7200AA22R00069_CCSDP RFP Amendment No. 1_Q&A.pdf

Subject: RFP No. 7200AA22R00069 Amendment Number: One (1) Issuance Date of Amendment Number One (1): January 27, 2023 Closing Date: February 13, 2023 at 1 PM

Dear Prospective Offerors:

The purpose of this Amendment One (1) to the Request for Proposals for Compliance and Capacity Support for Diverse Partnerships (CCSDP) IDIQ is to:

(1) Extend the closing date for phase 1,

(2) Revised RFP using track changes functionality to provide updates from Q&A below; please note that the RFP will contain most changes that were deleted or revised as a courtesy (page numbers in the revised RFP will start to differ around page 123, the tracked changes have created an additional page in the RFP).

However, Offeror’s are responsible for ensuring compliance with all terms and conditions of the RFP and the incorporated Amendment No.1, and

(3) Provide answers to questions asked by potential offerors. Please note that in an effort to eliminate redundant questions and answers Offerors may not see their questions as submitted verbatim, however, all questions submitted have been answered.

The RFP as described above is hereby amended as follows:

I. The closing date for phase 1 submissions is hereby extended from February 3, 2023 to February 13, 2023.

II. Provided below are answers to questions that pertain to the CCSDP.

All other terms and conditions of the CCSDP RFP remain unchanged.

*Questions and Answers

Request for Proposals Compliance and Capacity Support for Diverse Partnerships (CCSDP)

IDIQ

Solicitation No.: 7200AA22R00069

General Questions

1. The question is central to FAR 5.203 “Publicizing and Response Time”: It is noted that the solicitation issue date is January 11, 2023, and the solicitation closing date is established on February 3, 2023. Please advise regarding the rationale or need to reduce the solicitation response time from the required 30 days to 23 days? Considering there was no Source Sought and no Pre-Solicitation advertised which would have provided prospective offerors more time to develop the concept. The response time is fairly short, would USAID be amenable to extend the closing date to reflect the FAR 5.203?

Answer: Yes, the revised closing date for phase 1 will be February 13, 2023.

2. Pg. 120 of 148, Section L.8.a- Can USAID please confirm if offerors can use 10-point sized font in tables/charts/graphs etc.?

Answer: Yes.

3. Pg. 2 of 148, Section B.5- Section B.5 states that “In no event, however, may the amount of fixed fee in any individual task order exceed seven percent (7%) of the task order’s estimated cost, excluding fee.” However, Section L.9, Part 2 (Page 125 of 148) states “Offerors may not propose a fixed fee percentage above the statutory limit (10%) set forth in FAR 15.404-4.” Can USAID kindly clarify the fixed fee ceiling for CCSDP?

Answer: The amount of fixed fee in any individual task order may not exceed seven percent (7%) of the task order’s estimated cost, excluding fee.

4. Pg. 7 - 8 - Section B.7 (b) Minimum Qualifications, the RFP includes a table for Senior and Mid-level education and experience requirements. Would USAID consider reducing the Mid-level experience requirements, or including an additional Junior level category that would allow support staff to work with Mid and Senior level staff on tasks?

Answer: The minimum qualifications as described in the RFP will remain as-is. Noting that TOs under the IDIQ may have Junior or other level categories.

5. Pg. 123 of 148, Section L.8.c(3)- Can USAID please clarify if the required five past performance contracts to be listed are a grand total of five, or five each for the Prime and each major subcontractor?

Answer: Revised as follows:

The Offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) must provide performance information for itself and each major SubContractor (one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost) in accordance with the following. The sample past performance reference form (in Attachment J.3) may be used by Offerors to preset the information requested below:

a) List in an annex to the technical proposal all relevant contracts for the past 5 (five) years for the Offeror and each major subcontract for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. Provide: Contract/Task Order Number. Dollar Value. POC. Period of Performance. A statement as to why this award was chosen as being relevant to the Compliance and Capacity Support for Diverse Partnerships. Annotate if these references are in CPARS or not. See below if they are NOT in CPARS.

Note: The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar size, type of work, scope of work, and complexity/diversity of tasks, similar environment, and how recently they were performed. It should be clear whether the work by the Offeror was done as a prime Contractor or as a SubContractor.

(USAID recommends that you alert the contacts that their names have been submitted and that they are authorized to provide performance information concerning the listed contracts if and when USAID requests it.)

b) If extraordinary problems impacted any of the referenced contracts, provide a short explanation and describe the corrective action taken in the Technical Proposal Body.

c) Describe any quality awards or certifications that indicate exceptional capacity to provide the service or product described in the SOW in the Annex. This information is not included in the page limitation.

For all contracts listed above that are not in CPARS, provide a list of contact names, job titles, mailing addresses, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, explanation of relevance to the proposed acquisition and a description of the performance to include:

1. Scope of work or complexity/diversity of tasks,

2. Primary location(s) of work,

3. Term of performance,

4. Dollar value, and

5. Contract type, i.e., fixed-price, cost reimbursement, etc.

d) USAID may also review additional CPARS for the Offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) and major SubContractors.

6. Pg. 43 of 148, Section F.8- Does USAID plan to provide local compensation plan detail for the countries in question at each task order level to determine if proposed rates for non-key CCN personnel exceed allowable rates?

