72051421R00002 (01) - Attachment 2 - Questions and Answers.pdf

RFP 72051421R00002 – AMAZON ALIVE

ATTACHMENT 2 – QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Technical

1. Maps 1, 2 and 3, included in the Statement of Objectives attachment to the RFP (pages 132, 135 and 136) are displayed with a low resolution such that some of the detail on the maps, including the keys, are not very legible. Would USAID kindly consider providing higher resolution full page maps?

For map 1 please access the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development’s presentation on deforestation for the year 2019.

http://www.ideam.gov.co/documents/10182/105413996/presentacionbalancedeforestacion2019/7 9323fc-d0a1-4c95-b1a1-1892b162c067

For map 2 please refer to the following link from the UNODC report:

https://www.unodc.org/documents/crop-monitoring/Colombia/Colombia_Monitoreo_Cultivos_Ilicitos_2019.pdf

For map 3 please refer to the following link on communication from the Defensoria del Pueblo to the Minister of Interior last year http://www.indepaz.org.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/AT-N%C2%B0-018-2020- NACIONAL.pdf

2. Section L.7.3.2.a (page 111), Supporting Technical Information, requests a theory of change. May we include an accompanying graphic in an annex using 11 x 17-inch paper?

No. All pages must be 8.5 x 11 inches as stated in section L.7.2.

3. Page 13, Section C.5. states that the Supplemental Technical Assistance is to be used primarily to respond to emerging, unanticipated priorities in support of work by the GOC and/or USG, but may also be used to support and complement specific opportunities that present themselves in response to Colombia’s recent surge in deforestation and biodiversity loss in accordance with Section C.

However, Section F.10 (page 32) states that supplemental technical assistance is intended primarily to respond to emerging, unanticipated priorities related to GBV, migration, COVID-19 or any other unforeseen event by the GOC and/or USG, but may also be used to expand existing activity components or to support the Colombian peace agreement in accordance with Section C. • Can USAID please clarify the intended purpose of Supplemental Technical Assistance?

The first paragraph of Section F.10 of the RFP has been amended to read as follows:

“The Contractor must rapidly respond to additional needs of USAID/Colombia using Supplemental Technical Assistance ordered by the CO under a Request for Task Order Proposal (RFTOP).

Supplemental technical assistance is intended primarily to respond to emerging, unanticipated priorities in support of work by the GOC and/or the USG, but may also be used to support and complement specific opportunities that present themselves in response to Colombia’s recent surge http://www.ideam.gov.co/documents/10182/105413996/presentacionbalancedeforestacion2019/7c9323fc-d0a1-4c95-b1a1-1892b162c067 http://www.ideam.gov.co/documents/10182/105413996/presentacionbalancedeforestacion2019/7c9323fc-d0a1-4c95-b1a1-1892b162c067 https://www.unodc.org/documents/crop-monitoring/Colombia/Colombia_Monitoreo_Cultivos_Ilicitos_2019.pdf https://www.unodc.org/documents/crop-monitoring/Colombia/Colombia_Monitoreo_Cultivos_Ilicitos_2019.pdf http://www.indepaz.org.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/AT-N%C2%B0-018-2020-NACIONAL.pdf http://www.indepaz.org.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/AT-N%C2%B0-018-2020-NACIONAL.pdf in deforestation and biodiversity loss in accordance with Section C. The Contractor will respond to the RFTOP in a timely manner with the proposed implementation approach and cost proposal.

The CO may enter into negotiations with the Contractor to refine the proposed technical approach and proposed cost proposal until it is satisfied. The Contractor will assume contract management, financial administration, and monitoring and evaluation of activities under the resulting Task Order (TO).”

4. Page 110, Section L.7.3.1: PWS: Can USAID confirm that the PWS should only include the

Offeror’s proposed methodology for meeting Objectives 1 and 2 and that all activities, results and deliverables should be the Supporting Technical Information?

The PWS must contain the methodology to achieve each of the objectives proposed in the Statement of Objectives and the correspondent expected results per objective. The expected results provided in the PWS should be referenced and associated to the interventions, illustrative indicators with targets, and associated deliverables requested in the Supporting Technical Information. The PWS will become section C of the contract and elements of or the complete Supporting Technical Information may also be integrated into the contract (such as specific results or deliverables being incorporated into Section F.).

5. Page 110, Section L.7.3.1: PWS – USAID requires Offerors to provide the expected results under each objective. On page 111, Section L.7.3.2.d. Supporting Technical Information, USAID requires the Offeror to provide the expected result to be accomplished under each objective. Given page limitations would USAID allow Offeror’s to provide expected results only in the Supporting Technical Information?

The expected results provided in the PWS should be referenced and associated to the interventions, illustrative indicators with targets, and associated deliverables requested in the Supporting Technical Information.

6. Page 139, SOO, under Objective 1, USAID states “the Activity will increase the number of convictions and number of investigations related to deforestation as an environmental crime by 30%. Given that prosecution, convictions and investigations are outside the manageable control of the Offeror, would USAID remove the numeric value in this sentence?

The following paragraph in the Statement of Objectives, page 140, explains the awardee will build a baseline from which the statement above should be measured: “Progress towards the goals and objectives will be measured against a baseline assessment of environmental law enforcement and the degree to which interventions address the suite of threats and drivers that contribute to deforestation and weak governance. This Activity will also contribute to and report on progress towards relevant Sustainable Development Goals and National Development goals of the Colombian Government.”

