Amendment 000001 Attachment 1 - Answers to Questions from the prospective Offerors.pdf

QUESTION USAID ANSWER

1 To confirm the successful delivery and receipt of all proposal attachments before the proposal due date of Monday, January 24 at 10 AM Tbilisi Time (1 AM Eastern Standard Time), the Offerors must submit their proposals no later than close of business (COB) Thursday, January 20. This will allow for the Mission to provide confirmation of receipt on Friday, January 21. If Offerors submit proposals any later than Thursday COB, they risk not receiving confirmation of receipt until Monday, January 24, at which point it will be too late to resubmit. For this reason, would the Mission consider extending the proposal deadline by one day, to Tuesday, January 25?

The deadline for submitting proposals in response to the RFP #72011422R00005 USAID Local Governance Program is extended through February 7, 2022, 10:00 AM Tbilisi Time.

2 Would USAID please confirm if Offerors are required to submit Attachment 1- Disclosure of Lobbying Activities, and if so, where within the cost proposal?

Confirmed. Offeror must submit Disclosure of Lobbying Activities as part of the cost proposal, narrative part.

3 Section C.5, page C-8, states, “Within the agreement, ODC may provide approximately $900,000 to support LSGs to renovate and repair schools and other social sector infrastructure in target municipalities. The Contractor’s interventions must incorporate a tentative plan for an incentive program detailing how this funding available for social sector infrastructural needs can be used to incentivize reform and results in target municipalities. The proposed incentive program must define criteria, including indicators with milestones, targets, and verification mechanisms, to define selection and awarding of social sector infrastructure and maintenance support. The Contractor must be mindful that the Activity cannot directly transfer funding to LSGs for implementation of infrastructure improvements; as such, incentive-funded improvements will be determined by the LSGs, but managed by the Activity.” Should the ODC provide the additional $900,000 to support LSGs to renovate and repair schools and other social sector infrastructure in target a.Confirmed. It will be managed by the Contractor and included in the Contractor’s Budget.

b. Confirmed. It will be included within the $22 million ceiling.

c. Confirmed. As described in Section C.5, page C-9 “The Contractor must be mindful that the Activity cannot directly transfer funding to LSGs for implementation of infrastructure improvements; as such, incentive-funded improvements will be determined by the LSGs, but managed by the Activity”, e.g. the Contractor will be responsible for infrastructural renovations/repairs.

municipalities, we request USAID’s clarification on the following questions:

a. Will the $900,000 will be managed by the Contractor and included in the Contractor’s budget for the Local Governance Program?

b. If the $900,000 incentive fund is to be included in the Contractor’s budget for the Local Governance Program, will that be within the $22 million ceiling?

c. Will the Local Governance Program be responsible for managing these infrastructural renovations and repair?

4 Section F.6.5, page F-5, notes that “in addition to indicators that measure the logic model, the MEL Plan will include all standard foreign assistance (F) indicators and USAID/Georgia Performance Management Plan (PMP) indicators assigned by the COR.” Would USAID provide the USAID/Georgia PMP and/or the PMP Indicators?

Here is the list of standard foreign assistance (F) and USAID/Georgia Performance Management Plan (PMP) indicators to be included in the Contract’s MEL Plan:

DR.2.4-2 Number of mechanisms for external oversight of public resource use supported by USG assistance IR 2.2-3 Local Governance Index IR 2.2-4 % of local governments supported by USG actively engaging minority communities

5 Section F.6.5, page F-5, describes the Performance Indicator Tracking Table (PITT) as “an excel-based file that tracks all quantitative performance data and lists baseline figures, quarterly and/or annual actuals, quarterly and/or annual targets, and life of award targets, disaggregated as appropriate.” For the purposes of Section L.6 and the inclusion of a draft PITT in an annex to proposals, would USAID confirm:

a. What precisely is to be included in the draft PITT (e.g., performance indicators, baseline figures [where they are known], annual targets [and not quarterly targets], life of award targets, data disaggregation categories, etc.); and

a. Draft PITT at a minimum will have to include such data categories as Objectives; Results; Performance Indicators;

Frequency of Data Reporting; Data Measurement Unit;

Data Disaggregation by sex, age, geographic location, and ethnicity, when applicable; Baseline figures; Annual Targets; and Life of Award Targets.

b. Confirmed. Draft PITT could be presented in MS Word and PDF format, in an Annex to the technical proposal.

b. That the draft PITT Annex can be presented in Microsoft Word and PDF format (and not Excel)?

6 In Section F.9, page F-11, paragraph 3, USAID describes a series of “minimum requirements for the proposed senior Key Personnel.”

Would USAID kindly confirm that “senior Key Personnel” refers to the Chief of Party and the Deputy Chief of Party only, and not additional Key Personnel potentially proposed by Offerors?

“Senior” is eliminated. Minimum requirements apply to all key personnel proposed by the offeror. The Director of Administration and Finance key personnel position is added to Section F.9. See the revised Solicitation.

7 Section H.7, page H-5, of the draft contract includes geographic code 110 which incorporates the “independent states of the Soviet Union.”

