Cover Page_Answers to Questions_Amendment 2_RFP_72011720R00002_April 15.pdf

FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

Amendment Issuance Date:

April 15, 2020

Subject: Amendment 02 to Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 72011720R00002

Reference: Effective Justice

Dear Offerors, The purpose of Amendment 02 is to is to answer the questions received in response to the solicitation, and as a result revise the RFP and extend the deadline for receipt of proposals to May 15, 2020, 10:00 a.m. Chisinau, Moldova local time. All changes made to the revised RFP are highlighted in yellow for ease of reference.

Sincerely, ________/s/_________

Maria Televantos, Regional Contracting Officer

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Previous edition unusable

720117

Maria Televantos, Regional Contracting Officer

USAID/Moldova 00000

REQ-117-20-000004

72011720R00002

1 1

04/15/2020

2/28/2020

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

The purpose of Amendment 02 is to is to answer the questions received in response to the solicitation, and as a result revise the RFP and extend the deadline for receipt of proposals to May 15, 2020, 10:00 a.m. Chisinau, Moldova local time. All changes made to the revised RFP are highlighted in yellow for ease of reference.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER

00002

RFP 72011720R00002, Amendment 2

USAID MOLDOVA EFFECTIVE JUSTICE

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

# Question Answer 1 Page 32 of the RFP states “The TOCO will issue an RFTOP to all IDIQ contractors, as applicable, unless a fair opportunity exception applies.” Please confirm that this is an error and that Effective Justice is a single-holder IDIQ.

Effective Justice is a single-holder IDIQ. Language in Section F.7.3 has been revised to clarify this.

2 The most recent Open Justice Project report that is available on the DEC is the report for the quarter ending in March 2018. Could USAID provide more recent annual and quarterly reports?

The DEC is now up to date with the more recent reports.

3 Please clarify whether any property and equipment from the Open Justice Project will be transferred to Effective Justice Task Order 1.

For purposes of the proposal budget, all offerors should assume that no property will be transferred from another project. While transfer of property from Open Justice to Effective Justice is preferable, we cannot predict at this time what/if any property will be transferred.

4 Please confirm that local subcontractors are not required to be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM).

There is currently no requirement in the FAR for subcontractors to register in SAM. However, all subcontractors are required to have a unique entity identifier (Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number) in accordance with FAR Part 4.6, Contract Reporting, and 4.11 System for Award Management.

5 With the exception of letters of commitment, we request that for subcontractors at the IDIQ level USAID waive the requirements included in Parts 5, 6, 8, and 9 of the cost proposal instructions. Requiring this, especially from local organizations and small businesses who will not be included in Task Order 1, creates excessive paperwork for them without providing any guarantee for work under task orders.

The requirements included in the Cost Proposal Instructions, Parts 5, 6, 8, and 9 apply to subcontractors for which the offeror is requesting a consent to subcontract.

6 Due to the unusual nature of the coronavirus globally, we are inquiring as to whether USAID has guidance for contractors and whether it is contemplating adjusting or prolonging the solicitation period given disruptive circumstances.

Amendment 1 to the RFP extended the proposal submission deadline from April 10 to May 10 and this Amendment 2 further extends the deadline to May 15. USAID/Moldova also shared the draft Statement of Work with potential offerors in a Request for Information (RFI-117-20- 000001) posted to beta.sam.gov on November 15, 2019. USAID understands and appreciates the disruptions to proposal development that COVID-19 restrictions have imposed; however, we have extended the deadline as much as we can without impacting programming needs or risking the gains we’ve made in the justice sector.

7 Due to the current Coronavirus outbreak - this is to request that USAID provide a significant extension to the deadline for submission of proposals in response to the captioned RFP, or suspend the ongoing bidding process.

