Amendment 1 Apendix 1 Answers for Questions.pdf

# Question/Concerns USAID Responses

1 Is there an existing Initial Environmental

Examination for the USAID Climate Change

Adaptation Activity? If so, would USAID please provide the IEE for this program?

Attached as Section J.7 to the amended RFP

2 Will USAID please provide the initial environmental examination (IEE) DCN-Asia 21-022 covering Activity implementation? H.4 (31)

Attached as Section J.7 to the amended RFP

3 Can USAID please suggest what start date should we use for budgeting purposes

For planning purposes, USAID anticipated a start date of 9/17/2021. The actual start date will fall upon the signing date of the anticipated contract

4 What is the anticipated start date for the Sri Lanka and Maldives Climate Change Adaptation activity?

Please see question 3

5 To demonstrate past performance through recent and relevant contracts, should offerors use a format such as USAID’s past performance matrix, at https://www.usaid.gov/documents/1868/past-performance-matrix, or another format?

Attached as J.8 in the amended RFP

6 Could USAID please share the most recent Local

Compensation Plan for Sri Lanka?

Attached as J.9 in the amended RFP

7 Could USAID please provide Offerors with the updated Local Compensation Plan

(LCP) for Sri Lanka, inclusive of the salaries and related grade levels?

Attached as J.9 in the amended RFP

8 Could USAID please provide the salaries and related grade levels for the Maldives?

Attached as J.9 in the amended RFP

9 Local Compensation Plan (LCP) Maldives; P. 4, Table of Contents, Salary Schedules

Page 4 of the LCP Table of Contents references

“Salary Schedules” though this information appears to be missing. Can USAID please provide this information for the Maldives and Sri Lanka?

LCP plans for both countries are attached as

J.3 and J.9 in the amended RFP

10 Could USAID please confirm the exchange rate for

USD to Maldivian Rufiyaa (MVR) to be used in the cost proposal?

1USD = 15.4 Rufiyaa (Please see the amended

RFP)

11 Could USAID please provide an exchange rate for the Maldives?

1USD = 15.4 Rufiyaa (Please see the amended

RFP)

12 On page 97 of the proposal, it is stated that an

“exchange rate of $US 1.00 = LKR 185.00” should be used, can USAID kindly confirm if there is a set

$US to MVR exchange rate that should be used?

1USD = 15.4 Rufiyaa (Please see the amended

RFP)

13 Page 97

USAID has provided a standard exchange rate for conversion from USD to the Sri

Lankan Rupee. Does USAID have a standard exchange rate for conversion from USD to the Maldivian Rufiyaa that offerors should use? Or, 1USD = 15.4 Rufiyaa (Please see the amended

RFP)

should Offerors use the Sri Lankan

Rupee exchange rate for Maldives budget preparation also?

14 In Section L.9 on page 97, USAID provides the exchange rate to be used for the Sri Lanka Rupee.

Thank you for providing that. Could USAID also provide the preferred exchange rate for Maldivian

Rufiyaa?

1USD = 15.4 Rufiyaa (Please see the amended

RFP)

15 Please confirm that this contract will be fully funded using funds earmarked for adaptation and will not contain funds from other sources.

USAID reserves the right to use funds from other sources for this contract.

16 On page 1 of the RFP, USAID states that the overall estimate cost is approximately $19 million dollars, with $11 million for Maldives and $8 million for Sri

Lanka. As contractors propose costs that are appropriate, realistic, and reasonable, does USAID wish the costs to follow roughly this same ratio

(11:8 for Sri Lanka: Maldives) if the proposed cost is below $19 million?

USAID intends to allocate $11M for Maldives and $8M for Sri Lanka. This information is provided for planning purposes, but proposal cost breakdowns will be dependent upon the

Offeror’s approach to completing the work described in the SOO.

17 P. 6, Section B.4. Budget Schedule

Can USAID please provide a plug-figure for the amount that should be allocated to Grants in each country?

Grants amount $2.3M for Maldives and

$1.75M for Sri Lanka.

18 Can USAID please provide a plug figure for grants? Grants amount $2.3M for Maldives and

$1.75M for Sri Lanka.

19 Page 98

A Grants Manual is included as a project deliverable and the SOO references small grants mechanisms implemented through other USG initiatives and ensuring that “each grantee has a sustainability plan.”

Can USAID please confirm that offerors are to propose a grants under contract program?

If so, can USAID please clarify the plug figure for

GUCs and what, if any, restrictions

USAID intends to place on the use of such grants beyond those set forth in ADS

302.3.4.13?

Are the funds intended to support pilot projects mentioned in the SOO?

Grants amount $2.3M for Maldives and

$1.75M for Sri Lanka.

20 Will USAID clarify if there is an expected dollar amount that should be proposed for the grants under contract (GUC) line item? And if so, is there an expected split between Sri Lanka vs. Maldives implementation that should be assumed for the GUC line item?

Grants amount $2.3M for Maldives and

$1.75M for Sri Lanka.

