72012121R00002_AMENDMENT.pdf

5. PROJECT NO.

CODE

7. ADMINISTERED BY

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

CODE

6. ISSUED BY

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE

9B. DATED

PAGE OF PAGES

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

FACILITY CODE CODE

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:

E. IMPORTANT:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning __________ copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment of each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR AC- KNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

(REV. 10-83)

is required to sign this document and return ___________ copies to the issuing office. is not, A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

15C. DATE SIGNED

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

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 telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

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

D. OTHER

Contractor

16C. DATE SIGNED

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

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.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

STANDARD FORM 30 STANDARD FORM 30

(Type or print) (Type or print)

(Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

(No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

(If other than Item 6)

(Specify type of modification and authority)

(such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.)

(If required)

(If applicable)

(SEE ITEM 11)

(SEE ITEM 13)

(X)

(X)

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

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

01 See Block 16 C.

USAID/UKRAINE USAID/Kyiv Regional Contract Office Dept. of State 5850 Kyiv Place Washington, D.C. 20521-5850 one

1 14

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

72012121R00002 TO ALL OFFERORS x

X

06/10/2021

The purpose of this Amendment No. 01 is to:

1. Provide answers to the questions received in response to Request for Proposal(RFP) NO. 72012121R00002, USAID FINANCIAL SECTOR REFORM ACTIVITY; and

2. Revise Request for Proposal (RFP) No.72012121R00002.

3. Extend the closing date for proposals to July 20, 2021 at 9 a.m. Kyiv time.

All changes made to the revised RFP are highlighted in yellow. All other terms of the RFP remain unchanged.

Maria Televantos Contracting Officer

BY 6/25/2021

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extend ed, /s/

REQ-121-21-000007

720121

X oluchukvysotska Highlight

Request for Proposals (RFP) NO. 72012121R00002

USAID FINANCIAL SECTOR REFORM ACTIVITY

RFP 72012121R00002 USAID Financial Sector Reform Activity Answers to Questions from Offerors

1. After looking at the document we have one quick question regarding pages 29 and 30. On these pages the RFP makes mention of three key personnel including Chief of Party, Deputy Chief of Party, and Strategic Communications Director. The RFP does not make mention of the fact if CV's or Resumes are specifically required at the time of our submission and we were hoping you could clarify this to let us know if we need to identify specific individuals for these three key positions (at the time of submission of the proposal). In addition, we were wondering if USAID preferred or required for any of these three positions to be filled by Ukrainian Nationals.

ANSWER: In accordance with Section L.7(b) of the RFP, “The Offeror must not propose individuals to fill these roles; however, the Offeror must certify that the names and CVs of personnel to fill these key roles will be submitted by the Offeror for Contracting Officer approval within five business days of the date of award.” Offerors must propose a list of minimum required qualifications and desired qualifications for all key personnel positions noted in Section F.6 of the RFP and describe how the Offeror will make use of their unique skills and expertise -- both technical and management in nature -- in carrying out the activity. Offerors must not propose individuals and must not provide CVs or resumes with the proposal.

In terms of key personnel nationality, USAID leaves it up to Offerors to propose the most appropriate mix of skills to fulfill the SOW requirements. Please note that Section F.6 of the RFP states, “USAID/Ukraine encourages the employment of Ukrainians in Key Personnel positions as a means of ensuring a better grasp of the needs and reality on the ground, as well as improving senior management capabilities within Ukraine.”

2. B.4 page 8 Can USAID provide a total expected contract size of award or a range of expected contract size?

ANSWER: USAID/Ukraine anticipates awarding a cost plus fixed fee (CPFF) term type contract with 20,815 professional technical staff person productive days level of effort (LOE) and a period of performance of five (5) years. Since this is a CPFF term-type contract, the required LOE level has been provided. In accordance with ADS 302.3.5.7, COs may not include estimated price ranges in solicitations for CPFF term-type (LOE) contracts. Therefore, the estimated budget range for this requirement cannot be provided.

