sol_72048218R00005_Amend_No._01.pdf

Request for Proposals (RFP) No. 72048218R00005 – Amendment No. 01 Community Strengthening Project (CSP)

PART I – SOLICITATION REVISION

1- Section C.5.1(f), Objective 1 Tasks (page 13 of the RFP), DELETE “Consultations and analyses may be conducted directly by the Contractor’s staff, or through other means including STTA, sub-contract, or grant(s) under contract, as mutually agreed by USAID and the Contractor.”

2- Section F.7 Key Personnel, Minimum qualifications for the DCOP, second bullet, DELETE and REPLACE with the following:

“・ A B.A./B.S. in a relevant field such as international relations, political science, journalism, public administration, law, peace/conflict studies, accounting or business administration.”

3- Section F.8, DELETE “person-months” and REPLACE with “person-days.”

4- DELETE section H.37 “SECTION 508 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1978

AND FAC 97-27 “ELECTRONIC IT ACCOUNTABILITY”

5- Section L.9, Instructions for preparation of technical proposal, DELETE third paragraph, “the following annexes do not count against the page limit” in its entirety and REPLACE with the following:

“The Technical Proposal Annexes are limited to the following. All annexes do not count against the technical proposal page limit:

Annex 1: Key personnel See Key Personnel section below for required documents. 10 pages per person limit inclusive of all required documents.

Annex 2: Staffing plan See Staffing Plan section below for required documents. No more than 5 pages.

Annex 3: Past Performance See Past Performance section below for required documents. No page limit.

Annex 4: Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan See instructions in section L.10. No page limit.”

6- Section L.9.4. Key Personnel and L.9.5. Staffing Plan, DELETE in its entirety and REPLACE with the following:

“4. Key Personnel

The offeror will provide statements of qualifications that describe how each of the key personnel meet the minimum requirements of the position. Each statement of qualifications will also describe the unique attributes of each of the key personnel for the function they will perform under the contract. The statements of qualifications must not to exceed 3 pages each.

Offerors will also include a resume, not to exceed 5 pages, for each key personnel.

Offeror will provide five professional references. References will include email, phone, title, relationship to key person, and location of the reference (to facilitate phone call times).

Offerors will provide a signed letter of commitment from each candidate indicating his/her: (a) availability to serve in the stated position; and (b) intention to serve for a stated term of the service.

5. Staffing Plan

The Offeror must provide a staffing plan and proposed organizational chart. The staffing plan will demonstrate how staffing choices will implement the offeror’s proposed activity design cycle. The staffing plan will contain a matrix that summarizes the skills and capabilities of the proposed professional staff.”

7- Section L.11, Part 2 (page 113) DELETE “CPFF completion” and REPLACE with

“CPFF term.”

8- Section L.11 (page 115), last column of the LOE table, DELETE “months” and REPLACE with “days.”

9- All other terms and conditions of the solicitation remain unchanged.

PART II- RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS

The responses to questions received by the deadline provided in the original solicitation are provided below. Similar questions are combined to avoid duplication.

Q1: On page 17 of the RFP, under section C.6.2.1 Grants Under Contract, USAID states that it anticipates 85 grants each program year of up to $400,000. However, on page 54, under section H.9 GRANTS UNDER CONTRACTS (GUC), item (a) the RFP states that US organizations may not receive any individual grant in excess of $100,000. Can USAID/Burma clarify the ceiling amount of GUCs that may be provided to U.S. and local organizations?

R: There is no limitation on Grants to Non-US organizations. Grants to US Organizations must not exceed $100,000.

Q2: Page 110, section L.9.4: Please confirm that the statements of qualifications (not to exceed 3 pages per key personnel); resumes (not to exceed 5 pages per key personnel); professional references; and letters of commitment should be submitted as an annex.

R: Confirmed

Q3: Page 110, L.9.5, Staffing Plan. It is stated that “The staffing plan will contain a matrix that summarizes the skills and capabilities of the proposed professional staff.” Please confirm if the Matrix can be included as part of the Organizational Chart Annex.

R: Matrix can be included as part of the Organizational Chart Annex.

Q4: Page 113, L.11, states that the cost proposal is strictly limited to parts 1-10. Please confirm that per page 112, offerors may submit the Branding Implementation Plan (BIP) and Marking Plan (MP) as an annex to the cost proposal.

R: Branding Implementation Plan (BIP) and Marking Plan will be submitted as an annex to the technical proposal.

Q5: Please confirm that completed biographical data sheets should be submitted as an annex to the cost proposal.