21 -Section B.5

-Page 8

A company’s indirect rates are acknowledged to be proprietary and sensitive financial information, the disclosure of which would result in competitive harm and, consistent with the Trade Secrets Act, should therefore be protected from such disclosure to third parties (including prime contractors whom may be competitors on other Procurements).

Thus we respectfully request that the

Subcontractor’s indirect rate information not be included in Section B.5 or any part of the final

Contract and that such subcontractors pursue the option of submitting their confidential information directly to USAID.

In order to perform cost analysis USAID requires NICRA rates of prime and major sub-contractors therefore the requirement remain unchanged. Rates for subcontractors who do not meet the definition of ‘major’ will not be included in B.5. Additionally, there are certain exemptions that apply to trade secrets or financial information that prevent the public release of such information by USAID.

22 On page 10 of the RFP, there is a statement regarding the Performance Work Statement (PWS) response that states ‘Discussion of activities to ensure compliance with branding and marking requirements’. Would USAID kindly clarify the intent of this statement?

Contractors are required to coordinate with

COR and USAID DOC personnel on B&M marking requirements

23 Would USAID consider removing “Discussion of activities to ensure compliance with branding and marking requirements,” from the Performance Work

Statement requirements in Section C, and instead require this information solely in the Branding

Implementation Plan and Marking Plan annex?

This section has been removed by RFP

Amendment #1

24 Section F.7, Reports, states that all reports are subject to approval by the COR. In addition the table lists due dates. The due dates are clear, but would USAID consider including due dates for USAID responses to reports? This is especially critical for annual workplans as delays in feedback will delay implementation. Please consider including a statement indicating that USAID will respond to submitted reports within five (5) calendar days.

Thank you very much for this recommendation, but USAID will not include this statement at this time.

25 On page 16, the RFP requires submission of a start-up plan within 10 days of award and notes that the

Contractor’s Chief of Party is “required to arrive in-country no later than 14 days following the contract award date.” Given the uncertainty surrounding travel restrictions and COVID-19, and Sri Lanka’s suspension of visa-on-arrival options, will there be flexibility given to the contractor in developing a start-up plan that can adapt to the host countries’ latest restrictions and guidance?

The Contractor should make its best effort to ensure the Chief of Party arrives in-country no later than 14 days following the contract award date. If travel restrictions do not allow for this, the Contractor should contact the Contracting

Officer to make alternative arrangements.

26 On page 18, the RFP proposes illustrative performance indicators and states the Contractor

“shall propose its own standard or custom indicators to track anticipated activity outputs and outcomes.”

Is there a preference for custom indicators to be the same across Sri Lanka and Maldives? Is there a preference to draw from other categories of USAID indicators (i.e. sustainable landscapes) to highlight co-benefits?

USAID does not have a preference. The indicators very much depend on the technical approach, which could be unique to each offeror, and are left to the offeror to propose.

27 Section G.4, Technical Directions/Relationship with

USAID, states that the COR may not take any action which may impact on the contract schedule, scope or rate of utilization of LOE. We understand and agree on the limitations to changes in contract schedule, however, considering the type of contract envisioned, we request that the scope and rate of utilization of LOE be eliminated from the list of COR limitations.

Per FAR 16.306(d)(1) the completion form describes the scope of work by stating a definite goal or target and specifying an end product. It does not limit the scope or rate of utilization of LOE. The issue is neither a matter of personnel compensation as the scope or rate of LOE utilization does not change the daily rate. Would USAID consider removing the language on scope or rate of utilization of LOE from the list of

COR limitations?

This language is revised by Amendment #1.

Please refer to the relevant section.

28 The RFP references the use of grants under contract;

however, the specific authorizing language is not included in Section H of the RFP.

Would USAID incorporate the language authorizing grants under contract from

ADS 302 into Section H of the RFP

(ADS 302.3.5.6 and ADS 302.3.4.13)?

Please refer to Section H.38 of the amended

RFP

29 Pg. 43, H.23.f, “Additional Requirements for

Personnel Compensation: Consultants” states, “Unless the consultant is an employee of the contractor, they are considered subcontractors subject to the applicable clauses and requirements.” Would USAID consider waiving the Consent to Subcontract requirement for consultants given the implementation burden of requiring consent for each consultant and to avoid delays in programming?

Please refer to Section H.23 of the amended

RFP

30 Section H.23(f) on page 43 states, “Unless the consultant is an employee of the contractor, they are considered subcontractors subject to the applicable clauses and requirements.” This language presents significant issues for many offerors, particularly related to NICRAs and Cost Accounting Standards

(CAS). NICRAs are approved by USAID’s

Overhead, Special Cost, and Closeout Branch

Division and require many offerors to treat consultants as short-term personnel and apply relevant indirect costs. Should an offeror begin to treat consultants as subcontractors and apply subcontractor-related indirect costs, this would be viewed as inconsistent treatment of direct costs across U.S. Government-funded contracts and would be in violation of the terms of an offeror’s

NICRA and CAS. Further, it is industry standard to treat consultants as short-term personnel. Based on these concerns, would USAID please remove the language requiring offerors to treat consultants as subcontractors so that each offeror may classify consultants according to its own NICRA and CAS?