3. B.5 pages 8-9 A company’s indirect rates are acknowledged to be proprietary and sensitive financial information, the disclosure of which would result in competitive harm and, consistent with the Trade Secrets Act, should therefore be protected from such disclosure to third parties (including prime contractors whom may be competitors on other Procurements). Thus, we respectfully request that the Subcontractor’s indirect rate information not be included in Section B.5 or any part of the final Contract and that such subcontractors pursue the option of submitting their confidential information directly to USAID. Please acknowledge your acceptance of this clarification and request for protection of proprietary company financial data.

ANSWER: Proposed major subcontractors may submit their indirect rate information directly to USAID. USAID has revised the RFP to remove the subcontractor’s indirect rate information from Section B.5.

4. F.5 pages 29 Section F.5 specifies that professional/technical staff LOE does not include administrative positions. Please confirm that the following positions would be considered professional/technical staff:

a. Home office project management support

b. Director of Finance, Administration, and Compliance

c. Grants Manager and/or Grants Analysts

d. Translator(s)

e. Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) positions ANSWER: Professional technical staff level of effort (LOE) must not include administrative positions such as the Administrative Manager, Finance Manager, Human Resources (HR) Manager, Administrative Assistant, Finance Assistant, HR Assistant, or any other position that has the primary function of providing administrative support to the contract. The Director of Finance, Administration, and Compliance and Translators are not included in professional technical LOE.

Grants Manager and/or Grants Analysts, and Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) positions are included. Home Office program support is included. Home Office Admin Support is not included.

5. F.5 page 29 Please confirm that ‘professional technical staff person productive days’ would include subcontractor LOE if that subcontractor is working on a firm fixed price basis.

ANSWER: Firm fixed price subcontractor LOE will not be considered as part of the total LOE provided that the subcontract is not a fixed price LOE subcontract.

6. F.7.a pages 30-34 It is unspecified whether the deadlines for some of the Deliverables and Reports listed in the Deliverables and Reports section are in calendar days or business days. (E.g., “Within the 45 days of the effective contract start date” on p. 31) Are these deadlines all intended to be calendar days?

ANSWER: Yes, the deadlines are calendar days.

7. L.7 pages 97 and 99-100 Section L.7 specifies that all seven required sections must be within the 45-page limit, including Part 7 – Past Performance. However, description on Page 99 mentions the Past Performance Matrix should be provided as “Annex 1”. Can USAID clarify if the Past Performance Matrix is included in the 45-page limit and if it should be included as Part 7 of the technical proposal, or as an annex?

ANSWER: All aspects of the technical proposal, including past performance information, are included in the 45-page limit. The RFP has been revised to clarify that the past performance matrix must be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal rather than an annex.

8. L.7 and L8 pages 98 and 102 Section L.7 states that the “Offeror must not propose individuals to fill these [Key Personnel] roles” (p. 98). However, section L.8 states that “Completed biographical data sheets, FormAID1420‐17 must be provided for positions with named staff (this does not include positions such as secretaries and drivers) expected to perform on the contract.” (p. 102).

Can we confirm that individual staff members, including both key and non-key personnel, should not be named in any organizational chart in the Management Plan as well? In addition, as the Key Personnel and other roles are unnamed, can we confirm that the Cost/Business proposals should not include completed biographical data sheets?

ANSWER: While Key Personnel should not be named, the Offeror may name other personnel in the budget, in which case they must submit biodatas for those named personnel. Key Personnel biodatas will be collected for approval upon award.

9. L.7.a.1 page 99 Section L.7 specifies to “Provide in the “Past Performance Matrix” attached to this RFP (Attachment J.1) as Annex 1 to the technical proposal up to five (5) of the most relevant contracts. The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar type of work, and complexity/diversity of tasks and must be within the past three years. It should be clear whether the work by the Offeror was done as a prime Contractor or as a subcontractor.” Can USAID clarify if a past performance narrative is required in addition to the matrix? If so, what does that entail?

ANSWER: The RFP has been revised to clarify that the past performance matrix must be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal rather than an annex. Offerors should not duplicate information in the matrix in narrative form. Please note however that Section L.7 does require information that is not in the matrix, such as performance using small business concerns, that would need to be provided in a narrative.

10. L.7.a.1 page 99 Section L.7 specifies to “Provide in the “Past Performance Matrix” attached to this

RFP (Attachment J.1) as Annex 1 to the technical proposal up to five (5) of the most relevant contracts. The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar type of work, and complexity/diversity of tasks and must be within the past three years. It should be clear whether the work by the Offeror was done as a prime Contractor or as a subcontractor.” Can USAID clarify if major subcontractors’ relevant contracts are inclusive or exclusive of the 5- project limitation?

