SF30_Amendment 1_TIF_Questions and Answers (1).pdf

iv

Lebanon Trade and Facilitation (TIF) Activity

Request for Proposals No.: 72026820R00002

Attachment: Question and Answers Document

Question No.1

Section B.4 on pages 8-9 of the RFP, includes a budget schedule where the lower end of the budget range totals $64,000,000, as opposed to the $65,000,000 stated in the cover letter of the

RFP. Could USAID confirm that the lower end of the maximum budget estimate range is

$65,000,000?

USAID Response: The minimum amount for this activity is $64,000,000. See amended

RFP Cover Page for revised language.

Question No. 2

Section F.4 on page 16 of the RFP, lists Mrs. Rana El Jordi and Mr. Juan E. Proaño as recipients of all official communications related to the activity. Should Mrs. El Jordi and Mr. Proaño also be copied on proposal submissions?

USAID Response: No. Please note that all official communications related to this RFP must be submitted to TIFLebanonProposals@usaid.gov only.

Question No. 3

Section F.7.D.3 on page 30 of the RFP states a due date of ninety (90) days after contract execution as the due date for the Grants Manual while the Reporting and Deliverable Matrix in Section F.9 on page 31-32 of the RFP, lists a due date for the Grants Manual of sixty (60) days after contract award. Could USAID confirm the due date for the Grants Manual is ninety (90) days after contract execution?

USAID Response: The Grants Manual is due 60 days after contract execution. See amended

RFP page 30 for revised language.

Question No. 4

Section H.12(a)(1) on page 46 of the RFP, requests Cognizant Contracting Officer’s approval of salaries for “individual(s) that exceed 4% ceiling of the individual’s current salary or wage or the highest rate of annual salary or wage received during any full year of the immediately preceding three (3) years.” Under USAID’s new instructions on the Employee Biographical

Data (EBD) sheet, implementing partners must propose salaries at the market value for positions combined with a supporting rationale. On page 131, the RFP further states that “The

Biographical Data Sheets must include market value determination, proposed position, chronology of relevant work experience and academic qualification.” Considering the new EBD sheet and market value determination method, can USAID remove or revise the language contained in RFP section H.12(a)(1) to reflect the new requirements?

USAID Response: USAID agrees and has removed the requirement that one annual salary increase shall not be more than 4% after completion of each twelve-month period of mailto:TIFLebanonProposals@usaid.gov v satisfactory services under the contract. In accordance with AIDAR 752.7007 Personnel

Compensation, direct compensation of the Contractor’s personnel will be in accordance with the Contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, and the cost principles applicable to this contract. Merit or promotion increases should not exceed those provided by the contractor's established policy and practice. Please see page 45 of amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 5

Section H.42 on page 72 of the RFP, states that “VAT and customs duties are excluded from the cost of this contract.” Given the difficulties in obtaining VAT exemptions for USAID projects in

Lebanon, would USAID consider amending the RFP to instruct all offerors to include VAT in their cost proposals?

USAID Response: No. VAT costs must not be included as part of the cost proposal.

Question No. 6

Section L.6(d) on page 114 of the RFP, requires that a separate cover letter in PDF format accompany the TIF proposal. Section L.12.2 on page 117 requires a cover letter to be included as part of the technical proposal. May offerors include a 1-page cover page in the technical proposal instead of a second cover letter?

USAID Response: Yes, Offerors are allowed to include a 1-page cover page in the technical proposal that is not within the 20-page technical proposal limit, per Section L.12.2, instead of a second cover letter as specified in Section L.6(d).

Question No. 7

Section L.12.1.5 on page 116 of the RFP, permits the use of a font smaller than 12-point for maps, charts, and exhibits. May offerors also use a font smaller than 12-point for textboxes?

USAID Response: Offerors are not allowed to use a font smaller than 12-point for textboxes.

Question No. 8

Section L.12.2 on page 117 of the RFP, lists the draft Monitoring, Learning, and Evaluation

(MEL) Plan both in section 4. Technical Approach of the technical proposal and as Annex E.

Please confirm that the draft MEL Plan should be submitted only as Annex E, as referenced on pages 117 in the RFP.

USAID Response: Yes, the MEL Plan should only be submitted as Annex E.

Question No. 9

Section L.12.2 on page 117 of the RFP, lists the pages limit of the Technical Proposal as (15 pages maximum). Please confirm that the technical proposals are limited to 20 pages as referenced in sections L.12.1 (pages 116 and 117) in the RFP.

vi

USAID Response: The page limit for the Technical Proposal is 20-pages maximum. Please see page 116 and 117 of the amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 10

Section L.16.3 on page 131 of the RFP, instructs that “For CCNs, the salary in Blocks 6, 14, and

15 must be stated in local currency with the US Dollars equivalency in parenthesis.” Would

USAID confirm this language applies only to Box 6, considering USAID’s new EBD sheet eliminating salary history from boxes 14 and 15?

USAID Response: USAID confirms that only Box 6 must be stated in local currency with the US Dollars equivalency in parentheses as salary history has been eliminated from boxes

14 and 15 in the new Biodata Form. Please see page 130 of amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 11

Section L.16.8(4), in reference to the information requested per Section L.16.3 Part 3– Annexes, could USAID please confirm that offerors are only required to submit policies and procedures

(Annexes 3, 4, and 5) for themselves and subcontractors without prior USAID contracting experience (per Section L.16.5)?

