Amendment_01_-_7200AA18R00023_RTAC.pdf

RE: USAID Solicitation/Request for Proposals No. 7200AA18R00023 for

Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC)

Amendment: 01- Changes to solicitation text; Revision/clarification of select tasks and subtasks; Questions and Answers January 30, 2018 - February 9, 2018 at

12:00:00 pm ET

Issue Date: February 16, 2018

Amendment #01

Substantive Changes to Text:

Based on the questions received from Offerors in response to the RTAC RFP, USAID has made six (6) minor adjustments to the RFP which result in substantive changes. USAID wishes to draw Offerors’ attention to the following substantive changes to ensure Offerors incorporate this information appropriately when crafting their RTAC Technical and Cost Proposals as each of the following changes will impact the preparation of the Technical and/or Cost Proposals for RTAC:

1) Via this amendment, USAID replaces the following language from SECTION I.A: OVERVIEW:

“Formatting Requirements:

Technical proposals are limited to 20 (twenty) double-spaced pages (Any pages beyond 20 will

NOT be evaluated).

o The cover page, executive summary, table of contents, and appendices do not count against the page limit.

Technical proposals shall be written in English on letter-sized (8.5” x 11”) paper.

Format for the technical proposal must be in Microsoft Office Word or Adobe Acrobat (.PDF) format, Times New Roman font size 12. Pages should be double-spaced with 1” margins.

Each page should be numbered consecutively.

All narrative must be in English. Non-English submissions will not be read.

There is no specified font for graphics and charts. Only for graphics and charts may the Offeror use smaller than 12 point font and change the font type to fit the graphics and charts.

Proposals must be legible. Pages that contain a table, chart, graph, etc. that are not otherwise excluded below are subject to the 20 page limitation.

Any sections or appendices in the technical proposal must be listed in the table of contents.

Required order:

Cover Page (does not count against page limit)

Executive Summary (Limited to two pages and does not count against page limit)

Table of Contents (Does not count against page limit)

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 2

Technical Proposal (20 double-spaced pages maximum)”

With the language noted below:

Formatting Requirements:

Technical proposals are limited to 25 (twenty-five) double-spaced pages (Any pages beyond 25 will NOT be evaluated).

o The cover page, executive summary, table of contents, and appendices do not count against the page limit.

Technical proposals shall be written in English on letter-sized (8.5” x 11”) paper.

Format for the technical proposal must be in Microsoft Office Word or Adobe Acrobat (.PDF) format, Times New Roman font size 12. Pages should be double-spaced with 1” margins.

Each page should be numbered consecutively.

All narrative must be in English. Non-English submissions will not be read.

There is no specified font for graphics and charts. Only for graphics and charts may the Offeror use smaller than 12 point font and change the font type to fit the graphics and charts.

Proposals must be legible. Pages that contain a table, chart, graph, etc. that are not otherwise excluded below are subject to the 25 page limitation.

Any sections or appendices in the technical proposal must be listed in the table of contents.

Required order:

Cover Page (does not count against page limit)

Executive Summary (Limited to two pages and does not count against page limit)

Table of Contents (Does not count against page limit)

Technical Proposal (25 double-spaced pages maximum)”

NOTE: Any other places in the RTAC RFP or subsequent amendments that refers to the previous limit of “20” pages for the Technical Proposal narrative should hereby be replaced with the new

Technical Proposal limit of “25” double-spaced pages.

2) Via this amendment, USAID replaces the previous language under Task 6.C in its entirety with the following revised language for Task 6.C:

Subtask 6.C - Prepare and Conduct Trainings on Integrating Digital Tools Into USAID Programs.

The RTAC Prime must leverage the academic community to stand up a team of trainers to work with

USAID/Global Development Lab’s Center for Digital Development) to develop and present training for implementing partners and USAID Missions on best practices for digital integration into development programs.

Subtask 6.C.1 - Develop “Digital Integration Best Practices” Webinar/Slide Content (Year 1)

Within 60 days of Contract Award, the RTAC Prime must develop a presentation deck and prepare the necessary electronic support media to provide virtual training to implementing partners and USAID Mission colleagues on digital integration into USAID programs. The slides

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 3 must be developed in close consultation with USAID Lab’s Center for Digital Development, which will have the ability to approve the final deck.

Subtask 6.C.2 - Present Two Webinars on “Digital Integration Best Practices” (Year 1)

Within one month of approval of the slide deck in Subtask 6.C.1, the RTAC prime must arrange for and facilitate two webinars to present the information to interested M/B/IOs and implementing partners. The Webinars must last at least 1 hour and must be able to accommodate at least 50 participants. The Prime must be responsible for securing Webinar hosting software and facilitating all invitations, registrations, and participation in the Webinars.

Subtask 6.C.3 - Conduct Two In-Person Trainings on “Digital Integration Best Practices” (Year

1)

Within two months of approval of the slide deck in Subtask 6.C.1, the RTAC Prime must facilitate and present (up to) two in-person trainings for 25-30 participants, using the slides approved in Subtask 6.C.1. One training will take place in Washington, D.C and the second training will take place outside of the United States (most likely Africa). Both trainings will be half-day trainings and the RTAC Prime will be expected to provide food, space, AV and any requisite training materials. The RTAC Prime will not be responsible for paying for participant travel costs.”