ANSWER: The RFP has been revised to clarify that Offerors must provide up to five (5) of the most relevant contracts each for the prime and major subcontractor(s).

11. L.7 page 100 For the Performance in Using Small Business (SB) Concerns as part of Past Performance, can USAID clarify whether the details requested (summary of use of small businesses, narrative of up to five contracts in eSRS, names and addresses of three SB contacts) are included in the main technical or an annex and whether they count towards the 45 page limit? We request that these details do not count towards the 45-page limit as small businesses are not required to submit this information. Thus, some bidders may be disadvantaged by having to use space in the page limit providing this information while others do not.

ANSWER: All past performance information must be included in the body of the technical proposal and counts towards the page limit.

12. Since questions regarding the RFP are due June 22nd, will USAID/Ukraine consider extending the proposal deadline beyond July 15th? If so, would USAID/Ukraine consider announcing the new due date prior to USAID/Ukraine responding to all questions in order to give Offerors advanced notice of when proposals will be due.

ANSWER: USAID/Ukraine has extended the deadline for proposal submission to July 20th at 9 a.m. Kyiv time.

13. Does the 20% performance requirement for Major Subcontractors refer to the dollar value of the services or the number of LOE days?

ANSWER: Major subcontracts are defined as subcontractors expected to perform at least 20% or a prominent part of the technical effort. Offerors can use their discretion in deciding on the most appropriate way to measure the proportion of the effort.

14. Would USAID consider extending the three-year time limitation on PPRs to five years, which will allow small businesses to better demonstrate their relevant past performance?

ANSWER: USAID has amended the RFP to soften the language as follows: “The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar type of work, complexity/diversity of tasks, and within the past three years.” While we consider recent references within the last three years to be the most relevant, it does not preclude offerors from submitting references from four or five years ago.

15. Please confirm that Past Performance information (Attachment J.1) should be included in Annex 1 and not included in the 45-page limit? Section L.7 (b).7 seems to indicate that “Past Performance” is included in the 45-page limit. Does USAID/Ukraine expect a past performance narrative to be included in the 45-page technical proposal in addition to then Annex 1 J.1 Matrix?

ANSWER: All aspects of the technical proposal, including past performance information, are included in the 45-page limit. The RFP has been revised to clarify that the past performance matrix must be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal rather than an annex. Offerors should not duplicate information in the matrix in narrative form. Please note however that Section L.7 does require information that is not in the matrix, such as performance using small business concerns, that would need to be provided in a narrative.

16. How many from PPRs should be included for Major Subcontractors? Is 5 the limit for the entire consortium? Or, should the Prime Offeror submit 5 and each Major Subcontractor submit 5 of their own?

ANSWER: The RFP has been revised to clarify that Offerors must provide up to five (5) of the most relevant contracts each for the prime and major subcontractor(s).

17. Is there a page limitation for Annex 1(J.1 Matrix)?

ANSWER: All aspects of the technical proposal, including past performance information, are

18. Section C is written as a Statement of Work, but it does not prescribe specific interventions or activities. Each Component, however, includes examples of “anticipated results”. Should the technical proposal, therefore, be written as a performance Work Statement (PWS), in which Offeror’s describe how they will achieve the anticipated results? Or, should it be written as a Statement of Work that responds to the various technical areas under each Component?

ANSWER: Section C is indeed a statement of work that will be incorporated into the contract. In addition to the anticipated results, examples of specific interventions are also provided within the SOW. USAID expects Offerors to provide a technical approach describing how they will implement the Statement of Work. Instructions for preparing the technical approach are provided in Section L.7.

19. Attachment J.3 Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) includes “Defined or Illustrative Activities” under each Component. Should Offerors use these activities as a guide for the specific activities USAID/Ukraine wants under each Component (i.e., required activities)? Or, are the activities mere examples and Offerors are free to propose additional or different activities?

ANSWER: The illustrative activities are mere examples for the purposes of the IEE. Offerors must propose their technical approach based on the SOW.