Answer: No. To comply with the requirements of AIDAR 752.7007 and 722.170 (setting aside Mission Director/AA approval of an exception under 722.170(b), the contractor must provide adequate information and justification for the CO to determine the reasonableness and allowability of CCN-TCN compensation. The CO MAY use the LCP as part of their analysis about the "prevailing rates" of compensation in the local labor market since it is normally based on such data, however it would only be one reference in the CO's analysis of the CCN-TCN compensation cost besides other available labor market data.

7. Pg. 24, Requirement 4.5 - Supporting Local Service Providers and Organizations – the RFP States that “Therefore, the Contractor(s) shall subcontract or sub-award to local organizations when carrying out performance assessments to the maximum extent possible?” Can USAID define the wording “to the maximum extent possible” in the sentence? Is USAID flexible on this requirement if the Contractor(s) is/are unable to identify a qualified local organization to perform the performance assessment?

Answer: The extent to which the Contractor(s) will be required to utilize local organizations or companies will be determined at the Task Order level. Task Order Contracting Officers and Contracting Officer Representatives can determine the level of flexibility they will allow and what threshold will be used to determine that a qualified local organization is not available in-country.

8. Pg. 123 of 148, Section L.8.c (3)- Can USAID please confirm that there is no page limit for the past performance section?

Answer: Per page 120, past performance information is limited to 2 pages.

9. Pg. 124 of 148, Section L.9 Part 2- Can USAID please confirm that the completed cost/price evaluation matrix from the template in Attachment J.6 can be presented in MS-Excel format?

Answer: Yes.

10. Pg. 177, Section L.4 PHASED EVALUATION- The RFP states that “The Government intends to conduct this evaluation using a phased approach for proposal submission and evaluation.” Will USAID allow an additional round of questions for offerors that are invited to submit proposals for Phase 2?

Answer: Yes.

11. This is a set-aside procurement for Small Businesses. What is the authorized geographic code for the prime contractor’s “nationality” (as defined in 22 CFR 228) for this IDIQ?

Answer: The authorized geographic code is 937.

12. Is this procurement limited to US small businesses only, based on Geographic Code 000?

Answer: The authorized geographic code for procurement of goods and services under this contract is 937 for the prime contract and its subcontractors or as specified in task orders.

13. Is this procurement subject to Geographic Code 937, which means that a US subsidiary of a foreign company or foreign concern meeting the “nationality” of a developing country could apply, provided that they meet the regulatory compliance requirements below ?

The regulations, in pertinent part, define a business concern eligible set-asides as a small business (including participation in small business contracting programs) as “a business entity organized for profit, with a place of business located in the United States, and which operates primarily within the United States or which makes a significant contribution to the U.S. economy through payment of taxes or use of American products, materials or labor.” 13 C.F.R. § 121.105(a)(1).

Answer: The authorized geographic code for procurement of goods and services under this contract is 937 for the prime contract and its subcontractors or as specified in task orders. Offerors are encouraged to ensure that they meet the regulatory requirements.

14. Page 1, Cover Page: Please confirm the anticipated award date for this IDIQ?

Answer: USAID anticipates award of the IDIQ between April and May. USAID estimates a two-three week timeframe between Phases 1 and 2 for evaluation and notifications for Phase 1. Once notification takes place, offerors will have approximately 30 days to submit Phase 2 proposals. All timelines are estimates and are dependent on the volume of submissions or any other unforeseen circumstances. The exact submission date for Phase 2 will be published in an amendment to the

IDIQ.

15. Page 3, B.7 Considering this is at the IDIQ level, can we just describe the positions and labor categories and not provide specific names that will be determined by the TOs?

Answer: Confirmed. Only the names of key personnel, as specified in Section F.8 pages 42 - 43 are required.

16. Page 117, L.3 and Page 119 L.7 The general proposal instructions request that the proposal should be valid for 180 days whereas the case study refers to at least 90 days. Can USAID clarify?

Answer: Proposals must be valid for 180 days.

17. Page 119, L.8 and Page 120 L.8 The technical proposal seems to be limited to 20 pages in total, but the RFP requests a technical approach of 20 pages + a staffing and management plan of 5 pages and past performance information of 2 pages. Can USAID clarify the page limitation?

Answer: The technical proposal total page limit is 27 pages, inclusive of the staffing and management plan and past performance information.

18. Pg. 76 and 77, Section H.24 and H.25

● Do the provisions apply at the IDIQ level or will potential COI provision application be determined by the specific activities of each individual Task Order?

Answer: Both (provisions and clauses included in the IDIQ flow down to the TO unless otherwise stated).

● Will the provisions apply to subcontractors included in a prime's IDIQ proposal response?

Answer: If the provision applies to the subcontractors task, it will be applicable. This will be determined at the Task Order level.

● If adequate measures are taken by the prime contractor, will the government consider COI mitigation strategies at the IDIQ or Task Order level?

Answer: Mitigation strategies if necessary will be determined at the Task Order level..

19. Can USAID please confirm there will be another round of questions during Phase 2 of the proposal?

Answer: Yes

20. Can USAID kindly confirm if this IDIQ has defined geographic priorities, or this IDIQ is to be available to all USAID missions and USAID Operating Units?