Amendment 1 to the RFP extended the proposal submission deadline from April 10 to May 10 and this Amendment 2 further extends the deadline to May 15. USAID/Moldova also shared the draft Statement of Work with potential offerors in a Request for Information (RFI-117-20- 000001) posted to beta.sam.gov on November 15, 2019. USAID understands and appreciates the disruptions to proposal development that COVID-19 restrictions have imposed; however, we have extended the deadline as much as we can without impacting programming needs or risking the gains we’ve made in the justice sector.

Could USAID provide the two most recent Open Justice Project quarterly reports and the most recent annual report? These reports were not available on USAID DEC via search.

The DEC is now up to date with the more recent reports.

Due to the corona virus and the disruption this has created will you consider an extension?

Amendment 1 to the RFP extended the proposal submission deadline from April 10 to May 10 and this Amendment 2 further extends the deadline to May 15. USAID/Moldova also shared the draft Statement of Work with potential offerors in a Request for Information (RFI-117-20- 000001) posted to beta.sam.gov on November 15, 2019. USAID understands and appreciates the disruptions to proposal development that COVID-19 restrictions have imposed; however, we have extended the deadline as much as we can without impacting programming needs or risking the gains we’ve made in the justice sector.

May offerors use a font size of 8 or 9 point for text in graphs, charts, tables, text boxes and the like as long as the text is legible?

Section L.8 of the RFP has been amended to clarify that you may use other than 11-12 font size for text in graphs, charts, tables, and text boxes as long as the text is legible.

Can USAID kindly confirm whether the Executive Summary is included in the 30-page limit?

Yes, as the Executive Summary is a required aspect of the technical proposal, it is included in the 30-page limit.

Branding and Marking: on page 24 it states that the Project Name is “Effective Justice for the USAID Moldova”. Should it be Effective Justice in Moldova? Also Section L Part 1 Branding Implementation and Marking Plan on page 104 requires a branding plan for the IDIQ and the task order. What is the name of the task order and do you want or need two plans?

Section D.2 of the RFP has been amended to clarify the IDIQ name is “Effective Justice” for USAID’s Mission in Moldova.

The title of the Task Order 1 is “Model Court Initiative.” This has been added to the amended RFP in Attachment J.1, Section C.1 to clarify this.

As prescribed in Section L.9, Part 11 of the RFP, Offerors must submit two Branding and Marking plans: one for the IDIQ and one for Task Order 1.

Major Subcontractors: On page 8 it states that “(“major subcontractors” are those subcontractors expected to perform at least 20% or a prominent part of the technical effort):” Do we need to propose major subcontractors for both the IDIQ and the task order and if they do not have 20% of the task order is a prominent role sufficient?

The definition of a major subcontractor includes “or a prominent part of the technical effort” in order to allow flexibility for offerors to use their judgment to make this determination.

14 As personnel shall not be named in the proposal, please confirm that no biodatas are required in the cost proposal.

As stated in Section L.9 of the RFP, completed biographical data sheets must be provided for positions with named staff . Key Personnel biodatas will be collected for approval upon award. While Key Personnel should not be named, the offeror may name other personnel in the budget, in which case, biodatas should be provided.

15 As there are significant risks associated with grants management, we respectfully request that USAID allow offerors to charge fee on grants.

Fixed fee will not be charged on grants.

16 Section L.9 (page 100) states that “Fee may not be taken on GUCs.” This stipulation appears to be inconsistent with FAR 15.404-4 and ADS 302.3.6.9, which state, inter alia, that pre-negotiation fee objectives must be determined according to a structured approach that considers contractor effort, risk, and other special factors. Grants require significant effort to administer and carry risks for the contractor. Additionally, the statutory underpinnings of fixed fee at 10 USC 2306(d) and 41 USC 254(b) discuss fee definitions and limitations in terms of total estimated cost, which would include grants in this case. Consequently, we respectfully request that USAID reconsider its agency pre-negotiation fee objective of zero percent on grants and allow offerors to charge a fee that is reasonable and consistent with federal regulations.