However, ADS 310 does not specify the exact countries included as part of the “independent states of the Soviet Union.” To ensure compliance, would USAID provide a detailed list of countries that comprise the “independent states of the Soviet Union”?

Independent states of the Soviet Union include all independent states of the Soviet Union: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan. However, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia are excluded from the Code 110.

8 Section H.36, page H-18, makes reference to the requirements of ADS 548 which has been archived by USAID per this website:

https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1868/548.pdf.

As such, we respectfully request that this reference be removed.

The Reference is removed. See revised Solicitation.

9 Section L.5, page L-7, states, “The proposal shall be prepared in two separate parts: the Technical Proposal shall address technical aspects, only, while the Business (Cost) Proposal shall present the price and address related issues such as past performance and responsibility.”

Section L.6, however, states that past performance information should be included with the technical proposal. Please confirm that past performance information should be included as part of the technical proposal and as an annex to the technical proposal.

Yes. Past Performance information must be submitted as an annex to the technical proposal.

10 Section L.6 does not include an acronym list as a permissible section of the Technical Proposal. Would USAID confirm Offerors may include an acronym list and that it will not count against the page limit?

Confirmed. Offerors may include an acronym list. Acronym list will not be counted against the page limit.

Please find below revised Required Order of the Technical Proposal:

1. Cover Page (maximum 1 page; does not count against the overall 25-page limit of the Technical Proposal)

2. Cover Letter or Executive Summary (maximum 2 pages; does not count against the overall 25-page limitation of the Technical Proposal)

3. Table of Contents (no page limitation; does not count against the overall 25-page limit of the Technical Proposal)

4. List of Acronyms (no page limitation; does not count against the overall 25-page limit of the Technical Proposal)

5. Technical Approach (20-page limit)

6. Management and Staffing Approach (5-page limit)

7. Past Performance (Does not count against page limit)

8. Required Annexes – not included in the page limit for the Technical Proposal but are subject to page limitations.

a) Performance Indicator Tracking Table (PITT) (no page limit)

b) Deliverables Table (no page limit)

c) Illustrative Year 1 work plan including illustrative inception phase plan in a table chart format (5- page limit) d)Management Structure Chart (2 pages)

e) Résumés of proposed Key Personnel (not to exceed 3 pages for each proposed Key Personnel)

f) Letter of Commitment for Key Personnel (Exclusive commitments are discouraged; 1-page limit)

g) Project List (same as Past Performance Information Matrix; no page limit) and Past Performance References (no page limit)

h) Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan (not required with the initial proposal) See revised Solicitation

11 Section L.6, page L-7, says, “Required Annexes specified below will be counted towards the page limit.” If the Offeror were to propose five key personnel, however, annexes with allotted page limits alone would require 25 pages. Would USAID please confirm that annexes do

Confirmed. Required Annexes will not be counted against the page limits.

As specified on page L-7 the page limit for Technical Proposal is 25 pages, including Technical Approach -20 pages, and Management and Staffing Approach-5 pages.

not count toward the Technical Approach page limit and clarify page limits for all sections of the Technical Proposal?

See also answer to question 10.

12 Section L.6, page L-9, says, “At least one indicator must be included for each objective and each result.” Would USAID confirm that indicators:

a. Must relate to listed Results and not separately to Objectives (under which the Results sit); and

b. May relate to more than one Result?

a. Confirmed. Indicators must relate to listed Results and not separately to Objectives;

b. Confirmed. Indicators may relate to more than one Result.

13 Section L.6.1, page L-9, states “The offeror must utilize the indicators listed below; however, these indicators are not exhaustive.” The following paragraph refers to “a list of illustrative indicators to measure implementation progress.” Would USAID indicate if the list provided is mandatory or illustrative?

The provided list is mandatory.

Please see below the revised language in Section L.6.1, page L-9:

“Below is a list of mandatory indicators to measure implementation progress. ” See the revised Solicitation

14 Section L.6.1, page, L-9 references the “Number of LSG policy and implementation changes initiated by or implemented with contribution of local GECs.” Would USAID confirm that GEC is an acronym for Gender Equality Council?

Confirmed. GEC stands for Gender Equality Council.

15 Section L.6.3, Past Performance, says that contracts not in CPARS should be presented “in Attachment 3 – Past Performance Information Matrix Sheet.” Would USAID please confirm contracts that are included in CPARS may be listed in a format of our choosing not exceeding three pages? Would USAID also confirm Offerors should use Attachment 2, Past Performance Matrix, for contracts not in CPARS?

Section L.6.3 Past Performance is revised as follows:

(a) 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, in accordance with the following:

1. List in the Past Performance Information Matrix Sheet (Section J.

Past Performance Information Matrix Sheet Attachment J.2) the most relevant contracts, and Cooperative Agreements, performed over the last 3 years for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar size, scope, and complexity. (The Matrix shall be presented in MS Excel format without page limit.)

2. 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:

● Contract # (if applicable);

● Dollar Value;

● Term of Performance;

● Contracting Entity;

● Contract Type (i.e. fixed-price, cost reimbursement, etc.);

● Brief Description of Work Performed and Explanation of

Relevance to the Proposed Acquisition.

