Amendment 1_RFP No. 72048220R00002-RITA.pdf

ATTACHMENT 1

PART I. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS:

1. Is there an incumbent contractor currently performing these services? If so, could I please find out the contractor name and contract number? Any information is greatly appreciated.

USAID Answer: There is not an incumbent contractor for the services as described in the

RFP.

2. Section F.6.1 (page 15) of the RFP requires that the annual work plan and grants manual both be submitted 60 days after award. Given the activities identified in the work plan and given that implementation will feed into the development of the grants manual, would USAID consider requiring the draft grants manual to be due 90 days after award?

USAID Answer: As of now, the requirement as stated in the RFP will remain unchanged.

3. The RFP states that 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 the accuracy needed to hold to exact amounts forecasted for line items in the contract budget. Adjustments in technical activities will likely require the contractor to deviate from the original cost proposal. Section H.3 (page 29) of the RFP states that “All purchases of nonexpendable property … will require approval of the contracting officer.

Limiting the contractor’s ability to purchase nonexpendable property to what the contracts list, however, may delay implementation until the contractor receives approval from the contracting officer. Would USAID, therefore, please remove this approval requirement from H.3 of the resulting contract?

USAID Answer: No. This is a standard requirement in most USAID procurements and does not result in undue delays as long as the contractor provides timely requests for approval.

4. Section L.9 (page 85) of the RFP states that fixed fee must not be applied to Grants Under Contract. This appears to be inconsistent with FAR 15.404-4 and ADS 302.3.6.9, which state that the pre-negotiation fee objectives must be determined according to a structured approach that considers contractor effort, risk, and other special factors. Grants require significant effort to administer and carry risks for the contractor. Additionally, the statutory underpinnings of fixed fee at 10 USC 2306(d) and 41 USC 254(b) discuss fee definitions and limitations in terms of total estimated cost, which would include grants. Given these considerations, we respectfully request that USAID reconsider the maximum of zero percent fee on grants and allow offerors to charge a fee that is reasonable and consistent with federal regulations.

USAID Answer: Please see Part II, Item No. 6.d(12) that now references to the GUC amount as included in the calculation of base and award fee.

5. Section L.9, Part 2, D (1) (page 82) of the RFP requires offerors to adhere to the USAID/Burma Mission local compensation plan. The abovementioned salary restriction appears to be inconsistent with AIDAR 752.7007 Personnel Compensation, which Section I.1 (page 44) of the RFP incorporates into the contract. The section stipulates that personnel compensation be in accordance with contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, with reimbursement subject only to the USAID Contractor Salary Threshold. The salary restriction above may preclude contractors from following their established policies, procedures, and practices, as required by AIDAR 752.700. Therefore, we respectfully request that USAID remove the salary restriction from the RFP.

USAID Answer: See AIDAR 722.170 as incorporated in the RFP. “(a) General. It is USAID policy that cooperating country nationals (CCNs) and third country nationals (TCNs), who are hired abroad for work in a cooperating country under USAID-direct contracts, generally be extended the same benefits, and be subject to the same restrictions as TCNs and CCNs employed by the USAID Mission.” and “(b) Compensation. Compensation, including merit or promotion increases paid to TCNs and CCNs may not, without the approval of the Mission Director or the Assistant Administrator having program responsibility for the project, exceed the prevailing compensation paid to personnel performing comparable work in the cooperating country as determined by the USAID Mission.”

The proposed change is rejected.

6. Section L.9, Part 2 (13) (page 85) of the RFP states, “The base fee is expected to be no more than 1% of the total estimated cost. Although the use of a Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) CLIN contract incentivizes increasing efforts to exceed required results, not allowing for the payment of a base fee of more than 1% could discourage the contractor from taking risks that would be reasonable and worthwhile under other circumstances. Would USAID please consider negotiating a reasonable base fee only to cover financing and other unallowable costs that the contractor incurs in the ordinary course of business, with the balance of fee contingent on award fee determinations? Allowing offerors to propose a reasonable base fee and competitive award fee will mean the contractor’s profit for an entire objective will be at risk if USAID is unsatisfied with the contractor’s performance. This arrangement will encourage the contractor to take risks and exceed expectations with the knowledge that costs the contractor incurs in the ordinary course of business will be reimbursed if the contractor follow USAID regulations.