3) Via this amendment, USAID removes the following language in its entirety from B.6.5 from the

RFP:

“The Contractor will be responsible for submitting SF-425 on a quarterly basis throughout the life of the

Contract. The SF-425 must be signed and submitted to the COR via email (due dates = October 30, January 31, April 30, July 31).”

All other language within Section B.6: Payment remains the same.

4) Via this amendment, USAID replaces the previous language under Task 4.B.1 in its entirety with the following revised language for Task 4.B.1 (revisions highlighted in bold for ease of identification only):

Subtask 4.B.1: Develop Project-Specific Communication Products Based on Identified CDR Research

(All Contract Years)

Within 8 months of Contract Award, in close consultation with USAID, the RTAC Prime must select four

(4) CDR Projects to be highlighted for communication support. For each of the identified projects, RTAC must develop a user-friendly 1-2 page project-specific, graphically rich PDF document or PowerPoint visual slide(s) that highlights key findings and implications of the work completed. The products might include descriptions of the project objective, design, results, impact and/or recommended actions for funders, donors, policymakers, and general stakeholders (targeted stakeholder and audience may vary amongst selected research projects). The goal is to provide USAID and other end-users, like host government ministries, with easy to understand and useful descriptions of CDR-supported research results. The communication designer may be required to solicit more information from either USAID or

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 4 the researcher during the creation of the communication products. Each subsequent year of the

Contract (Years 2-4), the Contractor must develop two (2) additional project-specific communications documents for CDR, consistent with the directions in this subtask.

5) Via this amendment, USAID replaces the previous language under Task 4.C.1 in its entirety with the following revised language for Task 4.C.1 (revisions highlighted in bold for ease of identification only):

Subtask 4.C.1: Generate Research-To-Action Plans to Support Research Translation for Identified CDR

Research Projects (All Contract Years)

Within 10 months of Contract Award, in close consultation with USAID and the CDR award management teams, the RTAC Prime must identify RTAC staff or university-based researchers who can work with three (3) CDR projects to develop individual ‘research-to-action’ plans. The research-to-action plans must outline, among other things, how CDR-supported research can have meaningful uptake at a local, regional or national level. For each of the three projects, RTAC must analyze the opportunities and barriers to uptake of research using techniques such as stakeholder mapping and political economy analysis. Using these analyses, and in consultation with the CDR project principal investigators, RTAC researchers must create action plans. The action plans must detail critical data and any potential data gaps, suggest dissemination products and events, identify key stakeholders for uptake including implementing partners or government ministries that would use research results, and provide recommendations for policies and/or programs that countries could implement to respond to research results. The goal is to provide multiple stakeholders, including CDR-supported researchers, local partners and USAID, with the necessary materials to help them bridge the research-to-policy gap and therefore maximize the long-term impact of USAID’s investment in their work. For cost estimating purposes, USAID anticipates one project to be selected in each of the following major regions in which CDR projects are based: Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Each subsequent year of the Contract (Years 2-4), the Contractor must develop two (2) additional research-to-action plans for specific USAID projects, consistent with the directions in this subtask.

6) As a result of the preceding two changes, the Plug Figures of “$0.00” for Contract Years 2-4 of the Task 4.B. and Task 4.C sub-lines of the RTAC Budget Summary Table should be replaced with actual proposed costs for Years 2-4 by Offerors when they submit their full Cost Proposals.

Technical and Clarifying Questions

1. Does the Combined Synopsis/Solicitation under solicitation number 7200AA18R00023 contain requirements similar to a current contract? If possible, please provide the current contract number. Or, is this a new requirement for the government?

USAID Response: This is a brand new requirement for the Government. Elements from various other mechanisms across the Agency have been reviewed to help formulate some of the activities and approaches in this RFP. And as a part of our analysis of Agency best practices related to implementing

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 5

TA Center strategies we have incorporated some of those findings. But the RTAC requirement itself is a completely new requirement and is being solicited for the first time by USAID/CDR/LAB.

2. Our emphasis is on biocontrol of striga as a starter with more biocontrol for Africa once the infrastructure is in place. See several attachments, please. If we can be of any help let us know.

I have been doing foreign agriculture outreach for years, decades, and we (the toothpick project and XXXXX) could possibly be a part of your concept to provide the kind of science that will have major impacts.

USAID Response: All Offerors interested in submitting a proposal in response to the RTAC Request for

Proposal (RFP), should follow all applicable “instructions to Offerors” as found in the RTAC RFP on

FedBizOpps.gov.

3. I received your mail concerning RTAC. I am the representative of a local Lebanese NGO named Lebanese Student Association. Please can we know the requirements and have the opportunity to send our proposal based on your requirements and standards.

