RFP No. 72049721R00007 Amendment 1 USAID PADU.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

PAGE OF PAGES

1 19

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

See Block 16C

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO

REQ-497-21-000005

5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 720497 7. ADMINISTERED BY (IF OTHER THAN ITEM 6) CODE

USAID/Indonesia American Embassy

Jl. Medan Merdeka Selatan 3-5 Jakarta 10110

N/A

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State, and Zip Code)

(x) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO

72049721R00007

CODE:

FACILITY CODE: 10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

01/06/2022

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered, solicitation is amended as set forth in item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended ☐ is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers, FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER.

If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If Required) Net increase: - N/A

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO., AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify Authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43,103 (b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor X is NOT is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.

The purpose of this amendment is:

1) To revise specific sections of the solicitation; and

2) To respond to questions and requests for clarification that were received by January 3, 2022.

Accordingly, the RFP is modified as follows:

(Continuation – page 2)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

Brian Chang Contracting Officer

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 15C. DATE

SIGNED

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

16C. DATE

SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Previous Edition Unusable Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

U.S. Embassy Jakarta Jl. Medan Merdeka Selatan 3-5 Jakarta 10110, Indonesia USAID.gov

Issuance Date: January 10, 2022 Closing Date for Questions: January 3, 2022 Closing Date for Proposals: February 7, 2022 at 8:00 am Jakarta time Submission through: applications-indonesia@usaid.gov

NAICS Code: 541611 - Administrative Management and General Management

Consulting Services

Authorized Geographic Code: 937

Subject: RFP Amendment No. 1

Reference: Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 72049721R00007

Program Title: USAID/Indonesia – PADU (Partnerships for Productivity)

This Amendment No. 1 provides several revisions to the RFP and answers to questions.

Accordingly, the RFP is amended as specified herein:

Part I. Modification to RFP

1. Reference: Cover Letter In the cover letter page 1, revise the RFP closing date from “January 24, 2022” to “February 7, 2022”.

2. Reference: Section K of the Solicitation

In Subsection K.4 (a)(1) page 101, revise the NAICS code from “541990” to “541611”.

3. Reference: Section L of the Solicitation

a. In Subsection L.5.1. General third paragraph on page 117, revise the validity of solicitation from “210 days” to “180 days”.

b. In Subsection L.5.2 Delivery Instructions page 118, revise the solicitation number in the email subject line for Technical Proposal, Cost/Business Proposal and Branding and Marking Plans to “SOL-72049721R00007”.

c. In Subsection L.6.1 Technical Proposal Format second paragraph, delete point 4 “Past Performance Information (not included in page limit)”; and insert “ ● Annex C: Key Personnel CV (not included in the page limit)”.

mailto:applications-indo@usaid.gov

RFP No. 72049721R00007 Amendment No. 1

USAID PADU

PART II. Responses to Questions: Please see attached.

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the original RFP issued on December 16, 2021 remain unchanged, and in full force and effect.

Issuance of this request for proposal does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government nor does it commit the Government to pay for any costs incurred in preparation or submission of comments/suggestions or an application. Proposals are submitted at the risk of the applicant. All preparation and submission costs are at the contractor’s expense.

Sincerely, Brian Chang Contracting Officer USAID/Indonesia

Attachment:

1. Part II - Q&A

Attachment Part II - Q&A

No. Question(s) USAID Response(s)

1 Would USAID consider extending the due date of proposals to January 31st or February 7th? This would allow Offerors to have sufficient time to incorporate USAID’s answers and to account for the various holidays.

Please see the RFP (Amendment Part I).

2 Can USAID clarify which level of BLK it envisions PADU working with: centrally funded, Provincial, or District/Community level?

On page 14 of the RFP footnote # 9 reads, “Based on USAID recent consultations with the Ministry of Manpower, USAID will target only government-owned vocational training centers i.e., Balai Latihan Kerja (BLK) in 4 (four) USAID priority provinces.” Can USAID confirm that ONLY government owned BLKs are to be engaged as part of this project?

The footnote on page 14 states: “Based on USAID recent consultations with the Ministry of Manpower, USAID will target only government-owned vocational training centers i.e., Balai Latihan Kerja (BLK) in 4 (four) USAID priority provinces”.

