72011524R00002-01.pdf

received regarding this ; .

June 7, 2024

RFP 72011524R00002

Green Economy in the Kyrgyz Republic

Amendment 0001

NOTE: QUESTIONS & ANSWERS BEGIN ON PAGE 14 OF THIS DOCUMENT

RFP 72011524R00002, GREEN ECONOMY IN THE KYRGYZ REPUBLIC is amended as follows:

1. Based on the PDF file page count, delete pages 136-266. These pages are duplicates of pages previously included.

2. Delete Attachment J.2 Past Performance Information at PDF file page 287.

Substitute in its place Attachment J.2 Local Compensation Plan for Kyrgyz Republic, included with this amendment.

3. Add Attachment J.3 Regional Sustainable and Integrated Natural Resource Management Project factsheet, included with this amendment.

4. The title for Section B.3. is hereby revised to the following:

“B.3 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST, FIXED FEE (IF ANY), AND OBLIGATED

AMOUNT.”

5. Section L.5 c is revised to the following:

“Offer Validity. The proposals should be prepared according to the structural format set forth in Section L.6 below. Proposals must be received at the place designated and by the date specified in the Cover Letter of this RFP and must be valid through to October 1, 2024.”

6. Section L.5 e is revised to the following:

“Offer Acceptability. The Government may determine an offer to be unacceptable if the offer does not comply with all of the terms and conditions of the RFP, without qualification or reservation.”

7. Section L.7 (b) Technical Proposal Body is revised to the following:

“Technical Proposal Body. This section will include the following sections in the order indicated. (Included in the 25 page limit)

1. Technical Approach

2. Management Approach and Staffing Plan

3. Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan”

8. Section L.7 (b) Annexes is revised to the following:

“Annexes. The following annexes are authorized to accompany the technical proposal (Not included in the 25- page limit):

1. Organizational Chart

2. Contractor Past Performance

3. Resumes for Proposed Key Personnel. A complete and current resume must be submitted for each key personnel position, detailing the requisite qualifications and experience of the individual. Qualifications, experience and skills shall be placed in chronological order starting with most recent information.

4. Key Personnel References, Letters of Commitment. Offerors shall also submit a minimum of three (3) references of professional contacts within the last five years; with complete current contact information, including email addresses and telephone numbers, for each proposed key personnel candidate.

5. Monitoring, Evaluation & Learning Plan

These sections, including the annex where relevant, should include all information required to fairly evaluate the offeror under the applicable evaluation factor.”

9. Section L.11 is hereby deleted and replaced with the following:

“PAST PERFORMANCE

(a) Past Performance information will be used for both the responsibility determination and to determine the Highest Technical Rated Offeror.

USAID may use performance information obtained from other than the sources identified by the offeror/subcontractor. USAID will utilize existing databases of contractor performance information and solicit additional information from the references provided in Section L. 11 of this RFP and from other sources if and when the Contracting Officer finds the existing databases to be insufficient for evaluating an offeror’s performance.

(b) Adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond will be addressed in accordance with the policies and procedures set forth in the FAR 15.3.

(c) USAID will initially determine the relevance of similar performance information as a predictor of probable performance under the subject requirement. USAID may give more weight to performance information that is considered more relevant and/or more current.

(d) The contractor performance information determined to be relevant will be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation factors specified in Section M. The Offeror must provide past performance reference information for itself, and each major subcontractor. If the offeror is responding as part of a teaming arrangement or joint venture, past performance information must also needed for each organization that is part of such arrangements.

The past performance information should be included in an Annex to the technical proposal. Although it is not prohibited, there is no need to address past performance in the technical proposal. Up to five past performance references may be provided. The references should be past performance information (reports) for work done within the last five years.

The offeror can provide past performance information that is in the Contract Performance Assessment Reporting (CPAR) systems, but it is not a requirement that the past performance information be listed in the CPAR system.

If the past performance information is in CPAR system, it is sufficient to Identify:

the name of the contract;

the contract number;

the contracting officer;

the date of the report;

the overall total estimated cost for the entire activity; and the dates and duration of the activity.

Additionally, whether or not the past performance reference is in CPARS, for each reference, offers should provide a brief explanation of how the work is relevant to this procurement by discussing the size, scope, and complexity of the contract work.

For those past performance references that are not in CPARS, provide a list of contact names, job titles, mailing addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, and a description of the performance to include:

(1) Primary location(s) of work

(2) Results achieved

(3) Expertise required

(4) Dollar value;

(5) Contract type, i.e., fixed-price, cost reimbursement, etc.

(USAID recommends that Offerors alert the contacts that their names have been submitted and that they are authorized to provide performance information concerning the listed contracts if and when USAID requests it.)

If extraordinary problems impacted any of the referenced contracts, provide a short explanation and the corrective action taken (FAR 15.305(a)(2)).”