Proposal (RFP), should follow all applicable “instructions to Offerors” as found in the RTAC RFP on

4. Is this going to be set up in Sri Lanka or elsewhere?

USAID Response: USAID anticipates that RTAC will have the logistical, management, and operational capacity to support USAID’s work in all sectors of development in which USAID works, and to enable participation from local researchers in all developing countries in which USAID works.

The specific activities and requirements of RTAC will depend upon the needs of USAID over the course of the contract. Currently known activities are described in Tasks 1-3 of the RTAC RFP, which can be found on FedBizOpps.gov. The physical location of the RTAC Prime is not prescribed by the RFP and is left to the discretion of individual Offerors based on their unique organizational capacities.

5. I am ready to participate in the mentioned programme as I have experience in research and now am a PhD candidate at University of Dar Es Salaam Business School. May you give me details and procedure on how I can participate?

USAID Response: USAID does not have a role in the initial selection of the proposed researchers that Offerors choose to include in their proposed RTAC partner pools and cannot help individual researchers in this process. Solicitation #7200AA18R00023 announces USAID’s intent to develop a

Research Technical Assistance Center to support scientific and research-based technical assistance (TA) needs for the Agency by leveraging the technical and research expertise of the higher education community. Through this RFP, USAID is specifically looking to select and award a Prime organization to manage this RTAC on USAID’s behalf. USAID envisions that the most critical job of the RTAC Prime will be to establish and manage a network of university-based consultants/TA providers for USAID.

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=5a7b98b38791da4c77e6c8041a0c62cf&tab=core&_cview=0 https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=5a7b98b38791da4c77e6c8041a0c62cf&tab=core&_cview=0 https://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do https://www.usaid.gov/where-we-work https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=5a7b98b38791da4c77e6c8041a0c62cf&tab=core&_cview=0

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 6

Individual university researchers interested in applying to serve as a part of the RTAC Partner Pool can express their interest in applying to be a part of the RTAC Partner Pool by reaching out to potential

Offerors directly during the RFP solicitation phase or they can wait until the RTAC prime is selected and announced to reach out to them and express their interest at that time. Specific instructions for how individual researchers interested in participating in the RTAC Partner Pool can apply for consideration post-award will be communicated by the successful Offeror once a contract is awarded.

6. I received the email that gave me your emails. I would like to know how I can be of help to this center. I work in Colombia, specifically in agricultural and social developments.

USAID Response: Please see the answer to Question #5.

7. I am one of research associates under XXX at the University of XXX. I would appreciate if you could kindly advise and guide us to apply for the RTAC offered.

Proposal (RFP), should follow all applicable “instructions for offerers” as found in the RTAC RFP on

8. I wish to assist in the development of my studies and the scientific research project. I am ready to carry out projects and projects in northwest Syria.

USAID Response: Please see the answer to Question #5.

9. Section C.4, p. 24 — Subtask 2.A.4. instructs us to incentivize members of the RTAC Partner

Pool to remain members throughout the contract period. Could you provide more guidance about what types of incentives are permitted or not permitted? For instance, is it acceptable to offer monetary incentives to members who remain in the pool or who participate more extensively?

USAID Response: USAID leaves it up to Offerors to propose the incentive arrangement that seems the most appropriate, feasible, and manageable to them. USAID is particularly interested in Offerors who have plans to incentivize participation of a diverse RTAC Partner Pool, consistent with the demographics found on pages 42-43 of the RFP under the “Requirements of the RTAC Partner Pool” section. In addition to the incentives identified in the question, USAID could envision other realistic incentive structures to include (but not limited to): opportunities for RTAC Partner Pool researchers to publish on their work completed under the RTAC, support for trainings for RTAC Partner Pool members (either virtual or in person), networking and network building among members or opportunities for RTAC

Partner Pool members to publish their own academic work (once approved) on the RTAC website.

Please also see Question #20 for additional information.

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=5a7b98b38791da4c77e6c8041a0c62cf&tab=core&_cview=0

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 7

10. Section C.4, p. 26 - Could you provide guidance about the intensity of the research workload?

Approximately how frequently will USAID request research products? What will be the approximate turnaround times for these deliverables?

USAID Response: Per page 110 of the RFP, “additional work required under the RTAC Contract will be supported via “buy-ins” from other centers within the Global Development Lab, as well as by other

USAID M/B/IOs with interest in deepening their relationships with the academic community (as seen in the italicized Tasks 4.D, 5.C, 6.D, and 7). It is currently envisioned that between $2M-$4M per year of additional work will be requested via negotiated buy-ins to the RTAC Contract.” Beyond that estimate, USAID cannot predict the frequency or quantity in which USAID will need to request additional research support or products. Similarly, timelines for additional activities will vary, but, USAID would envision that most activities would be requested for completion within one month to 12 months, depending on the breadth and scope of the proposed additional activity(ies).

11. Section C.4, pp. 38-39 - The RFP states that offerors should propose specific individuals to fill the key administrative personnel positions. XXX is a soft-money research institute affiliated with the University of XXX. As such, our staff has expertise in all of the required areas.

