Attachment_1_to_the_Amendment_0001_-_Answers_to_Questions.docx

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE PROSPECTIVE OFFERORS

USAID ECONOMIC SECURITY PROGRAM – RFP SOL72011419R00001

1. Section C.3.4, pages 16-17 call for the use of a Partnership Development Fund of $1.5 million that will provide co-funding with private sector resource partners with at least a 1:1 match.

a. Can USAID please clarify the types of contractual arrangements it envisions resulting from this fund, i.e., grants, subcontracts?

Grants and subcontracts are possible under this component

b. Can the Partnership Development Fund be used for other purposes that facilitate investment or GDAs, such as feasibility studies?

No. The Partnership Development Fund will be used as co-funding, with at least a 1:1 match, to establish GDAs with the private sector resource partners.

c. Are there any limitations on how the Partnership Development Fund can be used?

The Partnership Development Fund shall be used to fund USAID's contribution to GDAs.

2. The table in Section F.6, page 28 states that the Start-up and Preliminary Work Plan are due within 30 days after award. Farther down on the page, it states that “the start-up plan will be submitted to the COR for written approval within 10 days of award.” Can USAID please confirm that the Start-up and Preliminary Work Plan are due 30 days after award?

The Start-up Plan is due 10 days after award, and will include, but is not limited to:

The preliminary work-plan is eliminated as a deliverable.

3. Section L.6. May offerors include a list of acronyms and abbreviations that does not count toward the 20-page limit?

Yes.

4. Section L.6, page 86-7 indicates that there is a Past Performance section to be included in the technical proposal. Yet, page 87 states that contractors must “List in an annex to the technical proposal five of the most recent and relevant contracts.” Please clarify what is to be included in the Past Performance section of the body of the technical proposal and what is to be included in the past performance annex.

The Past Performance information shall be included in the Annex. Section L.6.3 describes requirements what shall be submitted in the past performance Annex.

On RFP page 85 (Section L.6) the Results Table is listed as Annex B. On page 86 we are told to include the Results Table in the Technical Approach Narrative section. Please clarify where USAID would like to see the Results Table — in Annex B or as non-counting pages in the Technical Approach narrative.

The Results Table shall be included as an annex.

5. May subcontractors who wish to maintain their financial data confidential submit a “sealed bid” directly to USAID, withholding their indirect cost structure (and NICRA) from the prime contractor? Furthermore, can subcontractors also withhold unloaded salary data from the prime contractor, and provide the same to USAID?

No to both questions. Bidders must assume all responsibility for their subcontractor bids during the bidding process and are responsible for determining reasonableness of subcontract prices submitted as part of the bid, including submitting cost and pricing data where required as part of their own cost and pricing data.

6. Will USAID consider revising the cost-share requirements for MSMEs outlined in section C.5 Approach to Providing Cost-share Grants on page 17 to allow for a sliding scale in which medium enterprises make higher contributions than small and micro enterprises? This would allow for greater flexibility in using grants to finance smaller firms with more limited access to finance.

No.

7. Per page 21 of the RFP, “The Chief of Party must have 15 years of exceptional experience leading international donor-supported programs of similar size and complexity, at least five years of which was in a development context similar to Georgia’s.” Given the scope of the Economic Security Program, requiring 15 years of experience leading similar donor programs significantly limits the number of potentially qualified individuals for chief of party and USAID’s ability to access the best range of candidates for the position. This program requires flexible and adaptive implementation as well as innovative approaches to access and leverage financing. To implement these approaches, a chief of party must have fresh perspectives on development models and adaptive management as well as co-design and co-financing; these perspectives often come from leaders with fewer years of experience and a commitment to cutting edge innovations. The program also requires a private-sector and market-driven approach with a strong emphasis on developing partnerships with the private sector. Leaders who have been successful developing partnerships may have used this approach on projects of varying size and scope. We request that USAID reconsider the current chief of party requirements, and reduce the number of years of program leadership experience required and allow flexibility in the size and scope of projects the candidate has led; this will allow for consideration of candidates with broader experience, a greater focus on innovation and flexibility, and ultimately offer USAID lower risk and greater opportunities for program success.

No changes.

