Amendment___1_RFP_72052418R00001_Ideas_Locales.pdf

Amendment # 1/RFP No. 72052418R00001/“Ideas Locales”

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

1. Has a contractor performed similar work to this for the government in the past?

If available, please provide the incumbent contract number.

If you are unable to provide a contract number, is it safe to assume this is a new requirement for the government?

USAID Response: Somewhat similar work has been done under Cooperative

Agreement No.AID-524-A-00-10-00003 and Cooperative Agreement No.AID-524-A-

10-00006.

2. Can USAID provide offerors RFP Annex 2: USAID/Nicaragua Gender & Social Inclusion

Analysis, Oct. 2017 and RFP Annex 3: USAID/Nicaragua Youth Analysis, Sept 2017.

USAID Response: Yes. These documents will be made available as attachments to the

RFP Amendment in FedBizOps.

3. RFP page 132 states, "Format for the technical proposal must be in Word 2010, Times New

Roman font, 11-point size, text accessible. There is no specified font for graphics and charts." Can USAID please confirm that there is no specified font for tables and text-boxes as well as for graphics and charts?

USAID Response: Fonts for graphics and charts should be Word 2010, Times New

Roman font, 11-point size, text accessible.

4. RFP page 133 states, "A page in the Technical Proposal that contains a chart or graph will be counted as annexes and not subject to the page limitation. However, if tables are part of the technical proposal they will be counted in in the page limit." Can USAID please confirm that graphics (in addition to charts or graphs) will be counted as annexes and not subject to the page limitation? Additionally, can USAID please clarify whether pages with graphics, graphs, or charts to be excluded from the page limitation should contain solely the graphic, graph, or chart (and no narrative text) and not be page numbered?

USAID Response: If a graph or chart takes up a full page, it should be listed as an annex and will not count towards the maximum page limit. If a chart or graph is included on the same page as text for the technical proposal and does not take up a full page, it will be counted towards the page limit.

5. RFP page 132 states that the Technical Approach page limit is 12 pages. However, RFP page 133 states "The page length for the entire technical approach will not exceed 9 pages."

Can USAID please confirm that the page limit for the technical approach section of the technical proposal is 12 pages?

USAID Response: USAID confirms that the technical approach section is limited to 12 pages.

6. RFP page 132 states "Annex D: Past Performance Information/Summary Table for Prime and Major Subcontractors. Annex E: Past Performance Information." RFP page 135 states

"Contractor performance information –... information must be submitted as an Annex E of the technical proposal … a) 1. List in an annex … three to five of the most recent and relevant contracts … a) 2. For all contracts listed in the Contractor Performance Information provide a list of contact names … d) Performance in using small business concerns …" Can

USAID please confirm that Annex D should comprise item a) 1. List of three-five recent and relevant contracts; and Annex E should comprise item a) 2. and d)?

USAID Response: To avoid confusión, please include all past performance information as required in the RFP as Annex D. References to Annex E should be removed.

7. RFP page 132 asks that, for Annex E, "For all contracts listed in the Contractor Performance

Information [Annex D]" offerors provide a "description of the performance to include

…point of contact information for the CO, COR, or Activity Manager of the offeror's two largest, most recently awarded Federal contracts or orders." If Annex D does not include the offerors two largest, most recently awarded contracts, should offerors still provide this contact information as part of Annex E alongside the additional detail on the contracts listed in Annex D? Additionally, can USAID clarify what is meant by the "largest, most recently awarded contracts" - should offerors report the largest current contracts, or the most recently awarded current contracts, if they are not the same?

USAID Response: Please see answer to Question 6 above regarding Annex D and

Annex E information. Offerors should report the largest current contracts and the most recently awarded contracts, if they are not the same.

8. RFP page 132 lists technical proposal "Annex F. SF 294 Subcontracting Reports" and cites a link to the “SF 294 Model OSDBU Subcontracting Plan” in Attachment J.6 on RFP page

167. Could USAID please confirm it is requesting a "Subcontracting Plan" rather than

"Subcontracting Reports"? Secondly, as the OSDBU Subcontracting Plan template includes cost information, can USAID please confirm that this should be included as an annex to the cost proposal and not the technical proposal?

USAID Response: Annex F is requesting SF 294 Subcontracting Reports. They can be included in the cost proposal.

9. RFP page 135 states that offerors "shall submit three references" for each key personnel candidate. Can USAID please confirm the contact information for these three references shall not be counted toward the 2-page CV limit?

USAID Response: USAID confirms that reference information for key personnel will not count towards the 2-page CV limit.

10. Would USAID please allow offerors to include 2 page CVs for non-key personnel in Annex

C to the technical proposal?

USAID Response: No, offerors should not include 2 page CVs for non-key personnel.

11. RFP page 135 states "As an annex to the technical proposal … Offerors shall also include information in this section on what consultant services (if any) will be required over the life of the activity and their estimated total time." Can USAID please confirm that an STTA matrix can be included as part of Annex C to illustrate planned consultant services?

USAID Response: The STTA matrix may be included as part of Annex C to illustrate planned consultant services.