USAID Answer: USAID rejects the assertions made in this question. As described in the RFP, offerors may propose an award fee amount that reflects the level of performance risk involved in the contract. Additionally, USAID anticipates awarding fee based on a sliding scale for performance based on objective criteria.

7. Attachment J.1 (page 93) of the RFP states, “While the activity is not intended to work directly with the government on improvements to the business enabling environment, it may assist Myanmar’s private sector to engage the government to find practical solutions to constraints to investment and trade.” Section L.8.1 (page 78) of the RFP states, “The approach must focus on how solutions will achieve results, encourage collaboration among partners and stakeholders (including government, the private sector, and non-government actors).” Could USAID please clarify whether offerors may propose interventions to engage the government of Myanmar as appropriate?

USAID Answer: Offerors may propose interventions that will assist private sector actors engage with the government to find practical solutions to constraints to investment and trade, or improve accountability, transparency, and responsibility among firms operating in Myanmar. Limited and targeted engagement with the Union Government of Myanmar or State/Regional governments may be proposed as appropriate to advance transactions, conduct commercial advocacy, or support the private sector in accomplishing their engagement while advancing the objectives of the activity.

8. We respectfully request that USAID share the final report for the USAID/Burma Private Sector Development Activity and the most recent project reports for the USAID/Burma Transparent and Inclusive Growth Activity and USAID/Burma Agri-Food Systems Activity, as they are not currently available on the DEC.

USAID Answer: These documents are not essential in responding to this RFP, however, please see the following link for information on the USAID/Burma supported Agri-Food Systems Development Activity:

https://www.acdivoca.org/projects/agriculture-and-food-systems-development-activity-afda/

USAID will post a final version of the USAID/Burma Private Sector Development Activity report as an amendment to this solicitation as soon as it is available. Previous quarterly reports may be accessed through the DEC: https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/home/Default.aspx.

9. Attachment J.1 (page 94) of the RFP states, “Agriculture and agriculture-related businesses within the supply-chain should account for at least 30 percent of the overall technical level of effort of the activity.” Subsequently, Attachment J.1 (page 95 and 96) states that the Performance Work Statement must “clearly show how at least 30 percent of proposed interventions will lead to agriculture-sector results as they relate to the performance objectives.”

Would USAID please confirm that the “30 percent” is a percentage of the technical level-of-effort required of the activity rather than a percentage of the number of proposed interventions?

USAID Answer: Agriculture and agriculture-related businesses within the supply-chain should account for at least 30 percent of the overall technical level of effort of the activity.

Please see Part II item number 4 which references the referenced change to the RFP.

10. On Page 80, Section L.8.2 the solicitation states that the Offeror must include a Draft Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan in its technical proposal. Please confirm that https://www.acdivoca.org/projects/agriculture-and-food-systems-development-activity-afda/ https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/home/Default.aspx offerors should include the Draft Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan as Annex 3 of the technical proposal.

USAID Answer: Yes, the Draft Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan should be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal as Annex 3. Please see Part II, Item No. 5.b.

11. Page 81, Section L.9, Part 2 states that the offeror must submit a CPFF completion type detailed budget. Section B.2 on Page 6 states that this is a Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) completion type contract. Please clarify the contract type.

USAID Answer: The contract type is a Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) completion type contract. Any reference to cost plus fixed fee contract in the RFP is an error. Please see Part II, Item No. 6.a.

12. What types of costs should offerors include in the Operations Costs element in the format on Page 82?

USAID Answer: “Operations Cost” in the budget format in the RFP is a typographical error.

Please see Part II, Item No. 6.b.

13. On Page 82, Section L.9, part 2.d, cost element descriptions do not match the cost elements in the budget format. Please provide missing descriptions and/or revise?

USAID Answer: Please see Part II, Item No. 6.b where the cost elements in budget format match the cost element descriptions.