20. On page 98 under “Organizational Structure” USAID/Ukraine states, “The Management Plan must outline the Offeror’s proposed organizational structure and level of effort (including Offeror’s employees, long-term and short-term consultants and subcontractors).” This seems to contradict the Key Personnel section which specifically states that Offerors are not to propose specific named individuals. Can USAID confirm that Offerors should not name any specific personnel anywhere in their Proposals, including the Organizational Structure?

ANSWER: Offerors must not name individuals for key personnel positions in the proposal. Other personnel need not be named, but USAID does expect information regarding how the Offeror proposes to staff the project, such as proposed positions, subcontractors, short-term and long-term consultants. The RFP has been amended to clarify that the Management Plan must outline the Offeror’s proposed organizational structure and staffing plan that explains which positions will be filled by the prime’s employees, long-term and short-term consultants, and subcontractors.

21. The cover letter states 20,815 professional technical staff person productive days of LOE are expected over a period of performance of 5 years. Can USAID confirm that the 20,815 LOE days do not include administrative LOE days for personnel such as accountants, translators, administrators, drivers, housekeepers, etc. (i.e., non-technical staff).

ANSWER: Confirmed.

22. Is the 20,815 an estimate? Or, are Offerors required to propose exactly 20,815 professional LOE?

ANSWER: Per Section B.2 and Section F.5 of the RFP, Offerors must provide 20,815 professional technical staff person productive days level of effort (LOE).

23. Because USAID/Ukraine is not seeking any specific staffing names, CVs, or specific personnel in the proposal, how shall Offerors budget for specific daily rates? Can Offerors propose estimated daily rates based on established salary scales and/or market research? If so, will Offerors be required to submit personnel at/below those daily rates? Or, will USAID/Ukraine permit a range of reasonableness for each identified staff member and/or expert?

ANSWER: While Offerors are not required to name personnel, they should ensure that the rates proposed are fair and reasonable based on market research and requirements for each position.

24. Will the Branding Implementation and Marking Plan mentioned in Part 11 under L.8 be part of the evaluation? Is there a page limitation for the BIP & MP?

ANSWER: The Branding Implementation and Marking Plan must be submitted as part of the cost proposal. While it will not be will not be evaluated, it is a required aspect of the proposal, and USAID will check proposals to ensure it is submitted in compliance with RFP requirements.

Additionally, USAID will review the apparently successful Offeror’s BIP and MP prior to award.

There is no page limitation for the BIP and MP, but Offerors are encouraged to be concise.

25. Section H.3 states that CO waivers are required for TCNs to be paid in excess of the prevailing compensation paid to personnel performing comparable work in the cooperating country. FSR, however, will likely require consultants and personnel from EU countries who would be considered TCNs. Would USAID consider issuing a blanket waiver for TCNs to be paid up to the current CST maximum (i.e., the same as U.S. expatriate experts), provided that Contractors submit daily rate approvals as part of the technical and travel approval process?

ANSWER: AIDAR 722.170 states “Compensation, including merit or promotion increases paid to TCN's and CCN's may not, without the approval of the Mission Director or the Assistant Administrator having program responsibility for the project, exceed the prevailing compensation paid to personnel performing comparable work in the cooperating country as determined by the USAID Mission.” Requests for waivers will only be considered on a case by case basis and must be accompanied with sufficient justification.

26. We understand that M.3 of the RFP indicates that USAID will not assign points to or score an Offeror’s cost proposal. But considering USAID is using a prescriptive number of LOE days, and that the Management Plan calls for the mobilization of staff, experts and consultants, how will offerors be able to distinguish themselves if they are able to offer a more cost-effective solution?

Put another way, if all Offerors are proposing the same amount of LOE, then it stands to reason that pricing should be part of the best value analysis. Will USAID confirm that the proposed price will be considered as part of the best value tradeoff analysis between price and non-price factors?

Alternatively, would USAID consider providing its “probable cost estimate” for the Activity and then allow Offerors to offer more/less LOE based on their management approaches? This would allow USAID to better evaluate Offerors’ proposals since some Offerors may be able to offer more LOE than others.

ANSWER: As noted in Section M.5 of the RFP, this procurement utilizes the tradeoff process set forth in FAR 15.101-1. Further, Section M.1 of the RFP defines Best Value as “the offer that results in the most advantageous solution for the Government, in consideration of technical, cost and other factors.” While the cost proposal is not assigned points, it is evaluated, and price does play a role in determining which proposal demonstrates the best value to the government.