However in the absence of an award, currently-employed individuals are staffed on other projects, and the assignment of specific people to the key administrative positions would depend on their availability at the time of the award. How flexible is USAID about identifying specific individuals for each role in our submission? May we propose multiple candidates to fill the roles in order to give ourselves staffing flexibility if we receive the award?

USAID Response: As noted on pages 110-111 of the RFP, “FACTOR 4: Management & Staffing

Plan/Institutional Capabilities/Sub-factor 2: Key Personnel”, “the Offeror must propose key personnel who demonstrate the necessary experience and qualifications to develop, manage, and implement the scope outlined in this SOW, as well as individuals who meet or exceed the qualifications outlined in this

RFP. The Offeror must propose key personnel to fill the following roles: RTAC Project Director, Research Director, RTAC Operations Manager, Senior Communications & Engagement Lead, and

Monitoring & Evaluation Lead. The Offeror must clearly describe the requirements and responsibilities for each key personnel position identified, consistent with the RFP and the Offeror’s proposed approach.

These requirements and responsibilities will be incorporated into Section F.5 of the final Contract

Award.” Further, as noted in Section M of the RFP (page 123), Technical Evaluation Criteria Sub-factor

4.2: Offerors will be evaluated on, “The extent to which the Offeror identifies Key Personnel who meet or exceed the qualifications outlined in this RFP and clearly describes the responsibilities each Key

Personnel member will fulfill, in a way that is consistent with the RFP and the Offeror’s proposed approach, and that will likely lead to successful implementation.” Therefore, USAID believes that

Offerors that do not clearly identify qualified and available Key Personnel as a part of their proposals will not score as highly as those Offerors who do present qualified and available Key Personnel as a part of their proposal packages.

Finally, as found on page 38 of the RFP in the implementation section, please note that, “Before removing, replacing, or diverting any of the specified individuals, the Contractor shall notify the RTAC

COR and CO, in writing, before the change becomes effective. The Contractor shall submit information

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 8 to support the proposed action to enable the RTAC COR and CO to evaluate the potential impact of the change on the contract. The Contractor shall not remove or replace personnel under this contract until the

RTAC CO approves the change.”

12. Section C.4, pp. 38-39 - Our group includes several Ph.D. development economists with diverse regional and topical areas of expertise. We feel that two people working as research co-directors would do a more effective job and provide a higher-quality product than a single person. Is it acceptable to propose two people to serve as research co-directors at half time rather than a single research director at full time?

USAID Response: USAID leaves it up to Offerors to propose the staffing structure that is most appropriate, feasible, and manageable for the Offeror and the proposed approach. USAID is not opposed to Offerors’ proposing two co-directors (each at 50% time) to fill the role of Research Director if the

Offeror feels as if this will result in the strongest management arrangement for their proposed technical approach.

Please refer to USAID’s response to question 11 for additional information regarding Key Personnel expectations and evaluation.

13. Evaluation Criteria — Section M.2, p. 122 - The RFP provides guidance about the percentage of individuals from different categories in the partner pool. However it does not indicate how large the partner pool should be in order for a proposal to be competitive. Could you please provide guidance about the size of the initial partner pool that you expect to see?

USAID Response: USAID intentionally did not mandate the size of the initially proposed RTAC Partner

Pool as we want to leave it up to Offerors to propose the size that feels most appropriate to them based on their unique approaches to the RFP. Therefore, the “size” of the partner pool is not included as an explicit evaluation criteria. Rather, Offerors are notified under Sub-factor 1.1 (page 122) that they will be evaluated on “The extent to which the Offeror proposes an initial RTAC Partner Pool that meets the demographic parameters, diversity goals, and qualification expectations (technical and regional range of proposed researchers) outlined in Section L (see Section C: Task 2). Offerors who present a list of Partner

Pool members that exceed the target demographic numbers noted in Section L will be viewed favorably.

This will be the heaviest weighted sub-factor in this Factor.” Offerors should propose RTAC Partner

Pools that are sufficiently large and diverse in expertise and make-up that they they can meet (or exceed) all of the goals noted, as demonstrated in their completed and submitted “Proposed Members of the

RTAC Partner Pool” form. It is possible that one Offeror could have a higher NUMBER of proposed members of the RTAC Partner Pool, while still not meeting the requirement to have a diverse Partner

Pool. Similarly, it is possible that an Offeror could propose a robust diversity of skills and membership amongst only a small group of extremely qualified researchers. The ultimate evaluation and determination for this sub-factor will be made based on an analysis of the Offerors ability to meet or exceed the demographic parameters, diversity goals, and qualification expectations as outlined in the

RFP.

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 9

14. Contractual – Pages 8-9, Section B.5: Please clarify by what mechanism the M/B/IO buy-ins will be incorporated into the contract.

(1) Is it correct that the as-yet- undefined buy-in work will be specified by the Template 1 form, to which the RTAC Contractor will respond with a proposal for conducting the work using Template 2, which if accepted will be incorporated into the contract in the form of an amendment using Template 3 and that work on such an activity can only begin once the amendment has been executed.

