SOL-72052719r00002_Amendment_0001.pdf

SOL # 72052719R00002, Amd. 0001

Accordingly, the Solicitation is modified as follows:

COVER PAGE

1. Subject: Delete “72052719R0002” and replace it with “72052719R00002.”

2. Closing Date: delete “February 4, 2019” and replace it with “February 19, 2019.”

STANDARD FORM-33

1. Item 9: Delete “02/04/2019” and replace it with “02/19/2019.”

PART I – THE SCHEDULE

1. SECTION B.3 – ESTIMATED COST, FIXED FEE, AND OBLIGATED AMOUNT,

delete paragraph (b) in its entirety and replace it with the following:

“(b) Estimated Cost and Fixed Fee for CLIN 0002

The total estimated cost of this CLIN is $3,347,000, inclusive of the associated maximum fee. Each task order will determine its total estimated cost and fixed fee.”

2. SECTION B.4 – CONTRACT BUDGET AND CEILINGS, delete in its entirety and replace it with the following:

CLIN Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total

Estimated Cost Fixed Fee

Total Estimated Cost Plus Fixed Fee

Estimated Cost and

$3,347,000

Total Estimated Cost Plus

Estimated Cost Fixed Fee

Total Estimated Contract Cost Plus Fixed Fee

3. SECTION C – DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT OF WORK,

made the following changes:

(a) Section C.5.1.e. Last Paragraph: delete “biannual” and replace it with “biennial.”

(b) Section C.5.2.e: Include Item “6)” as follows:

“6) An annual USAID’s Monitoring and Evaluation workshop is held successfully each year in Lima.

4. SECTION E.3 – QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP), delete item “e).”

5. SECTION F.6.2 – ANNUAL WORK PLAN, delete the last paragraph and replace it with the following:

“The first AWP will cover the period of twelve (12) months. If acceptable, the COR will provide a written approval of the final AWP to the Contractor. Failure to have an approved AWP in place may be viewed as a failure to comply with essential terms and conditions of the contract. Significant deviations to the approved AWP will require the additional prior written approval of the COR.”

6. SECTION F.7 – DELIVERABLES, DELIVERY AND FIXED FEE SCHEDULE:

delete the FEE SCHEDULE in its entirety and replace it with the following:

SOW

Component #

Description of Deliverable

Due Date % of Fee

Fixed Fee

(US$)

Verification Method

Component 1 – Known Portion

Component 2

Component 3

Component 4

TOTAL 100%

7. SECTION H.27 - SUBCONTRACTING PLAN AND THE SF 294 –

SUBCONTRACTING REPORT FOR INDIVIDUAL CONTRACTS AND SF 295 –

SUMMARY CONTRACTING REPORT, delete this Section its entirety.

8. Change the numbers assigned to Sections H.28, H.29, H.30, H.31 and H.32 to H.27, H.28, H.29, H.30 and H.31, respectively.

9. SECTION I – CONTRACT CLAUSES: Delete the following clauses:

“52.219-29 NOTICE OF SET-ASIDE FOR, OR SOLE SOURCE AWARD TO,

ECONOMICALLY DISADVANGED WOMEN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS

CONCERN (DEC 2015) AND 52.219.30 NOTICE OF SET-ASIDE FOR, OR SOLE

SOURCE AWARD TO, WOMENT-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS

ELIGIBLE UNDER THE WOMEN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM (DEC

2015)”

10. SECTION J – LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER

ATTACHMENTS, add Attachment 6, as follows:

“ATTACHMENT 6 – CONTRACTOR PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

– SHORT FORM”

11. SECTION L.4. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS, include item (j) Exclusive

Agreements, as follows:

“(j) Exclusive Agreements: USAID discourages the use of exclusive agreements, as this limits USAID’s ability to receive the best services.”

12. SECTION L.5. DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS, Item (a): Delete “February 4, 2019” and replace it with “February 19, 2019.”

13. SECTION L.6. INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL

PROPOSAL: Make the following changes:

a. Section L.6.1. General Instructions:

i. First Paragraph: Delete “25 pages” and replace it with “28 pages.”

ii. The Technical Proposal, Item 5 – Technical Proposal Body: Delete in its entirety and replace it with:

“5. Technical Proposal Body - The technical proposal must address how the offeror intends to carry out and achieve the results of the Statement of Work (SOW) and Statement of Objectives (SOO). It must reflect a clear technical understanding of the objectives and outcomes to be achieved and must clearly describe how the proposed Project Management, Technical Approach, Capacity to Respond to Task Order, and Past Performance will best achieve the purpose, objectives, and expected results of the USAID/Peru Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning for Sustainability (MELS) activity.

The following are to be included in the TECHNICAL PROPOSAL as annexes and are not included in the 28 page limit of the Technical Proposal Body:

● Annex A: Illustrative Activity Monitoring, Evaluation & Learning Plan (description is detailed in Section F Deliverables and Reports) [not to include PIRS and not to exceed five (05) pages]

● Annex B: Draft Year 1 Work Plan: A draft first year work plan must be submitted with the proposal. The draft work plan must describe each proposed activity under each of the four Components; and enumerate the deliverables, time, level of effort, and other resources required to achieve each stated result. Component 1 activities will only include definite evaluations and assessments (CLIN 0001) as listed on page 21 of this RFP. (not to exceed five (5 pages)

● Annex C: Staffing Patterns and Organizational chart: The Offeror must construct a chart with the staffing structure that will remain in effect throughout the period of performance.