12. Page 52 – Section H. 12 states “The authorized source for procurement is Geographic Code

937.” Without a waiver, this would preclude the inclusion of highly qualified personnel or resources from numerous countries in the region. Would USAID please consider changing the Geographic Code for this project to 935?

USAID Response: The geographic code for this procurement is 937. If the Contractor determines that during implementation the code needs to change to 935, and is able to provide appropriate justification, then USAID will assess the request and make a determination. Please take note of the following regulatory information from CFR 228 indicating that the geographic code for this procurement (937) should have a negligible impact on the offeror’s inclusion of highly qualified personnel from numerous countries in the region.

§ 228.15 Nationality of employees and individuals under contracts or subcontracts for services. The rules set forth in §§228.10 through 228.13 of this part do not apply to the employees of contractors, or individuals providing technical or professional services to recipients or contractors. However, such individuals must not be citizens or lawful permanent residents (or equivalent immigration status) of countries which are prohibited sources.

13. Page 20 and Page 22. The RFP makes note of at least two documents to be included by

Annex that do not appear to be in the final RFP release. Would USAID please provide the most recent versions of the referenced "USAID Gender Equality and Female Empowerment

Policy", "Nicaragua Youth Analysis", as well as provide by attachment any available Annual or deliverable reports for the Municipal Governance Program and the Democratic

Leadership Development Program?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 2 above.

14. Page 135 states “…each major subcontractor (one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total budget)”... Page 143 states “Major subcontractors are those subcontractors whose costs exceed 20% of the contract value or who are otherwise defined by the prime to be essential to successful activity implementation.” Could USAID please clarify which definition of major subcontractor shall prevail?

USAID Response: The term major subcontractor as used and found in in the RFP is any sub contract proposed that exceeds 20% of the total contract cost proposed plus any other sub contracts defined by the prime as "major" regardless of their percent of the total cost of the proposal. As stated on Page 138, all Primes must identify “major subcontractors” if any, or the one (s) to be essential for a successful activity implementation in the cover letter of their proposals.

15. Page 153, Attachment J.1 - Impact Evaluation; since the evaluations will be managed directly by the DRG Learning Division in Washington, can USAID please confirm that the cost of the evaluations are separate and not part of the contractor budget for Ideas Locales?

USAID Response: The Impact Evaluation is a separate mechanism from Ideas

Locales and therefore should not be included in the contractor budget.

16. Page 47, Sections H.8(a)(1) and H.8(d) state (paraphrased) that annual salary increases of any kind are capped at “TBD%” unless granted with advanced written approval by the

Contracting Officer. Can USAID please confirm that offerors may propose their own ceiling on annual salary increases per section H.7(a).

USAID Response: Yes, offerors may propose their own ceiling on annual salary increases, and USAID will evaluatethem for reasonableness.

17. The final paragraph on page 138 states, “Narratives for the individual cost items must provide a discussion of any estimated escalation rates where applicable (no more than 3%).”

Can USAID please confirm that this language references non-labor escalation only (i.e.

Travel or ODCs).

USAID Response: OAA to respond. Yes, this refers to non-labor escalation. Please note that USAID will review both proposed labor and non-labor escalation rates for reasonableness.

18. RFP Page 141 states, “No fee will be allowed for GUCs. A fixed-fee is allowed under this contract, although additional fees will not be allowed for GUCs.” Please confirm that prime contractors may charge a fee on GUCs, and that the prohibition on fee cited on page 141 is referencing the grantees themselves. Please confirm that “additional fees” does not include any possible indirect costs that the prime contractor charges against GUCs.

USAID Response: To clarify, please delete the last two sentences under "vi." on p. 141, and replace with the following: A fee for the prime contractor's award and administration of the GUCs may be included in the total fixed fee proposed. The

GUCs themselves are assistance instruments and no fees will be allowed under the resulting awards.

19. RFP page 138 states “Subcontract budgets shall be provided in the same level of detail as the prime offeror”. However, page 188 then continues on to state “The offeror must submit a summary and detailed budget for the life of the activity for itself as well as for any proposed major subcontractor … The offeror and major subcontractors, if any, must submit a detailed budget narrative that supports item for item the cost estimates proposed in its detailed budget.” Can USAID please clarify that summary and detailed budgets and budget narratives are only required for major subcontractors rather than for all subcontractors?

USAID Response: USAID notes that both quotes are from page 138 of the RFP and there is not a page 188 in the RFP. The two statements quoted in the question stand as written. The difference between the two statements is that USAID only requires a summary plus detailed budet for major subcontractors. USAID requires for all proposed sub contractors the detailed Budget and sufficient supporting information to determine realism and reasonableness of the costs proposed.

20. Can USAID please provide the October 2017 USAID/Nicaragua’s Gender and Social

Inclusion Analysis referenced on page 20 of the RFP?

21. Can USAID clarify the statement on page 57: “Additionally, explicit deliverables will be required when awarding these grants”? Does USAID envision that all grants must contain deliverables? If not, we respectfully request removal of this sentence, as the implementing partner must have flexibility to award the most appropriate type of grant, depending on the objectives and organizational capacity of the CSO (which may include fixed-amount awards, standard grants, simplified grants, or in-kind grants).

