7200AA22R00069_CCSDP RFP Amendment No. 2_Q&A.pdf

Subject: RFP No. 7200AA22R00069 Amendment Number: Two (2) Issuance Date of Amendment Number Two (2): July 17, 2023 Closing Date: August 4, 2023 at 11 AM

Dear Prospective Offerors:

The purpose of this Amendment Two (2) to the Request for Proposals for Compliance and Capacity Support for Diverse Partnerships (CCSDP) IDIQ is to:

(1) Provide answers to questions asked by potential offerors for Phase 2 of the solicitation.

Answers previously provided in the Q&A amendment no. 1 to the RFP are still applicable unless otherwise noted in this amendment and will not be duplicated in this amendment

No. 2 Q&A;

(2) Amend past performance reference sections to delete page limitations and revise instructions; and

(3) Provide the amended J.6 Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix and instructions for Offeror’s

Use (will be posted as a separate attachment on SAM.gov).

The RFP as described above is hereby amended as follows:

I. Pg. 120 (a)(3), “Past Performance Information” - limited to 2 pages is hereby deleted and replaced with: no page limitation.

II. Pg.123 of 148, Section L.8.3.(c), this section is hereby 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 is anticipated to exceed 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost based on the tasks described in Section C) 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 5 (five) 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.

III. J.6 Cost/Price Matrix amended as attached; and

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

All other terms and conditions of the CCSDP RFP and Amendment No. 1 remain unchanged.

*Questions and Answers

Request for Proposals Compliance and Capacity Support for Diverse

Partnerships (CCSDP) IDIQ

Solicitation No.: 7200AA22R00069

General Questions

1. Question: In accordance with FAR 15.202, When providing a notice that an offeror is unlikely to be a “viable competitor” after the initial phase, the Government is required to provide “the general basis for that opinion.” (See FAR 15.202(b)). Could

USAID please elaborate on the basis of the opinion that an offeror is not a “viable competitor” for this procurement?

Answer: Post-Solicitation: Voluntary Down-Select Process. A voluntary down-select process provides for the use of multiple phases and the issuance of an advisory notification to offerors between stages. It differs from the FAR 15.202 advisory multi-step process in that the former is a pre-solicitation process, while the latter is part of the solicitation process. While the FAR does not define nor prescribe a post-solicitation process for down-selecting offerors, this approach is consistent with federal procurement law. Offerors who respond to phase 1 are not provided feedback on their submissions at this point in the evaluation.

Voluntary down-select notifications are not competitive range determinations. Offerors that withdraw from the competition are not entitled to an unsuccessful notice. After the award has been made, the CO may provide informal feedback on the Phase 1 evaluation to those offerors who opted not to participate in subsequent phases.

2. Question: Is there any chance we can receive any debrief or even any feedback about the evaluation of our proposal?

Answer: See answer to question 1 above.

3. Q&A #14, What is the updated date by which USAID anticipates awarding the IDIQs?

Answer: The anticipated award date is on or before September 30, 2023.

4. Page 129, Q&A #37, 121, and 132, Q&A #37 notes that Parts 7 and 8 are only required of major subcontractors but the amended solicitation just has "subcontractors". When items like this occur where an answer is given in the Q&A, but was not updated in the solicitation, please confirm that the initial answers still apply and supersede the amended solicitation.

Answer: See amendment no. 1, Q&A #37.

5. P. 117-118 L.6 DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS, Would USAID please confirm the required file format for submission of both the technical and cost volumes? Additionally, are offerors required to submit the cost/price evaluation matrix in PDF or in Excel?

Answer: Per RFP, page 117 and 118: Technical Volume in PDF and Cost/price evaluation matrix can be provided in either PDF or Excel format.

6. P. 120, L.8 (a) Would USAID please confirm that the font and font size for phase 2 proposals is Times New Roman (TNR) 11? Would USAID also confirm that graphics, textboxes and tables in phase 2 proposals must use no smaller than TNR size 10?

Answer: See amendment No. 1 to the RFP, Q&A #’s 2 & 85.

7. Would USAID kindly consider extending the closing date for Phase 2 proposal responses by 10 days to allow adequate time for Offerors to integrate responses to Phase II clarification questions?

Answer: No.

8. Section B, On page 3, Section B.7 Labor states, “The Contracting Officer has determined that a key (full-time) technical manager is not necessary or required to administer the basic IDIQ. Contractors will not be authorized to bill USAID directly for IDIQ management costs under this IDIQ or under task orders. Contractors must propose a centralized management structure that allows for recovery of IDIQ management costs as part of its indirect costs.” (Emphasis ours.)

At the same time, Page 122 Section L.8 (2) requires a “Table of Management Positions…that gives an overview of the anticipated roles/responsibilities and the minimum (required) and preferred qualifications/attributes to determine qualified candidates for the core management positions proposed in the IDIQ Staffing Plan.” Furthermore, the section states, “the Staffing

Plan must also describe how the proposed combination of in-country and headquarters management, long-term staff, and short-term technical assistance will collectively demonstrate exemplary technical expertise and management skills to provide leadership for the interventions and ensure the sustainable achievement of expected outcomes for TOs.”

