Innovation_and_Challenge_Programs_Support_Services__Amendment_1_7200AA18R00043.pdf

Subject: Request for Proposals (RFP) SOL No: 7200AA18R00043 Amendment Number: One (1) Issuance Date of Amendment Number One (1): Friday, July 6, 2018 Closing Date: July 20, 2018 Closing Time: 5 pm EST

Subject: USAID Request for Proposals (RFP) NO. SOL-7200AA18R00043, Innovation and Challenge Programs Support Services

Dear Prospective Offeror:

The purpose of this Amendment One (1) to the RFP Number SOL-7200AA18R00043 is to answer questions and provide any new information regarding the RFP. Please read carefully for any specific instructions.

Question 1. Is this a new requirement, or is this work, or any portion of the work currently being performed by a contractor? If so, would the Government please provide the incumbent’s name and contract number?

Answer 1. Much of the work anticipated under this procurement is similar in scope to services provided to USAID/LAB/CDI by DAI under AID-OAA-C-14-00185; additionally and due to the varied nature of the tasks required, CDI has procured services through buy-ins to other contracts and cooperative agreements throughout the agency in order to access specialized services.

Question 2. Is it possible to bid and win work under this solicitation without having the facility clearance and/or can we use a partnering company’s facility clearance until we are adjudicated?

Answer 2. A partnering company’s facility clearance may be used until the prime is able to receive clearance.

Question 3. Page 9 section B.5 notes that the obligated amount will be incrementally funded and determined at time of award. Please confirm that sufficient funds will be made available to fully mobilize the project’s two Key Personnel during the initial work planning period and to maintain core project activities.

Answer 3. USAID anticipates obligating sufficient resources at the time of award to fund two Key Personnel and initial work planning for the base period.

Question 4. Page 11 section B.6 provides a plug figure for travel, can USAID please confirm that this plug figure is to be used exclusively by direct labor on this contract, and that travel costs associated with project activities can be budgeted through a separate line item. Additionally, can the offeror propose an amount that better aligns with its technical approach?

Answer 4. The plug figure provided is exclusively for direct labor. The offeror may propose an amount that better aligns with its technical approach.

Question 5. Page 11 section B.6 includes a “Misc.” cost category line. Can USAID please clarify the purpose of “Misc.” as opposed to other line items in the Other Direct Costs table?

Answer 5. Anything that is outside of the defined categories will be considered Misc.

Question 6. Page 15 section C.4.1 and Page 58 section H.21 suggest that subgrants will be a large component of this project. However, Section B.6 “Awarded Prices” includes no line item or plug figure for sub-grants. Can USAID please confirm whether it intends for this project to issue sub-grants and subcontracts? If so, would USAID consider providing a plug figure value for sub-grants and subcontracts for budgeting?

Answer 6. USAID anticipates that subgrants will be a up to $100k-$500k per year. USAID anticipates a higher annual sub-contract amount of up to $1.0-2.0M per year although this figure may vary greatly depending on the offerors technical approach.

Question 7. Page 22 section C.4.1 states “All Key Personnel and core representation of the contractor must be based in a location near (within approximately 1.0 mile) to CDI’s offices located in the Ronald Reagan Building (1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW) in Washington, DC in order to accommodate timely and effective collaboration of work,” which implies the contractor is expected to find office space. However, page 101 states “USAID will provide office space, a computer, and basic office supplies for each position.” Can USAID please confirm that the offeror should budget for office space, computers, and basic office supplies?

Answer 7. In some cases, USAID may provide office space and a computer, however, the majority of project staff will not be provided office space by USAID and the offeror should provide space and supplies.

Question 8. Page 29 section F.13 states the contractor agrees to supply biographical data sheets for individuals traveling outside of the U.S. and “any employees designated as key personnel.” Given that this contract is Time and Materials and the contractor will bill fully loaded hourly rates, please confirm employee biographical data sheets are not required.

Answer 8. Only for the Key Personnel as requested, please include rates in your budget breakdown.

