RFP_72038618R00003,_Amdt_1.pdf

RFP No. 72038618R00003, Amendment #1 Forest-PLUS: forest for water and prosperity (Forest-PLUS 2.0)

Questions/Answers, Attachment 1

1. Reference: SOL Section C.5.4, page 21, paragraphs 3 and 4. Please confirm that management plans covering forest under the management authority of the wildlife protection wing of the forest department and following the Wildlife Institute of India guidelines would satisfy deliverables for tasks 1.1.1 and 1.1.2.

USAID Response: The management plans (working plans) mentioned in the RFP for forest areas pertains to forests managed by the territorial divisions of the forest department, and must be prepared following India’s National Working Plan Code-2014

2. Reference: SOL Section C.5.7, pages 31–33, and Section L.6.3.4, page 99. The RFP requests the development of a comprehensive monitoring, evaluation, learning, and adaptation framework (C.5.7), to include an Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) Plan with a detailed results framework, standard and custom output and outcome indicators (C.5.7.1), and a formal Collaborating, Learning, and Adapting (CLA) Plan (C.5.7.2). In light of the 30-page technical proposal page limit and the extent of the required elements, would USAID allow offerors to complement the technical narrative with an MEL annex? We request that USAID allow 20 extra pages to cover the material required, bringing the page limit for the annexes to 60 pages.

USAID Response: The MEL annex narrative may be up to 5 pages as USAID expect only a blueprint. USAID has increased annex page limit from 40 pages to 46 pages in this amendment (See L.6.2)

3. Reference: SOL Section H.6, page 58, paragraph 4. Section H.6 limits offerors to annual salary increases of not more than 3% of the employee’s base salary. This restriction may preclude offerors from complying with AIDAR 752.7007, incorporated in Section H.5, paragraph 1, which states “Direct compensation of the Contractor’s personnel will be in accordance with the Contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, and the cost principles associated with this contract.” We respectfully request that USAID remove this language from the RFP and allow offerors to issue annual salary increases in accordance with their policies and procedures.

OR

Per SOL Section H.6(e), page 58, “one annual salary increase not more than 3% may be granted after the employee’s completion of each twelve month period of satisfactory services under the contract.” This restriction may preclude offerors from complying with AIDAR 752.7007, incorporated in RFP Section H.6, which states that “direct compensation of the Contractor’s personnel will be in accordance with the Contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, and the cost principles applicable to this contract.” Specifying the annual salary increase offerors can provide their staff may result in offerors deviating from AIDAR 752.7007. We respectfully request that USAID revise the annual salary increase percentage to state “to be determined,” thereby allowing offerors to submit cost proposals in accordance with their established policies, procedures, and practice.

USAID Response: USAID has amended section H.6 to also include ceiling for both expats (3% and cooperating country national (5%). Section H.6 only covers the ceiling for the annual salary increase, but for rest contractor has to follow section H.5

4. Reference: SOL Section H.11, page 61. Could USAID confirm if a Defense Base Act (DBA) waiver is in place for India, and therefore offerors should not budget DBA insurance for long-term and short-term cooperating country nationals?

USAID Response: Please see the link : https://www.dol.gov/owcp/dlhwc/dbawaivers/dbawaivers.htm

5. Reference: SOL Section J, page 84, Attachment J.10. In the budget template supplied with the RFP, USAID provided a “Budget Summary Spreadsheet: By CLIN” tab. As the RFP does not reference CLINs, could USAID confirm that offerors do not need to use the CLIN budget tab.

https://www.dol.gov/owcp/dlhwc/dbawaivers/dbawaivers.htm

USAID Response: The Offerors should use three activity objectives as CLIN.

6. Reference: SOL Section L.6.2, page 98, paragraph 4. Please confirm that offerors may include a cover letter with their technical proposals that does not count against the 30-page limit.

OR

Reference: SOL Section L.6.2, page 98, paragraph 1. Please confirm that offerors may include title pages for technical proposal annexes that do not count against the overall annex page limit.

USAID Response: No, cover letters or title pages will count against the overall page limit.

7. Reference: SOL Section L.7, Part 2, 3. Budget Line Item Definitions, page 103, paragraph Salary. The RFP states that “Biographical Data Sheets are required for any individual specifically identified in the cost or technical proposal to allow for cost analysis of the proposed daily rate.” While offerors will submit biographical data sheets for any individual with a negotiated rate in the cost proposal, will USAID allow offerors to name individuals as illustrative in the technical proposal without submitting biographical data sheets, to be able to highlight available technical expertise?

USAID Response: No illustrative individuals by names are required for technical proposal.

8. Reference: SOL Section L.7, page 104, paragraph Other Direct Costs. The RFP states that “USAID anticipates the contractor will have a central office based in Pretoria.” Could USAID confirm the location of the central office?

USAID Response: USAID anticipates the contractor will have a central office based in New Delhi, India.

9. Reference: SOL Section Cover Page, page 1, paragraph 1; Section B.2, page 9; and Section L.2, page 94.

The RFP cover page and Section B.2 state that the contract type for the subject solicitation is Cost-Plus-Fixed- Fee Completion, but Section L.2 states that the contract type is Cost-Plus-Award-Fee. Could USAID please confirm the contract type?

OR

Reference: SOL Section L.2. FAR 52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT, page 94, paragraph 1: This section states that the Government is considering a Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) type contract. All other references in the RFP are to a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) type contract. Please clarify the anticipated award type.