USAID Response: Templates 1-3 were provided as illustrative examples of the type of Templates

USAID envisions using throughout the duration of this contract to facilitate the review and incorporation of buy-ins. Given this, there may be changes to the actual templates once the successful Offeror is identified, but, this general format/approach will be maintained. Yes, the Questioner’s interpretation is correct-- a USAID M/B/IO wishing to buy-in will complete Template 1, it will be provided to the RTAC

Contractor who will respond with a proposal under Template 2, and it will be incorporated into the

Contract via a formal amendment using a template similar to Template 3. One caveat to this to note is that the completion of Template 2 (the Contractor’s proposed response to the identified work) might occur at the RTAC Prime level OR, more likely, it will occur in partnership with an RTAC sub-contractor/Partner Pool Member who is proposing to complete that specific piece of work on behalf of the

RTAC Contractor.

(2) Please confirm that the cost of RTAC Contractor staff preparing the Template 2 response to Template 1 (which will necessarily involve Key Personnel) is an allowable cost under the Contract.

USAID Response: Yes, the cost of RTAC Contractor staff preparing and negotiating the response for

Template 2 (in addition to the cost of time for RTAC Contractor staff to manage a solicitation for a sub-contractor to support the completion of work under Template 2) is an allowable cost under the Contract. It should be included in the Fixed Price cost proposed by Offerors for Years 1-4 and should be listed under

Personnel Costs or discreetly under costs associated with Task 2: Establish and Maintain a Higher

Education-based RTAC Partner Pool which, under Subtask “Subtask 2.A.2: Develop and Implement a

Process for Marketing RTAC Opportunities and Selecting Qualified Researchers for USAID Requests” requires the Contractor to, develop and implement a “process for quickly marketing RTAC research opportunities to the RTAC Partner Pool (via SOWs/RFPs), soliciting responses, facilitating selection, and making subcontracts to support specific work. USAID reserves the right to approve the final selection of the proposed researcher(s) for each identified deliverable, or to request that USAID serve on the selection review board for some activities.”

The USAID RTAC contract does not, however, include specific funding for the costs of proposal application or preparation time that may be incurred by individual researchers under the RTAC Partner

Pool. Those expenses would be born by individual researchers and contributed at their own risk, just as they would have risk with any other research proposal they chose to submit as a part of their ongoing research agenda.

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 10

15. Contractual – Page 11, Section B.6. The RFP requires quarterly submission of SF-425 to the

COR. Please confirm this requirement and clarify its purpose, as SF-425 is typically used to report expenditures against advances/lines of credit under assistance agreements, not contracts.

USAID Response: USAID apologizes for the administrative oversight and corrects the error via this modification. USAID confirms that the SF-425 is not required under the Contract. Rather, monthly invoices for this contract will be required to be submitted in a timely manner on the SF-1034 form with any accompanying supporting documentation as required (per Section B.6.3).

16. Contractual – Page 11, Section B.8: The RFP states “All travel must be approved by the designated Contracting Officer Representative (COR).” Please clarify if this approval requirement applies to domestic travel within the U.S. or just to international travel (as implied by Section H.9).

USAID Response: Yes, the approval process referenced will only apply to international travel.

17. Contractual – Page 16, Section C.2: The RFP states “These individuals would then be available to serve as individual technical advisors, via subcontract agreements, upon whom USAID can call on for support across a wide variety of technical sectors as needed.” Please confirm that the term “subcontract agreements” as used here includes the use of consultant agreements with academic researchers as individuals (as is implied later on p. 17 in Section C.3).

USAID Response: Yes, “subcontract agreements” could come in the form of consultant agreements with academic researchers as individuals, consistent with institutional policies and regulations and provided the overall provisions of the Contract are followed.

18. Technical – Page 18, Section C.3: The RFP states “USAID expects that Offerors will lay out a clear plan in their proposals regarding how they will complete all of these plain text activities as part of their proposals.” Similar statements are found elsewhere in the RFP. We note, however, that the description of the tasks required under the contract total 18 single-spaced pages whereas the entire technical proposal is limited to 20 double-spaced pages. While we appreciate

USAID’s desire to avoid offerors having to prepare overly lengthy responses, we ask that

USAID reconsider the current page limit or provide additional guidance on how offerors should address the RFPs many tasks within the limited number of pages allowed.

USAID Response: Per item Number 1 in the “Substantive Changes to Text” section of this Amendment, USAID hereby modifies the page restriction for the narrative portion of the Technical Proposal for RTAC from 20 double-spaced pages to 25 double-spaced pages.

19. Technical – Page 23, Section C.4: The RFP states “The RTAC Prime must be available to assist applicants interested in applying to be considered for inclusion in the RTAC Partner Pool as needed (i.e. securing a Dun & Broadstreet's Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number, registering with the System for Award Management (SAM)). Please confirm that these

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 11 requirements only apply to institutions/organizations wishing to participate in the RTAC

Partner Pool, not individuals who wish to be engaged as consultants.