With the understanding that USAID declined an offeror’s request during Q&A (Amendment 1, Q68) to remove the requirement for a Staffing Plan due to CCSDP being an unfunded IDIQ with a worldwide scope, could USAID further define its expectations for the Staffing and

Management Plan requirements. Specifically:

· Can USAID confirm that the purpose of the Table of Management Positions is for the offeror to present the roles and responsibilities of its “centralized management structure” comprised of headquarters (HQ) staff funded by indirect rate recovery.

Answer: Confirmed.

· Can USAID confirm that the objective of the IDIQ Staffing Plan is for the offeror to demonstrate how it would staff a theoretical or illustrative task order (or task orders) and describe how the HQ staff and task order-funded LTTA and STTA would collectively achieve the TO’s expected outcomes.

Answer: Confirmed.

9. Section B.7 (b) Minimum Qualifications on page 7 contains a table that shows the required minimum years of relevant work experience by academic degree for the senior and mid-level positions. There are many qualified professionals in the US and just as importantly overseas who do not hold a college degree but that could substitute decades of on-the-job experience in their field of expertise in a way that will benefit USAID’s localization efforts. Could USAID consider adding a “less than BA/BS” category to the senior and mid-level that would allow candidates to substitute an additional 5 years of on-the-job experience for a BA/BS—that is, 12 years minimum experience for Senior and 9 years minimum experience for Mid?

Answer: The minimum education requirement for labor categories will remain. Additional years of experience in lieu of meeting education minimum requirements can be determined at a TO level.

Technical Questions

10. Page 5-6, section B.7 (a), Note 3: Note 3 states that "Unless otherwise authorized by

USAID, the compensation for CCN and TCN labor must not exceed the prevailing compensation paid to personnel performing comparable work in the cooperating country as determined by USAID and must be paid in the currency of the cooperating country.]". Could the Government replace "labor" with "employees" considering that AIDAR 722.170 applies to employees, not consultants?

Answer: USAID respectfully declines this request.

11. Technical and Cost - Page 117, L.6 Phase 2, Technical Proposal and Cost Proposal states that two attachments should be included. Should this be three: 1) Technical; 2)

Attachment J.6; and 3) Cost Proposal Narrative as required on page 125?

Answer: “Submit the technical and cost proposals via email to CCSDP@usaid.gov in two separate attachments with the subject line of the email labeled as “7200AA22R00069

CCSDP Phase II Technical/Cost Proposal.” The point of the instruction is to ensure Offerors do not combine the Technical and Cost Proposal in one attachment. If offerors need to submit the cost components in separate attachments, it is permitted.

12. Page 120, L.8(a), Please confirm that 10- point font can be used for tables in Phase 2 per Q&A #2.

Answer: See amendment No. 1 to the RFP, Q&A #’s 2 & 85 (duplicate of question no.6 in this amendment).

13. Page 120, L.8(a) Appendices, Are there page limits to the appendices, such as two pages for the Management Structure Organizational Chart(s) and 10 pages for the personnel summary matrix?

Answer: See amendment no. 1 to the RFP regarding page limitations for various sections.

Also see Q&A No. 87 in amendment no. 1.

14. Page 120, L.8(a) Appendices Can the personnel summary matrix be presented in a horizontal page orientation versus a vertical page orientation?

Answer: Page orientation is left to offerors discretion as there are no restrictive instructions.

15. Page 123, (3) Past Performance Information, Since the IDIQ scope is broad, can a limitation of up to three past performances for the prime and up to three past performances for each major subcontractor be specified versus any relevant past performance in the last five years? A limitation like that will help ease the burden on USAID evaluators in looking at numerous past performances.

Answer: See Sections I and II above of the revised past performance information instructions.

16. Technical – Pg. 123, Section L.8 – In Amendment 1, USAID revised Section L.8.c(3) to indicate that offerors should list in an annex ALL relevant contracts for the offeror and each major subcontractor for the past 5 years. This requirement could result in scores or hundreds of entries in the annex. We respectfully request that USAID limit this to 5 total projects per offeror.

Answer: See Sections I and II above of the revised past performance information instructions.

17. Pg. 16 of 149 Task 3 Risk Management Introduction- Bullet two in this section states

“The Contractor(s) will provide staff that are certified and adhere to accounting and auditing standards that are generally accepted in the United States of America”; Can

USAID please confirm whether the Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards

(GAGAS) Yellow Book is the guidance being referenced in this bullet?

Answer: Confirmed.

18. Pg. 16 of 149, Requirement 3.2 - Conducting Risk Related Assessments, Surveys, and

Audits- Bullet two in this section related to the PGRA Follow-Up - Risk Mitigation Plan and Capacity Development Plan “providing input into Implementation Letters between USAID/Mission and the host” as one of the requirements. Can USAID please confirm if prior-year Implementation Letters will be available to the contractor for historical context regarding the historical risk plans?

