. Please provide current names of incumbent(s) if any, performing these services and contract number.

Answer: This is a new procurement for USAID. It is not a direct follow on to any other award(s).

Section B

9. Pg. 16 – B.7 Subcontractor Rates – “the prime subcontracts with an approved subcontractor from the original IDIQ competition” - this statements seems to contradict with the statement on page 126 which states the following: “no subcontractor consent will be provided with the award of this contract. All consent to subcontracts will be provided under task orders in accordance with FAR 44.202-2.”

Answer: The CO will consider providing consent to major subcontractors under the IDIQ.

The solicitation is amended to include in Part 9 “The Offeror must address each of the elements in FAR 44.202-2 in order for proposed subcontractors to be considered by the contracting officer for consent of subcontractors to be granted with the initial award.”

10. Page 11, Section B.6(b) – “Contractors will not be authorized to bill USAID directly for

IDIQ management costs under this IDIQ or under task orders. Contractors must propose a centralized management structure that allows for recovery of IDIQ management costs as part of its indirect costs”.

Page 50, Section F.8.2 IDIQ Manager – The IDIQ Manager will also ensure fulfillment of the IDIQ reporting requirement in Section F.5.

Could you please define what roles and responsibilities would be included in a

“centralized management structure”? Please also confirm that the IDIQ Manager’s LOE for fulfilling the IDIQ reporting requirements are not billable to USAID per Section B.6

Answer: The IDIQ Manager will be the main point of contact for RFTOPs and must ensure completion of the IDIQ reports. Related costs are not billable to USAID as direct costs.

11. Page 12, Section B.7(a)(2) – “If junior –level personnel are required under task orders, they must be proposed at rates below the unburdened ceiling daily rate”. Please confirm that the junior – level personnel daily rates must be below the “mid-level” CDRs.

Answer: Confirmed.

12. Page 17, Section B.8 Note 1 and Page 126, Part 9 and Part 10 – Please clarify what constitutes a “major” subcontractor under an IDIQ since there is no LOE associated with the IDIQ. Page 249 states that major subcontractors are those whose proposed LOE exceeds 20% of the total LOE for the RFTOP.

Answer: See Section L.6.3.1 and response to question No. 78.

13. On RFP page 17, in Section B.8, the Indirect Cost matrix includes Ceiling Rate columns for Overhead and G&A only. Can you please clarify whether offerors are also required to bid ceilings for Fringe Benefit rates, and for any other indirect cost rates they may have according to their NICRA?

Answer: Ceiling on fringe benefits is not required.

14. The matrix on RFP page 17 requires both primes and major subcontractors to list their current approved indirect cost rates and proposed indirect cost rate ceilings. Given that a company’s indirect rates are considered proprietary and sensitive financial information, we anticipate that some prospective subcontractors may not be comfortable with this requirement. Therefore, if a major subcontractor should request authorization to submit its indirect cost rates directly to USAID, and to have those rates excluded from the prime contract in order to protect them from disclosure, would USAID consider granting this request? If the request is granted, will the subcontractor email their NICRA directly to the designated email address?

Answer: Subcontractors can send their indirect cost rate information directly to the

Contracting Officer at the email address designated for proposal submission. Additionally if any major subcontractor would like to have their indirect cost rate information excluded from the prime contract they should indicate their preference to the Contracting officer.

15. On RFP Page 11, Section B.5(a) states that the fixed fee ceiling “is not applicable to Grants under Contracts (GUCs)…or other costs that have a separate fee ceiling established in the

Contract.” It is not clear from the above language if in response to a future RFTOP, the

IDIQ holders can charge fee on grants or not. If not, we have concerns for the following reasons:

a) While USAID 2 CFR 700 prohibits profits under assistance, this prohibition should apply only to the recipient of a GUC, not to the Contractor providing the GUC.

b) The GUCs are considered costs under the Contract/Task Order and should be included in the pre-negotiation cost objective amounts as the basis for calculating the profit as per FAR

15.404-4.

c) FAR 15.404-4(c) explicitly lists the costs that shall be excluded from the pre-negotiation cost objective amounts, namely (a) the purchase cost of contractor-acquired property that is categorized as equipment as defined in FAR 45.101 where such equipment is to be charged directly to the contract and (b) facilities capital cost of money included in the cost objective amounts.

d) Implementing a GUC program creates a financial burden for the implementing partner as it involves advances to the recipients which cannot be recovered until they are liquidated, particularly since USAID usually declines to issue a Government Letter of Credit (LOC) for GUCs. Since interest paid by the implementing partner is not an allowable cost under the Cost Principles, this justifies the fee charged on GUCs.

e) The GUCs normally involve awarding grants to high-risk local NGOs, which exposes the contractor to a higher risk of cost disallowance, which warrants and justifies the fee.