This chart must be complemented through a narrative that explains how the positions proposed are necessary and sufficient for accomplishing the objectives outlined in Section C. The Offeror must include a description of the roles, skills, responsibilities for each technical position (key and non-key senior technical positions), a chain of command and the proposed sub-contractors.

Additionally, the Offeror must specify the profile and number of short-term consultants it envisions recruiting, the balance between permanent staff and short-term consultants, the anticipated duration of short-term consultancies, and how the anticipated profile of the staff (permanent and short-term) will enable the Contractor to maximize results.

(maximum four (04) pages)

● Annex D: CV/Resumes for proposed Key Personnel and long-term staff: CV/Resumes should contain: name, position title, e-mail address; qualifications, experience and skills relevant to the position they are proposed for in this activity, listed in reverse chronological order starting with the most recent experience. (maximum three (03) pages per CV/Resume plus one (01) for the letter of commitment).

Each resume must be accompanied by a signed letter of commitment of key personnel indicating his/her availability and intention to serve in the proposed position for the stated period of the service. The letter of commitment of proposed key personnel and long-term staff must not exceed one (1) page in length per person. Letters of commitment will not count against the page number for resumes. Letters of commitment are not required for non-key personnel proposed

● Annex E: Past Performance Information Matrix (maximum ten (10) pages)

● Annex F: Rapid Mobilization Plan: As described in Section F.6.1(maximum three (03) pages.)

● Annex G: Subcontractors Letters of Commitment

● Annex H: Branding and Marking Plan

● Annex I: QASP – Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (maximum four (04) pages)

Annex J: Contractor Past Performance Information – Short Form

The technical proposal must be strictly limited to the page limitations listed above. Any pages exceeding this limitation will not be considered or evaluated. Only those annexes listed above can be submitted. USAID will not review or consider any additional annexes provided.”

b. Section L.6.2. Project Management: Delete “(no more than 4 pages)” and replace it with “(no more than six (06) pages)”

c. Section L.6.4. Capacity to Respond to Task Order (no more than three (03) pages) (See Section M.2.3.): Delete in its entirety and replace it with the following:

“L.6.4. Capacity to Respond to Task Order (no more than three (03) pages) (See Section M.2.3.)

USAID/Peru, SAR and/or client Missions may request, at any time during life of project, specific evaluations, assessments, and other studies within a specific country or landscape to achieve one or all of the objectives and/or results within this SOW as described in Section F.9. Offeror shall demonstrate the capacity to respond to a task order up to $270,000 by preparing a task plan for a hypothetical case. The period of performance of this task order is eight months.

Hypothetical Scenario: USAID/SAR has identified the need to perform a final evaluation to the four-year regional program Strengthening the Capacity of Indigenous Organizations in the Amazon (SCIOA) to assess to what extent the SCIOA program has strengthened targeted indigenous organizations’ capacities to participate in the governance of development projects in the Amazon. Evidence of this evaluation will inform USAID/Peru, Colombia and Brazil the design of a follow-on activity to expand this strategic approach to other indigenous groups across the Amazon region and establish a network that allows sustainable replication and expansion of the approach.

The objective of SCIOA is to strengthen the capacity of at least five selected indigenous peoples’ organizations within the Amazon region to directly access and manage financial resources to improve their ability to take ownership of their own development planning and priorities, and to more effectively advocate for indigenous peoples’ governance of the Amazon. Strengthening indigenous organizations in administrative, technical, and financial management is a critical first step to protect their lands and livelihoods. This should increase respect for their territorial and political rights, reduce conflicts, increase their access to economic opportunities, and ultimately boost standards of living for their constituents.

Assumptions: This is the first quarter of the fourth year of the program. Targeted indigenous organizations are located in Brazil (Manaos), and in the capital cities of Colombia, Surinam, Guyana and Peru (Lima). Targeted organizations participated in institutional capacity assessments, and have been receiving tailored technical assistance for institutional strengthening, and sub-grants so that they learn about financial management by managing resources. Progress reports indicate that activities have been implemented according to schedule.

Offerors shall include management and staffing approach along with leveraging networks and partnerships throughout the Amazon region. Each Offeror representative task plan must not exceed two (03) pages.”

14. SECTION L.7. – INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE

COST/BUSINESS PROPOSAL (See Section M.3): Make the following changes:

a. Item 2 – Instructions: Delete the second paragraph and replace it with the

“The budget format to be submitted must be substantially similar following the sequential narrative which begins on paragraph 3 (b)(2) below. The offeror must include separate cost proposals for CLIN 0001 and CLIN 0003, with sufficient detail to support and explain all costs proposed, giving figures and narrative explanation. For example, labor costs should be supported by daily rates and specified labor escalation; with supporting documentation. For estimating purposes, the offeror must use the total amount of $3,347,000 for CLIN 0002. The offeror is not required to submit a cost proposal for this CLIN. All proposed indirect rates must be consistent for CLIN 0001 and CLIN 0003. In order to have a clear understanding of how the offeror will allocate time for key personnel and management and staffing (other than key personnel), a chart must be included showing CLINS 0001 and 0003 time allocation for the above mentioned staff.”

b. Item 3(b) – Part 2 – Proposed Cost/Price: make the following changes:

a. Sub-item(1) – First Paragraph: Delete “20 percent” and replace it with “25 percent.”

b. Sub-item (1) – Third paragraph: Delete “major” and replace it with “all.”

c. Sub-item (2)(A) – Salary and Wages: after the first sentence, add the following: “ALL the professional positions in this Contract will be established based on the market value of the position in the country of contract performance.”