Please refer to Section H.23 of the amended

RFP

31 Will USAID please provide the FAA 118/119

Analysis for Sri Lanka (2021-2024) covering

Activity implementation?

USAID will share this analysis after it has been finalized and made public.

32 J.1: Statement of Objectives:

On Page 2, J.1 SOO, in the last paragraph, please confirm that the reference is to the "Maldives

NAPA" from the year 2006, and not to a draft

Maldives NAP?

Confirmed

33 On Page 4, J.1 SOO, in the last paragraph of Page 3 and the first paragraph Page 4, USAID notes "The

Maldives’ and Sri Lanka’s private sectors struggle to identify and implement investments needed to reduce vulnerability to climate change. In some cases, firms and private sectors associations lack awareness of the numerous risks that climate change poses to their short- and long-term financial viability and business sustainability. In other cases, firms tend to view climate change adaptation through a corporate-social responsibility lens. Those firms that do acknowledge climate risks to their core business interests struggle to identify partnerships and solutions that would build their capacity to adapt to climate change and invest in these solutions." Please provide the source documentation for this information.

The source documentation for this information is stakeholder consultations.

34 On Page 7, J.1 SOO, "Results", Please clarify if the awardee will work with USAID to identify indicator targets post-award. In addition, please clarify that

As stated in the SOO, the Contractor must be prepared to actively manage the impact of acute events on implementation and take into

USAID will allow ample flexibility to update indicators under changing conditions during implementation and utilizing adaptive management techniques.

account the potentially sustained impact of

COVID-19 on Maldives and Sri Lanka in designing interventions. “Acute events” are not limited to COVID-19.

35 On Page 8, J.1 SOO, ‘Flexibility in implementation’. Please clarify how this goal of flexibility applies to the presentation of the two

PWSs, and how these will be evaluated under adaptive management.

As stated in the SOO, the Contractor must be prepared to actively manage the impact of acute events on implementation and take into account the potentially sustained impact of

COVID-19 on Maldives and Sri Lanka in designing interventions. “Acute events” are not limited to COVID-19. Please see Section

M.2 for how/where flexibility and adaptation will be evaluated.

36 Page 87

Section K.17 requests for Narcotics Offenses and

Drug Trafficking Certification “to be completed by all individuals identified as key personnel in the applications”. This appears to be required for applicants under assistance solicitation. Kindly clarify.

This section is removed by Amendment #1

37 Pg. 73, Section K.1 includes FAR 52.237-8, Restriction on severance payments to

Foreign Nationals (AUG 2003). However, section

I.1 does not list this clause and FAR

52.237-9, Waiver of Limitation on Severance

Payments to Foreign National. Consistent with the guidance in FAR 37.113-1 and that the anticipated contract will be performed overseas, we respectfully request that USAID include FAR 52.237-8 and FAR 52.237-9 to prevent conflict with applicable local employment laws in the cooperating country.

FAR 52.237-8 is removed by Amendment #1

Please refer to the Sri Lankan Labor Code from the link below.

http://www.labourdept.gov.lk/index.php?optio n=com_content&id=65&Itemid=59&lang=en

38 On page 97 of the RFP, under 3. Quality of

Contractor Past Performance point 1 the RFP indicates only contracts can be used for past performance. To ensure non-profit organizations have the opportunity to provide a comprehensive history of relevant work, we respectfully request

USAID to allow recent and relevant past performance from cooperative agreements.

Relevant past performances from Cooperative

Agreements are accepted. Please see the revision to Section L.8.

39 On page 97 of the RFP, Quality of Contractor Past

Performance, USAID notes that bidders must list five of the “most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal”.

Are recent and relevant cooperative agreements able to be showcased as part of this set of five?

Relevant past performances from Cooperative

Agreements are accepted. Please see the revision to Section L.8.

40 On page 100 of the RFP, Contractor Performance

Information, USAID requests an annex to the cost proposal for three (3) of the most recent and relevant contracts for subcontractors whose

Relevant past performances from Cooperative

Agreements are accepted. Please see the revision to Section L.8.