● Primary Location(s) of Work;

● Problems Encountered and Corrective Actions Taken;

● Point of Contract (name, job title, phone number, e-mail address).

See the revised Solicitation for the full section of L6.3 - Past Performance.

As specified above, the offerors shall list the most relevant Contracts and Cooperative Agreements performed over the past 3 years, in the Past Performance Information Matrix Sheet (Attachment J.2). For the Contracts not in CPARS, the offerors shall provide information listed in L.6.3 (a) 2.

Thus, the Past Performance Information Matrix Sheet will include the most relevant awards performed over the last 5 years that are in CPARS and that are not CPARS.

Please see the revised Solicitation, p.L-7-8.

16 Regarding Section L.7, (b) Part 2 on page L-12, would USAID please confirm that Offerors may use their own standard budget template, provided the major cost items are ordered the same as in USAID’s budget template in Attachment 3?

Confirmed. Offerors have the flexibility to utilize their own budget templates as long as the required information listed in section L.7 is addressed.

17 The current due date and time for proposals is January 24, 2022, 10:00 AM Tbilisi Time. Given that this includes the U.S. holidays of Christmas, New Year’s, and Martin Luther King Jr. Day, would USAID please consider extending the application closing date and time to January 31, 2022, 10:00 AM Tbilisi Time?

See Answer to Question 1.

18 On page C-8, Section C.5 states: “Within the agreement, ODC may provide approximately $900,000 to support LSGs to renovate and repair schools and other social sector infrastructure in target municipalities.” Can USAID provide any additional information about the timing and priorities of this ODC funding?

Implementation of Incentive Program for Local Self-Governments is conditional. USAID cannot provide any additional details beyond what is described in Section C.5, pages C-8 and C-9.

Please see revised language in Section 8, Table 1. Contract Deliverables, Deliverable 14, page C-12 “Number of municipalities benefiting from the Incentive Fund as a result of effective performance of target local governments with assistance of local governance activity (note: implementation of this deliverable is conditional depending on availability of ODC funding).” See the revised Solicitation.

19 On page F-2, Section F.6.3 indicates a 90-day inception phase. Due to the breadth and scope of activities required during the inception phase and to set up the program for success, alongside other start up requirements, would USAID please consider extending the inception phase?

No. 90-day inception phase is determined for the Contract as described in Section F.6.3, page F-2

20 On page I-10, Section I-6(c)(1) of the solicitation indicates that a subcontracting plan is required from offerors “upon request by the Contracting Officer.” Can USAID please confirm a Small Business Subcontracting Plan is not required to be submitted as part of proposals?

If the Offeror is other than a small business, it must submit a Subcontracting Plan. The subcontracting plan must include information found at FAR Part 19.704. Submitted plans must address subcontracting, if any, with small business (SB), veteran-owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns. This plan will be the equivalent of a master subcontracting plan for the overall contract.

This wording is added to INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION AND

SUBMISSION OF THE COST/BUSINESS PROPOSAL.

See the revised Solicitation.

21 On page L-6, Section L.5 of the RFP states: “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.” However, Section L.6 on page L-7 states that a “Cover Letter or Executive Summary” is required as part of the Technical Proposal. Please confirm that a signed cover letter typed on official organizational letterhead is required to be submitted with proposals.

And that this is in addition to (as opposed to being in place of) an Executive Summary, which it limited to 2 pages, that is required to be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal.

See Answer to Question 10.

22 On page L-7, Section L.6 of the RFP states: “Times New Roman point 12 font size (can be 10-point font in charts, graphs and tables).”

Please confirm that the 10-point font for charts, graphs and tables can be fonts other than Times New Roman.”

Confirmed. 10-point fonts other than Times New Roman may be used for charts, graphs, and tables

23 On page L-7, Section L.6 of the RFP states that technical proposals must be “submitted in Microsoft Word and Adobe PDF.” So that files are better able to meet the 20MB email size requirement, would USAID allow offerors to submit technical proposals in Adobe PDF only?

Yes, it is allowed to submit technical proposals in Adobe PDF only.

24 On page L-7, Section L.6 states: “Required Annexes specified below will be counted towards the page limit.” Please confirm that the required annexes will not count towards the twenty-five-page limit for the technical proposal and that each annex has its own page limits as indicated under item 7. Required Annexes – subject to page limitation.

Confirmed. Required Annexes specified below will not be counted towards the page limit. See the revised Solicitation

25 On page L-7, Section L.6 states that a “Deliverables Table (no page limit)” is to be included as an annex to the technical proposal. Further, page L-8, Section L.6.1 states: “Include the targets in the Results Table

a. Confirmed. The Deliverables Table annex must include information required in Table 1: Contract Deliverables as defined in Section C.8.

as described in Section C as part of the Annex. Targets must at a minimum meet the requirements provided in Section C, C.6 CONTRACT DELIVERABLES, Results Table. Additional amounts, targets or deliverables provided by the offeror may become part of the resulting contract as deliverables.”

a. Please confirm that the Deliverables Table annex should include the information required in Table 1: Contract Deliverables as defined in Section C.8.

b. Please confirm whether the listed deliverables are activity milestones and results of activities, which are different from reports and deliverables as specified in Section F.6.

c. Please confirm that these are different from the performance indicators as required in the Performance Indicator Tracking Table (PITT) annex as specified in L.6.

b. The Deliverables Table represents the main programmatic deliverables required under the resulting contract.

c. Confirmed. The listed deliverables are different from the performance indicators as required in the Performance Indicator Tracking Table (PITT) as specified in Section L.6.

