Amendment 3 - Attachment 1 - Q&A.pdf

Attachment No. One (1)

Questions and Answers to RFP 72027819R00011

1. B.6.1.h Locally-Hired National Personnel or Other Non-U.S. Expatriate Rates. It states

“Salaries for individual locally-hired personnel and other non-U.S. expatriates under this contract and any resulting subcontract must be in accordance with AIDAR 752.7007, Personnel

Compensation (July 2007), and should be based upon a combination of factors including the prevailing compensation paid to personnel performing comparable work in the cooperating country as determined by USAID and consideration of the individual's education, work experience and recent relevant salary history. Unless otherwise authorized by USAID, the compensation for CCN and TCN labor must not exceed the prevailing compensation paid to personnel performing comparable work in the cooperating country.”

It is confusing that in B.6.1 Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates states “(a) Unburdened Ceiling

Daily Rates (“CDR”) apply to all labor (i.e., the prime contractor, subcontractor, Third Country

Nationals (“TCNs”), Cooperating Country Nationals(“CCNs”), and consultant salaries) on cost-type task orders. CDRs assume a productive, eight hour work day.”

B6.1 (a) indicates we should propose unburdened CDR’s for expats, TCNs and CCN’s while section(h) indicates that compensation for CCN and TCN personnel should be based on the criteria in (h).

Answer: B.6.1(h) has been removed from the RFP. The change to the Form 1420 - Biographical

Data Form - removed the requirement to provide salary history on the form to USAID. With the revised form it is the responsibility of the offeror to justify the proposed salary for key personnel

(or other personnel where submission of the form is required) and all other employees based on the market value for a position in accordance with the offerors compensation policy. Recent relevant salary history and other relevant factors may be considered as part of the offerors negotiation of the salary with an individual after the offeror has set the negotiation range for a position based on market value in accordance with the offerors compensation policy.

Please note, removal of this language does not remove AIDAR 752.7007 and AIDAR 722.170 from the RFP and resulting contract.

Further, B.6.1(a) is amended as follows: “(a) Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates (“CDR”) apply to all labor (i.e., the prime contractor, subcontractor, Third Country Nationals (“TCNs”), Cooperating Country Nationals(“CCNs”), and consultant salaries) on cost-type task orders.”

2. Section B.6.1(h) establishes guidance for rate setting for CCNs and “other non-US expatriates.” The article refers to “recent relevant salary history” as a factor for determining salary rates. Given USAID’s recent change to Form 1420 – Biographical Data Form – which has removed salary history as a salary setting consideration, we would appreciate guidance as to how to adhere to this directive.

Kindly also note that Article H.31 “Additional Requirements for Personnel Compensation” also refers to salary history in the context of a prior approval requirement if proposed salary exceeds

3% of current salary which raises a similar request for clarification.

Answer: Please see question 1. With regards to Article H.31, please note the revised clause, attached.

3. Section B.6.1. (h) on page 7 states: “All locally hired national personnel and other non-U.S.

expatriates must be paid in accordance with AIDAR 722.170 … Personnel Compensation (July

2007), and should be based upon a combination of factors including the prevailing compensation paid to personnel performing comparable work in the cooperating country as determined by

USAID and consideration of the individual's education, work experience and recent relevant salary history. Unless otherwise authorized by USAID, the compensation for CCN and TCN labor must not exceed the prevailing compensation paid to personnel performing comparable work in the cooperating country.” Can USAID please share the applicable local compensation plan, and the highest local daily rate based on the current plan?

Answer: Please see response to questions 1 and 2. It is Mission Policy not to provide the Mission

Local Compensation (LCP) Plan.

4. Section B, Table 1. Labor Categories (page 8) Can USAID kindly allow offerors to propose additional labor categories? Specifically one tailored towards home office project management support?

Answer: No categories are to be added to the RFP labor categories. Categories are considered sufficiently broad to encompass all anticipated labor at the IDIQ level.

5. Section B.6.1(h) (page 10) states, “Unless otherwise authorized by USAID, the compensation for CCN and TCN labor must not exceed the prevailing compensation paid to personnel performing comparable work in the cooperating country. Unless otherwise authorized, the currency in which compensation is paid to contractors shall be in accordance with the prevailing local compensation practice of the post.” We request that these clauses be removed from the

RFP, as they appear inconsistent with AIDAR 752.7007, Personnel Compensation, incorporated in the contract under Section B.6.1(h) and H.2, which stipulates that personnel compensation accord with contractors’ policies, procedures, and practices, with reimbursement subject only to the proposed ceiling daily rates (CDRs) and USAID Contractor Salary Threshold. The rate restriction above may preclude contractors from following established policies, procedures, and practices as required by AIDAR 752.7007, which governs all USAID cost-reimbursement contracts.

Answer: Please answers to questions 1, 2 and 3.

6. Section F.7.2 and Section I.7 - Pages 67 & 144 - The two sections establish conflicting minimum and maximum order thresholds. Please clarify.

Answer: Discrepancy is noted. Section I.7 is revised as attached.

7. Section F.2 Performance Period (page 49) indicates, “the ordering period is limited to five years. Task orders may be issued during the ordering period with a maximum period of performance of no more than five years not to exceed the contract end date … For example, task orders issued during Years 1 and 2 may have a five-year period of performance, whereas task orders issued during Years 3, 4, and 5 will have less than a five-year period of performance.”