file:///C:/Users/bedelman/Downloads/FAR%2052.237-8%20is%20removed%20by%20Amendment%231Please%20refer%20to%20the%20Sri%20Lankan%20Labor%20Code%20from%20the%20link%20below.%20http:/www.labourdept.gov.lk/index.php%3foption=com_content&id=65&Itemid=59&lang=en%20%20 file:///C:/Users/bedelman/Downloads/FAR%2052.237-8%20is%20removed%20by%20Amendment%231Please%20refer%20to%20the%20Sri%20Lankan%20Labor%20Code%20from%20the%20link%20below.%20http:/www.labourdept.gov.lk/index.php%3foption=com_content&id=65&Itemid=59&lang=en%20%20 file:///C:/Users/bedelman/Downloads/FAR%2052.237-8%20is%20removed%20by%20Amendment%231Please%20refer%20to%20the%20Sri%20Lankan%20Labor%20Code%20from%20the%20link%20below.%20http:/www.labourdept.gov.lk/index.php%3foption=com_content&id=65&Itemid=59&lang=en%20%20 file:///C:/Users/bedelman/Downloads/FAR%2052.237-8%20is%20removed%20by%20Amendment%231Please%20refer%20to%20the%20Sri%20Lankan%20Labor%20Code%20from%20the%20link%20below.%20http:/www.labourdept.gov.lk/index.php%3foption=com_content&id=65&Itemid=59&lang=en%20%20 file:///C:/Users/bedelman/Downloads/FAR%2052.237-8%20is%20removed%20by%20Amendment%231Please%20refer%20to%20the%20Sri%20Lankan%20Labor%20Code%20from%20the%20link%20below.%20http:/www.labourdept.gov.lk/index.php%3foption=com_content&id=65&Itemid=59&lang=en%20%20 file:///C:/Users/bedelman/Downloads/FAR%2052.237-8%20is%20removed%20by%20Amendment%231Please%20refer%20to%20the%20Sri%20Lankan%20Labor%20Code%20from%20the%20link%20below.%20http:/www.labourdept.gov.lk/index.php%3foption=com_content&id=65&Itemid=59&lang=en%20%20 proposed cost exceeds 20% of the total proposed cost. Are recent and relevant cooperative agreements able to be showcased as part of this set of three?

41 In reference to the past performance submission and evaluation, page 97 states that, “2. For all contracts listed above that are not in the Contractor

Past Performance Information Retrieval System

(PPIRS), provide a list of contact names, job titles, mailing addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, explanation of relevance to the proposed acquisition and a description of the performance to include:

• Scope of work or complexity/diversity of tasks,

• Primary location(s) of work,

• Term of performance,

• Dollar value, and

• Contract type, i.e., fixed-price, cost reimbursement, etc.”

As many offerors have recent and relevant past performance implementing cooperative agreements or other types of projects related to the bullet points above, we kindly request that USAID expand this requirement to state, “For contracts, cooperative agreements, or task orders not in the Past

Performance Information Retrieval System

(PPIRS)...” to allow offerors to present their past performance.

Relevant past performances from Cooperative

Agreements are accepted. Please see the revision to Section L.8.

42 Page 96 of the RFP mentions that “Each PWS must also illustrate how the Offeror must initially allocate resources across the three objectives identified in the SOO.” Can USAID please clarify that

“resources” refers to the amount of LOE across the three objectives?

“Resources” refer to the estimated percentage of LOE allocated to each objective.

43 USAID has requested separate Summary Budget for

Sri Lanka and Maldives. Does USAID have a preference in how costs that cannot be attributed to a specific country be represented?

For example, Home Office staff time used for general management and oversight?

As another example, shall we assume a certain percentage of time of the Chief of Party to be allocated to each country?

Offerors should prorate HO staff time by country, i.e., indicate the percentage that will be allocated to each country.

This should be in proportion to the overall budget.

44 Pg. 97, Section L.9 states: “The cost proposal format to be submitted must contain two worksheets and a separate narrative.

1. Summary Budgets for Maldives and Sri Lanka.

2. Detailed Budgets. The detailed budgets must be rolled up in summary fashion into the budget elements.

3. Budget Narratives. The budget narrative must explain the basis for the estimate for each category of cost/input in sufficient detail to facilitate determination of cost reasonableness.”

Would USAID clarify if offerors must present separate summary budgets (separate tabs for each country) and separate detailed budgets

(separate tabs for each country) within one Excel file?

Do offerors need to present a combined summary budget (Maldives plus

Sri Lanka)?

Can USAID confirm whether offerors can include additional worksheets

(tabs) in addition to the those required?

Please provide separate budgets, one for

Maldives and one for Sri Lanka.

No, the offeror does not need to present a combined summary budget.

While there's no limitation to the number of worksheets in the budget Excel file, USAID encourages offerors to be concise as possible, yet provide necessary details to address the solicitation requirement.

45 In Section L.9 on page 97, USAID states that the

Excel budget should include 2 worksheets, “Summary Budgets for Maldives and Sri Lanka” and “Detailed Budgets”. Could USAID confirm that they would like the Summary Budgets for each country on the same worksheet and the Detailed

Budgets on the same worksheet?

Offerors shall provide summary and detailed budgets for Maldives and Sri Lanka in separate sheets of a single Excel file

46 USAID has requested Detailed Budgets. Is USAID requesting separate Detailed Budgets for Sri Lanka and Maldives?

Yes, please submit detailed budgets for each country.

47 L.9.2. – Offerors are asked to submit “Detailed

Budgets”. Can USAID please clarify if offerors should prepare two detailed budgets, one for each country, or a combined detailed budget for both Sri

Lanka and Maldives?

