7200AA20R00043_Amendment 001_A-E III IDIQ.pdf

(x)

7200AA20R00043

x x

1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted ; or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE

RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR

OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted , such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

x

N/A

Not Applicable

7200AA

Washington DC 20523-1000 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, UA Office of Acquisition & Assistance

USAID M/OAA

08/17/20200001

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) is not extended.is extended, Items 8 and 15, and returning

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended , by one of the following methods: (a) By completing

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

FACILITY CODE CODE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6)CODE 6. ISSUED BY

PAGE OF PAGES

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.3. EFFECTIVE DATE2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

06/01/2020

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority) appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return __________________ copies to the issuing office.

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

The purpose of Amendment 001 is to: 1) provide responses from questions received from interested parties by deadline stated in the solicitation (Q&A); 2) provide an updated RFQ that incorporates changes based on the Q&A; extend the deadline for submitting qualifications to Monday September 28, 2020 at 1:00 p.m. EDT.

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 16C. DATE SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

Matthew Courtad

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Previous edition unusable

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9 A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect .

USAID Responses to Questions Received from Offerors

1. Will USAID require all firms on a proposed bid team to complete a SF330 Part II, or only the prime and major subcontractors? (Page 30, 4(b) and 4(d) SF330 Part II)

USAID Response: Only the prime and major subcontractors will be required to complete an SF330 part II.

2. The Organization Chart Narrative is not listed in the RFQ, Sec. 4.d table. Please incorporate this requirement as an annex with the associated page limitation. (Page 30, 4(d) and Page 33, 5.3 paragraph 2.)

USAID Response: Section 4(d) table, and Proposal Structure Section 5.3 have been updated to make the organizational structure requirement clear.

3. Please reconcile the percentage used to define major subcontractors - i.e., 20% or 30%.

Additionally, the definition of "major subcontractor" seems to be in conflict - i.e., a subcontractor that will perform critical aspects of the architectural and engineering work, or at least 20% of the estimate A&E-specific work over the life of the IDIQ and (defined as one whose costs exceed 30% the of the Offero's total proposed cost for the Task Order). Since the offeror's are not certain of the task orders or values during this phase of the IDIQ, will the Government please reconcile the definition as a major subcontractor anticipated to perform at least 20% of the estimated work on the total contract? (Page 31, Section 5.1 and Page 40, Evaluation Factor 5)

USAID Response: The language in the RFQ has been corrected to reflect the definition of a major contractor for this IDIQ.

4. If it is the Government's intent to maximize small business utilization will you please revise the cited statements to allow offerors to include these important small business and specialty partners, and describe their intended work contribution IAW the SF330, Section C? This will allow offerors to create a more robust Small Business subcontracting approach with more aggressive goals to meet the SB objectives of USAID. (Page 30 Section 4(d) and Page 31, Section 5.1, Page 41-42, Evaluation Factor 6)

USAID Response: Language in section Proposal Structure section 5.1 has been updated to clarify that “the Offeror must specify the proposed small-business partners that are expected to be a recurring technical resource during the performance of the IDIQ contract”;. Also, section 5.6, Small Business Utilization; and Evaluation Factor 6 have been updated for clarity.

5. Please verify that each offeror's proposal is to contain no more than five (5) past performance forms for the proposed prime and major subcontractors. (Page 34, Section

5.5; Evaluation Factor 5)

USAID Response: Proposal Structure section 5.5, Past Performance and Evaluation Factor 5 section have been updated.

6. Will USAID please confirm that offerors may submit past performance contracts that have been completed within the past three (3) years? Extending the recency period will allow more firms to qualify while expanding the pool of competitive contractors for USAID. (Page 34, Section 5.5 and page 40, Evaluation Factor 5.)

USAID Response: The past performance reference period has been set to five years.

7. Some of the strongest international development engineering staff members are licensed in such places as the UK, Italy and South Africa. Given that the work requires adhereance to local codes and practices, please verify that licenses from these countries will meet the applicable licensing requirement as provided in this section. (Page 32, Section 5.2)

USAID Response: The RFQ does not restrict professional licensing in other countries;

however, professionals with registration/licenses in the U.S. will rank higher than the ones from other locations (all other things equal), because the work is with the U.S.

government, and the specific task order locations is unknown at this point. No update has been made to the RFQ on this subject.

8. Please verify where within the technical proposal we must describe how small businesses will participate in this contract. As the RFQ is written, it will be difficult to include small businesses in Section C as not all of them will be considered major subcontractors. (Page 35, Section 6 b)

USAID Response: Instructions are provided in the Proposal Structure section 5.6 and 4(d) table.

9. The Sec. 4.d table of proposal content and page limitations cites that the offeror's Subcontracting Plan is limited to 2 pages; however, the template in Annex 2 is 9 pages prior to the offeror filling in the required areas, and Sec. 2, para. K of the template further directs the offeror to add additional sheets, if necessary. Will the Government please remove the page restrictions for this Annex to facilitate each offeror's ability to submit a compliant and responsive Subcontracting Plan? (Page 46, Annex 2, Sec. 2, para. k)

USAID Response: Language has been updated in Section 4(d) table, and in Proposal Structure, section 5.6.