USAID Response: USAID confirms that offerors are required to submit Cost Proposal

Annexes 3, 4 and 5 for major subcontractors that have not previously submitted this information to USAID. Please see page 150 of amended RFP for revised language.

Question No.12

Section F.7.A on page 20 of the RFP, requests the ”Offeror to propose the technical deliverables based on their proposed PWS as part of the MEL Plan.” Section L and Section M do not require the technical deliverables to be included in the MEL plan. Could USAID confirm that technical deliverables must be included in the MEL plan, as referenced in section F.7.A on page 20?

USAID Response: USAID has changed the language in Section F.7.A of the amended RFP to instruct Offerors to propose technical deliverables based on their technical approach in the

PWS and submitted as Technical Proposal Annex G. Please see pages 20, 116-119, and 134 of amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 13

Can USAID confirm that offerors can apply a fee to Grants Under Contract?

USAID Response: No fee should be assessed on the Grants Under Contract portion of the budget.

Question No. 14

Please confirm if USAID wants Section K as Annex 9 (Section L.6.d page 114: “For Section K, offerors shall either submit the Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors as Cost Annex 9”) or Part 4 (Section L.16.4 page 139: “Part 4 - Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors”).

vii

USAID Response: USAID confirms that the offeror must include within Annex 9 all

Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors, as required in Section K of the RFP.

Question No. 15

Due to the complex operating environment and details required to address the Activity solicitation, the offeror respectfully requests that USAID consider extending the deadline of the subject RFP by a minimum of two weeks.

USAID Response: USAID extends the deadline of the submission of Technical and Cost

Proposals for the subject amended RFP to March 26, 2020 at 5:00 PM Beirut time (10:00

AM EST). See amended RFP Cover Page and SF30 for revisions.

Question No. 16

Would USAID please provide information on what might trigger the increased quantity options?

USAID Response: Exercise of an Option period under the proposed RFP is determined by the conditions and considerations included under FAR 17.207 Exercise of Options.

Question No. 17

Would a triggering of the increased quantity option in year 4 also be accompanied with an increase in the performance period since projects often begin the close down process at about year 4.5

USAID Response: No, exercising an option period would not be accompanied by an extension in the resulting contract’s period of performance. Please refer to section F.3

Period of Performance and the cover letter for additional information.

Question No. 18

Section H.12(a)(1) and H.12(d) state that initial salaries may not exceed 4 percent over the current salary and that annual salary increases may not exceed 4 percent. We respectfully request the removal of H.12(a)(1) and H.12(d) as it appears to conflict with AIDAR 752.7007, Personnel

Compensation, incorporated in the contract under Section H.11, which stipulates that personnel compensation be in accordance with the contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, with reimbursement subject only to the USAID Contractor Salary Threshold. The limitation on salary increases may preclude contractors from following their established policies, procedures, and practices as required by AIDAR 752.7007.

USAID Response: Please refer to Question No. 4 above.

Question No. 19 On page 46, Section H.12(f) states: “Unless the consultant is an employee of the contractor, they are considered subcontractors subject to the applicable clauses 52.244-2 requirements.” We respectfully ask USAID to consider the following revision: “Unless consultants are engaged as labor and hence considered contractor personnel, they are considered subcontractors subject to the applicable clauses and requirements.” It is our understanding that a consultant by definition cannot be an employee.

viii

FAR 31.205-33 (a) defines “professional and consultant services,” as “those services rendered by persons who are members of a particular profession or possess a special skill and who are not officers or employees of the contractor.” Because consultants provide personal services, they are considered contractor personnel, and their billable costs are governed by the contract clauses and regulations related to personnel (RFP Sections H.11 and H.12). When an individual is engaged as a legally constituted organization, including sole proprietorship, they are considered a subcontractor and subject to the appropriate contractual requirements.

USAID Response: USAID agrees to the requested change in language that, “Unless consultants are engaged as labor and hence considered contractor personnel, they are considered subcontractors subject to the applicable clauses and requirements.” Please refer to pages 45 and

46 of the amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 20

As offerors are not required to procure and deliver commodities or services directly to or for USAID that adhere to Section 508 standards, and Section 508 standards apply only to U.S. federal agencies

(E202.1, Application, and General Exceptions E202.4 of the 508 standards), we respectfully ask

USAID to remove Section H.23 from the contract.

USAID Response: USAID agrees and Section H.23 has been removed from the RFP. Please refer to pages 54 and 55 of the amended RFP.

Question No. 21 Section I.7 incorporates FAR 52.216-24 (Limitation of Government Liability). This FAR clause prescribes that this clause be included when a letter contract is contemplated. Because prior sections of the RFP describe a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract instead of a letter contract, would USAID please consider removing this FAR clause?

USAID Response: USAID agrees with this request and has deleted the provision FAR

52.216-24 from the amended RFP. Please refer to pages 79 and 86 of the amended RFP.

Question No. 22 Section L.12.2 notes that the technical proposal is limited to 15 pages, whereas Section L.12.1 states that technical proposals are limited to 20 pages. Can USAID kindly confirm that the page limit of the technical proposal is 20 pages?