Please see questions 43 to 46

48 In Section L.9 on page 97, USAID states that the

Excel budget should include 2 worksheets, Summary budgets for Maldives and Sri Lanka and

Detailed Budgets. Can USAID confirm contractors can use additional worksheets for cost input information and additional budget details that are linked to the detailed budgets?

Please see questions 43 to 46

49 Section L.9 on page 97 states that the cost proposal should contain two worksheets but then lists summary budgets and detailed budgets in plural.

Could USAID please clarify whether there should

Please see questions 43 to 46 be separate summary and detailed budgets for Sri

Lanka and the Maldives?

50 Please confirm that the following items should be in separate annexes in the technical proposal:

a. Contractor Past Performance

b. Key Personnel CVs and references.

c. Non-key Personnel CVs (if any)

d. Personnel letters of commitment

e. QASP (Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan)

Contractor Past Performance section shall not exceed 2 pages and it shall not be considered as an annex.

For guidance on Key/ Non-key Personnel CVs, Personnel letters of Commitment, and QASP, please read section L.8.2 of the revised RFP.

51 Please confirm that letters of commitment are required only for key personnel.

Letters of commitment are required for key personnel and no other positions.

52 Please confirm that letters of commitment are only required for key personnel.

Letters of commitment are required for key personnel and no other positions.

53 L.8.2. – USAID indicates that letters of commitment must indicate his/her: “(a) availability to serve in the stated position, in terms of months; after award; and

(b) intention to serve for a stated term of service.”

Can USAID please clarify what is meant by “after award” and the distinction between the requirements of (a) and (b)?

This language is removed by Amendment #1

54 Could USAID please confirm that the technical proposal does not require an

AMELP?

Confirmed. The technical proposal does not need an AMELP. However, the logical outcomes and outputs proposed in the PWSs must be thought out based on a consideration of what performance indicators can be used to measure these outputs and outcomes.

55 Because USAID has not issued many climate change adaptation programs in the last four years, under L.8, Quality of Contractor Past

Performance, could USAID please confirm that Contractors may submit performance information of programs completed within the last ten (10) years in order to maximize USAID’s ability to evaluate the Offeror's performance delivering relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal?

Yes. The offerors may submit past performance information of programs completed within the period of 2010 to 2020

56 Could USAID please confirm whether the

Conceptual Approach should demonstrate the Offeror's understanding of the TOC?

Technical Approach should demonstrate a sound understanding of the Theory of Change

(TOC).

57 Pg. 93, Section L.6.e.1 states that an offer may be deemed unacceptable without a completed Standard Form 33 (SF 33), however, no

SF 33 was included with the RFP.

Form SF 33 is attached as J.10

Would USAID provide an SF 33 and advise where it should appear in the cost volume?

58 In section L.7 Submission Instructions, USAID requires that Offerors “submit their proposals via email with up to 5MB in size per email”. Will

USAID kindly consider increasing the megabyte size per email to 10MB?

The size per email is revised to 15MB by

Amendment #1

59 Pg. 94, Section L.7.b indicates a 5MB limit for the proposal submission by email. A compiled cost or technical proposal is likely to exceed this limit, thereby requiring proposals to be split into a number of parts.

Additionally, it may not be possible to split or reduce certain files such as spreadsheets below

5MB. To aid in reading and compiling the proposals, would USAID consider increasing the

5MB limit?

Please see question 58

60 Page 100 indicates that “the Offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) must provide performance information for itself and each subcontractor whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost”, yet in section

M.2, page 106, USAID indicates that “The contractor and major subcontractor(s) past performance will be evaluated”, and that “A major subcontractor is defined as a subcontractor named in the proposal whose total cost exceeds 15% of the offer’s bottom line total cost, including fixed fee.”

Can USAID kindly clarify whether offerors should submit past performance information for subcontractors whose proposed costs exceed 15% or

20%?

This value is 20% and it is revised by

Amendment #1

61 On pages 96-97 of the RFP, 3. Quality of Contractor

Past Performance, performance information must be provided for the offeror and major subcontractors whose proposed cost exceeds 15% of the offeror’s total proposed cost as annex to the technical. On page 100, (g) Contractor Performance Information, performance information must be provided for the offeror and subcontractors whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost as annex to the cost proposal. Please confirm that performance information must be included in both the technical and cost application and please confirm the percentage of proposed cost whereby a subcontractor qualifies as a major subcontractor.

This value is 20% and it is revised by

Amendment #1

62 Page 96

Section L.8, 2. “Management Approach” requires submission of “Resumes/CVs for nonkey personnel must not exceed 1 page in length.” Further it states that “Each resume/CV must be accompanied by a signed FORM AID 1420

Contractor Employee Biographical

Data Sheet and a signed letter of commitment from each candidate indicating his/her: (a) availability to serve in the stated position, in terms of months; after award; and (b) intention to serve for a stated term of the service.”