OR

The cover page, SOL Section B.2, page 9, and Section L.4a), page 95, list the contract type as cost-plus-fixed fee, completion. However, SOL Section L.2, PAGE 94, states that USAID is contemplating award of a cost-plus-award-fee type contract. Can USAID please confirm that the contract type is cost-plus-fixed-fee completion?

USAID Response: The contract type is Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee.

10. Could USAID provide the most up-to-date Local Compensation Plan for India?

OR

Would USAID/India consider sharing with bidders the Local Compensation Plan (LCP)?

USAID Response: Local Compensation Plan is attached with this amendment.

11. Reference: SOL Section L.6.3.3.A, page 99. In order to demonstrate the qualifications of all proposed long-term, short-term, home office, and subcontractor technical staff, will USAID allow offerors to provide a staffing matrix in an annex to the technical proposal?

USAID Response: One page Staffing Matrix will be allowed as an annex to technical proposal. This should be with in the 45 page limit.

12. Reference: SOL Section L.6.2., page 97, paragraph 4: The last paragraph/list in this section indicates that SF-

294s and Letters of Commitment are not subject to page limitations. Please confirm that these items do not count toward the technical annex 40-page limit.

USAID Response: Letter of Commitment will be considered as part of the annex 40- page limit . The SF 294 should be included in cost proposal. (L.7.1

13. Reference: SOL Component 3, page 28, paragraph 3: Is there a budget limit to the small grants program? Can the small grants program be proposed to work across all three components?

USAID Response: Small grant program is only for component three. USAID has prescribed no budget limit as per ADS 302. However Grants Under Contracts (GUCs) will need to meet certain conditions that need to be under consideration at the time of your proposal like the Mission Director’s approval.

14. Cost-reimbursement contracts are managed with the understanding that the work proposed is based on an estimate of costs for the anticipated work and that not all costs can be planned and executed with sufficient accuracy so as to hold to exact line items in the contract budget. Adjustments in technical activities will likely require the contractor to deviate from the original cost proposal. Thus, limiting our ability to purchase NXP to what is listed in the contract could result in delays in implementation while waiting on approval. As such, we respectfully request that USAID remove this approval requirement from SOL Section H.25(b), page 66, of the resulting contract.

USAID Response: At this point USAID is not considering removal of section H.25(b).

15. We respectfully request removal of the note regarding ADS 548 from SOL Section H.25(b), page 66, paragraph

2. It is our understanding that ADS 548 is no longer valid as of Sept 30, 2016, and is being archived.

USAID Response: Please see the link: https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/500/548

16. SOL Section F.8.1-.5 — Key Personnel, Minimum (Required) Qualifications, pages 48-50, states all key personnel candidates must have an advanced degree. Would USAID consider revising the requirement to remove the advanced degree as a mandatory requirement and replace this with years of relevant professional experience?

USAID Response: Candidates must possess relevant advanced degree (Master’s level or equivalent).

https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/500/548

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I – THE SCHEDULE

SECTION B – SERVICES AND PRICE/COSTS

B.1 PURPOSE

B.2 CONTRACT TYPE

B.3 ESTIMATED COST, FIXED FEE, AND OBLIGATED AMOUNT

B.4 PRICE SCHEDULE

B.5 FIXED FEE

B.6 INDIRECT COSTS (DEC 1997)

B.7 CEILING ON INDIRECT COST RATES

B.8 COST REIMBURSABLE

B.9 MULTI-YEAR CONTRACT

SECTION C – DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT OF WORK

C.1 TITLE OF ACTIVITY

C.2 PURPOSE

C.3 BACKGROUND

C.4 RELEVANCE OF U.S. AND GOI

C.5 STATEMENT OF WORK

SECTION D – BRANDING AND MARKING

SECTION E – INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

E.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

E.2 INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

E.3 QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

SECTION F – DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

F.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

F.2 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

F.3 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

F.4 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

F.5 REPORTS AND DELIVERABLES

F.6 REQUIRED REPORTS

F.7 OTHER SPECIAL REPORTS

F.8 KEY PERSONNEL

SECTION G – CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

G.1 CONTRACTING OFFICER’S AUTHORITY

G.2 AIDAR 752.7003 DOCUMENTATION FOR PAYMENT (NOV 1998)

G.3 CONTRACTING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIVE (COR)

G.4 PAYING OFFICE

G.5 ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

G.6 TECHNICAL DIRECTIONS/RELATIONSHIP WITH USAID

G.7 CONTRACTOR’S PRIMARY POINT OF CONTACT

G.8 CONTRACTOR’S PAYMENT ADDRESS

SECTION H – SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

H.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

H.2 AIDAR 752.225-70 SOURCE AND NATIONALITY REQUIREMENTS (FEB 2012)

H.3 ADS 302.3.5.19 USAID-FINANCED THIRD-PARTY WEB SITES (NOV 2017)

H.4 ADS 302.3.5.21 SUBMISSION OF DATASETS TO THE DEVELOPMENT DATA LIBRARY (DDL) (OCT 2014) 57

H.5 AIDAR 752.7007 PERSONNEL COMPENSATION (JUL 2007)

H.6 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PERSONNEL COMPENSATION

H.7 AUTHORIZED WORK WEEK

H.8 AIDAR 752.7031 LEAVE AND HOLIDAYS (OCT 1989)

H.9 AIDAR 752.222-70 USAID DISABILITY POLICY (DEC 2004)