15. SECTION M.3. COST PROPOSAL EVALUATION (SEE Section L.7): Delete last paragraph in its entirety and replace it with the following:

“As stated in Section L.7, Offerors are required to submit a cost proposal for CLIN 0001 and CLIN 0003. For estimating purposes, the Offeror must use the total amount of $3,347,000 for CLIN 0002. The Offeror is not required to submit a cost proposal for this

CLIN.”

16. SECTION L.8. ATTACHMENTS: Delete this section in its entirety.

17. ATTACHMENT 2 – ILLUSTRATIVE SCHEDULE OF EVALUATIONS AND

ASSESSMENTS BY MAIN USER: Delete in its entirety and replace it with the

“ATTACHMENT 2 – ILLUSTRATIVE SCHEDULE OF EVALUATIONS AND

ASSESSMENTS BY MAIN USER

Task/Activity/Reference Geographic location

Planned year Preliminary main purpose

C L

IN

C L

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5

Alternative Development Component 1- Evaluations and Assessments Evaluations

Interim Performance Evaluation Alliance for Digital and Financial Services

72052718CA00003

San Martin, Huanuco, Ucayali X

Assess achievement of results.

X

Final Performance Evaluation Alliance for Digital and Financial Services

72052718CA00003

San Martin, Huanuco, Ucayali X

Assess the sustainability of results.

X

Interim Performance Evaluation The Coffee Alliance for Excellence

72052718CA00001

San Martin, Huanuco, Ucayali

X

Progress in complying with GDA expected results, including effectiveness of GDA approach to provide services to farmers, linkages between farmers and private sector.

X

Interim Performance Evaluation Peru Cacao Alliance II 527-A-16-00002

San Martin, Huanuco, Ucayali

X

Progress in complying with GDA expected results, including effectiveness of GDA approach to provide services to farmers, linkages location

Planned year Preliminary main purpose

C L between farmers and private sector.

Final Performance Evaluation The Coffee Alliance for Excellence

72052718CA00001

San Martin, Huanuco, Ucayali X

Assess sustainability of results. X

Final Performance Evaluation Peru Cacao Alliance II 527-A-16-00002

San Martin, Huanuco, Ucayali

X

Assess sustainability of results.

X

Interim Performance Evaluation Institutional Strengthening Partnership for DEVIDA 72052719C00001 DEVIDA Government to Government(G2G) Agreement

Huanuco, San Martin, Ucayali and possibly

VRAEM

X

Progress in strengthening Government of Peru’s institutional capacity to implement policies, programs, and activities within a sustainable and integral alternative development.

X

Final Performance Evaluation Institutional Strengthening Partnership for DEVIDA 72052719C00001

Huanuco, San Martin, Ucayali and possibly

VRAEM

X

Assess sustainability of results.

9 Impact Evaluation

Huanuco and/or possibly

VRAEM

X X X

Assess contribution of Alternative development strategy to sustainably reduce illicit coca. To be implemented with DEVIDA.

location

Planned year Preliminary main purpose

C L

Whole of Project Evaluation Alternative Development Project (Alliance for Digital and Financial Services, The Coffee Alliance, Peru Cacao Alliance II, Institutional Strengthening Partnership for DEVIDA, DEVIDA Government to Government Agreement, and others TBD)

Huanuco, San Martin, Ucayali and possibly

VRAEM

X

Assess contributions of each of the AD interventions to the achievement of Alternative Development objectives, including sustainability of licit incomes, farmers “graduation” of assistance, increase public and private investment in AD areas, sustainability of extension services provision, farmers’ and community organization.

X

Assessments and other studies

11 Gender Assessment

Huanuco, San Martin, Ucayali and possibly

VRAEM

X X X

Progress in improving gender equality.

X (Y1,3)

X (Y5)

Environmental Compliance Review

Huanuco, San Martin, Ucayali and possibly

VRAEM

X X X X X

Compliance of environmental mitigation measures in alternative development areas.

X

13 Special studies Huanuco, San Martin, X X Learning needs for the AD location

Planned year Preliminary main purpose

C L

Ucayali and possibly

VRAEM

team: e.g., Identify factors that influence a family´s decision to grow or not grow coca;

cost-empirical evidence to assess effectiveness of each AD type of intervention.

Environment Component 1. Evaluations and Assessments Evaluations

Whole of Project Evaluation Amazonia Verde Project (Forest Sector Governance Strengthening AID-527-T- 17-00001, Securing a sustainable, inclusive and profitable forest sector, and others TBD)

National, San Martin, Loreto, Ucayali and Madre de Dios

X

Assess the extent to which all of the strategic approaches, implemented by all of the mechanisms, have increased the area under sustainable management in the priority regions and reduced the emissions of greenhouse gases in the priority regions.