Question 9. The last two paragraphs on page 94 section L.5 state:

“Each potential offeror must be able to perform all elements of the scope under the two concentrations listed in Section C of this solicitation, found within the table. It is not USAID’s intent to partially award this action to firms by unique concentrations or elements therein. Due to the complexity of the requirement, the successful offeror shall provide narrative to illustrate how each element and tasks therein listed under the two concentrations will be achieved. This narrative should be detailed and should illustrate the resources required to complete the requirements.”

However, there is no reference to “two concentrations” elsewhere in the RFP. Could USAID please clarify what this refers to?

Answer 9. Replace the above statement on page 94 with the following:

“Each potential offeror must be able to perform all elements of the scope under the six concentrations listed in Section C.4 of this solicitation. It is not USAID’s intent to partially award this action to firms by unique concentrations or elements therein. Due to the complexity of the requirement, the successful offeror shall provide narrative to illustrate how each element and tasks therein listed under the six concentrations will be achieved. This narrative should be detailed and should illustrate the resources required to complete the requirements.”

Question 10. Page 93 Section L.4 (a) 4 states that “Proposals can be double-sided page numbered, and contain a table of contents. The sections and annexes in the technical and cost proposals must be tabbed and listed in the table of contents.” Since offerors are required to submit only electronic submissions, please confirm that the double-sided and tabbed requirements do not apply.

Answer 10. Confirmed.

Question 11. Page 94 Section L.5 – May the offeror include a list of acronyms and abbreviations that does not count toward the 50-page limit?

Answer 11. Yes, the offeror may include a list of acronyms and abbreviations. This will not count toward the 50-page limit.

Question 12. Page 94 Section L.5.3 states “Past Performance Report Short-Forms” and “Relevant Past Performance References” are not included in the 50 page limit. Can USAID please clarify the difference between these two documents?

Answer 12. The Past Performance Report Short-forms include relevant references.

Question 13. Page 97 section L.5 includes an Institutional Mobilization Capacity section; however, there is no mention of this section as part of the evaluation criteria in Section M. Can USAID please provide guidance on how this section will be evaluated?

Answer 13. Please see question and answer #16.

Question 14. Page 97 L.5.3 Factor 3 - Institutional Mobilization Capacity states “Such a Personnel Strategy will demonstrate….” Can USAID please confirm this should state “Institutional Mobilization Capacity”?

Answer 14. Confirmed. Replace “Such a Personnel Strategy will demonstrate a highly effective methodology, capacity, and ability to provide the necessary capacity to deliver the tasks outlined in section C.” (page 97) with “Such an Institutional Mobilization Capacity will demonstrate a highly effective methodology, capacity, and ability to provide the necessary capacity to deliver the tasks outlined in section C.”

Question 15. Page 98 L.5.4 Factor 4 - Past Performance states “Offerors must provide three (3) examples of relevant past performance history…” farther down on the page it states “If the offeror/subcontractor encountered any problems on any of the references contracts…” Can USAID please confirm that prime offerors and subcontractors can each submit 3 past performance references?

Answer 15. Confirmed

Question 16. Page 104 section M.2 states the evaluation criteria will include the following 4 factors: (1) Technical Understanding and Approach (Technical Approach, Implementation Plan, and Organizational Capacity) (2) Staffing Plan and Key Personnel, (3) Past Performance and (4) Price, there is no mention of how the Management Plan will be evaluated. Can USAID please provide guidance on how the Management Plan will be evaluated?

Answer 16. Replace the following on pages 104-106:

“1) Technical Approach: (Technical Approach, Implementation Plan, Organizational Capacity)

2) Staffing Plan and Key Personnel:

3) Past Performance:

4) Price (not rated)

Factors 1-3 together are considered the non-price technical factors.

Overall Proposal Rating/Score: _____________________________

Factor 1: TECHNICAL UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH

The technical approach should detail offerors’ demonstrated ability and proposed strategy for performing the tasks outlined in section C. Offerors should explain their proposed methodology for supporting existing and new programming, their experience designing and implementing open and collaborative innovation programming, their approaches to accelerating innovation, and how they will integrate with USAID in achieving these goals. The Approach should explain the offeror’s ability to implement what they have proposed, as well as their ability to adapt their management and approach to respond quickly and flexibly to evolving needs as the Center’s and Lab’s strategies are further defined. Excellence in execution in each of the tasks defined in Section C will be critical to the successful proposal.