Cost effective solutions are encouraged, and if the Contracting Officer determines that competing technical proposals are essentially equal, cost/price factors may become the determining factor in source selection. Conversely, if the Contracting Officer determines that competing cost/price proposals are essentially equal, technical factors may become the determining factor in source selection. Further, the Contracting Officer may award to a higher priced Offeror if a determination is made that the higher technical evaluation of that Offeror merits the additional cost/price.

27. How will USAID/Ukraine evaluate Small Business Offerors against large business Offerors under M.2. Factor 2 (“the extent to which the Offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting plan adequately and feasibly provides opportunities for US small businesses”) and M2 Factor 4 (“(d) 6. Utilization of Small Business”)? Will Small Business Offerors be given the highest score possible for these criteria considering they are not required to submit this information?

ANSWER: The extent to which the Offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting plan adequately and feasibly provides opportunities for US small businesses is not a separate subfactor. There is no separate score for it. This is a component of the management approach which will be evaluated as a whole factor. Small business offerors are not required to submit this information.

28. Page 28 states: “F.3 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE The place of performance under this Contract is Ukraine.” Currently, the State Department lists travel to Ukraine as Level 3: Reconsider Travel.

Only 2.9% of Ukrainians have been vaccinated and the country is under adaptive quarantine until August 31st. Even fully vaccinated individuals cannot be certain that they are now fully protected against current or future variants due to variant breakthroughs. The RFP states that Key Personnel (identified as the Chief of Party (COP) and Deputy Chief of Party (DCOP) and the Strategy Communications Director) must work locally in Ukraine. But what about the Contractor’s staff and subcontractors? Can some or all of the non-key personnel work remotely from the USA via Zoom or other forms of remote communication and collaboration?

ANSWER: This depends on the offeror’s management approach and proposed staffing plan and organizational structure. Ultimately, the place of performance is Ukraine, and sufficient staff must be in Ukraine to successfully implement the SOW, but it is up to the Offeror to propose how to structure home office staff supporting the field staff.

29. Page 103 states: “As per https://www.federalpay.org/ses/2021, the maximum USAID Contractor Salary Threshold for Agencies without a Certified SES Performance Appraisal System is $183,300/year and cannot be exceeded.” Will the State Department assist new contractors to become approved in the Certified SES Performance Appraisal System?

ANSWER: The SES Performance Appraisal System is relevant to government agencies, not contractors.

30. Page 104 states: “Indirect Costs FAR 31.203 and FAR 42.700 provide for those remaining costs (indirect) that are to be allocated to intermediate or two or more final cost objectives. The Offeror and each proposed subcontractor must include a complete copy of its most current Negotiated Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA) or other documentation from your cognizant U.S. Government audit agency, if any, stating the most recent provisional indirect cost rates…. “EXEMPTIONS FOR http://www.federalpay.org/ses/2021

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 …” How can a small business obtain a NICRA from the State Department? Alternatively, does the requirement for audited or reviewed financial statements apply to all small businesses, or is this meant only for small business offerors who serve as prime contractors?

ANSWER: The requirement for audited or reviewed financial statements applies to small businesses who are submitting the proposal as a prime offeror or are proposed as a major subcontractor.

A Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement is a formal written agreement between USAID and an organization that establishes provisional and final rates by fiscal year and identifies allocation bases. When the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) provides the majority of a non-profit organization’s Federal funding, it is the cognizant Federal agency for negotiating the organization’s indirect cost rates. The Overhead, Special Cost, and Closeout Branch (M/OAA/CAS/OCC), within the Cost Audit Support Division, Office of Acquisition and Assistance, within the Bureau for Management is the central unit authorized to negotiate indirect cost rates with concerns awarded contracts, grants or cooperative agreements by USAID.

