SWIT Questions with Answers.docx

Consolidated Questions

1. There are 12 small scale infrastructure projects in 5 selected districts to serve 35,000 citizens (approx. 5,000 households) within the targeted districts. Does this mean there are 175,000 citizens and 25,000 households in total for this 5-year project?

No, a total of 12 infrastructure projects in 5 districts to serve a total of 35,000 citizens over the 5 years.

2. Are the 10 institutional settings in addition to the 12 infrastructure projects or they included.

They are included to the 12 infrastructure projects. To be clear, a subset of the 12 infrastructure projects will provide at least 10 institutional settings (schools, clinics) with water, as well as households.

3. Population requirements: Patients and staff, students and staff (Estimated Water consumption per day) Such data is not available for rural areas, as the population, while connected, has intermittent access, with water interruptions lasting for hours because the system is deteriorated. ADB conducted a survey in urban settings, and it shows that non-incremental demand, which will replace the existing, more costly water supply as the population switches back from alternative sources to piped water, was calculated at 37 liters per capita per day (lpcd). Incremental demand, which pertains to the additional demand for water arising from the safer, more continuous supply of water, was assumed to be 80–160 lpcd. Again, this data is valid for urban settings. Clinics typically have a higher water demand than schools.

4. How was the $80,000 construction budget, per project determined?

This data was drawn from average cost of small-scale construction/rehabilitation/upgrades of previous USAID-funded water supply activities, and from other development agencies, such as Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation and OXFAM.

5. Does this total include any water treatment equipment?

Yes, it does, since the water supplied must be potable.

Equipment currently in use or stored for future installation?

This will be clear after site selection based on several criteria such as: identified gap, need for water, willingness to pay, local government political will and financial capacity to co-fund etc.; then we can identify, whether project will do construction from scratch or restore/upgrade existing systems.

Is the addition of water meters included in the total construction cost as well?

Yes.

Who is responsible for providing the water meters, installing and monitoring daily? Will the Government institute a billing process and conduct financial collection?

Water meters are usually procured and installed by government assigned local water operator; Water meters must be up to established government standards; And same water operator will then be responsible for collecting bills and finances; Project will certainly build/upgrade that capacity.

6. Does this include any upgrades to existing equipment as needed?

It might. The successful contractor will conduct an inventory of infrastructure and gap analysis of proposed sites for construction, based on above mentioned criteria. It will then determine whether project will do construction, rehabilitation or upgrade of existing system.

7. Is there a Gallon per Day (GPD) per person requirement that needs to be met for each project?

The government of Tajikistan has pre-established consumption norms. However, depending on consumer’s willingness to pay, availability of water in aquafers, etc, water supply can be regulated/even limited per certain hours per day. 24/7 supply will not be guaranteed in every selected site.

8. Are there any plans to do a “Site Visit” prior to the bid deadline?

No, as the target sites are not selected yet. The Contractor will select the sites based on above mentioned criteria.

9. Are there any “as built” drawings, pictures or documentation available for the systems that already exist?

No answer at this stage, this is something the successful offeror will need to find out during their initial assessment.

• Pipe Size (Flow rate: Gallons per Minute (GPM), Pressure capability, etc.) No answer at this stage, this is something the successful offeror will need to find out during their initial assessment.

• Pipe design (PVC, lead, copper, etc.) (What schedule is piping, Country of Origin for piping) Any special handling requirements? No answer at this stage, this is something the successful offeror will need to find out during their initial assessment.

• Pump Stations, Pressure Pumps, Hydraulic/Engineering requirements not addressed in the provided documents No answer at this stage, this is something the successful offeror will need to find out during their initial assessment.

• Raw and finished water storage details. Are there currently a storage facility and what is the capacity? No answer at this stage, this is something the successful offeror will need to find out during their initial assessment.

• How many “Centralized” water systems exist now and are they functional? There is no such data on the quantity of the centralized or decentralize systems, as no inventory has been conducted since the collapse of the Soviet Union. However, we do know that centralized systems are mostly in urban and peri urban settings.

• Are there any “Decentralized” water systems existing now and are they functional? Yes, there are many decentralized systems, especially in rural areas. Not all of them are functioning. There is no data on quantity, as there has been no inventory ever conducted.

