RFP_Amdt02_Attachment-1_QnA.pdf

Amendment No.: 02 RFP No.: 72027820R00002 USAID/Jordan-Business Growth Activity

ATTACHMENT 1 - ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

I. ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

EVALUATION CRITERIA

Q.1 Can USAID kindly clarify if the sub-factors in selection factor M.2.2 (Management and Staffing) are of equal weight?

A.1 Sub-factors in selection factor M.2.2 (Management and Staffing) are of equal weight.

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL CONTENT

Q.2. Can USAID please clarify how the 30-Page Technical Proposal should be broken out? By example, on RFP Page 121, the RFP states that the 30 pages should include the: I) Technical Approach and PWS; II) Management Approach and Staffing Plan, including Key Personnel; and III) Past Performance. Are there page limits or suggestions for these sections?

A.2.

There are no page limits on the required sections of the Technical Proposal.

Q.3. Annex D refers to Past Performance Information. Should Offerors include a narrative of Past Performance in the 30-Page Technical Proposal? Or, should Offerors only refer to Past Performance Information in Annex D and not in the 30-page Technical Proposal?

Q.4 Section L.7.a. (page 121) states that Section III of the technical approach will include past performance. L.7.c.(page 121) also calls for a past performance annex, labeled annex D. The instructions for Section III of the technical approach (pg. 127) also refer to Annex D (the past performance annex). Should offerors include past performance information on themselves and their consortia in both section III of the technical approach and Annex D? Could USAID provide more guidance on how past performance information should be included within the technical approach?

A.3,4 Offerors are not to include any narrative of Past Performance other than the information in Annex D.

Section L.7 (a) has been revised in the amended RFP.

Q.5 On page 127 of the RFP, it states “List in Annex D (Past Performance information template provided in the solicitation i.e. Attachment J.4) up to five (each for the prime and any major subcontractor) of the most recent (within the past 3 years) and relevant awards (being contracts, or orders, or cooperative agreements) for efforts similar to the work in subject proposal. Can USAID confirm that both the prime and any major subcontractor are to submit up to 5 past performance forms?

A.5 Confirmed.

Q.6 Is there a page limit for each Past Performance Information entry in Annex D?

A.6 The Past Performance Information for each relevant award must not exceed two (2) pages.

1 / 26

RFP No.: 72027820R00002 Amendment No.: 02 - ATTACHMENT 1-ANSWERS TO

QUESTIONS

Q.7 Should Offerors use the USAID-provided Annex J for the template for the BIP & MP? Or, should Offerors use their own template but include all of the request information? Is there a page limitation for Annex J?

A.7 Offerors can use either the USAID-provided template or their own template for the BIP & MP provided that their template contains at least the information in the USAID template. There is no page limit for Annex J.

Q.8 Considering the importance of private sector engagement to the success of JBG, would USAID allow the Offeror an additional technical annex to include relevant Letters of Association with Jordanian organizations and businesses?

A.8 No.

Q.9 The RFP asks for letters of commitment from key personnel, but not other senior staff. The RFP also does not ask for letters of commitment from sub-contractors. This would seem to imply local staff and contractors could be listed in a proposal when they may or may not have agreed to the work described in the proposal. Would USAID encourage inclusion of letters of commitments and brief teaming agreements and allowed Annex H?

A.9 As required under Section L.8 of the RFP, Offerors must include letters of commitment for all subcontractors as Annex 5 to the Cost Proposal.

Offerors are not required to submit letters of commitment for non-key personnel.

Q.10 Several small business primes with large firms as subcontractors, especially firms that have managed projects funded by USAID, are asking staff recruits to sign letters of exclusivity. Many of these potential staff members are previous employees of projects the large firms managed for USAID. They do not want to sign exclusivity agreements. Does USAID encourage bidders to require proposed personnel to sign exclusivity agreements?

A.10 USAID does not encourage or endorse any form of exclusivity agreements between offerors and prospective candidates.

Q.11 Can USAID please confirm that the Executive Summary should be written as a conventional proposal referencing the contents of the PWS, rather than in the style of a PWS?

A.11 As required in the RFP, under Section L.7(d), in the Executive Summary, the Offeror must describe its understanding of the challenges identified in the Statement of Objectives and the proposed solutions.

The executive summary must describe how the Contractor will achieve the desired results stated under Attachment J, a description of the organizational structure and a brief summary of the management and staffing arrangements, including subcontractors and key partners.

Q.12 We respectfully request that USAID remove reference to subgrantees from section F.7.10.i, as disposition occurs at time of acquisition for grantees as stated in the Mandatory Standard Provisions.

2 / 26

A.12 USAID deems the property disposition requirement in conjunction with closeout necessary. It does not preclude transfer of title to subgrantees upon purchase or grant-in-aid transfer otherwise.

Q.13 Per section F.7.18 Security Plan, the contractor’s security plan must be “implemented and maintained by all subcontractors (and/or sub-grantees).” We respectfully request that USAID remove the requirement for sub-grantees to implement and maintain the same security plan that is designed for project operations.

A.13 The Security Plan requirement is removed for sub-grantees in the amended RFP.

Q.14 May subcontractors participate in grants management or should CLIN 002 be included only in the prime offeror’s budget?