8. Per page 22 of the RFP, “The Deputy Chief of Party must have 10 years of exceptional experience leading international donor-supported programs of similar size and complexity, fluency in English and Georgian, and a record of successful performance in at least one contract technical area.” The requirement of ten years of experience leading similar donor-supported programs significantly limits the pool of qualified candidates for the deputy chief of party position. With the program’s broad and complex scope of work, focus on innovative partnerships and financing, and prioritization of flexible and adaptive implementation, we recommend that USAID consider a more open set of requirements for the deputy chief of party position. This will allow offerors to propose candidates with a more diverse background and ability to offer unique and innovative solutions to the program’s identified challenges.

No changes.

9. The Section F.6 deliverables chart on page 28 of the RFP indicates that that the Start-Up and Preliminary Work Plan are due 30 days after award. However, the narrative under Section F.6.a indicates that the start-up and preliminary work plan are due within 10 days of award. Would USAID please confirm that the start-up and preliminary work plan are due 30 days after award?

See answer to Question 2.

10. Section H.35 (1) provides that the grantee “is not…any governmental organization”. Can USAID confirm that the contractor may give solely in-kind grants to partner government entities as per the GUC authorizing language referenced in the same section?

Yes.

11. Section H.35 (4) provides that “Grants to US organizations, if any, shall not exceed $100,000. This threshold does not apply to non-US organizations.” Section C.5 Approach to Providing Cost-share Grants on page 17 provides that “The maximum grant size must be $100,000 per recipient with the majority of the grants being less than $70,000 per grant.” Could USAID please clarify if grants to non-US organizations may exceed $100,000?

Subgrants may not exceed $100,000 regardless of country of registration. Both US organizations and Non-US organizations are subject to this limitation. H.35 (4) has been modified to reflect this change.

12. Section L.6 indicates that the Technical Approach and Staffing Approach are limited to 20 pages and that any pages beyond this will not be evaluated. However, the Required Order of the Technical Proposal includes Past Performance in both the main volume and annexes, which are excluded from the page limitation. Would USAID please confirm that the Past Performance Section should only be included as an annex?

See Answer to question 4. Past Performance Section should be included as an Annex.

13. Section L.6 indicates that Resumes/CVs are to be included in the Annex and are not to exceed 2 pages. However, Section L.6.2 indicates that key personnel CVs may not exceed 3 pages, and non-key personnel Resumes/CVs many not exceed 1 page. Can USAID please clarify the page limitations for all types of resumes/CVs?

Resumes/CVs are to be included in the Annex. Key personnel CVs may not exceed 3 pages, and non-key personnel Resumes/CVs may not exceed 1 page.

14. Section L.6 (1) states that the “technical approach narrative section shall include a results table by program year”. Section L.6 Required Order of the Technical Proposal lists the Results Table as a required annex. Can USAID please confirm that the results table should be an annex? If USAID prefers the table to be included in full in the narrative, can USAID please confirm that the results table will not be included in the 20-page limit?

The Results Table should be included in the Annex.

15. Section L.6.2 references resumes/CVs for key personnel as well as non-key personnel. Further, Section L.6.2 states that each resume/CV must be accompanied by a letter of commitment. However, Section L.6 Required Order of the Technical Proposal refers only to letters of commitment for key personnel. Can USAID please confirm that letters of commitment are required only for key personnel?

Letters of Commitment are required for key personnel and for key-technical staff.

16. The Section F.6 deliverables chart on page 28 of the RFP indicates that that the Start-Up and Preliminary Work Plan are due 30 days after award. However, the narrative under Section F.6.a indicates that the start-up and preliminary work plan are due within 10 days of award. Would USAID please confirm that the start-up and preliminary work plan are due 30 days after award?

See answer to question 2.

17. In Section C.2, USAID defines “agriculture sector” for the purposes of this RFP. Please clarify whether wine production or wine tourism also fall under this definition of the agriculture sector.

Wine production falls under this definition of the agriculture sector but wine tourism does not.

18. In Section C.5 Table 1: Contract Deliverables, results 3, 4 and 5 refer to recipient organizations. Can USAID provide any further guidance on how it defines “organization” for the purposes of this RFP?

All legal entities that are registered in Georgia.

19. The minimum previous donor project leadership requirements for both key personnel positions appear excessive for a project of this size. We suggest both requirements be lowered in order to give USAID access to a more diverse pool of candidates.

No change.