R: Completed biographical data sheets should be submitted in an annex to the cost proposal.

Q6: Page, 114, Section L.11.e. Can USAID please confirm if offerors should present two summary budgets in the cost proposal, one in accordance with the standard cost elements included on page 114 and a second one in accordance with the table on page 6?

R: Offerors should present one budget in accordance with the standard cost elements included on page 114.

Q7: Page 115, Section L.11.e.ii references the approximate LOE targets for the Base Period and Individual Option Years. Considering the reduced LOE in Option Year 2/Year 5, would USAID please confirm that offerors should budget for closedown in Option Year 2/Year 5 rather than Year 3 (the final year of the base period)?

R: Offeror should budget for closedown in Year 3 (the final year of the base period). LOE is illustrative.

Q8: Page 128, Attachment 3. If CPARs have been finalized, please confirm that Offerors do not need to fill out the second half of the form (including program description).

R: Offerors do not need to fill out the second half of the form including program description if CPARs have been finalized.

Q9: We would like to take the chance to better understand the reasoning behind the assigning of geographic code 937. We would also like to take the chance respectfully suggest that USAID consider revising the geographic code to 935 (or granting a waiver for Grants under Contracts recipients), which would promote greater access to these critical development resources from partners who could bring added value to the proposals received by USAID.

R: The geographic code for the project is 937. Geographic code 937 is the default Geographic Code.

Q10: The RFP references the USAID/Burma Integrated Country Strategy (ICS). Would USAID please provide bidders with a copy of the ICS?

R: The ICS is an internal USG document. We have referenced the relevant goals to illustrate that the project fits into a broader context.

Q11: The RFP references a recent applied political economy analysis completed in October 2016. Would USAID please provide bidders with a copy of that analysis?

R. We are researching whether we can share the document. In the even that we can, we will publish it separately.

Q12: In Section M.3.1 9 (pages 121-122), USAID indicates that offerors will be scored based on "whether the offeror is currently using the system or not; where the system is currently in use;

...how many proposed project staff have experience using the system." We are concerned that attaching scoring to the age and history of a database system does not allow room for newer, modern, more robust, and flexible platforms, which may age better over the course of a multiyear program. Can USAID clarify if proposing a newer system will have a negative influence on scoring criteria? Furthermore, would USAID consider revising M.3.1 to prioritize innovation to better meet the requirements of Section C.7.1 (page 18)?"

R: The EID system will be rated balancing the factors listed in Evaluation Criteria 3. The age of the system is not mentioned in the criteria provided.

Q13: Per Section B.3 (page 5) and F.8 (page 44), the option period(s) may be exercised at any time during implementation of the Base Contract with the associated level of effort (LOE) for the option period(s) added to the base period. However, in other areas of the RFP, the option period(s) are treated more like separate years (Year 4 and 5). Could USAID confirm the structure of the option period(s)?

R: USAID views the options as years.

Q14: Per Section F.8 (page 44), LOE expended implementing the Project Activity Fund (PAF) “is not counted as part of the level of effort.” We understand that LOE associated with STTA and subcontracts specifically for the PAF do not count toward the LOE estimates provided, but could USAID confirm that any LTTA LOE related to the direct implementation of the PAF does count as LOE and should not be included within the PAF?

R: Long term technical assistance (LTTA) LOE related to or supporting the direct implementation of the PAF does count as LOE and should not be included within the PAF.

Q15: Section L.11, Part 2 (page 113) states, “Offeror must submit a CPFF completion detailed budget…” Since all other contract type references are CPFF term, could USAID please confirm that the detailed budget should be CPFF term rather than completion?

R: This was a typo. It should read “Offeror must submit a CPFF term detailed budget….”

Q16: Items (4), (7), and (8) of Section L.11, Part 2.e(ii) on pages 116-117 indicate that the PAF section provides plug figures for PAF STTA, training, and subcontracts; however, the PAF section only provides guidance on the size of the PAF related to total contract value and the percentage of grants under contract (GUCs) within the PAF. To ensure that offerors structure the PAF in a similar manner, could USAID please provide plug figures or additional guidance on PAF STTA, training, and subcontracts?

R: Item (11) Program Activity Fund (PAF), on page 117, provides guidance on how to estimate the PAF.

Q17: Per Section L.11 (page 115), the last column of the LOE table states in the header that the LOE totals should be presented in months and in the body that LOE should be provided in days.

Could USAID confirm that LOE should be presented in days to be consistent with the LOE estimates provided?

R: LOE should be presented in days.

Q18: When does USAID anticipate this project to start? Having this information would facilitate our recruitment efforts.

