SF30 72027822R00012_Amendment 01.pdf

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Previous edition unusable

Camille Garcia

The purpose of this amendment to the solicitation is to:

1. Provide responses to questions received by the deadline (see attachment).

2. Make minor revisions to the solicitation as reflected in yellow highlights in the attached amended RFP, which replaces the original solicitation in its entirety.

USAID/Jordan American Embassy PO Box 354 Amman, Jordan 11118

REQ-278-22-000105

72027822R00012

1 1

See Box 16C

10/12/2022

Request for Proposal (RFP) Number 72027822R00012, Amendment 0001

Attachment I – Questions and Answers

COVER LETTER:

1. Due to the significant number of stakeholders who must be conferred with and due to various public holidays, can applicants respectfully request for a deadline extension to Dec 2, 2022?

USAID Response: The proposal deadline remains unchanged.

SECTION B:

2. Can you USAID confirm that the Section referred to on page 8 of the RFP – “The services shall be ordered in accordance with Section H.25 entitled “ORDERING SUPPLEMENTAL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE (CLIN 0002)” – is a typo and means to reference Section H.24?

USAID Response: Thank you for bringing this typo to USAID’s attention. The correct reference is indeed Section H.24. The correction is reflected in the amended RFP.

3. On page 10, for the section “LEVEL-OF-EFFORT UNDER CLIN 0002,” can USAID clarify where in the application Offerors will include this table of labor categories?

USAID Response: Please refer to RFP Section L.8, under the Technical Proposal Body, number 2. Management Approach and Staffing (first paragraph on pg. 165). This information can be included as a table in the corresponding section of the proposal.

4. On page 10, for the section “LEVEL-OF-EFFORT UNDER CLIN 0002,” can applicants respectfully request to USAID that all Prime Offerors and all subcontracting organizations in their consortium each provide names up to a maximum of 1000 person-days within the specified labor categories?

USAID Response: No, please provide only the information specified in the RFP.

SECTION C:

5. Section C.2 (pg. 15): Does USAID anticipate the Contractor will provide direct support to police or law enforcement under the Himaya Activity? If so, are there any applicable vetting requirements for Offeror’s to consider in implementation?

USAID Response: Yes, the Police are a key stakeholder in the implementation of the Himaya contract. USAID will facilitate any relevant vetting requirements.

6. Section C (Statement of Work). Article C.3.2 (Grants Under Contracts): According to Article

C.3.2 (page 44), “The Contractor must ensure that all organizations supported through GUCs…” We understand this to mean that all GUCs must be able to provide all four of the requirements on page 45. Given USAID’s emphasis on engaging local entities and capacity development of those entities, can USAID please clarify whether a GUC be provided to an entity that meets some but not all of those requirements?

USAID Response: The requirements listed under Section C.3.2 (page 45) of the Himaya RFP are not envisioned as prerequisites for CSOs to qualify for grants, but rather as areas that the contractor will help strengthen as part of technical assistance provided by the contractor and/or as part of the interventions supported by the grant.

7. Section C.3.2 (pg. 44-45) We respectfully request that USAID remove the phrase “and must submit all draft solicitations, selection criteria and applications to the Contracting Officer’s Representative [COR]” from Section C.3.2. As our understanding is that the contractor has the designated authority to issue grants on USAID’s behalf, we request that USAID instead allow for those items to be approved as part of the grants manual, annual workplans, and ultimately COR approval of the recipients as outlined in Section H.6.

USAID Response: No, the text remains unchanged.

8. Section C (Scope of Work). Article C.3.4 (Institutional Support Fund): Can USAID please clarify whether ISF support can issued under a grant instrument?

USAID Response: No. Grants Under Contract are a separate activity with a separate budget line. ISF activities are not envisioned as grants, and grants are not envisioned under the ISF.

9. Can USAID clarify whether Institutional Support Funds can be utilized to supplement for construction activities?

USAID Response: No, the ISF cannot be utilized to supplement the construction activities. Construction activities are allocated separately with a separate budget line.

SECTION F:

10. Per the requirement in RFP Section F.5 p. 55, would USAID be willing to accept if just one of the key personnel positions (COP or DCOP) were fluent in both Arabic and English, rather than requiring Arabic specifically for the DCOP? It is our experience from working in Jordan that it is not necessary for effective program implementation that the DCOP be fluent in Arabic, but instead that it is necessary for at least one of the two key personnel positions (COP or DCOP) to be a fluent Arabic speaker.