• Are these locations secured and free of contamination (ground water, chemicals, drainage or sewerage contaminants)? Usually those that are functional, by Tajik law must be secured and free of contamination. Especially those that are funded by donor/development agencies. However, not every community may comply by that policy.

• Is electrical power currently available at each site? What is the power available and how reliable is the electrical grid? Is the power 110/120 or 220/240? Please provide power availability and quality of power for each location. Is there external generator support for each location? If so, who pays for the operation, repairs and fuel support? No answer at this stage; not every site may require electricity; there are some gravity fed, especially in higher elevation, mountainous areas. This is something the successful offeror will need to find out during their initial assessment.

• How old is existing systems? No answer at this stage, this is something the successful offeror will need to find out during their initial assessment.

10. What and where are the Raw Water (RW) sources available for each project?

This depends on the geography, can be either groundwater or springs.

Do we have direct proprietary control of the water source?

No, USAID doesn’t. It’s government property. Even if we dig borehole, and find a new source, it’s government property.

Do we have to request permits for water system install and construction?

Yes, this is required by Tajik law.

11. Is there any analytical data on the RW sources?

There is general information in the World Bank Poverty Diagnostic of Water Supply, Sanitation, and Hygiene Conditions in Tajikistan from 2017; specific information will need to be identified during the initial assessment.

12. Is there an existing Country Water Quality (WQ) Standard requirement for the finished water?

Yes

13. Are the 10 institutional settings included in the Centralized water design or can they be converted to a Decentralized design in which each location has its own water system?

In some places, such as urban and peri urban settings, local institutions are connected to the centralized system. In most of rural settings, local institutional settings, linked to decentralized water systems, if connected at all. This will be clear after contractor selects the target site.

14. Is there a separate budget for the institutional settings?

No. When selecting sites for construction, contractor will consider nearby institutions and consider connecting them to water in the design of construction.

15. Is there an existing 5-year plan for this conversion?

No Planned budget per year?

There is no planned government budget per year. If for the purposes of this contract, then the yearly budget will be finalized once the sites are selected. Do you have a Country Strategic Plan for water distribution and how this effort will be incorporated?

Yes, Tajikistan just recently passed a Water Sector Reform Program, which proposes to address some of the deficiencies on a broader level. However, this is yet to be achieved by way of an action plan, including review and introduction of revisions to the charters and regulations of the relevant water sector entities, as well as introduction of updates to the country’s Water Code. However, Tajikistan relies on donor support to implement its water sector program. The expected commitment from donors under the reform is estimated at 90 percent of the total budget requirements. So, SWIT will certainly be part of this effort.

16. Will there be a site visit, or a briefing given by Subject Matter Experts (SME) from the region on this project? If so when will this occur? If travel is required to said Country or hosted Country who will pay for the visit?

USAID has no comment at this time.

17. Where will supplies be flown into and out of? Who will pay for the transport of materials and supplies? How will project personnel get into the Country? Modes of transport available? Are security personnel available or a secure area provided for project personnel?

This is the responsibility of the contractor.

18. Is administrative office space provided for this project by USAID or Host Nation?

Contractor should include a budget for rental of office space as they envision the requirements for implementation and oversight.

Who determines the priority of the projects?

Project team together with the local governments and COR concurrence.

Is there a Liaison between our US Personnel the USAID and the Host Nation which we work with daily?

The USAID COR will be the contractor’s primary USG point of contact.

19. Will lodging, laundry services, vehicles, meals and medical care be provided by USAID assets? Is there US Embassy support for US project personnel to obtain personal and admin materials?

This is the responsibility of the contractor.

20. Who provides life support services?

This is the responsibility of the contractor.

21. Are there any governmental permits required to enter the Country (Visa, Country Clearance, Additional Tax Basis, US Personnel limitations, etc.)? Yes What permits are required for each site prior or after the install of water equipment?

There are 16 agencies, which needs to issue approval/permits. It includes targeted local government, State Agency for Construction and Architecture, Department of Geology, Sanitary Epidemiologic Service (SES) etc. Therefore, as soon as contractor gets registered in Tajikistan, it needs to do gap analysis, identify sites, make construction assessment, design and get approval from all those agencies. Based on our previous experience, it usually takes up to a year. If the Prime Contractor faces difficulties registering the activity in the country, it may take even longer.