USAID Response: Please refer to Question No. 9 above.

Question No. 23 Section L.12.2. states that the Draft MEL Plan should be included in the technical approach following the performance work statement but is also listed as Annex E to the technical proposal.

Can USAID confirm that the correct placement of the Draft MEL Plan is in Annex E only?

USAID Response: Please refer to Question No. 8 above.

Question No. 24

Section L.12.2 states that the Draft Staffing Plan and Organizational Chart must be limited to three pages. Given the requirements listed in Section L.13.2.B and Section M.4, including a description of ix roles and responsibilities, an organization chart, and an explanation of how coordination and collaboration with subawardee(s), partners, subcontractors (if any), and USAID is envisioned to operate, would USAID consider increasing the page limit to five pages?

USAID Response: No, the page limit for the Draft Staffing Plan and Organizational Chart remains unchanged (three pages).

Question No. 25

Section L.13.1.C of the RFP indicates that “offerors must also describe the process that they will follow to finalize the draft MEL Plan during the first six (6) months of the award period,” while

Section F.9 indicates that the final MEL Plan must be submitted within 60 days after contract award.

Could USAID clarify whether the MEL Plan is due six months or 60 days after contract execution?

USAID Response: The final MEL Plan must be submitted 60 days after the contract execution. Please see page 120 of amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 26

Section L.16 indicates a 2 MB limit for all files included in the cost proposal submission by email, whereas Section L.6 indicates a 25MB limit for files associated with the cost proposal (i.e., Excel spreadsheets). A compiled cost or technical proposal is likely to significantly exceed 2 MB, requiring proposals to be split into a cumbersome number of parts. Additionally, it may not be possible to split or reduce certain files (such as spreadsheets) to be smaller than 2 MB. As a result, to aid in reading/compiling the proposals, would USAID confirm that a 25 MB file limit is acceptable?

USAID Response: USAID confirms that the file limit is 25 MB as described in section

L.6.d. Please refer to page 125 of the amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 27

Section L.16.3 Part 3 lists nine annexes to be submitted with the cost proposal. Section L.16.4 includes many of the same requirements in a different order with separate instructions.

a) Can USAID please confirm that the offeror should follow the list of annexes included in

Section L.16.3 Part 3?

b) Given that Section L.16.5 Part 5 only requires personnel and travel policies if the “Offeror does not have prior USAID contracting experience,” can USAID clarify which of the annexes in

L.16.3 are required for offerors with prior USAID contracting experience?

c) For non-major subcontractors, per Section L.16.8.(4), could USAID please confirm that offerors are not required to submit the information requested in Section L.16.3, Part 3 –

Annexes, with the exception of Annex 1 (Form AID 1420-17) and Annex 9 (Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offeror)?

USAID Response:

a) Yes, offerors should follow the list of annexes included in Section L.16.3 Part 3.

b) If the Offeror has submitted the contents of these annexes to USAID previously, only personnel and travel policies should not be submitted. As otherwise instructed, all other

Annexes included under L.16.3 must be included as part of the cost proposal.

c) USAID confirms that nonmajor subcontractors are only required to submit Annex 1 and

Annex 9.

x

Question No. 28

Page 131, Section L.16.A, states that “Biographical Data Sheets are also required all identified long-term, short-term expatriate and home office personnel and all long-term and short term cooperating country personnel being proposed, as well as for all proposed consultants.” Would USAID kindly consider requiring biographical data sheets only for identified long-term expatriate, third country national, and cooperating country nationals rather than for all long and short-term identified personnel?

USAID Response: Biographical data sheets are required for all identified long-term, short-term expatriate and home office personnel, and all long-term and short term cooperating country personnel being proposed, as well as for all proposed consultants.

Question No. 29

Section M.4, Sub-Criteria 1.2 and Section L.13.1.A state that the PWS must include deliverables, measurable results and numerical targets to achieve the objectives of the activity. Similarly, Section

L.13.1.C states that the Draft MEL Plan must include targets, which will also be reflected in the fixed fee schedules included in the cost proposal. Rather than listing performance/technical deliverables and targets in the PWS and Draft MEL Plan, would USAID consider allowing offerors to submit them as an additional annex to the technical proposal?

USAID Response: See Question 12 above.

Question No. 30

Attachment J.8 includes a number of costs that do not align exactly with the line items found within the Prime/Subcontractor Costs sheet — e.g., the shipment of HHEs, “other” insurances, legal/bank/transportation/temporary services, software, security costs and guard services, VAT, vehicles, and freight.

a) Could USAID please advise how these costs should be included in Attachment J.8? Are offers permitted to add line items within the Price/Subcontract Costs sheets according to our own accounting standards?

b) Could USAID please confirm that the line items on the Summary Budget are defined by the line items listed under the Prime/Subcontractor Costs sheets; for example, Equipment on the Summary Budget should only include the Non-Security Equipment listed in the Prime Costs sheet?

c) Attachment J.8, Prime Costs, includes a line item in ODCs for Environmental Compliance and Management. Can USAID provide illustrative activities that might fall under this line item so that the offeror may budget accordingly?

d) Could USAID differentiate between short-term salaries, which are in Section A, and consultants, which are listed in Section C?

a) Attachment J.8 is a mandatory minimum format but Offerors are allowed to add line items to the detailed cost sheets in accordance with the offeror’s accounting standards.

xi

b) The line items included in the Summary Budget must include only those cost line items listed in Attachment J.8.

c) Please refer to Section H.21(3) Environmental Compliance and Requirements Contractor

Procedures of the RFP for a list of potential activities offerors will need to adhere to in terms of Environmental Compliance during the project activities. Also refer to Attachment J.10

Initial Environmental Evaluation (IEE) for additional information.

d) Section L.16.3, “Salaries” provides several sources each offeror might review to confirm personnel compensation. However, Direct salary and wages should be proposed in accordance with the Offeror’s personnel policies and in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements.

