USAID Udhyam Nepal Questions and Answers .pdf

Amendment 1 RFP No. 72036721R00003

Industry Questions and Answers

USAID UDHYAM NEPAL: RFP No. 72036721R00003 Questions from Industry

GENERAL

1. At the USAID OAA Quarterly Business Forecast call that took place on March 10, 2021, the USAID implementing partner community was advised to stop using the term Journey to Self- Reliance. The use of the term in Section M seems to contradict the guidance that was provided at the OAA quarterly call. Please advise if it is USAID/Nepal’s intention that offeror’s design an approach “to boost Nepal’s Journey to Self-Reliance.”

USAID Response: USAID remains committed to the sustainability of the investments that we make in Nepal. The principles of the Journey to Self-Reliance, and particularly its focus on accelerating enterprise-driven development to achieve and sustain results, remain helpful in Nepal and are applicable to USAID’s Udhyam Nepal activity. Offerors should therefore design an approach that boosts Nepal’s journey to self-reliance, as indicated in Section M.

2. General Question. Does USAID have a preferred conversion rate they would like offerors to use?

USAID Response: USAID/Nepal utilizes the conversion rate of US$1=NRs.110.

COVER LETTER

3. Reference: Section Cover Letter, Header, Page 1: Would USAID kindly extend the submission date to April 30, 2021 due to the complexity of the pricing requirements and to allow offerors time to adjust their proposals in line with USAID’s Q&A responses?

USAID Response: USAID will revise the closing date of this RFP to Friday, April 30, 2021 at 17:00 Nepal Time.

4. Reference: Section Cover Letter, Paragraph 3, Page 1: The Cover Letter states that “USAID is interested in expanding the number and sustainability of development partners.”

The RFP is silent on types of arrangements that may be expected or encouraged with Nepali organizations other than to allow for the creation of a small grants under contract mechanism. Exclusive arrangements with Nepali organizations by prime offeror’s would appear to limit the ability of expanding the number of local partners. Would USAID consider discouraging or prohibiting offerors from making exclusive partnership arrangements with Nepali organizations?

USAID Response: No.

5. Cover Page Given the COVID-19 constraint, can USAID/Nepal provide an extension to this proposal?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 3.

6. General Question. Would USAID consider extending the submission deadline for this opportunity?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 3.

SECTION B-SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICE/COSTS

7. RFP Section B.4, page 9 states, “Offerors must set aside up to 15 percent of its total budget to provide GUCs for CLIN 0001 and up to 25 percent of its total budget to provide GUCs for CLIN 0002.” Will USAID confirm this is meant to say the following? “Offerors must set aside up to 15 percent of its total CLIN 0001 budget to provide GUCs for CLIN 0001 and up to 25 percent of its total CLIN 0002 budget to provide GUCs for CLIN 0002.”

USAID Response: Confirmed.

8. B.4 Budget Line Items, page 9-143: indicates that “if proposing a Grant Under Contract (GUC) component, Offerors ‘must’ set aside up to 15 percent of its total budget...” Can USAID confirm that the word ‘must’ does not dictate a certain ceiling for GUC, and that offerors are free to dedicate any amount for grant up to the maximum limit stated in this section?

9. Reference B.4. Could USAID please clarify the statement: “If proposing a Grants Under Contract (GUC) component, Offerors must set aside up to 15 percent of its total budget to provide (GUCs for CLIN 0001 and up to 25 percent of its total budget to provide GUCs for CLIN 0002.” Does this mean offerors may propose any amount up to 15% of the total budget for CLIN 0001 and any amount up to 25% of the total budget for CLIN 0002 for grants?

USAID Response: Please see Questions 7 and 8.

SECTION H

10. RFP Section H.21(b), page 56 states, “GUCs to partner government entities to provide funds may be authorized if they meet the conditions, requirements, and approvals in ADS 302.” Will USAID confirm that a Project Appraisal Document (PAD) or Determination and Findings (D&F) has been conducted by USAID for the government institutions to which the contractor anticipates non-in-kind grants, or that one will be conducted by USAID during implementation? Per ADS 302.3.4.13, contracting officers must verify that these types of grants under contracts (GUCS) have been approved in a D&F.

USAID Response: If needed, a D&F will be done during implementation for non-in-kind grants to government institutions.

11. RFP Section H.21(e), page 57, requires reporting to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) for GUCs equal to or greater than $25,000. Our understanding is that this threshold has been revised to equal to or greater than

$30,000, per the standard provision entitled “Reporting Subawards and Executive Compensation.” Will USAID kindly revise this clause accordingly?

USAID Response: The clause will be revised to incorporate the November 2020 change to the subaward reporting threshold.

12. Section H.21, Paragraph (e), page 57 Can the Government clarify whether the award of a grant under contract is considered a sub-award for the purposes of FSRS reporting, and thus whether the contractor has an obligation to report each grant under contract award that is $25,000 or more?

USAID Response: Yes, as required by the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA), Part 200.308(c)(1)(vi) of Title 2 of the C.F.R, and Chapter 303.3.21a of the Automated Directives System (ADS), when the Agency approves a sub-award equal to or greater than $30,000 under an assistance instrument (GUC), the Contractor must report the grant through the Federal Sub-Award Reporting System (FSRS).