What are the environmental standards and quality control standards which we must ensure are met before we submit the bid?

According to current governing laws, water quality control mechanisms are to be developed by the scheme operator, agreed upon with the district level Sanitary Epidemiologic Service (SES), and approved by relevant local authorities. This is designed to facilitate the constant monitoring of water quality throughout the water supply network, including that of the intake and distribution points. Laboratory tests should be conducted at least four times a year by the service provider or by an accredited laboratory based on prior agreements.

22. Who is the approval authority for construction requests and how timely is the process? Who pays for these fees?

Ministry of Environmental Protection, State Architecture and Construction Agency, Department of Geology (after testing water quality in aquafers). It can take up to a year based on previous experience. After agreement, the fees could be the government’s contribution to the project.

23. Are the permits for establishment of the water systems and construction all obtained prior to start of the pilot program by USAID?

No, these are the responsibility of the Contractor after the sites are selected.

Who pays for these fees?

It would be the government’s contribution to the project, unless otherwise agreed

24. If permits are a problem as stated in Annex IV and V does this count as non-performance on the solicitor behalf due to program delays?

Yes.

Who pays for these fees?

Contractor

25. Is the list of In Country Personnel listed is that per site established?

Country personnel per whole activity, not per site.

How many Small Business do you envision starting to provide water to the Communities?

Per SWIT SOW, at least 5 local businesses

26. Who controls the security of the Water Source?

Water operator, local government, local sanitary and epidemiological service department; Water legislation contains the main requirements in respect of water resources protection that refer to prohibition of pollution, littering and depletion of waters. It provides for the responsibilities of water users, other enterprises and organizations to fulfill the main water protection requirements: When designing and constructing the buildings and facilities the efficient water purification systems need to be provided; To continuously reduce irrational water use; establish low waste and zero-waste water use systems; To undertake the measures focused on the enhancement of regime, protection from pollution and depletion of waters; to ensure favorable environment for flora and fauna; To create where necessary the sanitary, protective and water protection zones and belts that would ensure prevention of harmful effect of environment, economic and recreational activities on the condition of water sources.

Is all the facilities climate controlled or protected from inclement weather? What are the established standards for water quality?

WHO rates drinking water quality as “fair” for total dissolved solids (TDS) values 600−900 mg/L and as “poor” for TDS values 900−1200 mg/L. The national standards in Tajikistan consider water TDS compatible for any value below 1000mg/L.

Do we have capability documents on each site you want to start the water projects?

Not available at this stage. The contractor will select the sites based on initial assessment.

Are there environmental issues we need to be aware of such as piping systems, ground contamination, possible contamination from the source through the distribution system currently in place?

Yes, there might be number of environmental issues, including depleted aquafers, to level of pH, total dissolved solids (TDS), free chlorine, total chlorine, nitrate levels, and the presence or absence of Escherichia coli (E. coli). Prime contractor will have preconstruction assessment in compliance with USAID’s Environmental Compliance regulations. https://www.usaid.gov/our_work/environment/compliance/summary-216

27. Block 9 of the SF 33 form lists the closing date as March 13, 2020. Would USAID please confirm that the proposal is due no later than April 2, 2020 at 10 a.m. Almaty time as stated on the RFP cover page?

Proposals are due April 2, 2020 at 10:00am. The SF 33 will be amended to reflect this.

28. In RFP Section C.I (page 10) and Section 2.2 of the IEE (page 6), the project objective is described as providing a range of long- and short-term technical assistance and funding for small-scale construction and rehabilitation of drinking water systems to support the Tajikistan government. In Section M.2.C.I (page 110), the RFP states that the offeror’s proposal will be assessed on the “Strength of the Offeror’s approach to plan and implement water and sanitation construction…” Would USAID clarify whether the small-scale construction and rehabilitation is intended to be for drinking water systems only, or water and sanitation?