Question No. 31 USAID indicates in several places that there is a 20-page limit to the Technical Proposal. This includes references under L12.1 (items 4 and 5) and a reference under L.2.2 Organization of

Technical Proposal. However, USAID also included “{15 pages maximum}” in reference to the

Technical Proposal under L.12.2. Would USAID confirm that it intends to limit the technical proposal to 20 pages?

Question No. 32 On p. 117, USAID included both a Draft MEL Plan (item 4.iii) and Past Performance (item 6) in the outline to guide the organization of the Technical Proposal. The MEL Plan is also included as a required Annex, and both sections are excluded from the total page count of the Technical Proposal.

Would USAID consider requiring both items to be included as Annexes and removing them from the main body of the Technical Proposal outline?

USAID Response: No. The Draft MEL Plan (Annex E to the Technical Proposal) and Past

Performance (Section No.6 of the Technical Proposal) must be submitted in accordance with the instruction provided in the RFP under section L.12.2.

Question No. 33

With respect to B.5 Advance Understanding on Ceiling Indirect Cost Rates and Final

Reimbursement for Indirect Costs: It is our understanding that the government is not requiring a cost-sharing arrangement under the subject RFP, particularly since this requirement is not applicable to qualified Small Businesses and local organizations. For offerors with extensive past performance implementing prime contracts for the US Government and established NICRAs, the example situations described in FAR 42.707(b)(1) may not apply. In such cases, will the government consider waiving the requirement to apply ceiling rates for indirect costs? If not, can the government please clarify the requirement for ceilings on indirect costs?

USAID Response: USAID will not waive the application of ceiling rates for indirect costs at the solicitation stage for this procurement. For further information on NICRAs and indirect cost ceiling rates, please see USAID Automated Directives System 302.3.6.7

Negotiation of Indirect Cost Rates.

xii

Question No. 34

To effect efficient and rapid start-up, and to facilitate administration during implementation, would the government consider waiving or streamlining the requirements stipulated in H.12

Additional Requirements for Personnel Compensation (a)(1) if the contractor proposed a comprehensive Local Compensation Plan for CCN and TCN staff to the Contracting Officer for approval? We are mindful of USAID’s recent updates to form 1420 to remove salary history, USAID’s changing position on the use of salary history as the principal factor in driving personnel compensation rate determination, and the existing requirements of FAR 31.205-6 and

AIDAR 752.7007.

USAID Response: New language has been included in the referenced section that direct compensation of the Contractor’s personnel, including annual salary increases, will be in accordance with the Contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, and the cost principles applicable to this contract. Merit or promotion increases should not exceed those provided by the contractor's established policy and practice. Please see pages 45-46 of amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 35

For offerors that utilize a direct cost allocation methodology for headquarters staff, would the government consider waiving or streamlining the requirements stipulated in H.12 Additional

Requirements for Personnel Compensation (d) if the contractor submitted its headquarters compensation policy and associated bands for review by the Contracting Officer? We understand that this would not constitute any waiver of the Contractor Salary Threshold.

USAID Response: According to section H.11AIDAR 752.7007 Personnel Compensation

(2007) (a) Direct compensation of the Contractor’s personnel will be in accordance with the Contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, and the cost principles applicable to the resulting contract. In addition, L.16.3 Part 3 requires offerors to include a Copy of Human Resource/ Personnel policies and procedures as Annex 5.

Question No. 36

Can the government please confirm that H.12 Additional Requirements for Personnel

Compensation (f) represents a waiver of the normal consent to subcontract requirements at FAR

52.244-2 for consultants (i.e. independent contractors), provided COR approval is obtained in advance?

USAID Response: Revised wording has been included under Section H.12 (f). Please refer to pages 45 and 46 of the RFP for additional guidance. No waiver concerning the requirements of FAR 52.244-2 has been included under this RFP.

Question No. 37

Section H.12 Additional Requirements for Personnel Compensation (h) (paragraph 2) seems to indicate that employment agreements for CCNs/TCNs must specifically stipulate an annual raise entitlement. As we consider annual raises/compensation reviews to be merit-based following performance appraisal, can this language be clarified to state that employment agreements must xiii include provision that CCNs/TCNs are eligible for (rather than entitled to) annual salary increases?

USAID Response: Salary increases for CCNs/TCNs should be treated in accordance with the Offerors policies and procedures as instructed in Section 16.6.3 Salaries. The reference included under section H.12.h paragraph 2 is for budgeting purposes only, and does not instruct contractors to entail salary increases for CCN/TCN personnel.