Answer: This will be determined at a Task Order level in the event that this service is required and whether in each case there are prior-year Implementation Letters.

19. Pg. 18 of 149, Requirement 3.3 – Developing and Implementing Risk Management

Packages- The first paragraph states “Risk monitoring and management systems are then used to allow the host country partner organization, with the assistance and support of the

Contractor(s), to reassess its performance gaps and their fundamental causes, informing cyclical revisions to the risk management solution packages”; Can USAID please confirm whether access will be granted to contractors in an effort to identify and define each risk monitoring & management system?

Answer: This will be determined at the Task Order level

20. Pg. 18 of 149, Requirement 3.3 – Developing and Implementing Risk Management

Packages- The second paragraph states “Based upon risk assessments, Contractor(s) risk management package services to be provided can include but is not limited to any of the following as determined by the specific Task Order”. Can USAID please share the data taxonomy and data sets from the systems that pertain to the risk management package services? What is the aggregate inventory of systems and will orientation be provided to the contractor for familiarity to effectively execute task 3.3?

Answer: USAID will not provide orientation on these requirements as the Contractor will have demonstrated their ability to conform with USAID and U.S. Government requirements.

21. P. 123, L.8 (a) and (c) (3) Past Performance Information,

a) Would USAID please provide a maximum number of relevant contracts offerors can list in the Past Performance Information Appendix?

Answer: See Sections I and II above of the revised past performance information instructions.

b) We would appreciate clarification on format preferences for this Appendix.

Would USAID prefer that Offerors use the past performance reference form

(Attachment J.3) for all projects presented, even if they are in CPARS? Or would you prefer a list of projects for those that are in CPARS, and only use the J.3 attachment for those that are not in CPARS?

Answer: See Sections I and II above of the revised past performance information instructions.

22. P. 123, L.8 (c) (2) Staffing and Management Plan:

a) Would USAID please clarify if Offerors should submit the IDIQ Manager resume, references, and acknowledgement letter in a separate Appendix to the Technical Proposal?

If so, please confirm that this Appendix is separate from the Personnel Summary Matrix and does not count towards page limits and does not have a page limit in and of itself.

Answer: See amendment no. 1, Q&A #98.

b) This section states, “The proposed candidate must meet the minimum qualifications set forth in Section C.” There is a list of IDIQ Manager responsibilities in Section C, under Task

5 – IDIQ Central Management, but we do not see minimum qualifications listed. Could

USAID please update this requirement or provide the minimum qualifications?

Answer: See amendment no.1, Q&A #44.

23. Pg. 123, Section L.8 (c)(3) – With regard to Past Performance Information, can USAID clarify if there is a limit to the number of relevant contracts that Offerors and major subcontractors can list in an annex to the technical proposal?

Answer: See Sections I and II above of the revised past performance information instructions.

24. Pg. 123, Section L.8 (c)(3) – Can USAID confirm that Offerors may include relevant cooperative agreements as part of the past performance information provided as an annex to the technical proposal, in accordance with Amendment No. 1, response to question 78?

Answer: Yes.

25. Pg. 123, Section L.8 (c)(3) – The RFP instructs Offerors to list all relevant contracts for the past five years in an annex to the technical proposal and to provide an abbreviated list of information about those contracts. For all contracts listed that are not in CPARS, the RFP instructs Offerors to provide more extensive information about the contract that aligns with the fields in Attachment J.3. Can USAID clarify if Offerors and major subcontractors should list all relevant contracts and the required information in a table format and then complete and submit Attachment J.3 only for contracts that are not in CPARS? Or should Offerors and major subcontractors complete and submit Attachment J.3 for all relevant contracts?

26. Page 24, C, Task 5: Per Amendment 01 Q&A (Question 44), USAID stated that “the

IDIQ Manager is considered 002 – Administrative and Operational Staff under B.7 (a)

…….the IDIQ Manager would be considered at the mid-level education and experience requirements, as per B.7 (b).” Given that USAID states that “the IDIQ Manager shall be the individual bearing primary responsibility for technical aspects of contract performance” (pg.

24, Section C, Task 5) would USAID consider making this a Senior Level position?

Answer: USAID respectfully declines.

27. Page 120, L.8 (a): “Past Performance Information – limited to 2 pages” Could USAID please confirm that this section will only include a summary presentation of an Offerors’s past performance while all project details will be presented in the Attachment J.3 Past

Performance Information (PPI) tables?

Answer: See Sections I and II above of the revised past performance information instructions.

28. Page 120, L.8: Can an offeror use smaller font size (below 11 font size) for tables, graphs, and text boxes within the main Technical Proposal narrative?

Answer: See amendment No. 1 to the RFP, Q&A #’s 2 & 85.

29. Page 122, L.8 (c) (2) Staffing and Management Plan: Could USAID please clarify what is meant by “or other relationships that will contribute to the implementation”? Aside from subcontractors, does USAID wish to see other potential resource groups that might be accessed?