H.10 AUTHORIZED GEOGRAPHIC CODE

H.11 DEFENSE BASE ACT INSURANCE AND SERVICES

H.12 EXECUTIVE ORDERS ON TERRORISM FINANCING

H.13 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED FACILITIES OR PROPERTY

H.14 LOGISTICAL SUPPORT

H.15 LANGUAGE REQUIREMENTS

H.16 AIDAR 752.7032 INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL APPROVAL AND NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

(APR 2014)

H.17 FRAUD REPORTING

H.18 DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION

H.19 CONSENT TO SUBCONTRACT

H.20 SUBCONTRACTING PLAN REPORT FOR INDIVIDUAL CONTRACTS AND SUMMARY

CONTRACTING REPORT

H.21 GENDER CONSIDERATION

H.22 INHERENTLY GOVERNMENTAL AND CLOSELY ASSOCIATED FUNCTIONS

H.23 CONFLICT OF INTEREST

H.24 EXCHANGE VISITORS AND TRAINING

H.25 NON-EXPENDABLE PROPERTY PURCHASES

H.26 ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS SYSTEM (JULY 2014)

H.27 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE (22 CFR 216)

SECTION I - CONTRACT CLAUSES

I.1 52.252-2 CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

I.2 AIDAR 752.252-1 AIDAR SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (MAR

2015) 71

I.3 FAR 52.204-1 APPROVAL OF CONTRACT (DEC 1989)

I.4 FAR 52.222-50 COMBATING TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS (Mar 2015)

I.5 FAR 52.229-8 TAXES – FOREIGN COST-REIMBURSEMENT CONTRACTS (MAR 1990)

I.6 AIDAR 752.242-70 PERIODIC PROGRESS REPORTS (OCT 2007)

I.7 AIDAR 752.7025 APPROVALS (APR 1984)

I.8 AIDAR 752.7101 VOLUNTARY POPULATION PLANNING ACTIVITIES (JUNE 2008)

I.9 AIDAR 752.229-71 REPORTING OF FOREIGN TAXES (JULY 2007)

I.10 AIDAR 752.222-71 NONDISCRIMINATION (JUNE 2012)

I.11 AIDAR 752.231-72 CONFERENCE PLANNING AND REQUIRED APPROVALS (AUG 2013)

I.12 AIDAR 752.7036 USAID IMPLEMENTING PARTNER NOTICES (IPN) PORTAL FOR ACQUISITION

(JUL 2014)

I.13 AIDAR 752.7037 CHILD SAFEGUARDING STANDARDS (AUG 2016)

I.14 FAR 52.203-99 PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES THAT REQUIRE CERTAIN

INTERNAL CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS (APR 2015)

PART III – LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS, AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

SECTION J – LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

PART IV – REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION K - REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS

K.1 NOTICE LISTING SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

K.2 FAR 52.203-98 PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES THAT REQUIRE CERTAIN

INTERNAL CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS- REPRESENTATION (APR 2015)

K.3 FAR 52.204-8 ANNUAL REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS (JAN 2018)

K.4 FAR 52.209-5 CERTIFICATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (OCT 2015)

K.5 FAR 52.209-7 INFORMATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (JUL 2013)

K.6 FAR 52.209-11 REPRESENTATION BY CORPORATIONS REGARDING DELINQUENT TAX

LIABILITY OR A FELONY CONVICTION UNDER ANY FEDERAL LAW (FEB 2016)

K.7 FAR 52.222-22 PREVIOUS CONTRACTS AND COMPLIANCE REPORTS (FEB 1999)

K.8 FAR 52.222-25 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION COMPLIANCE (APR 1984)

K.9 FAR 52.230-1 COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS NOTICES AND CERTIFICATION (OCT 2015)

K.10 FAR 52.230-7 PROPOSAL DISCLOSURE—COST ACCOUNTING PRACTICE CHANGES (APR

2005) 93

K.11 INSURANCE—IMMUNITY FROM TORT LIABILITY

K.12 AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATORS

K.13 SIGNATURE

SECTION L – INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

L.1 FAR 52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

L.2 FAR 52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984)

L.3 FAR 52.233-2 SERVICE OF PROTEST (SEP 2006)

L.4 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

L.5 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

L.6 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

L.6.1 Proposal Format

L.6.2 Technical Proposal Page Limitation

L.6.3 Technical Proposal Contents

L.6.3.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

L.6.3.2 TECHNICAL APPROACH [M.2.1]

L.6.3.3 MANAGEMENT APPROACH [M.2.2]

L.6.3.4 ACTIVITY MONITORING, EVALUATION, AND LEARNING (MEL) PLAN [C.5.7 and M.2.3]

L.6.3.5 PAST PERFORMANCE [M.2.4]

L.6.3.6 ANNEXES

L.7 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE COST PROPOSAL [M.3]

L.7.1 General Part 1 - Standard Form (SF) 33 & Section B

Part 2 - Proposed Costs/Prices

Part 3 - Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors

Part 4 - Subcontracting Plan

Part 5 - Joint Venture Information

Part 6 - Evidence of Responsibility Part 7 - Information to Support Consent to Subcontractors

Part 8 - Information Concerning Work-Day, Work-Week, and Paid Absences

Part 9 – Listing of all Subcontracts, Sub awards, and Resource Partners

Part 10 – Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1 GENERAL INFORMATION

M.2 TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

M.3 COST/PRICE EVALUATION [L.7]

M.4 DETERMINATION OF THE COMPETITIVE RANGE AND CONTRACT AWARD

M.5 CONTRACTING WITH SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS AND DISADVANTAGED ENTERPRISES

PART I – THE SCHEDULE

SECTION B – SERVICES AND PRICE/COSTS

B.1 PURPOSE

The purpose of this contract is to provide technical assistance that supports the Government of India (GoI) and other stakeholders to manage forests as important components of broad-based, inclusive and sustainable economic growth that meet local needs and addresses global environmental challenges as described in detail in Section C for the implementation of USAID/India’s activity titled “Forest-PLUS: forest for water and prosperity (Forest-PLUS 2.0).”