Question No. 38

In light of the ongoing financial crisis and continued divergence of the official and unofficial market rates of exchange, would USAID consider specifying the rate of exchange to be used in budgeting, for purposes of cost realism and comparative analysis?

USAID Response: Offerors must include the current official Mid Rate approved by the

Government of Lebanon Central Bank of Lebanon, for their cost estimations. According to publicly available information, the official exchange Mid Rate as of February 27, 2020 is

LBP 1,507.50 per $1 U.S. Dollar.

Question No. 39

Can the government please clarify the language or intention in H.17 Confidentiality and

Ownership of Intellectual Property? This clause may conflict with standard provisions such as

FAR 52.227-14 Rights in Data-General, whistle-blower provisions, and H.29 ADS 302.3.5.21

Submission of Datasets to Development Data Library, etc

USAID Response: Clause H.17, rather than conflicting with the FAR and ADS, underscores the fact that reports and data collected under the resulting contract must be treated as sensitive and not be disseminated to the public without written consent of USAID personnel, when applicable.

Question No. 40

Section H.31 Limitation on Acquisition of Information Technology and H.37 Information

Technology Approval seem to impose a heavy administrative burden on both the contractor and government for even routine purchases necessary for performance (laptops, monitors, printers, etc.). Would USAID confirm whether item (4) signifies that desktop and laptop computers, peripherals, and other IT equipment purchased for use by project personnel in the regular course of implementation are excluded from the definition of “information technology” under this clause? If not, would the Contracting Officer consider any IT assets specified in the cost proposal as approved for the purposes of these clauses? Would the Contracting Officer use such assets as the basis for the list required in H.38 Nonexpendable Property and Information Technology

Resources?

USAID Response: USAID will review all “Information Technology” assets (as defined under section H.37) specified under the cost application for the successful offeror and will determine which items will be approved and included under the resulting contract at the time of contract execution.

xiv

Question No. 41

Can USAID please confirm that the additional approval request requirements stipulated at H.36

Subcontracting Requirements (c) and (d) only apply to subcontracts for which the contractor must obtain consent in accordance with FAR 52.244-2?

USAID Response: Yes. Approval request requirements stipulated under section H.36 (c) and (d) are applicable to subcontracts that need Contracting Officer consent in accordance with FAR 52.244-2.

Question No. 42

Section H.42 Value Added Tax (Vat) and Customs Duties indicates that VAT and customs duties are excluded from the cost of this contract, and that the Contractor is responsible for applying

[for] and obtaining exemption and refund of VAT from the host country Government.

Experience has demonstrated that the Lebanese government is inconsistent in granting exemptions, and in many cases has not granted it despite USAID’s support letter. We expect this reluctance to intensify under the current and growing fiscal pressures Lebanon is experiencing.

Would USAID consider waiving this clause or amending it to allow for recovery of VAT and customs duties in the event the Contractor is unable to obtain exemption from the host country government after reasonable efforts to do so?

USAID Response: VAT costs are not to be included in cost proposals. USAID will not waive or amend the above mentioned clause under the RFP.

Question No. 43

Regarding delivery instructions in section L.6 (page 114) a size limit of 25MB per email is specified. However, under section L.16 (page 126), a file size limit of 2MB is specified. Can

USAID clarify its guidance on the file size limits for submission?

USAID Response: Please refer to Question No. 26 above.

Question No. 44

On page 123 (section L.13), the RFP states that SOQ’s should include contact information for each prior employer. Given the seniority and breadth of experience key personnel typically bring, it is likely contact information has changed for some earlier employers. Also mindful of space constraints, would USAID consider revising the requirement to contact information being provided for only the three required recent references?

USAID Response: USAID confirms that Offerors must submit contact information for at least (3) recent references (within the past seven years) and not for all previous employers.

USAID will allow Offerors to limit previous employers and positions to most recent and relevant to TIF and fulfilling its objectives as part of point (3) of Section L.13.2.A Key and

Non-Key Personnel Summary. Please see page 122 of amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 45 xv

Given the complex situation in Lebanon at the moment, we would like to respectfully request that USAID consider a two-week extension to the due date of the submission of the technical and cost proposals.

USAID Response: Please refer to Question No. 15 above.

Question No. 46

On page 116, Section L.12.1, it states that the technical proposal narrative is 20 pages; however, on page 117, Section L.12.2 - Organization of the Technical Proposal, it states a 15 page maximum. Can USAID confirm the page limit for technical proposals?

Question No. 47

On page 117, Section L.12.2 Organization of Technical Proposal, we note that Past Performance is included as part of the technical proposal in addition to submission of Past Performance

Information due on February 28, 2020. Is it USAID's intention for Offerors to include the same information submitted on February 28, 2020 in the technical proposal or is this an opportunity for Offerors to expand on past performance experience?

USAID Response: Past performance information submitted according to the RFP deadline of February 28, 2020, will be considered final and used for evaluation and assist in responsibility determination purposes.

Question No. 48

Page 118, Section L.13.1.A Technical Approach Summary states “Offerors must provide definitions to key terms used in their proposals.” Can a supplemental section be allowed to present “Definitions of Key Terms” as part of the Acronym List, which is not considered within

Technical Proposal page limit?