In order to develop an indirect cost rate for proposal purposes, a for-profit organization should follow the requirements of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 42.705-1(b). A Non-profit organization should follow the guidance in OMB Circular A-122. A rate agreement is only provided to an organization with a prime award (not a sub-award) when it is in the interest of the U.S. government. In order to make this decision, consideration is given to the materiality of the proposed indirect costs and the number of awards an organization has with different Federal agencies. Given the extensive administrative process involved in the negotiation of indirect cost rates, it is unlikely that NICRAs will be issued for organizations with a few small awards with the agency and for which the indirect costs proposed are not very significant. On the other hand, if proposed indirect costs are significant and an organization has many awards with multiple U.S.

Government agencies, USAID most likely would want to issue a rate agreement to ensure that indirect costs are allocated to awards in an equitable manner and that the amounts billed are allowable.

31. Due to the complexity of this RFP, would it be possible to hold a bidder’s conference to hold an open discussion on the requirements and performance expectations of this RFP with all those interested in submitting an offeror and/or serving as a subcontractor?

ANSWER: USAID is not planning to hold a pre-proposal conference for this RFP.

32. My firm is interested in serving as a subcontractor on this project. Could we please obtain the contact information of the primes that submit questions to your RFP so that we can make them aware of our interest? Alternatively, could you post our contact information in your response to submitted questions to let primes know of our interest and contact details (shown below)?

ANSWER: We have made the vendor list available on sam.gov for this contract opportunity.

33. There is a 10-hour difference in time zones between Kyiv and San Francisco (PST). The

Contractor's staff and subcontractors have commitments with other clients. Will standard work hours be required for all the Contractor's staff and subcontractors in order to maintain a constant real-time channel of daily communication and collaboration between various work locations or can a flexible asynchronous work schedule be adopted?

ANSWER: It is up to the Offeror to propose a work schedule for the home office staff supporting the field staff that will ensure successful contract implementation.

34. Would USAID please confirm that all subcontractor level of effort (LOE), regardless of subcontract type, will count toward the overall LOE requirement listed in the RFP?

ANSWER: Subcontractor level of effort (LOE) will count toward the overall LOE requirement.

However, firm fixed price subcontractor LOE will not be considered as part of the total LOE provided that the subcontract is not a fixed price LOE subcontract.

35. Would USAID please consider excluding Annex 1 from the total page limit of the RFP?

ANSWER: All aspects of the technical proposal, including past performance information, are

36. Could USAID please confirm the budget range of this RFP?

ANSWER: USAID/Ukraine anticipates awarding a cost plus fixed fee (CPFF) term type contract with 20,815 professional technical staff person productive days level of effort (LOE) and a period of performance of five (5) years. Since this is a CPFF term-type contract, the required LOE level has been provided. In accordance with ADS 302.3.5.7, COs may not include estimated price ranges in solicitations for CPFF term-type (LOE) contracts. Therefore, the estimated budget range for this requirement cannot be provided.

37. Would USAID please consider providing a 2 week extension for submission of the Ukraine FSR proposal?

ANSWER: USAID/Ukraine has extended the deadline for proposal submission to July 20th at 9 a.m. Kyiv time.

38. Would USAID please consider excluding the Gantt chart and Logic Framework from the total page limit of the RFP?

ANSWER: No, the Gantt chart and Logic Framework are included in the total page limit.

39. Could USAID kindly provide more specificity on the weighting of the four factors (points assigned or percentage), beyond the descending order of importance currently presented in Section M.2?

ANSWER: All proposals shall be evaluated by the TEC in accordance with the evaluation factors in Section M.2, which are listed in descending order of importance.

40. On the Cover Page, the RFP states that the 20,815 days of Level of Effort applies to “professional technical staff productive days”. Would USAID kindly clarify the kind of staff that count as “professional technical” and USAID’s definition of “productive days?”

ANSWER: Professional technical staff level of effort (LOE) must not include administrative positions such as the Administrative Manager, Finance Manager, Human Resources (HR) Manager, Administrative Assistant, Finance Assistant, HR Assistant, or any other position that has the primary function of providing administrative support to the contract. Productive days do not include leave or holidays.

41. Would USAID consider providing expected level of effort broken down by year?

ANSWER: Offerors should determine the annual breakdown of the level of effort based on their proposed technical approaches.

42. Would USAID clarify whether the anticipated LOE of 20,815 is a maximum, minimum or specific fixed number of person-days that the contractor must meet?

ANSWER: Per Section B.2 and Section F.5 of the RFP, offerors must provide 20,815 professional technical staff person productive days level of effort (LOE).