The Contractor’s effort as it relates to grant management should be taken into consideration in its structured approach, but fee may not be charged on grants under contract.

17 Section H.2b. (page 38) and Section L.9, Part 2 (page 98) of the RFP require offerors to adhere to a local employee compensation plan. We respectfully request that USAID remove this salary restriction from the RFP, as it appears to be inconsistent with AIDAR

752.7007 Personnel Compensation, which Section H.1 (page 38) of the RFP incorporates into the contract. The section stipulates that “direct compensation of the Contractor’s personnel will be in accordance with the Contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices,” with reimbursement subject only to the USAID Contractor Salary Threshold. The salary restriction requiring offerors to adhere to a local employee compensation plan, however, may preclude contractors from following their established policies, procedures, and practices, as per AIDAR 752.700.

Per AIDAR 722.170 Employment of third country nationals (TCN's) and cooperating country nationals (CCN's):

“(a) General. It is USAID policy that cooperating country nationals (CCNs) and third country nationals (TCNs), who are hired abroad for work in a cooperating country under USAID-direct contracts, generally be extended the same benefits, and be subject to the same restrictions as TCNs and CCNs employed by the USAID Mission.”

The Contractor must follow their personnel policies, but they are restricted by USAID regulatory requirements such as the Local Compensation Plan and Contractor Salary Threshold.

18 Section H.2e. (page 39) of the RFP holds offerors to 5 percent annual salary increases for cooperating country national employees and 3 percent annual salary increases for U.S./third country national employees. We respectfully request that USAID remove this salary restriction from the RFP, as it appears to be inconsistent with AIDAR 752.7007 Personnel Compensation, which Section H.1 (page 38) of the RFP incorporates into the contract. The section stipulates that “direct compensation of the Contractor’s personnel compensation will be in accordance with the Contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices,” with reimbursement subject only to the USAID Contractor Salary Threshold. The salary restriction holding offerors to 5 percent annual salary increases for cooperating country national employees and 3 percent annual salary increases for U.S./third country national employees may preclude contractors from following their established policies, procedures, and practices, as per AIDAR 752.700.

The Contractor should follow their personnel policies, but they are restricted to contract requirements as well. In circumstances that are warranted and justified, the Contractor may request CO approval to exceed the annual salary increases stipulated in the contract.

19 Could USAID please confirm that offerors may provide the necessary detail and supporting information to address the solicitation requirement and to allow a complete analysis of each line item cost under Part 2 – Proposed Costs/Prices, as instructed under Section L.9 (page 97), and that offerors do not need to provide the same information under Part 4 – Budget Narrative?

Part 2 identifies the required sections of the budget, and Part 4 is explicitly requesting a budget narrative that should address each section noted in Part 2. Offerors are required to provide one Budget Narrative that allows a complete analysis of each line item of cost.

Could USAID provide the US Embassy/Moldova Mission Local Compensation Plan (LCP), or pay scale, that regulates local national salaries and benefits?

As identified in Section L.9, CCN and TCN (without an approved waiver) salaries must not exceed the thresholds in the US Embassy’s local employee compensation plan (LCP) at $65,237/year. Offerors are expected to conduct their own market research and use their established policies to propose justified CCN salaries.

Could USAID clarify if the CCN maximum salary threshold of $65,237/year per the US Embassy’s LCP applies to local employee base salary or to gross salary (base salary plus national social contributions and other benefits required by local labor law)? (RFP at 98.)

The maximum salary of the local employee compensation plan (LCP) at $65,237/year is inclusive of income tax but exclusive of other requirements such as the national social contributions and benefits required by local labor law.

Section L.9/Cost-Business Proposal (RFP at 94, 98). On p. 94, the RFP states that the offeror must not present key personnel names or resumes. On p. 98, the RFP indicates that complete biodatas are to be provided for positions with named staff (not including positions such as secretaries and drives). Could USAID clarify if the Contractor is to name non-key personnel staff and provide biodatas and resumes?