Small scale construction covers construction of water systems, not latrines. However, if water is extended to schools and clinics, and if the bathrooms are plumbed, they should include running water to the bathrooms. Other small scale improvements in institutional sanitation can also be considered and discussed with COR after completion of the initial assessment

29. The required results outlined in Section C.V (pages 16, 19, and 21) do not match the indicator results listed in the mandatory indicator table in Section F.5.2 (page 38-43). Would USAID please confirm which indicators are required?

The edited table (Section F.5.2) will be attached.

30. RFP Section C.VI (page 21) indicates that the focus of target activities are the rural and peri-urban populations of Tajikistan that are unserved or underserved with respect to safely managed drinking water, with no geographic restrictions. However, Section 2.0 (page 3) of the IEE notes that all three new Feed the Future activities (including Sustainable Water in Tajikistan) will target assistance within the Zone of Influence – meaning 12 of the 24 districts of Khatlon Region. Would USAID please clarify whether the geographic focus is unrestricted or restricted to the 12 Zone of Influence districts of Khatlon?

SWIT geographic focus is unrestricted. GDA Thrive currently has water projects in FtF ZOI. Therefore, for SWIT, site selection criteria is not USAID focused geographic area, rather potentials for partnering with local private sector, local government political will to do Public Private Partnership, and financial capacity to co-fund construction/subsidize operation and maintenance; citizen’s willingness to pay and their financial capacity.

31. Section C.VII (page 23), Grants under Contract (GUC) for local Civil Society Organizations, notes that offerors must address how grants will be used “to support a process of constructive engagement and planning between communities, local institutions, water operators, private sector and other relevant government agencies to work collaboratively in implementing the activities under this scope of work.” Would USAID kindly confirm that solely in-kind grants to government entities will be allowed under this contract, pursuant to ADS 302.3.4.13?

This section refers to Grants Under Contract for Civil Society Organizations. Such CSO’s receiving a grant, where appropriate, may engage with government entities.

32. RFP Section C.X (page 25) identifies the chief of party, deputy chief of party, and grants manager/procurement specialist as key personnel, while Section F.6 (page 48) designates the chief of party; team/technical leader; and monitoring, evaluation, and learning manager positions as key. Would USAID please clarify which positions are key and, if the positions listed in Section C are key, provide qualifications for the deputy chief of party and grants manager/procurement specialist?

The Chief of party, Team/technical leader and Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning manager positions are Key Personnel. The RFP page 25 will be amended to reflect this.

33. The due dates for contract deliverables listed in Section C.XII (page 26-28) do not match those in Section F.5 (page 34-47), which in certain cases do not match those in Section F.7 (page 49-50). Further, Section L.4 requires that the offeror submit “the proposed delivery dates and fee schedule as specified in Section F of this RFP.” Would USAID please confirm that offerors should use the deliverable due dates in Section F.7 in their proposed fee schedules?

The Fixed Fee Payment Schedule in F7 is correct. The RFP will be amended to ensure other provisions are consistent.

34. In RFP Section F.5.2 (page 42), Indicator Result 2.6 is the “percent increase of women and eligible youth in water operators’ managerial and other technical positions.” Would USAID please clarify the qualifying age range for “eligible youth” under this activity?

For management positions, youth is from 25-35 years old.

35. The RFP references the use of grants under contract, but the specific authorizing language isn’t included in Section H (page 58-74). Would USAID kindly incorporate the GUC authorizing language from ADS 302 into Section H (ADS 302.3.5.6 and ADS 302.3.4.13)?

The RFP will be amended so that Grants Under Contract language as per ADS 302 will be added to section H.

36. RFP Section L.6.2 (page 97) lists a Draft year One Work Plan and Draft Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan as components of the Technical Proposal, but the rest of Section L and Section M do not include any instructions or evaluation criteria. Would USAID please confirm whether these sections are required? If the sections are required, would USAID please provide instructions and evaluation criteria and allow the sections to be submitted as annexes that do not count against the page limit?

The RFP will be amended to remove the requirement for submission of a Draft Work Plan and Draft AMELP.

37. RFP Section L.6.2 (page 97) states that contractor past performance information is not to exceed three pages. Would USAID please confirm that this page limit is per project, as opposed to for all projects described in past performance, which is to include up to 10 projects?

The page limit is per contract.