10. Section L.12 is deleted and replaced with the following:

“ INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE COST PROPOSAL

The overall budget for this procurement may not exceed $23,999,151 million for five years. Offerors will submit a Cost Proposal which will be analyzed as part of the overall evaluation as indicated in Section M. The Offeror’s Cost Proposal must, at a minimum, include the following information and be organized in the manner described below:

Standard Form (SF) 33

Offerors must submit the Cover Page, Section A - Standard Form (SF) 33 entitled "Solicitation, Offer, and Award" with blocks 12 through 18 completed, with an original signature of a person authorized on behalf of the Offeror to sign the offer.

Proposed Costs/Prices

Offerors are requested to present cost/price information in response to the RFP. USAID anticipates to award a [TBD] contract with a total amount of [TBD] n funding over a 5-year period. Offeror must submit a cost plus-fixed fee (completion type) summary and detailed budget for the accomplishment of the interventions required to implement the activities in the Activity Description for all five (5) years of performance. The purpose of the detailed budget is to support cost-realism analysis.

This part of the Cost Proposal should include the following information: Detailed budgets (preferably in spreadsheet format), budget notes and supporting documents (e.g.

documents that support the calculation of costs included in the spreadsheets such as Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreements, Cost Agreements with subcontractors, etc.).

All formulas must be displayed, and all Excel sheets must not be locked, or cells hidden. While there is no limit on the number of pages of the cost proposal, the Offeror must provide ONE excel file.

An overall detailed budget should be provided for the total five years of performance. In addition to the overall detailed budget, detailed breakdowns should be provided for each year of performance. Budget details and supporting information must be provided containing sufficient detail to allow a complete and thorough analysis of cost realism.

The Offeror must submit a detailed budget narrative that supports item for item the cost estimates proposed in its detailed budget. The budget narrative must describe the nature of individual Cost Categories proposed and include a description of the basis for estimating that particular cost (e.g., historical experience with the cost item, catalog price, vendor price quotes, etc.). Narratives for the individual Cost Categories item by item must provide a discussion of any estimated escalation rates where applicable. Estimated costs proposed that exceed ceilings imposed by USAID or Federal procurement policy must be fully explained and justified. Any assumptions should be clearly stated.

Note: Individual subcontractors proposed must include the same Cost Categories breakdowns as the prime contractor by category and year as well as cost narratives in their budgets. The guidance/format below is provided for the use of Offerors in developing these documents. Cost estimates for office space, furnishings, home office support and related administrative inputs should be included.

The Budget Cost Categories described below for each element of cost are not intended to be a complete list of applicable regulations or policies. Also, the regulatory references assume cost-reimbursement contract types, and may vary or differ in their applicability given other types of contracts:

There is no page limitation for the Cost Proposal or narrative description, although it must include the following information:

Salaries/Labor/Personnel: FAR 31.205-6, AIDAR 731.205-46 and AIDAR 752.7007 provides for compensation for personnel services. Direct salary and wages should be proposed in accordance with the Offeror’s personnel policies and meet the regulatory requirements. They must be based on the requirements of the positions proposed and the market value of the position and should NOT be based on the proposed individuals' salary histories. Unit costs of long-term and short-term personnel should be broken down by person years, months, days or hours. Unit costs for each proposed position, key or not, must be expressed in an amount per work day with the corresponding level of effort required for the position (number of workdays) and then calculated to a total cost for each cost period in which the salary would be applicable. Narratives must provide a discussion of the estimated annual escalation of all salaries where applicable. The Offeror must separate expatriate and Cooperating Country National (CCN) labor categories for short/long-term and administrative staff. Offerors must provide Biographical Data Sheets for all Key Personnel. USAID discourages the use of exclusive agreements as this limits USAID’s ability to receive the best services.

Fringe Benefits: FAR 31.205-6 provides for allowances and services provided by the Contractor to its employees as compensation in addition to regular wages and salaries. If fringe benefits are provided for as part of a firm’s indirect cost rate structure, see FAR

42.700. If not part of an indirect cost rate, a detailed cost breakdown by benefits types should be provided for both international and local staff. The narrative should include a detailed breakdown of all items of fringe benefits (e.g., unemployment insurance, workers compensation, health and life insurance, retirement, FICA, etc.) and the costs of each, expressed in dollars and as a percentage of salaries.

Allowances: AIDAR 752.7028 provides for differentials and allowances with further references to Standardized Regulations. For example, allowances should be broken down by specific type and by person, and should be in accordance with Offeror’s policies and procedures.

Travel, Transportation, and Per Diem: FAR 31.205-46, AIDAR 731.205-46 and AIDAR 752- 7032 provide for costs for transportation, lodging, meals and incidental expenses. For example, costs should be broken down by the number of trips, domestic and international, cost per trip, per diem and other related travel costs. Specify the origin and destination, purpose for each proposed trip, duration of travel, and number of individuals traveling. In addition, Offeror must provide a consolidated travel chart (including subcontractor travel). Per diem must be based on the Federal Standardized Travel Regulations for cost Estimates.

Equipment and Supplies: FAR 2.101 provides for supplies as all property except land or interest in land, FAR 31.205-26 provides for material costs, and FAR 45 prescribes policies and procedures for providing Government property to Contractors, Contractors’ use and management of Government property, and reporting, redistributing, and disposing of Contractor inventory. For example, costs should be broken down by types and units, and include an analysis that it is more advantageous to purchase than lease.