20. In Section F.6-Reports and Deliverables or Outputs, there is inconsistency in the due date for ‘Start-Up and Preliminary WorkPlan’. The Deliverable table provided under this section lists ‘Start-Up and Preliminary Work Plan’ (Item #1) to be submitted within 30 days after award”, whereas in the description under Subparagraph (a) it is stated that the “Start-Up work plan will be submitted to COR for written approval within 10 days of award”. Please review and clarify the correct due date for this derivable.

See answer to question 2.

21. In Section L.6 on page 85, Item No.7 (d), states the page limits for Resumes to be attached with technical proposal. It states “Resumes not to exceed 2 pages for each individual”, whereas on page 86 in 2nd paragraph under Point No. 2 “Staffing Approach”, the RFP states “Resumes for Key Personnel may not exceed 3 pages in Length” and “Resumes for non-key personnel must not exceed 1 page in length”. Please review and clarify.

See answer to question 13.

22. In Section L.6 on page 85, the RFP states that the combination of the technical approach and the staffing approach is limited to 20 pages and goes on to specify that the technical approach is limited to 15 pages and the staffing approach is limited to 5 pages. Under the Required Order of the Technical Proposal, Past Performance is listed as section 6, separate from the technical and staffing approach sections and again in 7(f) of the required annexes. Please clarify the following:

· Should offerors address past performance in the technical proposal as well as in the annex? If so, should it count against the 15 page limit of the technical proposal or the 5 page limit of the staffing approach?

See answer to question 4.

· Please confirm that Annex F: Project List and Past Performance References should include the following three sections:

All aspects outlined in L6.3 Quality of Contractor Past Performance must be covered.

23. In Section L.6 on page 85, Item No.7 (e) requires offerors to include letter of commitment for key personnel. On page 86, section 2. Staffing Approach states “Each resume/CV will be accompanied by a signed letter of commitment from each candidate indicating his/her: (a) availability to serve in the stated position, in terms of months; after award; and (b) intention to serve for a stated term of the service.” Please confirm that letters of commitment are required only for key personnel.

See answer to question 15.

24. In the instructions for 3. Quality of Contractor Past Performance on page 87, offerors are required to list in an annex to the technical proposal five of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. For contracts listed that are in PPIRS, should offerors provide only the contract name and number? Is any additional information required? For contracts not listed in the PPIRS, should offerors provide the required additional information in the format provided in Attachment 4 Past Performance Matrix or in the standard past performance short form?

Yes.

25. I am hoping to find out if there is an incumbent contractor currently performing these services or if this is a new requirement. If there is an incumbent, could you please provide the contract number?

There is no incumbent. This is a new requirement.

26. Please confirm that the Work Plan is Annex A, and is not included in the Technical Approach narrative.

Work Plan for year 1 must be included as an Annex.

27. On page 85, L.6, we are told to number each page and paragraph consecutively. Please confirm that the numbering instruction refers solely to pagination.

The numbering instruction is valid for both: paragraphs and pages.

28. On page 85, Section L.6, there are three sections to the Technical Approach – Technical Approach, Staffing Approach, Quality of Past Performance, yet there are no pages assigned to Quality of Past Performance. Please confirm that information on Past Performance is solely in Annex F. 7.

Yes. See answer to questions 4 and 12.

29. On page 86 in the Staffing Approach section, we are told we must “provide a staffing plan and resumes/CVs of Key Personnel and other important technical roles in an annex.” There is no annex specified for a staffing plan. Should we add an annex for the Staffing Plan or does USAID want the Staffing Plan in Annex D with the required resumes/CVs.

The staffing plan must be a part of the Staffing Approach. CVs must be included as an Annex

30. Page 100 asks us to provide our utilization of Small Business concerns as subcontractors, including efforts in achieving small business participation goals. Should we include this information in Annex F? If so does USAID have a preferred format?

Yes. USAID has no preferred format.

31. In Section L.6 on page 85, section 2. Staffing Approach states “Each key personnel resume/CV will include at least 3 references within the last 3 years, along with an email address and phone number for each reference.” Should professional references be included in the page limit or can they be provided separately.

References are part of the CV, subsequently must be included as an Annex. References are included in the page limit.

32. Section L.5 page 84, states that “the proposal must be accompanied by a cover letter typed on official organizational letterhead and signed by a person who has signatory authority for the organization.” Section L.6 page 85 states that the technical proposal can include a Cover Letter or Executive Summary. Please confirm that offerors can submit a cover page that is signed by a person who has signatory authority in lieu of a cover letter, in addition to an executive summary.

Yes. The offerors can submit a cover page that is signed by a person who has signatory authority in addition to an executive summary.