10. The wording "…minimum of ten (5) years…" is conflicting. Will the Government please clarify and revise the RFQ to reflect that Tier 2 positions require a minimum of five (5) years of relevant experience? (Page 32, Section 2)

USAID Response: Typo was corrected to reflect “Five (5) years”.

11. Based on the multiple award and the stated total contract value, what contract value ($) should offerors use to determine SB participation in Annex 2? (Page 42, Section 6.5)

USAID Response: Offerors should use whole percentages, not dollar values.

12. Given the ordering period is 5 years and task orders can go for 2 years beyond the end of the IDIQ, can USAID please revise the IDIQ Contract Period of Performance to be 7 years to align with ADS 302.3.4.6? (Page 27 Section 1(g))

USAID Response: The solicitation has been updated accordingly.

13. Please confirm that offerors may use Consultants rather than team or JV members to fulfill the Sec. E requirement. Additionally, please clarify whether consultants are required to be U.S. citizens or if other nationalities are acceptable? Finally, what is USAID's preference for country of origin of professional registrations for all positions cited in Sec. 5.2? (RFQ Sec. 5.2, pg. 32)

USAID Response: Yes, for SF330, section E, the offerors may use consultants. U.S.

citizenship is not a requirement for the individual technical experts. Please see response to question #7 above in regards to professional registrations.

14. How will extent of participation be judged based on value if value is not part of this evaluation? (RFQ Sec. 6.5, pg. 42)

USAID Response: Offerors should use whole percentages, not dollar values.

15. Will the Government consider accepting PPQs from previous (recent - within the past five (5) years) contract submittals in lieu of contacting the offeror's references? Also, will the Government consider CPARS copies (included as an additional Annex) adequate for reference information? If so, will the Government please revise Sec. 5.5.b, pg. 34 to reflect this change and also include the CPARS and/or PPQ information as an Annex in the Sec. 4(d) table with no page limitation. (RFQ Sec. 5.5.b), pg. 34)

USAID Response: Although some past performance information from previous contracts may still be applicable (if within the last 5 years), the response to this solicitation must include up-to-date past performance information as stated in section

5.5. Copies of firms’ CPARS evaluations should not be submitted since USAID has access to the CPARS system and will review any/all relevant CPARS evaluations.

16. This section states that the information is to be placed in an annex to the technical proposal; however, in the Annex listing in Sec. 4.(d), there is not a Past Performance Annex reference. Will the Government please revise the table to include the Annex 1 - Past Performance Forms as an Annex to the SF330 proposal? (RFQ Sec. 5.a)

USAID Response: Section 4(d) table has been updated and reconciled with Section

5.5. PP information is part of the technical proposal, not the Annex.

17. There are numerous references in the RFQ to Section C, yet there is no section C found.

Please verify/confirm that Section C is in fact synonymous with Section 5 Statement of Work on page 8. (Page 40, Evaluation Factor 4)

USAID Response: Confirm, “Section C” is referring to Section 5 Statement of Work.

18. Will the Government allow a tabloid (11" x 17")-sized page for the organization chart?

(Sec. 4, General, pg. 30)

USAID Response: Yes, only if the organization chart roles and technical/administrative linkages require more space than letter-size to avoid splitting the chart.

19. Page 24, Section 5.3.1 (e). “The Contractor must award such grants only to non-U.S. or U.S. non-governmental organizations. It is anticipated that the approved amount of such grants shall not exceed the equivalent to the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (SAT) ($250,000 for U.S. in 2019), unless an exception is provided in writing by the contracting officer (and further approved by the HCA). This limitation does not apply to grant awards to non-U.S. NGOs”.

However, we note that ADS 302.3.4.13, Grants Under Contracts (GUCs) states that “c.

(1) Non-Governmental Organizations: The total value of an individual grant to a U.S.

NGO must not exceed $100,000. This limitation does not apply to grant awards to non- U.S. NGOs”. USAID’s AAPD 18-04, Increase in the Micro-Purchase Threshold, Simplified Acquisition Threshold and the Threshold for Requiring Certified Cost or Pricing Data (Class deviations from the FAR and the AIDAR), does not appear to address ADS 302 or the threshold for GUCs made to US NGOs.

Can USAID please clarify this section of the solicitation regarding the threshold for GUC awards to US NGOs?

USAID Response: Language has been updated to reflect that the approved amount of such grants to U.S NGOs shall not exceed $100,000.

20. In USAID’s May 26, 2020 Response to the Pre-solicitation Questions, Question # 26., USAID answered “Yes” to the question: “Does USAID expect including SF330 Section H to be a requirement of the A&E III IDIQ proposal”. However, the RFQ lists no requirements for Section H. Are bidders allowed to add additional information, at their discretion, to Section H.

USAID Response: Proposal Structure section 4(d) table has been updated to include 1-page section H, if needed to supplement information in other sections.