26 On page L-10, Section L.6.2 states: “Resumes/CVs for key personnel may not exceed 2 pages in length.” To allow offerors to comprehensively present the qualifications of each key personnel candidate, would USAID allow Resumes/CVs for each key personnel to not exceed 3 pages in length?

Yes. Resumes/CVS for each key personnel shall not exceed 3 pages limit. Please see the revised Solicitation.

27 On page L-10, Section L.6.3 states: “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)…”

a. Please confirm that the information required for the Project List and Past Performance References is, in fact, the same information as that required to be submitted in the Past Performance Information Matrix Sheet (Attachment 3).

a. Past Performance References shall be provided separately for contracts not in CPARS, using information in section L.6.3 (a) 2.

b. Due to the volume of information required for the Past Performance Matrix, would USAID allow offerors to submit Attachment 2 – Past Performance Matrix in MS Excel format as a separate attachment and annex to the technical proposal volume?

c. Would USAID consider removing the 3-page limit for the Project List and Past Performance References to allow offerors to comprehensively present this information for the offeror and all major subcontractors?

d. May offerors include grants and cooperative agreements, in addition to contracts in the past performance matrix?

e. Please confirm that up to five projects for the offeror and up to five projects for each major subcontractor listed in the Past Performance Information Matrix Sheet (Attachment 3) is sufficient to meet this requirement.

f. Please confirm that all presented projects should be listed in the Past Performance Information Matrix Sheet (Attachment 2) and that only those that are not in CPARS be included as past performance references in the technical proposal.

b. Attachment J.2 – Past Performance Matrix can be submitted in MS Excel Format (no page limit).

c. The page limit is removed. The offerors must present information regarding the most recent (past 3 years) and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject solicitation.

d. The relevant past performance from cooperative agreements may be included.

e. There is no limit for the number of past performance contracts from the Prime and major subcontracts performed over the last 3 years.

f. Confirmed.

28 On page L-11, Section L.6.3.d "Performance in Using Small Business Concerns," paragraph (3)(B) asks offerors to provide a list of the recent contracts for which subcontract reports have been submitted in eSRS. Please confirm if a list of ten (10) recent contracts are sufficient to satisfy this requirement.

Yes. A list of ten (10) recent (performed over the last 3 years) contracts will be sufficient to satisfy this requirement.

29 On page L-16, Section L.8 states: “Offerors do not need to submit a branding and marking plan with their initial proposals.” It goes on to state that “Offerors who are determined to be in the competitive

As specified on p. L-16, Offerors who are determined to be in the competitive range, or the apparent successful Offeror should no competitive range be established, shall submit a branding range … shall submit a branding implementation plan and marking plan which complies with Section D.1.” However, the same section also states, “The successful Offeror will submit a final detailed Branding Implementation Plan (BIP) and a Marking Plan (MP) within thirty (30) days after the contract start date.” Please confirm that the BIP/MP will be due within thirty (30) days after the contract start date and no BIP/MP is required for initial submission.

implementation plan and marking plan which complies with Section D.1.

30 Page 18 of the RFP states “ODC may provide approximately $900,000 to support LSGs to renovate and repair schools and other social sector infrastructure in target municipalities.” Should the Contractor budget for the $900,000, and does it fall within the contract ceiling?

The Contractor has to set aside up to $900,000 for the implementation of the Incentive Program. It falls within the Contract ceiling.

31 Page 128 of the RFP states “For contracts not listed in CPARS, list in the Past Performance Information Matrix Sheet (Attachment 3) contracts for efforts similar to the work required by this RFP.”

i. Is there a limit to the number of past performances listed in the past performance matrix?

ii. Where should Contractors include past performance information for contracts listed in CPARS?

iii. Would USAID allow Contractors to also list cooperative agreements and grants under Past Performance?

i. There is no limit for the number of past performance contracts from the Prime and major subcontracts, not listed in CPARS.

However, The offeror shall list the most relevant Contracts and Cooperative Agreements performed over the past 3 years.

ii In Section J, Attachment J.2. Past Performance Information Matrix Sheet

iii. Yes. The relevant cooperative agreements may be listed.

32 Pages 125-126 of the RFP identify Past Performance to be included both after the Management and Staffing Approach, as well as in the Required Annexes. Could USAID please distinguish between these two documents?

Past Performance Information is provided in the Required Annexes, J.2. Project List and Past Performance

33 Page 125 of the RFP lists “6. Past Performance” as part of the Technical Proposal.

i.. Could USAID please clarify if there is a page limit for this section?

ii. Could USAID please clarify how many PPRs Contractors are eligible to submit?

iii. Could USAID please provide a template for the information to be captured in this Past Performance section?