USAID Response: Per the RFP, the need for DUNS and SAM registration is a requirement for inclusion in the RTAC Partner Pool. This statement is applicable to all partners regardless of the entity’s classification (individual, institutional, organizational).

20. Technical – Page 25, Section C.4: Under Subtask 2.A.4, please clarify whether USAID will accept an incentives program that might include small-amount research-support funds or whether such incentives need to limited to in-kind support (such as funding conference registration fees, for example) or incentives that do not require the use of contract funds. If use of contract funds is allowable for this purpose, please specify any limitations of which offerors should be aware.

USAID Response: USAID leaves it up to Offerors to propose the incentive arrangement that seems the most appropriate, feasible, and manageable to them. Contract funds may be used for this purpose, and should be budgeted accordingly in the Offerors’ budget proposal for Contract Years 1-4. USAID is particularly interested in Offerors who have plans to incentivize participation of a diverse RTAC Partner

Pool, consistent with the demographics found on pages 42-43 of the RFP under the “Requirements of the

RTAC Partner Pool” section. There is nothing in the RFP that prohibits Offerors from proposing to provide small-amount research-support funds or funding of conference registration fees for RTAC Partner

Pool participation as a part of the proposal. However, Offerors should be advised that Cost Evaluation will also play a role in the ultimate best value determination made by USAID and therefore should consider expenses carefully while crafting proposed approaches to this Subtask.

Please see response to Question #09 for additional information.

21. Technical – Pages 40-41, Section C.4: The RTAC Operations Manager and Senior

Communications & Engagement Lead are both specified as part-time positions. What is

USAID’s expectation of the proportion of time that these positions will require (ie, does “part-time” here refer to 50% time or something more like 75% time)?

USAID Response: As noted on page 10 of the RFP, “...the level of effort for full-time key personnel is

2080 hours. For all other positions the offeror must propose the labor categories and the level of effort.”

Thus, USAID leaves it up to Offerors to propose the staffing structure that is most appropriate, feasible, and manageable for the Offeror and the proposed approach. Note that Cost Evaluation will also play a role in the ultimate best value determination made by USAID, thus Offerors should consider expenses carefully when establishing a staffing structure. Please refer to USAID’s response to question 11 for additional information regarding Key Personnel expectations and evaluation.

22. Contractual – Page 67, Section H.7: This clause repeats Section G.12; we suggest one of these clauses be deleted for clarity.

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 12

USAID Response: Agreed. Consider clause AIDAR 752.7007 PERSONNEL COMPENSATION (JUL

2007) to be deleted in its entirety as cited in H.7.

23. Contractual – Page 80, Section H.26: Please clarify the intent of “The contractor/recipient must maintain a Facility Security Clearance (FCL) at the level on the DD Form 254.” In particular:

(a) The RFP does not provide DD Form 254 nor any information on the level of security (ie, secret v. top secret); what requirement is intended to be met?

USAID Response: Form DD 254 which is referenced is only required to initiate the process to obtain a clearance. For RTAC it is expected that the successful offeror will obtain a Facility Security Clearance

(FCL).

(b) ADS 567 states at 567.3.2.a.: “According to the NISPOM, if the contract or assistance award is determined to be classified, the contractor or recipient must have or be able to maintain a valid Facility (Security) Clearance (FCL) equal to the level of Secret or Top

Secret, as specified in the contract or award.” Please confirm that this does not preclude an offeror which does not currently possess such an FCL from consideration for award by

USAID, subject to its willingness and presumed ability to obtain the appropriate FCL as quickly as the approval process will allow upon award and that, consistent with ADS 567, the appropriate USAID B/IO will provide the necessary FCL Sponsorship Request Letter.

USAID Response: Correct this will not inhibit the ability to receive award and as previously stated the successful offeror will need to be willing and able to obtain a FCL with the assistance of the USAID B/IO responsible for this procurement.

(c) Where the prime offeror does not yet have the to-be-specified FCL and an FCL requirement arises before the prime offeror’s FCL is obtained, may that FCL requirement be fulfilled by a subcontractor?

USAID Response: No, the Security requirement is that of the RTAC Prime.

24. Contractual – Pages 80-82, Section H.26: With regard to personal security clearances that may be required under the contract, please confirm that personnel with such clearances are required on an “as needed” basis and that such requirements will be communicated to the

Contractor as part of the MBIO Project Scope to Request RTAC Buy-In (Template 1 of the

RFP).

USAID Response: Yes, since the contractor will have a need to obtain only a Facility Security Clearance

(FCL) any additional security will apply as needed to individual personnel in accordance with AIDAR

704.404 in text below:

(a) When the contract includes a requirement for the contractor to access classified

(“Confidential”, “Secret”, or “Top Secret”), or administratively controlled (“Sensitive But

Unclassified”) information, the contracting officer must insert (48 CFR) FAR clause 52.204-2, Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 13

Security Requirements and (48 CFR) AIDAR clause 752.204-2, Security Requirements, in the solicitation and award.