21. Page 29, Section 3, Late Proposals. Is the correct time reference intended to be 1:00 PM EDT (not EST)?

USAID Response: Typo has been corrected to reflect EDT.

22. Page 30, Section 4(a), SF330. Because of the inflexibility of the GSA SF330 PDF form, are bidders allowed to use Microsoft Word templates with identical format and content?

USAID Response: No. The format of the form is PDF.

23. Page 30 Section 4. Reference is made to the term Annex.

Is this intended to refer to SF 330 Section H? Please clarify requirements

USAID Response: No, the Annex must include the items listed in Proposal Structure section 4(b) table. See answer to question #20 in regards to SF 330 Section H.

24. Page 30 Section 4 (d) and Page 32 Section 5.3 Organizational Structure. The Technical Proposal Page Limitation chart indicates a 3-page limit for Organizational Structure. The Table on page 30, section 4. (d) indicates that this information shall be placed as an “(attachment to Section C)”. The instructions contained in Section 5.3 states “The Offeror shall also provide a narrative describing how its corporate structure has enabled it to effectively carry out tasks like those described in Description of Design/Engineering Services of the RFQ. The Organization Chart Narrative should be placed in the annex.”

Reference to the Organizational Chart Narrative does not appear under the list of Annexes. Please clarify USAID requirements.

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #2.

25. Page 30, Section 4.(d) Table of Content of Proposals/Page Limitation. This table includes the requirement for a discussion of Small Business Utilization and Evidence of Responsibility. Where is this information to be placed (see also page 35, Section 5.6.(b))?

USAID Response: For Small Business Utilization, please see answer to question #9.

For Evidence of Responsibility, Proposal Structure section 4(d) table has been updated for clarity.

26. Page 31, Section 4.(d) Table of Content of Proposals/Page Limitations – Annex Section.

The Annex section lists a requirement for a 2-page “Small Business Utilization Narrative & References”. How is this requirement distinct from the 0.5 page requirement for a discussion of “Small Business Utilization” that appears earlier in the table, and on pages 34 and 35, Section 5.5.(e)?

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #9.

27. Page 31, Section 4.(d) Table of Content of Proposals/Page Limitation – Annex Section.

This section indicates a 2-page limit for the Subcontracting Plan. The USAID Small Business Subcontracting Plan Template is 9 pages in length. Are bidders required to compress their Small Business Plans into a 2-page limit?

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #9.

28. Page 31, Section 4.(d) Table of Content of Proposals/Page Limitation – Annex Section.

Are bidders required to use the specific USAID Small Business Subcontracting Plan Template (RFQ Annex 2). Or may bidders use their own Small Business Subcontracting Plan template that follows the format outlined in the USAID template and meets FAR

19.704 and 52.219-9 requirements?

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #9.

29. Page 31, Section 4.(d) Table of Content of Proposals/Page Limitations – Annex Section.

This section states the page length for the Evidence of Responsibility as “as needed”.

There is an apparent conflict with the page limit earlier in the table, which states “0.5 pages”. Please clarify the requirements.

USAID Response: Proposal Structure section 4(d) table has been updated for clarity.

30. Page 32, Section 5.2. “Tier 2 must have a minimum requirement of a bachelor’s degree, a minimum of ten (5) years of relevant experience in the proposed discipline, and the applicable licensing requirements.”

Please confirm this is five (5) years.

USAID Response: Please see the response to question #10.

31. Page 32 Section 2. In the list of disciplines one role is defined as “Cost Estimator/Economist”. Please clarify the desired skill set for this position as typically a construction cost estimator and an economist perform significantly different functions.

Page 40, Section 7 Evaluation Factor 5 Past Performance. “The Offeror must provide past performance information for itself, each major subcontractor under proposed for the Task Order (defined as one whose costs exceed 30 percent of the Offeror’s total proposed cost for the Task Order) in accordance with this section. The Offeror may include required information in Annex D, but it must summarize past performance information in this section of the Technical Proposal: List up to a total of 5 of the most recent (defined as any activity performed within 3 years of the closing date for receipt of the Contractor past performance information) and relevant contracts for efforts with similar scope and size to the work in the subject proposal. At least two (2) of the five (5) contracts must be from the prime contractor. Assistance awards of similar size, scope, and complexity may be provided as relevant indicators of performance for major subcontracts only. The Offeror must provide the Past Performance Information in the standardized format provided in Attachment J.1. The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar scope and size and requiring similar provision of services, similar technical complexity, and similarly challenging places of performance.

Specifically, such contracts must demonstrate the capabilities and experience of the Offeror and its core team in delivering power sector transactions and services substantially similar to those required. The Offeror must provide a brief description of the work along with the results achieved.”

Please clarify this section in its entirety. This appears to be evaluation criteria pertaining to a potential Task Order, ie. a major subcontractor is defined as one whose costs exceed 30%, and most recent activity is defined as performed within 3 years.

USAID Response: a) The preferred cost estimator should have a good understanding of economics, since it must often perform a life-cycle cost analysis of economic alternatives.

b) Proposal Structure section 5 and Evaluation Factor 5, Past Performance, have been updated.

