Amendment_01_RFQ_72011724Q00001_Signed.pdf

Amendment Issuance Date: February 13, 2024

Subject: Amendment 01 to Request for Quotation (RFQ) No. 72011724Q00001

Reference: Procurement of audit engagement services to conduct an attestation engagement (Professional Examination Engagement) and compliance audit of direct budget support (DBS) provided to the Government of Moldova

Dear Offeror, The purpose of the Amendment 01 is to amend Part I, Section B.7 Key Personnel and Part II, Section 1. Submission, of the referenced RFQ, and provide answers to the questions received in response to the subject Request for Quotation. All other terms and conditions remain the same.

Sincerely, Ethan Takahashi Supervisory Contracting Officer USAID/Moldova

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

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 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)

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

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

RFQ 72011724Q00001, Amendment Nr. 01 Con�nua�on Sheet

Specifically, the referenced RFQ is amended as follows:

1. Part I, Sec�on B.7 Key Personnel DELETE sec�on B.7 in its en�rety and INSERT the following in lieu thereof:

“The Contractor’s key personnel positions identified below are considered essential to the work being performed. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the USAID/Moldova Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall be responsible for providing such personnel for performance of the activity and for the term required. Failure to provide at a minimum the key personnel designated below may be considered nonperformance by the Contractor unless such failure is beyond the control, and through no fault or negligence of the audit firm. The audit firm shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer and USAID/Moldova of any key personnel departure and the reasons, therefore. The Contractor shall take steps to immediately rectify this situation and shall propose a substitute candidate for each vacated position along with an impact statement in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of the impact on the program.

The two key personnel positions listed below must be U.S. Certified Public Accountants or its equivalent accepted certification in Moldova. Costs associated with services performed by unqualified personnel may be disallowed.

Position Title

1. Engagement Partner - Name

2. Quality Assurance Expert – Name

Each person designated for the key personnel positions listed above shall be fluent in the English language.”

2. Part 2, Sec�on 1. Submission DELETE first paragraph of Sec�on 1. Submission in its en�rety and INSERT the following in lieu thereof:

“Submissions are limited to 10 pages - any pages beyond this will NOT be evaluated. All documents must be written in English and typed using font size that can be read without magnification, with each page numbered consecutively, in searchable PDF format. There is no page limit on the Price Quote, including required Representations and Certifications.”

[End of Amendment Nr. 01]

ATTACHMENT A

RFQ 72011724Q00001, Amendment 1

Engagement services to conduct an attestation engagement and compliance audit of direct budged support (DBS) provided to the Government of Moldova.

February 13, 2024

Answers to Questions

1. Question: The total electricity purchases from May 2022 to March 2023 listed in two tables under C.2 (page 7) add up to around $150 million, but the narrative in the Background section (C2, page 6) stated that USAID contribution to GOM is around $106.8 million ($30 + $76.8). Can you confirm if the difference was funded by other donors/sources and the auditor is expected to review only $106.8 million funded by USAID?

Answer: The auditor is expected to provide reasonable assurance for the total electricity purchases during the specified period, as confirmed in MESA’s Evaluation Results of Energocom’s Electricity Purchases. USAID’s reimbursed amount is not tied to specific purchases.

2. Question: Can USAID confirm that the auditor should follow only one of the two auditing standards listed under C.4, page 8, and both shall not be applicable at the same time?

Answer: Yes, either of the two.

3. Question: Please clarify whether the examination procedures Under C.6.1 are primarily intended to examine and verify the 1) MESA assessment and evaluation results reported by Tetra Tech, 2) the purchase of electricity by Energocom, or 3) both. This is important as there may be separate procedures to be performed for #1 and #2.

Answer: MESA assessment and evaluation results reported by Tetra Tech are the subject of the attestation engagement. Under C.5 Scope of work, the scope of work for the proposed services includes a quality control attestation of the work undertaken by TetraTech related to Energocom’s energy purchases. This attestation engagement (professional examination engagement) is to provide reasonable assurance of MESA’s Evaluation Results of Energocom’s Electricity Purchases.

4. Question: Can the auditor use sample selection for the examination under C.6.1 of electricity quantity and costs or shall the auditor do an examination of 100% of the electricity purchases?

Answer: The sufficiency of audit evidence is related to the design and size of an audit sample, among other factors. Evaluating the appropriateness of audit evidence is solely a matter of auditing judgment. Selecting and applying procedures that will accumulate evidence that is sufficient in the circumstances to provide a reasonable basis for the level of assurance to be expressed in the attest report requires the careful exercise of professional judgment.

5. Question: Under C.6.2, can you confirm whether the auditor should determine compliance with applicable local laws or just compliance with the terms of the agreement? If local laws, can you clarify which local laws are directly applicable?

Answer: The audit requirement is specific to agreement terms and local laws and regulations only related to the administration of direct budget support.

6. Question: The timeline under C.7 adds up to only 32 business days (7+15+5+5) after excluding the 18 days listed for USAID reviews (3+10+5). Can USAID reconsider the timeline for the contractor to allow at least 25 business days for field work for both engagements, considering multiple parties are involved, to ensure adequate time for clarifications and back and forth between the relevant parties?

Answer: No, USAID will not reconsider the timeline in Section C.7 at this time.

7. Question: Section B.7 - Can you please clarify whether audit staff with a Bachelor degree in Accounting and with substantial audit experience will meet this requirements or whether all staff involved in the engagement must be CPAs?

Answer: The two key personnel positions must be U.S. Certified Public Accountants or its equivalent accepted certification in Moldova. Section B.7 has been amended to clarify this requirement.

8. Question: Section C.7 - Can you please confirm whether audit team members will be required to be physically present in Moldova to conduct parts of this fieldwork or all fieldwork can be done remotely from here in the U.S.?