7. Page 140, SOO, under Objective 2 (second paragraph): USAID states that “The Activity must increase the number of people targeted by alternative livelihood activities in the community that have reduced their unsustainable practices by 50%.” • Can USAID reword this sentence to clarify the baseline?

As the awardee will build a baseline at the onset of the Activity in the geography selected, the contractor must consider benefiting at least half of the people who have already changed their productive practices to more sustainable ones under the alternative livelihoods activities defined.

8. Page 140, SOO: Under Objective 2 (second paragraph): USAID states “In order to sustain efforts developed in the Activity, natural resource governance must be supported by at least 70% of related laws, policies or regulations implemented”. • Can USAID reword this sentence to clarify its meaning?

Sustainability of the efforts developed under natural resource governance in the Activity must rely significantly (70%) on laws, policies, norms, regulations and the like developed by the contractor.

9. The SOO, page 140, USAID indicates the Activity should establish and operationalize at least 2 networks of community-based forest and wildlife crime monitors. Given the risks associated with increasing murder of community members and environmental leaders in the Colombian Amazon and potential exposures of communities to this risk, does USAID have a determination threshold for when it is not safe to work with Amazon communities?

Yes, USAID constantly monitors the security throughout the country. USAID’s Security expert has direct and regular contact with Implementing Partner counterparts to discuss the particular situations occurring. The assessment of a threshold for when it is not safe to work in an area and on specific activities is done on a case by case.

10. USAID refers to the northwestern subregion as of the Colombian Amazon as key due to the regions key importance as it serves a connectivity role for biodiversity. Does this mean that USAID prefers this region over the southeastern region?

The statement of objectives does not emphasize the northwestern region from the southwestern one. The Activity is designed to respond to the problema stated in the purpose, development context and problem statement presented in the Statement of Objectives; in order to assert the development hypothesis and the goals stated, the Geography defined is circumscribed in what the Government denominates as Arc of deforestation (map 4).

11. In the SOO, page 140, USAID states the following: “Progress towards the goals and objectives will be measured against a baseline assessment of environmental law enforcement and the degree to which interventions address the suite of threats and drivers that contribute to deforestation and weak governance. This Activity will also contribute to and report on progress towards relevant Sustainable Development Goals and National Development goals of the Colombian Government.”

While it is clear that progress towards forest and biodiversity conservation is required, could USAID clarify if the Activity would need to monitor the drivers of deforestation also described in the SOO, such as illicit crops, land grabbing, etc.

Yes. Monitoring drivers of deforestation complements monitoring deforestation rate but also gives valuable information throughout the implementation of the Activity for adaptive management purposes. Taking this into account, drivers of deforestation to monitor would be limited to those being tackled in the Activity.

12. RFP Reference: C.4 Page Number: 12 Relevant RFP Language: “This Activity will adopt a Local Systems Development3 using the ‘umbrella’ model for activity implementation4… 4 http://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/201saf.pdf”

Question: The link provided in footnote 4 leads to a document entitled “Evaluation Triggers” rather than a document about the “umbrella” model. Could USAID provide the correct link?

https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/LocalSystemsFramework.pdf This link has been added to the RFP.

13. RFP Reference: L.7.3.2.d Page Number: 111 Relevant RFP Language: “Include the expected results to be accomplished under each objective, illustrative indicators by which results would be measured, targets for those indicators, and the deliverables associated with each including the deadline for completion.”

Question: Usually, required deliverables are included in the PWS rather than the description of interventions to implement the methodologies (required as part of the Supporting Technical Information). Would USAID amend the RFP to require deliverables to be included under each objective in the PWS and delete the requirement to include deliverables in the Supporting Technical Information?

Please review L. 7.3.1.b. Expected results are included in the PWS. The PWS will become Section C of the contract and elements of or the complete Supporting Technical Information may also be integrated in the contract if needed.

14. RFP Reference: F.6.3 Page Number: 20 Relevant RFP Language: “Achievement of the Activity's two objectives will be measured using both standard and custom indicators that demonstrate the impact of the Activity's performance.

In addition, the Contractor will provide twelve (12) performance indicators with its correspondent Performance Indicator Reference Sheets (PIRS) to describe data sources, methodologies, frequency of and people responsible for data collection, as well as baselines for each of the indicators and annual targets.”

Question: Section F.6.3 requires the Contractor to include exactly 12 performance indicators in the Activity MEL Plan. So that the Contractor may include indicators to appropriately measure the proposed implementation approach, would USAID kindly revise that requirement to read “the Contractor will provide at least twelve (12) performance indicators”?

For management purposes USAID considers 12 indicators a good amount of indicators to be able to monitor. The number also gives space for possible additional indicators USAID can request.

15. Under Objective 1., J.1.F, USAID states that one of the required indicators is “The Activity will increase the number of interagency coordination networks by 80% according to the baseline measured at the beginning of implementation.” Would USAID consider modifying this indicator to “The Activity will increase the number of interinstitutional coordination networks or mechanisms by 80% according to the baseline measured at the beginning of implementation” to reflect the importance of coordination with other actors beyond government agencies to achieve Objective 1?