For all the above reasons, we respectfully request that you remove the language in Section

B.5(a) which restricts applying the fee to GUCs.

Answer: Neither the IDIQ nor the draft RFTOP contain language that would prohibit the application of fee on GUCs.

16. Section B.8, Should a prime or subcontractor offeror (which is not a small business) include a column in the table for ceiling for fringe benefits?

Answer: No.

17. In the Labor Category Grouping table in Section B.7 (a) (2) (page 12), the final labor category listed is “Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Advisor”. In Section B.7 (a) (3), (page 15) the final labor category definition is Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

Specialist. Please clarify the position title for this labor category.

Answer: The solicitation is amended to reflect the title as “Monitoring, Evaluation and

Learning Specialist”

18. On page 15, USAID provides a description for a Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist.

However, on pages 12, 134, 213, and 215 USAID references a Monitoring and Evaluation

Advisor. Can USAID please confirm these are the same position?

Answer: See answer to question No. 17.

19. In Section B.7, the RFP states that "the labor rates are fixed for all contract years".

However, Attachment 1, makes reference to escalation rates. Please confirm whether or not escalation rates are to be included in the table marked "Labor Category Groupings"

(showing a breakdown by level and year (Years 1-7)).

Answer: Attachment 1 is amended to remove references to an escalation rate.

20. On page 11, the RFP states that the ceiling of fixed fee is not applicable to Grants under

Contract. Please clarify whether offerors will be able to propose a fee on grants when applicable under task orders.

Answer: See answer to question No. 15.

21. On page 11, the RFP states, “Contractors will not be authorized to bill USAID directly for

IDIQ management costs under this IDIQ or under task orders.” Can USAID please clarify whether management costs directly related to task order implementation will be authorized to be billed?

Answer: “IDIQ management” and “task order implementation” under the statement of work of discrete task orders are considered distinct and separate. Work performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of individual task orders are billable under those mechanisms in line with the contractor’s billing structure.

22. On page 17, the RFP requires offerors to propose ceilings on indirect rates. Please clarify whether offerors need to propose ceilings on indirect rates for the five-year ordering period or for the seven-year period of performance for task orders.

Answer: Please see Section L.7 Part 2, Indirect Costs.

Section C

23. Pg. 25 – “It is anticipated that a majority of task orders issued under the IDIQ will include a transition award component….” Does this mean that the GUCs will have to meet the criteria set forth in ADS 303.3.6.5.b (3)?

Answer: Whether future task orders issued under the IDIQ contain a GUC component will be dependent on the requirements of the issuing Operating Unit. Generally, in order to issue a transition award, the requirements of ADS 303.3.6.5.b (3) must be met under the

“initial award” regardless of the type of subaward mechanism.

Regarding the draft RFTOP: it is expected that a subset of GUCs will result in transition awards; not all GUCs are required to be transition awards. In such cases when GUCs are utilized for transition awards, the criteria in ADS 303.3.6.5.b(3) will need to be met.

24. Indicators were updated in IDIQ but old in TO1, should we assume TO1 indicators will also be updated to match the IDIQ?

Answer: IDIQ Section C.6 Results provides a set of illustrative indicators for the IDIQ.

RFTOP Section C.6 Expected Results provides a list of illustrative results/indicators for

TO1.

25. Could USAID provide clarification on whether USAID would allow subs to fund local institutions as part of the transition process?

Answer: If the question relates to whether second-tier subcontracts to local organizations counts toward the 20% requirement, the answer is yes. If the question relates to whether a transition award can be made to a local organization who is a second-tier subcontractor, the answer is also yes.

26. Section C.3, Statement of Work: On page 25, under Transition and Sustainability, the RFP says “By project end, it is expected that approximately 20 percent of resources will go to local staff and partners through subcontracts and grants under individual task orders.” Does

USAID expect that small business contractors on the IDIQ will have to adhere to this subcontracting/subgranting requirement?

Answer: Yes.

27. In Section C.5 ( c ) of the RFP in the statement of work it states that contractors are required to source 20% to local organizations, can you comment on if that applies to the task orders awarded to the small businesses through the set-aside?

Answer: See response to question No. 26.

28. On Page 26, the RFP states, “By project end, it is expected that approximately 20 percent of resources will go to local staff and partners through subcontracts and grants under individual task orders.” What is USAID’s definition of “local staff” and “local partners” as the previous language contained in USAID Forward guidelines provides a clear definition of local organizations. The use of the term “local staff” in this context is particularly confusing.

Answer: This language will be revised to read: “It is expected that by the end of the period of performance of each task order, approximately 20 percent of the contractor’s work (i.e.