Consultants: FAR 31.205-33 provides for services rendered by persons who are members of a particular profession or possess a special skill and who are not officers or employees of the Contractor. For example, costs of consultants should be broken down by person years, months, days or hours. 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.

Subcontracts: FAR 44.101 provides for any contract entered into by a subcontractor to furnish supplies or services for performance of a prime contract or a subcontract. For every subcontract that involves development services or deliverables AND is not expected to be awarded on a fixed-price basis, separate spreadsheets should be submitted for each such subcontract with the same detail, organization and format set forth above in this section.

Grants Under Contract: Offerors must allocate $10,540,500 for Grants under Contracts.

Other Direct Costs: FAR 31.202 and FAR 31.205 provides for the allowability of direct costs and many cost elements. For example, costs should be broken down by types and units.

Offerors must include as part of their cost proposal all anticipated costs for branding and marking and their approach to achieving environmental compliance and management.

Environmental compliance implementation and monitoring costs to include:

● The respondent’s approach to developing and implementing an IEE or EA or environmental review process for a grant fund and/or an EMMP or M&M Plan.

● The respondent’s approach to providing necessary environmental management expertise, including examples of past experience of environmental management of similar activities.

● The Offeror must provide an illustrative budget for implementing the environmental compliance activities. For the purposes of this solicitation, Offerors should reflect illustrative costs for environmental compliance implementation and monitoring in their cost proposal.

Overhead, G&A and Material Overhead: FAR 31.203 and FAR 42.700 provides for those remaining costs (indirect) that are to be allocated to intermediate or two or more final cost objectives. For example, the indirect costs and bases as provided for in an

Offeror’s indirect cost rate agreement with the Government, or if approved rates have not been previously established with the Government, a breakdown of bases, pools, method of determining the rates and description of costs. Any indirect cost rate agreements for the offeror or a subcontractor should be included in the cost proposal.

Fixed Fee: FAR 15.404-4 provides for establishing the profit or fee portion of the Government pre-negotiation objective, and provides profit-analysis factors for analyzing profit or fee. For example, proposed fee with rationale supported by application of the profit-analysis factors.

Indirect Costs

Some offerors may not have indirect pools, which allocate costs in the manner identified above. For those items, which the offeror does not utilize to allocate indirect costs, please identify in the proposal that these categories are not applicable.

The prime and all subcontractors may propose lower overhead rates than their established Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA) and sign the letter found in ADS 300, Mandatory Reference for Best Practices Guide for Indirect Costing. Indirect rates proposed cannot be higher than the rates established in their Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA). Please read further instructions below if your organization does not have a NICRA.

Offerors may propose a single ceiling rate covering the term of award or a ceiling rate in each applicable contract year. If an annual ceiling rate is proposed, USAID will average the ceiling indirect rates and use that figure for evaluation purposes.

A. The Offeror and each subcontractor must include a complete copy of its most current NICRA or other documentation from its cognizant Government Audit Agency, if any, stating the most recent provisional indirect cost rates. The proposal must also include the name and address of the Government Audit Agency, and the name and telephone number of the auditor.

B. If the Offeror or subcontractor does not have a cognizant Government Audit Agency, the proposal must include:

- Audited balance sheets and profit and loss statements for the last two complete years, and the current year-to-date statements (or such lesser period of time if the Offeror is a newly-formed organization). The profit and loss statements should include detail of the total cost of goods and services sold, including a listing of the various indirect administrative costs, and be supplemented by information on the prime contractor’s customary indirect cost allocation method, together with supporting computations of the basis for the indirect cost rate(s) proposed; and

- The most recent two fiscal year pool and base cost compositions along with derived rates, the bases of allocation of these rates and an independent certified audit by a certified accounting firm of these rates.

Exemptions for small business offerors only

All the above instructions apply to small business offerors. However, if the small business offeror does not have a NICRA, the proposal must include either Audited Financial Statements or Reviewed Financial Statements as defined below:

1. Audited Financial Statements provide the auditor’s opinion that the financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, in conformity with the applicable financial reporting framework. In an audit, the auditor is required by auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAS) to obtain an understanding of the entity’s internal control and assess fraud risk. The auditor also corroborates the amounts and disclosures included in the financial statements by obtaining audit evidence through inquiry, physical inspection, observation, third-party confirmations, examination, analytical procedures and other procedures. The auditor issues a report that states that the audit was conducted in accordance with GAAS, the financial statements are the responsibility of management, provides an opinion that the financial statements present fairly in all material respects the financial position of the company and the results of operations are in conformity with the applicable financial reporting framework (or issues a qualified opinion if the financial statements are not in conformity with the applicable financial reporting framework. The auditor may also issue a disclaimer of opinion or an adverse opinion if appropriate).

