Questions and Answers 72016823R00001 SEI.pdf

Questions and Answers for the Solicitation No. 72016823R00003 USAID’s Support to Electoral Integrity in BiH Activity

Q.1. On page 13 of the RFP, in the table provided on Reporting and Delivery Schedule, USAID requires submission of the Quarterly Performance and Financial Reports 15 calendar days after the end of the quarter. However, on page 17 of the RFP, USAID writes that Quarterly Performance Reports are due 30 days after the end of the quarter and does not specify the deadline for the Quarterly Financial Reports.

Can USAID confirm the delivery schedule for these deliverables?

A.1. The Quarterly Financial Reports are required to be submitted within 15 calendar days after the end of the quarter. The Quarterly Performance Reports are required to be submitted within 30 calendar days after the end of the quarter. See Amendment 1 to the solicitation.

Q.2. Section H.22 Grants under Contract states "Only the CO is authorized to approve grants, subject to the COR technical concurrence." Should we anticipate CO approval of each grant as an additional step in the work planning process or will this approval be rolled up in the COR technical concurrence for each grant that we will receive in writing before awarding a grant to the local partner?

A.2. The CO will approve grants, subject to the COR technical concurrence. Any approval exceptions will be defined in the grants manual.

Q.3. Section H.22 Grants Under Contract (pg. 41): Please confirm if SAM registration is required for the GUC recipient(s).

A.3. Yes, SAM registration is required for the GUC recipients.

Q.4. Under Section L.6.1 (4) (pg.68), USAID indicates that the narrative text must be converted to PDF.

However, under Section L.6.2 (2), USAID indicates that the Offeror may in addition to providing the technical proposal in MS Word, provide its technical proposal, including annexes, in PDF format. Can USAID kindly confirm the required format for submission of technical narrative elements of the proposal?

A.4. The technical narrative elements of the proposals shall be submitted in accordance with Section L.6.2(2) of the solicitation. See Amendment 1 to the solicitation.

Q.5. Should offerors submit a 2-page Executive Summary and a 2-page Executive Summary table (total maximum 4 pages) within the technical proposal, or is the 2-page limit for both the Executive Summary and the Summary table (Section L, pg.71)?

A.5. Offerors should submit one 2-page Executive Summary (total 2 pages) per Section L, pg.71.

Q.6. Could USAID confirm whether offerors are required to propose specific municipalities to be covered by this activity, or will geographies be selected in consultation with USAID upon award? Does USAID have a preferred number of municipalities to be included in the proposed interventions, based on a pilot methodology (Section L, pg.72)?

A.6. The offeror should coordinate with the Central Election Commission (CEC) on which municipalities they are targeting in partnership with the European Union's (EU) pilot biometric reader activity. At this time, the identified municipalities are; Bihac, Gradiska, Derventa, Bijeljina, Konjic, Ilidza, Gorazde, Capljina, Trebinje, Brcko District. These are subject to refinement and changes. A USAID pilot with ballot scanners should be done in the same municipalities as those the EU is working

in. Additional municipalities, beyond the use of the ballot scanning pilot, and for the purposes of meeting Objective one goals, should also be proposed in consultation with the CEC. It is assumed that for these interventions there will be a much broader coverage of beneficiaries.

Q.7. Would USAID consider allowing the illustrative Year 1 work plan to be included as a 2-page proposal annex, rather than requiring it within the 25-page limit for the PWS (Section L, pg.73)?

A.7. USAID will allow the illustrative Year 1 work plan to be included as annex to the technical proposal. See Amendment 1 to the solicitation.

Q.8. RFP Pg. 73 USAID states “The offerors shall propose no more than three key personnel positions including the Chief of Party (COP). The COP position for the project should be of Expat nationality.”

Will USAID kindly reconsider this preference regarding the COP? Alternatively, would USAID kindly consider allowing a transition to a local COP at a later stage in the project?

A.8. Due to the political sensitivity of the activity and the perception of fraud in the election process, USAID would like a non-local COP for the duration of both election cycles (2024 and 2026) to avoid a BiH citizen from being the target of political attacks.

Q.9. Section L.6.3 p. 74 of the RFP requires offerors to submit Contractor Performance - Short Forms for all contracts/awards within the past six years that are of similar size/scope/complexity. For offerors that have implemented many similar awards in the past six years, may we limit the number of awards for which we submit this information to five?

A.9. Offerors are required to provide performance information for all relevant awards similar in size, scope and complexity for the past six years.

Q. 10. Section L.6.3 (a) p. 74 states that the offeror must submit past performance information for itself and major subcontractors. Can USAID confirm that major subcontractors should submit this information for all relevant programs in the past six years? Can the offeror submit this information for just one relevant program for major subcontractors?

A.10. The Offeror is required to provide past performance information for itself and each major subcontractor.