A.14 CLIN 0002 must only be shown in the ‘CLIN Summary Budget’ added to the budget table through this modification. Subcontractors may participate in grants management and may include costs associated with grants management in the subcontract budget in CLIN 0002 that is not part of CLIN 0002. The summary budget for CLIN 0001 must include such expenses as part of the ‘Subcontractor’ line item.

STAFFING PLAN

Q.15 In Annex A, USAID has requested the Offeror provide both resumes and statements of qualifications for the four key personnel. Considering the similarity between both documents, would USAID require only resumes to be submitted as part of Annex A, in addition to the key personnel references?

A.15 Statement of Qualifications and Resumes are synonymous, and Offerors are expected to present key personnel qualifications under Annex A as they deem necessary within the 3-page limit.

Q.16 In Section F.6, Key Personnel (page 19), USAID lists the Chief of Party and three TBD positions as personnel, and notes that “The number of key personnel will not be more than four…”. Regarding this:

a. May offerors propose fewer than four key personnel?

b. Must offerors create and describe all proposed positions, or may offerors propose that one or more Key personnel positions remain as TBD after project award?

c. If offers must create and describe all key personnel positions in the proposal, must offers propose candidate for each position, or may decisions on appropriate candidates be made after award?

A.16

a. Yes.

b. All key personnel positions must be identified and described in the technical proposal.

c. It is expected that Offerors propose candidates for all key personnel positions.

Q.17

1. On page 19, section F.6, Key Personnel, states that “the number of key personnel will not be more than four including the Chief of Party.” On Page 126, Section L.7.2.2., states that the Offeror must propose a Chief of Party and no more than three additional key personnel that are subject to evaluation IA W Section M.2.2.1 Subfactor 2.1….Could USAID please confirm that offerors have the discretion

3 / 26 to propose less than four key personnel if they choose or does USAID require offerors to propose four key personnel inclusive of the Chief of Party?

A.17 Offerors can propose less than four key personnel. The Chief of Party position is mandatory.

Q.18 The RfP indicates four key personnel can be proposed. Given the size and structure of the program, we feel it could benefit the project to have five senior management staff with the rank of key personnel.

Would USAID consider raising the number of key personnel from four to five?

A.18 The number of Key personnel allowed will not be more than four including the Chief of Party.

Q.19 Section L.7, page 122, indicates that the Annex E – Draft Staffing Plan should include qualifications of professional staff and a Management Approach. Would USAID prefer that the Annex E – Draft Staffing Plan include only the staffing chart, and that the Management Approach narrative be captured in the Management Approach and Staffing Plan section of the Technical Proposal?

A.19 Offerors are expected to organize the information on Staffing Plan and Management Approach as they deem appropriate in accordance with the RFP instructions.

Q.20 Annex E refers to the Draft Staffing Plan indicating qualifications of professional staff and Management Approach. But this information is also referred to in the 30-Page Technical Proposal.

a. Is there a Page limitation for Annex E?

b. What is the difference between Section II of the Technical Proposal and Annex E?

c. What information does USAID wish to see in the Technical Proposal vis-à-vis Annex E?

A.20

a. The RFP is amended to limit the number of pages to 5 under Annex E.

b. Offerors are expected to organize the information on Staffing Plan and Management Approach in the main Technical Proposal and Annex E as they deem appropriate in accordance with the RFP instructions.

c. Offerors are expected to organize the information on Staffing Plan and Management Approach in the main Technical Proposal and Annex E as they deem appropriate in accordance with the RFP instructions.

Q.21 Section L.7, Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal, p.122, requires the submission of Annex E - Draft Staffing Plan indicating qualifications of professional staff and Management Approach. Under the subsection heading #2. Management and Staffing, 2.1 Management Approach and Staffing Plan, p.125, the RFP describes the content requirements for this sub-section, stating, in the second paragraph, “A critical element of the management approach is the staffing plan (Technical Proposal Annex E)”. We understand this to mean that only the staffing plan (and not the entire management approach, as stated on p.122) should be included in Annex E. This paragraph, and the one that follows, describe what the offerors should address in their staffing plan, namely:

“The staffing plan must be appropriate for implementing the proposed technical approach/PWS and for achieving the sought results. The staffing plan must reflect a complete listing of positions, duty locations, estimated level of effort and source of labor (i.e. local, U.S. expatriate) and the associated lines of authority and responsibilities.

4 / 26

The staffing plan shall describe the roles and responsibilities of home office and field staff, their assigned management and decision-making authorities, and the relationship the Offeror will have with subcontractors. Furthermore, the proposed staffing plan shall demonstrate an appropriate balance of skills. The staffing plan shall present the mechanisms the Offeror will set in place for recruiting and managing staff; providing adequate home office support; addressing procurement compliance and logistical requirements; establishing field office/s; controlling costs; developing clear lines of communication and authority; managing for results; and anticipating and resolving implementation bottlenecks. In addition, the staffing plan shall include a staffing chart describing the roles and responsibilities of staff.

Offerors must demonstrate how the staff function as a team, and how the team, as a whole, has the capabilities to improve the competitiveness of Jordanian SMEs.”