38. RFP Section L.6.2 (page 100), Overall Past Performance, defines a major subcontractor as “one whose proposed cost exceeds 5 percent of the proposed cost.” However, Section L.7 (page 107), System for Award Management (SAM)/Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA), states that major subcontractors “are defined as a subcontractor whose total cost exceeds 25 percent of the offer’s bottom line total cost.” Would USAID kindly confirm the threshold for major subcontractors is 25 percent of the proposed cost?

It is confirmed that a major subcontractor is one whose proposed cost exceeds 25%. The RFP will be amended to reflect this.

39. Section L.6.2 (page 101), Past Performance Using Small Business, requires a “copy of any similarly recent subcontracting reports if they were not submitted to the eSRS.” Providing copies of subcontracting reports that were not submitted to eSRS accounts for an additional 85 pages to the technical volume. Would USAID consider removing this requirement to reduce the file size of the submission or requiring 10 recent reports that were not submitted to the eSRS instead?

The RFP states that up to 10 reports are required. Offerors have the option of giving less if there is sufficient information for the committee to make an informed evaluation.

40. Section L.6.2 (page 101), Past Performance Using Small Business, requires three small business concerns to serve as reference but does not specify if this information must be presented in the annex or technical proposal body. Would USAID kindly confirm that this information may be included as part of Annex 4?

Please include Past Performance as part of the Annex.

41. Section L.7 (page 107), System for Award Management (SAM)/Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA), states that the offeror and each proposed major subcontractor must complete the ORCA or Section K and sign and date “on the last page in the space provided.” Section K (page 91) does not provide a place to sign. Would USAID please provide an amended Section K?

For clarity, Section K will be deleted and replaced by a new section K.

42. Would USAID kindly clarify the guidance in Section L.7 (page 107), System for Award Management (SAM)/Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA), to specify whether Offerors and major subcontractors are required to submit a Section K in addition to a SAM certification?

For clarity, Section K will be deleted and replaced by a new section K.

43. In Section L.7 (page 108), Subcontractor Information, the RFP requests “a discussion and arrangement on type(s) of subcontract(s) to be used, and approximate percentage of each type of work to be subcontracted.” Would USAID please clarify if this requirement refers to the “Information to Support Consent to Subcontractors” in Section L.7 (page 109)?

This is correct. If subcontractors are to be used, the Offeror must address the elements of FAR 44.202-2.

Tetra Tech SWIT Questions for USAID

44. The SF-33 lists RFP issue and closing dates (in boxes 5 and 9, respectively) that differ from those provided in the solicitation’s cover page. Could USAID please confirm the closing date and update the SF-33 accordingly?

Proposals are due April 2, 2020 at 10:00am. The SF 33 will be amended to reflect this.

45. Section B.4, Price/Cost Schedule, of the RFP (pages 6-7) includes a summary of costs in which the presentation of some major cost categories differs from the summary budget template provided in Attachment J.4. Further, the detailed budget template included in Attachment J.4 contains an additional major cost category of Training that is not in either of the summaries. Lastly, neither Section B.4 nor Attachment J.4 includes Grants Under Contract as a separate cost category. Could USAID please confirm which ordering and presentation of major cost categories are preferred?

USAID recognizes that organizations have slight variations in their budget categories. Therefore, the budget template is a guide and offerors may make changes to fit in with their organization’s policies.

46. Section C.V., Goals and Objectives, under Objective 1 (page 15) provides a ceiling of $960,000 for infrastructure costs. Could USAID please clarify whether infrastructure costs should be included as part of the approximate $2 million for Grants Under Contract (GUC) or as a separate cost category?

The total value of Grants is not to exceed $500,000. The RFP will be amended to reflect this.

47. Section C.VII, Guiding Principles, GUC for local civil society organizations (page 23) provides a ceiling of $500,000 for cash GUC to local CSOs. Could USAID please clarify whether this ceiling applies to each grant to a local CSO or to the combined total of grants to all local CSOs?

$500,000 is the total combined amount.

48. Section C.VII, Guiding Principles, GUC (page 23), the RFP states that contractors may award cash GUCs “to civil society organizations to engage and mobilize communities in establishing robust customer feedback mechanisms and strengthening accountability of drinking water service providers.” Section C.XII, Reports/Plans, of the RFP (pages 27-28) states that “grants will be provided to NGOs and/or small and medium scale enterprises, which may include local, national or international organizations.” Can USAID please confirm if there is any distinction between these two references to potential grantees?