Would USAID consider requiring resumes, biographical data sheets and signed letters of commitment only for key personnel as a part of the

Cost Volume and not for non-key personnel?

The requirement is only for the key personnel please. This language is revised by

Amendment #1.

63 Page 97

Section L.8.3 “Performance in Using Small

Business (SB) Concerns”, it appears that this section (d) is incomplete/not included.

Kindly clarify.

This section is revised by Amendment #1

64 Section L.8 page 97 requires offerors to: “List in an annex to the technical proposal five of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal”. While in Section

L.9 Section G, in the Cost requirements, USAID requires offerors to “list in an annex to the cost proposal three (3) of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.” Does USAID intend on requiring offerors to submit past performance references as attachments to the technical volume and the cost volume? If so can USAID kindly require offers to submit 5 references for both cost and technical volumes?

The language is revised to include a total of 5 references. Please refer to the relevant section of the amended RFP.

65 Please confirm there is no page limitation for all required annexes.

A page limitation is provided for Management

Approach section annexes described in L.8.2.

66 Could USAID allow the inclusion of a cover page, a table of contents, and an acronym list for the technical and cost proposals? If allowed, could USAID please confirm that the cover page, table of contents, and acronyms list will not be included in the page limitation?

Yes, offerors may include a cover page, executive summary, a table of contents, and an acronym list. USAID will not include these documents in the page count.

67 Please confirm that offerors may include a cover page, table of contents, list of acronyms, and executive summary in their technical proposals that will not count against the technical proposal page limits.

Confirmed

68 Please confirm that offerors may include an activity organizational chart in the personnel annex that does not count against the page limit.

Confirmed

69 May the offeror include a cover page outside of the page limit?

Yes

70 May the offeror include an executive summary outside of the page limit?

Yes

71 May the offeror include an acronym outside of the page limit?

Yes

72 May the offeror include an Annex with letters of support from key stakeholders?

The evaluation will consider only the information relevant to factors stated in Section

M

73 Will USAID kindly allow for a 2 page executive summary in addition to the 15 page technical approach narrative?

Yes

74 Will USAID kindly allow for an Acronyms List in the technical proposal that does not count towards the page limitation?

Yes

75 Will USAID kindly allow for a Table of Contents in the technical proposal that does not count towards the page limitation?

Yes

76 Will USAID kindly allow for a cover page in the technical proposal that does not count towards the page limitation?

Yes

77 Could USAID please confirm that the annexes as a whole do not have a page limit?

Confirmed

78 Could USAID please allow the inclusion of an organizational chart as part of the

Annex?

Offerors are welcome to include an organizational chart as part of the Annex

79 Could USAID please allow the inclusion of an

Executive Summary? If allowed, could USAID please confirm that the Executive

Summary will not be included in the page limitation?

Yes. It will not be counted against the page limit.

80 L.8. – Please confirm whether USAID would like

Offerors to submit an Executive Summary to precede the Technical Approach. If so, please confirm whether the Executive Summary is included in the 15-page narrative section of the Technical

Approach.

Yes. It will not be counted against the page limit.

81 Please confirm that the cover letter, table of contents, and acronym list are not included in the

15-page limit for the narrative section of the

Technical Approach.

Yes. It will not be counted against the page limit.

82 -Page 95

Please confirm the entirety of the technical proposal must not exceed 35 pages (15 pages for general narrative, 10 pages for each PWS).

The Technical Approach is limited to 35 pages.

In addition, Management Approach is limited to 20 pages and Quality of Contractor Past

Performance to 2 pages. Please refer to section

L.8 of the amended RFP.

83 Please confirm that offerors can include a cover letter, table of contents, acronym list, and executive summary and that they do not count against the 15-page limit for the narrative section.

Confirmed

84 Page 96

Please confirm any USAID requirements for font style and size for the proposal, including within tables and graphics, and whether tables and figures are included within the page limitations of the technical proposal.

The offerors must use Calibri or equivalent font, font size 11-12. Please refer to the revised language in Section L.8 Tables and figures are included within the page limitations of the technical proposal.

85 Page 96

Please confirm that Resumes/CVs for Key and Non-

Key personnel should be provided as an annex and do not count against the page limitations provided.

Key Personnel Resumes are included in the page limit described in the revised

Management Approach section at L.8.2

86 Page 96

For non-key personnel, is there any limitation on the total number of personnel to be included?

There is no limitation on the total number of non-key personnel to be included.

87 Could USAID please confirm that 1420 Contractor

Employee Biographical Data

Sheet should be included as part of the Cost

Proposal and not the Technical Proposal?

This language has been removed by

Amendment #1

88 Contractor Employee Biographical Data Sheets

(Form AID 1420) contain sensitive personal information and are usually submitted as part of cost proposals. Please confirm that offerors should include Contractor Employee Biographical Data

Sheets only in the cost proposal.

Please see question 86

89 L.8.2. – Can USAID please clarify whether offerors should submit two QASPs, one to correspond to each Performance Work Statement (PWS), or only one QASP that combines information from each

PWS?