USAID Response: Thank you for the question. USAID has considered the suggestion.

Revised key personnel language is reflected in the amended RFP.

11. Per the requirement in RFP Section F.5 p. 55-56, would USAID be willing to accept a COP candidate with a Bachelor’s Degree in a relevant field coupled with 15+ years of subject-matter expertise/experience? It is our experience based on implementing similar programs in the gender and GBV space that a strong director requires proven years of experience in practice rather than a post-graduate degree (though optional).

USAID Response: Thank you for the question. USAID has considered the suggestion.

Revised key personnel language is reflected in the amended RFP.

12. Section F.5., Key Personnel, page 56, states: “The DCOP will be responsible for administrative oversight for the contract and technical oversight on all or parts of the contract’s interventions including staff management and quality assurance.” Would USAID consider removing this requirement so offerors can propose a separation of technical and administrative duties, and ensure adherence to offerors’ internal compliance standards?

USAID Response: No, this requirement remains unchanged.

13. Given the plethora of educated and experienced Jordanian experts in country, can applicants respectfully request that proposed Key Personnel candidates substitute years of experience as a COP/DCOP for a USAID project for relevant professional and academic years of experience?

USAID Response: The reference to COP/DCOP required experience for the proposed COP key personnel position reflects experience in senior management roles and does not require that the candidate have had served as part of a USAID project.

14. Section F.7 (pg. 82) states that contractors “will adhere to the annual self-reporting certification requirements under this contract, that include but not limited: FAR 52.222-50 Combating Trafficking in Persons and FAR 52.204-25, Prohibition on Contracting for Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment.” Can USAID clarify the stated annual certification requirement under FAR 52.204-25? Is this clause intended to address the representation at FAR 52.204-26 that is maintained in SAM.gov?

USAID Response: USAID deleted Section F.7 since both clauses referenced in this section are already included in Section I.

SECTION H:

15. Section H.2(b). The RFP states: “Unless otherwise approved by the Contracting Officer, the maximum prevailing compensation will be the same as the maximum salary under the Mission Local Compensation Plan” (p. 87). In addition, it states that “Salaries for long-term and short-term TCN and CCN employees must be in compliance with AIDAR 722.170. The maximum daily rate allowed under the Local Compensation Plan (LCP) is currently at JD

331.83 equivalent to $468.69” (p. 169). We respectfully request that such salary restrictions 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 (p. 116) — which stipulates that personnel compensation be in accordance with the contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, with reimbursement subject only to USAID’s contractor salary threshold. The salary restriction above may preclude contractors from following their established policies, procedures, and practices, as required by AIDAR 752.7007.

USAID Response: The limitations related to salaries for CCN and TCN employees are a matter of USAID policy as set forth in the AIDAR 722.170 and the required approvals cannot be waived. The updated maximum daily rate allowed under the Local Compensation Plan is reflected in the amended RFP in Section L.9 on page 171.

16. Section H (Special Contract Requirements): Article H6 (Grants Under Contracts): Per Article H.6 (page 91-92), the contract authorizes the execution of grants to non-governmental organizations in accordance with ADS 302.3.4.13 with prior approval from the Head Contracting Activity. Can USAID please clarify that GUCs to governments are not allowable under the contract?

USAID Response: As described in Section C of the RFP, the Grants Under Contract tool is designed to support non-governmental civil society organizations as critical actors in the protection framework.

17. Section H (Special Contract Requirements): Article H12 (Sovereign Relationships): Per

Article H.12 (pg. 93), “the contractor will not enter into any agreements, memorandum of understanding or other arrangements, binding or non-binding, directly or indirectly, with the Government of Jordan, without the express written consent of the Contracting Officer.” Can USAID confirm that we would be able to enter into an agreement or MOU with the Government of Jordan under a different project without the CO’s approval under a different project, including those not funded by USAID? Can USAID please define or provide two examples of “other arrangements” with the Government of Jordan?

USAID Response: If the intent of the agreement or MOU is not related to the Himaya activity, then consent is not required.

18. Section H (Special Contract Requirements). Article H13 (Meeting with Government of

Jordan Ministers): Per Article H13 (page 93), “the contract must notify the COR in writing of any meeting with the Government of Jordan Ministers.” Can you please confirm that this requirement only relates to any meetings that pertain to the contract with the Government of Jordan Ministers?