20 percent of the total estimated cost of each task order) will be implemented by local organizations either through subcontracts, grants or local consultants.”

29. On page 25 in Section C, USAID states, “by project end, it is expected that approximately

20 percent of resources will go to local staff and partners through subcontracts and grants under individual task orders.” Can USAID define resources? In addition, is the 20% over the life of the project, or during the final year of the project?

Answer: See response to question No. 26.

30. Section C.6, Results: On page 30, the following are the first two bullets:

• increased health budget at national and subnational levels;

• increased allocated health funds and expenditures;

Would USAID care to elaborate on its perception of the difference between “increased health budget” and “increased allocated health funds”?

Answer: USAID recognizes that these two bullets describe the same thing. The solicitation is amended to revise this section.

31. On page 28 of the RFP in Objective 4, USAID asks Offerors to “Increase private investment in the health sector, especially in the goods and services that people are likely to underutilize without some form of subsidy such as immunization." Page 202 of the RFP contains similar language. Private investment is normally made in circumstances where a return on investment is possible. However, this is not usually the case where subsidies are required, unless the investment is made from corporate social responsibility or is coupled with a donor or other third party subsidy (e.g., impact bond). Could USAID kindly clarify what is meant by the "especially" clause?

Answer: “The “especially” clause is meant to convey that USAID is interested in private investment which promotes use of interventions (like immunization) that people may under-utilize if they are associated with direct costs to the patient.”

32. On page 20, Table 2 lists ongoing programs with which this IDIQ will collaborate. It is our understanding that the HFG and ASSIST projects will end before the award of Task Order

1 of the IHS IDIQ. Can USAID confirm that those projects will be replaced by task orders issued under IHS?

Answer: At this time USAID does not plan direct follow-on awards to the current projects

HFG and ASSIST.

33. On page 20, Table 2 includes the GHSC-QA program, but none of the other GHSC programs (e.g., GHSC-PSM, GHSC-TO, GHSC-BI). Is the intent that the IHS IDIQ will not interface with these supply chain programs?

Answer: The solicitation is amended to include additional GHSC programs, which were omitted in the original version.

Section F

34. Pg. 41 – (3) “all task order statements of work and performance periods must be within the statement of work and effective period of this contract” seems to contradict the statement on page 34 (F.2.) “the POP for the contract is from (date of award) until the last TO expires, no more than 7 years from the date of award”

Answer: All task orders, which must not exceed five years when awarded, must be within the statement of work and effective period of this contract (seven years). No changes will be made.

35. On page 50, under F.8.2, USAID wrote that the “Contractor must designate an IDIQ

Manager as the primary point of contact whom USAID may contact for procedural and substantive matters. The Contracting Officer has determined that the IDIQ Manager is not necessary or required to be engaged on a full-time basis and will not be designated as key personnel.” However, on page 11 under B.6, USAID wrote that the “Contracting Officer has determined that a key (full-time) technical manager is not necessary or required to administer the basic IDIQ.” Can USAID confirm that Offerors are required to name an

IDIQ Manager at the IDIQ stage? If so, what are the qualifications of the Manager? What are Offerors required to submit for the IDIQ Manager?

Answer: The solicitation does not require that Offerors name an IDIQ Manager as part of the competitive process.

36. On page 50 in Section F.8.2, USAID wrote that the “Contractor must designate an IDIQ

Manager as the primary point of contact whom USAID may contact for procedural and substantive matters. Contractors will not be authorized to bill USAID directly for IDIQ management costs under this IDIQ or under task orders.” To the extent that an IDIQ

Manager is required and would provide support directly allocable to the Task Orders, please confirm that offerors may bill the level off effort directly to USAID for this position to the extent that doing so is consistent with their standard cost allocation policies.

Answer: As stated in Section F.8.2, contractors will not be authorized to bill USAID directly for IDIQ management costs under this IDIQ or under task orders.

37. Section F.6.1 (b).6- Fair Opportunity Exceptions, under Small Business Reserve, states “All task orders issued under this IDIQ greater than $3,500 but less than or equal to

$2,000,000 must be competed first with any category of small or small disadvantaged business contract holders.” Would USAID kindly consider increasing the small business reserve threshold to $5M to be more in line with the small business reserve for recent similar IDIQs (e.g., Power Africa Expansion IDIQ)?

Answer: See response to question No. 6.

38. Section F.8.2 - It is clear that the IDIQ Manager time doing IDIQ Management is not to be directly billed. Would the IDIQ Manager be precluded from working in a technical or managerial role on Task Orders?

39. Sections F.8.2 and L.6.3- Would USAID please confirm that Offerors are not required to submit a CV/Resume for the IDIQ Key Personnel- IDIQ Manager position as part of the

Technical Proposal?