32. What countries will the awarded contractors be working in?

USAID Response: Being awarded an IDIQ contract offers the contractor the opportunity to bid on Task Order solicitations that may originate from any USAID Mission, and even perform work at locations where there is no USAID presence.

33. Will firms with professional registration in those countries be preferred in the selection process?

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #7.

34. Page 30, Section 4(b), USAID states that “In the SF 330, Part II, block #4, Offerors must include a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) for itself and each major subcontractor of the Offeror’s Proposed Team. Under Section 4(d), instructions state that Part II of the SF 330 document should be prepared for each firm involved. Could

USAID please confirm if we should complete SF330, Part II, for all subcontractors, or only for major subcontractors?

USAID Response: SF330 Part II must be completed for all firms expected to be involved, not just major subcontractors.

35. Page 30, Section 4(d), USAID notes that Offerors should complete SF 330, Part II (General Qualifications) with one page for each firm involved. If a firm has branch offices, can we include more than one Section II page for the firm?

USAID Response: Yes, SF330 has a note that states “If a firm has branch offices, complete for each specific branch office seeking work”.

36. Page 30, Section 4(d), USAID notes a 3-page limit for the Organizational Structure section of the proposal. Could USAID clarify if both the organizational chart and organizational structure narrative together are limited to 3 pages? Should the narrative follow the chart?

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #2

37. Pages 30-31, Section 4(d), the outline of proposal content lists .5 page each for Small Business Utilization and Evidence of Responsibility in the Technical document, and then 2 pages for each under the Annexes. Could USAID kindly elaborate on what kind of information Offerors should include in the Technical document (.5 page each) vs. the Annexes (2 pages each) for both the Small Business Utilization and Evidence of Responsibility information?

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #25

38. Page 31, Section 5.1., USAID defines a major subcontractor as “a subcontractor that will perform critical aspects of the architectural and engineering work, or at least 20% of the estimated A&E-specific over the life of the IDIQ.” On page 40, under Evaluation Factor 5:

Past Performance, USAID defines a major subcontractor as “defined as one whose costs exceed 30 percent of the Offeror’s total proposed cost for the Task Order.” Could USAID kindly reconfirm the definition of a major subcontractor, including the percentage target for estimated work? Could USAID also reconfirm that a major subcontractor can be a subcontractor that will perform critical aspects of the work, but that may not reach a percentage target?

USAID Response: Proposal Structure section 5 and Evaluation Factor 5, Past Performance, have been updated.

39. Page 31, Section 5.1., USAID states that Offerors should identify our proposed team including major subcontractors in SF 330 – Part I, Section C – Proposed Team. Could

USAID please confirm if Offerors should identify all a team’s subcontractors – major and non-major – in Section C, or only major subcontractors?

USAID Response: SF330, Part I, section C must include all key subcontractors, not just major subcontractors.

40. Page 32, Section 5.2., USAID includes a List of Disciplines (Function Codes) for which Offerors must provide resumes.

o USAID notes a Cost Estimator/Economist discipline. Cost Engineer/Estimator (code 18) and Economist (code 20) are separate disciplines. Could USAID please confirm that Offerors can submit a resume for either a Cost Estimator OR an Economist for this position?

o USAID notes a Scheduler/Project Management Professional discipline.

Scheduler (code 53) and Project Manager (code 48) are separate disciplines. Could USAID please confirm that Offerors can submit a resume for a either Scheduler OR a Project Management Professional?

o USAID notes a CAD/GIS specialist discipline. CADD Technician (code 8) and GIS specialist (code 29) are separate disciplines. Could USAID please confirm that Offerors can submit a resume for either a CADD specialist OR a GIS specialist?

USAID Response: a) The preferred cost estimator should have a good understanding of economics, since it must often perform a life-cycle cost analysis of economic alternatives.

b) The basic requirement is a scheduler. It is preferred if the individual holds a professional certification such as PMP.

c) The requirement is for a CADD specialist. It is strongly preferred if the individual has GIS expertise also.

41. Page 32, Section 5.2., USAID notes “The positions in Tier 2 must have … a minimum of ten (5) years of relevant experience…” Could USAID kindly clarify the number of years’ experience required for candidates in Tier 2?

USAID Response: Please see the response to question #10.

42. Pages 32-33, Section 5.3, Organizational Structure, USAID refers to an annex requirement as an “Organization Structure Narrative” and “Organization Chart Narrative.”

The language in the SF 330 uses “Organizational Chart.” Could USAID please confirm if we should refer to the requested Annex as “Organizational Chart Narrative?”

USAID Response: Please see the response to question #2.

43. Page 40, Section 7, “Evaluation Factor 5: Past performance,” could USAID please clarify the sentence “Specifically, such contracts must demonstrate the capabilities … in delivering power sector transactions and services …” This is the first time transactions are cited, and it is not clear if USAID would like non-power sector experience to also demonstrate relevance to the power sector.

USAID Response: Please see the response to question #38.