This suggests that the IDIQ contract period of performance would be seven years, allowing task orders issued during Year 2 to extend for five years. However, the cover letter and L.4(a) states that USAID anticipates awarding “five-year IDIQs.” Could USAID clarify the IDIQ’s period of performance?

Answer: The period of performance for this Contract is five (5) years from the date of award.

Although Task Orders may be issued at any time during this ordering period, two constraints apply to the period of performance for Task Orders. First, the period of performance for a Task

Order may not go beyond two (2) years after the end of the ordering period of the IDIQ. Second, a Task Order Contract Officer (TOCO) may not award a Task Order for a period of performance that goes more than five (5) years at the time the order is either awarded or extended by modification.

8. Section F.5 (Page 51) of the RFP states “[Contracting Officer’s] Approval is not required for non-key personnel, unless their rates exceed the CDR in section B.” Similarly, Section H.31 (b and c) (Page 98) state that proposed salaries should reflect “market value” and follow the contractor’s established policy and practice. However, Section H.31 (d) states that Contracting

Officer approval is needed if the proposed salary is 3% higher than the current salary. This conflicts with both Sections F.5 and H.31 (b-c) *and* the new USAID Biographical Data Sheet requirement, which prohibits consideration of salary history. Please confirm that Section H.31

(d) is not applicable and should be removed.

Answer: Please see answer to question 2.

9. Section H.31 (page 98): Section H.31(b) indicates that USAID will consider the “market value” of proposed positions and the qualifications of candidates to determine whether a proposed salary is reasonable. However, under H.31 (d), the RFP includes language noting that the Contracting Officer must approve salaries above a 3% threshold over a candidate’s current or other salary within the last year. This language under H.31 (d) appears to contradict USAID’s recent actions to eliminate salary history from the USAID 1420-17 (EBD) form and to review salary approvals based on market determinations instead of an individual’s salary history. Would

USAID consider removing the language under section H.31 (d) or provide guidance to implementers on how they will strike a balance between instructions in Section H.31 (b) and

H.31 (d)?

Answer: Please see answer to question 2.

10. Referring to Section H.31(d) Initial Salaries, we appreciate USAID’s move to market-based salary justifications in compliance with compensation cost principles and the revised format of the SF 1420 Biodata. We understand the requirement to get an approval from the CO if existing

Contractor employees proposed to work under the contract receive more than a 3% increase from their current or preceding year rate.

However, would USAID clarify that NEW employees, who do not have a “current” salary with the Contractor, are not subject to this cap? It is the practice of most Contractors (especially those under CAS) to establish compensation for new hires in line with an overall market-based compensation policy, commensurate with established levels/grades and salary ranges. This is consistent with FAR 31.205-6 Compensation for Personal Services and the Selected Areas of

Cost guidebook of the DCAA Contract Audit Manual (CAM). Conversely, imposing a 3% cap on any preceding salary would be contrary to the compliance and consistency requirements of

FAR 31.205-6. It could also contribute to inequities of pay, as a wide range of social, demographic, and economic factors can contribute to salary histories not fairly representing the market value of an employee is hired into.

Answer: Please see answer to question 2.

11. Under H.31(e), the RFP establishes an approval requirement for any “replacement” personnel who do not either have 1) approved position under the contract or 2) whose proposed salary exceeds the approved salary limit for the approved position under the final proposal budget.

Would USAID consider limiting the applicability of this clause to CPFF Term Task Orders only?

Per FAR 16.306, under all other TO types the Contractor is asked to deliver completion targets or other types of deliverables while being reimbursed for allowable costs of the appropriate mix of labor positions, as needed. Under these types of task orders, the H.31(e) approval requirement is unnecessarily restrictive and administratively burdensome, and it will reduce Contractors’ flexibility to employ the right labor mix to timely complete scopes of work under CPFF

Completion, CPAF or CPIF Task Orders.

Answer: Please see answer to question 2.

12. Under paragraph H.31(f), the RFP establishes ceilings for international and CCN staff on the reimbursable base salary. However, this paragraph seems to contradict Section B.6.1

Unburdened Ceiling Rates (a) which indicates that CDR ceilings apply to all personnel, including TCNs and CCNs. In establishing ceiling rates for TCNs and CCNs, it also lists only the international ceiling rate of USAID CST. Can USAID please clarify what ceiling rates will apply to personnel compensation for US, CCN and TCN personnel?

Answer: Please see answer to question 2.

13. Paragraph H.31(h) makes a specific distinction between short term employees and consultants based on AIDAR definitions. In practice, however, Contractors often employ a wider range of labor types in the implementation of Task Orders. These include: Regular Employees.