Offerors can submit one QASP that combines information from each PWS.

90 Section L.8.2 on page 96 of the RFP instructs offerors to include Employee Biographical Data

Sheets for key personnel as part of the technical proposal annexes. As it is standard practice to keep technical and cost data separate, please confirm that offerors should instead include EBDs in their cost proposals.

This has been revised. Please include EDBs under technical proposals.

91 Page 96 states, “In this section 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 (defined as a subcontractor whose proposed cost exceeds 15% of the offeror’s total proposed cost) in accordance with the following:

List in an annex to the technical proposal five of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar size, scope, and complexity to the scope or work and how recently they were performed.”

Can USAID please confirm that the contractor may list up to 5 past performance references and each major subcontractor may list up to 5 past performance references?

The Offeror must list up to a total of 5 past performance references. The 5 references would include past performance from Major

Subcontractors. Offerors are encouraged to select what they consider the most relevant examples for themselves and major subcontractor(s) (if any).

92 Page 96, 100

Can USAID please confirm what constitutes a major subcontractor? While L.8.3 explicitly states that a major subcontractor is defined as “a subcontractor whose proposed cost exceeds 15% of the offeror’s total proposed cost,” L.9 indicates that subcontractors

“whose cost exceeds 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost” should provide performance information.

This is addressed by Amendment #1 and revised as "Major subcontractors are whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost"

93 Pg. 96, Section L.8.3, defines a “major subcontractor” as “a subcontractor whose proposed cost exceeds 15% of the offeror’s total proposed cost.” On pg. 100, Section

L.9.g.1, the RFP asks offerors to “provide performance information for itself and each subcontractor whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost.”

Would USAID clarify the RFP’s definition of

“major subcontractor”?

This is addressed by Amendment #1 and revised as "Major subcontractors are whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost"

94 Section L.9(g) on page 100 states that performance information for each subcontractor whose proposed costs exceed 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost must be included with the Cost Proposal.

However, page 106 indicates a major subcontractor is one whose proposed costs exceed 15%. Would

USAID please clarify whether a major subcontractor is one whose costs exceed 15% or 20% of the

Offeror’s total proposed cost? Would USAID confirm that performance information for each major subcontractor is to be provided? Are these

This is addressed by Amendment #1 and revised as "Major subcontractors are whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost"

The Offeror may list up to a total of 5 past performance references.

performance examples in addition to those of the

Prime Offeror?

95 Section L.8.3 defines a major subcontractor as a subcontractor “whose proposed cost exceeds 15% of the offeror’s total proposed cost while Section

L.9.g.(1). defines a major subcontractor as a subcontractor “whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost.” Could USAID clarify the budget threshold for major subcontractors?

Please see question 92

96 Will USAID clarify if the request for contractor performance information as an annex to the cost volume is different from the requested annex to the technical volume as detailed in section L.8.3? If so, will USAID please provide the template that should be used, and confirm if this request applies only to the prime and major subcontractors (defined as a subcontractor whose proposed cost exceeds 15% of the offeror’s total proposed cost)?

Contractors performance information requested in Cost proposal is removed by Amendment#1.

The definition of Major Subcontractors is also revised by Amendment #1. Please see question

97 Section L.9(g) on page 100 requests performance information for each subcontractor whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost. Section L.8.3 on page 96 includes a different definition of major subcontractor—one whose proposed cost exceeds 15% of the offeror’s total proposed cost. Could USAID please confirm the definition of major subcontractor?

Please see question 92

98 P. 100, Section L.9.g.1. Contractor Performance

Information

On Page 96 & Page 106, the solicitation defines a

“Major Subcontractor” as receiving more than 15% of the total cost, however on Page 100 it states 20%.

Can USAID confirm which is the correct threshold?

Please see question 92

99 L.8.3. – This section outlines past performance information required in the technical proposal.

L.9.(g) references similar past performance information required in the cost proposal. Please confirm that all past performance information is to be included only in an annex to the technical proposal, rather than in both the technical and cost proposals.

Contractors performance information requested in Cost proposal is removed by Amendmen#1.

100 The RFP includes instructions for the presentation of past performance information in both Section

L.8.3 (to be included as an attachment to the technical proposal [pages 96–97]) and Section L.9

Contractors performance information requested in Cost proposal is removed by Amendmen#1.

(g) (to be presented as an attachment to the cost proposal [page 100]). Please clarify which instructions offerors should follow.

101 Will USAID confirm if there is a specific format required for the past performance references (PPRs) and any page limitations for the annex to the technical volume? If so, will USAID please provide the template that should be used to qualify for evaluation?

Please use attachment J.8 of Amendment #1

102 Will USAID confirm if the offeror can include 5 total past performance references (PPRs) from the combination of the prime and any major subcontractors as an annex to the technical volume?

Or can the offeror propose 5 PPRs from the prime, plus 5 additional PPRs from each major subcontractor for evaluation?