Answer: The IDIQ is global; available to all USAID Missions and Operating Units

21. Section L.8(3), p. 123 - Past Performance:

a. Please clarify if Past Performance for contracts that are not in CPARS should follow the guidance on page 123, or follow the format provided in Attachment J3.

Answer: Use Attachment J3, following the instructions on page 123 as revised in this Amendment.

22. F.2. Performance Period - "The base period of performance for this contract is [To be determined at time of award]

The option period of performance is [To be determined at time of award]."

This is the first reference to an option period in the solicitation. Can USAID please confirm if an option is envisioned and if so, identify the length of base period of performance and option period(s)?

Answer:The following language is removed from page 29, Section F.2: “The base period of performance for this contract is [To be determined at time of award] The option period of performance is [To be determined at time of award].”

23. Section L.9 Part 9, pp. 128-129 - The heading of Part 9 is Part 9 – Letters of Commitment (Major Subcontractors), but that section then requests letters of commitment from each subcontractor.

Should Offerors include LOCs from all subcontractors, whether or not they are classified as Major Subcontractors?

Answer: Letters of commitment should be submitted for major subcontractors only.

24. F.5.2(1) p. 34 - This requires all awardees to provide the COR with copies of issued task orders.

We request USAID review the utility of this request and instead have the successful offeror send the task order to the COR after fully executed.

Answer: For clarity, the contractor awarded a new task order is responsible for sending a copy of the task order to the IDIQ COR.

25. C.4.1.2, p.14 - Section C, SOW, P. 14 Task 2 – Monitoring Evaluation and Learning section indicates the requirements associated with discrete task orders but it is unclear what emphasis, resources or funding these may be for cross-task order buy-in learning and dissemination. On page 16, however, USAID has indicated that “Learning and adapting” will be demonstrated in deliberate and reported efforts to ensure that USAID and the Contractor(s) is continuously learning from ongoing work on the ground as well as elsewhere in the world and applying learning to improving practices and methodologies. Can you clarify whether resources will be dedicated to harvesting learning across task orders with the aim of sharing these lessons based on the collective analysis and evaluation of task order activities? How will all IDIQ holders be kept updated on the best practices and lessons learned identified across the various IDIQ holders?

Answer: USAID expects that CLA is incorporated into all activities. As per ADS 201, USAID Operating Units (OU) should devote approximately 1 to 3 percent of total program funding to external evaluation on average. Specifics will be included at the Task Order level and Task Orders that emphasize or specify learning requirements may include additional resources. As per page 32, "The Contractor will provide USAID a concise annual report within 30 calendar days of the end of each 12-month period. This will include progress of major activities; problems encountered and proposed remedial actions. Depending on the timing of the award of the IDIQ, this could be instead of the fourth quarterly report but must cover the topics/format of the quarterly report at a minimum.

USAID will develop a reporting schedule with the contractor during the start-up phase of the project to provide final guidance on this." This is in addition to the quarterly report requiring similar content

- progress and problems/actions taken relate closely to continuous learning objectives. The New Partnerships Initiative team will provide additional human resources, beyond the Contracting Officer’s Representative, to ensure cross-learning and to capture lessons learned for dissemination.

26. F.6 Ordering Procedures, p. 37, B. Task Order Award (p): Deliverables/Results/Reports:

The RFP says: “For small business set-asides only, the small business prime must report the percentage of work being provided by its employees.” While we understand the intent, please consider changing the requirement from “employees” to “services,” to better conform with the restrictions in FAR 52.219-14

Answer: The current language will remain as is.

27. C.4, p.11 - Section C, SOW, P. 11 indicates one of the four target audiences/partners for this contract’s services are “3. Missions and OUs who are interested in systems-driven development, can receive advisory services through which potential local partners who are system leverage points can be identified, or systems-level MEL support when their activities target systems change.” Please clarify further whether this statement means that this contract will service Missions/OUs that are looking to receive advisory support to identify local partners that are system leverage points OR if this contract is meant to provide support in contracting with these local partners?

Answer: The third bullet refers to providing advisory services to Missions/OUs to identify potential local partners or to provide systems-level MEL support.

28. Page 27, Section D, D.1 AIDAR 752.7009 MARKING (January 1993), refers to requirements for “USAID-financed commodities and shipping containers, and project construction sites,” which do not seem relevant to the CCSDP IDIQ. Please clarify.

Answer: All Marking requirements must be followed in accordance with AIDAR 752.7009 but will be addressed on a Task Order level.

29. Page 30, Section F.4 Performance Standards, refers to “(v) Small business subcontracting (as applicable).” Would USAID please delete this reference, since it is not applicable to the CCSDP IDIQ, a total small business set aside procurement?

Answer: Yes.

30. Page 32, F.5.1 IDIQ Reports, (1) Annual Performance Report states “For small business setasides only, the small business prime must report the percentage of work being provided by its employees.

The IDIQ COR must inform the IDIQ CO if the percentage of work being conducted by the small business falls below the 50% requirement in FAR part 52.219-14, Limitations in Subcontracting.” As this is a total small business set aside procurement, would USAID kindly revise this statement for accuracy?

Answer: The statement applies as written.

31. Page 30, Section F.5.1 IDIQ Reports, indicates that monthly success stories are one of the reporting requirements. Monthly success stories are most likely not feasible under IDIQ contracts.