14. Page 82, Section L.9, part 2.d states, “The Offeror must submit a detailed budget, per component, and budget narrative that supports item for item the cost estimates proposed in its detailed budget.” Please clarify if USAID requires one detailed budget encompassing both performance objectives or a separate detailed budget for each of the primary performance objectives?

USAID Answer: The Offeror must submit a detailed budget, per cost element, and a budget narrative that supports the cost estimates proposed in its detailed budget.

15. Page 82, Section L.9, part 2.d.1 states, “A detailed LOE estimate with a separate line item for each proposed individual identifying each individual by name must be provided.”

(a) Please clarify if LOE and totals calculated and presented in the detailed budget breakdown will suffice or if USAID requires a separate LOE table, and

(b) If we do not identify a person by name, we may use TBD with the position title.

USAID Answer:

(a) Yes the totals calculated and presented in the detailed budget breakdown will suffice a separate LOE table is not required.

(b) Yes, TBD with the position title will be acceptable.

16. Attachment J.1, page 98 Section 6 (f) state that offerors not stipulate exclusive arrangements with sub-partners. Please confirm that sub-partners in this context refers to local subcontractors only.

USAID Answer: Sub-partners as referenced in Attachment J.1 page 98 refers to any organizations (local, U.S., international).

17. F.4 (p. 13) – Would USAID allow offerors to propose additional key personnel positions beyond the Chief of Party? If so, may offerors also submit a CV and Letter of Commitment for any additional Key Personnel?

USAID Answer: Per the RFP instructions and evaluation criteria, the Chief of Party and her/his qualifications will be the only Key Personnel considered. No additional Key Personnel should be submitted.

18. L.8(b) (p. 77) – May offerors use a font no smaller than 9 point for textboxes?

USAID Answer: As stated in L.8 (b) (p.77), the font used in tables, charts may be adjusted as appropriate but must be no smaller than 9 points.

19. L.8(d) – May offerors include an executive summary that does not count against the page limit?

USAID Answer: An executive summary is not required.

20. L.8.1 (p. 78) – Can USAID clarify whether the Performance Work Statement should be written from the perspective of USAID (for instance saying “the Contractor must” versus “we will”)?

USAID Answer: It should be written from the perspective of USAID.

21. L.8.2 (p. 78) – May offerors present organizational structure charts in an annex that does not count against the page limit?

USAID Answer:: No. The organizational structure and associated charts (if any) should be discussed / described under Section L.8.2 (page 78) and within the page limit.

22. L.8 (p. 80) - Would USAID consider the inclusion of additional annexes beyond the two listed?

USAID Answer: The Draft Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan may be submitted as Annex 3 part of the Technical Proposal. Please see Part II, Item No. 5.b.

23. L.8.2 (p. 80) – Please confirm that the branding implementation and marking plans are to be presented in an annex to the technical proposal that does not count against the page limit.

USAID Answer: Yes, the Draft Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan may be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal as Annex 3. Please see Part II, Item No. 5.b.

24. SOO (p. 95) – Can USAID please define “other partner countries” under Objective 1?

USAID Answer: Other partner countries include those where trade and investment relationships with Myanmar exist or could exist, and where the domestic legal and normative environment results in firms upholding international standards of good corporate governance to ensure responsibility, accountability, and transparency.

25. SOO (p. 96) - USAID refers to “public consultations;” would USAID clarify whether private sector advocacy for economic policy or regulatory reform falls within the scope of

RITA?

USAID Answer:: Working directly with the private sector or private-sector associations to advance individual or collective advocacy for policy or regulatory reform is within the scope of

RITA.

26. SOO (p. 98) – Non-Exclusivity: Could USAID clarify whether non-exclusivity only applies to local partners, or does this extend to international partners as well?

USAID Answer:: Please see the answer to question no. 16.

27. Section B.8 Payment of Award fee, will USAID consider roll-over of unearned fee award?'

USAID Answer:: The determination of the award fee, if any, earned by the Contractor must be in accordance with the Award Fee Evaluation Plan. Per FAR 16.401(e)(4), unearned award fee cannot rollover from one award fee increment to the next award fee increment.