USAID Response: USAID does not anticipate that all grants will have deliverables as this will depend upon the type of grant to be awarded. Please replace the word

“deliverables” with the words “expected results, which could include deliverables depending on the type of sub award” in the quote from page 57.

22. Can letters of commitment for key personnel be included in the technical proposal only? Per the RFP, they are required in both volumes (see RFP page 132, Annex C, and page 145, Part

8).

USAID Response: Letters of commitents for key personnel are required to be submitted in the technical proposal only. However, Part 8 on page 145 request letters on subcontractors’ letterhead, and signed by an authorized representative of each major subcontractor, which specifically indicates the major subcontractor’s agreement to be included in the offeror’s proposed teaming arrangement. These letters from the proposed subcontractors should be included in the cost proposal.

23. Can USAID please confirm that “Annex D: Past Performance Information/Summary Table for Prime and Major Subcontractors” on page 132 is an error? This table is not mentioned anywhere else in the RFP or under the instructions for contractor performance information.

May offerors instead adhere to Annex E: Performance Information?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 6 above.

24. Section L.8(4)(B) (page 137) requests a list of recent (up to two years) contracts for which we submitted subcontract reports to eSRS and a copy of any similarly recent subcontracting reports if they were not submitted to eSRS. Can USAID please confirm that we may submit a list of 10 recent reports submitted to eSRS and five SF294 reports in lieu of providing a list of contracts over the past two years, which total nearly 20MB?

USAID Response: Offerors may submit a list of 10 recent reports submitted to eSRS and five SF 294 reports.

25. Per Section C.2 of the RFP (page 8), USAID/Nicaragua does not have a bilateral assistance agreement with the Nicaraguan government, therefore USAID contractors are not exempt from paying value added taxes (VAT). In accordance with FAR 31.205-41(a) (1), which states taxes are an allowable cost if no exemption is available, can USAID please confirm that offerors should budget for VAT in their cost proposal in accordance with Nicaraguan tax law?

USAID Response: To address the confusion introduced by the question, please note that the term "bilateral assistance agreement" in the context of C.2 of the RFP is referring to an agreement between USAID and the Government of Nicaragua (GON) under which USG development assistance funds would be obligated if such an agreement existed. The term, "bilateral assistance agreement" in the context of C.2 does NOT refer to nor is it the same thing as the "bilateral agreement" signed in 1962 by the USG and GON under which the GON agreed to exonerate the USG from certain taxes on USG development assistance donations to Nicaragua. Recipients/Contractors working in Nicaragua are responsible for either using the GON system for exonerating

VAT expenses incurred under their USAID contracts and grants or for providing the

Contracting Officer with a request to make their VAT expenses allowable costs with supporting documentation demonstrating the Recipient/Contractor diligently attempted to obtain VAT exemption and/or reimbursement from the GON but the

GON would not honor this request. See USAID Procurement Executive Bulletin 17-02

(attached) for additional information on this subject.

26. On page 46, Section H.8(a)(1) requires establishment of salary ranges and states that individuals’ salaries must be negotiated within the established range, based on their certified salary history and the conditions stated further in this paragraph. This restriction may prevent offerors from complying with AIDAR 752.7007, incorporated in Section H.7(a), which states that “Direct compensation of the Contractor’s personnel will be in accordance with the

Contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, and the cost principles applicable to this contract.” We respectfully request that USAID allow offerors to follow their own established policies and procedures when negotiating salaries.

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 16 above.

27. Page 47, Section H.8(e) of the RFP states that for consultants, “the Offeror must submit a

Pay Scale, which will include the level of expertise (e.g., Junior, Mid-Level, Senior), along with the responsibilities and the qualifications sought for each level.” This restriction may prevent offerors from complying with AIDAR 752.7007, incorporated in Section H.7(a), which states that “Direct compensation of the Contractor’s personnel will be in accordance with the Contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, and the cost principles applicable to this contract.” We respectfully request that USAID allow offerors to follow their own established policies and procedures when negotiating salaries for consultants

28. On page 64, Section I.2. states: “FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION (48 CFR

Chapter 1) THE FOLLOWING FAR CLAUSES APPLY TO CLINS 001 AND 002.” Since there are no other references to CLINS in the RFP, can USAID please confirm that this reference to CLINs should be disregarded?

USAID Response: Yes, please delete any reference to CLIN 002 found in the RFP.

29. Page 132 says paper size cannot exceed 8.5 X 11. However, common practice is to use 11 X

17 for spreadsheets because fitting them on 8.5 X 11 results in very small print that is hard to read. We request that USAID make an exception for the budget spreadsheets.

USAID Response: Offerors may use 11 x 17 paper size for spreadsheets which must be legible an user friendly.

30. In Section L.9(C.2.i.a) on page 139, USAID requests biographical data sheets for all proposed personnel, including short-term personnel. Would USAID be amenable to receiving biographical data sheets for proposed long-term personnel only?

USAID Response: Offerors must submit biographical data sheets for proposed key and non-key long-term personnel. The offeror should also submit biographical data sheets for any short term consultant for which the offeror has identified at the time of proposal submission the person selected to conduct the short term consultancy.