Existing or newly hired individuals who may be assigned to work under contracts. They are subject to market-based corporate compensation policies, promotional increases and workforce development. Eligible for full fringe benefits. Fixed Term Employees. Hired specifically to perform under one or more contracts, these employees are subject to overall market-based compensation policies, but not to promotional potential or other non-permanent employee benefits. Normally eligible for limited fringe benefits. Short Term Purchased Labor Consultant – similar to Fixed Term employees, but engaged for shorter term arrangements, on daily or hourly basis, to provide nonpersonal services to augment Contractor’s existing work force. Considered

“purchased labor”, they are subject to the same compensation cost principles (FAR 31.205-6 for commercial organization, and Selected Areas of Cost of the DCAA Contract Audit Manual

Chapter 59). Because these short-term purchased labor consultants do not receive fringe benefits, their daily rates may include an additional allowance for such benefits that they have to pay themselves. As a result, daily rates may be in excess of USAID CST, but only to accommodate the additional self-paid fringe benefits amounts.

Professional Services Consultants. True professional and technical services consultants (e.g.

lawyers, engineers, doctors etc.) hired on short term labor hour or fixed price basis to provide specialized expertise. These services are subject to Professional and Consultant Services Cost

Principle at FAR 31.205-33 (The Selected Areas of Cost Guidebook of the DCAA Contract

Audit Manual (CAM) Chapter 58). As services performed under subcontracts (as defined in FAR

44), they should not be evaluated based on salary history (they often only have daily rate or fixed price per engagement history), nor based on Contractor Compensation Policies.

These should instead be evaluated based on commercially available information for comparable rates in similar functional professional categories or competed in accordance with the

Competition in Subcontracting Requirements of FAR 44. These contractors should not be subject to USAID CST, since USAID CST applies only to salaried employees (or short term purchased labor consultants) and not professional services consultants in this category.

Would USAID consider amending this clause to state the following?

Short term purchased labor consultants, who are independent contractors hired to augment

Contractor’s existing work force in the functional labor categories, normally employed by the

Contractor as regular employees, are subject to the same compensation limitations as regular

Contractor employees, including reasonable consideration for the self-paid fringe benefits, comparable to those normally provided by the Contractor for its regular employees. Short term purchased labor consultants’ compensation is subject to USAID CST daily rate limitations, not including a reasonable amount for self-paid fringe benefits.

Compensation for Professional Services Consultants providing services in the performance of this contract, who are members of specialized professions or technical experts in categories of labor not usually employed by the Contractor as regular employees, should be treated in accordance with the applicable cost principles for Professional and Consultant Services at FAR

31 and the requirements of FAR 44. Consent to subcontract for such services with individuals or entities must be obtained in accordance with FAR 52.244-2.

Answer: Please see answer to question 2.

14. Section H.31(h) (RFP Page 99) (Short-Term Employees and Consultants) requires

Contracting Officer approval when the proposed salary exceeds the preceding year’s by 3%.

Considering that the new USAID Biographical Data Sheet has removed the salary history of

Consultant Services, could USAID please confirm that proposed rates for consultants should reflect market value as competed and be set in accordance with the Offeror’ policy? If so, we respectfully request that bullet (1) in the second and third paragraphs of Section H.31(h) be removed.

Answer: Please see answer to question 2.

15. Section H.33 of the RFP (Page 101) states “USAID will not give pre-award consent for local subcontracts that include indirect cost rates.” In order to streamline the process of consent concurrent with IDIQ award, could USAID please clarify:

a. Whether a Directly Charged methodology is acceptable, and/or

Answer: This would be acceptable provided that the proposed local subcontractor meets the definition of a major subcontractor

b. Whether using a de minimis rate of 10% of modified total direct costs (MTDC) is acceptable.

Answer: No.

16. Can USAID please provide instructions regarding how to budget for the line in J.2 called:

“Paid absence not in fringe benefits?”

Answer: This is a line item to allow for instances where an offerors policies dictate recovery of paid absences as a direct charge in lieu of recovery of the costs through a NICRA.

17. Section L.5(d) (page 179): Would USAID please clarify the contents of the five submission pieces in L.5(d)? Specifically, is USAID requesting that the Cost Proposal be separated into two submissions: (1) the budget narratives and (2) the full cost proposal containing all signature files along with budget and narrative?

Answer: The subject section is clear in terms of required documents and their format.

Submission separation guidance is addressed in section L.5(c) of the same page.

18. Section L.7 (page 181): Please clarify the requirements for Past Performance

Information. Specifically, please define the following terms, which seem at times to be used interchangeably and, at other times, differently:

■ Past Performance Report (in the singular, including the relation of this term to

Attachment J.6)

■ Past Performance Reports (plural)

■ Past Performance Information

■ Past Performance Proposal

Answer: The Past Performance requirements are for Past Performance Information/Proposal

(used interchangeably) in the form of the Past Performance Report/Reports, as necessary.

19. Section L.7 (page 181) and Attachment J.6: Please clarify the past performance content that is to be limited to five (5) pages. Because the Past Performance Report (Attachment J.6) is 2 pages, including 3 forms for the prime contractor alone would already total 6 pages.

Answer: The Past Performance section is revised per the attached. The number of pages is increased from 6 to 12.

20. Section L.7 (page 181): Please clarify what is to be limited to the 5 pages of past performance.

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 19.

21. Section L.7(a) (page 181) and Attachment J.6: Please also explain what “past performance information” must be provided “in addition to submitting the Past Performance Report” and whether a page restriction applies to the additional past performance information.

Answer: Please note the revised section, attached.

22. Section L.7.2(b) (page 181): Do Sections L.7(a)2.(a), (b), and (c) apply only to contracts/agreements that are “not in CPARS”, per Section L.7(a)2? Or do they also apply to listed contracts/agreements that “are in CPARS”?