B.2 CONTRACT TYPE

This is a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) completion-type contract. For the consideration set forth below, the Contractor shall provide the performance requirements described in Section C and the deliverables or outputs described herein.

B.3 ESTIMATED COST, FIXED FEE, AND OBLIGATED AMOUNT

(a) The estimated cost for the performance of the work required hereunder, exclusive of fixed fee, if any, is: $ TBD. The fixed fee, if any, is $ TBD. The estimated cost plus fixed fee, if any, is $ TBD.

(b) Within the estimated cost plus fixed fee (if any) specified in paragraph (a) above, the amount currently obligated and available for reimbursement of allowable and allocable costs incurred by the Contractor (and payment of fee, if any) is $ TBD. The Contractor must not exceed the aforesaid obligated amount in accordance with the Limitation of Funds Clause, FAR 52.232.22.

(c) Funds obligated hereunder are anticipated to be sufficient through TBD.

B.4 PRICE SCHEDULE

Description Base Contract (USD)

Total Estimated Cost

Direct Costs

Indirect Costs

Fixed-Fee

Total Estimated Cost Plus Fixed Fee

B.5 FIXED FEE

Payment of fixed fee will be made upon receipt of a proper invoice and shall directly correspond to the percentage of allowable costs being paid. In accordance with FAR 52-216-8, Fixed Fee, the CO will withhold 15% of the total fee or $100,000, whichever is less until the required awards conditions under the reference clause have been met.

B.6 INDIRECT COSTS (DEC 1997)

The contract clause entitled “Allowable Cost and Payment (JUN 2013)”, FAR 52.216-7, specifies that the indirect cost rates shall be established for each of the Contractor’s accounting periods which apply to this contract. Pending establishment of revised provisional or final indirect cost rates, allowable indirect costs shall be reimbursed on the basis of the following negotiated provisional or predetermined rates and the appropriate bases:

Description Rate Base Type Period 1/ 1/ 1/ 2/ 2/ 2/ 3/ 3/ 3/

1/Base of Application: Type of

Rate: Provisional Period:

2/Base of Application: Type of

3/Base of Application: Type of

B.7 CEILING ON INDIRECT COST RATES

Ceilings are not applicable to Small Businesses.

(d) For each of the Contractor’s accounting periods during the term of this contract, the parties agree as follows:

(1) The distribution base for establishment of final overhead rates is .

(2) The distribution base for establishment of final G&A rates is

(e) The Contractor will make no change in its established method of classifying or allocating indirect costs without the prior written approval of the contracting officer.

(f) Reimbursement for indirect costs will be at final negotiated rates, but not in excess of the following ceiling rates for each fiscal year:

Indirect Cost Type FY 18 FY 19 FY20 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 (Contractor’s FY)

1. [TBD]

2. [TBD]

3. [TBD]

(g) The government will not be obligated to pay any additional amount on account of indirect costs above the ceiling rates established in the contract. This advance understanding will not change any monetary ceiling, cost limitation, or obligation established in the contract.

B.8 COST REIMBURSABLE

Allowable costs shall be limited to reasonable, allocable and necessary costs determined in accordance with FAR 52.216-7, Allowable Cost and Payment (JUN 2013), FAR 52.216-8, Fixed Fee (June 2011), if applicable, and AIDAR 752.7003, Documentation for Payment (NOV 1998).

In addition, the requirement and conditions concerning estimated cost and funding apply as detailed in FAR 52.232-22, Limitation of Funds (APR 1984).

B.9 MULTI-YEAR CONTRACT

This contract is considered non-severable, and is therefore a multi-year contract as defined in FAR

17.103. Consequently, this contract is subject to the requirements of FAR 17.106. This is a CPFF completion type contract where the Contractor is authorized to be reimbursed for all costs which are allowable in accordance with FAR 52.216-7, “Allowable Costs and Payment.” The Contractor will not incur any costs which would have been amortized over the life of the contract should the contract be cancelled in accordance with FAR 52.217-2. Therefore, the cancellation ceiling established pursuant to FAR 17.106-1(c)(1) for each program year is $0.00.

[END OF SECTION B]

SECTION C – DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT OF WORK

C.1 TITLE OF ACTIVITY

C.2 PURPOSE

The purpose of this Activity is to provide technical assistance that supports the Government of India (GoI) and other stakeholders to manage forests as important components of broad-based, inclusive and sustainable economic growth that meet local needs and addresses global environmental challenges.

C.3 BACKGROUND

India has set ambitious targets for its national economy, growth of the private sector, employment of its citizens, and its role in international engagements. These include targets related to improving access to clean water and sanitation, expanding the proportion of renewable energy supply in the power sector, and encouraging foreign and domestic investments in technology and industry. Within the forest sector, the GoI targets include:

● Increased forest and tree cover1 from the current 24 percent to 33 percent

● Enhanced ecosystem services including biodiversity, hydrological services, and carbon sequestration as a result of improved management of 10 million hectares

● Increased national carbon stocks in forest and tree cover by 2.5-3 billion tons by 2030

● Improved livelihoods for about three million forest-dependent households.