The RFP has been amended to reflect this change. Please see Part II, Item No. 1.

28. Section H.3 Non-expendable Property, will the NXP listed/submitted as part of Contractor’s Cost proposal considered to be approved by the CO?

USAID Answer: USAID will analyze the costs of the NXP listed in the offeror’s cost proposal and will notify the winning offeror if such property is approved.

29. L.9.PART 2.c – For budgeting purposes and consistency among bidders, can USAID provide offerors with an exchange rate?

USAID Answer: An exchange rate will not be provided in this solicitation and USAID will not analyze costs that are not stated in U.S. Dollars. Please ensure all costs in your cost proposal are stated in U.S. Dollars.

30. L.9.PART 2.d(1) – Would USAID please provide the most recent Local Compensation Plan for Burma?

USAID Answer: Salary ranges based on the most recent Local Compensation Plan for Burma are provided in the RFP Section L.9. PART 2.d (1).

31. L.9.PART 2.d(13) indicates that "USAID will not allow the GUCs to be included in the calculation of fixed fee." Could USAID confirm whether “fixed fee” in this case refers to the base fee? Would USAID confirm that a separate grants handling fee is allowable?

USAID Answer: Please see Part II, Item No. 6.d(12) that now references to the GUC amount as included in the calculation of base and award fee.

32. L.9.PART 2.d(13) (paragraph 2) indicates that "The base fee is expected to be no more than 1% of the total estimated cost." Would USAID confirm that this refers to the base fee and not the award fee, given the rest of the paragraph pertains to the award fee.

USAID Answer: Yes, the statement refers to base fee. Please see Part II, Item No. 6.b(12) for more clarity

33. Section F.4(g)I (page 14), Qualifications for the Chief of Party include a minimum of a Master’s degree, 10 years in a senior management position and 3 years engaged on a similar type of program. Would USAID consider allowing additional years of experience to replace the advanced degree requirement?

USAID Answer: Upon review, USAID will allow substitutions of an additional 10 years experience (20 years total) in a senior management position instead of an advanced degree.

Please see Part II, Item No. 2

34. Section F.6.1, (page 15), Given the complexity of establishing operations in country for foreign entities, would USAID consider allowing more time for the submission of the mobilization plan after award?

USAID Answer: The mobilization plan submission deadline remains unchanged, however, USAID may consider a later delivery date after execution of the contract.

35. Section I.7.52.229-8 (page 55), Is USAID aware of any bilateral agreements between the

U.S. Government and Burma that would exempt contractors operating under USAID funding from local taxes? If so, please provide a copy to all offerors.

USAID Answer: Based on the bilateral agreement between the Government of Myanmar and the USG, any goods, supplies, materials, equipment, property or services that are funded through the contract are exempt from any and all taxes, including any value added taxes or other similar charges. USAID will not provide a copy of the agreement to offerors, however.

36. Section L.8 (page 77) Can USAID please confirm that both the Table of Contents and the Acronym List will not be counted against the page limit?

USAID Answer: The list of items indicated under Section L.8 (d) (page 77) of the RFP are not counted against the page limit.

37. Section L.8 (page 77) Will USAID allow offerors to include a two-page executive summary that will not be counted against page limits provided?

USAID Answer: See the answer for question 19.

38. Section L.8.4 (page 79) The RFP states that offerors must submit up to five (5) of the most recent and relevant contracts to demonstrate past performance. In addition to contracts, would USAID allow offerors to include assistance awards including cooperative agreements and grants as examples of relevant past performance?

USAID Answer: USAID will only evaluate past performance information as performed under contracts.

39. Section L.8.4 (page 79) The RFP states the offeror must submit a past performance matrix that lists up to five (5) of the most recent and relevant contracts. The RFP also states the offeror must also provide contract details and a description of performance for each of the contracts listed.

• Can USAID provide either a template for the required past performance matrix or guidance on what details other than contract name and number should be included in the matrix?

