Questions_&_Answers_-_Amendment_02_(CSYA).pdf

720165-18-Q-00005, Amendment 02

Questions and Answers

1. Section C.3, Statement of Work (p.5) states, “The assessment must follow the USAID definition of youth (10-29), with a particular focus on opinions of diverse (in terms of gender, ethnicity, rural-urban, education background, vulnerable groups) youth of 15-29.” How does the Mission plan to handle Internal Review Board review of human subjects research, particularly as it relates to interviewing youth under age 18?

USAID Response: The successful offeror must comply with 22 CFR 225 Protection of Human Subjects and USAID’s policy on “Protection of Human Subjects in Research Supported by USAID.” Additional details will be reviewed with the successful offeror. Additionally, the successful offeror must comply with Macedonian laws protecting youth.

2. Section C.3, Statement of Work (p.6) states, “The programmatic recommendations must be youth focused, i.e., envision youth not only as project beneficiaries, but more as agents of change and direct partners.” Does the Mission have a youth advisory group or some other mechanism it uses for youth engagement in activities?

USAID Response: The Mission does not have a youth advisory group for youth engagement in activities. The youth engagement is handled by individual projects. There is a National Youth Council of Macedonia (NYCM) which is an umbrella of 50 organizations (20 of which are youth organizations) that the offerors may consult with. More info about NYCM on http://www.nms.org.mk/en/

3. On the same page, the RFQ states, “USAID will be closely involved with the assessment and considered part of the extended team. In addition to reviewing and approving assessment deliverables, USAID may also guide the strategic focus of the assessment and, if needed, interact with relevant stakeholders, the donor community, and the Government of Macedonia.” Will Mission staff be conducting key informant interviews, attending focus groups, or leading any of the other data collection activities? Or will Mission staff primarily be in support role?

USAID Response: USAID designated staff will only have a support role. Time permitting, and in consultation with the contractor, USAID staff may join the contractor’s team in portions of the field work.

4. Section C.3, Statement of Work, under the heading Phase 2 – Field Work, second paragraph (p.6), states, “At the start of Phase 2, the Contractor must pilot data collection instruments.” Does the Mission anticipate this to be primarily a qualitative assessment (key informant interviews and focus groups) or do they expect it to also include youth or other stakeholder surveys?

USAID Response: The assessment is meant to be a comprehensive cross-sectoral youth assessment and must include key informant interviews and focus groups as well as youth or other stakeholder surveys.

5. Under the heading Phase 3 – Reporting (p.7), the RFQ states, “The Contractor must prepare the first draft report to be presented at the final briefing with USAID/Macedonia.” How long does the Mission anticipate the team to stay in-country? Is it possible for international staff to return home for data analysis and report writing and conduct a virtual debrief on final report?

http://www.nms.org.mk/en/

USAID Response: Offerors must determine how much time they need to allocated for the work in-country based on the SOW and deliverables. The submission requirement has been revised and there is no additional presentation of the draft or final report following the outbrief at the end of phase 2. See revised language under Phase 3 – Reporting.

6. There appears to be a discrepancy between the language in Section C.3, Statement of Work, under the heading Phase 3 – Reporting and the language in Section C.4, Deliverables, in the paragraph that discusses the Draft Assessment Report. The former states that the Contractor must prepare the first draft report to be presented at the final briefing with USAID/Macedonia, whereas the latter says that the submission date for the draft assessment report will be 10 business days after the final presentation. Furthermore, the timeline of the subsequent USAID reviews and revised draft submissions do not match entirely (e.g., the former section indicates that USAID/Macedonia will provide comments within 10 business days of the final briefing, while the latter mentions 7 days for USAID’s review and comment on the initial draft).

USAID Response: The RFQ has been revised to clarify this. See revised language in Sections C.3 and C.4 of the RFQ.

7. The RFQ cover page states that quotations are due November 12, 2018, but the second page (the SF 1449) states that the due date is November 5, 2018. Could USAID please confirm that quotations are due November 12, 2018 at 14:00 local Skopje time?

USAID Response: USAID is extending the submission date to November 19, 2018 at 15:00 local Skopje time. The RFQ has been revised to reflect this.

8. Would USAID be able to inform Offerors whether conducting this cross-sectoral youth assessment, that will include programmatic recommendations, will preclude staff or consultants from working on related programs in the future?

USAID Response: Staff or consultants will not be precluded from working on related programs in the future. While USAID will avoid, neutralize, and mitigate the occurrence of Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI), offerors should take appropriate steps to avoid actual or apparent OCIs on future procurements.

9. Section C.3, Statement of Work, page 5, specifies field work focusing only on youth who have not left Macedonia, so there may be a selection bias that would distort the assessment.

USAID Response: To the extent possible, the assessment should also include the opinions of those youth who have left the country.

Would USAID be able to share with the Offerors any networks or sources of youth who have already left Macedonia?

