3._SPC_Questions_and_Answers.pdf

Questions/Answers (received by Nov 7, 2018)

1. Part 5 - Past Performance section on page 51 of the RFP states that both the offeror and each major subcontractor must provide past performance information that meet three criteria: 1) a cost between $10,000,000 and $20,000,000; 2) with a period of performance falling within the last three years; 3) involving similar work as in the SOO. This criteria will be difficult for some subcontracts to meet. Will USAID consider broadening this criteria, or providing different criteria for the subcontractor from the offeror?

USAID – Yes, we will remove this requirement for subcontractors.

2. Performance Work Statement on page 49 indicates that “The PWS must also summarize the capacity assessments of the three institutions.” It will be unrealistic and unreasonable for the selected institutions to have all offerors to conduct separate capacity assessments with institutions that they propose to work with under the contract. Can USAID share capacity assessment reports on proposed institutions for offerors to use for their analysis of the capacity building requirements for these three institutions?

USAID - No, we are unable to share these.

3. Can USAID provide additional clarification as to what is meant by “local institutions” in the context of selecting partner institutions to receive capacity building support?

USAID -Yes. Local institutions are institutions operating in Vietnam at the time of release of this solicitation. They can be private, educational, or governmental institutions at any level (e.g.

provincial or national).

4. Currently, provincial capacity building is often provided by government-affiliated universities and institutes. Are these organizations eligible to be one or more of the three local institutions targeted for capacity building?

USAID - Yes. Please see answer to question 3.

5. Can USAID confirm that offerors are not expected to enter into exclusive partnering arrangements with their proposed local institutional partners because this might unduly impact the quality of proposals received?

USAID - Correct. USAID strongly discourages use of exclusive partnering arrangements.

6. Under the Constraints section of the Statement of Objectives USAID states that offerors:

“Must deepen or build relationships between at least one (1) American institution working on capacitating local officials and the targeted Vietnamese officials.” It would seem that strengthening an American institution’s ties to local officials would create direct competition to the offerings provided by the three local partner institutions. Can USAID clarify whether it expects offerors to strengthen the American institution’s ties with local officials directly or whether it expects the American institution to strengthen support to local officials via partnership or coordination with the three local institutions?

USAID - We want to promote institutional partnerships. We have reviewed and revised the SOO to reflect the updated language.

7. Has USAID identified priority provinces for the SPC Activity? Is there a government of Vietnam counterpart for this Activity?

USAID - No, USAID doesn’t have priority provinces and the GVN counterpart will be determined once the institutions have been identified.

8. In the interest of promoting transparency and ensuring all potential bidders have access to the same information, could USAID please provide a list of local partners on its current and recent EG2 programs?

USAID - USAID currently supports VCCI to conduct the Provincial Competitiveness Index. This is the only direct local partner under EG2.

9. There are a limited number of viable local institutions available in Vietnam to partner with on this bid. Some of these institutions may already be working with potential bidders on other programs and may feel pressure to sign exclusively with these bidders. Would USAID consider adding language to the solicitation prohibiting exclusive partnership arrangements with local institutions to ensure that the competition is fair and open and that the best local institutions can be involved in the program regardless of which contractor is selected?

USAID - USAID strong discourages exclusive partnership arrangements.

10. Given that there are only a few viable local partner institutions for this opportunity, we expect that they will receive requests to participate in the required institutional assessment from multiple potential bidders. These assessments will place a burden on the time and resources of these institutions and will request that they provide sensitive information that they may not be comfortable sharing. Based on our experience working with Vietnamese institutions, we anticipate that they will be reluctant to take part in such assessments—especially with multiple bidders. Would USAID consider revising the technical proposal requirements to remove the Institutional Analysis appendix requirement and reduce the burden on potential local partners?

USAID - USAID supports Vietnamese ownership and leadership in this process. We would hope that for any targeted institution proposed, the institution would provide significant input into its capacity gaps and also where it hopes to be at the end the Strengthening Provincial Capacity activity. As this is a FFP contract, the offerors are incumbent to provide the end state for each of the three institutions, which means that the capacity assessment is necessary to develop the

PWS.

11. Please provide guidance concerning the number of provinces the program is expected to reach and preferences concerning which provinces the program should prioritize.

USAID – There is no guidance. The purpose of this activity is to strengthen the institutions that provide capacity opportunities to Vietnamese officials working at a provincial/local level.

12. Is the Strengthening Provincial Capacity Program directly related to supporting GVN to do the following:

a. Improve GVN provincial capacity to implement Resolution 19; and/or,

b. Improve GVN civil servant capacity to monitor and report against PCI (Provincial Competitiveness Index)?

USAID - Not necessarily for both a and b.

13. Please clarify how the required 20-page Performance Work Statement (PWS) differs from a standard USAID proposal. In particular:

a. Is there a recommended format for the PWS or specific sections the Mission expects to see?

USAID - The PWS serves as Section C of the resultant contract. There is no prescribed format, but offerors should consider how Sections C in other USAID contracts are structured. Since this is a true PWS, it must comply with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 37.6.

b. Should the PWS include an institutional capacity section?