For example, some contractors may not have an active Task Order (TO) or may have TOs that do not generate success stories every month. Would USAID kindly revise this section to eliminate this reporting requirement at the IDIQ level?

Answer: As per page 32, “Approximately one-page success stories to be submitted to the TOCOR through the USAID Country Representative. Success stories must be shared with the IDIQ COR.” In other words, success stories are for Task Orders but they are included in the table of IDIQ reports because they must be shared with the IDIQ COR.

32. Page 30, Section F.5.1 IDIQ Reports, Quarterly Report, describes reporting for individual TOs and not IDIQ level reporting. Please clarify.

Answer: Per page 32, “The Contractor will provide USAID a concise quarterly report on or before March 15, June 15, September 15, and December 15 of each year following the issuance of this IDIQ contract. This will summarize the country situation; program highlights, achievements, and major activities; budget information (including amounts obligated, Contractor funds obligated to program and grant activities, and funds disbursed); summary of grant implementation and appraisal;

problems encountered and proposed remedial actions. Depending on the timing of the award of the Task Order, this could be instead of the monthly report for that month. USAID will develop a reporting schedule with the contractor during the start-up phase of the project to provide final guidance on this. Contractor if required under the task order must report on subcontractor progress as appropriate.” (emphasis added)

33. Page 30, Section F.5.1 IDIQ Reports, requires submission of a Grants Manual within 30 calendar days of the IDIQ award. Would USAID kindly consider removing this requirement since a Grants Manual is usually required at the Task Order (TO) level when the TO includes a Grants Under Contract (GUCs) component, per Section L.8(c)((1)(d)??

Answer: The Grants Manual will be submitted and approved at a Task Order level.

34. Page 48, Section H.3 – Security Clearance, states “Even though the basic Contract is not classified, the Contractor may request a Secret level facility clearance at any time after the Contract is awarded in order to be eligible for consideration for a classified Task Order.” Can USAID please describe the process by which awardees will be able to request sponsorship to obtain a Secret level facility clearance post award?

Answer: See USAID’s Automated Directive System (ADS) Chapter 567, specifically ADS 567.3.2.

35. Pages 81-87, Section I.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE, can USAID kindly delete the following FAR clauses, which are not applicable to a total small business set aside procurement? “52.219-1 - Small Business Program Representation.

(Oct. 2022)” “52.230-2 - Cost Account Standards. (JUN 2020)” “52.230-3 - Disclosure and Consistency of Cost Accounting Practices. (JUN 2020)” “52.230-6 - Administration of Cost Accounting Standards. (JUN 2010)”

Answer: 52.230-2, 52.230-3, and 52.230-6 are removed from Section I.1.

Technical Questions

36. Pg 132, Section M Evaluation Criteria: Will USAID evaluation of the Phase 1 case study be considered as part of the evaluation criteria in determining whether or not to award the contractor an IDIQ under phase 2 (see pg 132). That is, does a scoring of “not likely to be a viable competitor” affect the ultimate costing and technical proposal evaluation conducted in phase 2?

Answer: Yes.

37. Pg 130,Section L: At the phase 2 stage, are letters of commitment and subcontractor pricing and reps and certs required for all subcontractors or only major subcontractors (pg 130). Can USAID clarify which components (e.g. Parts 7, 8, 9) are required for subcontractors (all) vs major subcontractors for the full technical and cost proposal submissions in phase 2?

Answer:All components are required for major subcontractors only.

38. Pg 147 Attachment J.7 Case Study: The Case study references a total of 4 organizations in the chart provided. Is the BCC awardee one of those organizations, and if so, which one? For the case study, should we presume that unless otherwise listed, each of the local organizations has access to the entire country of Florin? Does USAID have a desired format for the Case Study response? Does USAID expect the contractor to provide a both a technical and management approach in its response to the case study, including proposed personnel/positions.

Answer: As per the title of the table, this does include the BCC organization as it lists the 3 potential partners and the BCC awardee - the only health organization in the table, Organización Nacional para la Salud. Yes, unless otherwise listed, each of these organizations has access to the entire country.

Case Study response should follow the instructions in L.7 in a manner that is responsive to the Case Study evaluation factors included in M.2. USAID has no further instructions for the Case Study.

39. Pg 49, H.3 Security Clearance: Is the contractor expected to have a security clearance in order to bid on the IDIQ?

Answer: No.

40. Pg 149, Case Study: Third Party Monitoring: Can you please provide more clarity of what the request TPM would entail, programmatic performance monitoring (e.g. site visits) or administrative/contract/grant compliance, or both?

Answer: All USAID-required monitoring.

41. Pg. 122, Section L - Could USAID please clarify the number of pages allocated for the Executive Summary in Phase 2?

Answer: 1 page.

42. Pg. 146, Attachment J.7 Case Study - Could USAID please confirm that the province in The People’s Republic of Florin that is “completely inaccessible on a regular basis” is the “mountainous region in the south” that is mentioned on the same page?

Answer: Yes.

43. Given that this RFP requires responding to a hypothetical task order, is it possible to name actual existing local organizations in the LAC region?

Answer: As per page 148, Florin is not based on a real country, therefore no actual organizations exist for USAID to name.