This section of the RFP has been amended as follows: “According to the baseline measured at the beginning of implementation, the Activity will increase the number of interinstitutional coordination networks or mechanisms by 80%”.

16. Under Objective 1., J.1.F, USAID states that one of the required indicators is “The Activity will increase the number of convictions and number of investigations related to deforestation as an https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/LocalSystemsFramework.pdf environmental crime by 30%.” As stated, this indicator may inadvertently shift resources to investigate minor infractions and convict the most vulnerable people in a region instead of focusing on those whose offenders whose actions or financing are causing more significant deforestation and impacts. This has been one of the criticisms of the ARTEMISA operations carried out by the Colombian government. Would USAID consider changing this required indicator to a more useful indicator for measuring impact — “Number of formal charges against offenders that lead to sanctions”?

This section of the RFP has been amended as follows: “The Activity will increase the number of formal charges against offenders that lead to sanctions by 30%”

17. Section L.7.3.2 on page 110 requests “a Theory of Change developed through a Biodiversity threat-based analysis, laying out the proposed solution and broken down by intervention” and maps of the proposed work area. Given the complexity of this supporting technical information, would USAID exceptionally allow the Theory of Change graphics and maps to be displayed on 11” x 17” size paper for a more comprehensive and legible presentation and facilitate review?

See answer to question 2.

18. Section L.7.3.1. and L.7.3.1. b PWS on page 110 states that Offerors should list expected results under each objective. However, Section L.7.3.2., Supporting Technical Information (page 111), also states that we should include the expected results under this Section. So as to optimize presentation and page allocation, could USAID please clarify where Offerors should include expected results — in the PWS, or the Supporting Technical Information section?

See answer to questions 4 and 5

19. Could USAID please provide Offerors the two IEEs referenced in the RFP: LAC-IEE-18-18 and LAC-IEE-20-52? The USAID Environmental Compliance database where such documents are usually accessible remains down for unscheduled maintenance.

The solicitation has been amended to include these IEEs in section J.

20. Under Objective 2, J.1.F, USAID states that one of the indicators required is “Natural resource governance must be supported by at least 70% of related laws, policies or regulations implemented.” Could USAID clarify the definition of this indicator for Offerors? Are Offerors being asked to demonstrate how proposed activities are supporting the application of 70% of scope of work-related laws, policies, or regulations across all relevant sectors, or whether this indicator is intended to measure the percentage of project-supported laws, policies, or regulations, which are successfully implemented?

See answer to question 8.

21. Could USAID provide access to the USAID Natural Wealth most recent quarterly report FY20 Q4, currently not available on the DEC. Additionally, links provided under J.2. are not working. Kindly please provide working links to all other Natural Wealth reports.

USAID/Colombia checked the links and has not encountered any broken ones in J.2. Additionally, the solicitation has been amended to include the link to the most recent quarterly report to J.2.

https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/content/Detail_Presto.aspx?ctID=ODVhZjk4NWQtM2YyMi00YjRm LTkxNjktZTcxMjM2NDBmY2Uy&rID=NTczMzI0&inr=VHJ1ZQ%3d%3d&dc=YWRk&rrtc=VHJ 1ZQ%3d%3d&bckToL=

The link to all Natural Wealth reports has also been included:

https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/search/FusionSearchResults.aspx?q=natural+wealth

Business/Cost

22. Will USAID consider waivers from Branding and Marking requirements for activities implemented in conflict-affected areas?

USAID would consider waivers if circumstances warrant during implementation. The Agency has processes in place to waive marking requirements in the event these would pose compelling political, safety, or security concerns, or that marking would have an adverse impact in the host country.

23. Page 157, Attachment J-4 - Branding and Marking: Would USAID consider making the Branding Implementation Plan and Marking plan an unnumbered annex? The template provided by USAID is seven pages comprising more than 10% of the total page limit.

This solicitation has an ample page limit to allow Offerors to submit the information required in L.7.2.

24. The Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan is not an evaluated factor per Section M.3., page 128, but Section L.7.2. on page 109 includes it as part of the Technical Proposal’s 60-page limit. Would USAID consider including the Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan as an annex instead that is not included in the page limitation?

No. This solicitation has an ample page limit to allow Offerors to submit the information required in L.7.2.

25. Page 111, L. 7.4.2. iii, USAID requests the inclusion of “Resumes of maximum 3 pages which includes three professional references including their email and telephone number.” • Can USAID please confirm that the four resumes for key personnel (maximum 3 pages each) can be included in an annex?

It cannot be included in an annex. This is part of the Technical Proposal. Per section L.7.2, the written Technical Proposal is limited to sixty (60) pages. No part of the technical proposal is excluded from the page limitation.