40. Please indicate if the Government wants the offerors to propose a qualified IDIQ director.

Answer: The solicitation does not contain such requirement.

41. Will USAID allow past performance submissions from subcontractors?

Answer: If the questions relates to the competitive process, please see Section L.6.3.3.

If the question relates to Section F.4 performance standards: USAID will evaluate the prime contractor’s performance in CPARS on an annual basis, as required in FAR Part

42.15 and AIDAR 742.15. Any relevant performance information of subcontractors would need to be addressed as part of that report, if applicable and appropriate.

Section H

42. Section H.6(d) holds staff to an annual salary increase of not more than 3 percent of the current labor pool. Specifying the maximum amount for annual salary increase pool may preclude offerors from complying with AIDAR 752.7007, incorporated in section I.1, which states that “Direct compensation of the Contractor’s personnel will be in accordance with the Contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, and the cost principles applicable to this contract.” We respectfully request that USAID remove this salary increase pool restriction, thereby allowing offerors to submit cost proposals in accordance with their established policies, procedures, and practices.

Answer: The solicitation is amended to increase the limitation to 5%.

43. Page 61, (d) Annual Salary Increases – in our experience a ceiling annual salary increase of

3% can be administratively burdensome for the implementor and USAID given that even an increase of 4% would require an additional layer of approval request to the CO. We understand the need for a ceiling, however could USAID consider the cap to be 5%?

Answer: Please see the response to Question No. 42.

44. Page 61, Section H.6 (d) – if an organization’s personnel policies allocate more than 3% annual salary increases, does an organization have to request a waiver for the IDIQ?

Answer: No. Please also see the response to Question No. 42.

45. Section F.6.2.1, Task Order Limitations: Page 44, paragraphs (ii) and (iii): Would USAID care to clarify the process for TOs estimated to be between $2,000,000 and $5,000,000?

Answer: Section F.6.2.1(ii) covers the process for Task Orders estimated to be more than

$500,000 and equal to or less than $5,000,000.

Section I

46. IDIQ Page 85-86, I.13 722.170 Employment of third country nationals (TCN’s) and cooperating country nationals (CCN’s) section (f): Physical fitness: states “Contractors are required to insure that prospective TCN and CCN employees are examined prior to employment to determine whether the prospective employee meets the minimum physical requirements of the position and is free from any contagious disease.” Does USAID intend for CCNs to receive a physical prior to being hired, or is this requirement only for TCNs?

Answer: As noted in the referenced section, the clause applies to employment of TCNs and

CCNs.

47. IDIQ Page 89, I.17 752.7027 Personnel (DEC 1990) section (b) mentions “Physical fitness of employees and dependents.” This statement could imply that all dependents of all classes of employee (expat, TCN or CCN) are required to receive physicals. Could USAID clarify if this reading is correct, or clarify exactly who is required to receive a physical?

Answer: This AIDAR clause references AIDAR 752.7033 Physical fitness, which lays our clearly which employees are required to undertake examinations.

Section K

48. On page 124 of the RFP, USAID indicates that the Offeror must complete Section K, “Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors”. Will USAID kindly confirm that Section K must be completed only by the prime contractor, and that each proposed subcontractor is not required to provide a signed and dated Section K?

Answer: The solicitation is amended to reflect that Section K must be completed by the prime Offeror and major subcontractor(s).

49. Page 124, In addition to the prime offeror, are subcontractors required to provide a signed section K (representations, certifications and other statements of offerors)?

Answer: No, see response to question No. 48.

50. Do proposed subcontractors need to submit signed and dated Section K – Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of the Offeror?

Answer: No, see response to question No. 48.

Section L

General Instructions

51. In Section L.4 (h) of the RFP, it states that if the offeror wants to be considered for the unrestricted pool and the small business set-aside pool, it must submit two proposals. This seems to contradict Section M.7. Given the process explained in M.7, please explain the benefit of providing 2 proposals.

Answer: We do not see these two requirements as contradictory. Small business offerors may choose to submit two offers, one responding to the requirements of the unrestricted pool and one for the small business set-aside. If a small business offeror is selected for an award under the unrestricted pool, it is not eligible for an award under the set-aside pool.

Delivery Instructions

52. Past Performance Info: The cover letter says that the Past Performance Information (PPI) is due on April 11th, but Section L.6.3.3 of the RFP says that PPIs should be included as part of the full technical proposal (as an annex). Does USAID expect to receive past performance information via both methods?

Answer: No, the solicitation is amended to clarify that past performance information is only required for the initial submission.