The GoI, primarily through its Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), fully appreciates the magnitude of these targets and is rapidly mobilizing its State Forest Departments and other agencies toward their accomplishment. Some of the specific policy measures and resource mobilization actions are described further below.

The GoI is adopting a strategy of having state lands contribute as much as they can and encouraging private landowners to contribute from non-state lands. The state land contributions will come through improved productivity of forests, halting or reversing forest degradation, and more effective afforestation.2 Agroforestry, farm forestry, and additional afforestation are aimed at increasing what are called trees outside forests; i.e., forest and tree cover on non-state lands. Being able to efficiently implement this state and non-state land use strategy, and to measure progress toward the goals, necessitates landscape-scale application of ecosystem-based forest management.

USAID and MoEFCC had developed and deployed a number of interventions under the Partnership for Land Use Science (Forest-PLUS) activity to improve the management of forested landscapes in India, particularly in ways that can help mitigate climate change. India’s capacity to participate in Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) was an important objective of the Forest-PLUS program. The evaluation of Forest-PLUS, including lessons learned, can be found via ttp://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pa00d5tm.pdf.

USAID has garnered a number of interesting lessons from previous efforts, notably through the initial Forest- PLUS activity. These include:

● It is important for female foresters to improve their leadership skills. In response, Forest-PLUS 2.0 includes a leadership training program for women (Task 1.1.4) and will aim for at least 30% participation of women in training activities.

1 In the Indian context, the terms “forest and tree cover” incorporate: (1) forest cover – all lands larger than one hectare with a tree canopy greater than 10 percent irrespective of land use, ownership and legal status; it includes Recorded Forest Areas (i.e., state lands) and Trees Outside Forests such as plantations, orchards, etc. and (2) tree cover – small tree patches and isolated trees outside the recorded forest area which are less than one hectare in extent.

2 India does not maintain separate data for afforestation and reforestation as defined by the FAO.

● Forest-PLUS introduced the ecosystem approach to forest management. While the state governments have begun to implement this approach, tools and expertise are needed to support this work. Forest- PLUS 2.0 will strengthen the capacity of stakeholders to apply an ecosystem approach to forest management at different levels of management (e.g. state, local, community). The capacity building needs of men and women may vary and the activities to meet these needs will be incorporated into forest management capacity building activities.

● The Forest-PLUS work on livelihoods revealed that the economic incentives created through small scale income generating activities are often not sufficient for changing behaviors related to use of forest resources. Forest-PLUS 2.0 incorporates these lessons by encouraging offerors to support conservation enterprises and value chain partnerships in addition to small scale livelihoods activities. Women’s contribution to value chains through unpaid household and reproductive labor is unrecognized. Men and women are not equally distributed over levels of the value chains as wage workers, entrepreneurs or leaders. The constraints facing men and women in accessing and succeeding along the entire value chain must be addressed in activity implementation so that the needs of both men and women are met, activity must address barriers and constraints to the participation men, women, and youth from marginalized communities along the entire value chain in order to create more equitable opportunities.

As noted in the three examples above, Forest-PLUS 2.0 will build on the success of Forest-PLUS and will provide continued technical assistance to MoEFCC to strengthen implementation of ecosystem-based management practices on state as well as non-state lands.

C.3.1 Overview of Indian Forests At almost 3.3 million km² (1.3 million square miles; one-third the size of the U.S.), India is the seventh-largest country in the world. India extends between 8°4' and 37°6' North latitudes and 68°7' and 97°25' East longitudes.

Across this large area, the topographical diversity – including four major mountain ranges (Himalaya, Western Ghats, Eastern Ghats, and Aravallis) – combined with varied climatic conditions (ranging from 300 to more than 3000 mm precipitation per year on average) has given rise to tremendous ecological diversity. These diverse ecosystems support more than 91,000 animal and 45,500 plant species, making India one of 17 “megadiverse countries” which harbor 60-70 percent of the planet’s biodiversity. India also contains three biodiversity hotspots – extremely threatened ecoregions with exceptional biodiversity, particularly of endemic species.

India’s forests are classified into four major groups – tropical, subtropical, temperate, and alpine – that are further divided into 16 forest types:

● Tropical: wet evergreen, semi-evergreen, moist deciduous, littoral / swamp, dry deciduous, thorn

● Sub-tropical: broad-leaved hill forest, pine, dry evergreen

● Temperate: montane wet, Himalayan moist, Himalayan dry

● Alpine: sub-alpine, moist alpine, dry alpine scrub

The most recent India State of Forest Report (2017) provides detailed descriptions of soils, climate, species distributions, and other characteristics of each forest type (cf. Chapter 6). That same report provides updated information on forest cover for each state and union territory. National data show:

● Forest Survey of India (FSI) estimates total forest cover is 708,273 km2 (70 million hectares), or 21.54 percent of total national land area.

● Forest cover has increased by 6,778 km2 since the 2015 India State of Forest Report.

● FSI also estimates 7.0 billion tons of carbon stocks in forests and trees outside forests.

● Tree cover on areas of less than one hectare total 93,815 km2 (2.85% of total land area).