The reference on Page 23 is discussing Objective 3 specifically, which deals with engagement with local communities. Page 27-28 is referring to Grants more generally under this activity and is therefore not exclusively related to those grants to CSOs under Objective 3.

49. Section C.XII, 5. Grants Plan, on page 27 lists an approximate ceiling of $2 million for all grants over the life of the project and a $500,000 ceiling for any individual grant to any organization. Could USAID please confirm that offerors may propose a total amount for GUCs based on their respective technical approach?

The RFP is being amended to reduce the $2,000,000 ceiling to $500,000. The amounts budgeted by offerors are not to exceed the given figure. Offerors should calculate a reasonable figure based on their overall approach.

50. Section C.X, Staffing (page 25), lists the three key personnel for this procurement as the COP, DCOP, and Grant Manager/Procurement Specialist. Section F.6, Key Personnel (page 48), lists the key personnel positions as COP, Team/Technical Leader, and Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Manager. Please clarify for which key personnel positions offerors should be presenting candidates.

The Chief of party, Team/technical leader and Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning manager positions are Key Personnel. The RFP page 25 will be amended to reflect this.

51. The RFP references both an Activity Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (AMEP) and an Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan. Please confirm which title offerors are to use for this deliverable.

Contractor will be required to produce an AMELP. Please note that the RFP is being amended to remove the need for offerors to submit a draft AMELP.

52. Section C.XII, Reports/Plans (page 27), states that the First Year Work Plan must be submitted no later than 30 days following contract award. The table in Section F.7 (page 49) states that the Year 1 Annual Work Plan is due 45 days following award. Please confirm that this deliverable is due 45 days following award.

It is confirmed that the work plan will be due in 45 days. The RFP will be amended to reflect this.

53. Section C.XII, Reports/Plans, of the RFP (page 27) states that offerors must “submit the project-level AMELP and PITT no later than 30 days following contract award.” Section F.5.2 (page 36) and Section F.7 (page 49) both state that the Year 1 Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Plan is due within 45 days after the effective date of the contract. In light of the importance of aligning the MEL Plan with the First Year Work Plan, please consider requiring submission of the MELP Plan to 60 days following contract award.

The RFP will be amended to require the AMELP within 60 days after the effective date of the contract.

54. Would USAID please consider updating the authorized geographic code (as stated in Section H.2, Authorized Geographic Code, on page 59) to 935 to allow for regional partners from more developed countries outside 110?

USAID’s statutory procurement authority, Section 604(a) of the FAA, authorizes procurement “from the United States, recipient country or developing countries.” Tracking that statutory authority, the Regulation establishes a presumptive USAID Principal Geographic Code, Code 937, for all USAID federally financed procurement of commodities and services under implementation instruments, unless otherwise specified. Congress has augmented this with Geographic Code 110 and so the Geographic Codes will remain 110 and 937 for this procurement. Specific waivers may be considered on a case by case basis.

55. Section H.17 (page 69) indicates that USAID will advise on the procedures for currency conversion during implementation. Could USAID please provide an exchange rate for the proposal budget?

Offerors may use the exchange rate at the date they submit their offer and make a note on their budget.

56. Regarding Attachment J.2, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities, referenced on page 83, could USAID please clarify in which cost proposal section offerors should include a completed SF-LLL? In addition, is this a requirement for the offeror only or also for subcontractors (major or otherwise)?

You may add this as an attachment. Please refer to 31 U.S. Code § 1352, which will give the funding levels and other requirements to which this shall apply.

57. Please confirm that offerors are to submit both a cover letter and a cover page with the technical proposal that do not count against the 20-page limit.

Yes, this is confirmed.

58. Section L.6.2, Content of the Technical Proposal (page 97), lists “Key Personnel and Staffing Plan” as Section 2 of the technical proposal and “Management Approach (to include a Draft Year One Work Plan and Draft Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan)” as Section 3. However, the instructions that follow on page 98 and 99 indicate that the Section 2 of the proposal is “Personnel and Management Plan” (with no mention of the work or MEL plans) and that Section 3 is “Past Performance Information.” Please confirm the technical proposal section headers and that offerors are not to include a Draft Year One Work Plan or Draft Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan until after contract award.