Could USAID/Indonesia clarify whether the level of government engagement is expected to be at the central level (Balai Besar Pengembangan latihan Kerja) or at the provincial and district/city levels?

USAID envisions that through PADU, the Activity will work with all three levels of BLKs (centrally funded, provincial and district BLKs). It is not expected that PADU will work at the Community BLK (BLK Komunitas) level.

3 On page 20, the RFP provides example indicators. Can USAID please clarify the difference in “leveraging” and “mobilizing” funds? Can USAID please provide the Mission PMP and/or the PIRS for these two indicators?

“Leveraged” refers to new non-US Government resources, including cash and in-kind support, directed towards USG-supported interventions (co-founded or co-invested) as a result of USAID-supported activities, with the exception of cost-share.

Mobilized resources are resources enabled as a result of USAID efforts and invested by public, private, or civil society entities to achieve development goals.

4 On page 21, USAID states that “The Contractor must adopt professional capacity development principles for all of its staff”.

Can the contractor provide budget lines for professional capacity development for staff?

USAID does not require Offerors to provide a budget line for professional development for staff.

5 Page 120 of the RFP states “The Offeror must develop the implementation approach that correlates with the results framework.” Can USAID confirm offerors may propose their own results framework based on the objectives stated in the RFP? Or has USAID developed a results framework for PADU?

Yes, Offerors may propose their own results framework based on the objectives stated in the RFP.

Can USAID send bidders the European Training Foundation document, as the document was unavailable on the link provided: European Training Foundation, https://www.etf.europa.eu/sites/default/files/m/466C7A2340B3 DAE0C12580E60049FC1D_LMIS.pdf)

The document was available and accessible through the link provided on page 13 of the RFP.

Page 121, L.6.2.3: Staffing and Management Plan. Does USAID want a CV for Key Personnel to be included as an Annex?

Please confirm that Offerors should provide a CV/resume for the

Yes, Offerors should provide Key Personnel CV(s) as an annex.

There are no page limitations for the CV.

https://www.etf.europa.eu/sites/default/files/m/466C7A2340B3DAE0C12580E60049FC1D_LMIS.pdf https://www.etf.europa.eu/sites/default/files/m/466C7A2340B3DAE0C12580E60049FC1D_LMIS.pdf proposed COP? If so, are there any page limitations for that CV?

Page 120, Section L.6.1: Will USAID/Indonesia allow for the Key Personnel, i.e., Chief of Party CV to be included as an Annex to the Technical Proposal, and not included in the total 20-page limitation?

8 Page 122, L.7.a.1. USAID indicates that in J.2 “The Offeror must describe successful experiences using subcontractors to implement major technical components.”

Can USAID identify which section of J.2 should include this information? Or should we adapt the matrix to add a section?

Offerors can adapt the matrix to add information for subcontractors.

9 Page 123, Section L.8.2.2. Detailed Budget Part A.

Can USAID please confirm these are major line items and that USAID would like to see the detailed sub line items as well, or does USAID want only a description of those detailed items as described in the narrative under Part B? In other words, may we expand the table provided under Part A to include sub line items or would USAID only want to see this information under Part B in description?

The budget line items described in Parts A and B are illustrative budget line items. Offerors may expand the line items to align with their technical proposals.

10 Footnote #9 on Page 14 of the RFP states that “USAID will target only government-owned vocational training centers (i.e., Balai Latihan Kerja (BLK)) in 4 (four) USAID priority provinces.”

Does this mean that Offers may not propose working with other types of vocational institutions (e.g., SMKs, polytechnics, etc.)?

Please confirm that PADU is strictly restricted to working with BLKs only.

USAID confirms that the PADU Activity is restricted to working with BLKs only.

11 Can USAID confirm that Offerors must work in all four of the priority provinces (i.e., Banten, North Sumatra, South Sulawesi, and East Java)? Or, may Offerors choose to work in just two or three of these provinces? If USAID expects offerors to work in all four priority provinces, does USAID expect equal programming and resources to be allocated across the four provinces?

Offerors must work in all four of the priority provinces, but the programming need not be equal in each of these priority provinces.

12 Can USAID confirm that all RFP references to working with “local governments” and “provincial and district governments” should be understood as referring to local (provincial and district) governments in the four USAID priority provinces of North Sumatra, Banten, East Java and South Sulawesi?