Ecosystem services and value of forests Forests provide an array of benefits to people in the form of economic opportunities and ecosystem goods and services including timber and other wood products, non-timber forest products (e.g., herbs, mushrooms, fodder, honey), clean water and air, climate regulation, soil stabilization, recreation, spiritual values, etc. Although these benefits are rarely quantified in economic models, they are both substantial and fundamental at levels from households to companies and states. An expert panel convened in 2013 estimated that the net present value of India’s forests is $1.7 trillion.3

The GoI has identified landscape scale management, including increasing tree cover, for multiple benefits as key to achieving its goal of improving the long-term health and security of forests and their biological diversity with and for empowered communities. Better landscape and forest management can enhance the delivery of ecosystem services. Because ecosystem services underpin virtually all livelihood and economic activities, improving the capacity of landscapes, especially forests, to consistently and reliably provide ecosystem services can yield economic benefits and economic stability for households, communities, companies, and States. The GoI has highlighted ecosystem services in its forest planning process. Additionally, the National Forest Commission report of 2006 notes the importance of forests for the urban poor to meet part of their basic needs and income, including construction materials, energy, nutrition, and medicine.

The role of forests in regulating the water, energy, and carbon cycles is critically important in maintaining other systems such as agriculture, transport, tourism, etc. that rely on those cycles and their functionality.4 Perhaps no other service provided by forest ecosystems is as fundamental to human populations as that of hydrological regulation. In addition to recycling moisture into the atmosphere through evapotranspiration, forests regulate water supplies by facilitating groundwater storage, reducing direct runoff, and moderating or mitigating flooding. India is among a number of countries that are increasingly seeing their forests as water tanks and providers of other ecosystem services for the wider landscapes beyond the forests themselves.

Role of forests in economic security Approximately 300 million people in India depend on forests either directly or indirectly for their livelihoods.

Women and men, owning to their gendered responsibilities, possess unique knowledge sets about forest resources. Men’s and women’s knowledge of and management strategies for forests may be distinct and are directly related to their use and dependence on different forest resources. Forest products on average contribute 20-40% of total household income in forested areas of India, with poorer households being more dependent on forest resources such as fuelwood, fodder and other non-timber forest products (NTFPs). Healthy ecosystems and the ecosystem services they provide are important buffers against both natural and anthropogenic shocks (e.g., climate variability, climate change) for the people and communities living near or in them. For example, if the monsoon is deficient and crops fail, rural communities often can rely on gathering wild fruits, fishing in streams, or otherwise using the forest as their safety net to avert starvation. Furthermore, well-managed watersheds tend to have more reliable water flows, whereas watersheds lacking natural vegetation are more likely to experience flooding and soil erosion.

Put differently, forests are the core of India’s natural capital “bank account” that has provided economic security to surrounding communities and wider society for millennia. Converting forest capital to other land uses such as agriculture, industry, or urban areas has produced impressive returns on investment. And, the regenerative capacity of the core capital account (i.e., forests) has enabled the country to retain its ability for continued economic growth. As population and land pressures have increased, however, the capital account is being depleted faster than it can regenerate. Degradation of forest quality leads to deteriorating economic security for nearby communities and for the states’ and national economies more generally, due to erosion of the ecosystem services forests provide. Depletion or loss of hydrological services are especially troublesome, given the critical role that consistent flows of unpolluted water holds in all economic sectors.

Healthy forest ecosystems are particularly important for women and girls, who are typically the primary collectors of fuelwood and water for household use. Their economic security, therefore, is more directly related to forest and water quality. The opportunity costs of traveling farther and farther to collect these basic needs for rural households are higher for women and girls preventing women from using their time for leisure or more

3 Verma M, Negandhi D, Wahal AK, Kumar R. 2013. Revision of rates of NPV applicable for different class/category of forests. Indian Institute of Forest Management. Bhopal, India.

4 For example, see Ellison et al. 2017. Trees, forests and water: Cool insights for a hot world. GEC(43): 51-61 lucrative pursuits, and preventing girls from going to school or performing well in school as they have little free time for their studies. By contrast, resilient ecosystems where reinvestments in natural capital reduce or reverse degradation and lead to more resilient communities whose safety net is less frayed, economic opportunities are restored, and social cohesion is enhanced; in other words, increasing economic security while reducing the potential for local conflicts over natural resources.

C.4 RELEVANCE OF U.S. AND GOI

Policies and strategies USAID/India’s overarching goal for the Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS) for the period ending 2020 is USAID-India partnership transformed to increasingly contribute to global efforts to solve worldwide development challenges. This goal will be achieved through the following two sub-goals and four Development Objectives (DOs):

Sub-Goal 1: Indian systems strengthened in priority sectors DO 1: Increase the capacity of India’s health system to improve the health of vulnerable populations in India.

DO 2: Accelerate India’s transition to a low emissions economy.

Sub-Goal 2: Indian innovations accelerate development outcomes in India and globally DO 3: Development innovations impact people's lives at the base of the pyramid (BOP) in a range of sectors in India.

DO 4: India’s role in contributing to global development enhanced.

This activity will contribute to achieving the CDCS’s DO 2, “Accelerate India’s transition to a low emissions economy.” Under DO 2, the approach supports IR 2.1, “Reduce emissions and enhance sequestration through landscapes.”

USAID/India also conducted a Tropical Forest and Biodiversity Analysis (FAA 118/119) in tandem with and as part of the explicit analytical agenda of the CDCS formulation with the objective of assisting USAID/India to define how its proposed country strategy contributes to conservation needs. This also serves as an instrument to guide the integration of forestry and biodiversity concerns into proposed programs in the short and medium term. The Analysis can be found via http://www.usaidgems.org/Documents/FAA&Regs/FAA118119Asia/India_FAA_118_&_119_Analysis_2012.p df.

