RFP_72044018R00004_Amendment_1_(file_1_of_2).pdf

Attachment 1 of RFP#72044018R00004 Amendment 1

Questions/Answers

1. A sector can be defined as broadly as agriculture or as narrowly as coffee, for example. Can USAID clarify the scale at which they are using the term “sector” in calling for seven sectors to be proposed as part of sector analysis and proposed selection?

We agree that there are different definitions of “sector” and that different definitions may be relevant for the proposed work, e.g., the automobile sector might be suitable in one area, but perhaps in agriculture it might make sense to be more specific (a few specific crops and their value chains). This is up to the offeror to propose the suitable level where the results can be carefully identified and still potentially have wide impacts.

2. Can USAID clarify the anticipated duration of each of LinkSME’s three phases?

We anticipate that the three phases would last approximately as follows: Phase 1 - 18 months; Phase II - 24 months; and Phase III - 18 months.

3. Has USAID already received project approval for LinkSME from the Vietnamese Government? If yes, have USAID and the Vietnamese Government determined the ministerial or institutional home for the project?

We anticipate that the Ministry of Planning and Investment will provide the institutional home for this new activity. No, we have not received the project approval for LinkSME but we have initiated discussions with the potential counterpart, the Ministry of Planning and Investment. We expect the contractor will need to work further to receive project approval upon the award.

4. What mechanisms does USAID envision to ensure synergies are captured between TFP and LinkSME?

We expect that TFP and LinkSME will collaborate with each other as needed, particularly when it comes learning and adapting and developing replicable procedures that are useful to the other activity. We also envision that the TFP and LinkSME will collaborate on trade-related procedures that affect each other. For example, if there is a customs regulation or procedure that hinders the ability of a global value chain to import a needed part for a domestic firm to produce on time for a global firm, then we would expect the two activities to collaborate on this matter to help resolve the matter, and to report such issues to USAID for it to be raised in higher level policy discussions.

5. Considering that FDI firms operating in global value chains place a premium on confidentiality in their approaches to supply chain development/management, how does USAID recommend balancing this reality with the emphasis in LinkSME on broadly promoting details of successful supply chain models to catalyze replication?

This will need to be a careful balancing act and we will need to coordinate closely with value chain firms to protect supply chain development and management as needed. This is up to offerors to propose.

6. Section C.3, page 10 – Would USAID provide additional clarity to the definition of a transaction as a contract between GVC and SME firms?

The GVCs typically sign contracts with local firms for parts or supplies used in their supply chains. An example might be a contract for the delivery of 1000 cardboard boxes every week for packing purposes.

7. Section F.6.1, page 18 – Would USAID confirm the Baseline and Gender Assessment should identify the baseline for all five sectors in this initial assessment at the start of implementation?

Yes, that is correct.

8. Section F.6.b Deliverables, part E of the table, page 20 – The Report Deliverable is named “Phase 3 Plan” whereas in the description the “Date Due/Delivery” identifies it as the Phase 2 Plan. Would USAID confirm that the Phase 3 Plan must be submitted within the first 40 months of award?

Yes, thank you for pointing out this mistake -- it should say the Phase 3 Plan must be submitted within the first 40 months of award. Section F.6 has been revised.

9. Section F.6, page 18 – On page 18, subsection G, USAID states the SME Advisory Group must commence 90 days after award, whereas in the Deliverables Table of Section F.6.b page 20, under G, USAID states the SME Advisory Group must commence 60 days after award.

Would USAID clarify the date by which the SME Advisory Group must commence?

Thank you for pointing out the discrepancy. We meant to say 90 days on page 20. Section F.6 has been revised.

10. Section F.6, page 18 – On page 18, subsection J, USAID states the Demobilization Plan must be submitted to the COR 90 days before the end of the project, whereas in the Deliverables Table of Section F.6.b page 20, under J, USAID states the Demobilization Plan must be submitted 6 months before the end of the contract. Would USAID clarify when the Demobilization Plan should be submitted?