2. Reviewed Financial Statements provide a certified CPA accountant’s (referred to as “Accountant” or “CPA” herein) review; the accountant is not aware of any material modifications that should be made to the financial statements for the statements to be in conformity with the applicable federal financial reporting framework. During a review engagement, the Accountant obtains limited assurance that there are no material modifications that should be made to the financial statements. Therefore, the objective of a review of the financial statements is to obtain limited assurance that there are no material modifications that should be made to the financial statements. A review does not include obtaining an understanding of the entity’s internal control; assessing fraud risk;

testing accounting records; or other procedures ordinarily performed in an audit. The CPA issues a report stating the review was performed in accordance with Statements on

Standards for Accounting and Review Services; that management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework and for designing, implementing and maintaining internal control relevant to the preparation.

The proposal must not include compiled financial statements. Compiled financial statements will not be accepted because the Accountant does not obtain or provide any assurance that there are no material modifications that should be made to the financial statements. That is, there is no assurance that the organization is misrepresenting costs on compiled financial statements which puts the agency at risk. The objective of compiled financial statements is to assist management in presenting financial information in the form of financial statements without undertaking to provide any assurance that there are no material modifications that should be made to the financial statements.

If the small business offeror receives an award based on the submission of Reviewed Financial Statements, within six months after the end of the small business offeror’s fiscal year, they must submit an adequate final incurred cost proposal to the to the Contracting Officer (or cognizant Federal agency official) and auditor within the 6-month period following the expiration of each of its fiscal years in accordance with the Allowable Cost and Payment Clause FAR 52.216-7. The receipt of an adequate proposal by the audit office starts the audit process. This audit will establish the final indirect cost rate(s) for the audited year. Provisional rates will be updated as needed based on current information. USAID auditors will work with the small business to issue a NICRA establishing the proposed provisional indirect cost rates after award based upon acceptable information submitted above.

Joint Venture Information

If two or more parties have formed a partnership or joint venture (see FAR Subpart 9.6), for the purposes of submitting a proposal under this solicitation and, if selected, would perform the contract as a single entity, they must submit, as an attachment to the Cost/Business Proposal, the Corporate Charter, By-Laws, or Joint Venture or Partnership Agreement. In addition, the teaming arrangements must be identified, company relationships must be fully disclosed and respective responsibilities and method of work must be expressly stipulated. The joint venture or partnership agreement must include a full discussion of the relationship between the organizations, including identification of the organization, which will have responsibility for negotiation, which organization will have accounting responsibility, how work will be allocated, and profit or fee, if any, shared. In addition, the principles to the joint venture or partnership agreement must agree to be jointly and severally liable for the acts or omissions of the other.

Evidence of Responsibility

The Contracting Officer is required to make an affirmative determination of responsibility pursuant to the requirements of FAR Subsection 9.104-1 with respect to

Amendment 0001 the winning Offeror. As a result, the Offeror may be requested prior to award to submit additional specific information relating to the following criteria:

1. Have adequate financial resources to perform the contract, or the ability to obtain them (see FAR 9.104-3(a));

2. Be able to comply with the required or proposed delivery or performance schedule, taking into consideration all existing commercial and governmental commitments;

3. Have a satisfactory performance record (See FAR 9.104-3(b) and Subpart 42.15). A prospective Contractor shall not be determined responsible or non-responsible solely on the basis of a lack of relevant performance history, except as provided in FAR 9.104-2;

4. Have a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics;

5. Have the necessary organization, experience, accounting and operational controls, and technical skills, or the ability to obtain them (including, as appropriate, such elements as production control procedures, property control systems, quality assurance measures, and safety programs applicable to

6. Materials to be produced or services to be performed by the prospective Contractor and subcontractors). (See FAR 9.104-3(a);

7. Have the necessary production, construction, and technical equipment and facilities, or the ability to obtain them (See FAR 9.104-3(a)); and

8. Be otherwise qualified and eligible to receive an award under applicable laws and regulations (e.g., Equal Opportunity, Clean Air and Water, etc.).

The responsibility information that may be requested includes, but is not limited to, audited or certified financial statements, tax returns and other financial records necessary to establish responsibility. Please note that this information is only required upon a specific request from the Contracting Officer or his representative.

Information to Support Consent to Major Subcontractors

The Offeror must address each of the elements in FAR 44.202-2 in order for proposed subcontractors to be considered by the Contracting Officer for consent of sub-contractors to be granted with the initial award. “A “major subcontractor” means a subcontractor that is proposed a subcontract that equals or exceeds 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed CPFF.”

Information Concerning Work-Day, Work-Week, and Paid Absences1. The Offeror and each proposed major subcontractor shall indicate the number of hours and days in its normal workday and its normal workweek, both domestically and overseas, for employees and consultants. In addition, the Offeror and each proposed major subcontractor shall indicate how paid absences (US holidays, local holidays, vacation and sick) shall be covered.

2. A normal work-year, including paid absences (holidays, vacations, and sick leave) is 2,080 hours (260 days x 8 hours per day). However, some organizations do not have an 8-hour workday, and some accounting systems normally provide for direct recovery of paid absences by using a work-year of less than 2,080 hours to compute individuals' unburdened daily rates. The Offeror and major subcontractors shall describe their workday and workweek policies. The work-day and work-week policies and the method of accounting for paid absences for the Offeror and major subcontractors in affect at time of award shall remain in force throughout the period of the award.