Please confirm our understanding that the intent of Annex E instructions on p. 122 was for offerors to include only their staffing plan in this annex, and that the main narrative of the Technical Proposal should summarize this information (per Section L.7(c), p.121 that states “(c) Critical information from annexes should be summarized in the narrative of the Technical Proposal”), as well as describe the offeror’s Management Approach, which must address all other requirements from this section, i.e., effective use of the proposed human, technical, and organizational resources; maximizing efficiency, controlling costs, building local capacity, and ensuring sufficient flexibility to respond to unpredictable circumstances; and capability to provide technical assistance, coordination with key stakeholders, office locations, role of subcontractors and how partnerships will be managed, and the CLIN 0003 response.

A.21.

Offerors are expected to organize the information on Staffing Plan and Management Approach as they deem appropriate in accordance with the RFP instructions.

Q.22 Per section L.7.2 Management and Staffing, could USAID confirm that offerors may use Annex E, Draft Staffing Plan and Management Approach, to present the roles and responsibilities for all positions (evaluated under Management Approach), while key personnel qualifications, experience, and appropriateness be presented and evaluated in the Key Personnel section? We respectfully suggest this could help offerors to avoid redundancies between the Management and Staffing section of the proposal, and Annex E.

A.22 Offerors are expected to organize the information on Staffing Plan and Management Approach as they deem appropriate in accordance with the RFP instructions.

Q.23 The information asked for in the management approach and staffing plan is on page 125/141 and the information asked for in Annex E are similar. Does USAID want the information repeated in Annex E?

A.23 The RFP is amended to limit the pages under Annex E to 5. Offerors are expected to organize the information as they deem appropriate the Technical Proposal narrative and Annex E in accordance with the RFP instructions.

5 / 26

Q.24 Annex A (Resumes, Qualifications, and References) refers to a 3-page limit. Is that 3-page limit per person per resume? And if so, does the 3 page limit include the resume, qualifications, and reference all together? Or, is the 3 page limit for the resume only?

A.24 The 3 pages limit is per person and per resume including all qualifications, reference or other information pertaining to a key-person.

Q.25 L.7.c.(page 121) asks for Resumes, Statement of Qualifications, and References for Key Personnel, noting :”not to exceed 3 pages each”. Does the 3 page limit refer only to the resume, or are offerors expected to restrict all of the information in the Resume, Statement of Qualification, and References for each KP to three pages?

A.25 See answer to Q.24.

Q.26 L.7.c.(page 121) asks for a ‘Statement of Qualifications’. Please provide information on the format and content that USAID would like to see for this statement, and describe how it differs from the Resume.

A.26 Statement of Qualifications and Resumes are synonymous, and Offerors are expected to present key personnel qualifications under Annex A as they deem necessary within the 3-page limit.

Q.27 Please confirm that offerors may, but are not required to, name non-key personnel.

A.27 Offerors are only required to propose candidates for all identified key personnel positions.

SOO

Q.28 On page 3 of the Statement of Objectives, USAID/Jordan asks offerors to provide recommendations of sector(s) that Business Growth should support. The upcoming EDE – Tourism Support Activity has an anticipated release date of January 14, 2021 listed on the business forecast. Therefore, does USAID/Jordan intend to exclude tourism as a sector supported by Jordan Business Growth to avoid duplication?

A.28 USAID does not intend to exclude any sector, this activity is focused on SMEs that have the potential to grow and enhance their competitiveness, while they coordinate with other USAID activities.

Q.29 The activity will work with sectors that have the potential to export, increase revenues and employ Jordanians including youth, women and people with disabilities,” but will there be priority sectors and industries?

A.29 USAID/Jordan did not identify priority sectors and industries by design. Offerors are expected to propose an approach which will identify sectors and industries which have the greatest potential to fulfill the activity objectives.

6 / 26

Q.30 On page 2 of the SOO, USAID defines the development hypothesis as “If SMEs become more competitive, then SMEs will increase gross value added to GDP and contribute to a more economically stable and prosperous Jordan.”Would USAID please provide a definition of Gross Value Added to GDP?

A.30 USAID revised the hypothesis statement in the amended RFP.

Q.31 Can USAID clarify Section (d) on Page 7 of the SOO that discusses the Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA)? That paragraph refers to the Offeror being required to collect “firm level cash flows.” Can USAID please clarify this requirement? Also, should Offerors address the CBA and financial analysis in the Draft AMEL?

A.31 The exact methodology and details of the CBA will be agreed upon with the COR within two years into the activity and it is separate from the AMELP. The CBA must include the financial analysis, the economic analysis, stakeholder analysis, and a risk assessment of key variables. The CBA must summarize its calculations on a modified internal rate of return (MIRR) both financial and economic.

The firm level cash flows must be collected, Offerors must present a full Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) two years into the activity subject to USAID guidelines and approval, using a 15-year projection and a 12 percent discount rate. However, offerors are required to present a sustainability plan for each of the interventions to demonstrate how each activity will be sustained after the end of USAID assistance.

Q.32 On Page 3 of the SOO, USAID states that “Offerors must propose how to identify the following:”

listing three areas of data and recommendations for sector selection. Could USAID confirm that the PWS/proposal should propose a methodology for obtaining these data and reaching recommendations rather than presenting such data and recommendations in the proposal?