Thank you for pointing out the discrepancy. We meant to say 6 months on page 18. Section F.6 has been revised.

11. Section L.5, page 69 – USAID states “proposal must be accompanied by a cover letter typed on official organizational letterhead and signed by a person who has signatory authority for the organization.” However, in Section L.6, page 70, a cover letter is not included as part of the list under the Required Order. Would USAID confirm that a cover letter should accompany the proposal as a non-counting page?

Yes. Section L.6 has been revised to include the cover letter in the required order of the technical proposal.

12. Section L.6, page 71 – Would USAID allow offerors to include Key Personnel references separately from the two-page CV limit?

Offerors may include references, but they count towards the page limitation.

13. Would USAID allow offerors to include a list of acronyms as a non-counting page?

A list of acronyms does count against the 50 page limitation.

14. Section L.7.b, part 2, page 72 - USAID states that within the budget narrative, the offeror should include a breakdown of cost elements including “those costs associated with any proposed subcontract or sub grant,” however grants are not mentioned elsewhere. Would USAID clarify as to whether Grants under Contracts are allowed under LinkSME?

Grants under Contract are not authorized under this award.

15. Will USAID provide an LCP?

The basic salary rates for USAID/Vietnam local staff working 40 hours a week ranges from $4,139 to $54,358.

16. Will USAID provide a set exchange rate so that all bidders provide similar rates?

Yes, the rate is $1 = 22,700 VND. This is for budgeting purposes only and will not be part of the contract.

17. Attachment 3, Award Fee Plan - In attachment 3 to the RFP, USAID explains the award fee process, including a brief description of award fee criteria and weights. Can USAID elaborate on the criteria that the Award Fee Board will use to reach an adjectival rating for “private sector engagement” and “continuous learning?” More specifically, for private sector engagement, how will the AFB determine the extent and quality of private sector engagement? For continuous learning, how will the AFB determine the degree to which the contractor utilizes the Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan (MELP) to assess the effectiveness of the interventions, evaluate whether those interventions are succeeding, apply lessons learned, and adapt work appropriately?

Use of the award fee type contract is appropriate when it is not suitable to establish objective performance targets and incentives, i.e. defining success. Thus, the evaluation is more of a subjective evaluation, similar to a CPAR, where USAID evaluates the contractor against the specific criterion. USAID may work with the contractor to focus the criteria in the early stages of the award fee period.

18. Will USAID please clarify if an acronym page will be counted toward the 50-page limit for the technical proposal?

Please see the answer to Question 13.

19. Would USAID please clarify if it is within the scope of LinkSME to support linkages between Vietnamese SME suppliers and Vietnamese exporters, in addition to foreign direct investment firms?

It would be within the scope of this activity, but the offeror would need to provide a strong justification. The World Bank has recently completed thorough studies of this issue and has recommended that the local SMEs should be anchored to some of the leading FDI firms.

20. Page 17, Section F.6.d, states: “This plan must identify how, to be determined in consultation with the COR and SME Advisory Group.” Would USAID please elaborate on what the Phase 2 Plan must identify?

The section has been updated in the RFP.

21. Page 17, Section F.6.e, states “as with Phase 1 and Phase 2 workplans, the COR will provide concurrence, and the CO will approve the document.” Would USAID kindly confirm if the Contractor is required to submit a Phase 1 Work Plan? If yes, would USAID please provide details on the Phase 1 deliverable requirements?

Please review Section L.6 reqarding the requirement of a Phase 1 plan.

22. Page 22, Section F.7.h, states “The COP must have the ability to speak for and bind the contractor.” Since contractors have their own policies in place that determine to what extent a COP may bind the contractor depending on the risk of the transaction and experience of the COP, we respectfully request that this language be removed.

No.

23. Page 31, Section H.7(e) requires that no salary increase of more than 3 percent be applied in proposals. We respectfully request that this restriction for salary increases be removed from the RFP as it appears to be inconsistent with AIDAR 752.7007 Personnel Compensation, incorporated in the contract under Section H.6, which stipulates that personnel compensation be in accordance with the contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, with reimbursement subject only to the USAID Contractor Salary Threshold.