Policies and ProceduresUpon receiving a specific request from the Contracting Office, Offeror may be required to submit a copy of the Offeror’s personnel policies, especially regarding salary and wage scales, fringe benefits, merit increases, promotions, leave, differentials, travel and per diem regulations, etc., as they will relate to this project. The CO may determine that a pre-award survey is necessary (see FAR 9.105).

Letters of Commitment (Sub-offerors- refers to the Prime contractor sub awardees)Offerors may submit letters of commitment from partners, relevant memorandum of understanding or teaming arrangements, including any agreements, contracts or commitments it has with any potential subcontractor.

11.Section M.2 3 is revised to the following:

“3. The USAID/Central Asia’s Office of Acquisition and Assistance (OAA) will evaluate past performance as described in M.4., Factor 4. Any adverse past performance that an Offeror has not had an opportunity to address will be dealt with at this stage. “

12. Substantial involvement is replaced with significant involvement in Section

C.IV.2.”

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

QUESTION 1. Will USAID please identify to offerors the official U.S. dollar exchange rates for the

Kyrgystani Som for this proposal?

ANSWER: For purposes of proposal evaluation, use an exchange rate of 88.00 Som to 1 U.S. Dollar.

Budgets should be in USD.

QUESTION 2. Could USAID please provide an updated Local Compensation Plan (LCP) for the Kyrgyz

Republic?

ANSWER: The LCP is provided as a separate document with this Amendment.

QUESTION 3. The Contractor notes that the RFP is included twice in the same PDF file. Is there a difference between the repeated documents? If so, which one should offerors follow?

ANSWER: See item 1 on page 2 of this amendment. Based on the PDF file page count, delete pages

136‐266.

QUESTION 4. Could USAID provide clarity on the duplicate part on page 136 as it seems like the RFP repeats itself starting on page 136 of the PDF?

ANSWER: See item 1 on page 2 of this amendment. Based on the PDF file page count, delete pages

136‐266.

QUESTION 5. Both a cover letter and cover page are referenced in L.7. Will USAID please confirm that offerors may include a cover page and a cover (transmittal) letter that do not count toward the page limit in their technical proposal.

ANSWER: Offerors may include a cover letter (not to exceed one page) and cover sheet (not to exceed one page) and these will not count towards the page limit for the technical proposal

QUESTION 6. Section L.12, “Information to Support consent to Major Subcontractors”, may offerors present a request to consent for a non‐major subcontractor if the offeror is aware that consent to subcontract will apply upon award?

ANSWER: USAID will not provide consent to subcontract at the time of award, therefore the information requirements outlined in FAR Part 44.202‐2 are not required. Proposed subcontractors should still be identified and included in the budget.

With regard to Section L.12, the following paragraph is hereby deleted:

“Information to Support Consent to Major Subcontractors

The Offeror must address each of the elements in FAR 44.202‐2 in order for proposed subcontractors to be considered by the Contracting Officer for consent of sub‐contractors to be granted with the initial award. “A “major subcontractor” means a subcontractor that is proposed a subcontract that equals or exceeds 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed CPFF.”

QUESTION 7. In Section F.2 (p. 28), USAID notes that the period of performance for this contract is 5 years from the date of contract signature.

a) Can USAID please provide an anticipated start date for the contract for budgeting purposes?

ANSWER: Anticipated start date is October 1, 2024.

QUESTION 8. B.6 PAYMENT OF FEE ‐ (a) This is a Cost‐Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract. The total amount of fee, if any, that can be earned has been set at the time of award and does not vary with actual cost.

Cost Reimbursement with no fee will also be considered. Can USAID review and clarify the language in

Section B.6(a) of the RFP that states “This is a Cost‐Plus Fixed Fee Contract” but also includes the statement that “Cost reimbursement with no fee will also be considered”. Kindly review/clarify or remove the latter statement.

ANSWER: Delete “This is a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract.” at B.6.(a).

QUESTION 9. In Sections L.6.2 and L.6.3 (p. 115) of the RFP, USAID notes that all required spreadsheets must be submitted in both pdf and Excel formats.

a) Can USAID eliminate the requirement to submit required spreadsheets in both pdf and Excel formats, and only require that Offerors submit spreadsheets in an Excel format?

ANSWER: It is acceptable for offerors to only submit spreadsheets in Excel format. Please submit the summary of all the major cost elements in PDF.

QUESTION 10. Section C. IV.2 (page 18) of the RFP states that USAID must be involved in "selection of the source of nationality for the innovative technologies." Section H.12 (page 56) already restricts source and nationality to geographic codes 937 and 110. Further limiting source and nationality may delay implementation by preventing the activity from flexibly sourcing items as supply chain constraints continue to create challenges for equipment procurement. To maximize efficiency in procurement, would USAID please remove this requirement from Section C.IV.2, provided that the contractor continue to comply with all required procurement regulations?