Answer: Offer shall demonstrate to USAID the various entities (consortia members, partners, subcontractors, etc.) involved in the project that will have an impact on the stated desired outcomes. USAID does not dictate the terms Offerors use to describe the parties involved.

30. Page 123, L.8: Per Amendment 01 Q&A, (Question 96), USAID responded that “a major subcontractor is defined as “one whose proposed cost exceeds 20 percent of the offeror’s total proposed cost.” Given that a subcontractor’s cost percentage will be defined by the

Task Orders issued (which are unknown at this point), would USAID reconsider and reinstate an earlier definition that allowed an offeror to instead consider any subcontractor that is a “prominent part of the technical effort” as a major subcontractor?

Answer: Please see answer to question 16.

31. C.3. Objective, page 10, The opening sentence of the RFP’s Section C.3. Objective states that the primary objective of the CCSDP Contract “is to ensure that new, nontraditional, local partners and governments have the capabilities and resources to serve as prime partners for USAID programming; … “Can governments serve as prime partners for USAID programming?

Answer: Yes.

32. Section F.8. Key Personnel, page 42, “The key personnel that the Contractor must furnish for the performance of this contract are as follows:

IDIQ Manager _________________/___________________________ ”

This suggests that there might be more than one Key Personnel. Could you please clarify – is it one KP position or more than one? What is the preferred number and positions of the proposed KP?

Answer: Per the RFP, the IDIQ Manager is the Key Personnel position for the IDIQ.

33. Section C.4. Statement of Work and Section L.8. Phase 2 – Instructions for Tech

Proposal, pages 12 and 119, There are four areas of focus under the Statement of Work and four technical categories under Section L’s instructions. These separate four areas and categories are similar but not identical. Can USAID provide further guidance on harmonizing the differences between the two?

Answer: The technical approaches presented in Section C of the RFP highlights the intended work of the successful contractor(s). Section L of the RFP provides instructions to offerors of information USAID is seeking as part of the proposal for evaluation.

34. Section L.8. Phase 2 – Instructions for Tech Proposal, page 122, In the instructions for the Staffing and Management Plan, under the bullet beginning with "The Contractor must..." The section mentions the importance of "capacity strengthening of public institutions," but does not mention capacity strengthening of private institutions or nonprofit organizations. Is capacity strengthening of private institutions or nonprofit organizations also important?

Answer: The bullet highlights the specific level of expertise that the intending contractor(s) should have and demonstrate. As per the RFP (page 122), “the Offeror's management plan must include and demonstrate how the Offeror meets or exceeds the requisite technical and management competencies”.

35. Section L.8. Phase 2 – Instructions for Tech Proposal, page 123, The instructions for the

IDIQ Manager call for the inclusion of a resume, references, and a letter of commitment.

Please confirm that the IDIQ Manager’s resume, references, and letter of commitment can be included in the proposal as three separate appendices.

Answer: See amendment no. 1, Q&A #98.

36. Section L.8. Phase 2 – Instructions for Tech Proposal, page 123, Further regarding the instructions for the IDIQ Manager, the bullet beginning with "Primary Point of Contact ..."

references that IDIQ Manager must meet the "minimum qualifications as set forth in

Section C." However, Section C mentions roles and responsibilities, but does not cite minimum qualifications. Please clarify the minimum qualifications for the IDIQ Manager.

Answer: See amendment no. 1, Q&A #44.

37. Section L.8 Phase 2 – Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal (pg.

123): Can USAID please confirm that all requirements regarding past performance information are included under Section (3) Past Performance Information and that the use of Attachment J.3 as a template is optional?

Answer: Yes.

38. Section L.8 Phase 2 – Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal (pg.

120): the solicitation states that "All information from appendices must be referenced in the technical proposal and summarized and included in the annex section." Would USAID kindly consider removing this sentence?

Answer: USAID respectfully defines the removal of this sentence.

39. Section L.8 Phase 2 – Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal (pg.

120): the solicitation states that "All information from appendices must be referenced in the technical proposal and summarized and included in the annex section." Would USAID kindly consider removing the language regarding “summarized” information and “annex section” since they are not listed as required sections of the proposal? Alternatively, can

USAID please explain them?

Answer: See answer to question 38 above.

40. Section L, QUESTION 3, On page 120 of the revised RFP, Section L.8 (a) Organization of Technical Proposal states, “3. Past Performance Information – limited to 2 pages.” On page 123, Section L.8 (c) (3) Factors to Be Evaluated – Past Performance Information states, that the offeror must provide performance information for itself and each major subcontractor of “all relevant contracts for the past five (5) years.” Page 110 in Section J List of Attachments contains a link to Attachment J.3 – Past Performance Information which contains a one-page form. Can USAID clarify that the 2-page limit for past performance information is per Attachment J.3 Past Performance Information (PPI) submission, so that the total page limit for offerors would be [the number of all relevant contracts for the past 5 years] x [2 pages]?