The requirement is not inconsistent and will not be removed.

24. Page 31, Section H.7.e, states “unless the consultant is an employee of the contractor, they are considered subcontractors subject to the applicable clauses and requirements.” We respectfully ask that USAID to consider the following revision: “Unless the consultant is engaged as labor and hence considered contractor personnel or an employee of the organization, they are considered a subcontractor subject to the applicable clauses and requirements.” It is our understanding that a consultant by definition cannot be an employee. FAR 31.205-33 (a) defines “professional and consultant services,” […] as “those services rendered by persons who are members of a particular profession or possess a special skill and who are not officers or employees of the contractor.” As consultants provide personal services, they are considered contractor personnel and their billable costs are governed by the contract clauses and regulations related to personnel. When an individual is engaged as a legally constituted organization, including sole proprietorship, they are considered a subcontractor and subject to the appropriate contractual requirements.

No. Labor, including consultants, is classified as either an employee or a subcontractor.

25. Page 72, Section L.7.b.1.ii, states “the amount of base fee proposed should include the rationale for the proposed amount.” However, Section L.7.b.1.iii states, “the base fee is expected to be approximately 1% of the total estimated cost.” Would USAID please confirm that the amount proposed is at the offeror’s discretion?

These two parts in Section L.7 have been revised to remove the amount of base fee as there is no base fee under this award.

26. Page 74, Section L.7.d (1), states “offerors (including all partners of a joint venture) must use the ‘Past Performance Information Sheet’ (included as Attachment 6) to list in an annex to the cost proposal.” However, Page 75, Section L.7.d (2), states “Provide for each of the contracts the information that is required per Attachment 6 “Past Performance Information Sheet.” Can USAID please confirm that the contractor should submit a list of projects for Section L.7.d (1) and a completed Attachment 6 for each project for Section L.7.d (2)?

Section L.7 d (1) is about what information that offerors must/must not provide USAID in response to this solicitation, while Section L.7 d (2) is the recommendation for offerors to notify each contact about the information they provided to USAID.

27. Page 77, Section M.3.d (bullet 6), states “for prime Offerors who are not small business concerns, their utilization of Small Business concerns as subcontractors, including efforts in achieving small business participation goals.” If small business utilization will be evaluated as part of the proposal submission, will USAID please clarify what information on small business utilization is required, the format that should be used, and where it should be included in the cost proposal?

Like other elements listed in Section M.3 d), the information about the offeror’s utilization of Small Business concerns is attributed to the past performance evaluation on a “Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory/Neutral” Offerors must follow Section L when submitting the information on past performance.

28. What are the program funding sources for LinkSME?

The activity will be funded by a combination of economic growth and governance funding streams.

29. Page 31—Section H.7(e) states that “One annual salary increase not more than 3% percent may be granted after the employee’s completion of each twelve month period of satisfactory services under the contract.” Will USAID confirm if this applies to salaries for US Nationals and/or local hires? A 3% increase may not keep pace with percentage increases in the Consumer Price Index, which would affect our ability to hire and retain staff.

The requirement is to get prior, written CO approval for increases above 3%. It is not a blanket preclusion. The contractor may have situations warranting a higher than 3% increase and will just need to justify them to the CO.

30. Page 6—Section B.6 states that “Reimbursement for indirect costs must be at the lower of the negotiated final (or predetermined) rates or the following ceiling rates [for years 2018 through 2023]. Then page 72—Section L.7(b)(2) states that “Offerors may propose a single ceiling rate covering the term of award or a ceiling rate in each applicable contract year.” Will USAID please confirm that offerors may propose either annual ceiling indirect rates or a single ceiling rate covering the term of the award?

Yes.