See answer to question 32. Past Performance information: Project List and Past Performance References are captured in Attachment J2.

34 Section L.2 states for each of the offeror’s proposed Key Personnel positions, “the Offeror will submit the position titles, position description, describe the qualities and capabilities enabling them to contribute to the implementation of the proposed technical approach.” Does this fall within the 5 pages of the management section, or to be included as an annex?

Confirmed. The page limit for management and staffing approach narrative is 5 pages. CVs, letters of commitments, and management structure chart are to be included as annexes.

35 We have identified several potential grant-under-contract (GUC) recipients that we feel would contribute to the implementation of our technical approach, rapid project start-up, and fulfill the objectives of the Local Governance Program. As such, i.. Would USAID consider allowing the Offeror to name potential local GUC recipients in the technical proposal?

ii. If yes, would USAID accept Letters of Support from potential GUC recipients on a non-exclusive basis, to be included in an annex?

i. It is allowed, but not required.

ii. Letters of Support from potential GUC recipients can be presented in an additional annex, if named in the technical proposal, but is not required

36 Page 125 of the RFP states that Required Annexes will be counted towards the page limit and there are several annexes that have no page limit. Can USAID please clarify whether or not the Annexes count towards the 25-page limit for the technical proposal?

Required annexes are not counted towards the page limit. See the revised Solicitation.

37 Page 128 Would USAID consider reducing the major subcontractor threshold to 15%?

A major subcontractor is considered one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost

38 Page 130 of the RFP states “The offeror must provide a complete detailed budget, including the budgets for each subcontractor, by cost element. A major subcontractor is considered one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost.” Can USAID confirm that detailed budgets are required for major subcontractors only?

Yes. The detailed budgets are required for major subcontractors only. For non-major subcontracts (total cost under 20% of the total estimated cost of the offeror’s proposal), the offerors must submit sufficient information to determine reasonableness and address the requirements elements of FAR Part 44, in order for consent to be considered at the time of award.

See the revised Solicitation

39 Does USAID anticipate transferring vehicles from other USAID projects to the new Local Governance Program?

USAID anticipates transferring one vehicle. However, at this point we cannot confirm the transfer.

40 Would USAID kindly clarify if a list of acronyms is allowed and if it will count towards the 25-page limit of the technical proposal?

See answer to question 10

41 Could USAID kindly clarify if the Past Performance should be part of the Business (Cost) Proposal, as specified of page L-6: “…the Business (Cost) Proposal shall present the price and address related issues such as past performance and responsibility?” Or should it be in the Technical Proposal, as specified on page L-7?

As specified on page L-7, the Past Performance information (Attachment J.2 – Past Performance Matrix) shall be submitted as an Annex to the technical proposal. Additional information regarding past performance and responsibility, must be presented in the Business/Cost proposal, as stated on page L-6.

See revised Solicitation.

42 Please also clarify if there is a page limit for the past performance section included in the technical volume? Is this part of the 25-page limit?

No. Past Performance information presented in Attachment J.2 will not count in the 25-page limit of the technical proposal

43 Would USAID please clarify if the following should be in a separate annex or part of the 5-page management section? “For each of the offeror’s proposed Key Personnel positions, the Offeror will submit the position titles, position description, describe the qualities and capabilities enabling them to contribute to the implementation of the proposed technical approach” (L-10).

Yes. CVs, letters of commitments, and management structure chart are to be included as annexes. See answer to question 34

44 Should the PPRs be submitted separately in the USAID template or are offerors allowed to format PPRs in the technical proposal?

PPRs are not required to be submitted for awards in CPARS. The offerors must submit the Past Performance references for the most relevant awards performed within the last 3 years, not in CPARS.

45 For the Technical Approach on page L-8 under the third bullet, USAID calls for a “summary chart listing proposed interventions to achieve the objective results.” Is this chart to be included within the technical proposal and, if so, will it count towards the page limit?

Please see revised language in Section L.4.1. page L-9 “Include a list of illustrative interventions to achieve the objectives/results.

Describe how the proposed approach and interventions deliver sustainability of results. This will also include presenting the vision for working through local systems as well as approach to private sector engagement.” This will be part of the Technical Approach and count towards the 20-page limit. See the revised Solicitation.

46 Regarding the U.S. Department of Defense’s Office of Defense Cooperation (ODC) Incentive Program for Local Self-Governments, would USAID kindly clarify if the $900,000 be administered by the contractor on the ODC’s behalf? Is it essentially off-budget money for the municipalities, but managed by the project? Page C-8/page 18.

Please see answers to Questions 3, 18, and 30

47 Under heading C.8 Contract Deliverable in Table 1, would USAID please clarify what the contract total value represents? [page c-9, page 19]

Contract Total Value Represents end of Contract Targets

48 Regarding Section L-7, could USAID please kindly confirm that while all budget tables must be submitted in MS Excel format, only the summary budget table is needed in PDF format?