USAID Response: USAID is not aware that such networks exist. NYCM may have contacts of individuals who have left Macedonia that can form a focus group.

10. Section C.3, Statement of Work, subsection Phase 3-Reporting, page 7, states that the Contractor will submit a draft report at the final briefing to USAID, which will provide comment within 10 business days, against which the Contractor must provide a second draft within 5 business days, which USAID will comment upon within 5 business days, and the Contractor will finalize within 3 business days. However, Section C.4 Deliverables, “Draft Assessment Report;” pages 7-8, states that the draft report will be due submitted 10 days after the final briefing; that USAID will provide comments in 7 business days; that the contractor will submit revisions in 5 business days; that USAID will submit comments within 3 business days; and that a Final draft will be submitted in 3 business days. Last, Section C.4.1 Consolidated Deliverables Timeline – page 9, contain a chart stating the draft report will be due 10 days after the Final Presentation, and a Final Report will be due 18 days after receipt of the assessment report.

Would USAID please clarify the timing of the Final Presentation, the Draft Assessment Report, and the Final Assessment Report?

USAID Response: See response to question 6.

11. Would USAID allow Offerors to include a Cover Page, Table of Contents, and Acronyms List that would not count toward any page limitation?

USAID Response: Yes. The RFQ has been revised to reflect this.

12. Section L.3.1, subsection 3, Past Performance, page 41, includes instructions for the past performance references. Would USAID consider allowing Offerors to submit past performance references for contracts that are in the CPARS?

USAID Response: No.

13. Section M.2, Evaluation Criteria, page 43, states the factors that will be used to evaluate offers as: (1) Methodology and Work Plan; (2) Personnel; (3) Evaluation of Past Performance; and (4) Price. However, it does not list the order of importance of these factors. Would USAID kindly clarify the relative importance of the evaluation criteria as factors for award?

USAID Response: Factors are listed in descending order of importance and technical (non-price) factors are more important than price.

14. Section G.2, Invoices and Payment, page 13, requires that any VAT expenses must be included and shown separately on the invoice for payment, and that any invoiced amounts be denominated in both US Dollars and Macedonian Dinar, along with the exchange rate used.

Would USAID clarify whether the VAT amounts are to be proposed separately from all other firm fixed price charges, and whether these are to be claimed on a reimbursable basis?

USAID Response: Payment will be done in $U.S. currency. The requirement to denominate any invoiced amounts in both US Dollar and Macedonian Denars along with the exchange rate used, is applicable only to local Macedonian offerors/contractors. For Macedonia offerors/contractors, VAT is to be quoted separately from the net amount as USAID will pay the full invoice amount inclusive of VAT in case award is made to a local contractor. U.S offerors must quote the price without VAT.

15. In respect to past performance, can the experience of individuals be used as qualifying past performance?

16. Is an implementer prohibited from bidding on subsequent procurements in Macedonia?

USAID Response: See answer to question 8.

17. Can USAID confirm that international organizations are eligible to respond to this RFQ?

USAID Response: The authorized geographic code for this procurement is 937.

18. Given the detailed inputs required for the draft work plan (Section L.3.1) and the 10-page limit, will USAID consider permitting the draft data collection instruments and/or the draft detailed assessment design matrix to be included as an annex?

USAID Response: The draft data collection instruments and the draft detailed assessment design matrix may be submitted as annexes.

19. Will USAID consider allowing the final briefing to be delivered remotely via videoconference or similar online software?

USAID Response: See answer to question 5.

20. Please clarify some of the differences between sections C3 (under Phases descriptions), C4, and C4.1. in the SOW. Specifically:

a. Section C.3, page 6, Phase 2 – Field Work, says that USAID will provide comments on the work plan “within 2 business days after the in-brief. The Contractor must address all comments and submit final version within 2 business days after receipt of USAID/Macedonia comments.” Section C.4.1 suggests that final work plan is due 2 business days after the in-brief. Please clarify when the work plan is due.

USAID Response: C.3 Phase 2 has been revised to state that USAID will provide feedback at the in-brief and that the final work plan is due 2 business days later.

b. Section C.3, page 7, Phase 3 – Reporting, mentions that “the Contractor must provide a second draft of the report that addresses USAID/Macedonia comments within 5 business days after receipt of comments.” Section C.4.1 does not mention a second draft. Please clarify whether we are to submit a second draft.

USAID Response: This has been clarified in C.4.

c. Section C.3, page 7, Phase 3-Reporting, states that “the Contractor must prepare the first draft report to be presented at the final briefing with USAID/Macedonia.” Section C.4.1 states that the Draft Assessment Report is due 10 business days after the Final Presentation. Please confirm that the team will not submit the first draft of the assessment report the day of the final briefing and presentation.

USAID Response: Confirmed.

21. To what extent will USAID recommend/identify specific youth groups to meet with?

USAID Response: It is offerors’ responsibility to identify specific youth groups to meet with.