As stated in Section L.9 of the RFP, completed biographical data sheets must be provided for positions with named staff . Key Personnel biodatas will be collected for approval upon award. While Key Personnel should not be named, the offeror may name other personnel in the budget, in which case, biodatas should be provided.

In Section L (page 102) Part 4 Budget Narrative it indicates that “Offerors must provide the necessary detail and supporting information to address the solicitation requirement

A budget and narrative only for Task Order 1 is required, not the IDIQ.

Part 2 identifies the required sections of the budget, and Part 4 is explicitly requesting a budget narrative that should address each section and to allow a complete analysis of each line item cost.” Is not Part 2 the budget narrative for the model courts task order? And that there is not specific budget narrative for the IDIQ on a line item basis? Do you need Part 4? Please clarify noted in Part 2. Offerors are required to provide one Budget Narrative that allows a complete analysis of each line item of cost in addition to the detailed budget itself.

Could USAID please confirm that Offeror should propose costs associated with only 2 pilot model courts?

Offerors should propose costs, including number of pilot model courts, consistent with their proposed approach to Task Order 1.

May Offerors adjust the distribution of grants under contracts (the amounts to be disbursed by year) to fit their proposed technical approaches to achieving the objectives of Task Order 1?

Yes, so long as the total amount is $500,000.

Section L.7 specifies that the proposal must be only in PDF and Excel (p. 92). Section L.9, Part 2, requires that the detailed budget narrative be submitted in Word (p. 97). Please clarify whether USAID desires the entire proposal to be submitted only in PDF with the budget also submitted in Excel or whether the budget narrative must also be submitted in Word.

Please submit the budget narrative and other cost proposal documentation in PDF, and submit the budget itself in Excel. Section L.9 has been amended to clarify this.

Section L.8, Approach to Task Order One, specifies that the Offeror must not present key personnel names or resumes in the proposal (p. 94). Section L.9, Part 2, requires that biodata sheets be submitted in PDF format (p. 97). Section L.9, Part 2 (Direct Labor Salaries and Wages) requires completed biodata sheets for positions with named staff (p.

98) and for all consultants. Please clarify whether USAID intends for offerors to propose candidates for all staff and consultants except the two key personnel positions.

As stated in Section L.9 of the RFP, completed biographical data sheets must be provided for positions with named staff . Key Personnel biodatas will be collected for approval upon award. While Key Personnel should not be named, the offeror may name other personnel in the budget, in which case, biodatas should be provided.

Section I incorporates by reference both AIDAR 752.245-70 GOVERNMENT PROPERTY-USAID REPORTING and AIDAR 752.245-71 TITLE AND CARE OF PROPERTY REQUIREMENTS. Does USAID intend to provide any U.S. government property to the contractor? If so, what property will be provided?

AIDAR 752.245-71 is applicable to all non-expendable property purchased with contract funds. AIDAR 752.245-70 refers to government-furnished property, government-property, and non-expendable property (NXP). While USAID does not anticipate providing any government-furnished property at this time, there will most certainly be NXP purchased under the contract.

29 Please clarify the BIP/MP requirements presented on page 104 of the RFP. The first paragraph under the Branding Implementation and Marking Plan section refers to plans (plural) while the second paragraph refers to a plan (singular). Does USAID require an

USAID requires an IDIQ-level BIP/MP in addition to BIP/MP for Task Order 1. The IDIQ plan covers the IDIQ-level SOW and corresponding branding and marking, while the Task Order level should be specific to the TO1 SOW and corresponding branding and marking.

IDIQ-level BIP/MP in addition to BIP/MP for Task Order 1? If so, please clarify what the differences between the two should be.

30 As the past performance matrix (Attachment J.2) is not printer-friendly (the table stretches over multiple pages and some of its columns would feature disproportionally more text than other columns), please allow offerors to select a different reader-friendly format to present the information that is required in the matrix. Please note that we have encountered this past performance matrix requirement on several USAID RFPs both from USAID/Washington and from missions. After pointing out this problem, USAID has always agreed to revise this requirement.