26. Page 113, L. 7. 5 for Past Performance, USAID requests, “Describe any quality awards or certifications that indicate exceptional capacity to provide the service or product described in the Statement of Work. This information may be included in an annex and is not included in the page limitation.” However, on p. 106 under L.6, and on page 113 under L.7.2, USAID indicates that “no part of the technical proposal is excluded from the page limitations. Can USAID please confirm that the quality awards or certifications are excluded from the 60-page limit?

https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/content/Detail_Presto.aspx?ctID=ODVhZjk4NWQtM2YyMi00YjRmLTkxNjktZTcxMjM2NDBmY2Uy&rID=NTczMzI0&inr=VHJ1ZQ%3d%3d&dc=YWRk&rrtc=VHJ1ZQ%3d%3d&bckToL= https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/content/Detail_Presto.aspx?ctID=ODVhZjk4NWQtM2YyMi00YjRmLTkxNjktZTcxMjM2NDBmY2Uy&rID=NTczMzI0&inr=VHJ1ZQ%3d%3d&dc=YWRk&rrtc=VHJ1ZQ%3d%3d&bckToL= https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/content/Detail_Presto.aspx?ctID=ODVhZjk4NWQtM2YyMi00YjRmLTkxNjktZTcxMjM2NDBmY2Uy&rID=NTczMzI0&inr=VHJ1ZQ%3d%3d&dc=YWRk&rrtc=VHJ1ZQ%3d%3d&bckToL= https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/search/FusionSearchResults.aspx?q=natural+wealth

The solicitation has been amended to delete the sentence “This information may be included in an annex and is not included in the page limitation”

27. RFP Reference: L.7.2 Page Number: 109 Relevant RFP Language: “All graphs and charts must be included in the annexes.”

Question: We believe it would improve the readability of the proposal if the offeror is allowed to place graphs and charts next to the related text in main body of the proposal rather than placing them in annexes. Placing graphs and charts in annexes will require readers to flip between pages that are far apart in order to evaluate related information. Given that graphs and charts will count against the 60-page limit regardless of location, would USAID delete the sentence cited above and allow offerors to place graphs and charts in the main body of the proposal?

Section L.7.2 of the solicitation has been amended to remove the sentence “All graphs and charts must be included in the annexes”.

28. Section L.7.5.c (page 113), requests quality awards or certifications. Would USAID please clarify if the description of quality awards or certifications should specifically pertain to the two projects included as past performance references or if a broader selection of relevant projects may be included?

It refers to two of the most recent and relevant performed contracts or on-going contracts (or assistance instruments, such as cooperative agreements/grants) for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal for the Offeror

29. Section L.7.2.(page 109) states that text in any text boxes must be no less than 12-point font. Would

USAID kindly consider a smaller font limitation for text boxes?

The first paragraph of Section L.7.2 of the RFP has been amended to read as follows:

“The written Technical Proposal is limited to sixty (60) pages. No part of the technical proposal is excluded from the page limitation. As Past Performance Information is due prior to the rest of the technical proposal (See L.7.5), Offerors must ensure the entire technical proposal does not exceed the page limit, including the earlier submission of Past Performance Information. The proposal must be written in English and typed on standard 8.5” x 11” paper (216mm x 297mm), single spaced, Times New Roman font not less than 12 points in size, with margins no less than one inch of each border. Number each page consecutively. Text in graphs, charts and text boxes may be less than 12 points in size but no less than 8 points and must be legible.”

30. RFP Reference: L.7.2

Page Number: 109 Relevant RFP Language: “Text in graphs and charts may be less than 12 points in size but no less than 8 points and must be legible.”

Question: Could USAID confirm that a table is a type of chart and may contain less than 12 point font size as long as it is legible?

Yes, a table is a type of chart. See answer to Question 29.

31. Section L.7.2 on page 109 states, “Text in any text boxes included within the technical proposal must not be less than 12 points in size.” Would USAID consider allowing text smaller than size 12 in text boxes as long as it is legible?

See answer to question 29.

32. Page 109, Section L.7.2, format, page limitation, and content: USAID states, “The text in any text boxes included within the technical proposal must not be less than 12 points in size. All graphs and charts must be included in the annexes. Text in graphs and charts may be less than 12 points in size but no less than 8 points and must be legible.” • In the interest of visual presentation and readability, and in union with the font allowance for graphs and charts, would USAID consider allowing offerors to use Arial 9 point for text boxes?

See answer to question 29.

33. Page 109, Section L.7.2, “All graphs and charts must be included in the annexes. Text in graphs and charts may be less than 12 points in size but no less than 8 points and must be legible.” • Can USAID please confirm that “graphs and charts” includes tables, graphs, maps, figures, and other graphics? • Can USAID confirm that the minimum font size of 8 points applies to all of these types of content? • For the ease of the reader in evaluating the technical proposals, we normally include relevant content (charts, tables, maps, etc.) within the appropriate section or sub-section where it is referenced. Can USAID please clarify whether that is allowed? Alternately, can USAID please provide an expanded page limit and a new annex to accommodate this content being separated from the narrative?

See answer to question 29. Yes, this description includes tables, graphs, maps, figures and other graphics. References to annexes have been removed, so Offerors may include them in the relevant sections. The page limit remains unchanged.

34. Section L.7.2 on page 109 refers to annexes but the nature of these annexes is not denoted in Section L. Could USAID denote which parts of the submission it considers to be annexes?

References to annexes have been removed.

35. Section L.7.5 (page 113) instructs offerors who are not small business concerns to provide a narrative summary of the organization’s use of small business concerns over the past three years, plus associated information (list of recent contracts with subcontract reports submitted to eSRS, and small business references). Can USAID confirm that this additional information to the PPRs can be attached as an Annex?

No. In accordance with section L.7.2., the written Technical Proposal is limited to sixty (60) pages.

No part of the technical proposal is excluded from the page limitation.