USAID Response: USAID will allow Offerors to include “Definitions of Key Terms” as part of the Acronym list. This section will not be considered within the 20-page Technical

Proposal page limit and must not be more than 5 pages. Please see pages 116-117 of amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 49

Given the current situation and anticipated devaluation of the LBP, will USAID consider providing a blanket waiver to compensate CCN staff salaries in USD?

USAID Response: No, USAID will not provide a blanket waiver during the procurement phase of this solicitation.

Question No. 50

Will USAID provide an exchange rate for the budget?

USAID Response: Please refer to Question No. 38 above.

xvi

Question No. 51

On page 46, Section H.12(a)(1) limits salaries to 4% over “the individual’s current salary or wage or the highest rate of annual salary or wage received during any full year of the immediately preceding three (3) years.” However, since Offerors no longer collect salary history per the updated biodata form, there is no way for Offerors to confirm if offered rates are compliant with this clause. Instead, salaries are negotiated based on factors such as market rates.

As such, would USAID please consider striking this clause?

USAID Response: Please refer to Question No. 4 above.

Question No. 52

Please clarify requirements regarding Representations, Certifications and Other Statement of

Offerors? The last paragraph on page 114, Section L.6 of the RFP provides Offerors the option to either comply with FAR 52.204-7 via sam.gov or to submit Section K. However, L.16.3 explicitly requires that Section K be completed. Please clarify which section Offerors should follow.

USAID Response: Please refer to Question No. 14 above.

Question No. 53

The first paragraph on page 126, Section L.16 requests a detailed budget “by objective.”

However, later instruction under L.16.3.A, as well as the budget template, indicate that a budget by objective is not required for the base period or the option years, but only for Options 3-5.

Please clarify.

USAID Response: The reference to submitting a budget by objective has been deleted in section L.16. Please see page 125 of amended RFP. Please follow the mandatory budget template (Attachment J.8).

Question No. 54

Per the directions on page 128, Section L. 16.3 Annexes, Annex 7, please clarify if Offerors are to provide one certification for all personnel proposed, or one certification per person proposed?

USAID Response: Offerors are to provide one certification for all personnel proposed in response to the RFP.

Question No. 55

On page 133, Section L.16.3.C “Other Direct Costs” asks that Offerors include details such as venue for training costs and location for a project office. Since Offerors cannot guarantee that locations quoted will be available during implementation, would USAID please consider removing this requirement?

USAID Response: USAID will not remove this requirement from the RFP. Offerors should include all associated costs as specified in this question under the line item of “Other Direct xvii

Costs” in order to budget enough resources to accomplish the activities proposed under the program.

Question No. 56

Section L.16.4 on page 139 requires that subcontractors register on sam.gov. However, the FAR clause (52.204-7) which requires prime contractors to register on SAM is not a required flow-down to subcontractors. Since federal regulation does not require subcontractors to be registered on SAM unless they also hold a prime contract with the USG, will USAID please consider removing the requirement for SAM registration for subcontractors?

USAID Response: USAID confirms that SAM registration is not required for subcontractors not holding an active prime contract with the U.S Government. Please see page 138 of amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 57

On page 141, Section L.16.8 requires that subcontractors submit the information required in Part

3-Annexes (see page 127) of the cost proposal. Part 3 requires submission of the fixed fee schedule and a subcontracting plan under Annexes 6 and 8, respectively. Can USAID please confirm that subcontractors are exempt from submitting the following: Annex 6 fixed fee schedule; Annex 8 – Sub-contracting Plan?

USAID Response: Yes. USAID confirms that subcontractors are exempt from submitting

Annex 6: Fixed Fee Schedule, and Annex 8: Subcontracting Plan.

Question No. 58

On page 141, Section L.16.8 requires that subs submit the information required in Part 3-

Annexes (see page 127) of the cost proposal. Part 3 requires submission of Copy of Travel

Policies, Procurement Policies, and HR Policies in Annexes 3,4,5, respectively. However, on page 140, Section L.16.5 Part 5 Policies and Procedures, the RFP notes that Offerors without

USAID contracting experience should submit copies of personnel and travel policies, etc. Does this mean that subcontractors who have USAID contracting experience do not need to submit

Annexes 3, 4, 5?

USAID Response: Please refer to Question No. 27 above.

Question No. 59:

Section L.13.1.B on page 119 of the RFP, requires that the Program Work Statement (PWS) include sub-sections on 1. Objective, 2. Background, 3. Results and Goals, and 4. General

Program Parameters.

a. Please confirm our understanding that these initial sub-sections of the PWS, preceding 5.

Services/Tasks Required, are to be very brief summaries of material covered in other proposal sections and are to be included in the PWS solely to enable the PWS to become the complete Statement of Objectives of the resulting contract. The instructions in

Section L do not make clear how the contents of these sub-sections should differ, if at all, xviii from the corresponding statements in the SOO or from other sections of the offeror’s technical proposal.

b. Would USAID also consider including a page limit for these preliminary sub-sections over and above the 20-page limit for the technical proposal?

a) Please follow the instructions for the sub-sections on 1. Objective, 2. Background, 3.

Results and Goals, and 4. General Program Parameters of the Performance Work

Statement (PWS) as stated in Section L.13.1.B of the RFP.

b) USAID will not consider including a page limit for these sub-sections over and above the

20-page limit for the technical proposal.