USAID Response: Notification to the COR is required for any and all meetings of staff employed under this contract with Government of Jordan Ministers.

SECTION J:

19. Section J: Per the budget template shared with the RFP, the subcontractor budget template is only for 4 years. Can USAID confirm the start date and period of performance for subcontractors specifically?

USAID Response: Thank you for noting this discrepancy. Budgets for proposed subcontractors may reflect estimated costs for up to five years, as applicable and pursuant to the Offeror’s proposed approach.

SECTION K:

20. Per RFP Section K p. 130, do the Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of

Offerors need to be filled out by partners/subcontractors, or just the prime offeror?

USAID Response: Per Section L.9(b), Part 3, item (2), the Offeror and each proposed major subcontractor must complete Section K.

SECTION L:

21. Section L.8, Instructions for The Preparation of the Technical Proposal, page 160, states:

“proposals, including any text boxes, must be written in font style Times New Roman, font size 12. Offerors may use a font other than Times New Roman in graphs and tables. Smaller font size, but not smaller than 10 pt., can be used in tables and graphs.” We have the following related questions:

a. Would USAID consider changing the font requirement for textboxes to align with the requirements of using “a font other than Times New Roman” and a “smaller font size, but not smaller than 10pt” as outlined for graphs and tables?

USAID Response: No.

b. Can USAID kindly confirm that “a font other than Times New Roman” and a “smaller font size, but not smaller than 10pt” applies to graphics as well?

USAID Response: This is confirmed per the second paragraph under Section L.8 of the

RFP.

22. Section L.8, INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL

PROPOSAL, pages 160-161, indicate that the Technical Proposal should contain a cover letter (one-page limit), a table of contents (2-page limit); an acronym list (2-page limit) and a Technical Proposal Body (25-page limit.) Would USAID allow Offerors to submit a two-page executive summary that would not count against the Technical Proposal Body page limit?

USAID Response: USAID has considered the suggestion, and has determined that an executive summary up to a two-page limit is permissible. This is reflected in the amended

RFP.

23. L.8 (pg. 161): May offerors include an Executive Summary that does not count toward the

25-page limit, allowing offerors to summarize key elements of their technical approach and management approach and staffing plan for USAID’s quick reference?

USAID Response: See response to Question #22.

24. Can applicants please request that a 2 page executive summary, not part of the 25-page limit, be submitted with the technical proposal?

USAID Response: See response to Question #22.

25. L.8 (pg. 161): If Offeror’s use USAID’s past performance matrix template, can USAID please confirm that the paper size, font, font size, and page limits do not apply?

USAID Response: As stated in the RFP, Annex 4 has a limit of 4 pages. Please see response to question No. 32 for the paper size, font, and font size.

26. On page 161, USAID lists Annex 5 (Performance in Using Small Business (SB) Concerns) as “only required for U.S. organizations that are large businesses.” Can USAID clarify what constitutes as a “large business”?

USAID Response: Please see FAR 19.3.

a. Can USAID clarify what the revenue threshold and registration requirements would be to be considered a “large business”?

USAID Response: Please see FAR 19.3.

b. Does USAID consider 501(c)3 organizations as “large businesses” if they receive a certain level of revenue?

USAID Response: Please see FAR 19.3.

27. Section L.8 (pg. 162). The list of requirements for the technical proposal includes “six illustrative outcome indicators that the Offeror would propose to measure progress under the two outcomes outlined in the Results Framework in Section C”. Would USAID permit these indicators to be presented in a one-page annex to the technical proposal that does not count against the 25-page limit for the technical proposal?

USAID Response: No, this must be part of the Technical Proposal Body, under subsection number 1. Technical Approach, as indicated in RFP Section L.8 (pg. 163).

28. On page 162, can USAID clarify if Offerors should include a total of six illustrative outcome indicators for both outcomes or six for Outcome 1 and six for Outcome 2?

USAID Response: Offerors must include a total of six illustrative outcome indicators for both outcomes.