ANSWER: Geographic Codes 937 and 110 will not be removed from the RFP. If, during the course of implementation the geographic codes are hindering foreign assistance objectives, waivers may be considered.

QUESTION 11. Page 52, Section H.2 Authorized Geographic Code: We respectfully request that

Section H.2 Authorized Geographic Code, designated as 937 and 110, be changed to 935 to facilitate the unburdened engagement of the best resources available to the benefit of program implementation.

ANSWER: Geographic Codes 937 and 110 will not be removed from the RFP. If, during the course of implementation the geographic codes are hindering foreign assistance objectives, waivers may be considered.

QUESTION 12. Section H.9. (page 54) states that “The Contractor will offer and administer grants with private for‐profit and non‐for‐profit organizations, such as USAID‐assisted SMEs, private NGOs, business associations, academic institutions, policy and think tanks, research institutes and other private non‐governmental organizations.” However, ADS 302.3.4.13 allows contractors to execute solely in‐kind grants to government entities. Would USAID confirm that solely in‐kind grants to government entities will be allowed under this contract?

ANSWER: Grants to the government entities can only be in‐kind.

QUESTION 13. Page 60, H.16. 752.229‐71 REPORTING OF FOREIGN TAXES (JULY 2023): We respectfully request guidance from USAID on the VAT exemption procedures/process for the Kyrgyz

Republic.

ANSWER: USAID does not have specific guidance to offerors at this time. Offerors are expected to utilize due diligence in seeking to avoid VAT.

QUESTION 14. Could USAID confirm if there is an active bilateral cooperation agreement between

Kyrgyz Republic and the US that would exempt this activity from value added tax, customs duties, and other levies?

ANSWER: There is no bilateral agreement between Kyrgyz Republic and the US that provides exemption from VAT, duties and other levies. However, there may be other bases for tax exemption available.

QUESTION 15. Section B.6, page 6 states, “When a Fee Bearing Milestones is not completed on time, or requires more cost/effort to complete than projected in the WP and/or MEL Plan, the portion of the total fixed fee allocated to the Milestone in the Fee Distribution Plan shall be subject to adjustment of the fee by the Contracting Officer.” Could USAID kindly confirm what is meant by

“cost/effort”? Would USAID consider adding “within the Contractor’s manageable control” to this clause?

ANSWER: Offerors are expected to propose technical approaches with objectives that are achievable for the development context. Cost/Effort refers to the type of resources used to implement the activity.

QUESTION 16. Regarding section L.12, page 127, could USAID please confirm whether information concerning work day and work week is required from all proposed subcontractors or only from major subcontractors?

ANSWER: This is applicable to major subcontractors only. A major subcontractor is defined as equaling or exceeding 20% of the Offeror's total proposed cost.

QUESTION 17. Regarding section L.12, page 127 on “Information to Support Consent to Major

Subcontractors,” could USAID please confirm if this information requirement is applicable to all proposed subcontractors or only major subcontractors?

ANSWER: This is applicable to major subcontractors only. A major subcontractor is defined as equaling or exceeding 20% of the Offeror's total proposed cost.

QUESTION 18. Upon receiving a specific request from the Contracting Office, Offeror may be required to submit a copy of the Offeror’s personnel policies, especially regarding salary and wage scales, fringe benefits, merit increases, promotions, leave, differentials, travel and per diem regulations, etc., as they will relate to this project. The CO may determine that a pre‐award survey is necessary (see

FAR 9.105). For contractors with an approved purchasing system, would USAID consider advance notification, as per FAR 52.244‐2 (Alternate 1), instead of detailed information to support consent for subcontractors, as required by RFP Section L.12 (on page 127)?

ANSWER: Offerors should follow FAR part 52.244‐2 and provide information for USAID to consider when granting consent to subcontract.

QUESTION 19. Could USAID confirm whether offerors should submit letters of support from interested parties and potential resource partners? If so, could they be included as a supplemental annex to the Cost Proposal?

ANSWER: Letters of support are not needed.

QUESTION 20. THIS QUESTION INTENTIONALLY BLANK.

ANSWER: N/A

QUESTION 21. On page 21 of the RFP, USAID notes: “Policy and regulatory work may be undertaken as part of a GUC mechanism, or as direct technical assistance supplied by the Contractor to targeted government or civil society groups.” However, as noted in the RFP, the new Law on Foreign

Representatives is likely to hinder the program’s ability to operate in the area of public policy and with CSOs. Would USAID consider reallocating a portion of the 44% of the TEC to allow for a more flexible approach for engaging with government and CSO counterparts?

ANSWER: Offerors should respond to the RFP and propose approaches that satisfy the 44% requirement. If offerors wish to propose alternatives that deviate from the requirements they can do

so. However, in order to be considered responsive to the RFP, the requirements must initially be met.

QUESTION 22. Would USAID please allow offerors to set aside part of the GUC fund as an Activity

Fund, which would allow offerors to use the resources for STTA and local subcontractors in response to local stakeholder needs?