Answer: Section L.7(a)(2) in its entirety applies to Contracts/agreements listed in the prior section that “are not in CPARS”. Please refer to the subject section.

23. PPRs: Section L.7.a requests that Offerors “…summarize past performance information.”

Can USAID/Jordan clarify what this means? Is USAID/Jordan seeking a separate section other than first section of J.6 that requests 100-word responses to USAID’s questions? Or, is this referring to the three questions in the CPR Short Form’s first box?

Answer: This requirement is removed. Please note the revised section, attached.

24. PPRs: Can USAID/Jordan clarify the page limitation on the PPRs? The RFP states that PPRs must be limited to a combined total of 5 pages. Is that for just the Prime Offeror’s PPRs? Or, is that a total page limitation for the Prime Offeror and its IDIQ Members? Section L.7.a.1 requests no more than 2 PPRs from other IDIQ Members. Is there a page limitation for IDIQ Members’

PPRs?

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 19 and 21.

25. Annex A: Can USAID/Jordan further explain its expectations for Annex A: IDIQ

Management Charts and Biographies? There does not seem to be a direct linkage between Annex

A and Section M’s Evaluation Criteria. Will USAID be evaluating personnel as part of this

IDIQ? Should Offerors highlight potential experts who could be mobilized on Task Orders for the positions described in the Labor Categories in Section B? Further explanation of the purpose, requirements, and evaluation criteria for Annex A would be helpful.

Answer: Annex A has been deleted.

26. Section A Organization: Can USAID/Jordan further explain and clarify how Offerors should organize Section A: Corporate Capability and Experience? Most importantly, should Offerors organize this Section to match the Scope of Work in Section C? Or, should Offerors organize this Section to match the criteria outlined in Section M? It seems tailoring Offerors’ capabilities and experience to all of the technical areas outlined in Section C would be overly difficult in 18 pages. Please confirm that Section A should be tailored to the three general technical areas outlined in Section M.4.1.

Answer: Offerors should adhere to the criteria outlined in Section M.

27. Subcontractors’ Rates: Per Section L.9 (g), USAID states that, “Proposed budgets for major subcontractors proposed on a cost reimbursement basis must include the same cost breakdowns in their budgets.” Can USAID clarify what this means? Also, are Major Subcontractors required to submit a separate budget using Attachment J.2, and apply their own direct and indirect rates?

Finally, can USAID explain the line item “D” “Subcontract”? Does this refer to IDIQ

Subcontractors or TBD local subcontracts?

Answer: If the prime contractor has Major Subcontractors, then the cost proposal must include a budget for the work allocated to the Major Subcontractor as it can’t be represented as a plug figure. Please refer to L.9(g). The budget for the work allocated to the Major Subcontractor must be represented in the same format as that of the prime per the RFP instructions for the cost proposal. USAID could not locate a subsection “D” “Subcontract” under Section L.9.

28. Section L.7, Past performance Report format and page limitation, page 182, states that

“The Offeror must limit its Past Performance Report to a combined total of 5 pages, plus 2 additional pages when addressing the Utilization of Small Business” Would USAID please reconsider the page limitation given that the blank Past Performance Report Template

(attachment J.6) is 2 pages. And USAID is asking for a minimum of 3 of these reports and 2 more for each team member

Answer: Please refer to question No. 19 and 21

29. Section L.9 Part 9 on page 193: Consent to Subcontractors. Does this apply to only major subcontractors or also to minor subcontractors?

Answer: Major subcontractors only.

30. Does USAID expect contractors to include past performance references for all subcontractors, or only major subcontractors?

Answer: Major subcontractors only.

31. Would USAID extend the page limit for the Past Performance Report in order to accommodate 3 activities for the Offeror and 2 for each subcontractor?

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 19

32. Do Offerors and subcontractors who already have a record of working with USAID need to provide a copy of their policies and procedures?

Answer: Offerors are to submit copies of their policies and procedures as required by the RFP.

Offerors are not required to submit the policies and procedures of their proposed subcontractors.

This question was previously answered under Amendment No. 2. This response supersedes any prior one.

33. Section L.9 Part 3 on page 190: Does mandatory registration with CCR (www.sam.gov) only apply to major subcontractors or also to minor subcontractors?

Answer: Please see FAR 52.204-15 and instructions in www.sam.gov.

34. Page 191- L.9 Part 4: Would USAID please confirm that offerors with prior USG experience and/or those issued a NICRA are exempt from furnishing this requirement?

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 32.

35. Would USAID please confirm that offerors are discouraged from making exclusive teaming agreements with local Jordanian firms?

Answer: Confirmed.

36. For part 11 under section L, page 193: The following subcontract information: (a) the total value of anticipated subcontracting included in the total estimated cost or price and (b) for each anticipated subcontract of $100,000 or more to a U.S. organization, please provide: (1) the name and address of the subcontractor, (2) the name and/or U.S. telephone number of the subcontractor contact, if known, (3) a brief description of the services or commodities to be provided, (4) the estimated cost or price, and (5) the period of the subcontract.

Does any subcontractor information requested in (b) need to be provided since the actual amount of the award will not be known until the task orders are issued?