44. Page 43, Section F.8 indicates that the qualifications for the IDIQ manager must be in accordance with the Experience/Education levels specified in Section B. Also, page 123 Section L.8.C.2 refers to the minimum qualifications of the IDIQ Manager set forth in Section C.

• There is no mention of the IDIQ Manager position in Section B. Also, there are no minimum qualifications for this position in Section C. Please clarify this position's anticipated duties and responsibilities and the minimum qualifications.

Answer: IDIQ Manager’s duties and responsibilities are found on page 24. The IDIQ Manager is considered 002 - Administrative and Operational Staff under B.7 (a) Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates, as found on page 6. The IDIQ Manager would be considered at the mid-level education and experience requirements, as per B.7 (b) on page 7.

45. Page 122, Section L.8 instructs offerors to include a CV and references for the IDIQ Manager.

However, page 135, Section M.3.2 does not say specifically that the evaluation criteria for Staffing and Management Plan include the Key Personnel position of IDIQ Manager.

• Please clarify whether the candidate proposed for this position will be evaluated as part of USAID’s evaluation of staffing.

Answer: Yes.

46. Page 118, Section L.7 says that the Phase I response “should not reference the offeror’s technical approach or any factors that will be evaluated in Phase II.” However, page 134, Section M.2 says that one of the case study evaluation factors is “Offeror proposes innovative technical approach and creative merit of proposed mixed methodologies […]”

• Please clarify the instructions on page 118 to request offerors to propose technical approaches and methodologies as part of Phase 1.

Answer: Case Study response should follow the instructions in L.7 in a manner that is responsive to the Case Study evaluation factors included in M.2. A revision is hereby made to the sentence on page 134 as follows: “Offeror proposes innovative approach and creative merit of proposed mixed methodologies […]”. The case study response should mirror the intended technical and staffing/management approach.

47. Page 120, Section L.8.a. lists Appendices to be included in Phase 2. These include “Small Disadvantaged Business participation program targets information (per Section L).

• We do not find a requirement in section L to include small, disadvantaged business participation and request that this bullet be deleted. As small businesses themselves, prime offerors would not normally be required to have small disadvantaged business utilization plans and targets as part of an IDIQ.

Answer: The requirement for Small Disadvantaged Business participation does not apply, this requirement is hereby removed.

48. Page 148, Attachment J.7 Case Study says that the “response should include an overview of the yearly work plan.”

• Does this mean that the overview should cover just the year one work plan, or does USAID mean that the overview should cover a 3-year workplan?

Answer: As per page 137 “The Task Order (TO) will be for a three-year period” and page 138 “please describe in 5 pages how your organization, within the defined budget and scope, would realistically support the Mission with the above activities over a three-year period”. Offerors should include an overview of the yearly work plan, i.e. a work plan that is divided into three years.

49. Page 148,Technical Attachment J Phase 1 Case Study, The requirements state: “Once the award is made to the organization implementing the basic needs programming, conduct third party monitoring for the first two years of the award”

So if capacity gaps are identified during landscape analysis for this organization, the contractor is not required to provide capacity building during the ward for basic needs, correct? Since this will be a conflict with the contractor also conducting a MEL on the same program. Who would provide capacity building for this organization?

Answer: Correct. It would be determined by the Florin Mission who w/could provide the capacity strengthening for this partner.

50. Page 24, Section C.4 Statement of Work: Management of Grants Under Contract: Would USAID please confirm that only the prime awardees will be able to administer grants under contract as needed for task orders released through this IDIQ?

Answer: Confirmed.

51. Given TOs may be multiple years in performance which typically requires registration, is USAID able to give insight to at least the first few countries of anticipated activity to support planning?

● Task 4 similar Task 3, Req3

Answer: USAID is not able to provide a list of countries at this time.

52. Page 123, L.8 Does past performance similar in size refer to multi-year or short-term (IDIQ or case study)?

Answer: Similar in size refers to period of performance, dollar value, and contract type, i.e., fixed-price, cost reimbursement, etc.

53. Page 129, L.9 Can USAID confirm that this is referring to section H.3 Security clearance or other sections in section H that refer to security?

Answer:Yes.

54. Page 148, Case Study – second to last bullet “identify a local accounting firm to provide capacity strengthening so that they are able to perform this function in the future… “ Which function is being referred to? (1) the capacity building or (2) developing local partners’ NICRA package?

Answer: Both 1 and 2.

55. Page 148, Case Study – proposal workplan, Can the workplan be presented in the proposal as a separate annex?

Answer: Yes.

· Is "Contractor Performance Report – Short Form (see attachment in Section J" the same as "Past Performance Report Forms, References (per Section L)?

Answer: Yes.

56. Pg. 125, Section L.9 - Would USAID please confirm that Offerors are not required to propose indirect ceilings?

Answer: Confirmed.

57. Pg.148, Section J.7 - For the case study, could USAID please confirm that the two local partners that the contractor will support in developing a NICRA should be identified from among the three transition partners and the BCC partner?

Answer: Yes.

58. Pg.146 - 148, Case Study - Can an Annex (excluded from the 5 page count) summarizing organizational capabilities be included as part of the Case Study submission?

Answer: No. Only Factor 1 will be evaluated in this phase. Past performance and organizational capabilities are evaluated in Phase 2 (see section M, starting on page 132).