Confirmed. All budget tables, including Summary and Detailed budgets shall be submitted in MS Excel Format. Summary budget table can be provided in PDF format as well, if included in the budget narrative.

49 Would USAID please kindly confirm that provided that the budget categories are consistent to the Cost Elements table on page L-14, offerors may use their own budget templates?

Cost Elements Table as well as the attached budget is for information purposes only. Offerors have the flexibility to utilize their own budget templates as long as the required information listed in section L.7 is addressed.

50 Would USAID please kindly clarify if the “Communications” budget category, as delineated in the Budget Narrative section on page L-13, can be incorporated into the overall “Equipment and Supplies”

Yes. See answer to question 49.

category on the Budget Narrative instead to match the Cost Elements table on page L-14?

51 Section C.4 (page C-5), Result 1.2: “LSG systems, tools, and capacity for planning, management, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation strengthened, including those needed to effectively engage the private sector” includes a wide range of interventions in the entire cycle of sub-national public administration and service delivery. Could USAID specify the specific nature of activities the offerors are expected to propose under this result?

As described in Section C.5., page C-8 “ The Contractor shall plan to have an individualized/tailored plan of support for each targeted LSG, based on criteria mutually agreed upon by the Contractor and USAID during the Activity’s inception phase. Specific municipal systems/services should be identified and targeted for support based on the individual needs of each LSG. Illustrative target systems/services include: program budgeting; financial management and internal controls/integrity systems; participatory budgeting and/or other forms of citizen engagement; healthcare, education, child protection services.”

52 Section C.5 (page C-8): The Incentive Program for LSGs section states that the Contractor must define criteria, including milestones, targets, and verification mechanisms, to define selection and awarding of social sector infrastructure and maintenance support.

a. Please confirm that the Office of Defense Cooperation will provide engineering oversight of these infrastructure improvements facilitated by the Local Governance Program.

b. Please confirm what costs, if any, the LSGs will be covering for themselves that is not part of the $900,000 (for example: feasibility studies, surveys and design studies, engineering design services, risk evaluations, environmental compliance and/or climate risk management services, inspection and oversight, ongoing operations and maintenance, etc.).

c. Other than carrying out the incentive program and selecting the infrastructure activities, please specify the responsibilities of the LSGs. For example, will the LSGs conduct the tendering and, if so, must they follow USAID/FAR implementers’ procurement requirements?

Please see answers to the Questions 3, 18, and 30.

d. What is specifically included in the $900,000? Is it only costs associated with infrastructure improvement services, or also pre-design and design services, oversight, and O&M training?

e. Can USAID provide further information on what design standards or building codes the design and infrastructure improvements must comply with?

53 Section K (page K-1). Please clarify whether the section on pages K-1 through K-18, and System for Award Management Certification per page L-6, should be included as Cost Proposal annexes.

Yes. It can be included as Cost Proposal annexes

54 Section L.6 (page L-7): May offerors present charts, graphs, and tables in a standard font other than Times New Roman?

Yes.

55 Section L.6 (page L-7): As with charts, graphs, and tables, may offerors present textboxes in a smaller font size?

Yes.

Yes

56 Section L.6 (page L-7): May offerors present textboxes in a standard font other than Times New Roman?

Yes

57 Section L.6. (page L-7): Please confirm that offerors may include an acronym list in the technical proposal that does not count toward the page limit.

Confirmed. See answers to questions 10 and 40

58 58. Section L.6 (page L-7): Please confirm that no annex materials count toward the 25-page limit.

Confirmed. See answer to questions 11,24,36

59 Section L.6 (page L-7), Required Order of the Technical Proposal:

Instructions ask Offerors to include a 1. Cover Page (one page limit), followed by either a 2. Cover Letter or Executive Summary (two page limit), both not counting toward the 25 page limit.

At the same time, under the first paragraph of L.5, the offeror is asked for a typed Cover Letter on official organizational letterhead signed by the organization’s signatory authority. Given that the Cover Page and

Confirmed. See answer to question 10, and the revised Solicitation.

Cover Letter both seem to serve proposal presentation purposes, will USAID allow the offeror to include either a Cover Page or a Cover Letter and an Executive Summary that do not count against the page limit? The requested revision would be:

1. A Cover Page or Cover Letter (limited to one page and typed on official organizational letterhead, signed by a person who has signatory authority for the organization, and does not count against the page limit); and

2. An Executive Summary (limited to two pages and does not count against the page limit).

60 Section L.6 (page L-8): Bullet 3 under Technical Approach states that offerors are required to include “a summary chart listing proposed interventions to achieve the objectives/results.” Will USAID clarify or provide the envisaged, exact format for this summary chart, considering that the chart may duplicate the narrative on Objectives 1–4.

Please see the answer to Question 45.

61 Section L.6 (page L-8): Bullet 5 under Technical Approach states that the “Targets must at a minimum meet the requirements provided in Section C, C.6 Contract Deliverables, Results Table.” Please confirm that this language refers to Section C.8, rather than C.6.

Confirmed. This language refers to Section C.8.

62 Section L.6 (page L-8): Please confirm that the annex for Letters of Commitment for Key Personnel is limited to one-page per person/position.