The RFP will be amended to remove the requirement for a Draft Work Plan and Draft AMELP.

59. Section L.6.3, Technical Proposal Annexes, Annex 4, Past Performance Information, on page 102 references instructions in RFP Section L.7.2.4 Past Performance, Paragraph A.1. However, there is no Section L.7.2.4 in the RFP. Please clarify if there are further instructions for the preparation of past performance information other than what is included in Section L.6.

The correct attachment number for the past performance information is J9 and the references for instructions are L5 and L6.2. The RFP will be amended to reflect this information.

60. Please confirm that all information regarding past performance in using small business should be included as part of the past performance annex that does not count against the 20-page technical proposal limit.

This is confirmed.

61. Please confirm that the offerors are only required to fill out the Past Performance Information Form provided in Attachment J.9 for projects that do not appear in the US Government past performance systems.

This is confirmed.

62. Could USAID please confirm that the definition of a “major subcontractor” is 25% of the total proposed cost as stated in Section L.7 on page 107 and not 5% of the total proposed cost as stated in Section L.6.2 on page 100?

It is confirmed that a major subcontractor is one whose proposed cost exceeds 25%. The RFP will be amended to reflect this.

63. Section L.7, Standard Form (SF) 33, on page 102 requires an original signature on the SF-33. Since proposals will be submitted electronically, could USAID please confirm that a scanned or electronic signature will be sufficient?

A scanned signature will be sufficient.

64. The USAID Business Forecast stated that Tajikistan SWIT would be a three-year activity and the RFP states that this is a five-year activity. Please verify which is correct.

SWIT is a five-year activity.

65. Page 2 of the November 2016 Water PPP report provided as an annex to the RFP notes that the Local Governance Project in Tajikistan generated a report on “Site Selection.” This document is not available on the Development Clearinghouse web site. Could USAID please provide this report to offerors?

Please find this document as an annex to the RFP in this amendment.

This would be contracts with 3rd parties.

b. Some cost categories like Subcontracts, G&A, Fixed Fee, and Grants Under Contract are not included. Please clarify if USAID intends offerors to add relevant categories.

This table will be filled in with the specific numbers once the award is made. These items you refer to may fit into one of the existing categories – e.g. M&A is Indirect Costs, etc.

66. Page 15, Objective 1: the last paragraph in the objective discussion provides that “to increase access to a sustainable, safe drinking water supply in rural Tajikistan, this activity will provide financial resources, through flexible, transparent and competitive contracts with local construction companies, to fund new or rehabilitation of existing water supply and sanitation infrastructure investments.” Sanitation services is mentioned multiple times throughout the RFP. Please clarify if the activity will also address access to sanitation services in addition to drinking water.

This project will not construct latrines or lavatories. By extending water to institutional settings, such as schools and clinics’ bathrooms, it will improve sanitation in general.

67. Page 15, Objective 1. Illustrative Activities, 3 refers to improving services by “extending water to individual households and installing water meters,” and page 16 states: “Result 1.1: At least 35,000 people (approximately 5,000 households) gain new or improved access to safe drinking water as a result of USG assistance Please confirm if this means supply and installation of 5,000 water meters for households receiving new water service.

This is correct.

68. Section V, Goals and objectives, Page 15 provides that “Total costs for infrastructure are limited to $960,000 for the life of this activity.” Should offerors add this as a plug figure in the budget or calculate actual anticipated cost under this ceiling?

This figure is a ceiling because construction in excess of $1,000,000 has additional statutory requirements. Offerors are not required to budget the full amount.

This has been revised such that there are no longer matching grants under Objective 2, which is focused on technical assistance. The maximum allowed for Grants is $500,000, which is under Objective 3.

ii. Is this separate from GUC specified in the RFP (page 23)?

The grants specified in page 23 are for Objective 3.

iii. Should this be included as a plug figure in the budget?

The amounts are not to exceed the given figure. Offerors should calculate a reasonable figure based on their overall approach.

No.

ii. Should offeror include $500,000 as a plug figure in the budget?

The amounts presented by offerors are not to exceed the given figure. Offerors should calculate a reasonable figure based on their overall approach.