Answer: This bullet has been removed. This reporting requirement will be done at the task order level.

37. According to L.8.1.a, the technical proposal must be organized according to six sections and one annex (Annex A: IDIQ Management Charts and Bios).

Is the offeror permitted to include additional annexes to address the RFP requirements?

Specifically, Annex B: Past Performance (5 pages) and Utilization of Small Business Concerns

(2 pages) (per instructions on page 187); Annex C: Past Performance Report (per instructions on page 187); and Annex D: Subcontracting Plan (per instructions on page 192). If any of these additional annexes are not allowed, in which of the sections/annexes should this information be presented?

Answer: The submissions listed are not annexes, but their own sections of the proposal.

38. Under Section B.6.1 Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates, Table 3 Minimum Qualifications for

Labor Categories states N/A for the junior level Subject Matter Expert and the senior level

Support Specialist. However Table 1 Labor Categories has a dollar symbol in these two categories. Please confirm that a daily rate is not needed for these two categories.

Answer: No CDR should be proposed for a Junior Subject Matter Expert or a Senior Support

Specialist. Please refer to Amendment No. 2 to the RFP

39. Under Section L.9 Part 4. If a contractor has previously implemented USAID programs can they be exempt from submitting policies and procedures?

Answer: Please refer to question 32.

40. USAID has included details of a statement of work in the case study presented in attachment

J.2. USAID also clearly indicates that “No technical proposal is to be submitted to address the

Case Study” and provides assumptions for level of effort to be used in developing the budget.

Would USAID confirm that the Statement of Work included in the Case Study is for illustrative purposes only, and has no direct bearing on Offerors’ completion of the Cost/Price Evaluation

Matrix?

Answer: The illustrative Statement of Work (SOW) included in the case study is for evaluation purposes only and has no bearing on the proposed work under the IDIQ. The illustrative SOW is provided to give the offeror an activity from which they will form the case study cost proposal.

41. In section L.7 (a) the RFP states that “in addition to submitting the past Performance Report

(Attachment J.6), the Offeror must summarize past performance information.” L.7 1 states that

“the Offeror must provide the Past Performance Information in the standardized format provided in Attachment J.6.” Please confirm that the Past Performance Information is a separate summary from the one provided in the Past Performance Report.

Answer: Please refer to Questions No. 23

42. With reference to L.5, will USAID please clarify submission instructions for Attachment J.6, Past Performance Report? Please confirm Attachment J.6, Past Performance Report shall be provided as an annex to the Past Performance Proposal. Please also confirm there is no page limit for Attachment J.6.

Answer: The Past Performance requirement is limited to Attachment J.6 along with its revised page limitations. Please refer to question No. 19. No additional Annexes are to be submitted

43. Will USAID please confirm Offerors can submit Past Performance Reports for projects they are serving as a subcontractor?

Answer: Confirmed

44. Will USAID please clarify whether rates shall be provided for all of the labor categories identified in Section B Table 1, not only the ones in J.2 template?

Answer: Confirmed

45. Will USAID please clarify how Joint Venture partners shall present their cost proposal?

Answer: Please refer to guidance provided in terms of Joint Ventures under Section l.9, Part 7, Joint Venture Information under the RFP. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure that the proposal satisfies the requirements of the RFP.

46. Please clarify how Joint Venture partners shall present the cost proposal and indirect rates in

Attachment J.2.

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 45

47. Please confirm a Joint Venture shall present one set of documents as a Joint Venture for documents identified in Section L.9 (Part 3).

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 45

48. The instructions for the preparation of the Past Performance Proposal in section L.7 require that offerors use the report format provided in attachment J.6. The instructions allow offerors to submit up to 5 examples of past performance using this form. The instructions, on page 182, specify that “The Offeror must limit its Past Performance Report to a combined total of 5 pages, plus 2 additional pages when addressing the Utilization of Small Business.” Please confirm that these page limits apply to each example of past performance – i.e. each past performance report describing a previous project may be up to 5 pages long.

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 19. The page limit is applied as a total number of pages allowed.

49. Past Performance Reports requested in Section L.7 are limited to activities performed within the past 3 years. We suggest that USAID consider allowing offerors to submit examples of activities performed within the past 5 years, as such work would be recent enough to be considered a good indication of past performance, particularly for small business offerors.

Answer: The requirement for 3 years remains unchanged.

50. In section L.7.a. USAID notes that “In addition to submitting the Past Performance Report

(Attachment J.6), the Offeror must summarize past performance information”. Are offerors only required to summarize their own past performance, or must they also summarize past performance of proposed subcontractors? Will these summaries be counted as part of the page limit? Also, past performance information is required “for [the Prime Offeror], teaming arrangements, if any, and each major subcontractor” – do “teaming arrangements” refer to all proposed subcontractors?

Answer: Please refer to Questions No. 23 and 30

51. Section L. 9, Part 4, page 191, requires offers to submit a copy of personnel, and travel policies. Given USAID’s requirements to limit email size to 5 MB, would USAID consider making this requirement applicable only for offerors who do not have prior USAID contracting experience?

Answer: Direct attachments to email can not exceed 25MB. Links to documents stored in the

Cloud (i.e. Google Drive, OneDrive) will not be accepted. Please also refer to Question No. 32.