29. Section L.8 (pg. 162) asks the Offeror to “specifically describe its approach to rapidly and effectively performing tasks under the Supplemental Technical Assistance IDIQ CLIN 0002 set forth in Section C.4, and describe how it will mobilize and augment resources should the USAID order level-of-effort under the IDIQ CLIN 0002” and notes associated information in Section M.2 (pg.184) regarding its evaluation in the Technical Approach: “The extent to which the Offeror is able to rapidly and effectively respond to requests for supplemental technical assistance to implement tasks described in Section C.4 and in accordance with Section L.8.1.” We found the information requested by USAID on CLIN 0002 implementation in the Technical Approach to be duplicative of information requested on CLIN 0002 implementation in Offeror’s Management Approach and Staffing (L.8 pg. 163- 164), which does not have associated information on CLIN0002 implementation included in the evaluation criteria outlined in Section M.2 (pg. 184). Can USAID please clarify this duplication and consider including such information in either the Technical Approach or the Management Approach and Staffing section of Offeror’s Technical Proposal, as opposed to both?

USAID Response: USAID does not consider this duplicative. However, for greater clarity, the RFP is revised to clarify instructions in Section L.8 and also to clarify the evaluation criteria in Section M.2 related to the implementation of CLIN 0002.

30. Section L.8 (pg. 164) Given the detailed requirements and qualifications specified for COP and DCOP on page 55, Section F.5, would USAID please consider increasing the page limit for CVs from two pages to three pages to allow Offerors space to sufficiently showcase key personnel experience?

USAID Response: No, the page limit for CVs remains unchanged.

31. Could USAID confirm the number of references that are required for key personnel candidates.

USAID Response: The Offerors are not required to submit references for key personnel candidates.

32. Section L.8.3, Past Performance, pages 164-165, states: “Offerors are also encouraged to use the ‘Past Performance Template’ that is publicly available through https://www.usaid.gov/documents/1868/past-performance-matrix.” May Offerors submit this Excel document as a separate attachment to ensure there are no issues in formatting this matrix to fit within the technical proposal PDF/Word submission?

USAID Response: If utilized, the matrix may be formatted as sheets no larger than legal size paper (8.5 x 14.0 inches) with a minimum of ½ inch margins utilizing Times New Roman text with a font size of not smaller than 10 pt. The file must be converted from the Excel format to a .pdf format. This is reflected in the amended RFP Section L.8.3.

33. On page 164, can USAID clarify in more specific detail what should be included under the

“3. Past Performance” section of the Technical Proposal Body, which is separate from Annex 4 (not included in the Technical Body page limits)?

USAID Response: Refer to RFP Section L.8, under the Technical Proposal Body, subsection

3. Past Performance, under number 2. (pg. 166).

34. For budgeting purposes, can USAID provide a specific project start date?

USAID Response: USAID estimates that a contract could be awarded in June 2023.

35. Section L.9.(b), Instructions for the Preparation of the Cost Proposal, page 166, provides the components of the Cost Proposal, which are further described on pages 167-179. However, requirements for item number (4) Policies and Procedures, are not provided. Part 4, on page 176, describes Joint Venture Information. Can USAID please confirm that item number (4) Policies and Procedures is not required if offerors have prior experience contracting with

USAID?

USAID Response: Thank you for bringing this typo to USAID’s attention. The RFP has been amended to correct this error. Policies and procedures are not required as a separate section of the cost proposal, but rather should be included as relevant to support the Offeror’s proposed cost. For example, an Offeror may submit an excerpt of its human resources policies related to salary setting to support its proposed salaries.

36. On page 167, USAID lists “(4) Policies and Procedures” as a required component of the Cost Proposal but does not list what these should include. Can USAID please clarify what specific policies and procedures should be included in Part 4 of the Cost Proposal?

USAID Response: Please see the response to Question 35.

37. On page 168, the RFP states “certified cost or pricing data is not required for this proposal.”

Does this also apply to subcontractors included in the bid?

USAID Response: The prime Offeror is responsible for ensuring compliance with requirements related to its proposed subcontractors.

38. Section L.9.(b) Instructions for the Preparation of the Cost Proposal, page 169, states:

“Salaries for long-term and short-term TCN and CCN employees must be in compliance with AIDAR 722.170.” Specifically, AIDAR 722.170 (b) Compensation states: “Compensation, including merit or promotion increases paid to TCN's and CCN's may not, without the approval of the Mission Director or the Assistant Administrator having program responsibility for the project, exceed the prevailing compensation paid to personnel performing comparable work in the cooperating country as determined by the USAID Mission.” Would USAID kindly provide the USAID/Jordan Mission Local Compensation Plan to enable offerors to comply with this requirement?

USAID Response: The information needed for compliance with this requirement is provided in Section L.9 on pages 170-171 of the RFP.