Confirmed.

63 Section L.6.3 (page L-10), on Attachment 3 Past Performance Information Matrix Sheet: Please confirm that paper size, font, and margin requirements do not apply to the Past Performance Matrix.

Confirmed

64 Section L.6 (page L-10): One of the recommended indicators is “Percentage change in citizens’ access to and satisfaction with public services as reported by UNDP’s biannual ‘Study on Citizens’ Satisfaction with Public Services.” Offerors might find it challenging to measure progress in citizen satisfaction as reported by the UNDP

“Percentage change in citizens’ access to and satisfaction with public services as reported by UNDP’s biannual ‘Study on Citizens’ Satisfaction with Public Services.” is a good high level contextual indicator. The Offerrors are free to add additional custom survey because this survey covered all regions of Georgia, versus a subset of municipalities targeted by the USAID Local Governance Program. Please confirm that offerors can use other means of measuring citizen satisfaction with public service delivery.

indicators measuring citizen satisfaction with public service delivery.

65 Section L.6 (page L-10), Management and Staffing Approach: In the second paragraph, USAID requires Offerors to submit “position descriptions” within the body of the Management and Staffing Approach. Considering the five-page limit of this chapter—which includes an overview of the management approach, staffing structure, and the qualities of capabilities of up to five key personnel—will USAID allow offerors to include position descriptions as an annex that does not count against the 25-page limit?

Offerors must submit a summary of key functions instead of “position descriptions” for the proposed key personnel, that will count against the 5-page limit. See the revised Solicitation.

66 Section L.6 (pg. L-10): In L.6.2, USAID states that “Each resume/CV will be accompanied by a signed letter of commitment from each candidate.” However, L.6 (pg. L-8) lists resumes of proposed key personnel and letter of commitment for key personnel as separate annexes. Please confirm that key personnel resumes and letters of commitment should be presented in separate annexes.

Confirmed. Resumes and Letters of Commitments for key personnel should be presented in separate annexes, as specified on page L-8.

67 Section L.6 (page L-10), Past Performance: Please confirm that Past Performance will be evaluated based on information provided in Annex G only and that no separate, non-counting narrative describing Offeror’s past performance within the Technical Proposal is required.

The evaluation of past performance will be done in accordance with Section M. Also, no separate past performance narrative is required.

68 Section L.6 (page L-10), Past Performance: Under (a), USAID describes “each major subcontractor” as one “whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost.” Since managing grants is the responsibility of a prime, would USAID please consider revising the major sub definition to exclude the grant portfolio of 15% from the calculation?

A major subcontractor is considered one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost.

69 Section L.6.3 (Page L-10). Please confirm that offerors should include information on all relevant projects in the Past Performance Information Matrix Sheet and provide information listed on top of page L-11 for contracts that are not in CPARs using a Past Performance Short Form.

Confirmed. The offerors should include information on all relevant projects, performed over the last 3 years, in the Past Performance Information Matrix Sheet and provide information listed on top of page L-11 for contracts that are not in CPARs using a Past Performance Short Form.

70 Section L.6.3 (page L-10). Please confirm that for offerors proposing a major subcontractor, we can submit up to three pages, combined, for both the offeror and major subcontractor (i.e., 3 pages total, including the column for references)?

Confirmed. See also answer to question 69.

71 Section L.6 (page L-11). Past Performance, 2.(c)-(d) regarding awards, certifications and Small Business Concerns: Will USAID allow offerors to include requested information under (c) “any quality awards or certifications” and (d) “Performance in Using Small Business (SB) Concerns” as an additional, non-counting annex to the technical proposal.

Yes, it is allowed.

72 Section L.7 (page L-12): Please confirm that the cost proposal margins, font, and font size requirements apply only to the budget narrative.

Confirmed

73 Section L.7 (page L-12): Please confirm that the Excel budget can be formatted to fit on paper larger than 8 ½” x 11.

74 Section L.7 (page L-14). The budget template on page L-14 has the following categories: Salaries, Fringe, Consultant, Travel, Equipment and Supplies, Subcontract, Grants, Allowances, ODC, Overhead, G&A, Fixed Fee while the budget template per Attachment no. 3 has the following categories: Personnel, Fringe, Travel, Supplies, Equipment, Contracts, Allowance, ODC, Subgrants, Indirect charges, Fixed Fee.

Please clarify whether we should follow the budget template per Section L.7 of the RFP?

The budget template is provided for informational purposes.

Offerors have the flexibility to follow the budget template or utilize their own budget templates as long as the required information listed in section L.7 is addressed.

75 Section L.7.b.1 (page L-14) references a summary budget, while Attachment 3 Budget Template CPFF provided by USAID does not include one. Will USAID please provide offerors with a summary budget template?

See answer to question 74.

76 Attachment 1. Should Attachment No. 1. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities on page I-30 be included as part of Cost Proposal annexes?

77 Please provide an exchange rate to be used for this proposal.

In preparing your budget, please state what exchange rate is used.