31. We respectfully request that USAID consider removing the following statement under section L.9.C.2.vi (pg. 141) which states: “No fee will be allowed for GUCs. A fixed-fee is allowed under this contract, although additional fees will not be allowed for GUCs.” This appears inconsistent with FAR 15.404-4 and ADS 302.3.6.9 which state that pre-negotiation fee objectives must be determined according to a structured approach that includes contractor effort, risk, and other special factors. Grants require significant effort to administer and carry risks for the contractor. Based on this rationale, and to be consistent with the FAR and ADS, can USAID please consider removing this clause?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 18 above.

32. Can USAID please provide offerors with Annexes 2 and 3 to the RFP?

USAID Response: See response to Question 2 above.

33. Can USAID please indicate when the program is anticipated to begin?

USAID Response: USAID anticipates that the program will begin in September

2018.

34. On Page 132 the RFP states that the technical approach is limited to 12 pages, but on page

133 it states a 9 page limit for the technical approach. Can USAID please confirm that the technical approach page limit is 12 pages?

USAID Response: See response to Question 5 above.

35. Will USAID use past performance information for cooperative agreements in it’s evaluation of the offerors past performance?

USAID Response: Yes, USAID will evaluate offerors’ past performance for cooperative agreements.

36. Can USAID please clarify the difference between Annex D: Past Performance

Information/Summary Table for Prime and Major Subcontractors and Annex E: Past

Performance Information?

37. On Page 20 reference is made to the USAID Gender Equality and Female Empowerment

Policy in Annex 2, however no annex 2 is provided in the RFP. Can USAID provide this annex?

USAID Response: This is a public document available online. See response to

Question 2 above.

38. On Page 22 reference is made to the USAID Youth Analysis in Annex 3, however no

Annex 3 is provided in the RFP. Can USAID provide this annex?

USAID Response: See response to Question 2 above.

39. It is challenging to collect required data needed for quality quarterly reporting and prepare the report by the 15 th of the month following the end of the quarter. Would USAID consider making the due date the last day of the month following the end of each quarter?

USAID Response: The Delivery schedule for quarterly reports shown on page 30 of the RFP remains the same.

40. Can USAID please clarify the due dates of the quarterly financial reports? The quarterly financial reports due dates in the RFP fall within the last month of the reporting quarter.

Could the financial quarterly report due dates be aligned with the due dates of the quarterly narrative reports?

USAID Response: Quarterly financial reports with accrued expenditures must adhere to the submission deadlines set in the RFP. Final quarterly financial reports should be aligned with the due dates of the quarterly performance progress reports.

41. Would USAID consider holding annual Activity Implementation Reviews (AIR) rather than bi-annual implementation reviews? USAID will be working very closely with the implementer through the contract mechanism, bi-annual reviews will not be necessary for

USAID to be up-to-date of what is happening with implementation, and the AIR process is an extremely labor-intensive and time-consuming process for the implementer, which detracts from program implementation.

USAID Response: USAID/Nicaragua holds bi-annual Activity Implementation

Reviews in advance of bi-annual portfolio reviews, and will continue to do this with all partners.

42. From page 155 of the RFP “Mandatory vs. Optional Inclusion of Women and Youth

In the base period , 67% (140) of the total assisted community SGs will be required to have at least one woman and one youth as members. In the option period, 67% (140) of the total assisted community SGs will be required to have at least one woman and one youth as members. These are treatment groups C, D, E, and F in Table 1. 33% (70) of the total assisted community SGs will have no mandatory women or youth participation requirements; these are treatment groups A and B.

Youth and Women Trained in Leadership

In the base period, 33% (70) of the assisted community SGs will incorporate women and youth that are previous recipients of a Leadership Development program to be able to implement additional activities described in Objective Two of the scope of work. These are treatment groups E and F (per table 1).”

The highlighted sections seem to be contradictory….can USAID clarify if 33% will or will not have mandatory women and youth inclusion requirements?

USAID Response: The first highlighted portion (as stated above), refers to groups A and B while the highlighted portion in the Youth and Women Trained in Leadership refers to groups E and F, they are not the same groups.

43. As USAID understands that some CSOs may have organizational development (OD) needs to be addressed, will USAID accept budgeting for such needs to provide training where and if needed?

USAID Response: Yes. Offerors should make their own determination on the technical appropriatness and corresponding costs of OD activities.

44. As stated on Page 17, a minimum required result is “25% of the total community problems addressed by SGs are documented to support SGs work.” What does USAID consider

“documentation”, and how does USAID consider this documentation to support SG work?

USAID Response: Illustrative examples of documentation are pictures, videos, and audio recorded interviews. It is incumbent on the offeror to propose the type of documentation and how it will support the SG work.

45. Under RFP Attachment J.1, in the Section entitled “What are we measuring” (page 154), USAID states “By comparing outcomes from the controls group….we will be able to assess the average effect….”. Can USAID clarify what outcomes will be measured, considering illustrative indicators for each component are output indicators, and no outcome indicators are included in the RFP?

USAID Response: This was in reference to the Impact Evaluation that will accompany Ideas Locales, which is a separate mechanism for which the contractor will not be responsible.