An ideal technical Approach will possess a significant number of strengths and few or no weaknesses. Such a Technical Approach will demonstrate a highly effective methodology that possesses sound, logical processes to achieve stated objectives in a sustainable manner.

Offeror demonstrates a superior, well-seasoned understanding of open and collaborative innovation programs and how to support them. Offers a precise, compelling vision of the future complexion of the strategic intent of the center and articulates a viable strategy for achieving the goals in their vision. Technical Approach shows a strong capacity to deliver on nearly all required technical activities.

● Demonstrated knowledge of grant management policies, procedures, and appropriate application of those procedures for grantees.

● Demonstrate that understandings of the services outlined in the SOW were understood.

● Demonstrate proven success in providing response to requested task and management of multiple ongoing activities or assignments simultaneously.

● Must demonstrate the ability to meet the technical capabilities listed in the illustrative deliverables in each overarching objectives listed in the section C of the SOW. Evidence of the technical capability should be listed in order of each objectives listed in the SOW.

● Demonstrated knowledge of acceleration support services for grantees and appropriate application and conditions that need to be in place to successfully accelerate grantees.

● Demonstrated knowledge of Performance Evaluation and appropriate application and conditions that need to be in place to evaluate results of technical assistance provided.

● Demonstrated knowledge and capacity to be flexible to the support needs of each grantee while detailing an overall integrated strategy for the SOW.

● Demonstrated knowledge of and ability to identify and source highly specialized technical assistance services for each grantee.

FACTOR 2: KEY PERSONNEL AND STAFF

The offeror’s proposed Personnel Strategy will be evaluated on two levels: Key Personnel and Other Personnel. Offerors should demonstrate their ability to recruit and retain relevant technical and administrative experts and should include examples of the type of experts they have available, if possible.

In terms of Key Personnel, offerors will be evaluated based on the quality of proposed personnel to fill the given Key Personnel positions in section C.5. Candidates that meet or exceed the requirements provided will be viewed more favorably.

In terms of Other Personnel, offerors will be evaluated on the flexibility and quality of their proposed strategy to source the very best, cost effective, talent available. An ideal Personnel Strategy will possess a significant number of strengths and few or no weaknesses. Such a Personnel Strategy will demonstrate a highly effective methodology that possesses sound, logical processes to provide the necessary staffing in the most cost-effective manner. Offeror demonstrates a superior, well-seasoned ability to recruit and retain relevant technical and administrative experts quickly and do so at the lowest possible cost while meeting the necessary level of expertise. Personnel Strategy shows a strong capacity to deliver on nearly all required position.

The proposal will also be evaluated on the following:

● Chief of Party proposed is appropriate to facilitate the successful implementation of the contract including strong management and coordination skills, and knowledge of USAID development programming and rules and regulations.

● Prime organization’s and Home office staffing capabilities

● Relevant qualification and experience of all staff, including management skills, education levels etc., for the work to be performed under this activity.

FACTOR 3 -PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Past Performance will be evaluated against both the strategic and implementation expectations described above under Technical Approach. Past Performance will demonstrate a consistent record of superior performance providing relevant services to Federal or other customers. The Government will use past performance data gathered and evaluate the following:

● The extent to which contract objectives were achieved and the quality of products or services provided in technical areas related to this RFP;

● Ability to provide high quality service, including consistency and timeliness of performance, including adherence to contract schedules meeting goals and other time-sensitive project conditions, and effectiveness of home office management;

● Customer satisfaction, including satisfactory business relationship to clients, initiation and management of several complex activities simultaneously, prompt and satisfactory correction of problems, and cooperative attitude in fixing problems;

● Effectiveness of key personnel including effectiveness and appropriateness of personnel for the job, and prompt and satisfactory changes in personnel when problems with clients are identified;

● Other sources of past performance information may be considered in the evaluation;

● Ability to control and forecast costs, budgeting and financial tracking, and accurately produce financial reporting.”