59. Pg.146 - 148, Case Study - Can Offerors include a 1 page acronym list that is not included in the 5 page count for the Case Study?

Answer: Yes. The RFP will be updated.

60. Pg. 146 - 148, Case Study - Can Offerors include a Table of Content that is not included in the 5 page count for the Case Study?

Answer: No.

61. Pg.133, M.1 General Information - Page 134: (f) In accordance with FAR 52.215-1, the Government is contemplating making an award for six (6) recipients for an IDIQ award and the initial Task Order without discussions with the Offeror, although it reserves the right to enter into discussions. Therefore, Offerors are advised to submit their best technical and cost/price proposals in their initial offer.

Answer: There is no initial Task Order. RFP will be revised.

62. Pg. 120 - Can USAID clarify if a country and/or region has been selected for the initial task order to be able to properly budget costs that will be aligned with the country context?

Answer: There is no initial Task Order. RFP will be revised.

63. Pg. 10, C.3 Objective - On page 10, the RFP states: “USAID will support compliance services, technical capacity development, and systems change services offered under this IDIQ by providing an infrastructure for implementation, including: a package of tools to aid performance solution design, implementation, research, evaluation, and success/impact reporting.” Pg. 10, C.3 Objective - Can USAID Please confirm if the package of tools referenced above is the NPI Partnership Incubator Suite of Tools? And can USAID share a link and/or an attachment about these tools? If the reference above is for another set of tools, can USAID please provide a link and/or attachment about this package of tools?

Answer: It is not. This sentence states what USAID is supporting (buying) through this IDIQ and associated task orders. Resources cited such as “resources and tools developed through past efforts, such as the NPI Partnerships Incubator’s suite of tools, as well as ongoing products developed to support the forthcoming local capacity development policy or based on research conducted by USAID’s Local Works program” are, or will be available, via the Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC), LearningLab.org, USAID.gov (including the LCS Policy page), workwithUSAID.gov, among other sources.

64. Pg.11, SOW – target audiences - The SOW, page 11 only mentions 4 target audiences:

Missions and OUs interested in implementing NPI Action plans, 2) who are interested in system-driven development, 3) seeking to transition the implementation of activities to local partners, and 4) new non-traditional organizations interested in investing in their performance.

Will USAID require direct assistance and support to governmental institutions?

Answer: The cited page and sentence refers to the audience for services procured under this IDIQ.

Task 1 is Support for Mission Staff and, as per page 12, host country entity partners are among the type of organizations that may require support.

65. Pg.18 and 22, Requirement 3.3 and 4.3 The same bulleted list is provided under 3.3 and 4.3 for solutions packages. Please further elaborate on the differences USAID anticipates between 3.3 and 4.3 given that they are the same systems and all of the words are exactly the same with the bulleted systems such as budget planning, financial management systems, etc.

Answer: 3.3 refers to risk solutions and 4.3 refers to performance solutions.

66. Pg.118, L.7, Case Study - Please confirm that the Case Study submission is acceptable in PDF.

Answer: Yes.

67. Pg.118, L.7 "Phase 1 - Instructions for the Preparation of the Case Study" Would USAD allow one additional page to the case study response to address the requirement of an overview of the yearly work plan?

Answer: An overview of the work plan will be allowed as a one page appendix. The RFP will be updated.

68. Pg.122, 2 Staffing and Management Plan, bullet 2 - Outside of the core management positions, with this being an IDIQ, staffing will be dictated by task orders. Including a staffing plan of "in-country and headquarters management" is going to be dependent on the task order and what is being requested for services. Since this is an IDIQ and not a task order, we respectfully request that this bullet be removed and that no staffing plan be provided for the IDIQ when the scope is worldwide and so broad.

Answer: USAID respectfully declines the removal of the bullet.

69. Pg.122, 2 Staffing and Management Plan, bullet 3 - What is "core staff" in bullet 3 versus "core management positions" from bullet 1? How does this staffing differ from bullet 2? Again, this seems inappropriate for an IDIQ where "illustrative tasks" are not identified but rather broad scopes of services for compliance and capacity building. We respectfully request that USAID remove this bullet or at a minimum clarify what is being asked for between bullets 1, 2 and 3 especially given that this is an IDIQ.

Answer: “Core staff” and “core management positions” are to be determined by the offeror(s). Bullet 1 refers to the presentation of a Table of Management Positions, whereas bullet 2 refers to a Staffing Plan. Offeror will find illustrative tasks or potentially required services in Section C under each of the four main Tasks and in the Case Study.

70. Pg.123, 2 Staffing and Management Plan, bullet at the top of the page Under the appendices on page 120, none of this is mentioned. Please confirm that the resume, references, and commitment letter are all part of the appendices and are not included in the 5-page limit for this section.

Answer: Yes.

71. Pg.134, M.2, b - Can this be removed given the five-page limit and the limited details USAID has given in the case study? Competency and capacity in the service USAID requires seems more relevant than in multiple sectors and programming, which is addressed through bullets like a, c, e, and f.

Answer: No.

72. On page 10, Section C.3. OBJECTIVE, USAID refers to materials from the NPI Partnerships Incubator. Would USAID please share the most recent interim/annual reports from the NPI Partnerships Incubator contract? We note that they have not been uploaded to the development experience clearing house (DEC).