• Can USAID confirm that offerors should use the template included in J.3 to provide contract details and a description of performance for each contract listed?

USAID Answer: Regarding the requirement in Section L.8.4, USAID only requires offerors to submit a completed version of the template included in Section J.3 for each contract cited in the offeror’s past performance submission. Please see Part II, Item 5(d) , which clarifies this point.

40. Section L.8.2 (page 80) Can USAID please confirm that there is no page limit for the Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan?

USAID Answer: There is no page limit for the Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan

41. Section L.8.1 (page 80) Will USAID allow offerors to provide their detailed organizational chart in an annex to the technical?

USAID Answer: No. See answer for question no. 21.

42. Section L.8.1 (page 80) Can USAID please confirm that offerors should only include the CV of the Chief of Party in their proposals and that no other CVs will be evaluated?

USAID Answer: As stated in Section L. (page 80) offerors must provide the Resume/CV of the Proposed Chief of Party as Annex 1. No other CVs are required.

43. Section L.9-PART 3 (page 85) RFP states “Offerors and all proposed subcontractor must ensure they are registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) (www.sam.gov)”.

However, per ADS 302.3.6.11 “The System for Award Management (SAM) is the system used to compile information on all companies, organizations, and people that have direct awards with the U.S. Government. There is currently no requirement in the FAR for subcontractors to register in SAM.” In order to receive an award, all contractors and subcontractors are only required to have a unique entity identifier (Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number). Please confirm if subcontractors are required to be registered in SAM?

USAID Answer: Subcontractors are not required to be registered in SAM.gov. This requirement has been removed from the RFP. Please see Part II, Item 6.c.

44. Section L.9-PART 2 (page 85) Not allowing fee on grants disadvantages firms with a value-added G&A who do not apply any indirect charges such as G&A, grants handling fees, or PSM on grants. Will USAID permit such firms to propose a reasonable fee on grants, recognizing the underlying risks and liability that a contractor assumes when managing grants under contract?

USAID Answer: Please see USAID Answer to question No. 4 above.

45. Cover Letter, Section L.9-PART 2 (page 81) and Section L.9-PART 2 (page 85), USAID stipulates that this is a Cost Plus Award Fee in the Cover Letter and throughout the RFP.

However, the typical contract language normally included in a CPAF award is absent and in the 1st Sentence under “PART 2- Proposed Costs/Prices/Detail Budget” there is a reference to a CPFF completion type detail budget. Can USAID please confirm that this is a CPAF type contract and what the evaluation factors will be for determining the award fee?

Understanding the evaluation factors is essential to allow Offerors to determine the level of risk associated with award of the fee.

USAID Answer: The contract type is a Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) completion type contract. Any reference to cost plus fixed fee contract in the RFP is an error. Please see Part II, Item No. 6.a.

46. Section M.3.3 (page 89) Is the reference (P. 91) to “including measurable output and performance indicators” (1) a requirement for offerors to include indicator values by Year in their AMELP or (2) a more generic reference to simply including indicators that are ultimately measurable during implementation?

USAID Answer: Generic reference to indicators are acceptable to the extent that the Offeror’s AMELP clearly demonstrates how progress and impact will be tracked, measured and reported.

PART II. CHANGES TO THE SOLICITATION:

The RFP is amended as follows:

SECTION B:

1. In Section B.8 PAYMENT OF AWARD FEE, ADD the following under table.

“The determination of the award fee, if any, earned by the Contractor must be in accordance with the Award Fee Evaluation Plan. Per FAR 16.401(e)(4), unearned award fee cannot rollover from one award fee increment to the next award fee increment.