With the following:

“1) Technical Approach and Capability

2) Management and Personnel Plans

3) Institutional Mobilization Capacity

4) Past Performance

5) Price (not rated)

Factors 1-4 together are considered the non-price technical factors.

FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL APPROACH AND CAPABILITY

The Technical Approach and Capability should detail the offerors’ demonstrated ability and proposed strategy for performing the tasks outlined in section C. Offerors should explain their proposed methodology for supporting existing and new programming, their experience designing and implementing open innovation programming, their approaches to accelerating innovation, and how they will integrate with USAID in achieving these goals.

The Approach should explain the offeror’s ability to implement what they have proposed, as well as their ability to adapt their management and approach to respond quickly and flexibly to evolving needs as the Center’s strategies are further defined. Excellence in execution in each of the tasks defined in Section C will be critical to the successful proposal.

The Offeror may subcontract/partner to execute the Scope of Work in Section C. If subcontractor(s)/partner(s) will be used, Offeror shall provide a comprehensive list of subcontractor(s)/partner(s) within the proposal and provide a summary description of the subcontractor(s)/partner(s)’s area of expertise. The Offeror must describe collaboration process between prime and subcontractor/partner to implement the technical approach.

The subcontractor(s)/partner(s) may be current or potential future partners of the offeror.

An ideal Technical Approach and Capability will possess a significant number of strengths and few or no weaknesses. Such a Technical Approach will demonstrate a highly effective methodology that possesses sound, logical processes to achieve stated objectives in a sustainable manner. Offeror demonstrates a superior, well-reasoned understanding of open and collaborative innovation programs and how to support them. Offers a precise, compelling vision of the future complexion of the strategic intent of the Center and articulates a viable strategy for achieving the goals in their vision. Technical Approach shows a strong capacity to deliver on nearly all required technical activities.

The proposal will also be evaluated on the following:

● Demonstrate that understandings of the services outlined in the SOW were understood.

● Demonstrate proven success in providing response to requested task and management of multiple ongoing activities or assignments simultaneously.

● Must demonstrate the ability to meet the technical capabilities listed in the illustrative deliverables in each overarching objectives listed in the section C of the SOW. Evidence of the technical capability should be listed in order of each objectives listed in the SOW.

● Demonstrated knowledge of acceleration support services for grantees and appropriate application and conditions that need to be in place to successfully accelerate grantees.

● Demonstrated knowledge of Performance Evaluation and appropriate application and conditions that need to be in place to evaluate results of technical assistance provided.

● Demonstrated knowledge and capacity to be flexible to the support needs of each grantee while detailing an overall integrated strategy for the SOW.

L.5.2 FACTOR 2 – MANAGEMENT AND PERSONNEL PLANS

The offeror’s proposed Management Personnel Plans should demonstrate their ability to recruit and retain relevant technical and administrative experts and should include examples of the type of experts they have available, if possible.

Offerors will be evaluated on two levels: Management Plan, and Key Personnel and Other Personnel.

In terms of Key Personnel, offerors will be evaluated based on the quality of proposed personnel to fill the given Key Personnel positions in section C.5. Candidates that meet or exceed the requirements provided will be viewed more favorably. In terms of Other Personnel, offerors will be evaluated on the flexibility and quality of their proposed strategy to source and retain the very best, cost effective, talent available.

Short Term Technical Assistance (STTA) and/or Long Term Technical Assistance (LTTA) may be used. USAID reserves the right to approve/deny any subcontractor(s)/partner(s) that are not specified at the time of the award of the contract.

An ideal Personnel Strategy will possess a significant number of strengths and few or no weaknesses. Such a Personnel Strategy will demonstrate a highly effective methodology that possesses sound, logical processes to provide the necessary staffing in the most cost-effective manner. Offeror demonstrates a superior, well-reasoned ability to recruit and retain relevant technical and administrative experts quickly and do so at the lowest possible cost while meeting the necessary level of expertise. Personnel Strategy shows a strong capacity to deliver on required management and staffing needs.