53. In addition, contractor past performance information is listed as L.6.3.3 and included under

L.6.3 Content of the Technical Proposal. However, it is not listed as part of the organization of the technical proposal under L.6.1. Please clarify if past performance information should be included in the Technical Proposal or submitted on April 11 separately.

Answer: See response to question No. 52.

54. On the cover page of the solicitation, it states that the closing date and time for past performance information is April 11, 2018 at 10 am EST. Does USAID require that information to be submitted on April 11 by email to ihsip@usaid.gov?

Answer: Yes, as noted in Section L.5.1. Please note that Amendment No. 1 to the solicitation revised the due date to April 16, 2018.

55. Section L 5.1 states to provide the Contractor Past Performance Information electronically by the due date (April 11th) but then also as an Annex to the Technical Proposal (per L

6.3.3 pg. 119). Would USAID please confirm that Contractor Past Performance

Information is only to be submitted by April 11 th and not included also as a Technical

Annex in the proposal submission?

56. Please confirm that past performance information is due April 11, 10:00 am EDT.

(Reference – page 1 of the RFP)

Answer: Amendment No. 1 to the solicitation revised the due date to April 16, 2018.

57. Usually past performance information is due at the same time as the proposal due date.

Since that is not the case with this response, what is the purpose for the early submission of past performance information? (Reference - page 1 of RFP)

Answer: This allows for a more efficient proposal evaluation.

58. Would the government extend the deadline to submit past performance information to

April 18, 2018?

Answer: See response to question No. 56.

59. Finally, we wish to respectfully ask USAID to consider extending the closing date by a week to ensure Small Businesses prepare a thorough response after having received response to the questions above. We recognize and fully support the need for a timely procurement processes. However, small businesses have limited resources to allocate to an

IDIQ proposal and respectfully note that an extension will better enable all interested small business offerors to competitively respond to this solicitation.

Answer: The due date for past performance information has been extended. The due date for proposals remains unchanged.

Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal

60. Please clarify if the page limit for both the volumes?

Answer: See Section L.6.2 of both the IDIQ solicitation and the draft RFTOP. There is no limit on the number of pages in the cost proposals.

61. In Section L.6.3.2, Technical Approach, USAID notes offerors must present how proposed approach(es) will “seek to leverage and complement previous and ongoing efforts in the health sector.” We respectfully ask USAID to make publicly available all Health Finance and Governance Project progress reports and evaluations. Such access will enable all offerors to propose more effective approaches and activities that leverage and complement the prior work and accomplishments of USAID programs in the health sector. Access to these documents will also provide all potential offerors with equal information on current work, accomplishments, and lessons learned related to increasing financial protection and responsiveness.

Answer: As noted in the RFP, there are a range of USAID projects with complementary or ongoing work. In general, all USAID project reports are publicly available on individual project websites or through USAID’s Development Experience Clearinghouse

(https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/home/Default.aspx).

62. On page 117 of the RFP, USAID stipulates that “the text in any text boxes included within the technical proposal must be Times New Roman font not less than 12 points in size.

Tables, graphics, charts, graphs, etc. may be included, where appropriate, in the technical proposal … Text in tables, graphics, charts, graphs, etc. may not be smaller than 9 points in size.” To promote the use of text boxes to highlight key information without compromising space within the technical draft, would USAID also permit text box font size of not less than 9 points, as it does for tables, graphics, charts, graphs, etc.?

Answer: No, this requirement remains unchanged.

63. In reference to both the IDIQ proposal (p. 117) and the Draft Task Order (p. 239), the RFP states that text boxes included within the technical proposal must be in Times New Roman

(TNR) font not less than 12 points in size. For improved readability in terms of differentiation from main body text, would USAID consider allowing TNR not less than 10 points in size?

Answer: See response to question No. 62.

64. Section L.6.2- Would USAID allow a smaller font than 12 for text boxes?

Answer: See response to question No. 62.

65. RFP page 117, section L.6.2: “The text in any text boxes included within the technical proposal must be Times New Roman font not less than 12 points in size. Tables, graphics, charts, graphs, etc. may be included, where appropriate, in the technical proposal. If the

Offeror decides to provide additional tables, graphics, charts, graphs, etc. it may provide those in an annex which is limited to five pages. Text in tables, graphics, charts, graphs, etc. may not be smaller than 9 points in size.” May we change this to 8 points in size for graphics?

Answer: The limitation for fonts in graphics, charts, etc. is removed and the solicitation is amended to state “Text in tables, graphics, charts, graphs, etc. may use a different font and size, but must legible without magnification.” Also, please see the response to question No.

62.

66. Pg. 118, L.6.3.1, Would USAID consider allowing us to present experience that is beyond five years if it is relevant to the scope and still timely? USAID’s requirement to limit

L.6.3.1 to primes and major subcontractors, is restrictive for small businesses, who may not have the same breadth of experience as large businesses. Enabling us to use a broader range of our experience over time will help address this issue.