Including both prime and sub-contractors, Offerors shall provide total five Past performance references

Please see questions 55, 64, and 91

103 Would USAID clarify whether past performance information should be presented in the technical proposal or cost proposal and if offerors should present three or five recent and relevant contracts?

Stated under Technical proposal instructions hence should be presented with Technical proposal.

Contractors performance information requested in Cost proposal is removed by Amendment#1.

The Offeror may list up to a total of 5 past performance references.

104 Page 101

The RFP states that the contractor “must arrange for its own logistical arrangements such as office space, visas, international travel and travel within Sri Lanka, accommodations in the field, computers and other equipment, interpreting, and secretarial and other services.”

Can USAID clarify whether the same assumption applies to services in Maldives?

Yes, the same assumption applies to services in

Maldives.

105 P. 97, Section L.9. Instructions for Preparation of the Cost Proposal

Does USAID require the Budget Narrative also be submitted in Excel or may the applicant use a

Word/Pdf format?

Offerors shall provide budget narrative in

Word or PDF format

106 Could USAID please consider removing L.9 (g)

Contractor Performance

Information on page 100 as a submission requirement in the Cost Proposal since the section requests information similar to what the

Offeror will already supply in the

Technical Proposal?

Contractors performance information requested in Cost proposal is removed by Amendment#1.

107 Section L.9, Terms/Conditions (second paragraph), on page 98 states, “Offerors must provide a budget narrative justifying the rates for each cost category proposed with supporting information such as historical biodata forms used, Defense Contract

Audit Agency (DCAA) forward pricing agreements, other federal Contract rates, market research support, and payroll records.” This language typically is included in RFPs where offerors are justifying proposed Ceiling Daily Rates. Could

USAID please confirm that offerors may describe or explain the basis for each proposed rate within the budget narrative and are not expected to submit accompanying support documentation (outside biodata forms for key personnel)?

Yes. Offerors shall describe or explain the basis for each proposed rate within the budget narrative and are not expected to submit accompanying support documentation.

108 Regarding Section L.9(b) on page 99, per the GSA

Forms Library, the SF-119 is no longer in use.

Could USAID please remove this requirement or provide a template?

SF- 119 is no longer in use. However per FAR

3.404 (Contract clause) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.203-5, Covenant

Against Contingent Fees, in all solicitations and contracts exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, other than those for commercial items (see parts 2 and 12).

109 As for direct Cost (such as staff salary), how

USAID issue fund for the monthly direct cost?

Through monthly payment/reimbursement vouchers

110 The process of funding sub-projects (including procuring materials), how will it be paid (in advance, after completed or partially)?

Managing sub-projects is a sole responsibility of the prime contractor and with regard to the reimbursement Prime can include sub-grantee expenses in the monthly voucher they submit for reimbursement. Please see Section B.8.

111 Process of receiving fixed-fee payment, will it be the same as direct cost. If not, how is it different?

During implementation, Contractors shall include the proportionate fixed fee amount in the monthly voucher they submit for the reimbursement. However, please also note the

Fee reserve requirement in Section B.8, which will apply to the fixed-fee voucher payments.

112 P. 99, Section L.9.b Representations, Certification and Other Statements of the Offeror

Does USAID require all subcontractors to also complete Section K?

The Offeror and each major subcontractor must include a Statement of Contingent Fees (SF

119) if required by Section K.

113 P. 99, Section L.9.e. Evidence of Responsibility

Does USAID require all subcontractors to also complete the Evidence of Responsibility?

If included as a major subcontractor in the proposal, a prospective contractor is welcome to provide written evidence of responsibility for the major subcontractor, but this requirement only applies to the Prime contractor.

114 P. 100, Section L.9.g.1. Contractor Performance

Information

Is it acceptable for the projects presented in this section to be the same as those included in the

Technical Past Performance Annex?

Contractor Performance Information section is no longer required under Section L.9.(g) as it is removed by Amendment #1.

115 On page 107 of the RFP, Contracting with Small

Business Concerns, USAID indicates that where two offers are in effect equally eligible, the offer that provides the “greater” use of the categories of small business concerns may be determined to be the best value offer. Please clarify the definition of

“greater” - does USAID preference a group that utilizes a greater number of small businesses, or a group that subcontracts a greater dollar value to small businesses?

Offerors shall provide a statement of the total dollars planned to be subcontracted and a statement of the total dollars planned to be subcontracted to small business as a percentage of total subcontract dollars.

116 Related to the ongoing COVID-19 travel restrictions is there a contract start date that the offeror should assume for in-country implementation that will be factored into the evaluation criteria established in section M.2 and M.3?

Contract start date is addressed above.

According to Section M, a contract start date is not part of the evaluation criteria but see question 34 and 35 referring to the SOO.

117 Are there technical approach and/or management approach assumptions that the offeror should build into the Technical Proposal and/or Cost Proposal that will be scored as a part of the evaluation criteria established in section M.2 and M.3?

Please refer to Sections L and M