52. Section L.5(h), - Page 179 - To ease the need for multiple emails submission, we request

USAID revises the submission email size limitation from 5MB to 25MB

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 51

53. Section L.5 -Pages 179-180 - L.5.(d) on Page 179 states “The Offeror must submit its proposal as follows: (1) compatible PDF with Optical Character Recognition for the Past

Performance Proposal; (2) compatible PDF with Optical Character Recognition for the Technical

Proposal; (3) compatible PDF with Optical Character Recognition for accompanying budget narratives; (4) text accessible Microsoft Excel spreadsheets for budget and other cost-related tables; and (5) PDF for Signature Pages.” However, Page 180 states “Offerors must provide proposals in compatible MS Word (or PDF with Optical Character Recognition) and budgets as text accessible, MS Excel spreadsheets.”

Can USAID please clarify if proposals shall be submitted in MS Word, PDF, or both?

Answer: Please adhere to the document types as stipulated

54. Section L.7.3(C) - Page 182 - Please confirm that the required past performance information in the standardized format provided in Attachment J.6, Past Performance and recent subcontracting reports do not count towards the 5 and 2 pages limitation for the Past

Performance Report and can be provided as Annexes to the past performance volume.

Answer: No Annexes shall be submitted. Please refer to Question No. 19 in terms of page numbers.

55. Section L.8.1.a - Page 183 - In addition to the Cover page, please confirm that offerors may provide a signed one page cover letter that is not counted towards the 20 pages Technical

Approach page limitation.

Answer: Confirmed

56. Section L.9, Part 4 - Page 191 - We request that USAID waive the requirements of submitting “personnel policies, especially regarding salary and wage scales, fringe benefits, merit increases, promotions, leave, differentials, travel and per diem regulations” for Federal contractors with many Federal contracts over many years and are audited by their cognizant

Government Agency. As required by other sections of the RFP, copies of indirect cost information/NICRA and Work-Day, Work-Week, and Paid Absences policy will be submitted in the proposal.

Answer: Please see answer to Question 32.

57. Section L.9.g states that “Proposed budgets for major subcontractors proposed on a cost reimbursement basis must include the same cost breakdowns in their budgets.” However, Section L.9.l, Part 2 requires CDRs, budget narrative, and fee for the Prime Offeror only. Can

USAID please clarify:

a. Must Offerors include budgets (in the form of Attachment J.2) for subcontractors expecting to received cost reimbursement subawards?

Answer: Yes

b. If so, can USAID please clarify whether subcontractor budgets are required for all subcontractors expecting to receive cost reimbursement subawards, or only major subcontractors expecting to receive cost reimbursement subawards?

Answer: Only Major Subcontractors

c. If Subcontractors are expected to prepare a budget in the form of

Attachment J.2, can USAID please clarify whether a budget narrative is also required for subcontractors?

Answer: Yes, it is

58. Policies and Procedures (L.9.l, Part 4) – Typically in IDIQs USAID requires Policies and

Procedures for Offerors who have no prior federal contracting experience. Will USAID require

Policies and Procedures (as requested in Section L.9.l, Part 4) for Offerors who have prior federal contracting experience?

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 32.

59. Section L.9.l, Part 10 of the RFP is entitled “Letters of Commitment (Major

Subcontractors). However, the paragraph that follows states that “The Cost/Business Proposal must include a letter, on subcontractor letterhead, and signed by an authorized representative of each subcontractor, which specifically indicates the subcontractor’s agreement to be included in the Offeror’s proposed teaming arrangement.” Could USAID please clarify whether it would like Offerors to include letters of commitment for major subcontractors only or for all subcontractors?

Answer: Letters of commitment are required from Major Subcontractors only.

60. In past USAID RFPs we have seen a maximum file size of 25MB; however, page 179 of the

RFP states that the maximum file size for submission is 5MB. Can USAID please confirm that the maximum file size for submission is 5MB?

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 51

61. P. 179, L.5: Can USAID confirm that the technical and cost volumes can be sent in two separate emails.

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 51. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure proper receipt of the proposal. Therefore, the Offeror may send the proposal via multiple emails while noting the total number of emails sent and ensuring receipt of confirmation for each.

62. P. 191, L.9, Part 6: Subcontracting Plan and Small Business Concerns: Can USAID provide the referenced attachment (J.4: Subcontracting Plan).

Answer: A link was provided under the RFP.

63. Would USAID consider permitting Offerors to present Past Performance Reports for projects implemented within the last five years, in lieu of past three years as these are still recent and allows firms to show additional relevant projects?

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 49

64. Section L.7, page 181: The RFP states “List no more than 3 of the most recent (defined as any activity performed within 3 years of the closing date for receipt of the Contractor Past

Performance Information) and relevant contracts/agreements for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal for the Offeror.” This requirement puts medium and smaller firms with fewer projects in their portfolio at a disadvantage by limiting their ability to demonstrate a more robust sample of past performance within a reasonable period of time. Five years is typically the period most USAID RFPs allow. In order to allow offerors to showcase the most relevant past experience, can USAID allow offerors to submit Past Performance Forms (in J.6.) for the past 5 years?