ANSWER: International STTA should not be covered by the GUC fund. If a local subcontractors are used to respond to local stakeholder needs, this could be covered by the GUC, however, STTA should not exceed 10% of the GUC budget

QUESTION 23. Would USAID consider allocating a portion of the GUC funding to pay for Grants

Administration?

ANSWER: Grant Administration costs are not part of GUCs.

QUESTION 24. Section C.I ‐ “At least 44 percent of the TEC will be allocated to GUCs.” (page 8) Can

USAID please spell out the acronym “TEC” in this context?

ANSWER: TEC in this context is the Total Estimated Cost.

QUESTION 25. Section C.IV ‐ USAID states on page 17: “The grant component of this activity is expected to total approximately $10,540,500.”

a. Could USAID clarify whether the 44 percent requirement as listed on page 8, section C.I, is the principal requirement and the total as referenced above, $10,540,500, (page 17) is illustrative?

ANSWER: The expected Grant component should not be less than 44% of the proposed total cost of the Activity. The 10,540,500 is an illustrative amount.

QUESTION 26. Section C.V ‐ “The grants must be awarded on a cost‐share basis, with the firm or business organization contributing a blend of their own resources and/or third‐party funding to match

USAID funds with an ideal ratio of 3:1.” (page 20) Given the varied capacity of potential grantee recipients and the goal of allowing a broader audience of grantees, including start‐up organizations, would USAID be open to shifting the cost share ratio to an average rather than minimum requirement across all grant funding?

ANSWER: The Green Economy activity's goal of generating $3 for every $1 invested is an aggregate goal that applies to all the GUCs. Therefore, an average across all GUCs is acceptable.

QUESTION 27. Section C.V , on page 21 of the RFP, USAID notes: “Policy and regulatory work may be undertaken as part of a GUC mechanism, or as direct technical assistance supplied by the Contractor to targeted government or civil society groups.” However, as noted in the RFP, the new Law on

Foreign Representatives is likely to hinder the program’s ability to operate in the area of public policy and with CSOs. Would USAID consider reallocating a portion of the 44% of the TEC to allow for a more flexible approach for engaging with government and CSO counterparts?

ANSWER: Offerors should respond to the requirements of the RFP and propose approaches that satisfy the 44% requirement. If offerors wish to propose alternatives that deviate from the requirement, they can do so. However, in order to be considered responsive to the RFP, the proposal must initially satisfy all requirements.

QUESTION 28. Would USAID please allow offerors to set aside part of the GUC fund as an Activity

Fund, which would allow offerors to use the resources for short‐term technical assistance and local subcontractors in response to local stakeholder needs?

ANSWER: Offerors should respond to the requirements of the RFP and propose approaches that satisfy the 44% requirement. If offerors wish to propose alternatives that deviate from the requirement they can do so. However, in order to be considered responsive to the RFP, the proposal must initially satisfy all requirements.

QUESTION 29. In Section C.IV (p. 17), USAID notes that Offerors should allocate “approximately

$10,540,500” for Grants Under Contract, while Section C.I (p. 8) notes that “at least 44 per cent of the

TEC will be allocated to GUCs.”

a) Can USAID please confirm that Offerors should allocate at least 44% of their proposed TEC to the

GUCs fund? That is, that USAID’s estimate of $10,540,500 is illustrative based on USAID’s estimated ceiling, and not a plug figure.

ANSWER: The expected Grant component should not be less than 44% of the proposed total estimated cost of the Activity. The 10,540,500 is an illustrative amount.

QUESTION 30. Page 8, Section I indicates that “at least 44 per cent of the TEC will be allocated to

GUCs, whereas sections IV.2 (page 17), H.9 (page 54), L.12 (page 123) indicate that exactly

$10,540,500 should be allocated, which is slightly less than 44 per cent. Can USAID please clarify that exactly $10,540,500 should be allocated for GUCs?

QUESTION 31. The GUC component is expected to total $10,540,500. Individual grants issued to local entities are not anticipated to exceed $250,000. Can USAID please confirm that offerors are required to allocate $10,540,500 (as plug amount) for Grants under Contract?

QUESTION 32. Section C.V., page 20 states, “USAID requires that 44% of the total amount of funds be used for activity implementation be allocated to a GUC mechanism where businesses that operate in the Kyrgyz Republic can apply for grants…” and Section C, page 17, Section H.9, page 54 and Section

L.12, page 123 state, “The grant component of this activity is expected to total approximately

$10,540,500.”; “The GUC component is expected to total $10,540,500”; and “Grants Under Contract:

Offerors must allocate $10,540,500 for Grants under Contracts.” Could USAID kindly confirm whether

Offerors must allocate $10,540,500 in Grants under Contract or if Grants under Contract should be

44% of total proposed costs?