The proposal will also be evaluated on the following:

● A management plan that clearly delineates the roles and responsibilities of Key Personnel and other staff that may be required to complete the activities described in Sections C through F. The management plan should include an organizational chart and describe The Offeror’s proposed decision-making structure and system for the internal controls and communication.

● Chief of Party proposed is appropriate to facilitate the successful implementation of the contract including strong management and coordination skills, and knowledge of USAID development programming and rules and regulations.

● Prime organization’s and Home office staffing capabilities.

● A management plan and approach that logically and clearly outlines the necessary procedures, management plan and organizational structure that will enable the offeror to effectively establish and maintain a wide range of staffing and procurement capabilities.

● Relevant qualification and experience of all staff, including management skills, education levels etc., for the work to be performed under this activity.

● Ability to offer competitive salary and benefits, as well as opportunities for staff development and career advancement in order to recruit and retain personnel for highly technical roles.

FACTOR 3 – INSTITUTIONAL MOBILIZATION CAPACITY

The Institutional Mobilization Capacity should detail the extent to which the Offeror’s Proposal (inclusive of Prime Organization + subcontractors) provides an array of institutional capabilities likely to lead to successful completion of this SOW. USAID anticipates that a significant amount of work will need to be subcontracted because of the specialized skills and geography where the services need to be provided. The proposal will also be evaluated on the following:

An ideal Institutional Mobilization Capacity will possess a significant number of strengths and few or no weaknesses. Such a Personnel Strategy will demonstrate a highly effective methodology, capacity, and ability to provide the necessary capacity to deliver the tasks outlined in section C.

● Demonstrated knowledge of USAID grant and contract management policies, procedures, and appropriate application of those procedures for subawards.

● Ability to work with USAID to develop cost structures for specific activities such that USAID will be able to quickly address the wide array of regional and technical needs likely to be presented by USAID.

● Prime organization’s contract and grant management capacity to quickly and efficiently procure a wide range of services and staffing capabilities.

● Demonstrated capacity to procure additional technical capacity from short term-consultants to longer-term engagements with firms through subcontracts or subgrants.

● Demonstrated knowledge of and ability to identify and source highly specialized technical assistance services for each grantee.

[Note: USAID may require the offeror to submit a copy of the offerors personal policies, regarding salary, wage scales, fringe benefit, merit increases, promotions, leave, as they relate to this project]

FACTOR 4 – PAST PERFORMANCE

Offerors must provide three (3) examples of relevant past performance history that focuses on record of conforming to contract requirements and to standards of good workmanship;

record of forecasting and controlling costs, the contractor's adherence to contract schedules, including administrative aspects of performance; the contractor's history of reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction; the business-like concern for the interest of the customer; and the competency of key personnel who worked on the contract. The Offeror can submit examples of past performance. In cases where an offeror lacks relevant past performance history, information on past performance is not available; the offeror will not be evaluated favorable or unfavorable.

● The Offeror is required to submit Past Performance Information responding to the evaluation criteria set forth in Section M as it relates to performance of the tasks outlined in Section C of this solicitation. Past performance information shall be provided for the offeror and each proposed subcontractor. The past performance information shall be submitted in accordance with the following:

● The proposal should include past performance information demonstrating experience in aligned with the SOW outlined in Section C.

● The list shall list at least three (3) contracts or BPAs within the past 5 years under which same / similar items have been provided to the Government and list contract/BPA title and location, contract/BPA type, (i) the contract number and delivery order number if applicable (ii) the name of the organization, (iii) the project name, (iv) a brief project description, (v) the period of performance, (vi) the contract amount, and (vii) the name and telephone number of at least two contacts currently at the organization for which the service was performed (not the offeror).

● If the offeror/subcontractor encountered problems on any of the referenced contracts, they may provide a short explanation and the corrective action taken.

Offerors/subcontractors shall not provide general information on their performance.

● Offerors/subcontractors may describe any quality awards or certifications that indicate exceptional capacity to provide the service or product described in the statement of work.”

Question 17. Page 104 references an Implementation Plan as part of the evaluation criteria of the Technical Approach section, however there is no reference of an implementation plan in Section L nor in the description of the “Factor 1: Technical Understanding and Approach” in Section M. Could USAID please confirm that Offerors do not have to include an implementation plan as part of the technical proposal?