SECTION F:

2. In Section F.4(g)(i), under “Required qualifications for the COP”, revise item # 1 with the following:

1. Formal training (Master’s degree at a minimum) and education in business administration, economics, law, public policy, finance or a related field. In lieu of a Master’s degree USAID will accept 20 years of demonstrated experience of building and effectively managing a strong team, preferably with a private sector firm;

SECTION I:

3. In Section I.1, NOTICE LISTING CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE, include the following:

NUMBER TITLE DATE

FAR

52.204-7 SYSTEM FOR AWARD MANAGEMENT OCT 2018

52.216-7 ALLOWABLE COST AND PAYMENT AUG 2018

AIDAR

752.216-70 AWARD FEE MAY 1997

SECTION J:

4. In Attachment J.1, RITA - SOO, Section 5,Performance Objectives, paragraph 4, REVISE and REPLACE with the following:

“Per the stated emphasis on agriculture, the PWS must demonstrate an understanding of constraints and impediments to investment and trade, broadly defined. It must also clearly show how at least 30 percent of overall technical level effort of the activity will lead to agriculture-sector results as they relate to the performance objectives. Finally, the PWS must demonstrate an understanding of potential opportunities for coordination with USAID/Burma’s current portfolio of activities in agriculture, as well as USAID’s Feed the Future (FTF) priorities and strategies.”

SECTION L:

5. In Section L.8, INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF TECHNICAL

PROPOSAL:

a. On page 77, revise “(d) The Technical Proposal must also contain the following” with

“(c) The Technical Proposal must also contain the following” .

b. On page 80, Include the following:

“Annex 3 - Draft Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan”

c. On page 78, under L.8.2 Management and Staffing Plan, , DELETE paragraphs 4 and 5 which are a duplicate of paragraphs 2 and 3.

d. On page 79, under L.8.4 Contractor Past Performance Information, paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2), REVISE and REPLACE with the following:

“1. The Offeror must list up to five (5) of the most recent, or ongoing, and relevant contracts (or assistance instruments such as cooperative agreements/grants)for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal in the past five years, and up to three (3) of the most recent, or ongoing, and relevant contracts (or assistance instruments such as cooperative agreements/grants) using the template provided in Attachment J.3. The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar type of work, scope and size, and complexity/diversity and how recently they were performed.”

2. For all contracts (or assistance instruments) listed above that are not in CPARS, provide a list of contact names, job titles, mailing addresses, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, explanation of relevance to the proposed acquisition and a description of the performance to include:

• Scope of work or complexity/diversity of tasks,

• Primary location(s) of work,

• Term of performance,

• Skills/expertise required,

• Dollar value, and

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

e. On page 80, under “L.8.2, Instructions For Preparation Of Branding Implementation And Marking Plan”, REVISE and REPLACE the title with the following:

“L.8.5, Instructions For Preparation Of Branding Implementation And Marking Plan”

6. In Section L.9, INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE

COST/BUSINESS PROPOSAL,

a. Under PART 2 – PROPOSED COSTS/PRICES/ DETAILED BUDGET NARRATIVE, paragraph 1, first line, REVISE and REPLACE with the following:

“PART 2 – PROPOSED COSTS/PRICES/ DETAILED BUDGET NARRATIVE

Offeror must submit a cost-plus-award fee (CPAF) completion type detailed budget for the accomplishment of the activities proposed to achieve the results listed in the PWS.”

b.. Under PART 2 – PROPOSED COSTS/PRICES/ DETAILED BUDGET NARRATIVE, paragraphs (c) and (d), DELETE and REPLACE with the following:

“c. The Offeror must provide the Cost Proposal budgets in unprotected Microsoft Office Excel Worksheets. The budget must be completed in the format provided below. The budget must include the budget associated with all proposed subcontracts. Budget worksheets provided must include separate worksheets for the prime and all subcontracts. This will be used to analyze proposals and determine overall best value. If possible, we request that the Offeror’s detailed worksheets, in support of this summary, be provided in one large spreadsheet with linkages to the summary worksheets, to ease analysis.

Cost Elements Year 1 Year 2

Year

Year

Year

5 TOTAL

Salaries and Wages

Fringe Benefits

Consultants

Travel, Transportation and Per Diem 1/

Allowances

Equipment and Supplies

Other Direct Costs

Training

Subcontracts

Grants Under Contracts

Indirect Costs

TOTAL Estimated Cost

Base Fee

Maximum Award Fee

TOTAL Estimated Cost Plus Total Fee

1/ Refers to other project-related travel by staff.

d. The Offeror must submit a detailed budget, per cost element, and a budget narrative that supports the cost estimates proposed in its detailed budget. The budget narrative must describe the nature of individual proposed cost element calculations and include a description of the source of that particular cost estimate (current market value, current catalogue price, current vendor price quotes, etc.). Narratives for the individual cost items must provide a discussion of any estimated escalation rates where applicable. Estimated costs proposed to exceed ceilings imposed by USAID or Federal procurement policy must be fully explained and justified.