Yes, RFP references to working with “local governments” refer to local (provincial and district) governments in the four USAID priority provinces (North Sumatra, Banten, East Java and South Sulawesi).

13 The RFP and Section L do not require an Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan (AMELP) as part of Offerors’ proposal submissions. However, Section C.7 on Pages 19 and 20 describes potential indicators that should be considered when the AMEL is created after award. Further, Section B.7’s proposed fixed fee schedule makes reference to key deliverables (but there are no targets or numerical values associated with these deliverables). And finally, Section C.5.3 on Page 15 outlines PADU’s expected results. Considering Section M.2.1-Factor 1 on Page 133 states that USAID will evaluate Offerors on “robustness of proposed monitoring and evaluation system to measure results of partnerships”.

Should Offerors include proposed numerical indicators and numerical values for expected results as part of their Technical Approaches? Or, should Offerors only propose an “approach” for how it will handle MEL activities after award?

Page 133, Section M.2.1: Factor 1: Technical Approach includes

Offerors should include proposed numerical indicators and numerical values for expected results as part of their Technical Approaches.

“robustness of proposed monitoring and evaluation system to measure the results of partnerships” as part of the evaluation criteria. However, Section L.6.2.2 does not mention a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system and there are no pages allocated to presenting the M&E system in the technical proposal.

Would USAID/Indonesia consider removing this evaluation criterion from Section M.2.1?

14 Section L.6.2.2 indicates that the Contractor should, “Provide a monitoring and reporting strategy to capture the progress of partnership results.” Does USAID have a preference as to whether this should be presented alongside each Component or as a stand-alone section elsewhere in the proposal?

USAID does not have a preference. The monitoring and reporting strategy can be presented either way.

15 In Section C, Component 2, Activity 4, the RFP indicates that “The Contractor must assess the capacity of sections/units within the Ministry of Manpower and other relevant government agencies overseeing and/or managing LMIS [and] …provide technical assistance (TA) to address identified needs.”

However, no related assessment report appears in the Activity Level Deliverables in Section F. Should offerors budget for a formal assessment of these units and an accompanying deliverable report? Would this deliverable be due at the outset of the Activity?

Offerors may integrate the budget for a formal assessment of these units into the LMIS assessment.

16 Section C, Objective 3 as stated on page 15 is “To streamline regulations and guidelines related to utilization/implementation of tax deductions/incentives on training activities for the private sector.” However, the expected result attributes increased tax

USAID maintains result#6 as “increased tax deduction submissions to training activities as a result of training activities implemented in partnership with TVET institutions.”

However, USAID agrees that simplifications of guidelines deduction submissions to training activities rather than to regulatory simplification. Should expected result #6 be modified to include a reference to the result occurring “as a result of simplifications of guidelines and/or implementing regulations?”

and/or implementing regulations would contribute to the result.

17 Section C, Component 3 Activity 5 appears as, “Advise businesses on the applicability and processes of tax deductions for training costs, internships, apprenticeships and other types of workforce training programs.” Does USAID intend for Offerors to provide direct firm-level assistance under this award, rather than working through business associations and other partners?

If so, can USAID further clarify how USAID views PADU advising businesses directly? Does USAID intend for Offerors to provide one-off consultancies? Or, should Offerors propose ways to stimulate these services in the local market indirectly?

Finally, can we understand the term “applicability” to be interchangeable with “eligibility” in regard to tax deductions?

USAID intends for Offerors to provide direct firm-level assistance under this award. However, Offerors may also propose approaches to work through associations or other partners. Offerors can understand the term “applicability” to be interchangeable with “eligibility.”

18 Section C.6 on Pages 19 and 20 requires that Offerors conduct a gender assessment/analysis and action plan. These deliverables are not mentioned in F.4 “List of Deliverables.” Could USAID kindly clarify whether these deliverables are contractually required? Also, can USAID also clarify that the gender assessment and GIDAP are to be conducted post-award and not required to appear in the proposal?

Gender assessment and Gender and Inclusive Development Action Plans (GIDAP) are part of the Section F.4.3 Annual Work Plans.