31. Page 74—Section L.7.d states that “For contracts not in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), offerors (including all partners of a joint venture) must use the “Past Performance Information Sheet” (included as Attachment 6) to list in an annex to the cost proposal, past performance information for itself and each major subcontractor (one whose proposed cost exceeds 10% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost), with a period of performance falling within the last three years, and involving similar work as in Section C. All applicable fields in Attachment 6 must be completed. Offerors must not submit past performance information for contracts in PPIRS.” May offerors include past performance references for cooperative agreements and grants?

Offerors may submit information on cooperative agreements in Attachment 6.

32. Page 72—Section L.7 (b)(1) states “Under Other Direct Costs, international travel should be identified separately and broken down by destination, number of trips, and number of travelers.”

However, the budget template lists international travel under the Travel category. Can USAID please confirm that the required details for international travel should be budgeted under Travel rather than Other Direct Costs?

Confirmed. Section L.7 has been revised.

33. Page 71—Section L.7 (b)(1)(i) The RFP states that “The Offeror must provide a complete budget, including the budgets for each subcontractor, by cost element utilizing the provided budget template in Attachment 7. All formulas must be displayed and the budget must not be locked.” The Attachment 7 workbook does not include formulas. Will USAID confirm whether its preference is for offerors to modify the workbook to add formulas or if USAID prefers that offerors use their standard budget format and link to Attachment 7?

We reconfirm the request indicated in the Section L.7 (b)(1)(i). Offerors must use USAID’s workbook.

34. On page 11 of the RFP, USAID states: “USAID/Vietnam realizes that to achieve systemic changes within SME sectors, facilitating individual firm level transactions are necessary, but not sufficient, achievements. Rather, to achieve systemic changes, sectoral level changes need to occur. During Phase 2, the contractor must focus on replication and scaling of the pilot transactions both within the initial two sectors, and to an additional three sectors (5 sectors total) and a continued refinement of the learning and identification of lessons learned, which will inform Phase 3.” Then on page 71, the RFP references seven sectors. Will USAID confirm that the Offeror must include five sector analyses/justifications in the technical proposal?

The offeror must identify seven (7) promising sectors in the initial technical proposal. At Phase 2, the contractor will narrow the work down to five (5) of the sectors after working on the ground on two (2) pilot sectors during Phase 1.

35. Page 11, “USAID/Vietnam is committed to obtaining stakeholder input to our activities, coordinating all implementing partners’ efforts for greater efficiency and effectiveness, and measuring high-level indicators in an effort to apply the following Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning objectives”: Can USAID please explain or provide examples of what is meant by high-level indicators?

The high-level indicators are meant to capture progress at the outcome level, rather than the output level, and can be used to help the Mission assess if it is meeting its development objectives.

36. Page 12, Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning: Can definitions for the four required indicators be provided? Can USAID confirm that these indicators need only be included in the MEL Plan after the award?

1. Number of linkages within targeted industries and sectors

2. Number of replicated linkages outside target firms

3. Value, volume, and efficiency of production among assisted firms

4. Key characteristics of SME growth-ready firms identified

USAID does not have clear definitions at this time as these will be non-standard indicators. We will work together with the contractor to help define these indicators and set targets for these four after the award has been made.

37. Page 12, Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning: “All indicators must be disaggregated by participant gender and age, as well as firm size, sector, and location, to understand the extent to which various populations benefit(ed) from the project.”: Is it correct to assume that only individual-level indicators must be disaggregated by participant gender and age and that firm-level indicators will be disaggregated by firm size, sector, and location.

This is correct to a point. We are also interested in monitoring firm management / ownership by gender, so to the contractor must collect those disaggregated data too.

38. How is USAID defining an “SME” for the purposes of the solicitation, and does the definition differ by sector?

USAID is going by the definition in the new Law on SME Support 2017, which defines SMEs as less than 200 employees and investment capital less than $4 million or revenues under $13 million. We do not think this definition varies across sectors.

39. On page 10 of the RFP, “A transaction is defined as a contract between the GVC firms and SME firms.” When USAID refers to a “GVC firm,” is it referring specifically to a foreign invested enterprise (FIE) or does a linkage with a domestic or regional intermediary firm within the overall value chain also qualify as a “GVC firm”?