13. Reference H.4(f).

a. Question 1: USAID asks offerors to maintain a Pay Scale that includes the level of expertise for each consultant type. Is it USAID’s intention that these rates should represent pay ceilings at which rates will be capped, or that the pay scale serve as a general market rate justification to ensure that consultant rates for Udhyam Nepal are in line with market rates?

USAID Response: The Pay Scale may serve both functions.

b. Question 2: Could the Mission kindly confirm if the Pay Scale is meant to serve for expatriate consultants or local consultants?

USAID Response: The Pay Scale should serve for both expatriate and local consultants.

14. Section H.21.c.1 Award Amount Thresholds, first bullet point, indicates total value ceiling of individual grants to U.S. NGO and non-U.S. NGOs. Can you USAID elaborate why private sector firms (for profit entities but not incorporated as NGO) are not included here?

USAID Response: As per ADS 302.3.4.13.a “The Contracting Officer may enter into a direct contract (including a task order) that allows the USAID contractor to execute grants with non-governmental organizations (non-profits or for-profits) and partner government entities (also known as partner government implementing entity as defined in ADS 220).” The Award Amount Thresholds align with those two categories of potential grantees.

SECTION I

15. RFP Section I.1, page 71, The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) chart flows down FAR 52.227-14 Rights in Data General & FAR 52.227-17 Rights in data special works. Will USAID please clarify which data rights will apply to the resultant contract?

USAID Response: Both clauses will apply.

SECTION J

16. Section J.6 includes the 1420 form template. Would USAID please advise if this is required from all named personnel? Or only key staff? Also, can USAID advise where to offer under which section of the cost proposal would the offeror include the collected forms?

USAID Response: The 1420-17 Biographical Data Sheet form must be submitted for the Key Personnel positions. Biographical Data Sheet can be included in Annex J to the Cost Proposal.

17. The travel section of the Prime Detailed Spreadsheet provided in Attachment J.7 categorize the travel into the following categories:

● Assignment to Post and Entitlement

● International Travel

● Regional Travel

● Local Travel

● Per Diem

While the “Travel Details Cost” Spreadsheet provided under the Section (J.7) categorizes the travel into the following categories:

● International Travel

● Domestic Travel

● Travel Associated with Allowances

To ensure consistency, would USAID confirm the travel cost categories they would like to see under the travel section of the budget?

USAID Response: The generic cost template is provided as a guideline and may be tailored to the individual Offeror's cost accounting structures; however, please try to stay as close as possible to the general structure of Attachment J-2.

18. Can USAID please confirm if the “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities” form listed under section J2 are required from the prime contractor only?

USAID Response: The instructions for completing the “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities” can be found on page 2 of the form.

SECTION L

19. Reference L.4.k. The RFP states “The Offeror must send submissions by email to the addresses listed in the cover letter to this RFP.” Can USAID confirm that offerors should send their technical and cost submissions only to Marva Butler at (mbutler@usaid.gov)?

USAID Response: Offerors should send submissions to the Primary Point of Contact email listed in beta.sam.gov: kathmanduoaaexchange@usaid.gov.

mailto:mbutler@usaid.gov mailto:kathmanduoaaexchange@usaid.gov

20. Reference L.4.k(5). The RFP states that “The Offeror must submit the Technical Volume and Cost Volume in one email as two attachments….” However, L.7.1 (b) requires “The Offeror must submit Cost Volume Annexes as separate attachments….” Please confirm that offerors should follow the instruction in L.4.k(5) and submit one PDF with all cost elements and an Excel file with the budget.

USAID Response: The Technical Volume and Cost Volume should be submitted in separate email as indicated in the RFP Cover Letter. USAID will correct the relevant RFP sections for consistency.

21. Section L.4.k email Submission Procedures, point 5, page 120 – Can USAID please confirm our understanding that both Technical and Cost Volumes are to be transmitted in the same email. This requirement seems to be at odds with USAID practice of requesting submission of separate emails for cost and technical proposals.

USAID Response: Please see the response to Question 20.

22. Reference: Section L.5, Paragraph (2), Page 121: The RFP affords the opportunity for offerors to submit a 2-page Cover Letter. Would USAID consider revising the requirement to a 1-page Cover Letter and a 2-page Executive Summary to allow offerors to provide a concise overview of their proposed technical and management approach?

USAID Response: USAID will revise the submission requirement to include a 2-page Executive Summary instead of the Cover Letter.

23. Reference L.5.b. Would USAID consider allowing offerors to include an Executive Summary to provide an early, high-level overview of the offeror’s proposal?

USAID Response: Please see the response to Question 22.

24. Section L.5(b), page 121: The organization of the Technical Volume does not include the option of providing an Executive Summary. Would USAID consider allowing Offerors to include a two-page Executive Summary before the 20-page PWS?

25. Section L.5, Page 121, can the Offeror include an Executive Summary that would not count against the page limit? And will this count as separate from what the cover letter/cover page seems to suggest.