A.32 The Offeror must respond to the requirements stated on page 3 of Attachment J-1.

Q.33 On page 122/141 in (d) General Understanding Indicates approaches be “related to birth components.”

Earlier, Objectives and Sub-Objectives are used. Are objectives and components considered to be the same?

Or, could activities aimed at achieving objectives be arranged under components, for management and technical reasons?

A.33 The amended RFP combined the two sub-objectives under Objective 1. Activities aimed at achieving the objective can be arranged under components as the offeror sees fit.

Q.34 The RFP cites a necessity to align proposals with Jordan’s priorities as outlined in the Jordan Economic Growth Plan, Jordan 2025, the Jordan Reform Matrix, and the Jordan Renaissance Plan.

These plans will most likely be either amended or replaced by plans written/being written to deal with the economic impacts caused by the COVID 19 epidemic. Would USAID encourage bidders to align approaches to these new plans?

A.34 Currently the Government of Jordan is committed to these plans.. Offerors should align approaches to these plans.

7 / 26

Q.35 On page 4/8 of the SOO, states, “Offerors will propose ways in which they would partner with different private sector stakeholders to tackle the poor business practices resulting from outdated legal, regulatory, and procedural requirements that inhibit competition and are a necessary condition for increased SME dynamism and success.” Could USAID clarify that the intention is to change SME business practices that result from these outdated legal, regulatory, and procedural requirements, rather than to work to change those requirements? Could USAID offer an example of such a business practice that could be changed in the absence of changes to the underlying regulatory or procedural requirements?

Q.36 USAID’s description of Sub-Objective 1.2, SME Policies Improved, generally appears to focus on improving the policy environment for SMEs, indicating that offerors should work with the private sector to identify constraints, develop solutions, and advocate/implement solutions. However, the language becomes ambiguous when discussing “SME policies,” “poor business practices”, and “organizational constraints … (at the firm level)”. Could USAID clarify that the intent is to work with the private sector to address government policies, procedures, and practices that affect SMEs?

Accordingly, would USAID consider amending the wording of the Sub-Objective 1.2 outcomes/results to more clearly reflect its intent, e.g., “At least 25 priority policy and institutional problems that affect SMEs at the firm level identified and resolved with feasible, creative solutions”?

Q.37 Can USAID confirm that it would like Offerors to propose methods for improving policies both within firms and at the government level?

Q.38 In Attachment J-1, Statement of Objectives, 1.b,Sub-objective 1.2 (page 5) USAID states that one of the following outcomes/results of the project will be “At least 25 priority policy and institutional problems at the firm level identified and resolved…”. Will USAID please confirm that this reference to policy and institutional problems refers to Jordanian government policies and how they are implemented?

A.35,36,37,38 USAID revised the SOO to define intended policies. Please refer to the updated SOO in the amended RFP. Involvement into policy matters shall be limited to public/ private dialogue and collaboration with the prospective Economic Reform Activity (ERA). Specific areas of collaboration with ERA of policy reform will be determined after award. Offerors should not propose policy reforms.

Q.39 Regarding instructions on Page 7 of the SOO providing guidance on sustainability planning, does USAID have a preference as to whether Offerors should present the relevant sustainability plans alongside “each activity” and “sub-activity” or as a separate section of the proposal?

A.39 Sustainability is integral to this activity. Offerors are required to present a sustainability plan for each intervention to demonstrate how each activity will be sustained after the end of USAID assistance.

USAID leaves it to the offeror to decide how to present the sustainability plan.

Q.40 In Attachment J-1, Statement of Objectives, p. 4, USAID provides minimum outcomes/results for Sub-Objective 1.1. Would USAID confirm that target results “for assisted firms” may be considered in the aggregate? That is, may offerors plan to treat targets as an average growth in sales/exports/investment/employment/across the portfolio of assisted firms, rather than a minimum target for each and all assisted firms to meet or exceed?

8 / 26

A.40 The target is set as aggregate, but the indicator will be collected individually and each firm's growth will be monitored. The methodology of collective results to be measured against the target will be agreed upon and verified with our MELA contractor.

Q.41 On SOO page 4, what does “Investment in SMEs increased by a minimum ratio of 1:1 for assisted firms’ baseline” mean? Normally a ratio refers to a relationship between two numbers, but the two numbers to which this 1:1 ratio refers is unclear. Is the intended meaning “100% increase in investment from baseline?”

A.41 It is meant to secure additional funding other than grants matched at a minimum ratio of 1:1 that is 100% increase in investment from baseline.

Q.42 On page 4 of the Statement of Objectives under Sub Objective 1.1 USAID/Jordan lists Result 3 as, “Investment in SMEs increased by a minimum ratio of 1:1 for assisted firms’ baseline”. Can USAID/Jordan please confirm that USAID/Jordan intends “investment” to include equity, foreign direct investment, and/or investments by the SMEs themselves? Can USAID clarify that “investment” does not refer to any debt financing?

A.42 Investment can come from equity, foreign direct investment, debt financing, investments by the SMEs themselves and/or other forms.