41. On page 122, Section L.8 (c) (2) Staffing and Management Plan (see Section M.3.2, Factor 3) states that the “Offeror must propose a staffing and management plan that effectively and efficiently delivers expected outcomes under all TOs overall. See Section M, Factor 2 for evaluation criteria.” (Emphasis ours). Can USAID confirm that “Section M, Factor 2” should instead say “Section M.3.2, Factor 3” as reflected in the section title given that Factor 2 in Section M.3.1 on page 135 is for the technical approach?

Answer: Confirmed.

42. The answers to the Q&A in Amendment 1 issued on January 27, 2023, under Q70, Q97, Q98, and Q99 confirm that the IDIQ Manager’s CV, references, and letter of commitment are part of the Appendices.

(a) Can USAID clarify that the CV, references, and letter of commitment are a new, standalone Key Personnel appendix that should be added to the bulleted list of Appendices on page 120 under Section L.8 (a)?

Answer: Confirmed.

(b) Furthermore, can USAID verify the page limit for the CV, references, and letter of commitment are 5 pages (4 pages for the CV per Q98 plus 1 page for the LOC)?

Answer: See amendment no. 1, Q&A #98

Cost

43. Pages 4-5, section B.7 (a), CDR. In line with USAID's response to Question 141 A, that

CDRs do not apply to FFP TO, could the Government please remove Note 1 on page 5 that states "The Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates apply to any task order(s) that are awarded under this contract."

Answer: The specified language is hereby revised as follows: “The Unburdened

Ceiling Daily Rates apply to any task order(s) that are awarded under this contract, as applicable”.

44. Page 125, Labor Costs (a)(1); 142, Attachment J.6 Per the edits to page 126 in the amendment to eliminate ceiling, please confirm that "ceiling" before "indirect cost rates" should be removed from all parts of the solicitation.

Answer: Please see amendment no. 1 to the RFP as these topics are addressed throughout. See also amendment no. 1, q&a’s 56 & 117.

45. Page 126 (127 of PDF), RFP Section L.9, Indirect Costs, Given the proprietary nature of the material requested by USAID, please confirm that it is permissible for subcontractors to submit their NICRA/ indirect cost rate information directly to USAID. Subcontractors can appropriately reference the prime contractor and use a similar subject heading in their e-mail transmission.

Answer: Confirmed.

46. Page 143, J.6 Cost/Price Matrix, No information is provided for the number of person-days for each labor category. While #136 is addressing what person-days an offeror uses for full-time, it would be helpful for USAID to clarify its intentions about the positions.

Is each LTTA position to be proposed as full-time for one year and each STTA position to be proposed as 100 days per year? Given that this is an IDIQ and there is no scope for offerors to make a determination on number of days per labor category, what number of person-days does USAID want offerors to use so that it can conduct a reasonable "apples to apples" cost analysis?

Answer: See revised attachment J.6 Cost/Price Matrix.

47. Page 145, J.6 Cost/Price Matrix, Items P & TWhat is the difference between Items P & T

(they both appear to be indirects on ODCs)?

Answer: Item P is the Indirect Cost of Offeror ODC’s and T is the total of items (L-S). Item

T is hereby revised as follows: Total (L - S) Indirect Recovery on ODCs. See revised attachment J.6 Cost/Price Matrix.

48. P. 7 B.7(a).3 Definition of labor categories, Would USAID please provide further clarification of the difference between the Consultant and the Subject Matter Expert –

General labor categories?

Answer: See amendment no. 1, Q&A #109a.

49. P. 7 B.7 LABOR, B.4 (a) Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates (CDR), and B.7(a).3 Definition of labor categories, Would USAID consider adding a Chief of Party labor category since the role is unique in responsibilities and requires a unique set of experience from the other

IDIQ labor categories?

Answer: Any additional labor categories will be added at the Task Order level.

50. P 125 L.9. Part 2(a) The RFP states, “the same cost element breakdowns should be used for individual subcontract budgets as applicable;” however, there is no requirement in

Section L.9 for individual subcontract budgets. Therefore, would USAID please confirm budget narratives are not required from subcontractors?

Answer: Narratives must be provided for the cost proposed including major subcontractors. Please reference pages 125 - 128 of the RFP that highlights labor costs and indirect costs.

51. P 125 L.9. Part 2 – Proposed Cost/Prices, Labor Costs (2), This section states, “The prime Offeror must provide a narrative justifying the labor rates for each labor category proposed with supporting information such as historical biodata forms used (within the past five years), DCAA forward pricing agreements, other federal contract or orders (do not provide GSA rates, only final orders negotiated with the Government for a GSA order or

BPA) (please provide award number and CO contact information and narrative providing the unburdened rate in accordance with Section B), market research support, and payroll records.”

Would USAID please confirm that offerors are only required to describe the supporting information used to arrive at the proposed labor rates, and that actual copies of supporting documentation are not required for submission?

Answer: Yes, USAID will request support documents as needed.

52. Attachment J.6 Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix, May offerors amend the cost/price matrix in order to accommodate the base of application of our indirect rates? (E.g. G&A to

Labor and Fringe?)

Answer: Yes.

53. J.6 Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix, All labor included in Section A is for Home Office

US-based labor. Would USAID please confirm that since the matrix does not include any field-based labor, the line item for Fringe Benefits on LT Field-Based Personnel will be $0?