26. Reference L.5.b(6). Please clarify what information USAID expects to see in Annex C –

Proposed Key Personnel (inputs for Section F.4).

USAID Response: Please see Section F.4 “Key Personnel” of the RFP.

27. Section L.5.b Technical Volume Organization, Bullet 1 and 2, Page 121, Could USAID please confirm the requirements for the Cover page and the Cover Letter as they seem to be duplicative.

28. Reference L.6.a(2). USAID indicates that “The Offeror must outline briefly how it plans to operate under the current COVID-19 environment.” Under which section should this be addressed (Background, Objectives, Results, or Services/Tasks Required)?

USAID Response: Offerors should determine how best to capture that information in the Performance Work Statement.

29. Requirements to provide a response operating in a COVID environment appears on Pg. 121, PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (see Section M.2.a); and, on Pg. 128, STAFFING AND MANAGEMENT APPROACH (see Section M.2.b). Please advise on which section of the technical proposal where bidders should provide the narrative on operating in a COVID response.

USAID Response: The response requirements for L.6.and L.6.b. are distinct. Offerors must briefly outline how it plans to operate under the current COVID-19 environment in the Performance Work Statement. Offerors must also briefly outline how it plans to operate under the current COVID-19 environment with respect to staffing and management in the Staffing and Management Plan.

30. Section L.6(a)(2), page 122 The RFP indicates that the Offeror “must outline briefly how it plans to operate under the current COVID-19 environment.” Section L.6(b) includes a similar statement. Please confirm that this information can be included in the Staffing and Management Approach in Annex A rather than in the PWS?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 29.

31. Reference L.6.a(3). Would USAID consider restructuring the PWS to be organized by Objective (each objective to include a sub-section on results and services/tasks) rather than separating out the objective, results, and services content into their own sections?

USAID Response: Offerors may create sub-sections on results and services/tasks under each objective.

32. Reference L.6.a.(3). USAID states that “For each result, the Offeror must indicate any descriptive data necessary to support the result.” Could USAID clarify the meaning of ‘descriptive data.’ Does this mean, or could it be analogous to, M&E targets?

USAID Response: Descriptive data refers to supplemental information that will provide a better understanding and use of the results achieved.

33. Section L.6(a)(3), page 123 In its description of the Results section, the RFP indicates that the Offeror must indicate any descriptive data necessary to support the result. Could USAID please define “descriptive data”, i.e. does it refer to indicators or other types of data?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 32.

34. Reference L.6.a.(3). The RFP states that “The Objectives section must align with the SOO purpose and objectives as the launch point of the theory of change in the next section.” Could USAID clarify whether this second mention of objectives in this sentence refers to the general definition of objectives (the reasons actions are carried out) or to the specific Objectives 1,2 & 3 that are the organizing sub-components of the Udhyam Nepal Activity?

USAID Response: The second objectives in the sentence refers to the specific SOO objectives for the activity.

35. Reference: Section L.6(b), Paragraph 1(d), Page 124: The RFP requires offerors to develop a coordination strategy as part of the Staffing and Management Plan.

a. Does USAID currently participate in any GON led or donor coordination working groups or forums to facilitate collaboration across similar donor programming in Nepal?

b. If so, which of these working groups or other coordination bodies are most relevant for the Udhyam Activity?

USAID Response: USAID participates in the following donor coordination working groups which are relevant to Udhyam Nepal (not listed in any particular order): 1) Economic Growth and Private Sector; 2) Development Partner Food Security Group; and 3) Financial Sector Donor Partner Group.

36. Reference L.6.a.(3). The RFP states that “Results should be directional, actionable, clear, include the target beneficiary and, together, clearly form a theory of change linked to the SOO purpose and objectives.” Could USAID kindly define what is meant by ‘directional result’?

USAID Response: Results should be directly linked to the SOO purpose and objectives.

37. RFP Section L.6 (3), page 123, states that if offerors propose a GUC component, they must define clear criteria and objectives for small grant awards that would require the grants to “have financial cost-sharing from recipients.” We agree with the need for partner buy-in, however, given the management demands that cost share requires on the grantee, we kindly request that USAID remove this requirement. ADS 303.3.10.1 states that “When used, its [cost share’s] application should be flexible, case-specific, and used to support or contribute to the achievement of results. USAID should use cost sharing after considering whether it is appropriate for the recipient organization in the particular circumstances, in particular, the programmatic and technical context…” “…A specific program may be risky and discourages potential recipients from providing meaningful contributions.” Additionally, as per 2 CFR 200.201, “a fixed amount award cannot be used in programs which require mandatory cost sharing.” The use of mandatory cost sharing in the grants fund may unfairly limit competition as well as limit the type of mechanism that the successful implementing partner may use. As well, the administrative burden of submitting receipts and backup documentation could discourage some organizations from applying. Given these factors, will USAID consider removing the language requiring financial cost-sharing from recipients?

USAID Response: No. The requirement asks Offerors to define criteria and objectives for small grants awards that would require the grants to have financial cost-sharing from recipients. The requirement is not mandating cost-share for all grants issued under the GUC component.