X

Interim Performance Evaluation Natural Infrastructure for Water Security (NIWS)

72052718CA00002

Lima, Piura, Arequipa, Moquegua, Cusco

X

Assess major assumptions and progress towards achieving results, location

Planned year Preliminary main purpose

C L including role of political and public awareness in GI adoption, role of access and use of climate and hydrological data for water resource and GI planning, contribution of GI to safeguard water supply in target regions.

Interim Performance Evaluation Regional Promotion of Best Social and Environmental Management Practices in the Amazon.

72052718C00001

Peru, Brazil, Colombia, Surinam

X

Assess major assumptions and progress towards achieving results, including contribution to reduce projected forest degradation, protection of hydrologic regime and water quality, private sector adoption of best practices, role of civil society and indigenous populations’ participation in development.

X

Assessments 4 Systematization of best Lima, Piura, X Identify, X location

Planned year Preliminary main purpose

C L practices to promote Green Infrastructure in Peru

72052718CA00002

Arequipa, Moquegua, Cusco systematize and disseminate best practices to promote Green Infrastructure

Assessment Amazonia Verde Project

National, San Martin, Loreto, Ucayali and Madre de Dios

Assess progress in achieving results, identify lessons learned

Governance Component 1:

evaluations and assessments

Evaluations 1 Interim Performance

Evaluation Citizen Engagement in Clean Elections

72052718GR00002

Ucayali, Loreto Huanuco X

Assess progress in achieving results, identify lessons learned.

X

Interim Performance Evaluation Human Trafficking in the Peruvian Amazon 527-A-14-00004

Madre de Dios, Loreto, Lima

X

Assess progress in achieving results and lessons learned.

X

Interim Performance Evaluation Conflict TBD

Amazon region

X

Assess major assumptions and progress towards achieving results and identify lessons learned.

X

Interim Performance Evaluation Governance TBD

TBD X

Assess major assumptions and progress towards achieving results.

5 Final Performance TBD X Assess X location

Planned year Preliminary main purpose

C L

Evaluation Governance TBD sustainability of results.

Assessments

Assessment of Civil Society oversight activities

TBD

Lima, Piura, La Libertad, and other

TBD

X

Identify lessons learned from implementation of activities with civil society oversight

Mission-Wide Component 1:

evaluations and assessments

1 Gender assessment

Lima, Piura, Arequipa, Moquegua, Cusco, and others TBD

X

Examine USAID/Peru progress in reducing gender gaps, gender violence, and gender-based constraints.

X

Institutional strengthening assessment

Mission target areas

X

Identify best practices and lessons learned in the design, implementation , and monitoring of interventions related to strengthening

GOP

institutions efforts of selected

USAID

activities.

Assessment of sustainability approaches

Mission target areas

Identify best practices and location

Planned year Preliminary main purpose

C L lessons learned in the implementation of approaches to ensure sustainability of development results of selected

USAID

activities.

4 Other TBD

X X

As needed by Mission learning agenda.

X

Client-Missions ‐ ‐ ‐ Component 1:

Evaluation and assessments

Brazil/ Paraguay X X

TBD-

Evaluations or assessments

X

[END OF ATTACHMENT 2]

ATTACHMENT 6 – CONTRACTOR PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

[The provided information cannot exceed 1 page per activity. See Section L.6.5]

PERFORMANCE REPORT - SHORT FORM

PART I: Award Information (to be completed by Applicant)

1. Name of Awarding Entity:

2.Award Number:

3. Award Type:

4. Award Value (TEC): (if subagreement, subagreement value):

5. Problem: (if problems encountered on this award, explain corrective action taken)

6. Contacts: (Name, Telephone Number and E-mail address) 6a. Agreement/Contract Officer:

6b. Technical Officer (AOR/COR):

6c. Other:

7. Recipient:

8. Title/Brief Description of Product/Service Provided:

9. Information Provided in Response to RFA/RFP No.:

10. Does a PPIRS/CPARS Record Exist (Yes/No):

PART II: Performance Assessment (USAID will ask the Reference to Complete)

1. How well Recipient/Contractor performed:

1a. Quality of product or service, including consistency in meeting goals and targets, and cooperation and effectiveness in fixing problems. Comment:

1b. Timeliness of performance, including adherence to schedules and other time-sensitive project conditions, and effectiveness of home and field office management to make prompt decisions and ensure efficient operation of tasks. Comment:

1c. Cost control, including forecasting costs as well as accuracy in financial reporting.

Comment:

1d. Management, including satisfactory business relationship to clients, initiation and management of several complex activities simultaneously, management of personnel, coordination among subawardees and developing country partners, prompt and satisfactory correction of problems, and cooperative attitude in fixing problems. Comment:

1e. Regulatory compliance. Comment:

2. Specify instances of good or poor performance, especially in the most critical areas.

Comment:

3. List significant achievements and/or problems. Comment:

[END OF ATTACHMENT 6]

[End of AMENDMENT 0001 to SOL-72052719R00002]

MELS TECHNICAL QUESTIONS

1. Page 21 of the RFP, Section C.5.2, states: “As required in section L, offerors are invited to provide performance-based work statements (PWS) that presents a logical, comprehensive, concrete, and measurable set of interventions to achieve the stated Objectives and the activities’ purposes stated below…” However, Section L provides no additional details regarding a PWS, rather calling for a 2-page task plan against a hypothetical scenario. Please clarify what is required and provide any relevant instructions.