Answer: Offerors need to tailor the labor categories as appropriate (home based, field based, etc…) on the matrix.

54. Attachment J.6 Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix, In order to ensure equal evaluation of the cost/price matrix across all offerors, would USAID please provide plug figures for LOE days by labor category? If this is not possible, could USAID issue uniform guidance on specific tasks or a scope of work that offerors should use as a basis for proposing level of effort for these categories?

Answer: See response to question 46 above.

55. Pgs. 5-6, Section B.7(a) – Note 1 and Note 4 contradict each other. Can USAID revise

Note 1 to state that the Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates apply to any task orders(s) that are awarded under this contract, with the exception of Fixed-price Task Orders?

Answer: See response to question 43 above.

56. Pg. 5, Section B.7(a) – Would USAID consider combining Labor Category 09, Grants

Manager and 010, Grants Specialist, into one category with Senior and Mid-levels represented, given that the responsibilities of the role are very similar and the primary variance between the two roles is in level of seniority?

Answer: USAID respectfully declines combining the labor categories.

57. Pg. 125, Section L.9, Part 2 (a) – This section states, “Provide a clear and thorough explanation for each budgeted line item, reflecting either number or quantity and including a detailed description that identifies each cost element and addresses why these costs are considered realistic. The same cost element breakdowns should be used for individual subcontract budgets as applicable.” These instructions are not relevant given that USAID has not requested that Offerors submit a budget. Can USAID remove these instructions from the solicitation?

Answer: The language is hereby amended as follows: “Provide a clear and thorough explanation for each cost element and address why these costs are considered realistic. The same cost element breakdowns should be used for individual subcontract cost elements as applicable.”

58. Pg. 125, Section L.9, Part 2 (a)(1) – This section states, “The prime Offeror and each major subcontractor must propose ceiling indirect cost rates.” Can USAID remove the word

“ceiling” from this requirement, in accordance with Amendment No. 1, response to questions 56, 135, and 149?

Answer: See answers to the referenced questions as they’re still applicable.

59. Pg. 125, Section L.9, Part 2 (a)(3) – This section states, “The Offeror must also provide a

Prime and Major Subcontractor Percentage of Work Overview Chart as an annex to the

Cost/Business Proposal identifying the anticipated labor utilization for the prime and all subcontractors” (emphasis added). Can USAID clarify if the Percentage of Work Overview

Chart should identify the anticipated labor utilization, in accordance with these instructions, or the percentage of all proposed costs for subcontractors, in accordance with the definition of major subcontractors provided on Pg. 119, Section L.8: “Major subcontractors are those expected to perform more than 20% of the offeror’s proposed cost.

Answer: In accordance with these directions it should be for major subcontractors only.

60. Pg. 125, Section L.9, Part 2 (a)(3) – This section states that “The Offeror must also provide a Prime and Major Subcontractor Percentage of Work Overview Chart as an annex to the Cost/Business Proposal identifying the anticipated labor utilization for the prime and all subcontractors” (emphasis added). Can USAID confirm that this chart should be completed only for the Prime and Major Subcontractors, and does not need to be completed for all subcontractors, in accordance with the guidance provided on Pg. 119, Section L.8 that only major subcontractors are required for the proposal submission?

Answer: See answer to question 59 above.

61. Pg. 128-129, Section L.9, Part 3, Part 5, Part 7, Part 8, and Part 10 – Can USAID confirm that completed Section K; Information Concerning Workday, Workweek, and Paid

Absences; Evidence of Responsibility, Consent to Subcontractors, and Legislative Reporting

Information are required only from Major Subcontractors, in accordance with the guidance provided on Pg. 119, Section L.8 that only major subcontractors are required for the proposal submission, and in accordance with Amendment No. 1, response to questions 37 and 121?

Answer: Confirmed.

62. Pg. 129, Section L.9, Part 10 – This requests Offerors to provide (4) the estimated cost or price, and (5) the period of the subcontract. Because this information is not known at the

IDIQ level and will be defined at the task order level, can USAID remove these requirements?

Answer: Yes.

63. Pg. 142, Attachment J.6 – Note 2 requests Offerors propose ceiling indirect costs. Can

USAID revise the RFP to remove the word “ceiling,” in accordance with Amendment No. 1, response to questions 56, 135, and 149?

Answer: Responses from amendment no. 1 to the RFP are still applicable.

64. Pg. 143, Attachment J.6 – Can USAID provide the level of effort in person-days for each labor category within the Cost/Price Matrix, as is standard practice in RFPs for USAID

IDIQs (for example, the recent Central America Regional Support Services IDIQ)? This will provide a common basis for USAID to compare and evaluate Offerors’ Cost/Price Matrices against each other.

Answer: See responses to questions 46 & 54 in this amendment.

65. Pg. 145, Attachment J.6 – Can USAID clarify if Offerors are meant to provide their fringe benefits rates in a percentage format in Section B, Fringe Benefits, or if Offerors are meant to apply their fringe benefits rate to the labor proposed above and provide dollar amounts in this section?