36. Section B.3.c, CLIN 002 (page 8) states, “In no event, the fixed fee of the Task Orders under CLIN

002 can exceed the negotiated fee under CLIN 001.” Could USAID please confirm that this refers to the fixed fee percentage applied to CLIN 002 Task Orders and does not indicate that the negotiated fee amount under CLIN 001 is expected to cover CLIN 002 Task Orders too?

Yes, it refers to the percentage. The solicitation has been amended and now reads: “In no event, the fixed fee of the Task Orders under CLIN 002 can exceed the fee percentage negotiated under CLIN 001”.

37. Sections C.4 (page 12) and F.6.13 (page 27) note that the Activity Fund may include STTA;

however, the Detailed Budget tab of the required budget template has STTA listed under Salaries and Wages. Could USAID please confirm that Offerors may move STTA from Salaries and Wages to the Activity Fund in the Detailed Budget tab?

The solicitation has been amended to remove references to STTA in Sections C.4 and F.6.13

38. Section C.4 (page 12) states, “Subawards to local partners identified at the proposal stage are considered part of the Activity Fund.” Section L.8, Part 2, A.10 (page 119) lists both Subcontracts and Grants Under Contract (GUCs) under the Activity Fund without any indication that the subcontract portion applies only to local partners. Similarly, the Detailed Budget tab in Attachment J.6 does not include a separate cost category for Subcontracts, which seems to indicate that these costs should be budgeted under the Activity Fund. Could USAID please confirm that Offerors may budget international subcontractor costs under the Activity Fund? If this is not correct, please clarify which international subcontractor costs may be budgeted under the Activity Fund, e.g., STTA, programmatic activity costs, etc.

Offerors may budget international subcontractor costs under the Activity Fund. Please note that under L.7.4.3 Operational Plan, “To encourage local ownership and increase local capacity development as part of USAID’s Journey to Self- Reliance, the Offeror is encouraged to partner with local and/or regional partner/s and build mechanisms to develop the capacity of these organizations over the life of the Activity.”

39. Section H.3.a.1 (page 41) states that salary ranges for professional positions must be submitted to the CO within 90 days after award. Section H.3.e (page 42) requires a Pay Scale for STTA. Could USAID please confirm that the STTA Pay Scale also would be submitted post-award and is not a required element of the cost proposal?

Section H.3.e of the solicitation has been amended to read: “For Short-Term Technical Assistance (Consultants), the Contractor must submit a Pay Scale to the Contracting Officer within 90 days after award., which will include the level of expertise (e.g., Junior, Mid-Level, Senior), along with the responsibilities and the qualifications sought for each level. Consultant compensation must be within the pay scale specified and must not, without approval of the contracting officer, exceed the maximum daily salary rate as described in ADS 302.”

40. Regarding the Budget Template in Attachment J.6, please clarify the following items:

a. Could USAID please confirm that Offerors may remove Years 6-7 from the Detailed Budget tab to align with the period of performance for this project?

The budget template has been revised to remove years 6 and 7 from the detailed budget tab.

b. Could USAID please confirm that Offerors may add standard cost categories to the

Detailed Budget tab, such as Equipment/Supplies?

In accordance with section L.8.Part 2 - Proposed Costs and Prices/ Detailed budget narrative.b., “The cost proposal must be prepared in a manner consistent with your current accounting system.”. Therefore, equipment and supplies costs can be included in the detailed budget tab.

41. RFP Reference: Attachment J.6 Budget Guidance and Template

Question: The Detailed Budget for CLIN 001 excludes supplies and equipment. Would USAID consider adding sections for supplies and equipment in the Detailed Budget tab?

In accordance with section L.8.Part 2 - Proposed Costs and Prices/ Detailed budget narrative.b., “The cost proposal must be prepared in a manner consistent with your current accounting system.”. Therefore, equipment and supplies costs can be included in the detailed budget tab.

42. RFP Reference: Attachment J.6 Budget Guidance and Template

Question: In Attachment J.6, the template in the Detailed Budget sheet includes 7 years. Could USAID confirm that the period of performance for the activity is 5 years and the columns for Year 6 and Year 7 should be deleted?

The budget template has been revised to remove years 6 and 7 from the detailed budget tab.

43. RFP Reference: Attachment J.6 Budget Guidance and Template

Question a: In the LOE sheet of the Budget Template, Line 16 lists ceiling rates for each year, whereas the total in Line 41 at the bottom of that table says, Total Level of Effort”. Would USAID please clarify that the table for CLIN 002 on the “LOE” tab is for LOE and not ceiling daily rates?

The Budget Template has been revised to divide the tables for LOE and ceiling rates.

Question b: Could USAID confirm that offerors should add an additional sheet to the budget to present ceiling daily rates for each labor category?

No. The Budget Template has been revised to divide the tables for LOE and ceiling rates.

44. RFP Reference: L.8, Part 2.e Page Number: 116 Relevant RFP Language: “The Offeror must provide the Cost Proposal budgets in Microsoft Office Excel Worksheets. The budget must be completed in the format included in Section J.6 – BUDGET

TEMPLATE.”

Question: So that offerors may submit a budget that is consistent with our approved NICRA, could USAID please adjust the requirement above so that Attachment J.6 is considered a sample budget and that offerors may submit their own template, as long as it complies with the layout and structure in Attachment J.6?

