Solicitation No. 72052320R00003 (Questions & Answers).pdf

Request for Proposals (RFP) Number 72052320R00003 Improving Effectiveness of State-Level Justice Institutions in Mexico

(Questions & Answers)

1. Hope all is well, I would like to ask if this requirement is a follow-on to the incumbent contract currently held by MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC. under AID523C1400003? If not, can you confirm if incumbent exists for this effort or if this is a new requirement for USAID/Mexico. Thank you in advance!

Answer: USAID/Mexico has three current justice awards, including a contract implemented by Management Systems International (MSI), a Cooperative Agreement with Mexico Evalua, and a local contract to Fortis Consulting. This activity is not a direct follow-on to the current contract with MSI and USAID/Mexico encourages innovative approaches and thinking to achieve the objectives outlined. It is expected that prospective offerors’ Performance Work Statements will incorporate, and clearly reflect, learning and best practices from prior efforts to support Mexico’s justice sector. In addition, the successful offeror must closely collaborate with both Mexico Evalua and Fortis.

2. Good Morning, Hope all is well. I am wondering if an incumbent exists for the potential requirement: Improving Effectiveness of State-Level Justice Institutions in Mexico outlined under 72052320R00003. If so, could you please provide the following information?:

Vendor name: Management Systems International, Inc.

Contract number: AID-523-C-14-00003 Value: $72,255,703.00 Date of award: 07/03/2014 Expiration date: 07/15/2020

Thank you for your kind assistance!

Answer: Please also refer to the response to Question 1.

3. 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.

Answer: Please see response to Questions 1 and 2.

U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Project Title:Improving Effectiveness of State-Level Justice Institutions in Mexico Solicitation #: 72052320R00003 Page 1 of 10

4. Can USAID please confirm that the personnel summary matrix, management structure org charts, Past Performance Matrix, small disadvantaged business participation, and QASP listed on page 119 and mobilization plan listed on page 121 make up the Annexes and that no other annexes should be submitted?

Answer: Please refer to L.6., A. Language in Section L.6, A. ORGANIZATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, is revised in Amendment 1 to this RFP.

5. RFP page 160, in the QASP template, states that a QASP will be developed after award if the requirement includes a Statement of Objectives (SOO). Can USAID please confirm that, notwithstanding this language, a draft QASP should be included in Annex A as requested in Section L?

Answer: Offerors should submit a draft Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) as an Annex to the Technical Proposal. Refer to Section J, Attachment J.6 on the RFP.

6. RFP page 160 refers to the Performance Requirements Summary Matrix in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Section L, however, does not request a Performance Requirements Summary Matrix. Can USAID please confirm this is not a requirement in the technical proposal?

Answer: A Performance Requirements Summary Matrix must be included as required in the QASP. Offerors must reference the Matrix in the PWS.

7. Can USAID please confirm that the (1) Subcontracting: Small Business Goals Plan (including copies of any enforceable agreements) and the (2) Management Plan:

Subcontracting Utilization referred to on RFP p. 122 are to be included in an Annex and excluded from the 40 page limit?

Answer: The Small Business Goals Plan and the Subcontracting Utilization are not included in the 40 page limitation.

8. Would USAID allow a slight modification of the Budget Template included in Attachment J.2 of the solicitation to better present certain cost items? For example, Allowances could be separated from the Fringe Benefits group to better track support provided to professional expats.

Answer: Offerors must follow the Budget Template as provided in the RFP. Allowances can be separated from Fringe Benefits.

Solicitation #: 72052320R00003 Page 2 of 10

9. Can USAID confirm that the technical approach will form part of the contract and therefore will be presented in neutral language whereas the management approach will reflect the contractor’s specific background, partners/associations, and past performance references?

Answer: The Performance Work Statement will become Section C of the contract. Based on this, the PWS must be in neutral language. The management approach may reference offerors’ specific organizational capabilities and background.

10. Does USAID have an anticipated award date that offerors should use for their budget estimates?

Answer: USAID’s anticipated award date is June 2020.