Answer: Section L provides details on both the SOW and SOO. Regarding the hypothetical scenario, this falls under CLIN 002, Evaluations, Assessments and other studies (unknown portion) - IDIQ.

2. Page 24 of the RFP, Component 3, Section A, states: “The Evaluations Project also strengthened the Peru Monitoring and Evaluation Network- PERUME, a network composed by M&E professionals from the public sector that promotes M&E in the GOP to make informed decisions, and the EvalPeru, a voluntary network of local evaluators, in the use of these tools. While the tools were transferred to GOP partners, including targeted regional governments and the GOP National School for Public Administration - ENAP/National Civil Service-SERVIR, they may require additional updating and improving based on the needs of GOP targeted organizations, including partners and GOP M&E lead organizations.” Please provide a complete listing with any relevant details of the GOP partners who now own the USAID supported tools, which tools they are in possession of, and any data on utilization, modifications, etc. as appropriate.

Answer: Please refer to the “Evaluations Activity Final Progress Report” https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00T6DQ.pdf and “Evaluations Activity Final Report on Progress of Component 3” https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00TGTT.pdf for further details on the M&E tools developed and implemented by the Project.

Please see a summary list by GOP partners is hereby included as follows:

Institution Tools Status

Agencia Peruana de Cooperación Internacional-APCI

Toolkit for Design and Implementation of M&E Systems

Distributed for their use

CEPLAN Aplicativo para Medición del desempeño en base a buenas prácticas de monitoreo y evaluación de organizaciones implementadoras de planes, proyectos y programas de desarrollo

Distributed for their use

Application for performance measurement based on best practices of evaluation networks

Distributed for their use

Application for the self-assessment of development needs of competencies in monitoring, evaluation and evidence-based knowledge management

Distributed for their use

Toolkit for Design and Implementation of Distributed for their use

Institution Tools Status

M&E Systems DEVIDA Aplicativo para Medición del desempeño en base a buenas prácticas de monitoreo y evaluación de organizaciones implementadoras de planes, proyectos y programas de desarrollo

Used

Application for the self-assessment of development needs of competencies in monitoring, evaluation and evidence-based knowledge management

Used

ENAP/National Civil Service-SERVIR

Curso MOOC Comunicación de Evidencias en Monitoreo y Evaluación

Transferred, implemented and in use.

Monitoring and Evaluation Training Diploma

Transferred for their use

Toolkit for Design and Implementation of M&E Systems

Transferred for their use

MINAM Aplicativo para Medición del desempeño en base a buenas prácticas de monitoreo y evaluación de organizaciones implementadoras de planes, proyectos y programas de desarrollo

Used.

Application for the self-assessment of development needs of competencies in monitoring, evaluation and evidence-based knowledge management

Used.

PCM, Oficina General de Planificación y Presupuesto

Toolkit for Design and Implementation of M&E Systems

Distributed for their use.

Red PERUME Aplicativo para Medición del desempeño en base a buenas prácticas de monitoreo y evaluación de organizaciones implementadoras de planes, proyectos y programas de desarrollo

Transferred and Implemented

Application for performance measurement based on best practices of evaluation networks

Transferred and Implemented

Application for the self-assessment of development needs of competencies in monitoring, evaluation and evidence-based knowledge management

Transferred and Implemented

Toolkit for Design and Implementation of M&E Systems

Transferred

Regional Government of San Martin

Aplicativo para Medición del desempeño en base a buenas prácticas de monitoreo y evaluación de organizaciones implementadoras de planes, proyectos y programas de desarrollo

Transferred and Implemented

Institution Tools Status

Application for the self-assessment of development needs of competencies in monitoring, evaluation and evidence-based knowledge management

Transferred, implemented and in use

Toolkit for Design and Implementation of M&E Systems

Transferred, implemented and in use.

See Link:

http://www.dresanmartin.gob.pe /sistema-monitoreo-evaluacion

Regional Government of Ucayali (GRU)

Aplicativo para Medición del desempeño en base a buenas prácticas de monitoreo y evaluación de organizaciones implementadoras de planes, proyectos y programas de desarrollo

Transferred and Implemented

Application for the self-assessment of development needs of competencies in monitoring, evaluation and evidence-based knowledge management

Transferred, implemented and in use

Toolkit for Design and Implementation of M&E Systems

Transferred and Implemented.

See Link:

http://monitoreo.regionucayali.g ob.pe/

SERVIR Aplicativo para Medición del desempeño en base a buenas prácticas de monitoreo y evaluación de organizaciones implementadoras de planes, proyectos y programas de desarrollo

Distributed for their use

Application for performance measurement based on best practices of evaluation networks

Distributed for their use

Application for the self-assessment of development needs of competencies in monitoring, evaluation and evidence-based knowledge management

Distributed for their use

Universidad Agraria Monitoring and Evaluation Training Diploma

Transferred training materials

Universidad Mayor de San Marcos

Monitoring and Evaluation Training Diploma

Transferred training materials

3. Page 26 of the RFP, Component 4 Operating Constraints, states: The Contractor must avoid duplicating efforts and work to complement the efforts of USAID/Peru contractors currently conducting MEL activities (e.g., ongoing evaluation and assessment contractors, future knowledge management contractors, USAID/Washington contracted expert surveyors, etc.).” Please provide a complete list as possible of said contractors so that offerors may provide details on who coordination can and should take place to deliver on the MELS Mission in the most efficient fashion possible.