44. Please confirm that offers shall use the SF 330 as provided on the GSA website and make no alterations to it, such as, font size, color, size of input fields, position of input fields, etc. If alterations are permitted, please provide guidance on what alterations are permitted or whether offer can adjust the form as they see fit.

USAID Response: SF330 form must be used with no alterations.

45. Attachment 1, Section 6.1 (page 25) states, “The Contractor must supply one key personnel IDIQ Manager”. No other Key Personnel positions or minimum qualifications are described. Attachment 2, Section 4(d) (page 30) describes the page limitation for Professional Qualifications as “21 pages – (1 Section E for each Key Personnel)”, implying that all 21 disciplines listed on page 32 of the RFQ are designated Key Personnel. Given these discrepancies, please confirm that:

a. IDIQ Manager is the sole Key Personnel position.

b. List of Tier 1 and Tier 2 disciplines provided in Attachment 2, Section 5.2 (page 32) are not intended to be designated as Key Personnel.

c. Section E should include CVs for the IDIQ Manager, Tier 1, and Tier 2 discipline candidates.

d. Section G should include the project participation information for the IDIQ Manager, Tier 1, and Tier 2 discipline candidates.

USAID Response: a) IDIQ Manager is the sole Key Personnel position

b) Tier 1 and 2 staff are not Key Personnel. Language has been updated to eliminate the term “Key” for Tier 1 and 2.

c) Section E must be included for IDIQ Manager, Tier 1 and Tier 2 staff.

d) Section G must include IDIQ Manager, Tier 1 and Tier 2 staff.

46. Ref. Attachment 2, Section 5.2 (page 32): List of Disciplines includes the labor category “Cost estimator/Economist”. Cost estimators and Economists are functionally different in their training and experience, and it would be unusual for both functional capabilities to be found in a single individual. Could USAID please clarify which function this discipline would be expected to provide?

USAID Response: Please see the response to question #40.

47. Ref. Attachment 2, Section 5.2 (page 32): “The positions in Tier 2 must have a minimum requirement of a bachelor’s degree, a minimum of ten (5) years of relevant experience in the proposed discipline, and the applicable licensing requirements.” Please clarify whether Tier 2 positions require 5 or 10 years of experience.

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #10.

48. Ref. Attachment 2, Section 7, Evaluation Factor 2, evaluation criteria for Tier 1 and Tier 2 (page 39): please clarify whether:

a. Inclusion of staff from the prime contractor are preferred over staff from subconsultant firms.

b. Inclusion of full-time staff (employees) are preferred over long-term consultants.

c. Non-US nationals are permitted to be named.

USAID Response: a) Qualifications and experience to perform the work is what is required from the proposed staff; independent of teaming arrangements.

b) If the offeror proposes staff, they must have the capacity to address the work required by this contract, independent of teaming agreement.

c) U.S. citizenship is not a requirement or preference; however U.S. licensing and certifications are preferred.

49. Attachment 2, Section 5.5 (page 34) states, "Offerors are to list, in an annex to the technical proposal, five (5) of the most recent and relevant contracts....". In Attachment 2, Section 4(d) (page 30), Past Performance Information is not included in the listed contents for the Technical Proposal ANNEX but is listed as contents to be included in the Technical Proposal. Because there is no section in the SF 330 Part 1 that permits the inclusion of Past Performance Information, please confirm that the 10 pages allotted to Past Performance Information are intended to be included in the Technical Proposal ANNEX defined in Attachment 2, Section 4(d) (page 30).

USAID Response: Section 4(d) table, and Proposal Structure Section 5 have been updated for clarity on past performance requirements.

50. Ref. Attachment 2 Section 5.5 (page 34), Past Performance Instructions: please confirm that:

a. Quality awards or certifications (not included in the page count) may be added as an additional item in the Technical Proposal ANNEX, defined in Attachment 2, Section 4(d) (page 30).

b. Past performance references for ongoing contracts are acceptable to include.

c. Five projects maximum (at two pages per project) are requested from each consortium, not five projects maximum (at two pages per contract) each for the prime and each major subcontractor.

d. Past Performance references may be included for the prime or major subcontractors but, due to the maximum of five projects, not every major subcontractor is required to show past performance information.

USAID Response: a) Yes, see Proposal Structure section 5.5(d)

b) Yes, past performance references for ongoing contracts are acceptable for projects that are at least 40% complete.

c) Please see answer to question #49.

d) Please see answer to question #49.

51. Ref. Attachment 2, Section 7 Evaluation Factor 5, Past Performance (page 40): please confirm that:

a. Recent contracts are considered those performed within the last five (5) years as indicated in Attachment 2 Section 5.5, not three (3) years, as referenced in this section.

b. Past performance references for a total of 5 projects are required to be provided, and that these can be from either the prime contractor or major subcontractors, provided that at least two are from the prime contractor.

c. In the following sentence “The Offeror may include required information in Annex D…”, “Annex D” is intended to be interpreted as the Team Narrative.

d. Past Performance Information should be presented in the Past Performance Form (Attachment #3) and not the referenced J.1, which is not included in this solicitation (“The Offeror must provide the Past Performance Information in the standardized format provided in Attachment J.1.”)

e. This sentence was not intended for inclusion: “Specifically, such contracts must demonstrate the capabilities and experience of the Offeror and its core team in delivering power sector transactions and services substantially similar to those required.”

f. Responses to “(b) If extraordinary problems affected any of the referenced contracts, provide a short explanation and the corrective action taken (FAR 15.305(a)(2))” should be contained within the contract’s Past Performance Information Form.

g. Ref. Item d(2) of this section (page 41): “As part of the evaluation of performance in Section M of this solicitation, USAID will evaluate the extent to which the offeror used and promoted the use of small business concerns under current and prior contracts.”