11. Can USAID please provide an exchange rate for all bidders to utilize for the conversion of the LCP?

Answer: Offerors may use the current US Embassy exchange rate of $19 Mexican Pesos per $1 US Dollar for estimates.

12. Page 18 of the Annual Work Plan states that the Part Two Work Plan should cover "October 1, 2020 though the end of the three base years of performance." The Cover Letter indicates that the project for a five-year period. Can USAID confirm the period of performance is 5 years without any option periods?

Answer: USAID anticipates the award of a Cost-Plus-Fixed Fee (CPFF) Completion type contract for an anticipated five-year period. Language in Section F, ‘Reporting, Annual Work Plans’ is revised in Amendment 1 to this RFP.

13. Page 30, Additional Requirements for Personnel Compensation, (a) (1) refers to “proposed salary or wage that exceeds 5% ceiling of the individual’s current salary or wage or the highest rate of annual salary or wage received during any full year of the immediately preceding three years”. Can USAID provide guidance on how this requirement aligns with the new USAID 1420 Form (effective 10/09/2019) that eliminated salary history and requires that proposed salaries be based on the market value of the position?

Answer: The contractor is expected to comply with sections H.2 and H.3 of the RFP. The contractor is also expected to comply with the latest USAID 1420 Form as appropriate.

Solicitation #: 72052320R00003 Page 3 of 10

14. Page 119 indicates a "Personnel Summary Matrix (per Section L) on the expertise of staff, consultants and other personnel specialists"; however, section L does not address specifically a "Personnel Summary Matrix". Can USAID please clarify what should be included in the Personnel Summary Matrix?

Answer: Please include a Personnel Summary Matrix as an annex to the Technical Proposal. This must outline the appropriate staffing combination to support the proposed Technical Approach.

15. In various locations, the RFP states that a minimum of 20% of the total budget should be set aside for Grants Under Contract. Can USAID confirm that this 20% should be calculated on the total value of non-grant costs. For example, the sum of direct and indirect costs x 20% = Grants under contract figure.

Answer: Please refer to Section L.9, ‘Grants Under Contracts (GUCs)’. Offerors must set aside a minimum of 20% of its total estimated costs for Grants Under Contracts (GUCs).

16. Page 119 in the technical direction says the offeror must address the portion of its budget that will be set aside for GUCs. However, page 118 states “The technical proposal must be entirely separate from the cost proposal and it must not include cost information in the content of the technical proposal.” Could USAID please confirm that the amount budgeted for GUC should not appear in the technical proposal?

Answer: The amount budgeted for Grants Under Contracts must be identified in the Cost Proposal, not in the Technical Proposal. However, offerors are reminded of Section L.6, ‘Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal’, which requires that the offeror must clearly explain how relevant local organizations will be incorporated into proposed activities utilizing GUCs and clearly explain how these activities will complement direct engagement with GOM counterparts.

17. Page 121 indicates a Mobilization Plan is required as an annex; however, this item is not present in the list of items that do NOT count against the total page limitation on page

119. Can USAID confirm that the Mobilization Plan annex does not count towards the page limitation?

Answer:The Mobilization Plan must be submitted as an Annex to the Technical Proposal.

It does not count towards the 40 page limitation.

Solicitation #: 72052320R00003 Page 4 of 10

18. Page 122 states that Small Business Goal Plan should be included as part of the management section in the technical. Can USAID please clarify which items should be specifically included in the technical proposal and which should be included solely the Business/Cost Proposal? Also, should any of the small business information required in the technical volume be included in a non-counting annex?

Answer: Both the Small Business Goal Plan (for large businesses) and the Small Business Subcontracting Plan must be submitted as part of the Business/Cost Proposal.

19. Page 126 - (G) Contractual states that a subcontracting plan should be provided at a competitive range. Page 121 states that a subcontracting plan should be submitted as part of the technical. Can USAID please clarify:

a. Is a small business subcontracting plan required as part of the initial submission?

Answer: A Small Business Subcontracting Plan is required as part of an offerors initial submission. Language is revised in Amendment 1 to this RFP.

b. Should the small business subcontracting plan be submitted as part of the technical proposal or the cost proposal?