39. Can applicants respectfully request an updated LCP for USAID/Jordan, if there is one?

USAID Response: USAID has provided the maximum daily rate allowed under the Local Compensation Plan (LCP) for Jordan to facilitate compliance with AIDAR 722.170. (pg.

171).

40. Section L.9 (pg. 171) states that “the Institutional Support Fund is allocated for the procurement of items described in the Statement of Work, but can include some limited services that are directly related to procurement, such as equipment installation, delivery, maintenance, and training on the use of the items procured under the ISF.” However, B.3

(pg. 10) states that Offeror’s “must not include management or oversight related costs, or indirect costs or fee” as relates to 0001d (Institutional Support Fund), 0001e (Grants Under Contract) and 0001f (Construction). Can USAID please clarify whether Offeror’s can include costs in the allocated ISF plug figure for the Offeror’s technical staff or consultants to provide related services, such as procurement, equipment delivery, maintenance, and/or training?

USAID Response: The RFP describes the types of ancillary services contemplated under the ISF. See page 173 under the subheading 0001d Institutional Support Fund, which states:

“The Institutional Support Fund is allocated for the procurement of items described in the Statement of Work, but can include some limited services that are directly related to the procurement, such as equipment installation, delivery, maintenance, and training on the use of the items procured under the ISF. Any services funded under this budget line must be directly associated with the materials, software, hardware, tools, systems, and other items procured under the Institutional Support Fund [...]” USAID envisions that this would not include contractor employee staff time, but rather relate to services from the vendor of the item being purchased or as otherwise required from a third party commercial vendor. For example, there may be cases where an item is purchased from a commercial vendor and the delivery and/or installation of the item is charged separately by the vendor or by a third party.

Therefore, Offerors must utilize the plug figure for the ISF as instructed in the RFP. The ISF must not include employee salaries, other direct costs related to the Offeror’s operations, etc., indirect costs or fee.

41. Page 177 of the RFP: For Part 5 – Evidence of Responsibility, USAID states that “Offerors must submit sufficient evidence of responsibility for the Contracting Officer to make an affirmative determination of responsibility pursuant to the requirements of FAR Subsection 9.104-1.”

a. Can USAID please clarify what types of documents should be submitted with the proposal to demonstrate “submit sufficient evidence of responsibility”?

USAID Response: Offeror’s should read the RFP instructions and FAR 9.104 carefully and use their judgment.

b. Can USAID also clarify where should the Offeror include this information in the proposal?

USAID Response: As indicated in RFP Section L.9, this information should be included as Part 5 of the cost proposal.

42. L.10 (pg. 179) references that the “Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan will be evaluated but not as part of the technical evaluation.” Can USAID please confirm whether Offerors should include the Branding Implementation and Marking Plan with their cost proposal or with their technical proposal?

USAID Response: Thank you for bringing this to USAID’s attention. The Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan must be submitted as part of the cost proposal. This is reflected in the amended RFP Section L.10.

43. Can applicants please request that a Branding and Marking Plan not be included as part of the requirements of this application and only be required for the apparently successful applicant/s?

USAID Response: See response to Question 42.

44. As part of the disclosure requirements under FAR 52.204–24 (page 180), the Offeror must disclose use of covered technology. On October 5, 2022, the Department of Defense added new entities to the list of entities that could provide covered technology (https://media.defense.gov/2022/Oct/05/2003091659/-1/- 1/0/1260H%20COMPANIES.PDF). Given the limited time in which to conduct a review, is it reasonable to assume that offerors can disclose use of technology from the newly covered entities (if any) after the due date for the submission of the bid?

USAID Response: USAID assumes that the Offeror would update its representation after conducting a reasonable inquiry pursuant to the requirements of the provision. USAID also assumes that this could be completed within the time between submission of an offer and the award of a contract.

45. Section L.11 (pg. 181) states that “No agency waiver will be authorized to extend beyond August 13, 2022” with regards to the prohibitions under FAR Part 4.2101 and 52.204-25 regarding covered telecommunications and video surveillance services and equipment. Can USAID confirm whether this means that the modified Foreign Assistance Waiver USAID received from the Director of National Intelligence that expires on September 30, 2028, will not be applied to any contract resulting from this award?

USAID Response: The language being referred to pertains to the Agency-approved waivers and not to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) waivers. USAID confirms that the DNI Modified Foreign Assistance waiver could be applied to this award if the Offeror certifies that no other Section 889-compliant alternatives are available in the countries where the Offeror discloses the use of covered technology.