R: This project will start on October 1, 2018 with award to be completed by the end of the fiscal year.

Q19: Would USAID share their vision of the relationship of Objective 1 activities with the newly released Myanmar Analytical Activity?

R: The Objective 1 analytical work is specific to this project and will be used to identify and plan activities under Objectives 2-4. The Myanmar Analytical Activity is a separate activity intended to support the broader USAID/Burma portfolio.

Q20: On page 5, Section B.4, USAID notes that we are held to the line items in the table on page

6. As this is a CPFF contract, we are held to a ceiling exclusive of fixed fee. Would USAID consider merging the direct and indirect line items as indirect rates cannot be easily capped because provisional rates change annually?

R: USAID prefers to keep the direct and indirect costs separated.

Q21: On page 17, Section C.6.2.1, USAID notes that “Government entities will be limited to in-kind grants.” On page 54, Section H.9, USAID notes that “GUCS to partner Government entities have not been authorized.” Can USAID clarify?

R: Grants under contract to Government entities will be limited to in-kind grants only. Cash grants to Government entities are not authorized.

Q22: In Section F.8, page 44, USAID notes the “person-days level of effort” for the base three-year period and the first option year, but “person-months” for the second option year. Can USAID please clarify that it intended to write person-days, not person-months?

R: The base, Option 1 and Option 2 LOE will be “Person-days.”

Q23: In Section H.4, page 50, USAID states that the procurement of nonexpendable property purchased under this contract will be approved during implementation. Since 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 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 nonexpendable property 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 H.4 of the resulting contract.

R: This requirement cannot be removed as it follows rules and regulations. However, USAID will make the effort to expedite the approval process to avoid delay in implementation.

Q24: Section H.4, page 50, of the RFP states, “Agency program-funded IT investments with a threshold of $100,000 or more over the full IT project life cycle up to five years must receive Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) analysis support from the USAID Chief Information Officer (CIO) pursuant to ADS 548.” It is the offeror’s understanding that ADS 548 ceased to be valid as of September 30, 2016 and is being archived. Could USAID please consider removing this section?

R: USAID/Burma has received conflicting information regarding this requirement. We will continue to research it. It is likely that it will need to be resolved after award.

Q25: Referring to Section H.37, page 73, can USAID please confirm if the electronic intervention database and the analytical database will be subject to Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act? If not, would USAID please consider deleting this clause from the contract as no other information and communications technology or electronic and information technology products are required deliverables under the contract?

R: Section H.37 SECTION 508 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1978 AND FAC 97-27 ELECTRONIC IT ACCOUNTABILITY has been deleted.

Q26: On page 108, Section L.7, USAID states “Offerors will use Burma when associated with USAID (USAID/Burma) and Myanmar in all other instances.” The proposed title of the program is referred to as both the “USAID Community Strengthening Project in Myanmar (CSP)” on page 1 of the solicitation and as the “USAID/Burma Community Strengthening Project” on page 6 of the solicitation. Can USAID please clarify?

R: The name of this activity should be “USAID Community Strengthening Project” in accordance with Section D.3. Branding Strategy.

Q27: On page 109, Section L.9, the RFP specifies a limit for the number of pages in the annex for each key personnel. As per the details on page 110, we understand that the 10-page limit includes the statement of qualifications (SOQ) for each key personnel. However, on page 110, the RFP also refers to a “succinct statement of qualifications.” Is this the same as the SOQ, which is not to exceed three pages, or does it refer to what might go in the body of the proposal under Section 4. Key Personnel?

R: “Succinct statement of qualifications” is the same as “statement of qualification”. See revision on Page 109 and 110.

Q28: On page 109, Section L.9, the RFP mentions a five-page limit when referring to the organizational chart. Could USAID please clarify the following questions? a. Does the five-page limit refer to the organizational chart and/or the staffing plan (which is simply a matrix)?

R: The five page limit refers to all documents requested under “5. Staffing Plan”.

Q29: Do both the organizational chart and staffing plan go in a five-page annex called “Staffing Plan”? Or does USAID anticipate a Section 5. Staffing Plan in the body of the proposal?

R: USAID expects the documents will be in the Annex.

Q30: Can USAID please clarify that the staffing plan should be submitted as a separate annex and should be no more than five pages? Does the organizational chart count as one page of the staffing plan?

R: See answers above.

Q31: On page 109, the RFP suggests that all documentation related to past performance should be included in an annex. Does USAID also anticipate a Section 6. Past Performance in the body of the proposal?

R: No, all past performance information will be in an annex.