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 49

65. On page 181, L7 (a) 1. indicates that offerors should list no more than 2 of the most recent and relevant contracts for each of the IDIQ members. Please confirm if this should include completed J.6 forms for the subcontractors?

Answer: Confirmed. Please refer to Question No. 30 in terms of the change from “IDIQ

Members” to “Major Subcontractors” .

66. On page 186, Section L.9, Instructions for Cost Proposal, the RFP states that “proposed budgets for major subcontractors proposed on cost reimbursement basis must include the same cost breakdowns in their budgets.” However, the budget format in Attachment J.2 only contains a plug figure for subcontractors. Can USAID please confirm that for the purpose of this case study, offerors should only include the plug figure provided for subcontractors in the Cost/Price

Evaluation Matrix template?

Answer: See Section L.9(g) for instructions.

67. Page 181 of the RFP states: In addition to submitting the Past Performance Report

(Attachment J.6), the Offeror must summarize past performance information. Kindly clarify if the summary is in addition to the PPR and if so, should the summary be included as part of the technical narrative.

Answer: Please refer to Questions No. 19 and 21

68. Page 183 of the RFP states: “In the case only major subcontractors are required for the proposal submission”. Kindly clarify if this is in reference to the Case Study and Cost/Price

Evaluation Matrix.

Answer: Confirmed

69. Per Section L.9, Part 4, offerors must submit copies of their policies and procedures. Are major subcontractors also required to submit copies of their policies and procedures?

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 32

70. For small businesses, would USAID consider extending the period under which a program’s past performances will be considered relevant to five years (instead of three years) from the day that program ended? By definition, organizations that still qualify as small businesses have not had as many opportunities as large businesses to implement USAID contracts or agreements. It is our opinion that USAID will be depriving itself of a significant pool of qualified performance references if small businesses are only limited to programs that have ended within a three-year period of proposal submission.

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 49

71. Section L.9(l) Part 3(2) (page 190) requires offerors to submit a signed and dated Section K;

however, there is no signature block in Section K within the RFP. Could USAID revise Section

K to include a signature block?

Answer: The Offeror is to add a signature section at the bottom of Section K

72. Section L.9(l) Part 10 (page 193) is titled “Letters of Commitment (Major Subcontractors),” but the description states that they are required of “each subcontractor.” Can USAID confirm that this information is only required of major subcontractors?

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 59

73. Section L.7, page 181. USAID states that “In addition to submitting the Past Performance

Report (attachment J.6), the Offeror must summarize past performance information.” However, a past performance annex is not listed under section L8.1.1 (page 183). Can USAID confirm that

Offerors should submit Attachment J.6 as Annex B, as well as a summary of past performance for the prime offeror??

Answer: The summary requirement is removed. Please refer to Question No. 23.

74. Section L.7, page 182. In reference to format and page limitations, USAID states that “The offeror must limit its Past Performance report to a combined total of 5 pages, plus 2 additional pages when addressing the Utilization of Small Business Concern.”

a. Can USAID confirm that these page limits refer to the “summary of past performance information” referenced

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 23

b. Given that attachment J.6 Past Performance Report includes word count limits, will

USAID consider removing page limit references for J.6 outlined on page 184?

Answer: The page limitation is applicable. Please refer to Question No. 19 for the change in page numbers.

75. Section L.8.1.a, Page 183. In reference to Format and Page limitations USAID states “A page in the Technical Approach Proposal that contains a table, chart, graph etc. not otherwise excluded in the below paragraph (c) remains subject to the page limit.” However, there is no subsequent paragraph (c) in this section. Can USAID clarify what (if any) tables, charts, graphs, etc. are excluded from the page limit?

Answer: This is a typographical error. The paragraph being referenced is (b) as attached.

76. Section L.9.h, page 186. The RFP states, “The offeror must use the budget format contained in Attachment J.2 Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix to allow for meaningful comparisons. The Offeror may make minor adjustments to the format to accommodate its cost and pricing of its offer.” It is assumed that item C titled “Other Direct Costs” in Attachment J.2

Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix would include various non-labor expenses such as travel costs and materials purchases. Will USAID allow offerors to breakout these costs further (e.g. travel, other direct costs, and materials) which would allow bidders to more accurately apply their indirect burdens with respect to their distinctive indirect cost structures?

Answer: Yes

77. Section L.9.(d) (Page 186) states “The Offeror must prepare the cost proposal in Microsoft

Excel 2010, compatible with a MS Windows operating environment, making all calculations and formulas visible.” Could USAID please confirm Microsoft Excel 2010 or newer versions are also acceptable?

Answer: Confirm.

78. Section L.9, page 193 states “Part 10 - Letters of Commitment (Major Subcontractors): The

Cost/Business Proposal must include a letter, on subcontractor letterhead, and signed by an authorized representative of each subcontractor, which specifically indicates the subcontractor's agreement to be included in the Offeror's proposed teaming arrangement.” Please confirm that letters of commitment are only required to be submitted from proposed MAJOR subcontractors.

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 59

79. The Self-Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (Form LLL) is included as Attachment J.3 to the

RFP; however, it is not referred to in Section L.9. Please confirm the form is not required.

Answer: The form is required. Please include it with the Section K submittal section.

80. With reference to M.4.1, will USAID please clarify whether team expertise will be evaluated both in Team Composition and Technical Implementation Capacity Sections?