$500,000 relates specifically to Objective 3. The larger figure is for the whole activity.

ii. Should offeror include $2,000,000 in grants as a plug figure under the budget?

Please see above. The RFP has been amended to take out the grants in Objective 2.

70. While Section X, Staffing, Page 25 provides that the key personnel are: 1. COP, 2. DCOP, 3. Grants Manger/Procurement Specialist; Section F6, Key Personnel, Page 48 Lists Key Personnel as: 1. COP, 2. Team/Technical Leader, and 3. Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist. Please clarify.

The Chief of party, Team/technical leader and Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning manager positions are Key Personnel. The RFP page 25 will be amended to reflect this.

71. Section F.6, Key Personnel, Page 48 provides that a master’s degree is required for each of the three key positions. Can years of experience be acceptable in lieu of the master’s degree?

Yes, RFP has been amended to accept relevant experience.

Offerors should calculate a reasonable figure based on their overall approach.

b. The Final Report is due 30 days after the completion of the contract. Will USAID reimburse the contractor for costs incurred after the completion of the contract in connection with preparation of the Final Report, receiving USAID comments, and finalizing the report?

Offerors should calculate these costs as part of their overall budget.

73. Page 83, Section J, Attachments, lists Attachment J.2 as Disclosure of Lobbying Activities, however this is not listed as a requirement for either the cost or technical proposals. Are offerors required to submit SF-LLL with proposals?

You may add this as an attachment. Please refer to 31 U.S. Code § 1352, which will give the funding levels and other requirements to which this requirement shall for apply for contractors (and subcontractors if relevant).

74. Section L.6, Instructions for The Preparation of the Technical Proposal, L.6.2, Content of the Technical Proposal, Page 97 provides that: “The technical proposal must be organized as follows (Included in the 20 page limit.):

1. Technical Approach (12 pages);

2. Key Personnel and Staffing Plan; and

3. Management Approach:

i. Draft Year One Work Plan

ii. Draft Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan.

Do we understand correctly that the Key Personnel and Staffing Plan and the Management Approach (including Draft Year one Work Plan and the Draft Activity Monitoring Evaluation, and Learning Plan) are limited to 8 pages?

The RFP will be amended to remove the requirement for submission of a Draft Work Plan and Draft AMELP.

75. Overall Past Performance, Page 100 provides 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 5% of the proposed cost in accordance with the following” and System for Award Management (SAM/Online Representations and Certification Application (ORCA), page 107, states “each proposed major subcontractor which are defined as a subcontractors whose total cost exceeds 25 percent of the offer’s bottom line total cost must complete ORCA or Section K”. Please confirm that a major subcontractor is defined as a subcontractor whose total cost exceeds 25 percent of the offer’s bottom line total cost, not 5 percent.

It is confirmed that a major subcontractor is one whose proposed cost exceeds 25%. The RFP will be amended to reflect this.

76. Section L.7, Instructions for the Preparation of the Cost/Business Proposal, appears to describe “Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number” on page 107 as an individual piece of the cost proposal. Please confirm that if the offeror clearly lists the DUNS number on a cover page for the cost proposal, this does not need to be included as a separate section within the document.

The DUNS number of the Offeror must be made clear on the Cost Proposal.

77. Page 108, Subcontractor Information, lists three distinct documentation requirements for each proposed subcontractor, one of which is “The Offeror must address each of the elements in FAR 44.202-2 in order for proposed subcontractor(s) to be considered by the Contracting Officer for consent of subcontractor(s) to be granted with the award.” On page 109, Information to Support Consent to Subcontractors (comprised of the elements in FAR 44.202-2) is separately presented as an additional requirement in the cost proposal. Please confirm if USAID would like subcontractor information presented as separate sections, and if there is a required order.

If subcontractors are to be used, the Offeror must address the elements of FAR 44.202-2. This requirement refers to the “Information to Support Consent to Subcontractors” in Section L.7 (page 109).

78. The budget template provided in J.4 includes a single column for each program year. Please confirm that the offeror may add columns in order to show calculations for each year, for example daily rate and number of working days per year, in addition to the annual totals.

Offerors may use additional columns if they ensure the totals are still clear.