Q32: On page 111, under the Past Performance subheading, the RFP refers to “contractor teaming arrangements.” Could USAID clarify if this includes all organizations on the prime contractor’s team? a. Furthermore, does the limit of seven contracts or agreements apply only to the prime contractor?

R: USAID reads ‘contractor teaming arrangements’ to mean to joint ventures.

The prime and any joint venture partners must submit up to seven past performance information each. Major sub-contractors must submit up to seven past performance information each.

Q33: If the offeror wishes to include past performance information on organizations that are part of the “contractor teaming arrangements” but are not major subcontractors, would this be included in or in addition to the allowed seven?

R: See proceeding answer.

Q34: In Section L.11, number 11, page 117, USAID notes that the total value of the Program Activity Fund be greater than 40 percent of the total estimated contract value. Is this inclusive of fee?

R: Yes, it is inclusive of fee.

Q35: As this is a term type CPFF agreement and we are held to LOE, can USAID please clarify why we are being held to each line item as this may hinder management of the project? For example, the estimated amount of the indirect rates may increase as our NICRAs do change annually.

R: USAID does not know to what line items the question is referring.

Q36: The first page of the Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) (Attachment 5) indicates a project start date of September 1, 2018; however, the USAID forecast (updated on March 20, 2018) shows an anticipated award date of September 30, 2018. For budgeting purposes, could USAID please confirm the anticipated starting date for the project?

R: The start date of the award will be October 1, 2018.

Q37: Section C.5.1.(f), Objective 1 Tasks (page 13 of the RFP) states: “Consultations and analyses may be conducted directly by the Contractor’s staff, or through other means including STTA, sub-contract, or grant(s) under contract, as mutually agreed by USAID and the Contractor” (emphasis added). Could USAID please confirm grant(s) under contract here is not applicable since grants are under PAF which covers Objectives 2 to 4?

R: USAID has deleted this sentence.

Q38: Based on the description of Section C.7.2 (page 19 of the RFP), we infer that small-scale community infrastructure rehabilitation and construction projects will be one of the outcomes under Objective 3. Since this is directly associated with achieving the project objectives, could USAID please confirm that costs associated with small-scale infrastructure projects can be covered through the PAF?

R: Yes, small-scale infrastructure projects can be covered through the PAF.

Q39: Could USAID please confirm that this project will be exempt from Corporate Income tax, VAT, customs duties, tariffs and any other taxes (and that therefore offerors do not need to budget for taxes)? If so, could USAID please provide a copy of the relevant bilateral (or other) agreement?

R: While the USG has a bilateral that provides for tax exemptions, Government of Myanmar processes for administration of tax exemptions are not fully operationalized. While the tax exemptions are acknowledged by the Government, there are no processes to officially grant tax exemptions or reimburse taxes paid. As a result, some partners end up paying commercial taxes on some goods and services. There is no VAT tax in Burma. Other than for vehicles, customs duties exemptions are routinely granted. A copy of the relevant bilateral agreement will be provided after award.

Q40: Please confirm that Offerors may include one Cover Page [showing: the five required elements listed in L.6.c.2 (“the first page of the proposal must show…”); and the limitation on disclosure of data listed in L.6.e] that will not count against the 40-page limit for the technical proposal.

R: See section L.9. “Any cover letter, title pages, table of contents, acronym lists, or executive summaries counts against the 40 page limit above.”

Q41: Section L.8(b) states “Offerors must submit their proposal electronically, via internet email, with attachments compatible with Adobe Acrobat (PDF), MS Word 2010 and Excel MSOffice 2010 in an MS Windows environment, to…” Could USAID confirm that MS Office versions higher than 2010 will also be accepted?

R: MS Office versions higher than 2010 will not be accepted.

Q42: Section L.9 on page 109 lists Annex 2 as “Organizational Chart. See Staffing Plan section below for required documents. No more than 5 pages.” Please confirm that all information requested under Section L.9.5 should be submitted as an annex that will not count against the 40-page limit for the technical proposal.

R: All information requested under Section L.9.5 should be submitted as an annex that will not count against the 40-page limit for the technical proposal.

Q43: Could USAID please confirm that any associated ODCs (such as travel costs for PAF- STTA assignments) should also be covered under PAF?

R: Yes, all costs for PAF should be included in the PAF line item.

Q44: On page 117 of the RFP, section “Monitoring & Evaluation” is listed under “(10) Other Direct Costs,” which states “The Offeror must include costs of M&E Staff, data collection, analysis…” Could USAID please confirm that M&E staff can be budgeted in accordance with the offeror’s cost and accounting policies and NICRA (e.g. under Salary and Wages section), rather than under ODCs?