Question No. 60:

Section L.12.2 on page 117 of the RFP, instructs offerors to include a draft organizational chart in Annex C to the technical proposal. Would USAID consider allowing offerors to also include the organizational chart in the technical proposal as a non-counting page for ease of reference?

USAID Response: No, please include the Draft Staffing Plan and Organizational Chart as instructed in the amended RFP.

Question No. 61:

Section L.13.1.A on page 118 of the RFP, states that “Offerors must provide definitions of key terms used in their proposals”. Would USAID consider allowing a list of definitions to be included as a non-counting page?

USAID Response: USAID will allow Offerors to include “Definitions of Key Terms” as part of the Acronym list. This section will not be considered within the 20-page Technical

Proposal page limit and must not be more than 5 pages. Please see page 116-117 of amended

RFP for revised language.

Question No. 62:

Section L.13.2.A on page 123 of the RFP, states that offerors “must include a Statement of

Qualifications (SOQ) (as Annex A) listing prior positions and employers (including contact information) for all proposed key personnel (not to exceed three pages per position) and technical experts (not to exceed two pages per position). […] Each SOQ shall also include at least three (3) recent references (within the past seven years) including telephone numbers and email addresses for each reference. SOQs are not part of the 15-page limit.”

a. Could USAID confirm that offerors do not need to submit contact information for every employer listed in SOQs, as this could jeopardize an employee’s standing and employment with their current employer? A comprehensive list of prior employers could also absorb a large portion of the two-page limit for those with multiple short-term consultant engagements. Would USAID instead confirm that offerors submit SOQs with xix position, company name, location of employment, and dates of engagement, and that contact information is to be provided for references only?

b. Would USAID please confirm that offerors need not provide SOQs for every technical expert but only the senior and more important technical experts?

a. USAID confirms that Offerors must submit contact information for at least (3) recent references (within the past seven years) and not for all previous employers. USAID will allow Offerors to limit previous employers and positions to most recent and relevant to

TIF and fulfilling its objectives as part of point (3) of Section L.13.2.A Key and Non-Key

Personnel Summary. Please see Question 44 above and page 122 of amended RFP for

b. Offerors must submit SOQs for proposed Key Personnel only.

Question No. 63

Could USAID clarify the difference between technical deliverables (referenced in section

F.7.A on page 20 and in section F.9 on page 31-33), and performance deliverables (referenced in section L.13.1.A on page 118 and section L.16 on page 126 onward)? Could USAID also clarify how the two relate to performance standards, referenced in section L.13.1.A on page 118 and section M.4.1 on page 144?

USAID Response: Technical and performance deliverables are synonymous terms that are defined as specific milestones and reports that the Offeror is expected to propose with a schedule in order to achieve TIF targets and objectives. These technical/performance deliverables must be described in Technical Proposal Annex G, and as per Section L.16.2

Part 2 - Proposed Costs/Prices Fixed Fee, of the amended RFP, are linked to fee payments for the contractor (See Attachment J.12 for Fixed Fee Schedule Template to be submitted as

Cost Proposal Annex 6) and are to be inserted into Section B of the final Contract. Please see pages 20, 116, 117, 118 126 and Attachment J.12 of amended RFP for revised language.

USAID will evaluate the Contractor’s performance during Contract implementation by using performance standards such as technical quality, cost control, timeliness, management/business relations, small business subcontracting (as applicable), and regulatory compliance regarding the Contractor’s performance. For more detailed information about Performance Standards, please refer to Section E.3 of the amended RFP.

Please see pages 117-119, and 143 of amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 64:

The budget template has a figure of $2,000,000 for grants under contract in Option 2, the fifth and last year of the activity. Will USAID consider programming some of these funds in the Base

Period or Option 1 to factor in the close down phase and reduce the risk of not being able to implement these grants in the last year?

xx

USAID Response: Offerors should explain how they will effectively and efficiently deploy grants within the timeframe of the activity. If an option is exercised, the contractor would know ahead of time and plan for grant implementation. This should be part of the Offeror’s technical approach that should include the usage of grants as part of the tools to achieve the

Offeror proposed results leading to the achievement of the stated objectives.

Question No. 65:

Section L.13.1.C on page 121 of the RFP, "The draft MEL Plan must explain how such performance targets contribute to the above-mentioned PMPs." Would USAID please define

"PMP," and specify when documentation related to PMPs would be made available?

USAID Response: This sentence has been deleted from the amended RFP and reference to the PMP has been removed. Please see page 120 of amended RFP.

Question No. 66:

On page 119, Section L.13.1. Performance Work Statement, in the third paragraph that begins

“The PWS must:” under point 4, USAID Lebanon writes “The PWS must identify those interventions within each Objective that will contribute to the Cross-Cutting Requirements as listed in Section F, and the SOO (CLA, coordination, local capacity, sustainability, gender equity, innovation, youth and gender equality and women’s empowerment). However, neither section F nor the SOO lay out these cross-cutting principles in a sub-section. Would USAID please provide clarification?