33. Section L.6, page 85 states the “Resumes cannot exceed 2 pages for each individual”. However, page 86 states “Resumes/CVs for key personnel may not exceed 3 pages in length…Resumes for non-key personnel must not exceed 1 page in length.” Please clarify page limits for key and non-key personnel CVs.

See answer to question 13.

34. Section L.6 page 85 states that Letters of Commitment are to be included as an annex to the technical proposal and Section L.7 Part 10 page 92 states that letters of commitment for key personnel must also be included as part of the cost proposal. Please confirm which proposal volume letters of commitment are to be included.

Letters of commitment are included as an Annex to the Technical Proposal.

35. In Section L.6, page 87, it appears that the text regarding Performance Using Small Business Concerns was truncated. Please provide the complete instruction for this section.

See attached section L.6.3 Quality of Contractor Past Performance.

36. Sections L.6 page 85 and L.7 page 92, please confirm that the Branding Implementation and Marking Plans are to be included in both the cost and technical proposals.

Branding Implementation and Marking Plans are to be included as an Annex h to the Technical Proposal.

37. Section L.6 states that letters of commitment for key personnel must be included as an annex to the technical proposal. Section L.7(j) Part 10 also states that letters of commitment must be included in the cost proposal. Can USAID please confirm that the letters of commitment for key personnel should be included in both the technical and cost volumes?

Letters of commitment for key personnel and key-technical staff must be included as an annex to the technical proposal.

38. The RFP presents two different evaluation weighting methods. The first on page 98 states that the criteria – Technical Approach, Staffing Approach, and Quality of Past Performance -- will be evaluated in that descending order of importance as prescribed by the Technical Application format. The second on page 99 states that Technical Approach and Staffing Approach are weighted equally. Page 100 states that Past Performance is worth one-half the value of the Staffing Approach. Please clarify.

The sentence “The criteria below are presented by major category in the descending order of importance, so that Offerors will know which areas require emphasis in the preparation of information” is eliminated.

39. It is unclear if USAID wants the Branding and Marking Plan in Annex H in the Technical Volume or in the Cost Proposal. Please clarify.

See answer to question 36.

40. Is the Past Performance Matrix attached to the RFP intended to take the place of the Past Performance Reference forms or is that attachment the Project List referred to in Annex F?

Past Performance Matrix refers to Annex f - Project List and Past Performance References.

41. May subcontractors who wish to maintain their financial data confidential submit a “sealed bid” directly to USAID, withholding their indirect cost structure (and NICRA) from the prime contractor?

No. See Question 5 above.

Furthermore, can subcontractors also withhold unloaded salary data from the prime contractor, and provide the same to USAID?

See question 5 above.

42. Will USAID please provide an exchange rate for budgeting purposes?

No.

13. Please provide the most current Local Compensation Plan?

The summary of Local Compensation Plan is attached.

43. Page 87 of the RFP states that Offerors must “List in an annex to the technical proposal five of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar size, scope, and complexity to the scope or work and how recently they were performed.” We would like to respectfully request that cooperative agreements are included in the in the evaluation of Contractor Performance Information (CPI) in lieu of asking offerors without recent contract experience to submit a proposal with a neutral rating in order to showcase our recent experience implementing assistance programs that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the scope of work.

Supporting our request, we believe, is the guidance from ADS 302 Policy Guide for Assessment and Use of Contractor Performance and Integrity Information, which encourages USAID to allow for different types of relevant experience to be presented. In addition, according to the ADS 302 document, page 18 states that the “CO has broad discretion to consider or authorize consideration of CPI from other sources deemed relevant and reliable” to include “interviews with others who may be known to have relevant information, to address the offeror’s performance” (including the agreement officer) and on page 19, that “In most cases the TEC will find some related CPI for each offeror and therefore will not need to assign a neutral rating”. Finally, page 21 states the following:

“When considering the relevance of performance information for making a source selection decision, look for similarities in the following:

Scope of work;

Magnitude of effort;

Contract complexity/diversity of tasks;

Skills required to provide the service;

Location of the work to be performed;

Required levels of technology;

Nature of business area(s) involved;

Contract types”

All offerors are responsible for submitting relevant information to support their bid in compliance with requirements of the RFP. No changes.

44. On the cover page, USAID has stated that “the estimated cost of this contract is $18.5 Million, subject to the availability of funds.” Is there a minimum cost threshold that USAID/Georgia will accept to implement this Program?