(1) Salary and Wages: FAR 31.205-6, AIDAR 731.205-6 and AIDAR 752.7007 provides for compensation for personal services. Direct labor salary and wages must be proposed in accordance with the Offeror’s personnel policies and must meet the regulatory requirements.

Costs of long-term and short-term personnel must be broken down by person years, months, days or hours. A detailed LOE estimate with a separate line item for each proposed individual identifying each individual by name must be provided.

Labor cost for CCNs must not exceed the following salary ranges based on the USAID/Burma Mission local compensation plan.

Employee Classification Salary Range (US $)

Administrative staff $10,704 - $22,250

Junior level tech staff $17,025 – $28,219

Mid level technical staff $24,710 - $37,067

Senior level technical staff $31,875 – $57,273

Completed biographical data sheets: Form AID 1420-17 must be provided for all proposed Key Personnel. These forms must be properly completed, certified and signed by both employee and Contractor in the appropriate spaces with all blocks completed, as appropriate. The updated AID 1420-17 can be found at https://www.usaid.gov/forms/aid-1420-17

(2) Fringe benefits: FAR 31.205-6 provides for allowances and services provided by the Contractor to its employees as compensation in addition to regular wages and salaries. If fringe benefits are provided for as part of a firm’s indirect cost rate structure, see FAR 42.700. If not part of an indirect cost rate, a detailed cost breakdown by benefits types must be provided.

(3) Consultants: FAR 31.205-33 provides for 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. Costs of consultants must be broken down by person years, months, days or hours.

The Offeror must propose a blended daily consultant rate for each type of consultant and experience level. The blended rate must be proposed for each of the five years of the period of performance. The Offeror must provide a description of the methodology used to determine the blended rate for each consultant.

(4) Travel, transportation, and per-diem: FAR 31.205-46, AIDAR 731.205-46 and AIDAR

752.7032 provide for costs for transportation, lodging, meals and incidental expenses. Costs must be broken down by the number of trips, domestic and international, cost per trip, per-diem and other related travel costs. Specify the origin and destination, purpose for each proposed trip, duration of travel, and number of individuals traveling. In addition, the Offeror must provide a consolidated travel chart (including subcontractor travel). Per-diem must be based on the Offeror’s normal travel policies or may choose to refer to the Federal Standardized Travel Regulations for cost estimates.

(5) Allowances: AIDAR 752.7028 provides for differentials and allowances with further references to Standardized Regulations. Allowances should be broken down by specific type and by person, and should be in accordance with offeror’s policies and the applicable regulations.

(6) Equipment and supplies: FAR 2.101 provides for supplies as all property except land or interest in land, FAR 31.205-26 provides for material costs, and FAR 45 prescribes policies and procedures for providing Government property to Contractors, Contractors’ use and management of Government property, and reporting, redistributing, and disposing of Contractor inventory.

Costs must be broken down by types and units, and include an analysis that it is more advantageous to purchase than lease.

(7) Other Direct Costs: FAR 31.202 provides for the allowability of direct costs. Costs will be broken down by types and units. Specific information regarding the type of communication cost at issue (i.e. mail, telephone, cellular phones, internet etc.) must be included in order to allow an assessment of the realism and reasonableness of these types of costs. This can also include report preparation costs, passports and visas fees, medical exams and inoculations, insurance (other than insurance included in the Offeror’s fringe benefits), as well as any other miscellaneous costs, which directly benefit the program proposed by the Offeror. The narrative will provide a breakdown and support for all other direct costs. Other Direct Costs may include, but not limited to:

● Costs of Branding and Marking (ADS 320.3.6.3) must be included under this line item.