38. Reference: Section L.6(a), Paragraph (5), Page 123 and Section M.2(b), Paragraph 3, Page 140: Page 123 of the RFP requires a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (Annex D).

This requirement is listed under section L.6(a) Performance Work Statement. However, the evaluation factor for the QASP is presented on page 140 under Factor 2: Staffing and Management Approach. Will the QASP will be evaluated as part of the PWS or the Staffing and Management Approach? Given the linkages between the QASP and the PWS, we recommend that it be evaluated as part of Factor 1: Performance Work Statement.

USAID Response: Please see Section M.2 of the revised RFP.

39. Reference Section L.6(a), Paragraph (2), Page 122 and Section L.6(b), Paragraph 1(c), Page 123: Page 122 of the RFP in Section L.6(a) Performance Work Statement, requires offerors to “briefly describe how it plans to operate under the current COVID-19 environment.” This same requirement is also included under L.6(b) Staffing and Management Approach. Please confirm that the offeror should address its approach to operating in a COVID-19 environment in the Staffing and Management Plan and not in the PWS.

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 29.

40. Reference: Section L.6(c), Paragraph (1), Page 124: Due to the diversity of skillsets needed to deliver the complex scope of work for the Udhyam Nepal project, we request that USAID allow us to include Contractor Performance Information from any subcontractors taking on key roles within the three objectives and not just those deemed to be “major subcontractors” as defined in the RFP.

USAID Response: Offerors are required to provide Performance information for itself and each major subcontractor. Offerors may include information for other subcontractors at their discretion.

41. Section L.6.c CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE INFORMATION, page 124 states “(1) The offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) must provide performance information for itself, the contractor teaming arrangements, if any, and each major subcontractor (one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost) in accordance with the following: Attach as Annex F of the Technical Volume the form contained in Attachment J-3 of the RFP. Include up to five of the most recent (defined as performance within the past five years) and relevant contracts, task orders, grants, or cooperative agreements for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. Should the offeror and any major subcontractor provide up to five performance information forms each?

Or should the offeror and major subcontractors provide up to five performance information forms for the proposal as a whole?

USAID Response: The offeror and any major subcontractor should provide up to five performance information forms each.

42. Section L.6(b), page 124 and Section M.2, page 139-140 Please confirm that the “Staffing and Management Approach” should be only in Annex A, B, C and no standalone Staffing and Management Approach section should be in the PWS. Please confirm that these annexes are evaluated as “Factor 2: Staffing and Management Approach.”

USAID Response: The PWS does not require a standalone Staffing and Management Approach. Offeror’s proposals will be evaluated in accordance with Section M of the RFP.

43. Section L.6(c), page 124-125 and Section M.2, page 140-141 Please confirm that the “Contractor Performance Information” should be only in Annex F and no standalone section for the Contractor Performance Information should be in the PWS. Please confirm that these annexes are evaluated as “Factor 3: Contractor Past Performance Information.”

USAID Response: The PWS does not require a standalone Contractor Performance Information section. Offeror’s proposals will be evaluated in accordance with Section M of the RFP.

44. Section L.6, Paragraph c (1), page 124 The RFP states that the Offeror must provide past performance information for itself, the contractor teaming arrangements, if any, and each major subcontractor. The offeror is required to include up to five (5) of the most recent and relevant contracts, task order, grants or CAs for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. Please clarify if the offeror is required to include PPI of up to five(5) contracts in total (including Offeror itself and proposed major subs); or the Past Performance Information of up to five (5) contracts/CAs is individually required for the offeror and separate PPI on five contracts/CAs for each of the major subcontractors included in the proposal.

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 41.

45. Section L.6, Contractor Performance Information, 1.ii, Page 124, “For all contracts listed above that are not in CPARS, as per the form in Attachment J-3, USAID will contact your contact contained in Part I in order to fill in Part II of the J-3 Attachment. USAID recommends that you alert the contacts that their names have been submitted and that they are authorized to provide performance information concerning the listed contracts if and when USAID requests it.” Can USAID please confirm that it’s aware of FCDO’s policy regarding contractors’ performance review, and internal policy that prohibits its missions from completing forms other than FCDO’s?

USAID Response: Unconfirmed.

46. Section L.6, Annexes to the PWS, Annex F – Contractor Performance Information Form, Page 122. The RFP calls for a 3-page limit per form however the Blank form alone is more than 2 pages which further limits the amount of content to be provided, would USAID please consider relaxing the 3 page limit.

47. Section L.7.1, page 125 indicated that Annex I of the cost proposal should include a certification of covered telecommunications equipment or services representation. Given that FAR 52.204-24 is already embedded in Section K of the cost proposal (Pages 98-99), which the offeror needs to include under Annex B, can USAID advise what offeror needs to include under Annex I?

USAID Response: Annex I, talks about waiver under FAR PART 4.2101 Prohibition on Covered Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services and Equipment if any, as provided instruction in Section L.14. Section K talks about Representation as prescribed under

FAR 52.204-24.