Offerors must use the format included in J.6. Offerors may also complement this information by using their own detailed budget spreadsheet as a separate tab within the excel file.

45. Section L.8, Part 2, e (page 116) states, “The Summary Cost Worksheets provided must include separate worksheets for the prime and all subcontracts.” The Summary Budget tab in the required budget template includes only two line items with aggregate costs for CLINs 001 and 002. As subcontractors are unlikely to have separate budgets for CLIN 002, is it correct to assume that subcontractor summary cost worksheets will consist of a single line item for their CLIN 001 budget totals?

Yes. Subcontractor budgets are only for their CLIN 001 budget totals.

46. Section L.8, Part 2, f (page 117) states, “The Offeror must submit a detailed budget, per component…” Could USAID please confirm that “per component” means major cost categories?

The terms “per component” and “budget categories” are used interchangeably in this section.

However, the solicitation has been amended to remove the words “per component”.

47. RFP Reference: L.8, Part 2.f Page Number: 117 Relevant RFP Language: “The Offeror must submit a detailed budget, per component…”

Question: The term “component” has not been used elsewhere in the RFP. If the requirement to submit a detailed budget for CLIN 002 remains, in accordance with the Detailed Budget sheet of the budget template (Attachment J.6), could USAID confirm that “per component” means “per

CLIN”?

The terms “per component” and “budget categories” are used interchangeably in this section.

However, the solicitation has been amended to remove the words “per component”.

48. Regarding Section L.8, Part 2, B (CLIN 002) (pages 123-124), please clarify the following items:

a. The last sentence of paragraph two states, “For each of the positions, qualifications include at least 5 years of relevant experience.” Should Offerors assume that there is one level for all labor categories for all types of staff/consultants or may Offerors propose separate ceiling daily rates (CDRs) for mid-level and senior for expatriates and CCNs, respectively?

Offerors can propose separate ceiling rates for the same position by level; if that is the case, it must include in its cost proposal sufficient detail to support and explain all costs proposed, giving figures and narrative explanation, in accordance with Section L.8. Part 2.

B. CLIN 002.

b. Must Offerors use the proposed CDRs for the CLIN 002 budget or may they use more likely daily rates based on past experience? Please note that this is particularly important, should USAID limit the CDRs to one per labor category (to cover both expatriates and CCNs).

In accordance with Section L.8. Part 2. B. CLIN 002, the Offeror must propose ceiling daily rates for each of the illustrative positions. This section also states that for estimating purposes, the Offeror must propose costs for a total of [1,800] person-days equally distributed across all labor categories for each year of the five-year contract. If an Offeror were to propose separate ceiling rates for the same position by levels, it must use the ceiling rate for each level, as long as the mix provides the required LOE.

c. Could USAID please clarify whether ODCs need to be broken out or if they can be budgeted as a lump sum?

In accordance with Section L.8. Part 2. B. CLIN 002, the Offeror must include in its cost proposal sufficient detail to support and explain all costs proposed, giving figures and narrative explanation; this applies to ODCs.

d. Could USAID please confirm that the $1,700,000 ODC limitation refers to all direct material costs (e.g., travel, subcontracts, ODCs, etc.), and not just ODCs as a single cost category?

In accordance with Section B.5. OTHER DIRECT COST LIMITATIONS UNDER CLIN 002, “The estimated cost of this CLIN includes estimates for material, equipment, subcontracts, travel, and training required for performance of the total amount of work that can be ordered by the government under this CLIN during the life of this contract”.

49. RFP Reference: B.6 Page Number: 9 Relevant RFP Language: “In performing Government orders for Technical Assistance under CLIN 002, the Contractor is obligated to provide up to a maximum of 9,000 person-days.”

RFP Reference: L.8, Part 2.B. CLIN 002 Page Number: 123-124 Relevant RFP Language: “For the Supplemental Technical Assistance Portion, the Offeror must set aside twenty (20) percent of the proposed Total Estimated Cost to cover Task Orders to be potentially issued under the IDIQ Contract. In this request for proposal, the Government has specified [a maximum of 9,000] person-days of labor, to include subcontractor and consultant hours, as the maximum level of effort that may be required during the contract period for performance for authorized work under IDIQ CLIN 002, ‘Supplemental Technical Assistance.’…For estimating purposes, the Offeror must propose costs for a total of [ 1,800] person-days equally distributed across all labor categories for each year of the five-year contract.”

Question a: Section B.6 sets a maximum of 9,000 person-days to be ordered under CLIN 002. We understand that the government is creating a flexible mechanism and cannot determine the requirements for person-days at this time. However, the budgeting requirements for CLIN 002 on pages 123-124 and in Attachment J.6: Budget Template require the offeror to submit a total price for CLIN 002 by equally distributing the cost across all 23 labor categories for all 5 years.

Furthermore, the highest possible total cost for CLIN 002 is $7.4 million (20% of $37 million).