Answer: Expertise will be evaluated in both sections as detailed in the evaluation criteria.

81. Can USAID confirm that M.4.1.a should focus on team composition and structure and

M.4.1.c focuses on past experience and technical expertise in areas related to section C?

Answer: Confirmed

82. Regarding Section M.4.1 Offeror Corporate Capability and Experience (page 196), we have the following questions:

a Section M.4.1(a) Team Composition is organized by technical areas that overlap between ERA components. For ease of evaluation and to ensure all ERA components are accurately represented, would USAID consider restructuring the evaluation criteria to follow ERA’s four main component areas?

Answer: No, USAID will not be restructuring the evaluation criteria.

b Our understanding of M. 4.1.(c) Technical Implementation Criteria is that all four components should be cited in this section. Could USAID confirm or clarify that:

i The reference in the evaluation criteria to “private sector competitiveness” refers to Components 2 & 3.

Answer: Please reference Section C and the evaluation criteria.

ii The references to “challenges of the macro-business enabling environment and on a sector and firm level” refers to Component 1.

Answer: Please reference Section C and the evaluation criteria.

iii Where does USAID envision the offeror addressing Component 4 within this section of the proposal?

Answer: Please reference Section C and the evaluation criteria.

83. Section L.8.1.b, Section B. Technical Proposal Annexes states, “The offeror may include…a matrix of all subcontractors and their significant personnel, along with their relevant skills and experience…”, can USAID confirm that the Prime contract may also submit a matrix of significant personnel, in addition to the four half page biographies?

Answer: Please refer to Question No. 25

84. Section L.8.1.b -Page 185 - (Reference “Annex A: IDIQ Management Charts and

Biographies”) - The RFP asks for “key functional positions” and “significant personnel”, and references “critical positions and/or sector leads”, yet there is no Task Order against which the contractor can propose such positions, personnel, positions, or leads. Can USAID please clarify what kind of personnel should be presented as part of the IDIQ proposal, and how such personnel will be evaluated?

85. P. 185, Section L.8.1.b.B, Annex A: Could USAID clarify what is meant by “critical positions” under the IDIQ mechanism in the sentence: “For those individuals deemed by the

Offeror to fill critical positions…”

Could USAID clarify whether these critical positions should be held only by the prime Offeror or also could be held by proposed subcontractors?

86. P. 185, Section L.8.1.b.B, Annex A: Could USAID clarify the difference between significant personnel in the first sentence and individuals deemed by the Offeror to fill critical positions in the second sentence? Are they interchangeable?

87. On page 185, Section L.8, Annex, the RFP states that the Offeror may include “…key functional positions along with descriptions, a matrix of all subcontractors and their significant personnel…” among other information.

a. Can USAID provide additional detail regarding the key functional positions to be included, and any corresponding evaluation criteria?

b. This section also states that the Offeror may include up to four half page biographies of individuals. Can USAID confirm these biographies are in addition the matrix of all subcontractors and their significant personnel?

88. Can USAID clarify if the biographies to be presented in Annex A required on page 185 should refer to offeror personnel with IDIQ Management responsibilities, or alternatively if

USAID would like to see illustrative bios of technical experts (such as sector leads)?

89. On page 185, Section L.8.1.b. B. Technical Proposal Annexes. The RFP states: “Annex A is not to exceed 5 pages” and then it states “the Offeror may include up to four half-page biographies that discuss the individuals’ relevant experience, education, and language skills.”

Can USAID confirm that these 2 pages of biographies are in addition to the 5 pages for charts?

90. On page 185, Section L.8.1.b. B. Technical Proposal Annexes, USAID requests offerors to include Annex A: IDIQ Management Charts and Biographies. However, Section M does not explicitly mention this Annex. Can USAID clarify how this Annex will be evaluated?

91. Section L.8.1.b. page 185. In reference to Annex A: IDIQ Management Charts and

Biographies, USAID indicates that offerors can include “key functional positions along with descriptions” and include “up to four (4) half (1/2) page biographies that discuss the individuals’ relevant experience, education, and language skills” for “critical positions and/or sector leads”.

a. Is the reference to the key functional positions and descriptions the same as the 4 half page biographies?

b. Can USAID please confirm that offerors are required to highlight “critical positions and/or sector leads” for personnel we anticipate using on future task orders and not for IDIQ management?

92. Section L.8.1.b. B Technical Proposal Annexes (Page 185) states “Annex A is not to exceed

5 pages. The Offeror may include… *a matrix of all subcontractors and their significant personnel, along with their relevant skills and experience applicable to the transaction, technical and other related services set out in Section C of the IDIQ.*” (emphasis added). Please confirm that the prime contractor may also include its significant personnel in this matrix.

93. Section L.8.1.b. B (Technical Proposal Annexes on Page 185) states “The Offeror may include charts of…key functional positions along with descriptions…” Please provide more specific guidance on what USAID would like to receive in response to this requirement.

94. The evaluation criteria do not make a reference to Annex A. IDIQ Management Charts and

Biographies. Will USAID please clarify?

95. B.6 Labor & F.5 Key Personnel: Table 2 & 3 (pages 9-11) | Annex A (page 185):

a. Should Annex A bio-summaries be aligned against either or both of the labor…