Ministry In India, MoEFCC is the nodal agency in the administrative structure of the Central Government for the planning, promotion, coordination, and overseeing the implementation of India’s environmental and forestry policies and programs.

National Forest Policy In 1952, the GoI enunciated a Forest Policy for management of State Forests in the country. The policy was revised in 1988 to ensure environmental stability and maintenance of ecological balance, including atmospheric equilibrium, which are vital for sustenance of all life forms, human, animal and plant. A draft revision of the 1988 policy is under consideration by the MoEFCC. The draft recognizes runoff regulation, aquifer recharge and water purification functions as the major tangible ecosystem services from forests. Among other objectives, are (1) adoption a landscape-scale and ecosystem-based approach to land management, and (2) factoring green accounting and valuation of ecosystem services into the planning and management.

National Working Plan Code (NWPC) Working Plans have been the main instrument of forest planning for scientific management of forests in India.

All forests are to be sustainably managed under the prescriptions of an approved working plan. The National Forest Policy 1988 states that no forest should be permitted to be worked without an approved plan. To sustainably manage, conserve and utilize the forest resources and to bring uniformity in forest management planning across the country, the Government of India adopted a uniform code, the National Working Plan Code http://www.usaidgems.org/Documents/FAA&Regs/FAA118119Asia/India_FAA_118_&_119_Analysis_2012.pdf http://www.usaidgems.org/Documents/FAA&Regs/FAA118119Asia/India_FAA_118_&_119_Analysis_2012.pdf in 2004. The revised code is the National Working Plan Code – 2014, which updated data requirements for developing working plans and encourages management objectives that incorporate ecosystem services.

National Mission for a Green India The National Mission for a Green India (GIM) under India’s National Action Plan on Climate Change acknowledges the influences that the forestry sector has on environmental amelioration through climate mitigation, food security, water security, biodiversity conservation, and livelihood security of forest dependent communities. GIM seeks to enhance ecosystem services such as carbon sequestration and storage in forests and other ecosystems, hydrological services, and biodiversity, as well as other provisioning services such as fuelwood, fodder, and other NTFPs.

National Agroforestry Policy India’s National Agroforestry Policy 2014 recognizes the potential of agroforestry to reduce poverty and enhance productivity. The policy intends to address the increasing demand for timber, NTFPs, food, fuelwood, fodder, and fibre, while at the same time promoting ecological stability and improving livelihoods.

Finance Commission The core mandate of the Finance Commission (FC), as laid out in Article 280 of the Constitution, is to make recommendations on “the distribution between the Union and the States of the net proceeds of taxes which are to be, or may be, divided between them”, “the allocation between the States of the respective shares of such proceeds” and “the principles which should govern the grants-in-aid of the revenues of the States out of the Consolidated Fund of India”.

The FC-XIII introduced a forward-looking, incentive-based grant rewarding the States with forest cover and linking it to the quality of forests in a State. Forests and the externalities arising from them impact both the revenue capacities and the expenditure needs of the States. FC-XIV noted that there is a need to address the concerns of people living in forest areas and ensure a desirable level of services for them. At the same time, it is necessary to compensate the decline in revenues due to existing policy prescriptions. In its view, forests, a global public good, should not be seen as a handicap but as a national resource to be preserved and expanded to full potential, including afforestation in degraded forests or forests with low density cover. Maintaining a green cover, and adding to it, would also enable the nation to meet its international obligations on environment-related measures. It recognized that the States have to be enabled to contribute to this national endeavor and, among other measures, assigned a 7.5% weightage to ‘forest cover’ in the formula for allocations to the States and Union Territories.

C.5 STATEMENT OF WORK

The forest sector contributes toward the high performance of the economy by increasing economic opportunities for forest-dependent people and communities. The low emission aspect of the DO is achieved through sequestering and storing carbon into forest and tree cover, thus complementing emissions reductions in the energy and transport sectors of the Indian economy. Forests also are uniquely able to increase climate resilience by regulating water flows within a landscape, thus contributing both to mitigation of and adaptation to climate change.

The National Forest Commission report of 2006 drew particular attention to the role of forests in regulating the quality and quantity of water available for domestic consumption, agricultural and industrial users, and other sectors of the economy. “Water flow, both quantitative and qualitative, may now be regarded as the single greatest product of forests, since most of our rivers and rivulets emanate from forests and forests constitute the upper catchments of these water bodies.” A number of GoI studies and reports over the past decade have highlighted the importance of the relationship between forests and water. Forest-PLUS 2.0 will contribute toward ongoing efforts to quantify and where possible determine economic values for those relationships at management levels. See figure 1 for the Results Framework.

Figure 1: Results Framework

C.5.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES

Problem Statement:

The ability of forests in India to provide goods and services needed for India’s growing population and economic growth is limited by the pressure on the landscapes (of which forests are part) and the absence of an integrated approach to landscape management. Lack of planning and decision-support tools are the major impediments towards implementing an integrated approach to landscape management, and measurement and valuation of ecosystem services will help inform the integrated planning and decision making.

Development Hypothesis:

The development hypothesis for Forest-PLUS 2.0 is that ecosystem-based management of India’s forest landscapes will increase their ecological and socioeconomic sustainability by demonstrating the value of these landscapes to broader development goals. USAID and Indian counterpart stakeholders will test this hypothesis by reducing or removing impediments to landscape-scale application of best management practices that link ecosystem services and inclusive economic growth to that improved management.