USAID - USAID will be looking at a synopsis of the institutional capacity analysis in the PWS.

c. Should the PWS include a management section?

USAID - It is not a required section and it is up to the offeror to propose.

14. Please confirm that there is no page limit for the Executive Summary as long as it fits within the 50 pages allocated for the entire technical proposal.

USAID - Confirmed.

15. Please confirm that there is no page limit for the Institutional Selection Analysis as long as it fits within the 50 pages allocated for the entire technical proposal.

USAID - Confirmed.

16. Please clarify how the required QASP differs from the M&E plan included in a typical USAID contract proposal.

a. Is there a recommended format or a template for the QASP or specific sections the Mission expects to see?

USAID - The QASP identifies how USAID will conduct quality assurance. An MEL plan captures progress of performance against agreed upon indicators. It monitors whether USAID, through the contractor, is accomplishing its development objective. A QASP establishes the plan for how the Government will ensure the contractor is performing up to the quality standards established in the contract. There is no standard template, but offerors are encouraged to review FAR Subpart 46.4 as well as other federal agencies’ implementing guidance.

17. Does the Mission have a preferred template for providing further budget details?

USAID - No. Since this is fixed price, budget details aren’t necessary.

18. USAID states in the cover letter that they are utilizing a “build-to-budget model” for this acquisition. Could USAID please explain what this model entails in terms of Offeror requirements?

USAID - Build-to-budget just means that USAID is disclosing the amount of funding available for this activity and asking offerors to develop their proposal with that operating constraint in mind.

This does not set a price floor, and USAID is still required to analyze price. This is meant to provide offerors with more information and change the paradigm from “how much will this program cost” to “how much development can USAID get with the funding”.

19. In Section B.4 on page 6, Section L.7, Part 2 on page 50, and Section L.8 on page 52, USAID outlines the requirement of a performance-based payment schedule. Section L.8(d) includes a list of required elements. Since this mechanism is infrequently used for USAID prime contracts, could USAID please provide a template for a performance-based payment schedule?

USAID - Offerors can look at a Fixed Amount Award, in which the payments are associated with milestones, provided any performance-based payment plan complies with provisions in the contract. Offerors are also encouraged to review FAR Subpart 32.10.

20. The Award Fee Board structure in Section B.5 on page 6, is not conducive to a capacity development or governance project. There are a number of determinants that go into whether a contractor would be able to achieve deliverables, key among them ownership, leadership, participation, and capacity of the Vietnamese counterpart institutions. As such, there is a high risk that the contractor will not be able to achieve deliverables based on issues completely outside their control. Will USAID reconsider the fee approach to focus on a more flexible deliverables schedule, which would be more responsive to the dynamics of a project as has been proposed in the SOO?

USAID – No. The award fee, determined in the fifth year, is an incentive to the offeror to think through their interventions right from the beginning of the program to implement the best activity.

21. Section J, Attachment 3 on page 38 includes a SF-LLL; however, this form is not listed as a required element of the cost proposal (Section L.7). Would USAID please confirm whether Offerors should submit a completed SF-LLL with their cost proposals?

USAID – We have revised the Section L.7 to include the requirement for Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.

22. Section L.5 on page 47 notes that a “cover letter typed on official organizational letterhead” must accompany the proposal. Yet Section L.6 (page 49) does not include a cover letter. Please confirm that the cover letter may be submitted separately from the technical and cost proposals and not count against the page limits of the technical proposal.

USAID - The letter referenced in Section L.5 must be submitted as part of the business proposal along with the SF-33. We have revised Section L.7.

23. Section L.6 on page 49 provides page limits for the Performance Work Statement and the QASP. Is there a page limit for the Executive Summary or for the Institutional Selection Analysis?

USAID - No, as long as the total technical proposal is not more than 50 pages. Please see Questions 14 and 15.

24. In Section L.6, 4 (Performance Work Statement), USAID refers to a summary of “the capacity assessments of the three institutions.” Should the Offeror conduct the Institutional Selection Analysis as part of preparing this proposal?

USAID - Yes. However, USAID only requires a synopsis to be included in the PWS.

25. Section L.6, 7 (Key Personnel) on page 50 requires CVs and references. May these be included as an attachment? If so, are other attachments allowed?

USAID - They can be included as an attachment and they count against the technical proposal page limit. Other attachments are allowed and they also count against the technical proposal page limit.

26. Section L.7, Part 1 on page 50 states that the SF-33 should include an original signature.

As proposals will be submitted electronically, could USAID please confirm that a scanned or electronic signature would be sufficient?

USAID - Confirmed.

27. Regarding Section L.7, Part 5 (3) on page 51, please confirm that quality awards and certifications may be included for contracts that are in PPIRS.

USAID - No. We have amended Section L.7 to address the inconsistency.

28. Section M.3 on pages 53-54 includes the elements of Past Performance that USAID will evaluate; however Past Performance is not listed as a section of the 50-page proposal, but is included in the cost proposal. May Offerors provide the Past Performance information in the technical proposal as an attachment that does not count against the page limit?