48. Reference: Section L.7.2, Paragraph (a), Page 126: L.7.2 of the RFP lists tabs that must be included in the MS Excel file. Please confirm that offerors may add other tabs, if needed, to provide additional detail. Also please confirm that offerors may add rows/columns to the spreadsheets, as needed.

49. Section L.7.3.2 PERSONNEL, page 127 states “(b) The Offeror must propose all direct labor costs by Labor Category/experience/FSN level and not by named person. USAID does not require a labor budget by person.” Is USAID indicating that personnel should not be listed by name in the cost volume? Or that the offeror should simply TBD unidentified personnel?

USAID Response: For each proposed position, Offerors should provide the title of the position, not the names of the candidates.

50. Reference L.7.3.2.b. USAID states that “The Offeror must propose all direct labor costs by Labor Category/experience/FSN level and not by the named person. USAID does not require a labor budget by person.” Can the Mission clarify whether offerors may include names of a) proposed Key Personnel and b) proposed non-Key Personnel in the budget?

USAID Response: Please see the response to Question 49.

51. Section L.7.3.2 on page 26 indicates that “The Offeror must provide a labor cost breakdown using the solicitation mandated labor groupings (long-term U.S. National, long-term professional TCN/CCN, long-term administrative TCN/CCN, home office, U.S. National short-term technical assistance, TCN/CCN short-term technical assistance), as identified in Attachment J-7, Budget Template.”. The budget template provided in attachment J.7 includes different categories (Direct Long Term Labor, Direct Short Term Labor, Local Staff, and

Home Office). Can the offerer have the flexibility to categories the labor based on its accounting system as long as it covers the above categories?

USAID Response: Yes. The generic cost template is provided as a guideline and can be tailored to the individual Offeror's cost accounting system.

52. Section L.7.3.2. (b) on page 126 indicates that “The Offeror must propose all direct labor costs by Labor Category/experience/FSN level and not by named person. USAID does not require a labor budget by a person.”. Please advise if by labor category you mean “position title”. If not, please clarify what category should be used for expatriate since the FSN only include the general local staff categories.

USAID Response: Labor Categories may refer to Position Title. Please also see the response to Question 51 and the generic cost template provided as a guide.

53. Section L.7.3.2. (b) on page 126 indicates that “The Offeror must propose all direct labor costs by Labor Category/experience/FSN level and not by named person. USAID does not require a labor budget by a person.”, while on Section L.7.3.2.(j) it indicates that “The Offeror must propose local labor by Labor Category and FSN Grade”. Please advise if years of experience are required? And how will that be projected for the “to-be-hired” staff?

USAID Response: Yes, experience is required and should be based on the requirement for the proposed position, not future candidates.

54. Section L.7.3.2.(h) on page 127 indicated that “For this procurement, the Offeror should not propose any salary that exceeds the Contractor Salary Threshold (CST)”, while Section L.7.3.2.(i) indicates that “Waivers to pay TCN allowances and/or pay CCN/TCN salaries that exceed Local Compensation Plan (“LCP”) maximums are not required at this time and such salaries will be presumed to be reasonable under the assumption that the Offeror can justify a waiver during administration of the contract. Upon award, CCN and TCN salaries proposed in excess of the LCP limits will require a salary justification and waiver from the contract awarded for USAID approval, pursuant to paragraph (b) of AIDAR 722.170.”. And again section L.7.3.2.(J0 indicates that “If the Offeror’ s proposed salary rate falls within the applicable LCP salary range, that proposed rate will be considered reasonable and realistic and no further substantiation is required from the Offeror. Offerors proposing a salary rate that falls outside the applicable market range must support that outlier rate with additional data, such as biodata sheets, pay stubs, or data from the results of salary surveys, and must clearly show how such data was used to develop the proposed salary rate. Offerors are cautioned not to propose rates at the absolute minimum or maximum of these salary ranges.”. Can USAID please advise if salaries above the CST are acceptable if they are justifiable?

USAID Response: The Local Compensation Plan is the salary threshold for CCN and TCN candidates, whereas the Contractor Salary Threshold applies to U.S. direct hires (See H.4(a)(2)). The Director of M/OAA, must approve any contractor salary that exceeds the USAID CST before the Contracting Officer (CO) may authorize the payment of the salary under a USAID direct contract.

55. Section L.7.3.2.(J) indicates that “Offerors proposing a salary rate that falls outside the applicable market range must support that outlier rate with additional data, such as biodata sheets, pay stubs, or data from the results of salary surveys, and must clearly show how such data was used to develop the proposed salary rate”. Can USAID please advise if the additional data should be included under Annex J, or should be added as a separate annex?

USAID Response: Salary Range Data and Certification should be included in Annex J.

56. Section L.7.3.2. (n) on page 128 indicates that “Salary ranges for ALL proposed professional positions must be established based on the market value, based on duties and responsibilities of the position, in country and locality of contract performance. The established range must be realistic and reasonable for the responsibilities of each position and must not be based on the salary history or the qualifications of the candidate selected. The salary ranges must be certified by the Contractor and submitted as Annex J of the cost proposal to the Contracting Officer with the proposal for approval.” Can USAID please advise what exactly need to be reported under Annex J? Will a table of the position, salary range and base of price used be sufficient?