(b) If the contract requires the contractor (or contractor employees) to have routine physical access to USAID-controlled facilities in the U.S. (i.e., will need an ID for regular entry to USAID space), or have logical access to USAID's information systems (i.e., access to AIDNet, Phoenix, the Global Acquisition and Assistance System (GLAAS,) etc.,) and the solicitation and contract contains (48 CFR) FAR 52.204-9(a), the contracting officer must also insert (48 CFR) AIDAR

752.204-72, Access to USAID Facilities and USAID's Information Systems. Only U.S citizen employees or consultants of a U.S.-based company may request routine physical access to

USAID-controlled facilities or logical access to USAID's information systems.

25. Contractual – Pages 84, FAR 52.211-12: Our reading of the RFP does not indicate any construction activities are contemplated; please clarify under what circumstances this FAR clause would apply?

USAID Response: Please disregard the inclusion of FAR clause 52.211-12 as construction activities are not a factor.

26. Contractual – Pages 84, FAR 52.219-16: Potentially the bulk of the work to be conducted under the contract (the italicized text in Section C) is not yet fully defined, will only be specified incrementally by USAID, and may not fully materialize if contract buy-ins are less than anticipated. Please confirm that USAID recognizes the uncertainty associated with the nature of the work is outside of the Contractor’s control and may limit the Contractor’s ability to meet its proposed subcontracting goals and that this uncertainty will be considered when assess the

Contractor’s good faith efforts with respect to this FAR clause.

USAID Response: Yes, USAID does recognize the uncertainty associated with the nature of the work proposed in portions of this Contract. However, it is an expectation of the Contract Award that Offerors will make a good faith effort towards meeting or exceeding their small business subcontracting goals throughout the duration of the Contract period, regardless of when/how many additional buy-ins are finalized. USAID recommends that Offerors that are other than small businesses construct their original subcontracting breakouts, and subsequent plan for fulfilling additional buy-in scopes, with this information in mind.

27. Contractual – Page 104, Section L.2.b.2): Please clarify this requirement in light of questions

(23) and (24) above. Please confirm also that the process for Employment

Authorization/unescorted facility access will be fulfilled after contract award.

USAID Response: Please see responses to questions 22 and 23 and yes this will be a requirement upon award.

28. Technical – Pages 106-110, Section L.4.I.A-B.: The four technical factors listed in this section make multiple references to offerors providing details on many of the contract components – approach for establishing and maintain the RTAC Partner Pool; the application process;

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 14 detailed plans for non-italicized Tasks 3, 4, 5, and 6 (and subtasks); identifying/recruiting, selecting, and developing cost responses to buy-in requests; a management plan, including key personnel requirements and responsibilities for incorporation into the contract – as well as personnel and institutional capabilities of the offeror team. As noted above, it appears exceedingly challenging to meet all of these evaluation criteria (which require more than four single-spaced pages to enumerate) in the equivalent of 10 single-spaced pages. Please consider providing some limited additional pages for addressing the technical requirements.

USAID Response: Per item Number 1 in the “Substantive Changes to Text” section of this Amendment, USAID hereby modifies the page restriction for the narrative portion of the Technical Proposal for RTAC from 20 double-spaced pages to 25 double-spaced pages.

29. Technical – Page 112, Section L.4.I.B.: The subcontracting goals indicated are for USAID as a whole. The subcontracted work anticipated under the contract will largely be carried out by academic institutions that, by their non-profit status, would not qualify as small businesses even if they met the annual revenue test. This limits the ability of offerors to direct work to small businesses to meet the subcontracting goals. Given this, will USAID require offerors to submit subcontracting plans that match the Agency goals or will it accept and not rate unfavorably subcontracting plans that realistically reflect the nature of the work being ordered?

USAID Response: As detailed under “Sub-factor 4: Utilization of Small Businesses” (page 112), “the

Government will evaluate the extent to which the Offeror proposes to provide meaningful opportunities for small business participation during performance of the RTAC Contract. USAID anticipates that those non-small business Offerors who exceed the goals noted [on page 112] in their proposals will be viewed more favorably in the evaluation of sub-factor 4.4 than those non-small business Offerors who merely meet the subcontracting goals.”

The Offeror is also reminded that USAID expects that some portions of the RTAC Prime’s work will be subcontracted to small businesses. As noted on page 18, the use of “RTAC Prime” in the text “...is not intended to suggest that the RTAC Prime may not propose subcontracts under the Prime Contract. Rather, USAID expects that all non-small business Offerors will propose that some portions of the following

SOW could be best performed by small business subcontractors and will set-aside those components of work for the small business community accordingly.”

USAID anticipates that small business plans submitted by Offerors will concretely demonstrate their plans to meet or exceed the Agency's small business goals for all portions of the SOW to be completed on a Fixed Price basis (which includes any proposed costs the Offeror is including in their proposal Budget

Summary Table) because these are the currently known tasks/costs. In addition, USAID directs

Offerors to document in their proposals their plans to demonstrate and exert a good faith effort to meet or exceed these same targets as they seek to complete any potential additional work via partnership with university researchers (to be funded under a cost-reimbursement model) identified post-Contract award.