Q.43 On page 4 of the Statement of Objectives under Sub Objective 1.1 USAID/Jordan lists Result 3 as, “Investment in SMEs increased by a minimum ratio of 1:1 for assisted firms’ baseline” and Result 5 as, “SMEs capital increased either through debt or equity”. Can USAID please clarify how these two results will be measured to ensure there will not be overlap?

A.43 USAID combined these two results; please see the revised list on page 5 of Attachment J-1.

Q.44 Sub-objective 1.1 #1 indicates outcomes in terms of sales should be measured. There are many cases when improved sales have not led to increased profitability. Would USAID encourage increases in profitability, and other business improvement indicators to be measured too?

A.44 USAID will leave it up to the offerors to propose relevant additional indicators to be measured.

Q.45 Should baselines include pre- and post- COVID 19 epidemic measurements. This could be important for measuring real economic and firm growth. For example, because employment by SMEs is currently at the worst levels ever, dramatic percentage increases may indicate real growth over pre-COVID levels.

A.45 Baselines shall be collected during the implementation of the activity based on current realities.

Q.46 Also, in the section on sustainability SME self-reliance. Many firms would have considered themselves self reliant before the COVID crisis. Would USAID encourage pre- and post-epidemic growth measures?

9 / 26

A.46 USAID will expect the Contractor to address the state of SMEs as a result of the Covid-19 crisis.

Q.47 In Section L, USAID states the requirement that BG “incorporates techniques for reaching the widest range of SMEs likely to increase sales, exports, investment, productivity and jobs while maintaining quality services and reasonable costs.” Should offerors understand that they may propose a variety of “techniques” in addition to or in lieu of direct firm-level assistance to companies to reach this goal?

For example, under Sub-Objective 1.1, may offerors support SMEs both directly and at the market systems level if it contributes to the stated outcomes and results for that sub-Objective?

Q.48 Section M.2.1 technical evaluation criteria include the offeror’s proposed “techniques for reaching the widest range of SMEs likely to increase sales, exports, investment, productivity and jobs…” Yet page 3 of Attachment J.1 Statement of Objectives indicates that offerors must propose how to identify “recommendations of sectors that Business Growth should support.” Could USAID clarify the meaning of “widest range” in the context of an approach where offerors must select sectors?

A.47,48 It is up to the offeror to come up with the best strategy and techniques to meet the widest range of small and medium-sized enterprises which have the potential to expand and thereby increase their profitability and competitiveness.

Q.49 On page 4 of the SOO, USAID states “In other words, to pursue feasible and cost-effective solutions to …increase entrepreneurship opportunities with special consideration for startups and tech enabled companies that have the potential to grow and scale up.” In light of the fact that few startups have more than 10 employees at launch (but often have more than 10 employees shortly after they are funded/launched), will an exception to the rule of greater than 10 employees be made for BG activities related to startups? If not, should we understand that only startups that have reached 10 employees are eligible for assistance under BG?

A.49 Startups and tech companies with less than ten employees but already raised funds and are financially sustainable can be included.

Q.50 In Attachment J-1, Statement of Objectives, 1.a (page 3) USAID notes the definition of SMEs based on number of employees. Does USAID prefer that offerors work with established firms instead of start-up firms?

A.50 BGA is designed to provide assistance to SMEs that have potential to grow and become more competitive.

Q.51 Under Grants under Contract – GUC mechanism, USAID makes reference to the “cost share” of beneficiary organizations. Under 2 CFR § 200.306, what may be counted as “cost sharing (or matching)” of Federal grants is tightly defined, and the requirements for determining the value of shared costs can be quite complex. To assist offerors in estimating the level of effort and other requirements to manage the GUC mechanism and monitor compliance, and given that Jordanian SMEs will not have the systems, knowledge, or capacity to support the accounting and compliance requirements of matching grants, would USAID clarify its intent and/or consider amending the language to discuss “leverage” or similar terms?

10 / 26

A.51:

The RFP is amended to require leverage rather than cost-share of subgrantees.

Q.52 In the Grants under Contract section, cost share is mentioned, but there does not seem to be a cost-share requirement. Does USAID have in mind a minimum or suggested cost share level the project should achieve?

A.52 The RFP is amended to require leverage rather than cost share. The minimum leverage requirement is 1:1. It will be up to the Offeror to come up with the leverage level the project should achieve not less than the 1:1 ratio.

Q.53 Are there any restrictions on which organizations can apply and receive a grant?

A.53 Jordanian, non-governmental, organizations will be eligible to receive grants. The intended target group of the grants program are Jordanian SMEs. In addition, grants to associations, chambers and other NGOs are allowed in furtherance of the activity's objective.

Q.54 On page 8 of the SOO, USAID states that “Offerors must propose how Collaboration, Learning, and Adaptation (CLA) principles will be reflected throughout their proposed interventions.” Based on this guidance:

a. Does USAID prefer to see (a) a CLA section expressing how CLA principles are reflected, or, (b) ongoing/continuous references to CLA throughout the proposal and proposed interventions?

If USAID prefers (a) a freestanding CLA section, may Offerors present this in the Management Plan?

b. Draft Work Plans and Co-Work Planning - Will the co-work planning process starting in Year 2 engage specific ERA Task Order activities or ERA IDIQ holders at the higher level in addition to

WEELA?