19 In Section M we are unsure about how to interpret the merit criteria that states, “Scale/breadth of private sector partners proposed for the activity.” Is USAID asking for offerors to name specific partner firms at the proposal stage? If so, could USAID kindly suggest where this should be presented for the convenience of reviewers?

Offerors should indicate the number of private sector partners proposed for the activity but need not name specific partner firms.

20 On Page 13, Footnote 5, USAID states that it has consulted with several companies. Can USAID share which companies were consulted and whether they were in the four target provinces?

USAID conducted consultations with several companies operating in the Jabodetabek area and in the North Sumatra province for the purpose of market research only.

21 Could USAID kindly clarify the meaning of the merit criteria of “Value of modalities or resources offered” in M.2.1?

The merit criteria “Value of modalities or resources offered” refers to expertise in the form of market-based solutions or proven technical approaches or other in-kind contributions such as licenses and intellectual property rights utilized by Offerors in Technical Approaches.

22 Is there a page limit for the Past Performance Matrix (Attachment J.2). We note that the format of this template does not leave much room for large program descriptions. Should Offerors keep those descriptions brief?

There is no page limit for the Past Performance Matrix.

However, Offerors should keep the Program Descriptions brief.

23 Are Offerors required to use USAID’s Past Performance Matrix Excel Template (Attachment 3)? Or, can Offerors use their own Word-based Past Performance format?

Offeror must use the Past Performance Excel Matrix (J.2) template. The CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE REFERENCE SHEET (J.3) can be submitted in Microsoft Word Document format.

24 Please confirm that Attachment J.3 is only for contracts not in CPARS (e.g., Cooperative Agreements). If the Contracts are in CPARS then this is not required.

Attachment J.3 is for both awards with CPARS and without CPARS. Offeror must fill out the question column of “Is there a CPARS report available? Y/N”.

25 May Offerors propose other Key Personnel in addition to the

COP?

Please refer to Section C.10 Staffing and Personnel, “The Contractor must assemble a competent team that combines a core team to implement PADU. The core team at the minimum consists of a local hire Chief of Party, designated as a sole Key Personnel.”

26 Are Offerors required to submit CV/resumes for other named personnel (e.g., DCOP, component leads, etc.)?

CV/resumes for other named personnel are not required.

27 Are Offerors required to submit references for the COP and other Key Personnel?

References for the COP are not required.

28 Are Offerors required to submit Letters of Commitment for Key Personnel and all Subcontractors?

Would USAID accept the inclusion of Letters of Commitment from non-major subs and/or resource partners as part of the cost proposal?

Offerors may submit Letters of Commitment for Key Personnel and major subcontractors only.

29 Is Form 1420-Biodata required for all named personnel? Or, just Key Personnel?

Form 1420-Biodata is required for Key personnel only.

30 Are Offerors required to name all personnel (Key and Non-Key) to be staffed on PADU? Or, should Offerors only name the Key Personnel only and leave all other positions as TBD?

Offerors must name the Key Personnel only and may leave all other positions as TBD.

31 On Page 101, Section K.4, the NAICS code of 541990 differs from the one on the Cover Page (541611). Can USAID clarify which one prevails?

The NAICS code is 541611. Please see the RFP Amendment Part I.

32 Would USAID consider the addition of other technical relevant annexes beyond those listed on page 119 (section L.6.1)? If yes, can USAID confirm that these additional annexes would not be included in the page limit of the technical proposal?

Offeror can only add one additional annex beyond those listed in Section L.6.1. This annex is for Key Personnel CV. Please see the RFP Amendment Part I.

Please see below page limits for Annexes:

● Annex A: Table of Management Positions (included in page limit)

● Annex B: Organizational Chart (not included in page limit)

● Annex C: Key Personnel CV (not included in the page limit)

33 On page 118 of the RFP (section L.5.2.b), there are two different RFP numbers listed for this solicitation (e.g., Technical

The RFP Number is 72049721R00007. Please use this number as a reference for proposal submission. Please see the RFP

Proposal: SOL-7204972100007 and Past Performance Information: SOL-72049721R00007). Can USAID kindly confirm the correct RFP number?

Amendment Part I.

34 On page 119 of the RFP (section L.5.8), the RFP notes that USAID recommends at least 6 months of validity to be included on the Standard Form-33. However, page 117 (section L.5.1) notes that proposals will be considered valid for a period of 210 days from the solicitation closing date. Can USAID kindly confirm the preferred validity period to be included on the SF- 33?