USAID Response: Offerors should determine how best to present the required information.

57. Section L.7.3.6, page 129 indicates that Offeror must submit a detail such as a year, make, model, size, and any other relevant characteristics to support proposed cost for equipment over $5,000. Will USAID reconsider this requirement and delay submitting these details to the project implementation stage.

58. Reference: Section L.7.3.8, Paragraph (a)(1) and (a)(2), Page 130 and Attachment J.7:

Attachment J.7 provides template spreadsheets for subcontractor detailed budget. These templates reflect a cost reimbursement type mechanism with indirect rates broken out. As Section L.7.3.8 “Subcontracts “of the RFP allows offerors to also negotiate T&M or FFP subcontracts, where deemed appropriate, may offerors adjust these subcontractor detail templates to accommodate either T&M or FFP budgets?

USAID Response: Yes. The generic cost template is provided as a guideline and can be tailored by each Offeror.

59. Reference: Section L.7.3.8, Paragraph (b), Page 130 and Section L.11, Paragraph 1, Page 135: L.7.3.8(b) and L.11 of the RFP reference requirements for subcontractor consent requests. Please confirm that any proposed subcontracts that will be fixed-priced and under the simplified acquisition threshold are exempt from these requirements, in accordance with FAR 52.244-2(c)(2)(ii)?

60. Reference: Section L.7.3.8, Paragraph (a), Page 130: L.7.3.8(a) requires budgets for all subcontracts, including fixed-price type subcontracts. Would USAID please consider removing this requirement for fixed-price subcontracts below the Simplified Acquisition Threshold, since consent would not be required?

USAID Response: Please see Question 59.

61. RFP Section L.7.3.9 (g), page 132, RFP states that for cooperating country and third country nationals consultants, the offeror must propose using the labor category and associated Foreign Service National (FSN) level and that offerors must support the rate with data, such as biodata sheets (with appropriate consultant rate history provided). Will USAID please delete the rate history request as the updated USAID biodata form 1420 no longer requires candidates to provide their salary histories?

USAID Response: USAID will revise.

62. Section L.7.3.12, subsection (b), pg. 133: There is mention that “any new deliverables or results must be outlined in Annex I of the Technical Volume”. But in section L.5 (b).6 which lists all of the Annexes that can be included, there is no mention of an Annex I. Please clarify.

USAID Response: The reference should state Annex H instead of Annex I. USAID will revise.

63. Section L.7.3.13 Optional CLIN, section (b), pg. 133: states that the Offeror will need to provide five scenarios for Optional CLIN. Is the $4 million ceiling on the Optional CLIN applicable for all scenarios – i.e. if we start something in year 1 and continue it through year 5 the ceiling would be $4 million for five years; and if we start something in year 5 only we could still budget up to $4 million for one year?

USAID Response: Yes.

64. Section L.7.3.13, page 132 indicates that “Offerors must anticipate that this Optional CLIN may be exercised at any point during the five periods of performance. As such, Offerors are requested to propose costs for five different scenarios – to account for it being exercised at the beginning of each year of performance”. Giving the fixed and limited amount of budget allocated to this CLIN, presenting five different scenarios may not be practical. Would USAID please reconsider the requirements? Or provide more guidance on how offeror can cost this

CLIN.

USAID Response: USAID may exercise the Optional CLIN at any time during the period of performance and will be used from the time it is exercised until the end of the five-year period of performance. For budgeting purposes, offerors should assume that USAID may exercise the Optional CLIN at the beginning of each Year of Performance. For example, USAID may exercise the Optional CLIN at award for Year 1, and thus Offerors must budget up to $4 million for five years or 60 months; USAID may exercise the Optional CLIN at the start of Year 2, and thus Offerors must account for four years of funding; USAID may exercise the Optional CLIN at the start of Year 3, and thus Offerors must budget for three years of funding; USAID may exercise the Optional CLIN at the start of Year 4, and thus

Offerors must budget for two years of funding; or USAID may exercise the Optional CLIN at the start of Year 5, and thus Offerors must budget for one year of funding.

65. Reference: Section L.7.3.13, Paragraph (b), Page 132 and Attachment J.7: L.7.3.13 of the

RFP requires offerors to propose “direct and indirect costs” for the optional CLIN, but the optional CLIN tab in Attachment J.7 does not provide a detailed budget template, as is required for the base award. Does this mean that USAID only wishes to see a breakdown of direct v. indirect costs for each optional CLIN scenario? Or should offerors use the format of the “Detailed Prime” to present itemized budgets for each of the 5 scenarios?

USAID Response: Offerors may use their own budget template for the Optional CLIN.

66. RFP Section L.7.3.13 (b), page 133, states that, “Offerors must propose direct and indirect costs for the optional CLIN to align with the proposed technical approach for these services.

Offerors must anticipate that this optional CLIN may be exercised at any point during the five period of performance. As such, offerors are requested to propose costs for five different scenarios — to account for it being exercised at the beginning of each year of performance.”

Could USAID please clarify what are the five scenarios?