Offerors are welcome to use a reader-friendly format to present the required information. If offerors use a different format, they should ensure it still includes all the required information.

31 Please confirm that the Management Approach for Overall IDIQ SOW section shall not include a technical approach in response to the potential task order areas (scope of services) outlined in Section C.

As indicated in Section F.8 under “Management Approach to the Overall IDIQ,” Offerors must describe their proposed management approach for achieving the IDIQ expected results.

32 Page 113 of the RFP states “The Contractor must competitively select the first two pilot partner courts of first instance to identify agents of change within the judicial system.”

Please clarify how many of the 15 primary and 26 secondary court premises Task Order 1 is expected to work with.

The initial number of pilot courts is up to the discretion of the Offeror, but must include a minimum of two. Selection of a partner district court includes both the primary and secondary premises. The approach to how secondary facilities will be integrated should be part of the technical proposal. The Offeror should weigh the work necessary to improve performance standards in selected courts when considering the total number of courts with which it is feasible to work with and may consider a phased approach.

33 Please clarify whether any additional model courts (beyond the first two pilot courts) should be competitively selected and therefore are not expected to be named in the proposal.

The initial number of pilot courts is up to the discretion of the Offeror.

Any partner courts involved in the activity must be competitively selected and therefore are not expected to be named in the technical proposal.

34 Does USAID expect any model court construction work under Task Order 1? No construction is expected.

35 Does USAID expect any model court renovation/refurbishment work under Task Order

1?

No renovation or refurbishment work is expected.

36 Does USAID expect any model court construction work under the IDIQ as a whole? No construction is expected under the IDIQ as a whole.

37 Does USAID expect any model court renovation/refurbishment work under the IDIQ as a whole?

No reconstruction or refurbishment is expected under the IDIQ as a whole.

Section L.8/Past Performance (RFP at 95). Could USAID confirm that USG cooperative agreements may be submitted to indicate past performance?

Section L.8 states that offerors should provide “up to five (5) of the most relevant contracts.”

Attachment J.1, Section C.6 (RFP at 113). Can project budget funds be allocated for discrete renovations/remodeling of pilot court physical premises and other assistance needs of pilot courts that are linked to improving court processes and services delivery in contrast to funding construction of new court facilities?

Budget funds should not be allocated for renovation and remodeling of court facilities. Other court assistance needs may be considered if linked to improving court processes and service delivery.

Attachment J.1, Section C.6 (RFP at 115). Could USAID clarify if a preliminary Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) Plan is required for the proposal, or if the Contractor is to propose a plan for how the Contractor will assess progress against court performance targets? An actual MEL plan is due 120 days after the Task Order effective date (p. 118).

No, a preliminary MEL plan is not required with the proposal. In order to demonstrate Offerors’ understanding, they must present illustrative indicators to measure court performance as part of the technical proposal.

Section L.8 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal (page 93) Under L.8 on page 93 it refers to “7. Institutional Capacity and Experience” and then On page 95 it refers to IDIQ Level Institutional Capacity and Experience” and in Section M.

Institutional Capacity and Experience on page 105. Can you clarify that the institutional capacity and experience should be at the IDIQ level? And should we use the label from page 95.

Yes, Offerors must demonstrate their IDIQ Level Institutional Capacity and Experience. The RFP has been amended to clarify for consistency.

On page 93 it refers to the “6. Management Approach to the IDIQ SOW” and then on page 95 “Management Approach for the Overall IDIQ” and “Management Approach to Overall IDIQ.” There is a difference between managing the IDIQ and an approach to the IDIQ SOW. Can you clarify?

RFP was amended throughout to clarify that it is the Management Approach to the Overall IDIQ.