USAID Response: USAID hereby removes this sentence in Section L.13.1, from “Identify those interventions within each Objective that will contribute to the Cross-Cutting

Requirements as listed in Section F, and the SOO (CLA, coordination, local capacity, sustainability, gender equity, innovation, youth, and gender equality and women’s empowerment)”; to: “Identify those interventions within each Objective that will contribute to the Cross-Cutting Requirements (CLA, local capacity, sustainability, innovation, youth, and gender equality and women’s empowerment).” Please refer to Section F.7 of the RFP for additional information, and see page 118 of amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 67

Section L.13.1.C on page 122 of the RFP states "Academic quality...CBAs...will be a key aspect of the MEL plan." Would USAID please confirm that plans for use of CBA - but not completed

CBAs - must be included in the draft MEL plan?

USAID Response: Offerors should explain how they intend to use CBAs as part of their proposed draft MEL plan to inform decisions. Completed CBAs are not required for the proposal.

Question No. 68 Section F.7.A requests that the offeror propose technical deliverables based on their proposed PWS as part of the MEL Plan. Can USAID confirm that these technical deliverables refer to the indicators/activity deliverables described in Section L.16, Fixed Fee Template (page 139)?

xxi

USAID Response: USAID has changed the language in Section F.7.3 of the amended RFP to instruct Offerors to propose technical deliverables based on their technical approach in the

PWS and submitted as Technical Proposal Annex G.

Technical and performance deliverables are synonymous terms that are defined as specific milestones and reports that the Offeror is expected to propose with a schedule in order to achieve ARE targets and objectives. These technical/performance deliverables must be described in Technical Proposal Annex G, and as per Section L.16.2 Part 2 - Proposed

Costs/Prices Fixed Fee, of the amended RFP, are linked to fee payments for the contractor

(See Attachment J.12 for Fixed Fee Schedule Template to be submitted as Cost Proposal

Annex 6) as the indicators, activity deliverables, and technical/performance deliverables and are to be inserted into Section B of the final Contract. Please see pages 20, 116, 117, 118

126 and Attachment J.12 of amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 69:

Page 123, Section L.13.2.A, Key and Non-Key Personnel, refers to inclusion of a Statement of

Qualifications (SOQ) for “all proposed key personnel (not to exceed three pages per position) and technical experts non-key long term and short term - (not to exceed two pages per position)” as

Annex A and states that it “shall include items normally associated with CVs or resumes i.e. list of all previous employers & positions occupied and main achievements.” Given limitations on space, would USAID consider revising the requirements so that SOQs limit previous employers and positions to those most recent and relevant to the activity and fulfilling its objectives? Additionally, could USAID confirm that SOQs are only required for all proposed long-term personnel?

USAID Response: Please refer to Question No. 62 above.

Question No. 70:

On page 24 under Section B.7 (Baseline Report), the RFP states, “The draft MEL Plan will outline the Contractor’s approach for establishing the baseline.” In Section C.8 (Monitoring, Evaluation, and

Learning Plan) on page 28, the RFP states, “The draft MEL Plan must include estimated values for baseline data (including plan for baseline data collection).” Could USAID confirm that the offeror is to propose estimated values for baseline data in addition to the approach for establishing the baseline?

USAID Response: USAID confirms that the Offeror is to propose estimated values for baseline data in addition to explaining the approach for establishing the baseline in the MEL

Plan. Section F, paragraph B, point 7 means that the awarded offeror has to complete the baseline data collection within 180 days of award and submit it to the COR for approval in a baseline report.

Question No. 71:

Under L.12.1 item 5, USAID indicates that “Maps, charts or exhibits may use a font size smaller than 12 point as long as they are legible without magnification.” On the following page, USAID specifies that “type may be 10-point font in charts and graphs.” Would USAID confirm that, per the first instruction, offerors may use fonts smaller than 10-point in graphs and charts, as long as magnification is not required to read the content?

xxii

USAID Response: Text must not be smaller than 10-point in graphs and charts. Please see page 115 of amended RFP for revised language.

Question No. 72:

Section H.16 Language Requirements and Reporting includes what appears to be a blanket requirement for language skills of both English and Arabic of at least Foreign Service Institute proficiency level IV. It is not clear whether it is USAID’s intent for this requirement to apply to all personnel working on the contract, including Contractor personnel working in the US. Given that language proficiency requirements differ considerably based on the location, duties, and other attribute of potential roles under the contract, would USAID consider removing or amending this clause to clarify its intended scope?

USAID Response: The referenced requirement for Arabic Level IV has been removed. See amended RFP Page 50 for revised language.

Question No. 73

On page 121 (section L.13), the RFP indicates the draft MEL plan must explain “how performance targets contribute to the above-mentioned PMPs”. Can USAID please clarify the location of these PMPs within the RFP?

USAID Response: See response to Question 65 above.

Question No. 74

Can USAID please clarify if there is a preference for how to show MEL targets options 1-5, as is illustrated in table 2 of the cost proposal (page 138).

USAID Response: There is no preference for how to show MEL targets.

Question No. 75

Page 117, L.12.2 Organization of Technical Proposal prescribes including the Draft MEL Plan under item No. 4. Technical Approach, sub-bullet iii. Draft MEL Plan. A second reference is made to Annex E: Draft MEL Plan. Please clarify if Offerors should include the Draft MEL Plan in both sections of the Technical Proposal.

USAID Response: Please refer…