Answer: This IDIQ contract is a new requirement for the government and not a follow-on award to any previous project. As per ADS 540, contractors are responsible for submitting materials to the Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC). USAID confirmed that the Partnership Incubator annual reports are on the DEC.

73. On page 12, Section C.4 STATEMENT OF WORK lists "Indigenous NGOs" as one of the potential recipient organizations. Is it appropriate to assume that Indigenous NGOs refer to any local NGOs or only those organizations led by indigenous groups?

Answer: This could mean either organizations indigenous to the country or those serving indigenous populations.

74. On page 32, Section F.5.1 IDIQ Reports, (2) Quarterly Reports, states that, “Depending on the timing of the award of the Task Order, this could be instead of the monthly report for that month.”

However, the only monthly reporting listed for the IDIQ is the provision of success stories. Is this the monthly report being referred to, or does USAID anticipate that Task Orders will require monthly reports?

Answer: Yes, this is the monthly report being referred to.

75. On pages 55-56, and page 76, Section H, Clauses H.13, H.14, H.24 (a), and H.25 (b)] indicate that the Contractor will be precluded from implementing services that are related to services provided to local partners under Task Orders. Could USAID please confirm that Contractors will not be precluded from implementing services that are unrelated to localization efforts at the Mission level?

Answer: This will be determined on a Task Order level.

76. On page 118, Section L.7, PHASE I - INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE CASE STUDY (a) ORGANIZATION OF THE CASE STUDY, USAID gives a 5-page limit for the narrative. Would USAID consider allowing offerors to include the work plan as an appendix to the case study?

Answer: Yes. The RFP will be updated.

77. On page 120 Section L.8 PHASE 2 - INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (a) ORGANIZATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, requires submission of a “Personnel summary matrix” as an appendix. In the same section, under (c) FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED, there is a requirement for a Table of Management Positions. Is the Personnel summary matrix the same as the Table of Management Positions? Or is this a separate requirement? If it is a separate requirement, should the Table of Management Positions be included in the Staffing and Management Plan?

Answer: As per Section L.8(c)(2), the Table of Management Positions is a component of the Staffing and Management Plan; also see Section M.3.2, Factor 3. The Staffing and Management Plan is limited to 5 pages as part of the Technical Proposal. The Personnel summary matrix is listed as an appendix.

78. On page 123, Section J.8 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (a) ORGANIZATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (c) FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED, (3) Past Performance Information, Factor 4, specifies, “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.” Will USAID allow the submission of relevant cooperative agreements as past performance information?

Answer: Yes.

79. Page 123 | Past Performance Information – Is there a limit to how far back a past performance reference can be? For example, to be considered relevant, your past performance must be within the past (5) five years.

Answer:Yes, 5 years.

80. Page 146, Attachment J.7 – Case Study – Can you provide the “transition award language” for the cooperative agreement in place with the large international NGO?

Answer: See the definition of ‘transition award’ in ADS 303, particularly points b. and c. Also refer to ADS 303mbb for additional information on transition awards.

81. Page 120, L.8 – Phase 2 Instructions – Should the content of the offeror’s Case Study response in Phase 1 carry over to the Phase 2 Technical Proposal, (e.g., assumptions, teaming, etc.)?

Answer: Note M.1(a)(ii) on page 132 “(ii) Phase 2 - Factors 2, 3 and 4 will be evaluated in this phase and will be inclusive of the previous evaluation conducted for Phase 1 - Factor 1.” Yes, the case study response should be indicative of the Offerors intended approach.

82. Pg 149 Case Study: Regarding support for 2 local partners in submitting their NICRA. Are these two additional local partners or is USAID referring to selecting 2 of the local partners previously identified (3 total for transition) that the contractor would be working with, or from amongst the 7 to be graduated? If they are not among the 3 previously listed in the table in the case study, can USAID provide similar organizational details?

Answer: Two of the three transitioning partners.

83. Pg. 11, Section C.4 – This section lists five tasks (Task 1: Support for Mission Staff to Improve Local Partnership; Task 2: Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning; Task 3: Risk Management; Task 4:

Capacity Strengthening for Local Actors; and Task 5: IDIQ Central Management). However, Pg. 121, Section L.8 and Pg. 134, Section M.3.1 ask that the technical approach be organized around a different structure (A. Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Support addressing Task 2, B. Capacity Strengthening, addressing Task 4 and Task 1, C. Compliance addressing Task 3, and D. Grants Under Contract). Would USAID consider revising Sections L.8 and Section M.3.1 so that the technical approach and evaluation criteria match the tasks outlined in Section C.4?

Answer: USAID will keep Sections L.8 and M.3.1 the same as presented in the solicitation.

84. Pg. 17, Section C.4 – Requirement 3.2 includes procurement of supplies as a possible required service. Could USAID provide more information on what kinds of supplies the Contractor may be asked to procure under this requirement?

Answer: This will be determined on a Task Order level.

85. Pg 120, Section L.8 – Subsection (a)1 states that the technical proposal should not use type smaller than size 11 font. Would USAID consider allowing Offerors to use a smaller font size for tables, charts, graphics, and text boxes as long as it is no smaller than size 9?

Answer: No.