USAID - No. Past performance is not a technical factor and not part of the technical proposal.

29. Regarding Section L.8(d)(1) on page 52, could USAID please clarify who proposes the contractual language describing the performance-based payments? If the Offeror, could USAID please provide an example of suitable language?

USAID – The Offeror is to propose the contractual language. Please see question 19.

30. Does USAID intend to work in all provinces in Vietnam? Or is the Activity to focus on a particular region and/or province?

USAID - No, USAID does not intend to work in all provinces. The purpose of this activity is to strengthen the institutions that provide capacity opportunities to Vietnamese officials working at the provincial/local level.

31. Please confirm whether this activity falls under Development Objective #1 (Do1):

Governance Enhanced to Facilitate Broader-Based, Sustainable Growth, Development Objective #2 (Do2): Capacity Strengthened to Protect And Improve Health And Well-Being, or both of the Country Development Cooperation Strategy for Vietnam (2014-2019).

USAID - This activity does fall under Development Objective 1, but equally as important, the activity is a part of the Trade and Growth Project. USAID will be revising the CDCS in 2019.

Under the Trade and Growth Project, this activity will contribute to the sub-purpose “Provincial Capacity to Implement Economic Governance Reforms Increased,” which will support the overall purpose, “Replicable Approaches Developed to Facilitate a More Predictable Investment Climate for Domestic and International Investors.” The sub-purpose is supported by three IRs:

IR 3.1 - “Institutions to Capacitate Local Officials Are Sustainable;” IR 3.2 - “Provincial Officials’ Leadership Opportunities Expanded;” and IR 3.3 - “Sustainable, Reliable Evidence Exists to Monitor and Measure Provincial Economic Governance Capacity. Please see the attached Results Framework for the Trade and Growth Project.

32. Regarding Section 4 (Objectives), is the American institution “working on capacitating local officials” an additional institution, or is it included in the three existing institutions with which the Offeror must work?

USAID - It is an additional institution.

33. Please provide additional information as to the institutions the offeror is expected to support under Section 4 (Objectives). Would these include government, private, or educational institutions? Will USAID provide guidance as to which three institutions the project should support? Or is the contractor to propose the three institutions?

USAID - Please see answer to Question 3. USAID is relying on the offerors to provide the rationale for selecting the three institutions.

34. Regarding Section 4 (Objectives), does USAID envision that the “provincial capacity building extension services” would serve both local-level and provincial-level officials? Could capacity building extension services also target civil society organizations?

USAID - USAID envisions that this would serve local level and provincial level officials.

35. Are the three existing institutions to be targeted only at the central level or can they also be at the provincial level?

USAID - Please see answer to Question 3. We encourage selecting institutions that are already providing relevant capacity development opportunities for provincial officials regardless of where they are located.

36. Please clarify the relationship between the current USAID/Vietnam Partner Capacity Development Program (PCD) and the Strengthening Provincial Capacity Activity.

USAID - There will be no relationship between the two activities. PCD will be ending in July 2019 and is focused on capacitating local organizations (Civil Society Organizations).

37. What is a build-to-budget model?

USAID – Please see answers to Question 18.

38. A fixed price contract type requires that highly specific deliverables and/or results are defined at the outset of the contract in order to make clear between client and implementing partner the basis on which the implementing partner’s performance will be assessed. Outside of RFP Section F.5 where required program deliverables are discussed, this level of specificity doesn’t appear to be evident in the solicitation documents. Can USAID assist potential offerors by making more clear the specific deliverables, outcomes, and/or objectives that will be used to determine whether an implementing partner: (a) has successfully completed the fixed price contract, and (b) is deserving of receiving the award fee at a certain percentage?

USAID –The offeror provides the items mentioned in (a) above. USAID is giving the Offeror the ability to write the contract’s Statement of Work (SOW), identify success, and provide us with a measurable level of success (with deliverables and outcomes) as well as the knowledge of how much funding is available. This provides enough information for offerors to adequately estimate costs. In order for the contractor to have access to the award fee, the contractor must have achieved all the success identified in the SOW, which are proposed by the Offeror, by the end of Year 4. The process and criteria for the award fee is set out in the Award Fee Plan attached to the RFP. Please also refer to the notes for the pre-proposal conference for more information.

39. Section B.5. Payment of Award Fee: USAID notes that “the contractor will be eligible for consideration of an award fee only if, by the end of Year 4, the Contractor has met all requirements and deliverables in the contract.” Building on information included in Attachment 1-Statement of Objectives, can USAID elaborate on what the contract requirements are for SPC with as much specificity as possible?

USAID – As this is utilizing a SOO, Offerors provide this information.

40. Section B.5. Payment of Award Fee: Can USAID help potential offerors understand why award fee disbursement will be only be considered after the end of Year 4 as opposed to on an annual basis?

USAID – USAID wants to incentivize the partner to think through the sustainability right at the outset of the program and to implement the best activity. The award fee is to reward the partner for the results of sustainability they achieved. It is in addition to any profit gained under the fixed-price.