A.54

a. USAID has no preference.

b. This has to be coordinated and agreed upon with the respective CORs after award. The Contractor will initiate the co-work planning process starting in year 2 with the ERA task order holders and the WEELA contractor.

Q.55 Would USAID provide additional guidance to suggest how the Business Growth Activity should plan to work with activities under the pending Economic Reform Activity, which will also be focused on policy reform?

A.55 USAID has revised the SOO. Please refer to the revised SOO in the amended RFP.

Q.56 The contractors of the LENS, JCP, JWP projects conducted many assessments of individual firms’ and business associations’ capacities. The reports issued by these projects list general information about numbers of firms engaged. However, there is no information given about firm-level achievements or performance.

LENS, in particular, issued numerous solicitations for services provided by local contractors.

However, their reports do not show performance (positive or negative) of these contractors or the organizations they assisted.

11 / 26

Having that information on an exclusive basis provides them with significant competitive advantages.

Would USAID ask incumbent contractors to release such information?

A.56 All relevant information is available at dec.usaid.gov.

Q.57 Furthermore, on page 8 in the Section entitled Coordination with other projects, demonstrate an understanding of other USAID programs. Many of these sector specific programs, such as the energy project, for example, will have significant information developed by projects about Jordanian firms operating in their sectors. Can USAID ensure projects managed by firms that subcontract to small business bidders, have made assessments and reports that include information about firms operating in specific sectors are made public?

A.57 The reports in question are available at dec.usaid.gov and/or at https://jordankmportal.com/

Q.58 There is no mention about geography or governorates. Are there specific areas USAID would like the project to focus on?

A.58 No specific geographic region or governorate area of focus within Jordan is identified in the RFP.. Per section F.3 of the RFP, the place of performance is the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Q.59 Sections L.6.(b)(4) and L.7.(b) reference the submission of the offeror’s proposal in Word Document.

Would USAID please confirm that the offeror may submit the technical proposal in PDF format in lieu of Word Document?

A.59 Technical Proposal can be submitted either in Adobe PDF (with Optical Character Recognition) or Microsoft Word Document version.

Q.60 Can USAID/Jordan confirm that offerors may submit the technical proposal in compatible PDF with Optical Character Recognition for the Technical Proposal in replacement of a Word document?

A.60 See answer to Q.59

Q.61 Page 120 of the RFP refers to a submission method involving a “Business Growth Google Mail Group.” Can USAID explain what the Google Mail Group is? Is this merely an email address? Or, is there some group that we must join in order to submit the proposal?

A.61 Offerors are to submit proposals to the email address: jordan_bg@usaid.gov.

Q.62 Due to the fact that questions regarding the RFP are due July 9th, will USAID/Jordan consider extending the proposal deadline? Is so, would USAID/Jordan consider announcing the new due date prior to USAID issuing all the responses to offerors’ questions?

A.62 The closing date for the submission of proposals in the amended RFP is changed to August 24, 2020.

12 / 26 https://jordankmportal.com/ mailto:jordan_bg@usaid.gov

Q.63 Can Offerors include a transmittal letter in the groups of pages that are excluded in the page limitations on RFP page 121?

A.63 USAID requires a cover page that is not included in the page limit. Any additional cover or transmittal letter will count towards the page limitation.

Q.64 Do Offerors need to include SF-33 in the Technical Proposal? RFP Page 123 suggests that SF 33 should be included in the Technical Proposal but this form is usually only included in the Cost Proposal.

A.64 This requirement has been removed from Section L.7 of the amended RFP. Offerors are not required to include the SF-33 with the Technical Proposal. Section L.8 requires that the SF-33 be submitted with the cost proposal.

Q.65 Section L.7.(b) describes the components of the technical proposal. May the Offeror include a list of acronyms and abbreviations as part of the technical proposal, that does not count against the 30-page limit?

A.65 Yes. The Offeror can include a list of acronyms and abbreviations not exceeding 2 pages as part of the technical proposal that does not count against the 30-page limit.

Q.66 Section L.7.b.(page 121) indicates that 9 point font is acceptable for tables and charts. Is 9 point font also accessible for text boxes?

A.66 Text boxes shall be formatted using 12 point Times New Roman font.

Q.67 May offerors use A4 paper, as stated on p. 121?

A.67 Yes.

AMELP

Q.68 Section L.7, page 121, indicates that the Annex C – Draft MEL Plan, should include a logic model and indicators. Page 124 then indicates the same Annex should feature a results framework. Considering the slight differences between the two models, would USAID please confirm the Offeror should submit a Results Framework only?

A.68 USAID confirms that the Offeror should submit a draft AMELP featuring a Results Framework.

Q.69 Is there a page limitation for Annex C Draft Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan, including logic model and indicators?

13 / 26

A.69 The RFP is amended to limit the number of pages under Annex C Draft Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan to five (5).

Reporting

Q.70 Section F.7.14 indicates Short-Term Consultant Reports are required 10 calendar days following departure of a Consultant. Would USAID please consider removing this qualification, considering the significant number of Consultants required to complete this activity – particularly under CLIN 0003?

A.70 The RFP is amended to require Short-Term Consultant Reports as part of the Quarterly Reports.