We would be open to considering domestic or regional firms if it could be shown that they are part of a larger GVC firm’s supply chain.

40. Page 11 of the RFP states that, “During Phase 3, the contractor must apply lessons learned from the previous two phases, to implement a plan to eliminate major barriers affecting SMEs in Vietnam.” Will USAID please confirm that the intent of Phase 3 is to institutionalize key reforms at the national level while discontinuing activities targeting new and enhancing existing linkages between SME and GVC firms?

This is NOT our intent. It is our goal to focus more on eliminating barriers in Phase 3, including (if applicable) any important institutional (e.g., legal, regulatory or policy) barriers that may be identified in Phases 1 and 2. Other barriers that may still remain a problem in the Phase 3 could also include such firm-level issues as limited human capital, overcoming technical constraints to produce high volumes at consistently high quality and pricing, access to finance, etc. The goal is to learn during the first two phases and continue making progress. We anticipate that during third phase that the emphasis will change a bit to address the institutional issues, in conjunction with ongoing technical aspects.

41. Page 12 of the RFP states that, “All indicators must be disaggregated by participant gender and age, as well as firm size, sector, and location, to understand the extent to which various populations benefit(ed) from the project.” Will USAID please confirm that the definition for youth is 16 – 30 years old?

This is correct, we want to be consistent with Vietnam’s Youth Development Strategy.

42. Could USAID please confirm the specific government counterpart for LinkSME?

Please see the answer to Question 3.

43. Page 71 of the RFP under Section L.6, Technical Implementation Plan for Phase 1 requires that, “Offerors must detail all planned activities that will be done in Phase 1, including specific activities for the two chosen sectors” and on page 76 under Section M.2, Technical Implementation Plan for Phase 1, that the offeror will be evaluated on “The quality of the plan and extent to which it will successfully complete Phase 1 of the contract.” Will USAID please confirm that the offeror should not include technical implementation plans for Phase 2 and Phase 3 in addition to Phase 1?

Correct.

44. Page 76 of the RFP states that one of the evaluation criteria will be “the quality of the sector analysis and proposed sector selection, including the selection and justification of the initial two sectors.” Page 10 of the RFP under Section C.4 states that, “The sector plans must engage in research to inform how the contractor will engage with sectors for future phases. This may include stakeholder analyses, sectoral reviews, and focus groups to identify key constraints, challenges and opportunities.” Can USAID kindly clarify the difference between the “sector analysis” required for the proposal versus the sector analysis to be completed at the end of Phase 1?

We expect the sector analysis to be relatively similar in spirit, but that there would be substantial growth and learning as we go progress from the initial bidding process to the end of Phase 1. We expect that over time the offeror will have developed deeper analytic insights and recommendations to address the linkage challenges and will be in a stronger place to recommend how to expand most effectively from two pilot sectors in Phase 1 to five sectors in Phase 2.

45. Will USAID please provide a current local compensation plan?

Please see the answer to Question 15.

46. In the answers to questions for the Trade Facilitation Program (TFP) USAID stated that the maximum local salary was $44,476. However, the local compensation plan effective July 12, 2015 shows that the maximum salary for a grade 12, step 12 was $49,948. Will USAID please confirm that the maximum local salary is less in 2018 than it was in 2015?

Please see the answer to Question 15. The answer to questions on current local compensation plan for the solicitation of USAID Trade Facilitation Program has been revised.

47. Will USAID please include a proposed exchange rate for consistency of the offerors’ proposed budgets?

Please see the answer to Question 16.

48. Page 31 of the RFP states that, “one annual increase salary increase not more than 3% percent may be granted after the employee’s completion of each twelve month period of satisfactory services under the contract.” Page 30 of the RFP states that, “Direct compensation of the Contractor’s personnel will be in accordance with the contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices.” Please confirm that the salary increase can revert to the contractor’s personnel policies.