Answer: Please see the response to Question 18.

20. Page 127 indicates a specific section for construction. Can USAID provide guidance on whether construction activities will be a primary type of interventions? If so, can USAID provide a plug figure so that offerors are aware of the size of this specific activity type and the relevant management needs?

Answer: This is standard contractual language. Construction activities are not envisioned under this award.

21. Page 132 indicates that the Offeror must submit and negotiate a Branding Implementation Plan and a Marking Plan. Is this required as part of the initial proposal? If so, should this be included in the cost or technical submission? If it is part of the technical, will USAID confirm that it should be included as a non-counting annex?

Answer: The Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan must be submitted as part of the initial Business/Cost proposal.

Solicitation #: 72052320R00003 Page 5 of 10

22. L.6.B(c) Please confirm that all required information on Contractor Performance Information should be placed in an annex to the technical proposal.

Answer: The offeror must include a summary of relevant past performance information which will count towards the 40 page limitation. Contractor Performance Information, including the Past performance matrix (See ATTACHMENT J.7) and past performance report forms, references, Past Performance information in using small business concerns (See ATTACHMENT J.8), does not count towards the 40 page limitation.

23. In Section L, pages 119-120, USAID provides a list of details required for each intervention (e.g., description, work plan, and indicators). Can USAID confirm the approximate number of “interventions” that each Offeror is expected to propose?

Answer: The total number of interventions will depend on each offeror’s proposed technical approach.

24. In Section L, page 120, USAID asks for “at least two proposed indicators per intervention.” Due to the complementary and cross-cutting nature of some interventions and activities, instead of presenting two indicators per intervention, can Offerors provide one overall indicator table (making sure that all interventions are represented) under the PWS-Technical Approach section?

Answer: Offerors may provide an overall summary indicator table, however, the PWS narrative must also include a direct reference to the proposed indicators. It is possible that certain indicators will be supported by multiple interventions.

25. In Section L, page 120, USAID states that “for each proposed intervention” the Offeror should provide “an illustrative Work Plan for the intervention.”

(A): Given the need for flexibility and adaptation, can USAID update the timeframe requirement for a Year 1 Work Plan only?

Answer: The successful offeror will have 90 days from the date of award to prepare the Year 1 Work Plan. Language is revised in Amendment 1 to this RFP.

Solicitation #: 72052320R00003 Page 6 of 10

(B): Rather than providing multiple Work Plans for each individual intervention, can Offerors provide one overall Work Plan? Can this combined Work Plan be included as an Annex not included in the page limitation?

Answer: To clarify, the language on page 120 of the solicitation should read “an illustrative implementation plan for the intervention” rather than “an illustrative Work Plan for the intervention.” What USAID expects is a description of the proposed interventions (ie. project components and/or activities) that clearly illustrates connections and synergies between and among the proposed interventions and reflects how these combined efforts will contribute to achieve higher-level objectives.

Please note that the successful offeror will have 90 days from the date of award to prepare the Year 1 Work Plan and then Contractor will be required to submit annual work plans every year on September 1. Language is revised in Amendment 1 to this RFP.

26. Can USAID provide more specific guidance on how to structure the PWS? For example, should Offerors use language like “The Contractor must…” instead of referring to the organization by name?

Answer: While all of the objectives in the SOO must be covered, the ultimate structure of the PWS will be determined by the offeror’s proposed technical approach. Please also refer to response to Question 9.

27. Per Section C.4.H indicates the contractor develops a security plan for the project. Please confirm that offerors should provide a general discussion of their security approach in the management approach section and that the plan will be developed after award.

Answer: Security must be addressed in the Management Approach. A full security plan must be developed post-award and submitted concurrently with the first work plan.

28. Page 122 indicates the Offeror should provide “up to three” examples of past performance for itself, and any for each major subcontractor. Can USAID confirm whether the total of the 3 past performance references is inclusive to both the prime and major subcontractor?