Answer: There are no USAID/Peru contractors currently conducting MEL activities.

4. Please clarify whether and if the Rapid Mobilization Plan Annex will be evaluated as it is referenced explicitly under M.2.1 Project Management, but included only as an Annex in the instructions under Section L. Please also provide any page limit for said plan as appropriate.

Answer: The Rapid Mobilization Plan will be evaluated as per M.2.1. Page limit: 3 pages.

5. Is there a page limitation for the Year 1 Work Plan?

Answer: The page limitation for the Year 1 Work Plan is 5 pages.

6. Section C.5.1.d page 19 indicates that USAID/Peru expects to complete one impact evaluation. Can the Contractor assume that the impact evaluation in Attachment 2 on page 125 that occurs in years 1, 3, and 5 will all be the same impact evaluation and that the three years represents the baseline, midterm, and final and not three separate impact evaluations?

Answer: Yes. The impact evaluation in Attachment 2 that occurs in years 1, 3 and 5 will all be the same impact evaluation.

7. The Impact Evaluation of the Alternative Development Program is not described as part of CLIN 0001. Can you confirm that it is part of CLIN 0002 and the tentative dates for issuing the Request for Task Order?

Answer: The Impact Evaluation of the Alternative Development Program is part of CLIN 0002. Tentative dates for issuing the Request for Task Order are TBD.

8. Can fulltime project staff charge time to the project to develop responses to the task orders under CLIN 0002? And under what CLIN would this time be charged?

Answer: Fulltime project staff may be assigned to develop responses to the task orders under CLIN 0002. However, the costs associated with time charged must be segregated to clearly show the time devoted to the appropriate CLIN.

9. Section L.8 page 115 requires a list of attachments, at least (CVs and Past Performance) are duplicative of Annexes listed in L.6.1 and one refers to information included in the cost proposal (Section K). Please clarify if these attachments are in addition to information already included in the technical and cost proposals or if they are duplicative and not required, with the exception of the Branding and Marking Plan.

Answer: Section L.8 is hereby deleted. Please refer to RFP Amendment No. 01 Section L.6.1.

10. If the items listed as an attachment are required in addition to the Annexes, what is the difference between the Annexes and the Attachment? Other related questions are:

� Is there a page limit for CVs included in the Attachment as there is in the Annex?

� What other information is required on proposed sub-awardees or sub-contractors?

� Should the certifications for K be attached to the Cost Proposal?

Answer: See answer to question No. 9.

11. Section C.5.1.e page 20 indicates that the contractor will perform “at least a biannual gender assessment,” meaning twice a year for a total of 10 over the life of the contract.

Please confirm that USAID meant biennial (every other year) which would match the detailed description under CLIN 0001in Section C, Section F.7, and the table in Attachment 2.

Answer: USAID means biennial, meaning every other year.

12. Section C.5.1.e page 20 indicates that the contractor will perform an “annual environmental compliance review for specific target areas in Peru.” The detailed description under CLIN 0001 in Section C and Section F.7 indicates that this will occur in year 1 but the table in Attachment 2 indicates that it is indeed annual for a total of 5.

Should the contractor plan to complete the environmental compliance review only in year 1 or in all 5 years?

Answer: USAID currently anticipates that one environmental compliance review will be undertaken each year. USAID has identified only one environmental compliance review for year 1. The other four reviews are currently unidentified and planned under CLIN 0002, and subject to confirmation through a Request for Task Order.

13. In Section F.7 on page 45 the table references “USAID Monitoring and Evaluation annual workshops,” which are not described in Section C on page 23 under deliverables.

Can the Contractor assume that USAID/Peru will cover the costs of the meeting place and meals, and that the contractor will be responsible for materials and facilitation of these workshops?

Answer: No. The Offeror should not assume that USAID/Peru will cover the costs of the meeting place and meals. Under the SOO, the Offeror is expected to propose innovative and efficient approaches to achieve the expected objectives.

14. To ensure that the information is consistent across all offerors, will the Mission share a template for the Past Performance Matrix referenced on page 106?

Answer: Please see RFP Amendment No. 1, Item 10.

15. Does USAID have an estimate about how many deliverables will require translation into Dutch and Portuguese?

Answer: Under Component 1, CLIN 001, the Interim Performance Evaluation for the Promotion of Best Social and Environmental Practices in the Amazon is expected to be translated into Dutch and Portuguese. Under CLIN 0002, one undefined evaluation or assessment is expected to be translated into Dutch and Portuguese, and one additional undefined evaluation or assessment into Portuguese.

16. How many attendees should the Contractor budget for attending the:

� Annual M&E workshop for IPs in Lima � Annual regional M&E workshop for IPs

� Annual USAID M&E workshop � Learning events in Lima � Regional partner meeting

Answer: Historically, 15-20 participants attended the Annual USAID M&E workshops;

25-30 the M&E workshops for IPs; and 50-60 the regional partners' meetings.