Answer: Percentage Rates, See revised attachment J.6 Cost/Price Matrix.

66. Pg. 145, Attachment J.6 – Can USAID clarify how Offerors are meant to complete fringe benefits on LT Field-Based Personnel, Consultants, and Local Hires, considering that the labor section above only identifies labor for Long-Term Home Office staff and Short-Term

Home Office staff?

Answer: See answer to question 65 above, See revised attachment J.6 Cost/Price Matrix.

67. Pg. 146, Attachment J.6 – Fixed Fee (On Subgrant Costs (No LOC): is listed as 0%.

However, there is also a line for Offerors to propose their own fixed fee here. May Offerors remove 0% from the Cost/Price Matrix and propose their own fixed fee in this section?

Answer: Yes.

68. General Question: Would USAID kindly consider extending the closing date for Phase 2 proposal responses by 10 days to allow adequate time for Offerors to integrate responses to

Phase II clarification questions?

Answer: See response to question no. 7 above.

69. Page 142, Attachment J.6 Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix, Unburdened Ceiling Daily

Rates Table: Could USAID clarify why are there only 6 categories of costs included in the cost evaluation when there are 10 categories cited in Attachment J.6 – Cost/Price

Evaluation Matrix (Page 140)?

Answer: Offerors are to tailor the matrix as needed for labor categories provided and any additional labor categories proposed. See revised attachment J.6 Cost/Price Matrix.

70. Page 142: If paid absence is part of the company’s fringe benefits, please confirm if an offeror can put only the days directly billed to USAID and that “Paid Absence not in Fringe

Benefits” would be considered 0$.

Answer: Confirmed.

71. Pg. 142, Cost/Price Matrix Person Day: In the earlier round of question (Question

136), USAID said that: “Offerors are responsible for proposing the level of effort for each labor category in accordance with their proposed approach, staffing and management plan, and organizations policies and procedures. See also page 128, Part 5 (2).” Without any task orders to budget against, it seems like this request will end up with offerors presenting a wide range of LOE along with various assumptions that will make a comparison of one cost matrix to another inconsistent. Could USAID please clarify or provide any other parameters against which the LOE to be included in the cost matrix will be evaluated?

Answer: See response to question 46 above, See revised attachment J.6 Cost/Price Matrix.

72. Pg. 144: Could USAID please clarify how an offeror is expected to apply fringe benefits to the various labor categories (i.e., LT US Based, LT Field Based, Consultants and Local

Hires) when the specifics of a Task Order and required mix of personnel are unknown?

Answer: See answer to question no. 65 above, See revised attachment J.6 Cost/Price

Matrix.

73. Page. 144: Since local fringe benefits are dictated by local laws – which are currently not identified – could USAID please clarify/provide additional guidance on how Offerors should apply local fringe benefits?

Answer: The cost/price matrix has been adjusted, See revised attachment J.6 Cost/Price

Matrix.

74. Pages 144/145: Could USAID kindly clarify if the “Total Estimated Subgrant Costs” (top of pg.146) are the same as the K – Sub Grants = $675,000 in Other Direct Costs (page 145)?

Answer: Total estimated subgrant cost would be the total of K-subgrants + S - Indirects on K, See revised attachment J.6 Cost/Price Matrix.

75. Attachment J.6. – Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix, page 142, Under the Cost/Price

Matrix:

On what basis should we estimate LOE days? Can USAID provide a plug figure for LOE days so that each contractor's cost proposal can be compared using the same assumptions?

Answer: See response to question no. 46 above, See revised attachment J.6 Cost/Price

Matrix.

76. Attachment J.6. – Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix, page 145, Under the Cost/Price Matrix, each labor category indicates that it is a Home Office, US-based employee. Do we need to provide fringe rates for the "Local Hires," since it would not be used in the calculation?

Answer: See answer to question no. 73 above.

77. Attachment J.6. – Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix, page 145, Under the Cost/Price

Matrix:

Are we to use the plug figures listed under Other Direct Costs (ODCs) or are these illustrative and we are to propose our own estimates?

Answer: Confirming plug-figures are provided for use.

78. Attachment J.6. – Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix, page 146, Under the Cost/Price

Matrix, the fixed fee on subgrant costs indicates 0%. Are we supposed to use this number or propose a number?

Answer: See response to question no. 67 above.

79. Section B.7 (a) Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates (pg. 7): the definition of the 009 - Grants

Manager states that “The Grants Administrator will provide oversight and capacity building support for grants issued under USAID task orders". Can USAID please confirm that the referenced “Grants Administrator” is the same labor category as the Grants Manager?

Answer: Confirmed.

80. Section L.9, Part 2 (pg. 125) states "The prime Offeror must provide a narrative justifying the labor rates for each labor category proposed with supporting information such as historical biodata forms used (within the past five years), DCAA forward pricing agreements, other federal contract or orders (do not provide GSA rates, only final orders negotiated with the Government for a GSA order or BPA) (please provide award number and CO contact information and narrative providing the unloaded rate in accordance with

Section B), market research support, and payroll records."