86. Pg. 120, Section L.8 – The list of appendices includes both Appendix 2, Contractor Performance Report – Short Form and Appendix 4, Past Performance Matrix and Past Performance Report Forms.

These appendices appear to be duplicative. Could USAID please remove one of these appendices?

Answer:Yes, the Contractor Performance Report is hereby removed.

87. Pg. 123, Section L.8 – (c) Factors to be Evaluated, subsection (2) Staffing and Management Plan requires that offerors submit a CV, three references, and a signed acknowledgement letter from the IDIQ Manager. Can USAID confirm that these documents should be provided as appendices to the technical proposal and would not be subject to the 20-page limit?

Answer: Yes.

88. Pg. 147, Attachment J.7 – Does USAID envision that the $5 million in task order funding could include grants to local service providers and organizations, as referenced on Pg. 24, Section C.4, Management of Grants Under Contract?

Answer: No, Grants Under Contract are not mentioned in the Case Study.

89. Pg. 148, Attachment J.7 –

Considering space limitations, should the work plan be presented in a Gantt Chart format?

Answer: This is up to individual offerors.

90. L.8(a), p. 120 The RFP references a “Personnel summary matrix (per Section L) on the expertise of staff, consultants, and other personnel specialists.” However, there is no other reference to this appendix. Will USAID allow a personnel matrix to showcase our roster of talent to support CCSDP and, if so, are there specific instructions to guide the matrix contents and length?

Answer: Yes this is allowed. There are no specific instructions for the matrix as it is up to offerors.

91. F.5.1(10) p. 34 - AFP and Reporting. We do not see any reference to an AMELP or AFP aside from this section. Can USAID please confirm if a draft of the AFP or AMELP with Phase 2 submissions?

Answer: The Accountability and Feedback Planning tool and as a section of the Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan (AMELP) is a requirement in Section F. DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE which contain the post-award requirements for those who receive an IDIQ contract.

92. B.7(b) p.7 - Notes “the Contractor must provide personnel that meet the minimum education and experience requirements.” We ask that USAID amend this to read “meet or exceed the minimum requirements.”

Answer: Meeting the minimum is a requirement of USAID; offerors may choose to go beyond this minimum requirement.

93. C.4, p.1 - Section C, SOW, P.11 indicates one of the four target audiences/partners for this contract’s services are “2. New and non-traditional organizations interested in investing in their own performance improvement, who are recognized by USAID as important actors in the local system and/or current USAID partners.” Please clarify how these organizations would solicit support from the contract? Would there be a direct contractual relationship and what level of oversight and management would USAID exercise over these buy-ins?

Answer: USAID is the Agency issuing the IDIQ and IDIQ holders have a direct contractual relationship with USAID only, therefore USAID would be the one soliciting any work under the IDIQ in the form of a Task Order. Upon award, Section G will be updated to include the names of the Contracting Officer and Contracting Officer’s Representative who will provide oversight and management of the IDIQ on behalf of USAID. Task Order CORs will be responsible for technical oversight for that specific Task Order. Support to such organizations would be determined in Task Orders or under the technical direction of a Task Order COR.

94. Page 10, Section C.2 states “Through the Office of Acquisition and Assistance’s (OAA) listening tours and the NPI Action Plans exercise it demonstrated a strong need for compliance and capacity services across Missions and OUs. This funding was re-emphasized by Missions in their 2021 NPI Action Plans.” Can USAID please share the list of Missions who developed 2021 NPI Action Plans?

Answer: All operational USAID Missions were requested to submit a NPI Action Plan, in which 77 were received.

95. Page 56, Section H.12 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: PRECLUSION FROM IMPLEMENTATION CONTRACT, appears to be identical to Section H.25 302.3.5.10-7

ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: AUDIT (SEPTEMBER 2018) 302.3.5.10

Organizational Conflicts of Interest: Preclusion from Furnishing Certain Services and Restriction on Use of Information (September 2018) on page 76. Would USAID kindly consider deleting one of these clauses/sections to eliminate redundancy?

Answer:Yes, H.12 is hereby deleted.

96. Page 119, Section L.8, PHASE 2 - INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, defines Major subcontractors as “those expected to perform at least 20% or a prominent part of the technical effort.” In the same section, subpart (3) Past Performance Information on page 123, a major subcontractor is defined as “one whose proposed cost exceeds 20 percent of the offeror’s total proposed cost.” Would USAID kindly consider deleting the second, conflicting definition on page 123?

Answer: The definition provided on page 119 for major subcontractors is hereby deleted and replaced with “a major subcontractor is defined as “one whose proposed cost exceeds 20 percent of the offeror’s total proposed cost.”

97. Page 119, Section L.8, PHASE 2 - INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL states that “Only major subcontractors are required for the proposal submission.” Later on, on page 122, Section L.8, PHASE 2 - INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL states that “the Management Plan will identify potential and proposed consortia, partnerships, subcontracting arrangements, and/or other relationships that will contribute to the implementation and sustainability of interventions and outcomes.” Please confirm that, in addition to any required major subcontractors, offerors may propose subcontractors as part of their consortia, if they so desire, consistent with the detailed Section L instructions on page 122.

Answer: Yes.

98. Page 123, Section L.8, PHASE 2 - INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL states “The…