The validity of the proposal is 180 days from the solicitation closing date as stated in the SF-33. Please see the RFP Amendment Part I.

35 On page 13 of the RFP footnote #5 reads, “USAID/HCP has conducted initial consultations with GOI (the Ministry of Manpower and the Ministry of Education) and several companies. Follow-on consultations with other stakeholders, such as with the Ministry of Industry as well as the Ministry of Finance (DirGen of Tax) on the expectations and mechanics of the tax facility, will take place at the activity implementation stage.” Can USAID kindly clarify what type of agreements are in place with the Ministry of Manpower, Ministry of Finance, or other potential participating government entities, especially noting how such agreements would facilitate the launch and implementation of PADU?

USAID is finalizing a Grant Implementation Agreement with the Ministry of Manpower under which PADU will be implemented.

36 Can USAID please shed light on if they envision PADU working in any capacity with the Ministry of Education and Culture?

USAID does not envision PADU to work directly with the Ministry of Education and Culture (MOEC). However, USAID expects coordination of PADU programs with MOEC relevant programs to ensure synergy and to avoid overlap.

37 Can USAID please shed light on if they envision PADU working in any capacity with the Central Planning Agency

(BAPPENAS)?

USAID does not envision PADU to work directly with the Central Planning Agency (BAPPENAS). However, USIAD expects coordination of PADU programs with BAPPENAS policy and relevant programs.

38 On page 14 of the RFP footnote # 9 reads, “Based on USAID recent consultations with the Ministry of Manpower, USAID will target only government-owned vocational training centers i.e., Balai Latihan Kerja (BLK) in 4 (four) USAID priority provinces.” Can USAID confirm if they are open to having offerors kick off the project in two provinces, then, based on lessons learned, scale PADU activities to the other two provinces? If yes, can USAID confirm which two provinces would be preferred for rapid start-up and which two provinces would be preferred for scaling-up?

USAID does not expect PADU to begin programs in all four provinces simultaneously, however programs should be active in all four provinces by the end of the second year.

39 Are there any limitations to the types of private sector partners that can participate under PADU?

USAID PSE Policy (https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1865/usai d_psepolicy_final.pdf) defines private sector as the following:

● For-profit, commercial entities and their affiliated foundations;

● Financial institutions, investors and intermediaries;

● Business associations and cooperatives;

● Micro, small, medium and large enterprises that operate in the formal and informal sectors;

● American, local, regional, and multi-national businesses; and

● For-profit approaches that generate sustainable income

(e.g., a venture fund run by a non-governmental organization (NGO) or a social enterprise)

40 On page 117 (section L.5.2), the RFP states that, “All copies of the Technical Proposal, Past Performance information, Cost Proposal, and Branding and Marking Plans respectively must be separately submitted, and clearly marked....” Then, on Page 118 (section L.5.2), the RFP states that the Branding and Marking

As stated in page 118 Section L.5.2, Branding and Marking Plan will only be required for the apparently successful Offeror and will be requested by the CO. Offerors are not expected to include a draft BMP as part of their initial submission.

https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1865/usaid_psepolicy_final.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1865/usaid_psepolicy_final.pdf

Plans, “will only be required for the apparently successful Offeror and will be requested by the CO).” Can USAID confirm if offerors are expected to include a draft BMP as part of their initial submission?

41 Would USAID consider that “Annex A: Table of Management Positions” not be included in the page limit of the technical proposal?

“Annex A: Table of Management Positions” will be included in the page limit of the technical proposal.

42 On page 119, the RFP states that, “Proposals must be submitted in four separate parts: (a) Technical Proposal; (b) Past Performance Information; (c) Cost/Business Proposal; and (d) Branding Implementation and Marking Plans.” Then, on page 120, the RFP states that the following section is part of the Technical Proposal, “Past Performance Information (not included in page limit).”