Q.11. RFP p. 74 L.6.3: Can USAID clarify whether the offeror should submit Attachment J.7 for programs that do not have CPARS? Or is it sufficient to provide a list of contact names, job titles, mailing addresses, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, a description of the performance, and an explanation of relevance to the solicitation for these programs? Furthermore, where CPARS do not exist for previous programs, should the offeror provide self-assessments of the program's performance on 1.) Quality 2.)

Cost Control; 3.) Schedule; 4.) Management or business relations; 5.) Regulatory Compliance; and 6.)

Small business utilization, or will USAID acquire this information by completing reference checks for these programs?

A.11. Offerors may use the short form to present past performance information. Please see Section L.6.3.1 and Section L.6.3.2.

Q.12. RFP Pg. 75 USAID states that “USAID anticipates receiving between $4,000,000 and $6,000,000 to fund this activity over the four-year contract term out of which $750,000 must be reserved for Pod Lupom election monitoring activities (GUC).”

Q.12.a. Since USAID has already approved an award to Pod Lupom, can USAID please clarify what inputs are required from Pod Lupom beyond a budget, budget narrative, and Letter of Commitment?

A.12.a. USAID requires an activity description with illustrative activities and illustrative achievements. The funds provided to Pod lupom under this contract will not be sufficient to fully cover civil observation in two election cycles, i.e. 2024 and 2026 Municipal and General elections respectively. Further, Pod lupom has a history of receiving funds from other international donors and are likely to receive these in the future. The offeror should propose at least an illustrative activity description for Pod lupom which would build their capacity as the major player in election observations. This activity description will be defined in the annual work plan.

Q.12.b. Can USAID please confirm that this means Pod Lupom is anticipated to be the only local subawardee under this contract?

A.12.b. USAID confirms that Pod lupom is anticipated to be the only local sub-grantee under this contract since this Coalition of civil society organizations has developed a unique election observation methodology and has been implementing election observation for many years.

Q.13. Section L.7.A p. 75 of the RFP states that $500,000 of the proposed budget must be reserved to pilot the use of technology at polling stations as a subcontract. Are offerors expected to propose subcontractors to implement this award, or does USAID have a subcontractor in mind to implement this work.

A.13. Potential Offerors should perform their own market research and communicate closely with the CEC on their market research into ballot scanners.

Q.14. Will USAID approve a letter of credit for disbursement of the $750,000 Grants Under Contract funding?

A.14. USAID/BiH is willing to approve a letter of credit for disbursement of Grants under Contract.

Q.15. Does USAID intend for a grant under this contract to be issued to the Pod Lupom network as a single recipient, or should there be a competitive grants pool with eligibility restricted to organizations that are part of the Pod Lupom network?

A.15. USAID/BIH intends for a single grant under contract to be issued to the Pod lupom network.

This is the only coalition of civil society organizations trained to conduct civil observation of the elections and USAID/BiH seeks to contribute in sustaining Pod lupom's efforts through this grant and capacity building.

Q.16. Section L.7.1 (i) Personnel: Thank you for providing the LCP maximum annual rate. Will USAID provide a copy of the most recent local compensation plan? If not, could USAID please provide the range for the following categories: junior level, mid-level, senior level and senior management?

A.16. Please see updates under Section L.7.1(i).

Q.17. Section L.7.3 Policies and Procedures: Is the offeror required to submit its organizational policies and procedures with the proposal, or is it sufficient for the offeror to certify it has the referenced policies and procedures in place and will provide these to USAID upon award?

A.17. It is sufficient for the offeror to certify and reference the policies and submit a copy of policies if requested by the Contracting Officer. See Amendment 1 to the solicitation.

Q.18. Are the indicators included in USAID's Logframe mandatory for this program, or may the offeror propose alternative indicators based on the proposed approach?

A.18. Please refer to the revised logframe. Offerors are required to propose non-output indicators for the Purpose, Sup-purpose 1, and Sub Purpose 2 level results. Offerors should feel free to further develop the logframe (i.e. expand it with outcomes/outputs) and add appropriate indicators for such result levels. Offerors should include relevant SFAI indicators, as appropriate.

Q.19. SOO Pg. 2 USAID states “The contract will build on past USAID work in election integrity”. We appreciate USAID’s recognition of the importance of incorporating lessons learned into new program designs. To ensure all offerors are able to do so, would USAID kindly request implementers of such BiH election integrity programs to please upload the quarterly and annual reports to the DEC, per their award requirements and good development practice.

A.19. See additional documents for your review: SPPG Midterm Evaluation and Attachment J.11 Quarterly Reports, Objective 4, SPPG.

https://measurebih.com/uimages/MII20SPPG20PE20Report20FINAL2028completed292011-11-2021.pdf