There is no Section M provided in this RFQ. Please clarify.

USAID Response: The entire section on Past Performance has been replaced.

a) Please see answer to question #6.

b) Please see answer to question #49.

c) Please see answer to question #38.

d) Please see answer to question #38.

e) Please see answer to question #38.

f) Box #6 on the Contractor Performance Report form provides space for that.

g) Offerors should ignore all reference to “section M.”

52. In Attachment 2, Section 4(d), Organizational Structure (page 30-31), three pages are allotted for Organizational Structure. Attachment 2, Section 5.3 (page 32-33) requires “SF 330- Part I Contract-Specific Qualifications; Section D - Organizational Chart of Proposed Team; and Organization Structure Narrative”. The last paragraph of Attachment 2, Section 5.3 (page 33) also states “The Organizational Chart Narrative should be placed in the Annex.” However, we note that there is no reference in Section 4(d) to the Organization Chart Narrative in the Technical Proposal ANNEX. Please clarify that:

a. One page shall be allocated to the Organizational Chart (Section D), and that 11 x 17-page size may be permitted for legible presentation of the Organization Chart graphic in Section D.

b. Two pages shall be allocated to the Organizational Chart Narrative, and that this section may be placed in the Technical Proposal ANNEX (defined in Attachment 2, Section 4[d].

USAID Response: a) Please see answer to question #18.

b) Please see answer to question #2.

53. Ref. the SF 330 forms linked in Attachment 2, Section 4(a) (page 30): please confirm that:

a. Offerors may adapt the SF 330 PDFs into stylized Word formats, provided they retain all sections and numbering contained within the SF 330 PDFs and are converted to PDF for submission.

b. Offerors may include graphics within the SF 330 forms.

USAID Response: a) Please see answer to question #22.

b) No. The form does not allow for that.

54. Regarding all items in the Technical Proposal and ANNEX, please confirm:

a. We are not restricted to the Arial 10 font automated in the SF 330 PDFs.

b. We may use a smaller font size for graphics contained in the SF 330 and annexed items, provided it is legible.

c. A 11x17 graphical representation counts as one page.

USAID Response: a) Please see answer to question #22.

b) No. The form does not allow for that.

c) For the Organizational Chart only, yes an 11”x17” chart would count as 1 page.

55. Please confirm the proposal may include dividers to separate the required sections.

USAID Response: Yes, dividers may be included, just with headings to separate sections, and cannot include additional text addressing the RFQ sections.

56. Ref. Attachment 2, Section 4(d) (page 30) and Section 5.4 (page 33): We note that the Offeror is required to provide a large quantity of information (eight different sections, some of which have multiple subsections) for the Team Narrative within five pages. We respectfully request that USAID consider expanding the Team Narrative allotment to at least 8 pages so we can adequately respond to each item.

USAID Response: No. The team narrative must be concise, and not repeat information already provided somewhere else (i.e. in SF330 section E, and/or Organizational Chart).

57. Ref. Attachment 2, Section 4(d) (page 30-31): The Technical Proposal allocates 0.5 pages for “Small Business Narrative” and 0.5 pages for “Evidence of Responsibility”. The Technical Proposal ANNEX allocates 2 pages for “Small Business Utilization Narrative and References” and as-needed pages for “Evidence of Responsibility.”

a. Please clarify that the “Small Business Utilization Narrative and References” and “Evidence of Responsibility” sections shall be placed in the Technical Proposal ANNEX, and that the duplicative requirements which are indicated to be included in the main Technical Proposal should be deleted from the RFQ.

b. Please clarify that page allocations for these two sections are as assigned under the

Technical Proposal Annex, given that 0.5 pages/section would not be adequate for presentation of this material.

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #25.

58. In Attachment 2, Section 5.1 (page 31), “major subcontractor” is defined as follows: “…a subcontractor that will perform critical aspects of the architectural and engineering work, or at least 20% of the estimated A&E-specific [work] over the life of the IDIQ”. However, Attachment 2, Section 7, Evaluation Factor 5: Past Performance (page 40) states “each major subcontractor under the proposed for the Task Order (defined as one whose costs exceed 30 percent of the Offeror’s total proposed cost for the Task Order)”. Because it is not possible at the IDIQ level to determine with certainty which subcontractors’ costs will exceed 30% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost, please confirm that the original definition of major subcontractor is correct: “a subcontractor that will perform critical aspects of the architectural and engineering work, or at least 20% of the estimated A&E-specific [work] over the life of the IDIQ”.