22. Section L says that the proposal must not exceed 10 pages and include: 1) the methodology to implement the activities; and 2) a draft workplan, which will include a schedule; methodology for conducting field work; assessment design matrix; draft instruments; data collection, analysis and management plan; limitations; a list of AT members and their roles and responsibilities; and a list of potential interviewees. Given the requirements, would USAID allow for the assessment design matrix, the list of potential interviewees, and the instruments to be included as annexes?

USAID Response: Yes, that is acceptable.

23. Per Cover Page, Page 1: Would the Mission be able to provide an anticipated date of award?

USAID Response: USAID anticipates making the award by the end of this calendar year.

24. Per Section F.3, Page 12: Can a CCN with commensurate qualifications be proposed for key personnel position(s) designated as international?

USAID Response: Ivica Yes.

25. Per Section F.3, Page 12: Are offerors able to additionally propose non-key personnel in response to this solicitation?

USAID Response: Offerors may configure their assessment team as they deem appropriate to complete the deliverables. However, for evaluation purposes, only the requested CVs must be submitted with the proposal.

26. Per Section L.3, Page 40-41: Can the Mission please confirm that offerors should submit separate Technical and Cost/Financial proposals?

USAID Response: The Standard Form (SF) 1449 should be used for submission of the price quotation and it must be submitted as a separate document from the technical proposal.

27. Per Section L.3, Page 41: Can the Mission please confirm that all volumes required for submitting a quotation in response to this solicitation (i.e. Methodology and Draft Workplan, Personnel, Past Performance, and Price Quotation) can be submitted in a word-searchable Adobe PDF format?

USAID Response: Yes, all volumes required for submitting a quotation in response to the solicitation can be submitted in a word-searchable Adobe PDF format.

28. Per Section M.2, Page 43: Would the Mission be able to provide weighted evaluation criteria for assessing offerors’ responses to this solicitation?

USAID Response: See answer to question 13.

29. We realized that the proposal due date listed on the cover page, November 12, is a U.S. federal holiday. Given offices will be closed that day, Offerors will not be able to confirm with USAID that proposals have been received by the deadline. Would USAID kindly consider extending the proposal due date to Tuesday, November 13 to account for the federal holiday?

USAID Response: See response to question 7.

30. Does USAID/Macedonia have flexibility with respect to the timelines specified in Section C? In particular, would the Mission consider adding additional time to the desk review to ensure adequate access to relevant documentation (e.g. receipt of all relevant technical documents) and to the draft/final reports to ensure adequate time for analysis of qualitative data and quality assurance processes?

31. With respect to the reference in C.3 of USAID’s role in the assessment, would the Mission please clarify whether they expect a USAID staff member to join portions of the data collection efforts?

USAID Response: See response to question 3.

32. Is the Mission open to prioritization or streamlining of the questions listed in C.3 in order to better align with best practice on the number of research questions for assessments?

USAID Response: All research questions from Section C must be answered.

33. Does the Mission have a target sample number of youth they hope to reach/have represented through this assessment?

USAID Response: While USAID does not have a minimum sample number of youth, it is incumbent upon offerors to propose a target sample and substantiate how the proposed sample meets applicable quality standards for assessments of this type.

34. Could the Mission please clarify the intended timing of the draft assessment report? C.3 (Phase

3) makes note of the draft report to be presented at the final briefing, while C.4 specifies the submission would be following the presentation.

USAID Response: See response to question 6.

35. Section L.3.1 requests offerors submit draft data collection instruments as part of the proposal, but our experience has shown that it is often useful to have the desk review and initial discussions with key stakeholders inform the development of those instruments. Would the Mission consider moving the draft instrument submission from the proposal stage to the desk review stage?

USAID Response: The draft data collection instruments are still due with the quotation, but a revised version may be submitted following the in-brief with USAID. The instruments may be submitted as an annex and do not count toward the page limit.

36. Would the Mission consider the addition of non-key personnel to the assessment team?

USAID Response: The assessment team composition is the offeror’s responsibility. CVs must only be submitted in accordance with the RFQ.

37. Page 41 of 47. Section L.3.1. 2. Personnel: Offerors must submit CVs for key personnel positions proposed. CVs may not be more than 2 pages and must include 3 references per CV. Would USAID please confirm that references are not included in the 2-page limit for the CVs for key personnel positions?

USAID Response: References refer to persons who can be contacted to receive more detailed information on the proposed candidate. These are included in the 2 page limit.

38. May a Gantt chart (as part of the workplan) be submitted in an annex to the proposal not to be counted against the ten-page limit for the methodology section?

USAID Response: Yes, that is acceptable.

39. Would USAID be able to provide a contract price range for this RFQ?

40. Does USAID have a preferred format or template for the price quotation?

USAID Response: See response to question 26.

41. Can USAID clarify what “direct United States Government support” means? Does it include subcontracts or subawards for USAID-funded projects?

USAID Response: Direct support does not include subcontracts or subawards under USAID funded awards.