43. In the context of adaptive management, what flexibility would the Contractor have in programming and budget, if the Contractor is allowed to shift LOE among positions over time within the overall LOE allotment?

ANSWER: As stated in Section F.5(b), the number of person-days for any labor category may be used in any other labor category, subject to the written approval or direction of the COR. As noted in Section B.4, a detailed budget will not be incorporated into the budget to allow for flexibility, and the only budget line items in the contract will include Direct Costs, Subcontracts, Grants Under Contracts, Indirect Costs and Fixed Fee.

44. On page 97, section L7.b, the RFP states: “All required aspects of the technical proposal as noted below must be combined into a single, searchable PDF, and the page limitation will be calculated by the total number of pages of the entire PDF.” On page 99, the RFP states: “Provide in the “Past Performance Matrix” attached to this RFP (Attachment J.1) as Annex 1 to the technical proposal up to five (5) of the most relevant contracts.” Can USAID confirm if Annex 1 counts towards the 45-page maximum?

ANSWER: All aspects of the technical proposal, including past performance information, are

45. Section L.8, Part 2 - Proposed Costs/Prices states that “Biographical Data Sheets must be submitted in PDF format, duly signed by both the employee and the contractor and must be put in alphabetical order”. However, the RFP states that named personnel are not required. Will USAID please confirm that biographical data sheets are not required for consultants and employees?

ANSWER: While Key Personnel should not be named, the Offeror may name other personnel in the budget, in which case they must submit biodatas for those named personnel. Key Personnel biodatas will be collected for approval upon award.

46. F.7.j page 34 Can USAID please clarify whether the successful bidder is expected to produce both a newsletter (3-4 times a year) and a webpage. Or should the newsletter be in the form of a webpage?

ANSWER: The successful offeror is expected to prepare and circulate an electronic newsletter. The webpage requirement has been removed in the amended RFP. However, if during implementation a project website is needed, then the Contractor may consider it in coordination with USAID and it must be approved by the Website Governance Board.

47. Should the Gantt chart referenced on page 98 cover the life of the Activity or just Year 1? Should the chart be integrated into the 45-page proposal or provided as an annex?

ANSWER: Offerors must provide a Gantt chart covering the entire implementation period to provide a broad overview of the proposed activities and must be accompanied by a justification for how the proposed activities will be sequenced by each year. The Gantt chart must be integrated into the technical approach. It is not a separate annex and counts towards the 45-page proposal limit.

48. Could USAID please clarify that the required Gantt chart under section L only applies to year 1?

ANSWER: Offerors must provide a Gantt chart covering the entire implementation period to provide a broad overview of the proposed activities and must be accompanied by a justification for how the proposed activities will be sequenced by each year.

49. Page 11 states: “FSR aims to transform the country’s financial sector into a sophisticated, well-functioning, competitive market that is aligned with European Union (EU) standards and integrated into international financial systems.” If European Union standards differ from US standards, is it safe to assume that EU standards must prevail? What leeway will be granted to use US standards over EU standards, particularly if it can be proven that US standards are superior or more appropriate and cost-effective given current circumstances?

ANSWER: FSR will support the integration of Ukraine’s financial market with international financial markets and internationally recognized standards. The offerors should propose an approach that will be aligned with Ukraine’s international commitments (including, but not limited to, the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement and IMF reform package) and support respective interlinked components. Offeror's approach must take into account the key reform principles and be responsive to the key implementation principles to ensure progress toward achieving the purpose of the SOW.

50. To what extent will the Contractor’s staff and subcontractors communicate directly with the key stakeholders referred to in the “STRATEGY OF UKRAINIAN FINANCIAL SECTOR DEVELOPMENT UNTIL 2025,” namely, the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine (MoF), the National Bank of Ukraine (NBU), the National Securities and Stock Market Commission (NSSMC), and the

Deposit Guarantee Fund (DGF)? In which language will communications be required to be performed? Or is it anticipated that the Key Personnel and Cooperating Country Nationals (CCNs) located in Ukraine will serve as the conduit for all communications between the Contractor’s staff and subcontractors with key stakeholders? If necessary, will interpreters be provided for any communication between the Contractor’s staff and subcontractors with key stakeholders? If interpreters are required who will pay for these services?