R: M&E staff can be budgeted in accordance with the offeror’s cost and accounting policies and NICRA (e.g. under Salary and Wages section), rather than under ODCs.

Q45: On page 120 of the RFP, PART 9 states “Letter of Commitment (Major Subcontractors)”, however the requirement below states “The Cost/Business Proposal must include a letter, on subcontractor letterhead, and signed by an authorized representative of each subcontractor” Could USAID please confirm Letter of Commitment is only required for Major Subcontractors?

R: Letter of commitment is only required for Major Subcontractors.

Q46: RFP page #9 C.4.1 Expected outcomes: “Capacity of USAID technical teams to identify and implement conflict sensitive interventions in areas within Myanmar affected by conflict enhanced;” and under Section C.5.1 (f) Consultants and Training USAID anticipates that the Contractor will provide up to four training sessions per month. Could USAID provide mode detail of the anticipated number of participants per each of the four trainings sessions per month, and whether these are part of the Project Activity Fund?

R: It is unknown at this time.

Q47: Section L.11, Part 2, Monitoring & Evaluation, the RFP requires that, “[t]he offeror must include costs of M&E staff, data collection, analysis, and reporting as a separate line item in their budgets...” Can USAID confirm whether offerors may provide a separate worksheet tab as part of its Budget workbook/excel file that will highlight/extract all M&E costs built into the detailed budget since costs associated with M&E will cut across cost categories (Labor, Travel, ODCs, etc.)?

R: Offerors may provide a separate worksheet tab as part of its Budget workbook/excel file that will highlight/extract all M&E costs built into the detailed budget since costs associated with M&E will cut across cost categories (Labor, Travel, ODCs, etc.)

Q48: Section L.11, Part 2, LOE Table (professional technical personnel), states, “Professional technical personnel do not include administrative support personnel such as logistical support personnel, interpreters/translators, office administrative assistants, secretaries/receptionists, drivers, janitors, guards, and IT managers.”

Can USAID confirm whether the following positions can be considered professional technical personnel by Offerors:

• Grants Manager, Grants Officer, Grants Assistants

• Finance/Administration Managers and Accountants

• HR and Office Managers

Grants Mangers, Grants Officers, Grants Assistants, Finance Managers, and Accountants should be included in professional/technical personnel by offerors.

HR and Office Managers should not be included.

Q49: Can USAID confirm whether facilitators for conferences/trainings specified under Section C of the RFP are to be considered professional technical labor?

• RFP Section C.7.4/Start-Up Conference: “External facilitator”

• RFP Section C.7.5/Activity Advisory Council: “Professional facilitator(s)”

• RFP Section C.7.6/Strategy Review Workshops: “Professional facilitator(s)”

R: Yes.

Q50: In accordance with Section H.7.1 and AIDAR 752.7007, as incorporated in Section I, please confirm if the selected Contractor’s personnel will be compensated in accordance with the Contractor's established policies, procedures, and practices.

R: Yes

Q51: RFP pg. 109, L.9; Can USAID please confirm that a 3-page Statement of Qualifications is required for each key personnel and not a summary for all five, and that they are included in an annex as part of the Key Personnel Documents?

R: A statement of qualifications is required for each key personnel. They are included in the Annex.

Q52: The DCOP position requires the DCOP to oversee the procurement process, the review of financial management, and monitoring grant implementation. Since there are a lot of business type activities that go along with the DCOP’s role, would someone with an accounting degree or business administration degree be acceptable? We would feel more comfortable having someone in that role with that type of educational background, but we would really like to know whether it is acceptable.

R: An accounting or business administration degree is acceptable. Please see modified language.

Q53: The RFP asks for specific experience in Asia. Since Asia is a fairly broad term, would you please clarify the term Asia? Does it stretch into Afghanistan and Pakistan? Or are you using the broadest possible term, meaning that it actually extends into Iraq and Syria? I know this may sound tedious, but it is a really useful clarification.

R: Offerors should explain how and why the proposed Asian experience is relevant to the project.

Q54: We want to confirm that the contract is three years, with two option years, but the budget allotted in the RFP is for the full five years of the contract.

R: The contract is three years (Base) with two one-year options. The budget will show the base and options for a total of five years.

Q55: Could you please clarify that a 937 code means that this contract is available for all organizations that are not from the advanced developing countries listed in the following USAID mandatory reference: https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PBAAE881.pdf ?

R: See section H.2. and ADS 310.

[END OF SOLICITATION AMENDMENT No. 01]