Would USAID please confirm that offerors are only required to describe the supporting information used to arrive at the proposed labor rates, and that actual copies of supporting documentation are not required to be submitted?

Answer: See answer to question no. 51 above.

81. Section L.9, Part 2, Labor Costs section (pg. 125) states "The prime Offeror and each major subcontractor must propose ceiling indirect cost rates.". However, in the Indirect

Costs section (pg. 126), USAID has deleted reference to ceiling indirect cost rates.

Answer: See answer to question no. 58 above.

82. Would USAID please (a) consider revising the sentence on pg. 125 to state "The prime

Offeror and each major subcontractor must propose ceiling indirect cost rates" - and (b) confirm that Offerors should follow the instruction on pg. 126 and therefore, are not required to propose ceiling indirect cost rates?

Answer: See answer to question no. 58 above.

83. Attachment J.6, On page 143 of the revised RFP, Amendment 1 changed the Cost/Price

Evaluation Matrix instructions to say, "The offeror will multiply the proposed CDR (use the rate proposed in the last year of the contract) with the Offeror’s proposed level of effort in person-days." (Note that the prior version said, "USAID provided" instead of "Offeror's proposed.") However, offerors have no basis with which to propose LOE at the IDIQ level because (all emphasis is ours):

On page 3, Section B.7 Labor states, “The Contracting Officer has determined that a key

(full-time) technical manager is not necessary or required to administer the basic IDIQ.

Contractors will not be authorized to bill USAID directly for IDIQ management costs under this IDIQ or under task orders. Contractors must propose a centralized management structure that allows for recovery of IDIQ management costs as part of its indirect costs.”

Furthermore, Page 128 Section L.9 “Cost/Price Matrix Instructions” states, “IDIQ Program

Manager Cost: Offerors must specify in their cost proposal how central management costs will be charged. The Offeror may include the costs for this central management as part of their indirect costs or may charge percentages of the individual's effort under task orders to the extent the functions are allocable to the particular task order. Treatment of central management cost must be in accordance with the Offeror's accounting system. Offeror’s cost proposals must specify how project director costs will be charged.” If different offerors use different approaches to accounting, this may lead to “apples-to-oranges” matrices that are not directly comparable.

The answer to Question 119 states, "There is no initial Task Order. Central management costs for the IDIQ Manager may not be charged to a Task Order, however, if there are functions allocable to a particular Task Order performed by the IDIQ Manager, this can be directly charged."

Therefore, can USAID clarify:

How should offerors complete the Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix when they are unable to propose LOE for an unfunded IDIQ with an indefinite number of future task orders with unknown scopes and funding that will be competed across an anticipated 6 holders?

Answer: See revised attachment J.6 Cost/Price Matrix.

84. On page 7, Section B.7 (a) Unburdened Ceiling Rates (CDR), “Other Labor Categories” states, “Other labor categories not listed above may also be required under Task Orders…at any time and throughout the life of the contract, at the request of either the Contractor or the Government, the Contractor may propose additional labor categories, rates and descriptions to be added to the IDIQ contract.”

(a) How does USAID intend to evaluate offeror-proposed labor categories in an

“apples-to-apples” comparison if different offerors propose different labor categories with varied minimum requirements, especially given the concern in the previous question about offerors’ inability to project LOE to an unfunded IDIQ?

Answer: Cost analysis will be performed in accordance with FAR part 15.404-1.

(b) How does USAID intend to normalize the chart by assigning plug figures to the labor categories since they can't know what new labor categories each offeror is proposing (and therefore cannot get apples-to-apples)?

Answer: USAID has not assigned plug-figures to any labor categories.

85. Given all of the questions outlined above in QUESTION 84, to ensure a fair, comparable price/cost evaluation, could USAID restrict IDIQ submissions to the RFP-defined labor categories (thereby deferring offeror-proposed labor categories to RFTOPs) and provide

LOE plug figures for each category so that all offers can multiply their Year 5 CDRs against the same figures?

Answer: Yes, USAID is willing to defer offeror-proposed labor categories to RFTOPs. See revised attachment J.6 Cost/Price Matrix.

86. On page 143 of the revised RFP, the instructions for the Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix instructs offerors to “use the rate proposed in the last year of the contract.” Given that (1) the US Government adjusts the Contractor Salary Threshold (CST) annually; the Year 5 CST cannot be predicted with precision today; different offerors may make different assumptions about the CST escalation between Year 1 and Year 5; and USAID’s answer to Q129 in

Amendment 1 states that, “Offerors may state in the proposal that all rates proposed at the

CST will increase in future years in accordance with CST increases after year 1”:

Can USAID provide a “plug” CST rate for Year 5 so that all offerors are using an

“apples-to-apples” figure for their Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix calculations.

Answer: USAID respectfully declines this request.

[This concludes the Phase 2 Question and Answer Period, no additional questions will be accepted or clarified]

[END OF AMENDMENT NO.2]