Answer 17. Please see question and answer #16.

Question 18. Page 10-11 references three different CLINs: “labor CLIN,” a “travel CLIN,” and “labor CLINs.” Can USAID please confirm there will be the following 3 CLINs under this contract: Labor CLIN, Other Direct Costs CLIN, and G&A CLIN?

Answer 18. Confirmed.

Question 19. Page 101 states “The offeror shall propose payment milestones for each CLIN identified.” Given that this will be a T&M contract; would USAID please clarify how the offeror shall propose payment milestones for each CLIN identified?

Answer 19. Disregard.

Question 20. Page 12. The RFP states “All personnel under this Contract must have a security clearance of SECRET or the ability to obtain a SECRET clearance. The contractors must have and maintain a Facility Security Clearance at the level of SECRET on Form DD-254.” Could USAID please confirm that SECRET Facility Security Clearance may be obtained upon award?

Answer 20. SECRET Facility Security Clearance may be obtained upon award.

Question 21. Page 15. Section C.4 Tasks states “These tasks will be completed both directly and through the execution of sub-awards. USAID expects individual sub-awards/contracts will range from $50,000 to $200,000, and that less commonly there may be sub-awards/contracts as low as $5,000 and as high as $1 million.” Could USAID confirm that the solicitation ceiling is not meant to include the value of the anticipated sub-awards/contracts and that the sub-awards/contracts will be issued directly from USAID to the sub-awardees?

Answer 21. The anticipated TEC includes all cost categories including subgrants and subcontracts.

See question #6.

Question 22. Page 95. The RFP mentions that USAID anticipates a handover from the existing Management Services Contract, to the successful offeror. Could USAID provide an inventory of current activities, tools etc. that it anticipates transitioning? In addition, if USAID expects that the offeror will assume oversight of DIV, GCD or Prize awards, could you kindly provide a list of these awards that includes the recipient organization, the dollar amount, the date of award and duration?

Answer 22. USAID maintains oversight of awards issued by USAID. The offeror will be expected to provide technical assistance and acceleration support to select grantees identified collaboratively by the awardee and USAID. Transition documentation will be exchanged post award.

Question 23. Page 95. Does USAID anticipate sharing the current contractor workplan on the CDI Management Services Contract so offerors can synch their approach and ensure a smooth and well-organized transition?

Answer 23. Transition from current contractor to new awardee will occur post-award.

Question 24. Page 98. Can USAID please confirm the solicitation only allows for three Past Performance Records (PPR) in total rather than PPRs for each prime and major subcontractor?

Answer 24. Confirmed.

Question 25. Page 99. Can USAID confirm that in the cost proposal subcontractors should use the same rates for each labor category as the prime contractor?

Answer 25. Confirmed.

Question 26. Page 97. Section L.5.3 FACTOR 3 highlights the INSTITUTIONAL MOBILIZATION CAPACITY as a major factor in the technical review, but INSTITUTIONAL MOBILIZATION CAPACITY does not appear as an evaluation factor in Section M. Could USAID either include INSTITUTIONAL MOBILIZATION CAPACITY as an evaluation factor in Section M or, alternatively, drop the instruction from Section L?

Answer 26. Please see the response to question 16..

Question 27. F.3, Page 22. This section states all key personnel and core representation of contractor must be based in a location near (within approximately 1 mile) of CDI’s offices in Ronald Reagan Building.

1 mile is very restrictive. We suggest expanding to local to the DC metro area and available for impromptu collaboration at the request of the government stakeholders.

Answer 27. Replace “(within approximately 1 mile)”, page 22, with “(within approximately 20 minute commute)”.

Question 28. F.3, Page 22. Does this facility need to be certified for Secret level work and systems?

Answer 28. No.

Question 29. F.3, Page 22. We are a company that has a TS Facility Clearance. We use a dynamic overhead model, taking advantage of collaborative coworking locations in proximity to our customers. Is this an acceptable form of office space in close proximity to CDI’s offices?

Answer 29. Yes, the use of a coworking location within close proximity to CDI’s offices is acceptable.