78 To allow all offerors equal access to information related to USAID GGI implementation and analyses related to the local governance topics (such as sectoral analyses and analyses related to delegation of competencies) covered under this RFP, will USAID provide all offerors with links to the relevant GGI analyses and quarterly/annual reports, to supplement documents posted on the DEC?

See links to GGI documents posted on the DEC in Attachment 4 to the Amendment 000001 to the RFP 72011422R00005

79 Would USAID consider adjusting the proposal due date to February 4?

USAID correctly emphasizes working with local partners. The current due date places a high burden on local Georgian CSOs and companies to provide proposal inputs during the height of their holiday season – the end of December and first week or two of January. Moving the proposal date back just a couple of weeks would relieve the pressure on local partners. To have this effect, though, the due date change would have to be communicated before the holiday season begins.

The due date for proposals is extended through February 7, 2022, 10:00 AM Tbilisi Time. Please see answers to question 1, 17, 79.

80 Would USAID please advise if Offeror must submit a ceiling for their indirect rates? And if so, would that apply to major SUBs as well?

Section B.5 seems to suggest that Offerors are to use their standard NICRA rates. However, Section B.6 suggests the ceiling rates may be required.

Indirect ceiling rates are required per Section B.6 ADVANCE

UNDERSTANDING ON CEILING INDIRECT COST RATES

AND FINAL REIMBURSEMENT FOR INDIRECT COSTS

of the RFP.

81 Sub-Section C.4 (pg. C-5-7). SCOPE OF WORK. Could USAID clarify under which Objective(s) and Result(s) the Contractor might engage directly with Central Government entities on new legislative/regulatory measures or on amending existing ones, including any supportive policy research? Objective 4 reads as follow:

“National commitment, legislative frameworks, institutional capacities, and partnerships for decentralization strengthened.”

Would all support to the GoG in strengthening the “legislative frameworks” come under Result 4.2? (4.1 just envisages capacity building; under 4.3 the Contractor presumably might support “national partnerships” in advocacy work.) Under this interpretation, any activities on national level policy and legislative frameworks, including associated advocacy and consensus building, would be implemented under Result 4.2 even if it relates to issues under Objectives 1-3. So, for example, if in work under Objective 2 it is determined that there needs to be revisions to the national tax code, this would be spearheaded under Result 4.2. Is this the correct interpretation?

The results under the objective are cross-cutting and interlinked.

Engagement with the Central Government entities could occur in any of the results and objectives if the offeror is able to justify it.

82 Sub-Section C.4, SCOPE OF WORK (pg. C-7). The RFP, Result 4.3 made a slight change in the RFI’s wording for R. 1.3 from “National partnerships (including civil society, private sector, municipal and business associations) for decentralization supported” in the RFI to “Long-term, sustainable national partnerships (including civil society, private sector, municipal, and business associations) for decentralization established” in the RFP.

• Does this change from “supported” to “Established” mean that USAID wants the contractor to only work on creating totally new partnerships, or could the scope include strengthening existing partnerships?

• Could activities under this Result 4.3 also include working one-on-one to strengthen an existing national association such as NALAG (in the sense that NALAG is a “partnership” among local

● No. Strengthening existing partnerships is allowed as well.

● Activities under Result 4.3. does not envisage institutional support of any specific association but rather envisage support for partnerships among different organizations, including associations.

governments) or would the Contractor only assist NALAG in its partnering with other NGOs (most likely other national associations)?

83 Section C.4 (pg. C-6). Objective 2 calls for increasing the capacity of local governments to deliver services, but none of Objective 2's results seem directly related to activities that would be needed to build the capacity of LG staff for improved services, with Result 2.2 focused on performance measurement; Results 2.2 and 2.4 on building partnerships to improve services; and Results 2.3 and 2.5 focused on ensuring equitable access and increased public accountability. One of the Contract Deliverables makes explicit the need for the project to improve 3 services in each target local government. Would USAID consider either adding a result to capture this essential component to this project (e.g. "LSG capacity to deliver public services improved in quality, coverage, and/or efficiency") and/or adapting Result 2.1: "LSG capacity to deliver public services improved, including its capacity to collect, track, analyze, and use public service delivery data to improve evidence-driven management of targeted public services."

The requested Contract Deliverable on improvement of services is fully aligned with the Objective 2. All the results under the objective are interlinked. No need to adjust any of the results since all of them in one way or another are linked to improvement of service delivery.

84 Section C.4 (pg. C-6-7). We applaud USAID's strong emphasis on strengthening citizen engagement, which is reflected in the 2 results under Objective 3 and in Results 1.5, 2.5, and 4.3 of the other objectives. To avoid duplication, could USAID confirm that Result 1.5 interventions should focus on LSG engagement platforms related to public finance and Result 2.5 on social accountability mechanisms related to services and wider government performance? The distinction between the results sought in Results 3.1 and 3.2 are also not clear. It appears that Result 3.1 is about building citizen awareness and capacity for constructive engagement, whereas Result

3.2 is concerned with the institutionalization of social accountability and transparency mechanisms. Is this a correct interpretation? If not, could USAID clarify the different results it is trying to achieve?