Answer: This section of the solicitation remains unchanged.

67. Pg. 118, L.6.3.1, will USAID consider allowing us to present experience from subcontractors who are not considered major subcontractors? This will enable us to show the depth and breadth of our consortium.

Answer: No, the solicitation remains unchanged.

68. Pg. 119, L.6.3.3, USAID asks the offeror to include past performance information in an annex but on page 121, USAID only provides for two annexes: 1. Branding

Implementation Plan and Marking Plan and 2. Illustrative charts and graphs. Can USAID confirm that it wants the offeror to include Past Performance Information as an Annex to the Technical Proposal, in addition to submitting it on April 11th?

Answer: The solicitation is amended to reflect Offerors do not need to resubmit past performance information with the technical proposal. This information is only requested by the revised date and time on the cover letter in accordance with Amendment No. 1 of the solicitation.

69. Pg. 119, L.6.3.3, USAID notes that “assistance awards will not be accepted” for past performance. We understand that USAID would like offerors to demonstrate their ability to manage contracts. However due to the large number of assistance mechanisms used by

USAID for health procurements, this requirement excludes many relevant projects of similar scope. We ask that USAID consider allowing us to submit a mix of both contracts and assistance awards so that we can demonstrate our management experience with contracts as well as the breadth of our experience with projects of similar scope.

Answer: Upon further consideration and taking into account the feedback received from the industry, the solicitation has been amended to allow for submission of past performance information relative to assistance instruments. The due date for past performance reports was also extended to allow additional time for submission. (See Amendment No. 1 of the solicitation.)

70. Section L.6.3.3 (page 119). Given that most USAID-funded global health awards are cooperative agreements, would USAID reconsider its restriction on past performance information and allow offerors to submit past performance for assistance awards?

Answer: See response to question No. 69.

71. Given that some of the current and previous USAID projects covering many of the major aspects of this IDIQ were implemented under Cooperative Agreements, will USAID allow the inclusion of both contracts and cooperative agreements in past performance?

72. On page 119 in Section L.6.3.3, USAID ask Offerors to “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five (5) of the most recent (active or ended no more than 3 years ago) and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal for the Offeror and up to (3) three for each major subcontractor using the template provided in Attachment 3.”

Would USAID allow Offerors to submit past performance information for assistance instruments such as cooperative agreements or grants as well as contracts?

73. On RFP page 119, in Section L.6.3.3 paragraph A.1, the RFP states that past performance information must be provided for relevant contracts which ended no more than three years ago, and that assistance awards will not be accepted. Yet in recent years, because USAID has chosen to issue more assistance awards and fewer contracts for health-related work, much of the experience gained on projects similar to this one has been acquired under assistance awards. Thus, restricting past performance information to recent contracts disproportionately favors offerors who also work outside the health sector, where USAID has continued to issue contracts. Would USAID be willing to accept contracts which ended within the past five years (as opposed to the past three years) and/or assistance awards directly relevant to this SOW, including non-U.S. Government contracts and awards?

Answer: See response to question No. 69. Also, the solicitation does not restrict past performance information to U.S. Government issued awards.

74. Section L.6.3.3, The section states that “Note: assistance awards will not be accepted.”

Would USAID reconsider allowing assistance awards for Past Performance?

75. For the consideration of suitable PPRs, can USAID provide additional clarification on the definition of “Contracts” and “Assistance Awards” relating to non-US government funded projects?

76. In Section L.6.3.3 of the RFP, it states that assistance awards will not be accepted for past performance information, please confirm that this only applied to USG Cooperative

Agreements and not non USG work.

77. On page 119, Section L.6.3.3, the request for Contractor Past Performance Information is limited to contracts active or ending no more than 3 years ago. Given USAID’s long-term investments in health systems strengthening, would USAID consider inclusion of examples active or ending no more than 5 years ago? If so, will USAID extend the deadline for providing past performance information?

Answer: The definition of what is considered recent remains unchanged. See also response to question No. 69.

78. RFP Section L.6.3.1 (page 118) indicates that “Major subcontractors are those whose proposed cost is expected to exceed 20% of the Offer’s total estimated cost for each future task order”. TO1 Section L.7.13 (Page 249) indicates that “Major subcontractors are those whose proposed LOE exceeds 20% of the total LOE (base plus options)”. Could USAID please confirm that the determination for major subcontractors will be made on the basis of

LOE, rather than total cost?

Answer: The solicitation is amended to include a clarification sentence in L.6.3.1 “For

CPFF term form task orders major subcontractors are those whose proposed LOE is expected to exceed 20% of the total LOE.”

