Questions&Answers.pdf

Solicitation No.: -72011518R00003 USAID Learning from Evaluations & Assessments for Development (LEAD) Amendment 0001: Questions and Answers

1. On the SF-33 Form, it lists the due date as February 1st. Would USAID please confirm the submission deadline is March 26, 2018?

USAID’s Response: The closing date/time is as indicated on the cover page, March 26, 2018 at 10 a.m. Almaty time.

2. Can you please tell me if non-commercial entities / NGOs can apply.

USAID’s Response: US qualified small business concerns can apply.

3. I see in the introductory paragraph of the cover letter that the award is for qualified small businesses. Where can I find the definition of a qualified small business in this context?

USAID’s Response: As defined under the Small Business Act, FAR 2.101, and FAR 52.219- 6, a small-business concern means a concern, including its affiliates, which is independently owned and operated, not dominant in its field of operation in which it is bidding on Government contracts, and qualified as a small business under the size standards in this solicitation.

4. Is SBA Certification required to be the prime contractor for this program? In other words, is self-certified small business eligible to apply?

USAID’s Response: Yes, in accordance with FAR 19.301-1(a) “To be eligible for award as a small business, an offeror must represent in good faith that it is a small business at the time of its written representation. An offeror may represent that it is a small business concern in connection with a specific solicitation if it meets the definition of a small business concern applicable to the solicitation and has not been determined by the Small Business Administration (SBA) to be other than a small business.”

5. Can US registered small business use past project references of a company established outside the US that has experience of working with USAID programs?

USAID’s Response: Past performance information must meet the standards and requirements as provided under sections L.6.3.4 and M.2.4.

6. Is there a page limit for the Branding and Marking Plan?

USAID’s Response: No, as stated under L.6.2, technical proposal annexes are not included in the page limitation.

7. TO 1, which consists of two evaluations, needs to include:

Proposed methodology/ies as well as limitations (as well as how the proposed methodology will generate evidence to ensure rigor and reliability of results; and why/how the proposed methodology will minimize bias)

- How the study will answer the evaluation questions

– What methods will be used to obtain answers for each evaluation question

– Detailed evaluation matrix

– Data analysis plan for each question

– Draft questionnaires and other data collection instruments

– Criteria for assessing responses to evaluation questions

– Known limitations to the evaluation design

– Dissemination plan

– Work plan with schedule and roles of team members

Given that in addition to the above we also need to include a General Approach, Management Plan, Key Personnel Description, and Institutional Capacity, 20 pages for the technical proposal seem insufficient. Would USAID consider increasing the page limit and/or moving some of the parts, such as evaluation design matrix, work plan, questionnaires to annexes?

USAID’s Response: The page limit has been increased to 25 pages. Please see Amendment 0001 for revised language.

8. Section L.6.3.1.b - Would USAID please confirm that the following can be submitted in the Technical Proposal Annex and will not count towards the page limit: evaluation matrix, data analysis plan, draft questionnaires and other data collection instruments, and evaluation schedule?

USAID’s Response: Technical proposal annexes are detailed in section L.6.3.5. Only those annexes listed will be accepted. All other documents are subject to the technical proposal page limitation as provided under section L.6.3.1.

9. Is there a page limit for the resumes?

USAID’s Response: Please refer to sections L.6.2 and L.6.3.5. Resumes are not subject to the page limit requirement.

10. Page 93 says “CVs/Resumes, biodata, and letters of commitment for all proposed Key Personnel.” Biodata generally goes to the Cost Proposal. Please confirm where we should include them.

USAID’s Response: Annex 4 language on page 93 will be amended in the RFP. Biodata must be included in the cost proposal as described in section L.7, Part 2.

11. RFP Reference: L.6.3.5, Technical Proposal Annexes, Page: 93

Relevant RFP Language: “The IDIQ branding Strategy and subsequent Branding Implementation and Marking Plan will apply to all task orders under the project name USAID Power the Future.”

Question: Is “USAID Power the Future” a typo in this instance?

USAID’s Response: Yes, this language is deleted and replaced in Amendment 0001.

12. Should we include CV/Resumes, biodatas, and Letters of Commitment for the IDIQ or just

Task Order 1?

USAID’s Response: Yes, for Task Order 1 only. See response 10 above with regard to biodata information.

13. Would USAID allow a smaller font than 12 for text boxes?

USAID’s Response: No, as stated in section L.6.2, “text in any text boxes included within the technical proposal must not be less than 12 points in size.”

14. In Section L.7, Part 2, the RFP states “The Offeror must propose a blended daily consultant rate for each type of consultant and experience level. The blended rate must be proposed for each year of the period of performance. The Offeror must provide a description of the methodology used to determine the blended rate for each consultant.” Please clarify what is meant by a “blended rate” in this instance. For example, is USAID requiring that unburdened fixed daily rates be proposed for each type of consultant and experience level?

