Advancing Digital Democracy (ADD) RFP Q and A - Amendment 2.pdf

Issuance Date: Nov. 21, 2024

Subject: Amendment 2 to Advancing Digital Democracy (ADD) RFP

7200AA24R00083

The purpose of this amendment is to provide answers to the follow-up questions received by the question submission deadline of 4:00pm (EST) on Nov. 19, 2024. Questions and answers are found in Attachment A of this amendment. The other changes to the RFP, if any, are found in on the following pages.

Sincerely, Mir Ershadullah Contracting Officer

7200AA24R00083 – Amendment 2 to Advancing Digital Democracy (ADD) RFP

Attachment A

As a result of this amendment, the specific changes to Advancing Digital Democracy (ADD) RFP are as follows:

N/A

Attachment B

Questions and Answers

1. Q&A: 26. L8.3: Please confirm bidders may submit Contractor Performance Information forms for both subcontractors and major subcontractors.

Ans:

● Offerors may present the required information for major subcontractors in Word rather than Excel but each past performance reference cannot exceed three pages.

Follow up question: Can USAID clarify if they will accept past performance references from non-major subcontractors?

Ans:

● The offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) must provide performance information for itself, the contractor teaming arrangements, if any, and each major subcontractor (one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost)

2. Q&A: C4: Will GUCs be used for both Level I and Level II activities or just Level II?

Ans.

● GUCs may be used for both Level I and Level II activities.

Follow-up question: Can USAID clarify if GUCs will be used for Level I or Level II or for both?

Ans.

● GUCs may be used for both Level I and Level II activities.

3. RFP Q&A Letter: This modification also extends the Phase One Proposal Submission Due Date from November 18, 2024 to November 25, 2024.

Follow-up question: Given the delay in posting of the Questions and Answers for ADD and Thanksgiving holiday, would USAID consider a one-week further extension to submit Phase 1 submissions the first week of December?

Ans.

● Given the delay, USAID has provided a one week extension to submit Phase 1 submissions. No further extensions will be provided.

4. The response to Question 19 under Technical (page 10) states: "The RFP does not request the offeror to include the proportionate amount of LOE forecasted. References to LOE throughout the RFP refer to 'professional technical staff person days,' as described in Section F.6." Can USAID please confirm: a) that this response is only in regard to the illustrative Kenya designs; and b) that for general budgeting purposes, offerors can allocate part of the LOE for the labor category “Long-Term Technical Assistance Key Personnel” to the Buy-in Component CLIN if they will be contributing to Level II activities?

Ans.

● a) As noted in the response to Question 19, “References to LOE throughout the RFP refer to 'professional technical staff person days,' as described in Section F.6.” This reference to LOE is in regard to the RFP, not only the illustrative Kenya designs.

● b) Correct. For general budgeting purposes, offerors can allocate part of the LOE for the labor category “Long-Term Technical Assistance Key Personnel” to the Buy-in Component CLIN if they will be contributing to Level II activities.

5. RFP Q&A section “Technical,” question 19. Can USAID Please confirm that any project leadership (e.g., the chief of party), are considered professional technical staff as per the labor category table on page 31 of the revised RFP?

Ans.

● Yes. Any project leadership are considered professional technical staff as per the labor category table on page 31 of the revised RFP.

6. RFP Q&A section “Technical,” question 24. Factor 2 notes that USAID will evaluate Offerors on “The extent to which the introduction demonstrates an understanding of USAID’s vision, needs, and objectives as described in Section C.” How does USAID define “needs” in Factor 2 given that there are not needs specific to USAID explicitly identified in Section C?

Ans.

● Please note that Factor 2 was edited through the prior Q&A round to read, “The extent to which the programmatic approach and institutional capacity provided by the offeror demonstrate an understanding of USAID’s vision, needs, and objectives as described in Section C.”

● USAID identified the explicit needs in Section C through use of terms such as (please note that this list is not exhaustive):

○ “the Contractor must”

○ “the Contractor will”

○ “Core Activities”

○ “support must include”

○ “ADD activities must”

7. RFP Q&A section “Technical,” question 48. While we understand that no documents or reports are available “related to the announcement of ADD Academy,” would USAID please provide additional guidance on requirements or expectations related to its implementation which may not be included in the RFP? Specifically, would USAID please provide confirmation of any anticipated partnerships or collaborations, including, but not limited to, entities such as Google, Microsoft, and Cloudflare, as referenced in publicly available documents such as https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2024-03/USAID-S4D3-Updates- Factsheet_0.pdf and https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/20/fact-sheet-delivering-on-the-biden-harris-administrations-commitment-to-democratic-renewal-at-the-third-summit-for-democracy/. Would USAID please confirm how they are currently engaging these entities?

Ans.

● USAID notes that the description of ADD Academy in the RFP is more detailed than that provided in the White House Fact Sheet. USAID will not provide additional information and welcomes offerors to propose approaches for this activity as part of the RFP responses.

8. RFP Q&A section “Cost or Budget,” question 8. Our understanding is that fee cannot be billed as a direct or indirect cost because it is not an allowable cost under FAR 31, as required under FAR 52.216-7 Allowable Cost and Payment clause (FAR 31 and FAR 52.216-7 are specifically referenced on Pages 8-9 of the RFP). Will USAID please confirm that because fee cannot be considered an allowable cost, which is what would be required to include it in a provisional (or final) NICRA rate, offerors (1) should use their established NICRA, consistent with FAR requirements; and (2) may propose a fee, if any, on GUCs that is compliant with FAR regulations?

Ans.

● Only offerors that have GUC management fee in their NICRA (indirect rates) are allowed to charge fee on the GUC. Such a fee, where applicable, is to be included in the offeror’s indirect cost and disclosed on line 16 of the cost element. Note: Offerors that charge GUC management fee must make sure the fee charged is not counted twice as it is supposed to be included as part of their indirect cost.

https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2024-03/USAID-S4D3-Updates-Factsheet_0.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2024-03/USAID-S4D3-Updates-Factsheet_0.pdf https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/20/fact-sheet-delivering-on-the-biden-harris-administrations-commitment-to-democratic-renewal-at-the-third-summit-for-democracy/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/20/fact-sheet-delivering-on-the-biden-harris-administrations-commitment-to-democratic-renewal-at-the-third-summit-for-democracy/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/20/fact-sheet-delivering-on-the-biden-harris-administrations-commitment-to-democratic-renewal-at-the-third-summit-for-democracy/