79. On page 118, Section L.6.3.1, the request for institutional experience and capability is limited to the Offeror and major subcontractors, defined as “those whose proposed cost is expected to exceed 20% of the Offeror’s total estimated cost for each future task order.”

The RFP and Draft Task Order recognize that anticipated work will increase impact by

“customizing support to the country context” (p. 199) and will require “a diverse and integrated set of skills and expertise” to achieve objectives (p. 201). Success under IHS also depends on ability to implement in multiple countries simultaneously and provide technical support on short notice (p. 201). Given the need for flexibility to tailor activities to unique country contexts and depth to respond to diverse country needs, it may be difficult to identify and propose – upfront – the major subcontractors for each future task order. Further, restricting the response only to the Offeror and major subcontractors will limit USAID’s evaluation of the full capability of proposed teams, which may include niche and non-traditional partners. Would USAID consider revising its criteria for defining major subcontractors or allow presentation of full team capabilities?

Answer: We consider the requirements laid out in Section L.6.3.1 of the solicitation to best meet USAID’s needs, while representing a fair assessment of experience and capabilities at the IDIQ level. No changes will be made.

80. On page 120, USAID requests that offerors include a section on performance in using

Small Business (SB) concerns. Under 3(a) Offerors are to “provide a narrative summary of your organization’s use of SB concerns over the past three years”. Is this narrative part of the 20 page technical proposal or is this to be submitted as part of the Past performance

Information and submitted to USAID on April 11 th

Answer: All information relative to Section L.6.3.3 Contractor Past Performance

Information must be submitted by April 16, 2018. This information does not count against the 20 page limitation.

81. Could USAID please clarify if section L.6.3.3 Section D Performance in using Small

Business Concerns on page 119 should be part of cost proposal only.

Answer: No, please see response to question No. 80.

82. Page 128, says only major subcontractors can be used in the institutional experience section. Can we present experience of all partners, not only major partners?

Answer: No, this requirement remains unchanged.

83. Major subcontractors 20%. One place says each contractor and one place says each task order one says overall, can USAID provide clarification?

Answer: It is unclear what the organization is referring to. The IDIQ solicitation and draft

RFTOP each provide a definition relative to the mechanism.

84. On page 118, under L.6.3.1, USAID states that, if “any major subcontractor(s) are proposed, the Offeror must demonstrate combined experience and capability and must describe the complementarity of the experience and capability.” Please confirm that the experience and capabilities of other subcontractors who do not qualify as “major” per the definition of USAID in this section may also be described by offerors in the Institutional

Experience and Capability section.

Answer: No, such information is not requested under this criterion and will not be evaluated if provided.

85. USAID has asked that Offerors submit past performance information on April 11, 2018.

Can USAID verify this only includes Section L.6.3.3 A.1 (“List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five [5] of the most recent [active or ended no more than 3 years ago] and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal for the Offeror and up to [3] three for each major subcontractor using the template provided in Attachment 3”) and A.2 (“For all contracts listed above that are not in CPARS, provide a list of contact names, job titles, mailing addresses, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, explanation of relevance to the proposed acquisition and a description of the performance.”)

Answer: All information required by Section L.6.3.3 must be submitted by the due date for past performance information.

86. Section L.6.3.4- Is there a page limit for the Technical Annex- Branding and Marking

Plan?

87. Would the Government please confirm that the 20 page limit of the technical proposal only includes the Institutional Experience and Capability and the Technical approach sections?

88. Would the Government please confirm that the Contractor Past Performance Information is not part of the 20 page limit and should be included in Annex 3 after the Branding

Implementation and Marking Plan (Annex 1) and Illustrative Charts a Graphs (annex 2) and that there is no page limit to this annex?

Answer: See responses to questions No. 86 and 87.

89. [Organization] requests that USAID consider revising the requirements related to subcontractors and Institutional Experience and Capability (Section L.6.3.1) and Contractor

Past Performance Information (Section L.6.3.3). Would USAID please revise to state that

“major subcontractors are those whose proposed cost is expected to exceed 20% of the

Offeror’s cost across all task orders over the life of the project”?

Answer: This requirement remains unchanged.

90. On page 119 of the RFP in section L.6.3.3., USAID instructs to “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five (5) of the most recent...and relevant contracts…”. On pages

120-121 under L.6.3.4. Technical Proposal Annexes, this past performance information is not listed as an annex. Can USAID please clarify if the past performance information from section L.6.3.3 should be included as an annex to the technical proposal, or if it should only be submitted separately on April 11th as instructed on the cover page?

91. In Sections L.6.3.2 and M.2.2, the RFP does not request staff bios or CV’s. Can these be included in the technical approach and as an Appendix?