USAID Response: Please see the answer to Question 64.

67. Reference: Section L.7.3.13, Paragraph (b), Page 132 and Section B.4, Table, Page 9:

L.7.3.13 of the RFP requests that offerors present 5 different scenarios for how the Optional CLIN will be expended. These 5 scenarios must present how the funds will be expended if the option is exercised in either Year 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5. Section B.4 of the RFP and resulting contract indicates only one price for the Optional CLIN. This seems to indicate that USAID expects for offerors to budget each scenario up to the same estimated ceiling price, even though technical activities likely will differ as the project progresses from one year to the next.

Can USAID please confirm if this is USAID’s expectation? If this is not the case, and instead the ceiling price and technical activities may differ from one scenario to another, the table in B.4 does not presently reflect the 5 different ceiling prices/scenarios for the Optional CLIN.

In this case, would USAID please update Section B.4 to provide for 5 separate variations of the Optional CLIN, considering that FAR 52.217-7 indicates that the government may require the delivery of the option “in the quantity and at the price stated in the schedule”?

USAID Response: USAID provides confirmation for the first question posed.

68. Reference L.7.3.13.

a. Question 1: Would USAID consider allowing offerors to utilize their own budget template for the Optional CLIN?

USAID Response: Yes. Offerors may use their own budget template for the Optional

CLIN.

b. Question 2: Throughout the RPF, USAID makes reference to one option CLIN, however in Section L.7.3.13 on page 133, USAID states: “Offerors must anticipate that this Optional CLIN may be exercised at any point during the five period of performance. As such, Offerors are requested to propose costs for five different scenarios – to account for it being exercised at the beginning of each year of performance.”

i. Would this require offerors to have five separate tabs for each scenario for Optional CLIN 2?

USAID Response: There is only one optional CLIN.

ii. Could USAID confirm the parameters of each of the five scenarios?

USAID Response: Please see the answer to Question 64.

69. Section L.8 on page 134 indicates that “the Government invites the Offeror to propose terms under which the Government will make performance-based contract financing payments during contract performance”. Can USAID advise if offeror can include the performance-based contract payment under a separate annex of the cost proposal.

USAID Response: Offerors may include the proposed terms as part of Annex A to the Cost Proposal.

70. Section L.8, section (a), pg. 134: states that the “Government will consider performance-based payment financing”. Is this related only to fixed fee payments or to payments for all costs – direct, indirect and fee? Can USAID provide more guidance on this?

USAID Response: USAID will consider performance-based payment financing in accordance with FAR 52.232-28.

71. Reference: Section L.9, Paragraph 1, Page 134: L.9 states that evidence of responsibility forms may not exceed 5 pages. Could USAID please clarify if the 5 pages applies to the offeror and all subs as a whole? Or if each entity is limited to 5 pages each?

USAID Response: Each entity is limited to 5 pages.

72. Reference: Section L.13, Paragraph 1, Page 135 and Section L.7.1, Paragraph (b)(iii), Page 125: L.13.1 states that the Small Business Subcontracting Goal Plan should be submitted as Annex J, but under L.7.1(b)(iii) this annex is listed as Annex G while Annex J is assigned to Salary Ranging and Certification. Please confirm the small business subcontracting goal plan should be included as Annex G.

USAID Response: The reference should state Annex G instead of Annex J. USAID will revise.

73. Given the level of details required under each of the budget categories, will USAID allow contractor to breakdown the prime detailed budget to more than one tab (Labor tab, Allowances tab, etc.)?

USAID Response: Yes

74. If Local Fringe Benefits are proposed as a direct charge that is not recovered via the Offeror’s

NICRA rate, can the Offeror include the local fringe benefit costs under the “Other Direct Cost”?

USAID Response: Local Fringe Benefits should be included under “Fringe Benefits”.

SECTION M

75. Section M.2(a), page 140 Under the second, third and fourth bullets, the RFP indicates that the PWS will evaluated on a number of factors that are typically included in an Activity Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan (how “interventions will be sequenced, monitored/tracked, measured, documented and reported”, “how each proposed intervention is fully described and how it included indicators and semiannual targets”, “methodology that will be utilized to evaluate engagements and how it can determine what development objectives (indicators, if relevant) is/are being addressed/achieved, “clear monitoring and evaluation procedures established to measure progress towards improving social inclusion”). Such language is not included in the PWS requirements under Section L.6(a). If USAID intends for Offerors to provide detailed information on indicators and methodologies for monitoring and evaluation, would USAID consider permitting either additional pages to include it in the PWS or in a separate Annex?

USAID Response: USAID will not consider adding additional pages to the PWS. Offerors PWS will be evaluated in accordance with Section M of the RFP.

76. Reference: Section M.2(a), Paragraph 2, Page 139: Page 139 of the RFP under Section M.2(a) Factor 1: Performance Work Statement states that offerors will be evaluated on the “extent to which the technical approach (including Optional CLIN) is technically sound and evidence-based; offerors diversified commercial transactions; promotes secure and expedient trade of agricultural and non-agricultural goods across borders; increases investment in targeted sectors; enhances business development to boost Nepal’s Journey to Self-Reliance;

and is likely to accomplish the objectives and purpose set forth in the SOO. Are these requirements listed in the order of importance?