C.5.2 OVERALL VISION

The goal of this Activity is improved management of targeted forest landscapes in India for enhanced ecosystem services and increased inclusive economic opportunities. The focus on ecosystem services and inclusive economic growth represents a transition from previous management objectives of either timber production or protectionist conservation. This approach reflects the evolution of thinking within the MoEFCC, and the broader set of stakeholders active in natural resource management practice within India and beyond.

Having recognized that India’s forest landscapes have ecological, economic, social, cultural, and scientific value to all segments of Indian and indeed global society, multiple-objective management is not only desirable but necessary.

Arguably, the core elements of multiple-objective management are ecological integrity and economic opportunity. Management decisions must consider both long-term and near-term impacts and objectives.

USAID and our counterparts believe that adopting a landscape-scale and ecosystem-based approach to land management fosters cooperation and collaboration among managers of different land units – whether state, community, or private sector – that will lead to practices that are better able to encourage positive, mutually reinforcing objectives and outcomes.

Forest-PLUS 2.0 will continue the successful, close collaboration and cooperation among implementing partners of USAID/India, MoEFCC, forest departments in targeted states, academic and research institutions, private sector entities, and forest-dependent communities. Activities will build upon the tools, techniques, and practices developed through Forest-PLUS and evolve support toward addressing current and future challenges facing India and achievement of its national goals in the forest and land use sectors. More attention will be paid in Forest-PLUS in addressing gender specific barriers to women’s participation (both women forest managers and women in the community) in forest management decision making and, for women in the community, access to more varied economic opportunities.

Through this Activity, USAID and MoEFCC will partner with public, private, and community land managers, as well as other stakeholders, to develop and demonstrate viable, practical, and replicable field models that contribute toward India meeting its goals of economic and ecological sustainability in landscape management.

Technical assistance provided by the contractor under this Activity must include a focus on capacity building of the various stakeholders for achievement and sustainability of all the results and outcomes. Please note that training is not the same as capacity building.

C.5.3 OVERALL ACTIVITY INDICATORS AND PRELIMINARY TARGETS

The following are preliminary targets that Activity implementing partners must attain by the end of the Base Period and Option Period, respectively. Final target-setting will be negotiated as part of formulating the Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) Plan after award. The extent to which the Offeror has achieved the objectives of the Base Period will be among the criteria used to determine whether USAID will continue into the Option Period.

Table 1: Preliminary Targets for Forest-PLUS 2.0

Objectives Base Period Target (3 years) Option Period Target (2 years)

1. To strengthen ecosystem-based management of forest landscapes

400,000 hectares of land is under improved management as a result of USG assistance.

Disaggregates: 70% public land (280k); 30% non-state land (130k)

Additional 600,000 hectares of land is under improved management as a result of USG assistance.

Disaggregates: TBD

LOP target (5 years): 1,000,000 hectares

2. To factor ecosystem services into management of forest landscapes

Water, carbon, and biodiversity services quantified as inputs to at least five management plans

Reassessment of key ecosystem services documents that they have increased by 10% over baseline

One incentive mechanism developed for managing landscapes for ecosystem services

One incentive mechanism demonstrated in managing landscapes for ecosystem services

3. To increase economic opportunities from improved landscape management

$2 million of new, inclusive economic activity5 is conducted as a result of USG assistance

Additional $3 million of new, inclusive economic activity is conducted as a result of USG assistance

LOP target (5 years): $5 million

Offerors to propose an ambitious and feasible target for the number of households that accrue measurable economic benefits as a result of USG assistance

Offerors to propose an ambitious and feasible target for the number of households that accrue measurable economic benefits as a result of USG assistance that builds from the results achieved in the base period

For the Forest-PLUS 2.0 team to meet these targets requires meeting two critical challenges. The first challenge is of technical interventions capable of leveraging actions by others, which requires a high degree of competent facilitation. USAID does not expect the Forest-PLUS 2.0 team to actively engage in management planning for one million hectares of public and private lands within diverse landscapes; rather, to engage stakeholders with the interest, skills, ability, and means to improve management at scale. Likewise, USAID does not expect the Forest-PLUS 2.0 team to directly support the generation of new economic activity in the target households;

rather, to motivate and mobilize such activity by individuals and entities with the wherewithal to generate economic benefits in these households. The second critical challenge will be in documenting that these targets have been reached as a result of USG assistance. USAID is confident that the Indian context provides the requisite conditions for both challenges to be met successfully.

5 “New economic activity” may include, inter alia, sales of products, public or private sector investments, access to GoI programs, or other forms of economic activity not present in target landscapes prior to USAID interventions.

C.5.4 ACTIVITY OBJECTIVES, TASKS, and DELIVERABLES

This section describes the objectives and sub-objectives for the Forest-PLUS 2.0 activity, the tasks expected to be completed to achieve each sub-objective, and the Deliverables required to demonstrate achievement.

The objectives for the Forest-PLUS 2.0 activity are:

1. To strengthen ecosystem-based management of forest landscapes

2. To factor ecosystem services into management of forest landscapes

3. To increase economic opportunities from improved landscape management

1. To strengthen ecosystem-based management of forest landscapes6 Under this objective, the contractor will provide technical assistance to GoI and other stakeholders that increases application by these stakeholders of practices that contribute toward improved management for forest landscapes for ecological and economic sustainability.