Requiring offerors to submit a total cost for CLIN 002 with these parameters means that the average ceiling daily rate (CDR) will be approximately $300-$400/day (some positions might have a ceiling a little higher, some a little lower) in order for the total to add up to exactly 20% of total estimated cost. The instruction “For estimating purposes, the Offeror must propose costs for a total of [1,800] person-days equally distributed across all labor categories for each year of the five-year contract” on page 124 results in the offeror budgeting all 9,000 days, which results in having to develop a low average rate for all CDRs. It is the combination of the ceiling and the requirement to budget all days that results in having to limit the ceilings. Lower ceilings will limit the Contractor to engage only mid-level experts (mostly local nationals) for most, if not all, labor categories. Ceilings at this level will limit the ability of the Contractor to hire international experts, if needed. So that USAID can have access to experts with a broad range of experience across all labor categories, would USAID consider changing the requirement for CLIN 002 so that offerors only need to submit ceiling daily rates for each labor category and include 20% of total cost as a summary line item

(and not submit a detailed budget for CLIN 002)? This would still allow USAID to compare ceiling daily rates across offerors while not restricting the pool of experts that the Contractor can engage during implementation.

Offerors can propose separate ceiling rates for the same position by level; if that is the case, it must include in its cost proposal sufficient detail to support and explain all costs proposed, giving figures and narrative explanation, in accordance with Section L.8. Part 2. B. CLIN 002. This section also states that the Offeror must propose ceiling daily rates for each of the illustrative positions and for estimating purposes, the Offeror must propose costs for a total of [1,800] person-days equally distributed across all labor categories for each year of the five-year contract. If an Offeror were to propose separate ceiling rates for the same position by level, it must use the ceiling rate for each, as long as the mix provides the required LOE.

Question b: If the requirement for a detailed budget for CLIN 002 remains, requiring offerors to budget the ceiling rates for each position represents a worst-case scenario rather than the rates of a mix of technical experts that would actually provide the technical assistance during implementation. Therefore, would USAID consider allowing offerors to propose rates below the proposed CDRs in the detailed CLIN 002 budget that represent more likely daily rates based on past experience?

Please refer to the answer provided for numeral a. of this question.

Question c: In addition, would USAID consider allowing offerors to propose multiple levels (mid and senior) within a labor category to provide flexibility within the IDIQ?

Please refer to the answer provided for numeral a. of this question.

50. Section L.8, Part 10 (page 126) indicates in the heading that Information to Support Consent must be submitted for major subcontractors; however, the text below refers to “proposed subcontractors.” Could USAID please confirm that Offerors may submit Information to Support Consent for all subcontractors to ensure timely engagement of subcontractors?

The solicitation has been amended and the title of this section changed to “Part 10 - Information to Support Consent to Subcontracts” to signal that this requirement is applicable to all proposed Subcontractors and not just Major Subcontractors.

51. RFP Reference: L.8 Page Number: 115 Relevant RFP Language: “For budgeting purposes only, Offerors must budget using an exchange rate of COP 3,200/USD.”

Question: The COP/USD exchange rate has fluctuated significantly over the past several months.

Using a 6-month average would provide a more accurate representation of costs likely to be incurred during project implementation. Would USAID revise the required exchange rate to be COP 3,675/USD based on OANDA data from the last 6 months?

In accordance with Section L.8, for budgeting purposes only, Offerors must budget using an exchange rate of COP 3,200/USD.

52. RFP Reference: B.5 Page Number: 8

Relevant RFP Language: “The estimated cost of this CLIN [002] includes estimates for material, equipment, subcontracts, travel, and training required for performance of the total amount of work that can be ordered by the government under this CLIN during the life of this contract. The amount of ordered Other Direct costs will not exceed $1,700,000.00.”

Question: Because subcontractor personnel will provide technical assistance and therefore be a component of the Salaries and Wages composition of CLIN 002, would USAID consider removing “subcontractors” from the Other Direct Costs?

This section remains unchanged.

53. RFP Reference: F.6.13 Page Number: 27 Relevant RFP Language: “Up to 50% of the Total Estimated Cost of CLIN 001 of this Activity is required to be spent through an Activity Fund. The Activity Fund can include Grants under Contract (GUCs), Subcontracts and Short-Term Technical Assistance (STTA).”

RFP Reference: L.7.4.3 Page Number: 112 Relevant RFP Language: “Subawards to local partners identified at the proposal stage are considered part of the Activity Fund (up to 50% of the TEC of CLIN 001).”

Question: We understand that CCN consultants should be included in the Activity Fund. Could USAID confirm that international consultants should be included under ODCs?

The solicitation has been amended to remove references to STTA in Sections C.4 and F.6.13. The budget template has a specific section to include local and international STTA.

54. RFP Reference: H.3.a

Page Number: 41 Relevant RFP Language: “1. Salary ranges for ALL the professional positions in this Contract will be established based on the market value, based on duties and responsibilities of the position, in the country and locality of contract performance. The established range must be realistic and reasonable for the responsibilities of each position and must not be based on the salary history or the qualifications of the candidate selected. The salary ranges must be certified by the Contractor and submitted to the Contracting Officer within 90 days after award. Upon establishment of the salary ranges of the professional positions, an appropriate candidate must be selected based on the qualifications sought for that position and the Contractor’s personnel practices…

“All Cooperating Country Nationals (CCNs) and Third Country Nationals (TCNs) salaries must not exceed the Local compensation Plan (LCP). Approval of the Contractor’s budget does not absolve the Contractor’s duty to request and receive Mission Director’s approval prior to hiring CCN and TCN personnel whose salaries are above the LCP.”