No. Please see the answer to Question 23.

49. Will USAID please confirm that an acronym list is not counted against the page limit?

Please see the answer to Question 13.

50. Page 74 of the RFP, under section (d) Part 4 – Past Performance states, “(1) For contracts not in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), offerors (including all partners of a joint venture) must use the “Past Performance Information Sheet” (included as Attachment

6) to list in an annex to the cost proposal, past performance information for itself and each major subcontractor (one whose proposed cost exceeds 10% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost), with a period of performance falling within the last three years, and involving similar work as in Section C.” As many offerors have recent and relevant past performance implementing cooperative agreements or other types of projects, 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)…”

Offerors may submit information on cooperative agreements in Attachment 6.

51. Would USAID consider past performance references with a period of performance falling within the last five years, instead of the last three years?

No.

52. Can USAID please confirm that the three references for each Key Personnel should be included on a separate page outside of the two page CV limit?

The references count towards the 2 page limit.

53. On page 10, the RFP states “The contractor, using the methodology incorporated from the proposal dated (TBD), must achieve a quantified private sector engagement of ($TBD). Are bidders expected to propose a value of private sector engagement in the proposal?

Yes, as indicated in Section L.6.

How will USAID determine the “$TBD?”

The “$TBD” is the value proposition offered in proposals and it will be incorporated in the award.

54. On page 17, F.6.d. Phase 2 Plan, the RFP states: “This Plan must identify how, to be determined in consultation with the COR and SME Advisory Group.” Can USAID clarify what the plan must identify?

Please see the answer to Question 20.

55. On page 17, F.6.d. Phase 2 Plan, the RFP states that the Phase 2 Plan should be submitted within 18 months of award. Can USAID confirm how long USAID will take to review and approve this plan following its submission? Can USAID confirm by when Phase 2 should be scheduled to start following the approval of the Phase 2 Plan?

The COR will review the Phase 2 Plan and provide comments within two weeks of receipt. We expect that the Phase 2 will begin no later than 19 months from the beginning of the project.

56. On page 18, F.6.g. SME Advisory Group the RFP states: “Ninety (90) days after award, the contractor must commence the SME Advisory Group.” On page 19, F.6.b. Deliverables table, row G., the RFP indicates that SME Advisory Group shall commence within 60 days from the effective day of the contract. Can USAID confirm that SME Advisory Group must commence ninety (90) days after award?

Please see the answer to Question 9.

57. On page 18, F.6.g. Demobilization Plan the RFP states: “The contractor must submit a demobilization plan to the COR for approval 90 days before the end of the contract.” On page 20, F.6.b. Deliverables table, row J., the RFP indicates that the Demobilization Plan must be submitted within 6 months prior to the end of the contract. Can USAID confirm if the Demobilization Plan is due 90 days before the end of the contract or 6 months?

Please see Question 10.

58. On page 20, F.6.b. Deliverables Table. Row E. The RFP states that the Report/Deliverable is the Phase 3 Plan, but in the Date Due/Delivery column states that “Phase 2 Plan must be submitted within the first forty (40) months of award.” Can USAID confirm that Phase 3 Plan must be submitted within the first forty (40) months of award?

Please see the answer to Question 8.

59. On page 69, section L.5 the RFP states: “The proposal must be accompanied by a cover letter typed on official organizational letterhead and signed by a person who has signatory authority for the organization.” However, on page 70, section L.6, the RFP does not mention the cover letter.

Can USAID confirm that a cover letter should be included and placed between the cover page and the executive summary, and that the cover letter does not count towards the page limit?

Section L.6 has been revised to include the cover letter in the required order of the technical proposal.

60. On page 71, section L.6. the RFP states: “Sector Analysis and Proposed Sector: Offerors must identify seven promising sectors to work in and promote systemic, sustainable linkages with GVCs.” However on page 11 section C4 the RFP states: “During Phase 2, the contractor must focus on replication and scaling of the pilot transactions both within the initial two sectors, and to an additional three sectors (5 sectors total) and a continued refinement of the learning and identification of lessons learned, which will form Phase 3.” Can USAID confirm how many sectors (5 or 7) should be presented in the Sector Analysis?