Under the SOO, the Offeror should propose a maximum number of attendees that could be reasonably managed in order to achieve the objectives of the meetings, events, or workshops as per the approach proposed.

17. Can the Contractor assume that the IPs and regional partners will pay for the travel, transportation, and per diem of their staff to the annual M&E workshops and learning events?

Answer: Yes. IPs should pay for the travel of their own staff to annual M&E workshops and learning events in Lima. Historically, staff from host government partners residing outside Lima required some travel support.

18. Please provide current names of incumbent(s) if any, performing these services and contract number.

Answer: There is no current incumbent contractor performing these services.

19. How will the reports and deliverables or outputs be evaluated?

Answer: The COR will use a variety of mechanisms to evaluate the quality of the reports, deliverable or outputs, prior to acceptance, including but not limited to the requirements listed in the Contract Award, the approved Work Plan, and feedback from USAID stakeholders.

20. Regarding meetings, will all contractors be on site, or will contractors be able to attend meetings remotely?

Answer: The Offeror should propose a management approach to use resources in a cost-effective way to meet expected objectives.

21. Does the Government provide an NTE or plug-in number for Travel?

Answer: No. The Offeror should estimate the travel based on their technical and management approach.

22. Report Writing: Will reports be submitted in English or will they need to be prepared in multiple languages?

Answer: Reports listed in Section F.6 Reports Matrix table will be submitted in English.

Component 1 reports will all be submitted in English and Spanish, and some in Portuguese and Dutch, as stated in question 15. Component 2, 3, and 4 reports will be submitted in English and/or Spanish as specified by the COR and described in the approved Annual work plan.

23. Is the Executive Summary included in the page limit?

Answer: Yes, the Executive Summary is included in the 28 page limitation. See L.6.1.

24. Section F.7, Component 2 Deliverables ending on page 45, “USAID’s Monitoring and Evaluation annual workshop” (year 1 due with 45 days of award) is listed as a sixth deliverable for Component 2 but is not included in the description in C.5.2, Component 2, e. Deliverables, bottom of p. 23. Is this workshop separate from other workshops listed in F deliverables, or is it connected to the Lima workshop for IPs?

Answer: Yes, it is separate from other workshops listed in Section F Deliverables.

Section C.5.2 Component 2 is amended to include this deliverable.

25. In the first paragraph on page 28, the RFP says “If expatriate professionals are proposed to cover Key Personnel positions, their period of performance cannot be more than two years, and the Contractor must present a plan for their successful replacement with a local expert.” In the first paragraph on page 107, the RFP says “USAID strongly prefers that Offerors minimize the number of proposed long term expatriate staff in order to offer the maximum number of positions to Peruvian and Latin American region subject matter experts. This would include Key Personnel positions as well as Short Term Technical Assistance (STTA) provided under the terms of the contract.” Please confirm that the definition of “local expert” as the term is used on page 28 would include experts from Peru and other countries in Latin America.

Answer: USAID considers "local expert" a professional who resides in the country where work is performed. USAID is not contemplating hiring TCNs as Key Personnel or long-term positions.

26. In the second paragraph on page 39, section F.6.2, the RFP states “The first AWP will cover the period from the Contract effective date through the end of the next U.S. Fiscal Year (i.e., through September 30, 2020).” If the contract is awarded in the March-April 2019 timeframe, the first work plan will cover some 18 months. Please confirm whether the draft annual plan requested in Section L.6.1., to be submitted as Annex B of the technical proposal, should cover a period of 18 months or only 12 months.

Answer: The offeror must submit the draft AWP for a period of 12 months.

27. Section C.5.1.c bullet point (v) on page 18 says that conducting national or regional level population surveys will be a requirement. We note that the resources available under this contract would not support a proper national, let alone, regional level population survey. Please confirm that this requirement refers to building the capacity of the GOP or other entities to conduct such surveys.

Answer: Conducting national or regional (meaning sub-national, in a political or geographical region within a country) population surveys may or may not be a requirement. However, the Offeror must have the capacity to propose cost effective approaches to conduct such surveys to meet expected objectives.

28. For Annex D, please clarify whether CVs are required for long-term staff who are not proposed as key personnel. Please also clarify whether letters of commitment are required for long-term staff who are not proposed as key personnel.

Answer: Yes, CVs are required for long-term staff and key personnel. Letters of commitment are required for both. Exclusive agreements are not required. See Section L.4.

29. Please clarify what is meant by “task plan” as used in the first paragraph of section L.6.4 on p. 108 and in the first paragraph on p. 109. Is this different than a work plan?

Answer: No, it is the same plan.

30. Section C.5.1.e.ii: Component 1: Evaluations, assessment and other studies, page 21: g. Expected Results: Please clarify the deliverables anticipated for CLIN 0002 as none are listed in Section F.

Answer: Deliverables for CLIN 0002 are not listed in section F. These deliverables will be identified at the time of the Request for Task Order Proposal (RFTOP) is issued.