LOE will be designated to manage and implement these plans and the required communications and outreach. These costs are eligible for financing if reasonable, allocable, and allowable in accordance with the applicable cost principles.

● Monitoring & Evaluation: The Offeror must include costs of M&E Staff, data collection, analysis, and reporting as a separate line item in their budgets to ensure that adequate resources are available.

(8) Training: AIDAR 752.7019 and ADS 253 provides for participant training and training in development. The specific training programs and number of training sessions must be proposed that will help attain the objectives identified in the PWS. Costs must be broken down by types and participants.

(9) Subcontracts: FAR 44.101 provides for any contract entered into by a subcontractor to furnish supplies or services for performance of a prime contract or a subcontract. The cost and pricing proposal must describe all potential subcontracting arrangements. Information sufficient to determine the reasonableness of the cost of each specific subcontract and consultant expected to be hired must be included. Similar information must be provided for all consultants provided under the category for personnel. Any costs for local organizations and local personnel MUST include a US$ equivalent column.

(10) Grants Under Contracts: ADS 302.3.4.13, Offerors must propose approaches to use GUCs up to $3 million to achieve the objectives of the activity. GUCs to local organizations are encouraged in support of USAID’s focus on local capacity building as part of improving host country self-reliance. GUCs to the Government of Myanmar or subsidiaries must not be included.

(11) Indirect Costs (e.g., overhead, G&A, material & handling): The Offeror and all proposed major subcontractors may propose lower overhead rates than their established Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA) and sign the letter found in ADS 300, Mandatory Reference for Best Practices Guide for Indirect Costing. Indirect rates proposed cannot be higher than the rates established in their Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA). Please read further instructions below if your organization does not have a NICRA.

The Offeror may propose a single ceiling rate covering the term of award or a ceiling rate in each applicable contract year. If an annual ceiling rate is proposed, USAID will average the ceiling indirect rates and use that figure for evaluation purposes.

● The Offeror and each proposed major subcontractor must include a complete copy of its most current NICRA or other documentation from its cognizant Government Audit Agency, if any, stating the most recent provisional indirect cost rates. The proposal must also include the name and address of the Government Audit Agency, and the name and telephone number of the auditor.

● If the Offeror or major subcontractor does not have a cognizant Government Audit Agency, the proposal must include:

a. Audited balance sheets and profit and loss statements for the last two complete years, and the current year-to-date statements (or such lesser period of time if the Offeror is a newly-formed organization). The profit and loss statements should include detail of the total cost of goods and services sold, including a listing of the various indirect administrative costs, and be supplemented by information on the prime contractor’s customary indirect cost allocation method, together with supporting computations of the basis for the indirect cost rate(s) proposed; and

b. The most recent two Fiscal Year pool and base cost compositions along with derived rates, the bases of allocation of these rates and an independent certified audit by a certified accounting firm of these rates.

(12) Fee (base and award): FAR 15.404-4 provides for establishing the profit or fee portion of the Government pre-negotiation objective, and provides profit-analysis factors for analyzing profit or fee. Propose fee with rationale supported by application of the profit-analysis factors.

The GUC amount may be included in the calculation of base and award fee. Also, USAID considers calculating fixed fee over subcontractors’ fixed fee unreasonable and requires that offerors exclude subcontractors’ fixed fee when calculating their own fixed fee.

The complete budget must include a base fee and the maximum amount of award fee proposed, and a rationale for the proposed amount must be included in the budget narrative. The base fee is expected to be no more than 1% of the total estimated cost. The Government's purpose in granting an award fee is to encourage and reward superior contract performance. The payment of the award fee will be determined in accordance with the QASP and will be disbursed in accordance with the schedule in Section B.7, and is not correlated with total costs incurred by the Contractor at time of payment.”

c. Section L.9 Part III, PART 3 - REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND

OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS, revise and replace the first line of the first paragraph with the following:

“Offerors must ensure they are registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) (www.sam.gov) per FAR part 4.”

- End of Attachment 1, Amendment 1 -