Can USAID confirm that, since offerors are submitting “(b) Past Performance Information (per page 119) in a separate email, that Section L.6.1 should be revised to reflect that the Technical Proposal contents should only include the following:

● Cover Page (1 page, not included in page limit)

● Technical Approach (15 pages, included in page limit)

● Staffing and Management Plan (5 pages, included in page limit)

● Annex A: Table of Management Positions (included in page limit)

● Annex B: Organizational Chart (not included in page limit)

Page 118, Section L.5.2 indicates that Past Performance Information is to be submitted separately from the Technical Proposal and the Cost/Business Proposal. While page 120, Section L.6.1 lists “4. Past Performance Information” as a

Past Performance Information is now not included in the Technical Proposal. Please see the RFP Amendment Part I.

section of the Technical Proposal.

Please confirm that Offerors are not to include Past Performance Information in their Technical Proposals (M.2.1 – Factor 1), but rather as a separate Past Performance Information submission (M.2.3 – Factor 3) in the format of Attachment J.2, Past Performance Matrix and Attachment J.3, Past Performance Reference Form, per pages 121-122, Section L.7.

43 Will USAID/Indonesia allow a 1-page cover letter that is not included in the total page limit (in addition to a cover page) for the Technical Proposal, Past Performance Information, and Cost/Business Proposal?

A one page cover letter is not included in the total page limit.

44 Page 119, Section L.5.9 FORMAT states: “Format for the Technical Proposal must be in Microsoft Word, Times New Roman font size 12, text accessible. There is no specified font for graphics and charts but font size may be no smaller than font size 6.”

Will USAID/Indonesia kindly also permit for text boxes to be in font size no smaller than font size 10?

For graphics and charts, the font size may be no smaller than font size 6.

45 Page 19, Section C.7 lists requirements for an Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan (AMEL Plan) while page 28 with reference to Section F.4.2 states “Draft of Initial AMEL and CLA Plan due within 90 days after the award effective date.” Please kindly confirm that Offerors are not required to submit a draft AMEL Plan at the proposal stage.

USAID confirms that Offerors are not required to submit a draft AMEL Plan at the proposal stage.

46 Page 20, C.7 MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING, regarding the potential indicator, “Percent of females and males with new employment within 6 months of

This indicator will be focused on youth jobseekers who gain new employment/are recruited by private sector employers after graduating from BLK, as well as youth entrepreneurs who training following participation in USG- assisted workforce development programs (EG 6-12).”

Will this indicator be focused only on youth job seekers who gain new employment/are recruited by private sector employers after graduating from BLK? Or will this indicator also consider youth entrepreneurs who start their own businesses and identify business opportunities within private sector supply chains?

start their own businesses as a result of training implemented through partnerships between BLK and private sector entities.

47 Page 120, Section L.6.1: Will USAID/Indonesia allow a Table of Contents and a List of Acronyms to be included in the Technical Proposal, and not included in the total 20-page limitation?

Table of Contents and a List of Acronyms will not be included in the total of 20-page limitation.

48 Page 120, Section L.6.2.2 states “Executive Summary [1 page, included in page count]. The Executive Summary must be a synthesis of the key features of the Offeror’s strategy, proposed technical approach, management approach, implementation plan, and expected results.”

a. We note that the Technical Approach section is not to exceed 15 pages and the Staffing and Management Plan section is not to exceed 5 pages, while the Executive Summary is also to include a summary of both these sections. Therefore, we kindly request for the 1-page Executive Summary to be a stand-alone section that appears before the Technical Approach section, and not integrated within the Technical Approach section.

b. We kindly request for the 1-page Executive Summary not to be included in the overall 20-page limitation for the Technical Proposal.

The Executive Summary is included in the overall 20-page limitation for the Technical Proposal.

49 Page 120, Section L.6.1: Annex A: Table of Management a. Please refer to information in Section L.6.2.3.

Positions

a. Could USAID/Indonesia provide additional guidance on what minimum information Offerors should provide in this Annex? It is unclear what information from page 121, Section L.6.2.3 should be presented in Annex A.

b. It states that Annex A is “included in the page limit.” Since this is an Annex to the Technical Proposal, and since “Technical Approach” is limited to 15 pages and “Staffing and Management Plan” is limited to 5 pages - we kindly request for Annex A not to be included in the total 20-page limitation of the Technical Proposal.

b. Please see Answer No. 41.