Q.71 Page 21, Section F.7.8 indicates the Annual Reports are due 15 calendar days after the end of the first full USAID fiscal year and annually thereafter. However, Section F.7.8 on page 28 indicates the Annual Reports are due 20 calendar days after the end of the first full USAID fiscal year and annually thereafter. Would USAID please confirm Annual Reports are due 20 calendar days after the end of the first full USAID fiscal year and annually thereafter?

A.71 USAID requires Annual Reports 20 calendar days after the end of each fiscal year. The RFP is amended accordingly.

II. ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON THE COST PROPOSAL

PERSONNEL COMPENSATION

Q.72 Page 39, Section H.2(d) – “Initial Salaries” requires Contracting Officer’s approval for “initial starting salaries of all USN, TCN, and CCN consultants or employees whose salaries are charged as a direct cost…if the proposed salary is 3% higher than the employee’s current salary or wage, or the annual salary or wage received during the preceding year.” Under USAID’s new instructions on the Employee Biographical Data (EBD) sheet, implementing partners must propose salaries at the market value for positions. Also, in Section H.2 (parts b and c), the RFP states: “Salaries and wages must be reflective of the market value for each position” and “the Contracting Officer will consider the market value of each proposed position and the associated minimum qualifications as defined in the position description.”

a. Considering the new EBD instructions and market value determination method, can USAID remove or revise the language contained in Section H.2(d) to reflect the new requirements?

b. Page 40-41, Section H.2.(h) – This section also states that Contracting Officer’s approval is required when the proposed salary for consultants/short-term employees exceeds the annual compensation received by the consultant during the preceding year by 3%. Would USAID consider removing or revising this language to reflect the new EBD/market rate determination requirements?

A.72

a. The revised Section H.2 of the amended RFP reflects the new requirement for setting salaries.

b. The requirement to obtain CO’s approval for annual salary increases in excess of 3% remains unchanged.

Q.73 On page 39 of the RFP, Section H.2 (C) states “Salaries and wages must be reflective of the market value for each position. Salaries and wages may not exceed the contractor’s established policy and

14 / 26 practice, including the contractor’s established pay scale for equivalent classifications of employees.”

However, Section H.2.(d) of the RFP, instructs that “the initial starting salaries for all USN, TCN, and CCN consultants or employees whose salaries are charged as a direct cost to this contract must be approved, in advance and in writing, by the Contracting Officer if the proposed salary is 3% higher than the employees current salary or wage or the annual salary or wage received during the preceding year.” On pages 40 and 41 of the RFP, Section H.2(h) instructs that Contracting Officer approval is required when compensation for international and local short-term employees or consultants exceeds the annual compensation received by the consultant during the preceding year by 3%. Requesting salary history information is no longer a federally mandated requirement, resulting in changes to the AID 1420-17 Contractor Employee Biographical Data Sheet that now do not require salary history.We respectfully request USAID consider issuing a modification to the Solicitation that would remove salary limitations prescribed by Section H.2.(d) and H.2 (h).

A.73 The revised Section H.2 of the amended RFP reflects the new requirement for setting salaries.

Q.74 Section H.2(d), p.39, states that “The initial starting salaries of all US national (USN), third country national (TCN), and cooperating country national (CCN) consultants or employees whose salaries are charged as a direct cost to this contract must be approved, in advance and in writing, by the Contracting Officer if the proposed salary is 3% higher than the employee’s current salary or wage, or the annual salary or wage received during the preceding year.” This restriction seems to contradict the Agency’s own movement away from using salary history as the determinant for reasonable future earnings, especially when the proposed employee is new to the organization and could be assuming a role with significantly different or expanded responsibilities. Please consider removing this restriction in lieu of a market-based approach to compensation.

A.74.

The revised Section H.2 of the amended RFP reflects the new requirement for setting salaries.

Q.75 Section H.2(e), p. 40, states that “With the exception of key personnel, initial salaries of new staff replacing those previously approved in the contractor’s final proposal revision do not require prior approval by the Contracting Officer, provided that the following conditions are met: the position has been authorized in the contract; the proposed rate is reflective of the market value; and does not exceed the approved salary for the particular position in the final proposal revision. The contractor must obtain COR approval of the individual’s technical appropriateness to work on program activities.” Using the salary of the incumbent for a position does not take into account that the incumbent’s salary would have been in the range for a particular position. Just like the USG’s GS and FS scales, positions do not have a single market price but rather a range that the employer deems reasonable for the level of responsibility and prior knowledge and skills that the position requires.

Combined with the restriction in Section H.2, the Agency is effectively stating that employers must take both prior earnings and the prior employee’s compensation into account for any new employee’s rate. This seems both contrary to the market-based approach the Agency has adopted and harmful, especially for women and other marginalized individuals who disproportionately bear the negative consequences of such policies. Please consider removing this restriction in lieu of a market-based approach to compensation.

A.75 The revised Section H.2 in the amended RFP reflects the new requirement for setting salaries that must be reasonable per the factors set forth in the applicable cost principles (FAR Part 31), AIDAR 752.7007, and AIDAR 722.170. In addition to these factors, the Contracting Officer will consider the “market value” of each proposed position and the associated minimum qualifications as defined in the position description.