USAID’s Response: The requirement for blended daily consultant rates has been removed in Amendment 0001.

15. I understand that this is an IDIQ contract, likely to be implemented against TOs, and that

USAID may have this relationship with several contractors simultaneously under this contract. Please confirm that winning the award will not mean the awarded party would not necessarily be issued TOs.

USAID’s Response: This is a single award IDIQ contract, which means the awarded contractor will perform all task orders issued under the IDIQ.

16. The compensation rates referred to on page 42 (section H.4(a) direct us to the AIDAR

752.7007, which publishes recent rate ceilings; however, in the following section on DBA, on page 44 (section H6(4) there is a reference to maximum rates of compensation reflected by the Secretary of Labor (dlhwc/naww). Which are the rates we should understand are our limits for the resources we would allocate to this proposal?

USAID’s Response: The compensation rates under Section H.4(a) AIDAR 752.7007 “Personnel Compensation” are applicable to this RFP.

17. Please confirm there’s no need for the Offeror to provide a budget or ceiling daily rates for any of the labor categories in section C.7. for the IDIQ.

USAID’s Response: Yes, confirmed.

18. B.3 of the Task Order states that the ceiling price is TBD, but the L.7 of the IDIQ RFP states

“The total estimated cost (TEC) for TO No. 1 is estimated at approximately $134,037 for the Access to Information Activity evaluation and $110,501 for the Tajikistan Agriculture and Water Activity evaluation, respectively.” Can USAID please confirm the ceiling price for TO No.1?

USAID’s Response: The price ranges for TO No.1 are estimated at approximately:

- $125,000 to $175,000 for the Access to Information Activity evaluation, and

- $100,000 to $150,000 for the Tajikistan Agriculture and Water Activity evaluation.

Please note, that Offerors cost proposals must be consistent with their own estimated costs in accordance with section L.7 of the RFP. The specified section has been revised as part of Amendment 0001 to this RFP.

19. Section L.7 Part 2 Proposed Costs/Prices - Page 93 states TO budgets at $134,037 and

$110,501 – do these totals include travel costs and are travel costs also considered FFP. Or will travel costs alone be cost reimbursable.

USAID’s Response: See response to question 18 above.

20. Could USAID clarify if there is a requirement for a Prime Contractor to have a minimum

Financial Turnover over the past 3 years? Are there requirements for Prime only or for Major Subcontractors as well.?

USAID’s Response: The Offeror and each major subcontractor must submit the information as described under section L.2, Part 2.9.

21. L.7 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE COST/BUSINESS

PROPOSAL, Part 2 – Proposed Costs/Prices states that:

“Offerors are requested to present cost/price information for Task Order No. 1 only”.

It further states that “The total estimated cost (TEC) for TO No. 1 is estimated at approximately $134,037 for the Access to Information Activity evaluation and $110,501 for the Tajikistan Agriculture and Water Activity evaluation, respectively”. Could USAID clarify if the detailed budget should show costs separately for this two tasks?

USAID’s Response: Yes, budgets should show costs separately for the two tasks. Budget must be submitted in one cost proposal for the two evaluations under TO 1.

22. L.6.3.4 Contractor Past Performance Information States that:

“The Offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) must provide performance information for itself and each major subcontractor (one whose proposed cost exceeds 25% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost) in accordance with the following:

1. List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five (5) of the most recent (active or ended no more than 3 years ago) and relevant contracts/agreements for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal for the Offeror and up to (3) three for each major subcontractor.”

a. Could USAID clarify what are the evaluation points to be allocated to the past performance information?

USAID’s Response: See section M.2 for details.

b. Could USAID clarify whether a company not having relevant past performance information is still eligible to be the prime contractor?

USAID’s Response: Please see section M.2.4 (3) for further details.

c. In case prime contractor doesn’t have relevant past performance information to provide, can it use only major subcontractors past performance information and still be considered as eligible?

USAID’s Response: See responses a. and b. to question 22.

d. Could USAID clarify whether a company not having relevant references will be excluded from the proposal evaluation or just loose points allocated to past performance information?

USAID’s Response: See responses a. and b. to question 22.

23. Is it safe to assume this is a new requirement for the government?

USAID’s Response: Yes.

24. Page 13, Under Objective 1, says that “USAID/Central Asia estimates an annual average of 3-6 studies of all types combined.” Will there be other studies under the other objectives?

USAID’s Response: Under Objective 1 the Mission can request three to six studies annually on average but is not limited to these numbers. The Mission will also request activities under Objective 2 as necessary. Objective 3 is cross-cutting and must be considered during implementation of Objectives 1 and 2.