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #38.

59. Ref. Attachment 2, Section 4(d) (page 40): The Subcontracting Plan to be provided in the Technical Proposal ANNEX is indicated with a maximum length of two pages.

However, the draft template provided with the RFQ (which includes instructions that will be removed/replaced) is nine pages. Previous plans we have provided for other USAID projects have varied between five to eight pages. It is not clear how we can truncate this section into two pages, given the information we are required to provide in this section.

Please consider allocating up to eight pages for the Subcontracting Plan.

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #9

60. Is it acceptable to use 11 pt. Times New Roman font in the proposal, with smaller font permissible in graphics, charts, and tables?

USAID Response: Font size and type on the SF 330 should not be altered from what the form generates on first use. Smaller font is allowed in any graphics, charts and tables, but not lower than 9 pt.

61. Are tabs and/or divider sheets allowed and excluded from page limitations?

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #55.

62. Will USAID allow a cover letter and Table of Contents to be included in proposals?

USAID Response: Yes.

63. Are SF330 Sections H (Additional Information) and I (Authorized Signature) required in proposal responses? If so, can USAID clarify the contents of Section H, and where sections H-I should be included in the proposal response?

USAID Response: a) For section H, please see answer to question #20.

b) Section I must be included with the form.

64. Page 30 requires a “Part II (one page for each firm involved)”: Will Part II forms for branch offices of the same firm be permitted if those offices will be involved in the contract?

USAID Response: Yes.

65. Will USAID allow an 11x17 page for the organization chart in Section D, and if so, will it count as 1 or 2 pages?

USAID Response: Please see answer to questions #18 and #54.

66. The organization chart narrative is not listed in the Annex items on pages 30-31 of the solicitation. Can USAID confirm an org chart narrative should be included in the Annex and in what order?

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #2.

67. The page limit listed for the Organization Structure is 3 pages. Can USAID confirm that it is up to the Offeror how to allocate the 3 pages between the organization chart and the narrative?

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #2.

68. Can USAID clarify if there are any project age limitations for Section F projects (i.e.

projects completed within the last X years), similar to the limitations stated for Past Performance?

USAID Response: No age limitation for Section F; however recent projects would rank better compared to much older projects (when everything else is similar).

69. Criteria 5. Past Performance, page 34, item a) states: “Offerors are to use the Past Performance Form provided to list, in an annex to the technical proposal, five (5) of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal (these projects can be the same or different from the projects identified in SF 330 Section F).” Will USAID evaluate more or less favorably proposals in which Section F projects match the Past Performance projects?

USAID Response: Past Performance section has been updated, please see answer to question #49. Also, although past performance aligned with projects in SF330 Section F would facilitate the review, they will not necessarily rank higher, because Past Performance, and Specialized Experience and Technical Competence are independent evaluation factors.

70. Will USAID confirm the definition of “recent” for projects included in Past Performance?

There are conflicting definitions of “recent” in the Solicitation: Page 34 Past Performance (under 5. Proposal Structure): “a) Offerors are to use the Past Performance Form provided to list, in an annex to the technical proposal, five (5) of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal (these projects can be the same or different from the projects identified in SF 330 Section F). The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar type of work and skills/ expertise required. Recent contracts are those performed within the last five (5) years.”

This conflicts with Page 40 of the Past Performance evaluation criteria, which lists the following: “List up to a total of 5 of the most recent (defined as any activity performed within 3 years of the closing date for receipt of the Contractor past performance information) and relevant contracts for efforts with similar scope and size to the work in the subject proposal.”

USAID Response: Please see answers to questions #38 and #49.

71. Annex 1 - Contractor Performance Report included on page 45 the Solicitation PDF differs from the Annex 1 Word Document attachment included in the beta.sam.gov posting. Can USAID confirm which version of Annex 1 Offerors should use?

USAID Response: The Contractor Performance Report in the RFQ has been updated to match the attachment in the solicitation on beta.sam.gov.

72. If the Word Document version of Annex 1 – Contractor Performance Report is required, it appears to require client feedback in the Part II section of the form. Can USAID clarify if Part II of this form is applicable?

USAID Response: Yes, it is applicable.

73. If Part II of Annex 1 Contractor Performance Report is required, can USAID clarify the instructions for Offerors regarding Part II – for example, should Offerors coordinate with their respective clients to complete the form and submit in proposals, or should clients complete and submit directly to USAID, etc.?

USAID Response: Offerors must coordinate with their respective clients to complete the form and submit directly to the Contracting Officer for this RFQ. Language has been updated in Proposal Structure Section 5.5, Past Performance.

http://beta.sam.gov/

74. Page 31 lists a 2-page limit for the subcontracting plan. Can USAID clarify what is required to be included in the 2-pages, as the Annex 2 Small Business Subcontracting Plan Template is 9 pages?

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #9.