Answer: The contractor should propose their approach to meet the audit/attestation objectives.

The firm should apply an audit approach to conduct an audit/attestation engagement effectively and efficiently. It should be based on the firm's system of quality management and this risk-based audit approach to ensure that audit/attestation objectives are met. A firm can propose a remote approach if it can meet these objectives.

9. Question: Section B.3 - It appears that this work can be performed remotely, is that a possibility?

Answer: Please see the answer to question 8 above.

10. Question: Section C.6.1 and C.6.2 - Is the expectation that there will be two reports, one each for the examination engagement and the compliance audit? Each one requires a different assurance.

Answer: Section C.5 requires two reports and both reports should provide reasonable assurance.

11. Question: Section B.7 - Paragraph 2 of Section B.7 states “All staff and personnel” must possess a U.S. CPA or Moldova equivalent. Are all staff required to have a CPA or equivalent? If so, it will undermine use of the leveraged service delivery model commonly used to provide assurance services.

Answer: Please see the answer to question 7 above.

12. Question: Section C.2 - Were original source documents listed in paragraph 3 of Section C.2 in prepared in the English language?

Answer: No

13.

Question: Section C.2 - Are the “Number of advance invoices” listed in the bottom of the tables in Section C.2 indicative of the volume of documents to be examined in Section C.6.1?

Answer: Yes

14. Question: Section C.3 - How can the documents listed in Section C.3 be accessed for review?

Answer: Documents unless publicly available will be provided to the selected contractor.

15. Question: Section C.4 - Is the contractor required to adhere to both International Standards of

Auditing issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board and U.S. Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS), issued by the Comptroller General of the United States Government Accountability Office, as applicable or simply either?

Answer: Please see the answer to question 2 above.

16. Question: Section C.6.2 - Section C.6.2 states “The Contractor is solely responsible for making all reasonable efforts to obtain access to source data and appropriate audit evidence.” Is there any reason to believe the GOM will not cooperate with the Contractor when requesting access to source data and appropriate audit evidence.

Answer: No

17. Question: Section C.6.2 - Are all “source data and appropriate audit evidence” and related laws originally prepared in the English language?

Answer: No

18. Question: Section C.7 - The schedule presented in Section C.7 requires delivery of an audit plan within 7 business days. Is it anticipated that pre-engagement review of regulations and policies in Section C.3 will facilitate the schedule?

19. Question: Section B.3 - Due to the short project time period and distance to Moldova, can all the work be performed remotely?

20. Question: In order to properly budget for indirect costs, can the government provide an estimate of the number of trips to Moldova required and proposed length of stay in performance of the work?

21. Question: Can the government extend the date of proposal response to 3/11/24 to allow contractors sufficient time to review and incorporate responses to questions and clarifications?

Answer: No, USAID will not extend the date of proposal at this time.

22. Question: Section C.2 - Will Tetra Tech (IP) obtain all the documents from Energocom and other participants for the Contractor to perform the attestation and Compliance audit in the U.S.?

Answer: No, Tetra Tech will provide all documents that it obtained for the Attestation engagement. Tetra Tech does not have the applicable documents for the Compliance audit.

23. Question: Section C.2 - Will the Contractor perform the Attestation engagement and Compliance audit fieldworks onsite in Ukraine/ Moldova and/or virtual or both?

24. Question: Section C.2 - Will the Contractor travel to Ukraine and/or Moldova to complete the Attestation and the Compliance audit?

25. Question: Section C.2 - Can the Contractor estimate travel cost in the Price Quote?

Answer: Contractors are responsible for providing fixed price quotes in accordance with the

RFQ.

26. Question: Section C.2 - Will the Contractor, after reviewing assessment report at Tetra Tech, allow to visit Energocom office for further follow-up review of supporting documents and invoices if necessary?

Answer: If the need to follow up or visit Energocom arises, then USAID’s representative must be notified.

27. Question: Section C.5 - Will the Contractor have access to the Government of Moldova (GOM) and the World Bank for inquiries or document requests for the audit?

28. Question: Are the Cover page; Executive Summary; and the Table of Content pages included in the 10-page limit for the technical proposal document?

Answer: Yes, cover page, executive summary and table of content pages are included in the 10-page limit for the technical proposal document.

29. Question: Can the descriptions included in the tables or boxes be typed 8 or 9- point font size less than the required 11- point font size?

Answer: Please see the amended language in Part II, Section 1. Submission for font size requirements.

30. Question: Will there be any times during which the auditors will not be permitted on site?

Answer: Auditors will be permitted on site during regular business hours with advance notice and coordination.

31. Question: Is there a preferred amount of time the auditors should plan to be on-site to conduct field work?

Answer: USAID does not have a preference on the amount of time the auditors should plan to be on-site.

32. Question: Is a background in energy or engineering recommended to better evaluate Tetra Tech’s assessment of the Energocom documentation?

Answer: Background in energy is recommended, or at least experience in auditing energy supply or trade entities.

33. Question: What is the estimated level of effort (number of people on the contract or value of the contract)?

Answer: Based on the solicitation requirements, the firm should compose engagement team(s) to ensure that engagement objectives are met. Engagement team members should have appropriate levels of capabilities and competence to respond to anticipated risks and their responsibilities should be accordingly allocated. An overall engagement strategy considers the factors that, in the auditor's professional judgment, are significant in allocating the engagement team's effort.

34. Question: Can you please be more detailed on what is the work expected to be done on-site and what can be done remotely?

[END OF ATTACHMENT A, AMENDMENT 01, RFQ 72011724Q00001]

1. amend Part I, Section B.7 Key Personnel and Part II, Section 1. Submission, and

2. provide answers to questions received in response to the referenced RFQ. Attachment A provides responses to the received questions.

See continuation sheets for amendment details