IDIQ Scope of Work: Does “C.8 Results Framework and Scope of Services” on pages 17- 21 define the entire scope of the IDIQ? And if there are other parts of the scope that are part of the IDIQ can you identify these other elements?

Yes, these pages and the rest of Section C, describes the entire IDIQ SOW. Attachment J.1 describes the Task Order and its SOW.

May Offerors propose to enhance current ICT capacity where it would make sense to achieve Objective 1 and/or Objective 2? Specifically, may Offerors propose equipment, software and the like?

Yes.

We understand that Task Order One excludes construction. May Offerors propose small-scale cosmetic improvements, refurbishment, and/or furniture associated with

No, offerors should not propose renovation or refurbishment. Other means to improve internal space for efficiency (e.g. furniture, storage, etc) may be proposed.

reorganization of internal space for greater efficiency, quality of services, transparency, etc. to courts of first instance?

Would USAID please confirm that by “permanent staff” in the third paragraph of Section L.8 on page 94, USAID means long-term project staff and/or home office staff?

By permanent staff, USAID means long-term project staff and home office staff.

To clarify the scope required in the Offeror’s technical proposal under Section L.8 Approach to Task (page 94), would USAID please confirm whether the Approach to Task Order One should essentially include a Staffing and Management Plan for Task Order One to meet the requirements of the third paragraph (p.94) and fourth paragraph (pages 94- 95)?

The Offeror may present information in any format they feel is most responsive to the requirements and evaluation criteria.

On page 95 under Section L.8, IDIQ Level Institutional Capacity and Experience, the RFP says, “The proposal must describe the capacity and experience of the Offeror and any major subcontractors (subcontractors expected to perform at least 20% or a prominent part of the technical effort).” Would USAID please: a) define “a prominent part of the technical effort” to ensure that Offerors’ have some certainty that proposals are evaluated on the basis of comparable information across all proposals; b) consider further defining “20% or a prominent part of the technical effort” as being for Task Order One rather than for the whole IDIQ? Since the specific activities and their relative value across all task orders, as well as final total value of task orders under IDIQ is not yet clear, it may be difficult for Offerors to estimate the potential value or prominence of services provided by IDIQ subcontractors.

The definition of a major subcontractor includes “or a prominent part of the technical effort” in order to allow flexibility for offerors to use their judgment to make this determination. If offerors wish to define a subcontractor contributing a prominent part of the technical effort under TO1 as a major subcontractor, they are welcome to do so and must indicate the major subcontractors on the cover page of their proposal as required by Section L.8.

Regarding instructions for Past Performance Information under Section L.8 (pages 95-96) would USAID kindly confirm whether:

a) Information to be provided in Annex 1 counts toward the 30-page limit;

a) Yes, Past Performance Information is included in the 30-page limit. The RFP has been amended to clarify that it is not an annex.

b) Please use a reader friendly font and format to present the information that is required in the matrix. Information on font size/type is identified in Section L.8(a).

b) Offerors should use the font (Century Gothic, font size 10) in Attachment J.2 as provided by USAID or are free to use another font, and if so, if what font size;

c) Information required under item (a) 1. is to be provided in Annex 1 or in the body of the technical proposal;

d) Given the number of columns and content required for each column, USAID would allow Offerors to submit Attachment J.2 in US legal format and count each legal page as one page toward the 30-page limit;

e) The information identified in Past Performance Information, items (b) and (c) is to be provided in Annex 1 or in the body of the technical proposal;

f) USAID requires or desires any further information not identified in items (a), (b), (c), and (d) regarding Past Performance in the body of the technical proposal (e.g., a summary or relevant highlights of information provided in Annex 1)?

c) Past performance information must be included in the body of the technical proposal. The RFP has been amended to clarify that past performance information is not an annex.

d) Yes.

e) Past performance information must be included in the body of the technical proposal. The RFP has been amended to clarify that past performance information is not an annex.

f) Only the information requested is required.

Standard Form 30 - Amendment of Solicitation_Modification of Contract April15