46. As all staff will speak fluent Spanish and the communities engaged and activities implemented will all be performed in Spanish, the need for the DCOP to also speak English at FSI level 4 seems unnecessary. Would USAID reconsider the requirement so that highly qualified DCOP candidates with professional working proficiency (FSI 3) of English may be considered?

USAID Response: USAID/Nicaragua requires that the DCOP of Ideas Locales has

FSI level 4 in English. This requirement was not made lightly, and was based on

Mission needs.

47. Page 17 states “Annual local budgets implementation are monitored by at least 40% of the total SGs.” Is this measured through the follow-up on SG proposals as a result of their action plans or as follow up to the general municipal budget?

USAID Response: Annual local budgets implementation are monitored by at least

40% of the total SGs through the follow-up to the general municipal budget.

48. Page 18 states that “small ‘socially innovative’ initiatives” should be supported. Is this any social innovation, or should the focus be on citizen innovation? The latter would imply promoting novel ways of fulfilling rights (legal framework), interacting with authorities, and generating greater capacity to influence local decisions.

USAID Response: The offeror should define “socially innovative initiatives” and how they will be supported in its proposal.

49. The number of communities USAID indicates in the RFP (210 for the base period, 210 for the option years) seems too large for the budget allotted ($10-$15 million) based on best practice for CDD programs. Resources for training, travel and personnel will be stretched, impeding the contractor’s ability to have a nuanced understanding of community dynamics that contribute to successful CDD programming. Will USAID consider reducing the number of communities in support of adequate resources for successful CDD implementation?

USAID Response: USAID cannot reduce the number of communities.

50. At what point is it determined if option years 4 and 5 will actually be funded?

USAID Response: At the latest, six months before the end of year three.

51. Would USAID consider GUCs larger than the recommended $25,000 - $450,000?

USAID Response: No, Nicaraguan civil society organizations generally don’t have the capacity to manage sub-grants greater than $450,000.

52. The RFP sometimes refers to one Option Period of 2 years as in P. 13-20 and sometimes it refers to Two Option Periods of one year each, such as in p. 142. Can USAID please confirm that there is one option period that consists of 2 years that needs to be budgeted for separately?

USAID Response: There is one option period for two years. The sentence under Budget

Format on page 142 should be changed to the following, “The estimated range for this

Activity is $10-15 million including the two year option period and the fixed fee. The

Chart label on page 142 currently stating “Option Period 1” should be deleted and replaced with “Option Year 1”, and the column with the label, “Option Period 2” should be deleted and replaced with “Option Year 2” (see the chart provided in the answer for Question No. 57). On page 151 under M.4, Cost Proposal Evaluation, the words “Option Periods” are hereby changed to “Option Period”. Any instance of the words “Option Periods” found anywhere in the RFP is hereby changed to the words

“Option Period”, with the understanding that the “Option Period” is two years in duration. We note that section B.5 on page 3 of the RFP remains unchanged.

53. In Section B.9 the RFP indicates that the deliverables for the fee schedule will be set at the time of award. May offerors submit a draft fee schedule with their proposal for USAID’s later consideration at the award stage?

USAID Response: - Offerors may submit a draft fee schedule but it is not a requirment or a part of the evaluation criteria for their proposal. We will request this draft fee schedule from the selected offeror.

54. Can USAID please adjust the following sentence: “Therefore, the cancellation ceiling for each cancellation date is [TBD]” to reflect the requirement of a cancellation ceiling per year as outlined under the same paragraph of Section B.10:

a. Contract Year 2: DATE TBD, 2020

b. Contract Year 3: DATE TBD, 2021

c. Contract Year 4: DATE TBD,

d. 2022

Contract Year 5: DATE TBD, 2023

USAID Response: USAID will provide additional/more detailed information on cancellation ceilings in the contract award.

55. Under FAR 15.403-1 “Prohibition on obtaining certified cost or pricing data” there is a subsection that outlines exceptions to certified cost or pricing data requirements, including

“When the contracting officer determines that prices agreed upon are based on adequate price competition.” Based on this, would USAID please consider removing Section

L.3 “52.215-20 Requirements for Certified Cost or Pricing Data or Data Other Than Cost or

Pricing Data?” It is our understanding that 52.215-20 does not apply to this solicitation, as adequate price competition will be achieved through the competitive proposal process.

USAID Response: Requirements for Cerfified Cost or Pricing Data or Data Other than

Cost or Pricing Data has been removed based on the Contracting officer’s determination that there will be adequate Price competition in the competitive proposal process.

56. USAID states that “The budget narrative should describe the nature of individual cost items proposed and include a description of the source of that particular cost estimate (historical experience with the cost item, catalogue price, vendor price quotes, etc. with supporting documentation.” Can USAID please confirm that offerors should simply indicate that they retain supporting documentation that can be furnished to USAID if requested rather than submitting such documentation with the proposal?

USAID Response: Supporting documentation should be submitted with the proposal for the particular cost ítem as a PDF file.