Question 30. L.5.2, Page 96 C.4.6, Page 16. Factor 2 states that USAID reserves the right to approve / deny any subcontractor(s)/partner(s) that are not specified at the time of the award.

Does USAID want to see in-country partners and worldwide networks in the “coherent plan for maximizing these engagements”?

Answer 30. The offerors proposed in-country partners and worldwide networks will likely affect the offerors technical approach.

Question 31. B.5, Page 9. In the section for Estimated Ceiling and Obligated Amount, it states “the remainder from the Lab and other USAID M/B/IOs who would have the ability to ‘buy into’”.

Does this indicate the contract may have lapses in funding until M/B/IOs have aligned requirements and funding?

Answer 31. The majority of activities anticipated under this proposal will support and be funded by LAB/CDI and the requisite funding is expected. Additional buy-ins from other USAID M/B/IOs will be based on need and funding availability.

Question 32. B.7, Page 12. In the Security Clearances section, it states “all personnel working under this contract must have a Secret security or the ability to obtain a Secret clearance”.

Does this require Secret clearances at the time of submitting a response or will USAID sponsor Secret investigations for eligible candidates?

Answer 32. This only requires the ability to obtain a Secret clearance at the time of proposal submission.

Question 33. H.4, Page 43. In the section regarding USAID-FINANCED THIRD-PARTY WEB SITES, will the government allow third-party websites to administer challenges without USAID branding?

Is the contractor permitted to use third-party websites common for event registration?

Answer 33. Branding requirements will likely vary depending on specific activity and audience.

The use of third-party websites is generally allowable but will be determined on a case by case basis.

Question 34. F.13, Page 29. In the section regarding AIDAIR 752.7001 Biographical Data, does the government require biographies for individuals that will be sent outside the US at the time of submission or at the time of award?

Answer 34. Only for the Key Personnel as requested and please include rates in your budget breakdown at the time of submission.

Question 35. Can 8a businesses partner with other businesses?

Answer 35. Yes, offerors are encouraged to partner with other entities to support the proposed activities.

Question 36. What is the Estimated Cost for the Base Award?

Answer 36. USAID anticipates obligating between $3-6M per year for these activities, or between $6-12M over the two-year base period.

Question 37. Define anticipated institutional support?

Answer 37. Institutional support is long or short-term staff technical that directly supports project activities and is colocated with USAID staff. Also see question and answer #39.

Question 38. Under the Technical Area: Please clarify; is the Awardee responsible for providing technical assistance and acceleration support to existing program grantees?

Answer 38. The awardee will be responsible for providing technical assistance and acceleration support to select current and future grantees from DIV, GCD, and other innovation and challenge programs.

Question 39. Will awardee have office space co-located inside USAID office space (i.e. Chief of Party and Program Manager)?

Answer 39. Depending on position, USAID may request that awardee staff co-locate within USAID office space. USAID anticipates the majority of staff to not be located inside USAID offices.

Question 40. What’s the average number grants you anticipate awarding within a year?

Answer 40. The issuance of sub-grants is not expected to be a major component of these activities.

See question and answer #6.

Question 41. Page 94 Section L.5 (last paragraph). What is meant by “provide a narrative to illustrate the concentrations?” What are the “Two Concentrations” from Section C.?

Answer 41. Please see question and answer #9.

Question 42. Is there an incumbent or is this a brand new requirement?

Answer 42. Please see question and answer #1.

Question 43 Page 15 C.4 Task (first paragraph) Does this provision apply to the Dorkin core team or to the external organization supporting the grantee relevant to the LTTA and STTA support? Will the government provide separate funding for these support efforts from an external organization or is the funding all-inclusive of the 24 million dollar contract award?

Answer 43. Please see question and answer #6 and #21.

Question 44. Will the closing date be extended?

Answer 44. Yes, the closing date and time has been amended to Friday July 20th 5pm EST.

All other terms and conditions of the RFP remain unchanged.

Sincerely, /s/ Roderick D. Watson Sr.

Contracting/Agreement Officer USAID/Washington rwatson@usaid.gov