75. Page 35, item ii states: “To supplement the Narrative summary in (A), provide a list of the recent (within the last three (3) years) contracts for which you submitted subcontract reports to eSRS (FAR 52.219-9(d)(10) and a copy of any similarly recent subcontracting reports if they were not submitted to eSRS.” Can USAID clarify what item (A) refers to?

USAID Response: Proposal Structure section 5.5.e.3 has been updated.

76. Page 34-35, e) Performance in Using Small Business (SB) Concerns items 3i, ii, and iii fall under the Past Performance evaluation criteria instead of the Small business Utilization evaluation criteria. Can USAID confirm that Offerors should place responses to items 3i, ii, and iii in the “Small Business Utilization Narrative & References” Annex?

USAID Response: Performance in Using Small Business (SB) Concerns must be presented under the Past Performance section, per Proposal Structure section 5.5.(e);

while proposed utilization of SB concerns for this IDIQ must be presented under the Small Business Utilization section 5.6.

77. Page 35, item ii requests copies of similarly recent subcontracting reports if they were not submitted to eSRS. Can USAID clarify if these reports can be included in an Annex and excluded from page limitations?

USAID Response: Section 4(d) table, and Proposal Structure Section 5.5 have been updated to allow space for subcontracting reports not submitted to eSRS.

78. Data from eSRS in support of historical small business utilization clarification: Page 35, item 3, ii states: “To supplement the Narrative summary in (A), provide a list of the recent (within the last three (3) years) contracts for which you submitted subcontract reports to eSRS.” This conflicts with Page 41, item 3, ii which states: “To supplement the narrative summary in (A), provide a list of three recent contracts for which offeror submitted subcontract reports to eSRS.” Can USAID clarify if Offerors should submit a list of all contracts for which subcontract reports were filed in eSRS in the last three years, a representative list of contracts for which subcontract reports were filed in eSRS in the last three years, or a list of three recent contracts for which subcontract reports were filed in eSRS?

USAID Response: Proposal Structure Section 5.5 (e) has been updated for clarity on subcontracting reports.

79. If a complete list of all contracts is required in response to item 3 ii, will USAID allow this listing to be submitted in an annex without page limitation?

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #78. Also, note, Evaluation Factor 5, Past Performance, has been updated.

80. Pages 30-31 of the solicitation list two separate page limitations for Evidence of Responsibility – 0.5 pages in Technical Proposal, and “as needed” for Annex. Can USAID confirm the response required from Offerors in the 0.5 page requirement?

USAID Response: Please see answer to question #25.

81. Page 32: The minimum years of relevant experience listed for Tier 2 positions is shown as "minimum of ten (5) years of relevant experience in the proposed discipline, and the applicable licensing requirements.” Can USAID confirm that five years is the minimum for Tier 2 positions?

USAID Response: Please see the response to question #10.

82. One of the Tier 1 disciplines is “Cost Estimator/Economist”. Will USAID consider separating into two disciplines (and subsequently expanding the page limit from 21 to 22 pages for resumes), given the differences between cost estimator and economist qualifications and role responsibilities?

USAID Response: Please see the response to question #40.

83. Page 34, item d) states: “Describe any quality awards or certifications that indicate exceptional capacity to provide the service or product described in the Description of Design/Engineering Services. This information is not included in the page limitation.”

Can USAID confirm that this information should be included at the end of each Past Performance Short Form?

USAID Response: Please see the response to question #50.

84. Page 40 references an “Annex D”, yet there is no additional reference to this Annex in the solicitation. Can USACE provide Annex D?

USAID Response: Evaluation Factor 5, Past Performance, has been updated.

85. Page 35: USAID lists a 5% 8(a) Program subcontracting goal. Does participation from small disadvantaged businesses who are not currently SBA certified as 8(a) firms fulfill this goal?

USAID Response: “8(a) Program” has been replaced with “Small Disadvantaged

Businesses” to account for both designations.

86. Page 42, Evaluation Factor 6, item 5 states that Offeror will be assessed on the extent of SB participation in terms of value of the total acquisition. The provided Small Business Subcontracting Plan template requests goals to be stated as a percentage of subcontracting dollars. Should goals also be stated as a percentage of total contract dollars?

USAID Response: Evaluation Factor 6 language has been updated. The SB goal must be submitted as a percentage of the total acquisition.

87. When does USAID anticipate posting the answers to questions?

USAID Response: This amendment constitutes answers to questions received.

88. Will USAID provide adequate time for the Offerors to adjust the responses in their proposals when the answers provided impact the content?

USAID Response: The deadline for submission of qualifications has been extended to September 28th at 1:00 pm EDT.

89. Will USAID allow follow-up questions to clarify any significant ambiguities in the Q&A?

USAID Response: Offerors are welcome to submit follow-up questions. USAID will determine whether a response is necessary.

90. What is meant by “finalized (100% final design) preliminary to construction” (5.1.2 para.

2)

USAID Response: 100% final design or ready-to-advertise design means a complete design (analysis, specifications, and drawings) including annotated submittal review comments resulting from the design reviews. This becomes part of the solicitation and construction contract for execution of the work.

91. Clarify the statement “should also incorporate the operations and…