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 15

Finally, once awarded, and as noted on page 114 of the RFP, "throughout the Contract period, the successful Offeror must submit requisite subcontracting reports via the electronic Subcontracting

Reporting System (eSRS) and the Contracting Officer will monitor the contractor's subcontracting performance. The contractor's small business utilization will be addressed twice a year via submission of individual subcontract reports (ISR reports) in the eSRS system."

30. Can research institutes with highly qualified technical staff that are experienced in delivering technical assistance to USAID missions (and other organizations) be part of the RTAC Partner

Pool, or must the Partner Pool be comprised solely of universities and university-affiliated academics?

USAID Response: As noted on page 108, “USAID envisions that the most critical job of the RTAC

Prime will be to establish and manage a network of university-based short-term research support providers for USAID that are able to provide expertise in the vast array of technical and geographic areas in which USAID works (Section C: Task 2). This network, known as the RTAC Partner Pool, is envisioned to be comprised primarily of university researchers, faculty, and graduate students (domestic and international) as well as (potentially) research institutions/consortia of university departments who can be available to respond to time-sensitive and varied USAID needs as a part of the RTAC Partner

Pool.” For purposes of this RFP, USAID defines higher education institutions as follows, consistent with guidance provided by USAID/E3/Education: “A tertiary education institution is an organization that provides educational opportunities that build on secondary education, providing learning activities in specialized fields. It aims at learning at a high level of complexity and specialization. Tertiary education includes what is commonly understood as academic education but also includes advanced vocational or professional education. This may include public or private universities, colleges, research institutes, training institutes [including teacher training institutes], etc.” Tasks that might be better suited for a small-business sub-award should be considered for a possible set-aside for small businesses.

Cost Proposal Questions

1. Technical/Cost — Section C.4, p. 27 - Is the political economy analysis of wildlife trafficking in the Mekong Delta typical of the assignments we should expect from USAID? How much researcher time is reasonable to budget for this assignment?

USAID Response: USAID envisions that additional work of the type outlined in this SOW could come from any of the various geographic or technical regions in which USAID works. But, yes, the activity found in Subtask 4.A.1 is a good illustrative example of the type of activities USAID anticipates supporting under this Contract. It is up to individual Offerors to propose in their approach to USAID the amount of time and the corresponding budget that they feel is reasonable to complete the task.

2. Cost – Page 8, Section B.5: Are all of the costs in Budget Table 1.1 considered to be part of the fixed price component of the contract (ie, both the costs in the first five lines – Personnel, Fringe

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 16

Benefits, Travel, Equipment, Supplies – and the specific tasks and subtasks that follow) or are the first five lines treated as cost-reimbursable?

USAID Response: All costs for Contract Years 1-4, to be included in Budget Table 1.1, are considered to be part of the fixed price component of the contract. This should include expected costs for all activities noted in Section C in plain text (NON-italicized text) that should be budgeted for as a part of the RTAC

Prime’s Budget.

Any additional activities identified post-award (essentially all italicized activities listed in Section C.)

should not be specifically budgeted for at this time and instead will be evaluated and awarded based on an analysis of the proposed hourly/daily rates identified by Offerors in their RTAC Labor Rate Chart. The

“other costs” associated with those new activities (travel, equipment, supplies, etc.) will be negotiated at that time.

3. Cost – Page 8, Section B.5: Please confirm that:

(a) the total amount to be shown in Budget Table 1.1 is the sum of all fixed price components

(non-italicized sections of the Statement of Work (SOW)) plus the cost of supplying the key personnel and support required to operate the project;

USAID Response: This is correct.

(b) if so, the difference in cost between the total in Budget Table 1.1 and the $24 million ceiling is the amount available for “buy-ins” by M/B/IOs; and

USAID Response: This is correct.

(c) no illustrative budget for this difference needs to be prepared or submitted.

USAID Response: Per page 9 of the RFP, in “order to enable the Government to evaluate the costs for additional services to be performed under this contract Offerors must complete and submit the RTAC

Labor Rate Chart (Table 2) to outline proposed costs by labor category for additional technical assistance and support service needs to be fulfilled under this Contract. Once negotiated, the final burdened rates from the RTAC Labor Rate Chart will be incorporated into the final Contract Award for the successful

Offeror and will be used to determine appropriate salary costs for consultants supported under the

“additional” Section C tasks as they are further defined in the future.” All other costs associated with the additional tasks will be negotiated at the time of buy-in and will be formally modified into the Contract via an amendment to the Contract.

4. Cost – Page 8, Section B.5: Some cells in Budget Table 1.1 are blank and others contain “$0.00.”

(a) Please clarify if these differences are material.

USAID Response: It is the expectation that the Offeror will determine cost values for the blank cells in the document. Cells with $0.00 (that are not summation cells) there is no expectation of costs in the corresponding year (ie Task 6.A.1 is denoted as occurring only in Year 1, therefore has a blank cell in the

Amendment 01 to 7200AA18R00023 – Research Technical Assistance Center (RTAC) | 17 corresponding Year 1 column and $0.00 in the cells corresponding to Years 2-4).