QUESTION 33. Section C.IV.2 (page 17) and Section H.9 (page 54) list the grant component of the

Green Economy Activity as $10,540,500. The RFP envisions a broad range of partners for this activity, and use of a grants plug figure of this value may limit opportunities to engage the private sector and other partners in implementation. Would USAID consider changing the grants plug to a flexible mechanism that includes grants, subcontracts, training, and technical assistance to promote private sector engagement services in a way that more closely aligns with the existing market? A flexible mechanism would allow the implementing partner to engage local organizations in the most appropriate mechanism that reflects their capacity and the long‐term goals of the project to build a sustainable marketplace.

ANSWER: The GUC component will be a demand‐driven mechanism. GUC could include local subcontracts that will help the grant recipients (for example accounting or tax service providers) to implement the grant. The Grant itself could be requested by the Private company for international certification (for example Green Energy Certification of Buildings or similar certifications) in which case the total grant will be a technical assistance.

QUESTION 34: THIS QUESTION INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

QUESTION 35. Section C.V. (page 20) states that “USAID requires that 44% of the total amount of funds be used for activity implementation be allocated to a GUC mechanism where businesses that operate in the Kyrgyz Republic can apply for grants to implement projects of their choosing.” Would

USAID please confirm that grants may also be awarded to international and U.S. organizations in accordance with ADS 302?

ANSWER: The GUC is designed to support local entities, USAID considers that grants could be awarded to Local Entities or LEPs as defined in ADS 303. The grants approval will have significant

USAID involvement. While there is not a prohibition on awarding to US or international organizations, would need to be consistent with the purpose of the GUC component and have a strong justification for USAID to approve.

QUESTION 36. Section C.V. (pages 20 and 21) indicates that “grants must be awarded on a cost‐share basis, with the firm or business organization contributing a blend of their own resources and/or third‐ party funding to match USAID funds with an ideal ratio of 3:1,” and “businesses will need to contribute a 1:1 ratio of external funds to USAID funds.”

a. Would USAID adjust the language to make both ratios “highly encouraged,” rather than required, allowing the contractor to partner with local organizations that may not yet have the resources or experiences to identify other funding sources at the outset of the grant?

b. Mandatory cost‐sharing may limit the reach and effectiveness of the Green Economy Activity’s GUC because, as per 2 CFR 200.201, “a fixed amount award cannot be used in programs which require mandatory cost sharing.” Given that fixed‐amount awards are a common, efficient form of grant with a strong performance‐based award mechanism, would USAID remove the language requiring financial cost‐sharing from grantees? If yes, would USAID confirm that cost‐share, matching, and co‐financing referenced throughout the RFP may be in the form of leveraging (which would include anything of value that is measured, such as financial contributions, third‐party contributions, donated services, or property, etc.) or grantee contributions to the activity?

goal that applies across all GUCs, so leveraging can be allowed on a case by case basis. However, the overall measure of success is still $3 or more for every $1 dollar invested.

QUESTION 37. Pages 17‐18, Section C.1, Sub‐Section IV., Performance Objectives and Results: 2.

Adoption of innovative technology by the public and private sectors, states: “The total leverage of the private capital from USAID GUCs should be threefold.” Subsequently, within the same section, page

18, Bullet 2.3, states: “The indicative results of this area are the following: At least $50 million in total funding leveraged by private firms, financial institutions and organizations (excluding land used as leverage) for projects that advance a green economy.” Question: The offeror respectfully requests

USAID to clarify the expected leverage ratio concerning the GUC. Specifically, there is a reference to a

3:1 leverage ratio on page 17, while another reference suggests a leverage amount of approximately

$50 million, implying a different ratio.

goal that applies to all the GUCs. Therefore, yes, an average across all GUCs is acceptable.

QUESTION 38. Section C.V ‐ Considering the size of the GUC component ($10 million) and the 3:1 ratio for 85% of the GUC (almost $26 million), can USAID clarify what other types of “organizations,” besides private sector and financial institutions, will contribute towards the overall private sector leverage target of “at least $50 million” under result 2.3 on page 18?

ANSWER: Private Equity Funds, Venture Capital companies, high‐net‐worth individuals, institutional investors, foreign investors, development funds, quasi‐public sector companies (examples are Ayil

Bank, Megacom), Funds that are registered as NGOs, international NGOs working in the country.

USAID is open for expanding its stakeholder base within its policies.

QUESTION 39. Section C.V ‐ USAID states that “the project‐based grants should meet ADS 302 small grant requirements and be similar to the public‐private partnership modality.” (page 20) Can USAID confirm that the public‐private partnership modality is one of several partnership modalities that can be used under the GUC?

ANSWER: Yes. Public‐private partnership modality is one of the options that can be used, but other options that meet the objectives are also welcome.

QUESTION 40. Section C, page 17 states, “This Component of the Green economy Activity will use grants under contract (GUCs) to provide incentives for the private sector to create green jobs, reduce

GHG emissions, and increase green financing.” Could USAID confirm if GUCs will be awarded to organizations in support of activities across all three Areas, or only Area 2?

ANSWER: GUCs will be used across all three areas.

QUESTION 41. Section C, page 17, and Section H.9, page 54 states: “Individual grants are subject to grant application but anticipated to be under $250,000” and “Individual grants issued to local entities are not anticipated to…