57. Given the different references made to the structuring of the budget detail and budget summary as laid out in p. 3, 4, 138, 142 and 143, can USAID please confirm that in fact it requires both detailed and summary budget to represent the Base period of 3 years individually as originally suggested under Section B on p.3 of the RFP rather than sum up the based period in one column as suggested by the budget format included on p. 142-143.?

USAID Response: USAID clarifies that the Summary Budget should sum up the base period of three years in one column and the Option Period for two years for a total of five years. The detailed budget, however, should reflect the Base Period of three years individually as well as the Option Period individually for two years (Year 1 & 2) for a total of five years.

For clarification purposes, please refer to the following Budget Format for the detailed budget format which replaces the one shown in pages 142-143

Cost Element Base

Year 1

Base

Year 2

Base

Year 3

Option

Year 1

Option

Year 2

Total

Personnel Prime Contractor $_________ $_____ $_______

Labor (Home Office Salaries) $________ $_____ $_____

Labor (US Field Expatriates Salaries) $________ $_____ $_____

Labor (CCN Professionals) $________ $_____ $_____

Labor (CCN Administrative) $________ $_____ $_____

Fringe Benefits $________ $_____ $_______

Allowances

Travel, Transportation and Per Diem $________ $_____ $_____

Equipment and Supplies $________ $_____ $_____

Other Direct Costs $________ $_____ $_____

Total Direct Charges $________ $_____ $_____

Grants Under Contracts (GUCs) $________ $_____ $_____

Indirect Costs $________ $_____ $_____

Fixed Fee $________ $_____ $_____

Total Est. Cost Plus Fixed Fee $________ $_____ $_____

58. Can USAID publish the excel budget file that the Offerors should use for the submission of the cost proposal?

USAID Response: Offerors should submit their own excel budget as required in the

RFP in a clear, user friendly manner. Please refer to instructions for the preparation of the Cost proposal.

59. Can USAID please clarify what it means by “certification” in the following sentence

“Describe the relationship between your organization and the proposed personnel, including a certification whether the individual is a full-time, intermittent employee, or consultant”?

For example, would USAID consider the budget narrative explanation provided by the

Offeror for each position describing whether the individual is a full-time, intermittent employee, or consultant as a certification on each position’s status?

USAID Response: Yes, budget narrative with enough detail as to the category of personnel proposed will be suffiicient.

60. Can USAID please provide Offerors/Contractors with the full local compensation plan?

USAID Response: No, the full local compensation plan will not be provided.

61. Page 139 states “Under any circumstances, the proposed rates for consultants shall exceed the SES maximum salary rate.” Can USAID please confirm that the proposed rates for consultants can in fact exceed SES maximum salary rate?

USAID Response: No, the proposed rate for consultants shall not exceed the SES máximum salary rate.

62. Would USAID accept the disclosure of allowances by type and by person (when multiple persons are entitled to allowances) to be disclosed in a separate spreadsheet annexed to the budget?

USAID Response: This can be included in the same spreadsheet in a different label.

63. Would USAID issue a LOC to finance the GUCs? Can the contractor charge a different fee rate depending on whether USAID will issue a LOC or not?

USAID Response: This would depend on the type of organization that is awarded the contract. USAID does not generally offer advance mechansims such as LOC to for profit organizations. Offerors should make their own determinations on how they propose/justify their fee rates in their cost proposals.

64. Section L. 9 c) Part 2 (vi) states “Grants Under Contract (GUCs) page 141 “No fee will be allowed for GUCs. A fixed-fee is allowed under this contract, although additional fees will not be allowed for GUCs”? Can USAID confirm this means our proposed fixed-fee is allowed on GUCs, but no additional fees are allowed?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 18 above.

65. The last sentence in the paragraph related to “(g) Part 6 - Joint Venture Information” (pg.

144) is not complete. Can USAID please provide the remaining text of this paragraph?

USAID Response: The paragraph should read “In addition, the principles to the joint venture or partnership agreement must agree to be jointly and severally liable for the acts or omissions of the other”.

66. With reference to Part 9 - Information to Support Consent to Subcontractors on page 145 states that “The offeror must address each of the elements in FAR 44.202-2 in order for proposed major subcontractors to be considered by the contracting officer for consent of subcontractors to be granted with the initial award”. Can USAID please confirm whether such information needs to be submitted with the Offerors/Contractor’s cost proposal?

USAID Response: Yes, USAID confirms that this information should be submitted with the cost proposal.

67. With reference to P. 146 (m) Part 12, can USAID please confirm that the additional information to be provided on the proposed and accepted long-term key personnel is to be made available for vetting after the contract has been awarded to the Contractor?

Alternatively, if additional information on the proposed and accepted long-term key personnel needs to be submitted with the cost proposal, can USAID please provide a comprehensive list of the exact additional information/documents that need to be submitted to meet the vetting requirements of Section L Part 12?

USAID Response: The information on the proposed and accepted long-term

Nicaraguan key personnel is to be made availabe before the contract has been awarded and will be requested from the selected offeror only. The information should contain the following: Full Name, Date and Place of birth, Nicaraguan ID number (cedulas), father and mother’s name. Vetting process may take up to one month to complete.