There is no minimum threshold.

45. The RFP Section I.1 includes FAR Clause 52.229-8 Taxes – Foreign Cost-Reimbursement Contracts. Please confirm if the resultant contract will be exempted from local taxes and duties in Georgia (for U.S. and local teaming partners and their personnel).

Yes.

46. In the instructions for the preparation of the cost proposal, the RFP specifies that the cost proposal must be prepared and submitted on A4- Reference Question size paper. Instructions for the technical proposal specify 8 1/2” x 11” letter-size paper. Can USAID please confirm that the technical proposal should be submitted on letter size paper while the cost should be submitted on A-4 size paper?

Confirmed.

47. In the instructions for 3. Quality of Contractor Past Performance on page 87, offerors are required to list in an annex to the technical proposal five of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. For contracts listed that are in PPIRS, should offerors provide only the contract name and number?

Yes.

Is any additional information required? For contracts not listed in the PPIRS, should offerors provide the required additional information in the format provided in Attachment 4 Past Performance Matrix or in the standard past performance short form?

Additional information must be provided in the format of Past Performance Matrix.

48. In Section L.6 on page 85, under the Required Order of the Technical Proposal, Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan is listed as 7(h) of the required annexes. In Section L.7, the Branding and Marking is listed as Part 9 of the Cost proposal. Can USAID please review and clarify.

See answer to question 36.

49. Can USAID please confirm if offerors can submit both Technical and Cost proposals in either Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF or if submission in both formats is required?

For Technical proposal Microsoft Word and/or Adobe PDF is preferred. For Cost Proposal – Budget must be submitted in MS Excel with unlocked formulas, narrative part in MS Word and/or PDF.

51. In section L.7 on page 90, grants is listed twice in the standard cost elements table. Can USAID please confirm that this is a duplicate and that the second instance can be deleted from the table?

Yes. The second instance is deleted.

Section B.8 PAYMENT OF FIXED FEE is eliminated.

53. Sections L.6 page 85 and L.7 page 87, please confirm that offerors’ technical proposals are to be prepared for 8 ½ x 11” paper and cost proposals are to be prepared for A4 paper.

See answer to question 46.

54. Section M.2 page 98 states that “The criteria below are presented by major category in the descending order of importance…” However, page 99 then states that “Factor 1- Soundness of Technical Approach Factor is equal to the value of Factor 2; Factor 2-Soundness of Staffing Approach Factor is equal to the value of Factor 1; Factor 3-Quality of Contractor Past Performance Information Factor is equal to one-half of the value of Factor 2.” This implies that Factor 1 and 2 are of equal importance rather than Factor 2 being of less value as indicated by language on page 98. Please clarify the values assigned to each factor.

Correct. Factor 1 and Factor 2 have equal importance.

55. Please confirm that letters of commitment are required for key personnel only.

See answer to question 15.

56. Is USAID amenable to a variety of grants, such as cost reimbursable, fixed award amount, and in kind, under the program’s grant facility?

All types of assistance instruments can be considered.

57. Will USAID please confirm that an acronym list is not counted against the page limit? In the instructions for the preparation of the cost proposal, the RFP specifies that the cost proposal must be prepared and submitted on A4- size paper. Instructions for the technical proposal specify 8 1/2” x 11” letter-size paper. Can USAID please confirm that the technical proposal should be submitted on letter size paper while the cost should be submitted on A-4 size paper?

See answers to questions 3, 46, 53.

58. In Section L.6 on page 85, under the Required Order of the Technical Proposal, Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan is listed as 7(h) of the required annexes. In Section L.7, the Branding and Marking is listed as Part 9 of the Cost proposal. Can USAID please review and clarify.

See answers to questions 36, 48.

59. Section L.6 lists the Branding Implementation and Marking Plan as an Annex to the Technical Proposal, and Section L.8 also requires the inclusion of the preliminary BIP and MP in the cost proposal. Section L.8 indicates that the offers must include “all estimated costs associated with the Branding Implementation Plan and the Marking Plan of BEP.” Given the instructions in Section L.5 that the technical proposals must not reference pricing data, can USAID please clarify the guidelines and placement of the BIP and MP? Can USAID also clarify whether reference to “BEP” is a typographical error?

BEP is a typo and is replaced by BIP (Branding Implementation Plan). See answer to questions 36, 48, 58.