25. Page 90, Technical Approach – TO 1, says that the offeror should describe “general approach to how the offeror will plan to organize, implement, and manage task order per each objective.” Please confirm that even though the heading says Technical Approach for Task Order 1, we are still required to provide a general approach for task orders under each objective.

USAID’s Response: Please see Amendment 0001 for revised language. The paragraph has been moved to Section L.6.3.3 Management Plan.

26. Page 90, Technical Approach – TO 1, says that the offeror should describe “general approach to how the offeror will plan to organize, implement, and manage task order per each objective.” Generally, this information goes under Management Section. Please confirm that it should be included under Technical Approach – TO1.

USAID’s Response: See response for question 25.

27. Is the IDIQ Manager Key Personnel?

USAID’s Response: Yes, please consider the IDIQ Manager as a Key Personnel.

28. Section B.6 (a) states “The Contracting Officer has determined that a full-time key personnel position is not necessary or required to administer the IDIQ”, while Section C.5 General (page 8) states “The Contractor must maintain a full-time IDIQ Manager for the term of the contract to manage the entire contract and ensure that quality standards and schedules are met for all tasks.” Can USAID please clarify whether the IDIQ Manager is expected to be full-time?

USAID’s Response: The language under section B.6 is for CPFF completion type TOs only.

However, the language under section C.5 has been revised in Amendment 0001 to remove the word “full-time”.

29. C.7 page 20 states “The IDIQ Manager position will be funded through indirect costs, except as they are assigned to and paid directly under specific Task Orders. The Contractor must not bill USAID directly for IDIQ management costs under this IDIQ or under task orders.” Can USAID please clarify that a portion of the IDIQ Manager’s LOE can be billed under task orders?

USAID’s Response: Yes, the IDIQ Manager’s LOE can be billed directly under task orders when allocable to and paid directly under specific Task Orders. Please see Amendment 0001 for revised language in section C.7 under IDIQ Manager.

30. Could USAID please confirm that resumes are only required for the below provided 5 key personnel:

IDIQ Manager Team Leader/Evaluation Specialist (Task Order No 1: The evaluation of A2I) Technical Specialist (Task Order No 1: The evaluation of A2I) Team Leader/Evaluation Specialist (Task Order No 1: The evaluation of TAWA) Technical Specialist for The evaluation (Task Order No 1: The evaluation of TAWA)

USAID’s Response: Yes. Resumes are only required for the listed key personnel described in F.3 of task order 1 in addition to the IDIQ Manager.

31. Page 5 of TO 1 says that “Travel to Kyrgyzstan is not included in the budget or SOW.” Is there any budget for the TO that USAID can share with us?

USAID’s Response: Offerors must not budget for any travel or in-country data collection costs in Kyrgyzstan under the A2I portion of the evaluation.

32. RFP Reference: C.4, Objective 3, Page: 15

Relevant RFP Language: “The roles of local/regional firms/specialists shall not be limited to data collection, but also in the design, planning and administration of the study. It is preferable that local experts serve as the team lead.”

Question: Does this mean that the Mission confirm that it would prefer local experts to serve as the team lead for Task Orders? In F.3 pg. 12 of Task Order 1, the Team Leader/Evaluation Expert positions for both TAWA and A2I evaluations do not require proficiency in local languages.

USAID’s Response: Yes, local experts are preferred but not required. Proposed personnel should meet the requirements as provided in section L.6.3.2.

33. Regarding EQ1 of TAWA, which focuses on women beneficiaries adapting improved farming practices / technologies, shall we assume that USAID is not evaluating beneficiaries in this respect? Would USAID be interested in how women compare to men? We note that for some activities the beneficiaries appear to be primarily women (kitchen gardens), for others men and women benefit fairly evenly (extension services) and in others men predominate (irrigation water management).

USAID’s Response: TAWA is already collecting data on technology adoption through surveys that take place at a set period of time after training takes place. These data are disaggregated by sex. As EQ1 states, USAID wants to know if technology adoption continues over the long term (beyond the point in time of TAWA's survey) and, if possible, it would be great to know if there is any secondary adoption of TAWA-introduced technologies by people who never received training from TAWA. If there are indeed differences in the rate of technology adoption between men and women, it would be interesting if the evaluation team could help discern why that might be the case.

34. Is data available, aside from baseline data, which the evaluation team could use to assess the activity’s management, financial, and cost-efficiency? We ask, because the evaluation is described as being qualitative in nature, ‘with some secondary, quantitative data analysis.’

USAID’s Response: The available data will be provided upon request, should the offeror identify its necessity in the evaluation design.

35. The Task Order notes that USAID is interested in financial and cost-efficiency findings, among other things. However, the four evaluation questions don’t clearly link to these issues.

Should we understand these as cross-cutting themes?

USAID’s Response: Yes. Please consider financial and cost-efficiency themes as cross-cutting, but the main focus must be on the evaluation questions.