Answer: Past performance must be addressed in the Contractor Performance Information section of the Technical Proposal. In addition, offerors must submit as annexes to the Technical Proposal up to three examples (for the prime and any major subcontractors) of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal, which does not count towards the 40 page limitation.

Solicitation #: 72052320R00003 Page 7 of 10

29. Attachment J.7 includes a past performance matrix. Is this information duplicative of what is required in Attachment J.8. Can USAID confirm if the Offeror should complete this in addition to filling out the Past Performance Information (PPI) template in Attachment J.8 for up to three examples of similar work? Should the same examples used to fill out the PPI template be listed in the matrix?

Answer: Both attachments must be completed and submitted. It is up to the offeror to determine the most appropriate information used to fill in the forms.

30. Can USAID please advise how VAT for subcontractors named in the proposal should be handled?

Answer: Offerors must use costs and prices inclusive of VAT in their cost estimates.

31. In Section L and page 121 the RFP states that offerors should propose the Key Personnel

Roles.

a. Is there a minimum number of Key Personnel positions required?

Answer: There is no minimum. It is up to the offeror to propose the most appropriate combination of personnel, including Key Personnel, in accordance with Section L.6 (b)

b. How would USAID like Offerors to budget for salaries, fringe, allowances, travel, social costs, and other associated costs for two different potential candidates for each key position?

Answer: Please refer to Section L.9. Part 2, (3)(A) ‘Personnel’ for instructions on the Cost Proposal. In the Technical Proposal, offerors must present appropriate personnel profiles in accordance with instructions provided in L.6.B.(b), not specific candidates.

32. Given that Key Personnel should not be presented in the proposal, will USAID provide guidance on how offerors should handle non-key personnel? Should non-key positions also be presented as TBD?

Answer: It is up to the offeror to propose the appropriate mix of non-key personnel needed.

Solicitation #: 72052320R00003 Page 8 of 10

33. Will there be a waiver for the Mexico IESJI Activity to work with state-level police?

Answer: USAID does not intend for police to be the primary beneficiaries of programmatic interventions under this award but recognizes that there is the possibility for specific members of police forces to be engaged in the course of implementation. USAID has statutory authority to work with police under appropriate circumstances, and should it be necessary to do so under these activities, USAID/Mexico will seek the appropriate agency approvals to allow such work to be done under the award.

34. Section L.6.B(a), page 120, of the RFP states that offerors will need to include the following information for each proposed intervention: “a plan for coordinating the implementation of the intervention with the GOM at all appropriate levels; a plan for synergy and avoiding duplication of effort with existing USAID/Mexico activities, along with other USG and other donor-funded activities; an illustrative workplan for the intervention; and at least two proposed indicators per intervention and semi-annual targets for each indicator.” Given the potential large number of proposed interventions under each objective, would USAID kindly allow offerors to present this information at the objective level rather than at the intervention level?

Answer: Offerors should provide the stated information at the intervention level, in order to best present the details of their proposed approach, and clearly indicate required GOM coordination and counterparts for each proposed workstream.

35. Section L.9. Part 2(A), page 125, states, “Biographical Data Sheets are required for all long term, short term expatriates and for all short term and long term cooperating country personnel being proposed.” Given that Section L.6.B(b) states, “The Offeror must not propose individuals to fill these roles” in respect to key personnel, could USAID please remove the clause about Biographical Data Sheets from Section L.9.Part 2(A), so that personnel names are not revealed in the cost volume?

Answer: Offerors must not reveal personnel names on the proposal. They can be listed as TBD (To be Determined) and will be subject to USAID review and approval after award.

The successful offeror must present candidates and Biographical Data Sheets within five business days of the date of award.

Solicitation #: 72052320R00003 Page 9 of 10

36. Could USAID confirm that it intends to allow the implementing partner to give non-in-kind support to Mexican governmental institutions under the Grants Under Contract program? If so, could USAID please indicate which specific Mexican institutions are covered under the project appraisal document or a determination and findings?

Answer: USAID does not envision the provision of equipment, supplies, or personnel of any variety to Government of Mexico institutions.

U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)

Solicitation #: 72052320R00003 Page 10 of 10