ANSWER: The Contractor’s staff and subcontractors will communicate directly with a wide range of key stakeholders to the extent necessary to achieve the purpose of the SOW. Communications, particularly with high-level officials or on high-profile or sensitive issues, must be done in consultation with USAID and other parties as needed. Communications must occur in the language most appropriate to the context of the engagement. The Contractor will be responsible for securing appropriate translation services as needed in support of achieving the SOW. Section H.5 has been revised to provide additional clarity.

51. On page 22 under section C.8.6 it states that “The Contractor must work with the activity’s counterparts and beneficiaries, as well as industry and business associations, civil society and international organizations to forward gender equality. Specifically, the Contractor must: Support the GOU to strengthen the coherence between fiscal policies and gender equality objectives, with focus on integration of gender issues into planning and budgeting processes” could USAID please clarify whether Ukraine FSR is supposed to support fiscal policy?

ANSWER: The contractor is not expected to work in fiscal policy. The RFP has been revised to remove this example of gender integration.

52. Could USAID please confirm whether implementers are expected to budget for software or other procurement intended for financial sector regulators or other state entities?

ANSWER: Yes, USAID has revised the RFP to provide a $3.5 million plug figure that Offerors must use for IT procurement for local partners/financial sector regulators/state entities.

53. To ensure consistency of assumptions among bidders and comparability of offers, would USAID please provide assumptions on the following, relative to COVID-19, and its current and anticipated impacts, including:

a) lifting of travel restrictions on entry into Ukraine from the US and Europe

b) lifting of travel restrictions on entry of Ukrainians into the rest of Europe and the US

c) intensity and types of public health preventative measures, such as but not limited to social distancing, masking, remote working, etc.

d) growth in GDP (annually, year over year, life of project)

e) changes in financial sector indicators, such as non-performing loans, bank liquidity and solvency ratios, etc.

f) changes in real economy indicators, such as business formation, business bankruptcy, changes in employment, changes in labor wages, etc.

ANSWER: Offerors are advised to base assumptions on travel restrictions and economic indicators on publicly available information they deem to be most credible and reliable at the time of drafting the proposal. To justify their proposed approach, Offerors may wish to incorporate, explain, or cite sources for such assumptions within the proposal.

54. Page 98 Section Management Plan (See Section M.2 Factor 2: Management Plan) states the following (see below) under the Organizational Structure requirement. Please confirm if this only requires the LOE for the in-country technical expert project staff. “Organizational Structure: The Management Plan must outline the Offeror’s proposed organizational structure and level of effort (including Offeror’s employees, long-term and short-term consultants and subcontractors).”

ANSWER: The RFP has been amended to clarify that the Management Plan must outline the Offeror’s proposed organizational structure and staffing plan that explains which positions will be filled by the prime’s employees, long-term and short-term consultants, and subcontractors. Offerors are not require to identify specific level of effort days in the Management Plan; however, they are required to provide this in the cost proposal as stated in Section L.8

55. Page 47 states: “H.10 LANGUAGE REQUIREMENTS All deliverables must be produced in English.” Are there any other language requirements? Must the entire Contractor's staff, including subcontractors, be fluent in Ukrainian, Russian, or any other languages?

ANSWER: All deliverables must be produced in English. Some deliverables may need to be translated into Ukrainian. Since the place of performance for this contract is Ukraine, many stakeholder discussions will take place in Ukrainian and products produced by the Contractor will need to be translated into Ukrainian. The offeror should propose a management plan that demonstrates the team has the necessary language skills to operate in the Ukrainian context and fulfill the requirements of the SOW. Section H.5 has been revised to provide additional clarity.

56. Page 98 refers to “minimum required qualifications and desired qualifications” and also to “desired or required qualifications” for Key Personnel. Please clarify whether Offerors should provide two separate lists of qualifications (i.e., minimum and desired) or just one set of qualifications for each position.

ANSWER: As long as Offerors make it clear which qualifications are required versus desired, USAID does not have a preference for how Offerors present the qualifications. If Offerors propose one set of qualifications for each position, then they should be sure to mark which qualifications are required and which are desired. Offerors are also welcome to split the qualifications into two separate lists.

[End of Amendment #01]

Answers to Questions from Offerors