68. Would USAID consider allowing offerors to propose sub-contracts to Nicaraguan implementing partner CSOs in addition to sub-grants to count as part of the 52% target?

USAID Response: Yes, offerors may propose sub-contracts to Nicaraguan implementing partner CSOs in addition to sub-grants, but outside of (in addition to) the 52% GUC target.

69. Please confirm the start-up period for this project.

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 33 above.

70. Page 10. Section C.5. The RFP states that “it is estimated that sub-grants to CSOs will be around 52% of the overall budget.” Could USAID please confirm that sub-grants to CSOs are anticipated to be approximately 52% of the offeror’s submitted budget value, rather than of the ceiling value indicated in the RFP?

USAID Response: The USAID requirement is that the total budget allocated in the cost proposal to Sub-grants to CSOs (GUCs) over the five year period be at least 52% of the total proposed costs for the five year period.

71. Page 20. Section C.5. Would USAID please make the 2017 Gender Analysis and 2017

Youth Analysis for Strategic Planning documents available to bidders?

72. Page 132. Section L.7. The submission instructions indicate that the technical proposal, cost proposal and budget narrative must be in Word 2010. Would USAID also accept offers in PDF format, to facilitate integration of multiple-format constituent files?

USAID Response: Offerors may submit the technical proposal in PDF but a Word versión is required.

73. Page 132-134. Section L.8. The page limit for the Technical Approach is listed as 12 pages on pages 132 and 134; however, page 133 states that “the technical approach will not exceed

9 pages.” Please confirm that the correct page limit for the Technical Approach is 12 pages.

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 5 above.

74. Page 132. Section L.8. The list of Annexes includes:

“Annex D: Past Performance Information/Summary Table for Prime and Major

Subcontractors

Annex E: Past Performance Information”

On page 135, Section L.8 (4) the RFP states “Contractor Performance Information -Page limitation does not apply to this section and information must be submitted as an Annex E of the technical proposal.” Given this instruction, could USAID please clarify what information should be included in Annex D?

75. Page 135. Section L.8. (4)(2). The RFP requires that offerors “list in an annex to the technical proposal at least three to five of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal”. Can offerors submit recent and relevant cooperative agreements in order to meet this requirement?

USAID Response: Recent and relevant Cooperative Agreements with similar efforts may be listed in the annex. See answer to No. 35.

76. Page 135. Section L.8. (4)(a). The RFP states: “The offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) must provide performance information for itself, the contractor teaming arrangements, if any, and each major subcontractor (one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost).” Would USAID please clarify what is meant by

“contractor teaming arrangements”?

USAID Response: Per FAR definitions in Subpart 9.6 “Contractor team arrangement,” means an arrangement in which—

(1) Two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor; or

(2) A potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractors under a specified Government contract or acquisition program.

77. Pages 136. Section L.8. (4)(2). At the top of page 136, the RFP states that offerors should provide a list of “contact names, job titles, mailing addresses, phone numbers, e-mail addresses” for “all contracts listed in the Contractor Performance Information”. However, the last bullet point under this paragraph states that offerors must include point of contact information for the “CO, COR, or Activity Manager of the offeror’s two largest, most recently awarded Federal contracts or orders.” Would USAID please clarify whether the same contact information is required for all contracts listed in the Past Performance

Information section, or whether additional information is required for the two largest contracts or orders?

USAID Response: The same contact information is required for all contracts listed in the Past Performance Information Section.

78. Page 136. Section L.8. (4)(d). Please confirm that Performance in Using Small Business

(SB) Concerns should be included in Annex E.

79. Page 146. Section L.9. Part 12. The RFP states: “As part of the Mission’s internal vetting requirements for all local long-term key personnel proposed, the selected offeror will be asked to provide additional information on their proposed and accepted long-term key personnel. This information will include among other things, copies of their identification number, etc.” Could USAID please provide additional clarity on the information that may be requested for long-term key personnel?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 67 above.

80. Would USAID please provide a plug figure for the exchange rate for evaluations purposes of the budget to ensure parity across offerors’ budgets?

USAID Response: The current internal exchange rate that USAID uses is C$30.40 x

US$1.00 US dollar.

81. Pages 3-4, Section B.5, Contract Budget). Please add a Total Estimated Cost & Fixed Fee line to the Budget Summary listed on pages 3-4.

USAID Response:

Please refer to the following:

Cost Element Base

Year 1

Base

Year 2

Base

Year 3

Option

Year 1

Option

Year 2

Total

Direct Costs

Grants under

Contracts

Indirect costs

Fixed Fee

Total Estimated

Costs ($)TBD

82. (Page 4, Section B.7, Ceiling on Indirect Costs). Please confirm that the offerors should propose indirect ceiling rates. Please provide a table for the ceilings on indirect rates.

USAID Response: Yes, Offerors should propose indirect ceiling rates. Please refer to

Section B.7 on page 4. If offeror wishes to develop and insert a table for B.7, then the offeror may do so.

83. (Page 10, Section C.5, Scope of Work). The solicitation states that “provided that in both periods of the activity (base and option) the contractor will assist a total of 420 communities, it is estimated that the sub-grants to CSOs will be around 52% of the overall budget.”