15 / 26

Q.76 H.2(g) states that salary increases may not exceed 3% per employee regardless of the annual escalation pool in the budget. We respectfully request the entirety of H.2(g) be removed from the RFP as it appears to be inconsistent with AIDAR 752.7007 Personnel Compensation, incorporated in the contract under Section I.3, 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.

A.76 The revised Section H.2 in the amended RFP is in harmony with AIDAR 752.7007, as it requires compensation in accordance with the Contractor's established policies, procedures, and practices, and the cost principles applicable to this contract. USAID will not consider removing the requirement for approval by the CO for annual salary increases in excess of 3%.

Q.77 In order to retain qualified staff and to allow a Contractor to account for changing market conditions, would USAID consider increasing the limit on annual salary increases in H.2(g) to 5%?

A.77 USAID does not consider removing the requirement to obtain CO’s approval for annual salary increases in excess of 3%.

Q.78 Attachment J7 includes a “Personnel List” table with instructions that ask for proposed project personnel’s current and proposed salaries. Pg. 39 of the RFP indicates that CO approval is required for all starting salaries that exceed 3% above current wage or salary. This table and the RFP instructions seem to run contrary to USAID’s recent move away from requiring salary history on biodata forms and salary history-based compensation setting. Can USAID please confirm that proposed salaries should be market-based and that salary history is not required for proposed personnel?

A.78 The “Personnel List” table in Attachment J7 is amended to not require current annual salary. Please see the revised Section H.2 in the amended RFP for the revised requirements for setting salaries.

Q.79 Attachment J-7, Row 49 on worksheet “Personnel List” states “Please list the personnel proposed, their job title, current annual salary and proposed starting annual salary.” Please confirm that the information requested is only the proposed starting annual salary.

A.79 The table is revised in the amended RFP to require contractors to list only the proposed starting annual salary.

Q.80 Section H.2(g), p. 40, Annual Salary Increases, does not allow for increases exceeding 3% with advance written approval of the Contracting Officer for CCNs, as it does for International Staff.

Please consider applying the same conditions for such approval allowed for International Staff to CCN staff.

A.80 Please see the revised Section H.2 in the amended RFP.

16 / 26

Q.81 Pg. 40 indicates a ceiling has been set for international and CCN salaries, however, only the ceiling for international salaries is provided. Can USAID confirm that CCNs are also held to the CST? Is there a different ceiling for CCN staff?

A.81 Please see the revised Section H.2 in the amended RFP.

Q.82 On Page 40, Section H.2.(f) of the Solicitation states that a ceiling has been established for CCN staff but does not list what the ceiling for CCN staff is. Could USAID kindly provide a copy of the current local employee compensation plan (LCP) for Jordan? Could USAID confirm the LCP max is the ceiling mentioned for CCN staff?

A.82 It is a USAID/Jordan policy that the Local Compensation Plan is not shared with the public. The language regarding ceilings is deleted in Section H.2. The Offeror’s policies on CCN compensation must be in line with the local labor market and supported by relevant data.

Q.83 Please confirm that Biodata Forms are required only for Key Personnel.

Q.84 In Section L.8 (5), USAID states that “Biographical Data Sheets are required for the following individuals to be employed in the performance of the contract: (1) All individuals to be sent outside of the United States, or (2) any employees designated as key personnel”. Can Offerors read this to mean Biodatas will be required for any USN or TCN being sent to Jordan (for long- or short-term positions) and any key personnel?

Q.85 Page 129 notes that biodata sheets “are required for the following individuals to be employed in the performance of the contract: (1) All individuals to be sent outside the United States…” Can USAID clarify what is meant by “to be sent outside the United States” in this clause? Does it refer to any non-CCN employees who will work from Jordan?

Q.86 Page 129 notes that biodata sheets “are required for the following individuals to be employed in the performance of the contract: (1) All individuals to be sent outside the United States…” Can USAID confirm that the use of “to be employed” in this context refers to those individuals hired as a project employee by the offeror or subcontractors?

Q.87 Section L.8 Part 2-(5)(A) states “Biographical Data Sheets are required for the following individuals to be employed in the performance of the contract: (1) All individuals to be sent outside the United States”. Can USAID please confirm that Biographical Data Sheets are required only for US/international personnel who are named in the proposal and are expected to travel to Jordan?

A. 83-87 Pursuant to AIDAR 752.7001, ‘Biographical Data (JUL 1997)’ incorporated into the RFP, the Offeror shall furnish to the contracting officer on USAID Form 1420-17, “Contractor Employee Biographical Data Sheet”, biographical information on the following individuals to be employed in the performance of the contract: (1) All individuals to be sent outside the United States, or (2) any employees designated as “key personnel”.

Section L.8 contains the same requirement.

Accordingly, offerors must submit biodata sheets for key personnel, for USN and TCN employees and consultants of the prime and subcontractors proposed to travel to Jordan for on-site assignments, and

17 / 26 for USNs and TCNs other than the contractor’s or any subcontractor’s regular employees supporting the project from the U.S. or elsewhere remotely.

WORK WEEK

Q.88 Section H.2(k), p.41, Work Week, for non-overseas employees, please remove the…