50 Page 133, Section M.2.1 – Factor 1: Technical Approach:

“incorporating innovative approaches to creating partnerships to implement training programs for building skills required for business/industry transformation to Industry 4.0,”

a. We note the top five industry sectors prioritized in Industry

4.0. Could USAID/Indonesia confirm whether PADU will

prioritize some or all of the Industry 4.0 sectors?

b. Could USAID/Indonesia provide a list of priority sectors/industries that are aligned with PADU priorities?

a. USAID does not determine prioritization of the Industry

4.0 sectors for PADU.

b. USAID does not have specific priority sectors/industries.

51 At the bottom of page 127: “Fixed Fee (if any). 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. The Offeror must provide its proposed fee with rationale supported by application of profit-analysis factors. It is not expected that fees will be applied to other than direct costs for sub-awards.”

Could USAID/Indonesia please confirm that the last sentence regarding subcontractor’s fee is meant to state that the Offeror may not apply a fee on top of a subcontractor’s fee (double fee)?

Offeror may not apply a fee on top of a subcontractor’s fee.

It is standard practice to apply a fee on all subcontractor costs (both direct and indirect), but not on top of the subcontractor's fee.

52 Page 41, Section F.6.1 under “Minimum Qualifications” states that the Chief of Party should “Hold bachelor’s degree in related field of study e.g., business administration, education, humanity/development studies, social sciences, international development etc. with at least 10 (ten) years of experience working for development programs, or hold master’s degree with a minimum of 8 (eight) years of professional experience working in donor-funded development programs preferably with

USAID.”

Please kindly confirm that it is acceptable for the Chief of Party to have relevant professional experience working with non- USAID donor-funded development programs (such as United Nations, ILO, etc.).

As noted, the proposed Chief of Party’s professional experience working in donor-funded development programs with USAID is preferable. However, there is no restriction on the relevant professional experience that the COP may have, working with other types of development programs.

53 Page 41, Section F.6.1 under “Minimum Qualifications” states that the Chief of Party should have “Proven substantial international professional experience leading capacity development programs that involve building of partnershipRequired /collaborations between public institutions and the private sector, organizational/institutional capacity and systems strengthening.”

Could USAID/Indonesia kindly confirm that “substantial international professional experience” includes relevant experience working on international donor-funded projects within Indonesia?

Yes, substantial international professional experience includes relevant experience working on international donor-funded projects within Indonesia.

54 Section C.3.2, Tech-related TVET, Is the government open to Offerors may propose IT Sector and tech-related TVET considering IT sector and tech-related TVET training to prep students in AI, VR, etc., and link with IT private sector providers such as Google, FinTech, Telkom, Astra, etc.?

training program areas/fields as long as the training is conducted through partnerships between private sector companies and BLKs.

55 Section C.4.Provinces, what are USAID's four priority provinces in Indonesia, based on USAID's recent consultations with the Ministry of Manpower?

The four priority provinces are North Sumatra, Banten, East Java and South Sulawesi.

56 Section H.17.(c) Grants Under Contract, there is reference to grants under contract (GUC) payments. Can USAID elaborate on limitations (cash, GIK, etc.) and/or exceptions?

Grants under Contract (GUC) does not apply to this activity.

57 Section H.36.(c) Certifications, are there certifications required for contractor employees other than CISSP and CIPP stated in this section?

There are no additional certification requirements for contractor employees.

58 Section I.4. Construction, will construction services be required in relation to the BLKs or other entities at any stage in the contract?

This activity will not require construction.

59 Section L.6.1 / Page 120, Technical Proposal Format, will the government please consider expanding the page count of the Technical Approach to 20 pages?

The Technical Proposal may not exceed 20 pages.

60 Section C.10. Management Structure, Staffing and Personnel:

The Contractor must assemble a competent team that combines a core team to implement PADU. The core team at the minimum consist of a local hire Chief of Party, designated as a sole Key Personnel. The Chief of Party must serve as Alliance Builder who will be leading PADU efforts in identifying potential alliance partners, working hand-in-hand with the private sector, and building partnerships between vocational training centers and the private sector

The Chief of Party must be a local/cooperating country national.

Could the Government please clarify if they mean that the Chief of Party must be a local national, and ordinary resident, or if the local hire can be from the ASEAN region member countries, as Indonesia is an ASEAN member state?

61 Is there an incumbent for this effort? If there is an incumbent, please provide the contract number and title.

There is no incumbent for this activity.