77. Reference M.2.a. Would USAID consider providing guidance on the number of value chains Udhyam Nepal should target?

USAID Response: The offeror should determine the appropriate number and mix of value chains to target.

78. Section M.2, section (a), bullet point 3: states: “The extent to which the Offeror demonstrates the methodology that will be utilized to evaluate engagements and how it can determine what development objectives (indicators, if relevant) is/are being addressed/achieved if the investment were to be facilitated by this Activity”. Are the engagements referenced by USAID the same as the “proposed interventions” cited in the previous bullet point? And then it asks, “how it can determine what development objectives (indicators, if relevant) is/are being addressed/achieved if the investment were to be facilitated by the Activity”. This last sentence is a little confusing. Can USAID provide some more clarification on what will be the basis of the evaluation criterion – e.g. the strength and relevance of indicators selected? The impact and likelihood of investments promoted by the project?

USAID Response: Yes; by “engagements”, USAID is referring to the same “proposed interventions” cited in the previous bullet.

The basis of this evaluation criterion is the strength and relevance of the procedures proposed for 1) determining the likely development impact of investments before making them; and 2) monitoring and evaluating the development impact of investments and interventions over the life of the activity.

STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES

79. Please confirm that it is USAID’s expectation that the Udhyam Nepal Activity facilitates commercial diversified transactions.

USAID Response: Yes. USAID’s expectation is that the Udyam Nepal activity will facilitate increased diversification of competitive products and services with increased geographic destinations for these products and services. This will increase the overall diversification of Nepal’s market transactions.

80. Please provide USAID’s definition of diversified transaction.

USAID Response: As it relates to Udhyam Nepal, USAID defines “commercial diversified transactions” as increased product and geographic diversification to increase the overall diversification of Nepal’s market transactions.

81. Is it USAID’s expectation that the Udhyam Nepal Activity only focus on export- oriented sectors or also support domestic sectors with high growth potential?

USAID Response: As stated in the SOO, the overall goal of Udhyam Nepal is: “Nepali private sector’s competitiveness in targeted domestic and global value chains increased.”

Therefore, USAID does not expect Udhyam Nepal to focus exclusively on export-oriented sectors. Offerors can also propose domestic sectors with high growth potential.

82. Reference SOO, Objective 3 (Page 5). The original Trade and Competitiveness RFI, issued on Friday, May 8, 2020, instructed offerors not to focus on sanitary and phytosanitary standards (P.10: “Offerors should not focus on SPS interventions.”) Can USAID clarify that sanitary and phytosanitary sectors are acceptable sectors in which to work on Udhyam Nepal, as indicated in the SOO?

USAID Response: Sanitary and phytosanitary sectors are acceptable sectors in which to work.

83. Attachment J1. Statement of Objectives, Section 2, Scope, Page 1- Reference to

Performance Work Statement: will benefit from added clarity on the exact format/template to use for the same. There are differing sets of guidance from USAID in the past and issues with consistency. Also, in the same section, there is reference to the project working with SMEs associated with targeted value chains (e.g., agro-processing, digital services, or tourism).

Are these the sectors of specific focus for this project. How does the proposed work in the agro-processing relate to the ongoing work under the USAID-Kisan Project. How does USAID intend to manage duplication of work, if any, that may arise with USAID-Kisan activities?

USAID Response: USAID does not have a template or format for Performance Work Statements.

USAID has not selected specific focus sectors for Udhyam Nepal. Agro-processing, digital services, and tourism are listed in the SOO only as examples of sectors that offerors could potentially choose to focus on. Offerors must determine and propose focus sectors in the Performance Work Statement.

Udhyam Nepal is expected to coordinate with USAID’s KISAN II on any work related to agriculture and agro-processing if selected as focus sectors. Udhyam Nepal and KISAN II should coordinate at the work planning stage, and over the course of implementation, in order to ensure complementarity and avoid duplication.

84. Attachment J1. Statement of Objectives, Section 2, Scope, Page 1- Geographic focus.

Given the focus of USAID in the recent past on certain specific regions (including zone of influence), would the same apply for this project as well. Is there a specific geographic focus for this project given the above?

USAID Response: There is no predetermined geographic focus for Udhyam Nepal. The geographic focus should be driven by the selected value chains.

85. Attachment J1. Statement of Objectives, Section 5, Performance Objectives, Optional Contract Line Item (CLIN): Objective Four, Page 6: Any strategy for work under this CLIN may have to place emphasis on short term recovery actions. But these will need to be done in coordination with longer term strategic goals. Some short-term recovery might involve more government involvement/budget outlays whereas a truly driven market approach will be private sector led and take more time beyond short term recovery objectives. What will be the expected trade off/balance between these two priorities under this CLIN?

USAID Response: This CLIN is intended to focus on short- and medium-term recovery actions, as needed, in coordination with the longer-term strategic objectives of Udhyam Nepal. Offerors are expected to propose an approach that they think is appropriate to implementing this CLIN.