Question: The RFP does not contain an LCP. Could USAID confirm that the offeror may use its own national salary scale for CCN hires?

The Offeror can use its own national salary scale to the extent it is consistent with market value, based on duties and responsibilities of the position, realistic and reasonable. If any of the salaries proposed by the winning Offeror for CCNs exceed the LCP, Mission Director’s approval would be required per AIDAR 722.170. There would need to be an extremely compelling reason to pay contractor CCNs more than the LCP given the intent of the AIDAR restriction is to ensure parity of pay for both USAID CCNs and contractor CCNs.

LCP ranges are included in the chart below:

55. RFP Reference: L.7.5.a.1 Page Number: 113 Relevant RFP Language: “List two (2) of the most recent and relevant performed contracts or on-going contracts (or assistance instruments, such as cooperative agreements/grants) for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal for the Offeror and two (2) for each major subcontractor using the template provided in Section J.5. This submission will count against the technical proposal page limit indicated in L.7.2.”

RFP Reference: J.5 - PAST PERFORMANCE REPORT – SHORT FORM Page Number: 165 Relevant RFP Language: “The form is not required if the below information is available in the Government past performance systems.”

Question: For relevant contracts that have completed evaluations in the CPARS database, could USAID confirm that offerors may simply list the name of the project and the contract number (and no additional information is required as part of the proposal for these contracts)?

Confirmed. If the evaluations are in the CPARS database, contract numbers are sufficient.

56. Can USAID confirm that per Section F.6.13, Activity Fund Manual (page 27), “The Activity Fund can include Grants under Contract (GUCs), Subcontracts, Short-Term Technical Assistance (STTA),” and participatory training?

The solicitation has been amended to remove references to STTA in Sections C.4 and F.6.13. Also, Participatory training is not to be included in the Activity Fund.

57. Could USAID please clarify if J.6 Budget Template (Table 1. Summary Budget; Table 2. Budget Summary Cost Sheet: Level of Effort; Table 3. Budget Template by CLIN) will need to be completed for each subcontractor, or just the prime contractor?

The Level of Effort tab will need to be completed for the prime and each major subcontractor.

Section L.8. Part 2, e. states “the budget must be completed in the format included in Section J.6 – BUDGET TEMPLATE. The budget must include the budget associated with all proposed subcontracts. The Summary Cost Worksheets provided must include separate worksheets for the prime and all subcontracts. Section M.2.3 states “As labor costs are the principal cost driver of the overall cost, cost realism will be done only on the labor costs included in CLIN 001, to include direct labor and consultant labor costs of the prime offeror and of any major subcontractors (defined as any that represent 20% or more of the CLIN 001 budget).

58. Can USAID confirm whether Key Personnel Letters of Commitment are required? If so, can USAID clarify where they should be included in the technical or cost volume?

Per the terms of this solicitation, letters of commitment for Key personnel are not required.

59. Page 9., B.6 Level of Effort (CLIN 002) a. Could USAID please clarify if offerors are required to provide a budget inclusive of exactly 9,000 person-days or if 9,000 person-days is a maximum person-day figure for this CLIN?

Exactly 9,000 person-days. Section L.8., Part 2, B. CLIN 002 provides the following instruction to Offerors: “For the Supplemental Technical Assistance Portion, the Offeror must set aside twenty

(20) percent of the proposed Total Estimated Cost to cover Task Orders to be potentially issued under the IDIQ Contract. In this request for proposal, the Government has specified [a maximum of 9,000] persondays of labor, to include subcontractor and consultant hours, as the maximum level of effort that may be required during the contract period for performance for authorized work under IDIQ CLIN 002, “Supplemental Technical Assistance. Accordingly, the Offeror must propose costs associated with the above number of person-days of level-of-effort.”

60. Page 123., Section L Part 2 – Proposed Costs and Prices, B. CLIN 002

a. Could USAID please clarify that offerors are permitted to choose and budget for positions which are applicable to their specific technical approach from the list provided in this section of the RFP and that it is not required to budget for all positions included in this list?

No. Per section L.8., Part 2, B. CLIN 002, “The Offeror must propose ceiling daily rates for each of the illustrative positions”. Also, per section I.8, “This is an indefinite-quantity contract for the supplies or services specified, and effective for the period stated in the Schedule. The quantities of supplies and services specified in the Schedule are estimates only and are not purchased by this contract.” In the absence of a SOW for a Task Order under CLIN 002, which may or may not be executed by the Government, it is unclear what specific technical approach could exist at this point for the Offeror to choose some of these positions.

b. Similar to the question related to B.6 Level of Effort in CLIN 002, could USAID please clarify that if Offerors are required to budget for 1,800 person days per year, then the 9,000 labor-day estimate is a requirement and not a maximum threshold?

Yes. Section L.8., Part 2, B. CLIN 002 provides the following instruction to Offerors: “For the Supplemental Technical Assistance Portion, the Offeror must set aside twenty (20) percent of the proposed Total Estimated Cost to cover Task Orders to be potentially issued under the IDIQ

Contract. In this request for proposal, the Government has specified [a maximum of 9,000] persondays of labor, to include subcontractor and consultant hours, as the maximum level of effort that may be required during the contract period for performance for authorized work under IDIQ CLIN 002, “Supplemental Technical Assistance.” Accordingly, the Offeror must propose costs…