Answer: CVs are requested under the draft RFTOP for key personnel, submissions must follow the requirements. Additional information will not be considered.

92. On page 118, the RFP states, “The Offeror must demonstrate experience and capability in implementing health system strengthening activities of magnitude and complexity to those described in Section C of the IDIQ.” The section appears to limit this experience and capability to the prime offeror and any major subcontractors. Since USAID has put an emphasis on engagement with small businesses and non-traditional partners, we request that USAID allow us to present the experience and capability of our broader consortium. in the “Institutional Experience and Capability” section of the proposal.

Answer: See response to question No. 79.

93. The past performance template requests information from the prime and major subcontractors. Is information on performance using small business concerns required for the subcontractors?

94. Sections L.6.3.3 and M.2.3 of Attachment 9 indicate that a MEL Plan for Uganda should be included in the RFTOP response. Can you confirm that you do not expect extensive indicator tables or PIRS as part of the MEL, which would exceed the five-page limit on tables and graphs in the annexes?

Answer: USAID confirms that we do not expect extensive indicator tables or PRIS as part of the preliminary country-specific MEL Plan for Uganda.

95. Does the government require Resumes for all Labor Categories?

Instructions for the Preparation of the Cost/Business Proposal

96. Section L.7 Part 9 (page 126). Consent to Subcontractors indicates that USAID does not anticipate providing consent for any subcontracts with the award of the IDIQ contract. In light of this statement, would USAID consider removing the requirement to submit EORs and work day work week documentation for all subcontractors, and instead require this documentation only for major subcontractors who are named on the IDIQ?

Answer: See response to question No. 9.

97. Indirect cost ceilings are required if a cost-sharing arrangement is authorized as part of procurement or in those circumstances which are described in FAR 42.707 (b) (1). What is the reason for requiring indirect costs ceilings for this IQC pursuant to FAR 42.707?

Does the requirement for cost ceilings only applies to contractors meeting the descriptions in FAR 42.707 (b)(1) (i) or (ii)? In accordance with USAID Best Practices for Indirect

Costing – Mandatory Help Document of USAID ADS 300, Indirect costs should not be reviewed as part of any cost effective evaluation criteria, therefore the ceilings should not be considered in evaluations unless the circumstance in FAR 42.707 are met.

Answer: Please note that the situations, listed in FAR 42.707(b) “that make it prudent to provide a final indirect cost rate ceiling” are just examples and not an exclusive list.

98. Do proposed subcontractors need to ensure registration in SAM?

99. Do proposed subcontractors need to submit Policies and Procedures?

100. Do proposed subcontractors need to submit information concerning Work-Day, Work-

Week, and Paid Absences?

Answer: See Part 5 of L.7.

101. Do proposed subcontractors need to submit Certification Regarding Trafficking in Persons

Compliance Plan?

102. Do proposed subcontractors need to submit NICRA or other documentation such as audited balanced sheet, profit and loss statement, etc., as listed on p. 122?

Answer: L.7 Part 2 under indirect costs clearly identifies who need to submit this information.

103. Page 124, Part3 – please confirm that subcontractors are not required to submit Section K.

Answer: See responses to question No. 9 and 48.

104. Page 126, Part 9 Consent to Subcontractors – please clarify/confirm that consent will not be provided at the IDIQ level? For those partners proposed at the IDIQ level, does consent to subcontract have to be requested for the IDIQ subcontractors for every TO award or does it only apply to those non-IDIQ subcontractors?

Answer: See response to question No. 9.

105. On RFP page 122, under Indirect Costs, the first paragraph states “Indirect rates proposed cannot be higher than the rates established in [an offeror’s] Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate

Agreement.” Since for this RFP the only indirect rates proposed will be ceilings – not billing rates – and the ceilings will need to be valid for seven years, we respectfully request that this restriction be deleted.

Answer: That is incorrect. Indirect rates must be proposed for Section B.8 and will be incorporated into the IDIQ contract along with indirect ceiling rates. No changes will be made.

106. On page 125, under Part 6 - Subcontracting Plan, the RFP instructs offerors to use a Total

Estimated Cost of $500 million for the subcontracting plan. Since $500 million is the IDIQ ceiling for all awardees combined, and will not be multiplied by the number of awardees, can USAID clarify whether it is also the correct figure for each offeror to list in its subcontracting plan as its own Total Estimated Cost?

Answer: This requirement remains unchanged.

107. On page 126, under Part 11 - Legislative Reporting Information, the RFP asks offerors to provide detailed information on anticipated subcontracts. Since no consent to subcontract will be provided with the IDIQ, would "TBD" be an acceptable response for the questions about subcontract values and performance periods?

Answer: The solicitation is amended to require this information from major subcontractors only.