Seven. Please see the answer to Question 34.

61. On page 74, (d) Part 4 – Past Performance, the RFP states: “For contracts not in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), offerors (including all partners of a joint venture) must use the “Past Performance Information Sheet” (included as Attachment 6). Can USAID confirm that offerors should also provide a list of relevant contracts in the PPIRS indicating their title and award number, together with the short explanation of extraordinary problems that may have impacted referenced contracts and corrective action taken, as well as quality awards or certifications?

No. If the award is in PPIRS, then offerors need not provide the information.

62. On page 76, M.2. Private Sector Engagement, the RFP states that proposals will be evaluated by “The ambitiousness and realism of the quantified private sector engagement, using the proposed methodology.” Can USAID clarify on what basis the ambitiousness and realism of the quantified private sector engagement will be measured? Does USAID have a baseline or a benchmark that USAID will use to assess ambitiousness and realism?

No, USAID does not have a baseline or benchmark since each offeror’s proposal is going to be unique given the entirety of the technical proposal.

63. Will USAID provide a current local compensation plan?

Please see Question 15.

64. Will USAID provide an exchange rate for budgeting purposes?

Please see the answer to Question 16.

65. Can USAID confirm if the table below should include all costs, (labor, other direct costs, indirect costs, and fee) split out into the Phases and Management cost categories, or does the table only reflect LOE costs?

Cost Center Estimated cost Assumptions Explanation of the linkage between the technical components and cost elements

Management Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

The above table, as indicated in the Section L.7 of the solicitation, should reflect total estimated costs split into 3 phases, but not including fee. Please refer to the answer for Question 66 and the revised Section L.7.

66. Can USAID confirm if the cost category “Management” should reflect Key Personnel only, or does this include some Key Personnel costs (like COP’s time in management of the project, etc.) plus non-technical costs like Home Office Support labor costs and Field Office administrative labor costs?

USAID recognizes that there are fixed costs associated with every award, those that can’t be directly associated with programming. Ultimately, how this is defined is up to the offeror as each offeror’s business model is slightly different. Given the question, it is meant as the latter explanation.

67. The RFP uses the term “sector” without defining the level of aggregation that is envisioned.

For example, the NAICS defines “sector” very broadly at the 2-digit level (such as “Manufacturing”), and narrows it further at the 3- digit “subsector” (such as “Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing”), the 4-digit “industry group” (such as “Household Appliance Manufacturing”), and the 5-digit “industry” level (such as “Major Household Appliance Manufacturing”). Can USAID confirm that the RFP’s sector selection for LinkSME is not envisioned at the very broad 2-digit level? Can USAID provide any further guidance on how it defines “sector” for the purposes of this RFP?

Please see Question 1.

68. B.5 and B.6, Pages 6-7: A company’s indirect rates are widely 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 Major subcontractor’s indirect rate information not be included in the final Prime Contract. Please acknowledge your acceptance of this clarification and request for protection of proprietary company financial data.

Agreed. Section B has been revised to remove the listing of major subcontractor indirect rate information. However, this information is still required to be submitted as part of the cost proposal from the prime offeror.

69. H.11, Page 34: Based on our experience implementing other USAID projects in Vietnam, we have found it extremely beneficial to contract with Australian subject matter experts due to their regional experience and significant working experience in Vietnam. Further, as LinkSME is designed to foster engagement by Vietnamese in the GVC we anticipate the possibility of needing to subcontract with regional firms, including from other advanced countries, would USAID consider changing the Geographic Code from 937 to 935.

At this time, no.

70. Attachment 3: Based on the Award Fee Evaluation Plan provided as Attachment 3 to the RFP, it is unclear how a grade would be determined. Can USAID please provide performance standards for the award fee mechanism?

Please refer to Question 17.