However, on page 154, Impact Evaluation, it states that “in Phase 2 (2 additional years -option period), all initially treated communities (210 communities) will cease to receive the activity, and a randomly-selected share of the initial control communities plus an additional set of communities will become beneficiaries of the activity.” Please clarify how many of the control communities are expected to be reached in Phase 2 by the program. Additionally, please indicate how many communities will be in the “additional set,” and if and how they are different from the control communities.

USAID Response: USAID can not anticipate how many of the initial control communities will become beneficiaries. Thus, there is no estimation of how many communities there will be in the additional set, provided that it will be 210 minus those that will then be treatment communities. The experimental design for the impact evaluation anticipates the control groups being similar to those of the treatment groups, thus, the additional group would have to meet the same criteria.

84. (Page 11, Objective 1A). Please confirm that catalysts can be compensated for their services.

USAID Response: No, it is anticipated that they will be volunteers. There will be two incentives to become catalysts: the training, which provides important life skills, and their desire to serve their neighbors. Implementing partner can decide to provide transportation (in those cases that the community is too big) and per diem.

85. (Page 11, Objective 1A, Footnote 10). The solicitation states here that “Nicaragua’s legal framework does not have a definition of communities except for the Caribbean Coast which mentions ethnic communities per Law 445. In Nicaragua’s Pacific and Central regions, the municipalities’ subdivision term established by the Nicaraguan Territorial Studies Institute

(INETER) is ‘comarcas’ through a ‘Comarcas’ Municipal Division Guide’ published on

February of 2009.” On page 12, the solicitation states “following the subdivision dialogues, community members and catalysts will convene in a Community Assembly (CA) as a primary source of feedback for community needs.”

USAID Response: Question was not clear. Please refer to answer to questions 86 and 88 below.

86. Please clarify USAID’s operative definition of a “subdivision” and “community”.

Specifically, does USAID consider a subdivision an area subordinate to a community?

USAID Response: USAID considers a community subdivision (also mentioned as

“subdivision”) as a smaller unit within a community

87. In addition, please clarify USAID’s definition of “community subdivision” compared to

“subdivision.”

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 86 above.

88. (Page 11, Objective 1A, Footnote 10.) The solicitation states “for the purposes of this project it will be accepted to define communities by either of the terms: “pueblo, villa or caserío” which are defined by decree 78 - 2002.” There is no mention of “barrios” as depiction of communities in urban settings. Does this mean that all communities of this project are in rural areas?

USAID Response: If a “barrio” fits within the contractor’s established communities’ selection criteria, a “barrio” can be considered a community. No, it does not mean that all communities of this project are in rural areas.

89. (Page 14, Objective 1A Component Minimum Requirements). The solicitation states the offeror must “establish and support a minimum of 735 Solution Groups (SGs) in 210 selected communities (630 in the non-fixed SG model, and 105 in the fixed SG model)”.

However, on page 155 it says that SG fixed membership models from “50% of the assisted communities (105) are required to choose permanent SG members that will serve for two years. In the option period, 50% of the assisted communities (105) are required to choose permanent SG members that will serve for two years.” The same proportions are requested for the SG rotational membership. Please clarify that USAID would like the proportion of communities receiving these two models to be balanced, even if the number of participants within those communities is to be skewed accordingly.

USAID Response: Per impact evaluation attachment J1 in the RFP, USAID expects the two models to have the same number of communities (105). The number of participants in the SG is suggested to be between four and six participants (volunteers) per text in page 12, Section C.

90. (Page 22, Key Personnel). The solicitation states that “candidates for key personnel positions with an additional 10 years of experience in lieu of the required or advance degree will also qualify for the position.” Please clarify whether the additional 10 years of experience are inclusive of or in addition to the minimum required years of experience.

Please also clarify whether the additional years of experience are in lieu of the required degree, or advanced degree, or both.

USAID Response: The 10 years is in addition to the minimum number of required years of experience, if they do not have an advanced degree. Please delete the quoted sentence from page 22 on the RFP, and replace it with the following: Ten years of experience beyond that required for the key personnel position will qualify a candidate for a key personnel position if the candidate meets the lower academic degree requirement but not the Masters Degree or post graduate education requirement.

91. (Page 43, Section H.2, Source and Nationality Requirements). Please confirm that the list of restricted goods is not required for this RFP.

USAID Response: Offerors should abide by what is stated in Section H.2 (c) restricted goods.

92. (Page 46, AIDAR 722.170, Personnel Compensation, Section H.7). To ensure compliance with AIDAR 722.170 requirements that contractor CCN staff salaries and benefits should not exceed those paid by the USAID Mission to CCN direct hires, could UASID please provide a list of local benefits and allowances for Nicaragua?

USAID Response: Offerors may want to research this issue. Said research could include finding out what allowances and benefits are required under Nicaraguan labor laws.

93. (Page 46-47, Section H.8, Additional Requirements for Personnel Compensation). Please confirm that offerors may propose annual salary escalations which may exceed 3% per company policy and within annual salary increase ceiling rates proposed under Section H.8.

94. (Page 46-47, Section H.8, Additional Requirements for Personnel Compensation).