31. Section C.8: IDIQ Additional Country-Specific Activities (CLIN 0002), page 28: “In addition to the activities described in C.5.1.d (ii) and in accordance with Section B.2, “the Contractor must furnish additional activities that are consistent with the purpose and objectives of the Contract.” Please clarify what additional activities may be requested under this CLIN.

Answer: Additional activities that may be requested under CLIN 002 include the type of activities described under C.5.1.c, C.5.1.d, and C.5.1.e. For illustrative purposes, see Attachment 2 for CLIN 0002 additional information.

32. Section F. 7: Deliverables, Delivery and Fixed Fee Schedule, page 43: Table for Component 1: Evaluations, Assessment and Other Studies: Please confirm that the activities and quantity of each activity are all of the activities to be covered under CLIN 0001.

Answer: Yes. All of the deliverables listed in Section F.7 Component 1: Evaluations, Assessments and Other Studies, are to be covered under CLIN 001. USAID expects the Contractor to perform the types of services listed in Section C.5.1.c General Requirements to meet the expected purpose of Component 1.

33. Section, L.6.1 General Instructions, page 105 – Annex A - AMELP: An illustrative AMELP is required as Annex A to the technical proposal. Does USAID/Peru have an AMELP template or other Mission guidance for AMELPs? If so, could the Mission please share this to inform writing of this annex?

Answer: No. USAID/Peru does not have a template. See ADS 201.4.3.10 and https://usaidlearninglab.org/sites/default/files/resource/files/cleared_-_how-to_note_- _activity_mel_plan_sep2017.pdf for guidance.

34. Section, L.6.1 General Instructions, page 105-106 - Annex D: CV/Resumes for proposed Key Personnel and long-term staff: CV/Resumes should contain: name, position title, relationship, email address.” Please clarify what is meant by “relationship”.

Answer: The RFP is modified hereby to delete the word "relationship".

35. Section L.6.1 General Instructions, page 105- 106 - Annex D: CV/Resumes for proposed Key Personnel and long-term staff: Please clarify if Letters of Commitment are required for Key Personnel only or if USAID wishes to see Letter of Commitment for both Key Personnel and Long-Term Staff proposed.

Answer: See response to question No. 28.

36. Section L.6.1 General Instructions, page 106 - Annex F. Mobilization Plan: Please clarify if there is a page limit for this annex.

Answer: See response to question No. 4.

37. Section L.8 Attachments, page 115: USAID asks to provide additional information on proposed sub-awardees or sub-contractors. Please clarify which Annex of those described on pages 105-106 should this information be presented in.

Answer: See response to question No. 10.

38. Section L.8 Attachments, page 115: Please clarify if we should include the Branding and Marking plan in our proposal response, and, if so, should this be included in our cost proposal?

Answer: The Branding & Marking Plan must be included in the technical proposal. See response to question No. 9.

39. We kindly request the updated CDCS covering the period 2012-2019. The RFP (p. 13) cites the current CDCS as covering the period 2012-2019 but the version available on the USAID Peru webpage (https://www.usaid.gov/peru/cdcs) only covers the period 2012-2016.

Answer: The expiration date of the CDCS 2012-2016, which is the CDCS available on the USAID Peru webpage, was extended through June 2019. More updated information on USAID/Peru's work can be found in https://www.usaid.gov/peru/our-work.

40. Within a four-page limitation for the Project Management section, we observe that there will be limited space to present all of the required elements of our management and staffing plans, as well as institutional experience. Would USAID please confirm that offerors can provide an overview of its Staffing Plan in this section while providing detailed content for staffing structure and proposed personnel in Annexes C and D?

Answer: Yes. Note that Project Management section has been extended to six (06) pages. See Section L.6.2.

41. Please clarify if Letters of Commitment from subcontractors should be included in the Technical Volume or the Cost Volume? May offerors create an additional Annex for this purpose?

Answer: Letters of Commitment from subcontractors should be included in the Technical Proposal volume as Annex G. USAID strongly discourages to enter into exclusive agreements with local partners.

42. RFP Section E.3 (p. 33) includes a description of the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan, and USAID provides a sample QASP matrix in Attachment 3. We do not see a reference to the QASP in Sections L or M. Please clarify if a QASP is required as part of the technical proposal, and, if so, where it will be scored?

Answer: Yes, a QASP is required. See Annex I under L.6.1. The QASP will not be scored.

43. In RFP Section L.6.1 (p.25) , the Executive Summary is allowed “up to two pages.”

Please confirm this is in addition to the 25 page limit for the Technical Proposal Body.

Answer: See response to question No. 23.

44. Would USAID please describe what is meant by the term “synthesis evaluation? This type of evaluation is mentioned in the RFP Section C.5.1(a) (p. 17): “Towards this end, the Contractor is required throughout the performance period of this contract to provide services for performance, impact (quasi-experimental), whole-of project, synthesis, and multi-country evaluations, including the design and implementation of quantitative and qualitative baseline studies, surveys, statistical analysis and other studies as required by the evaluation design.”

Answer: USAID meant an evaluation synthesis, which is a systematic procedure for organizing findings from several disparate evaluation studies. The synthesis identifies cross-cutting findings on specific issues, summarize knowledge gained from evaluations conducted around a particular sector, which provides a useful overview of what has been learned and can also help inform USAID strategy, project and activity development. See https://www.usaid.gov/documents/1870/strengthening-evidence-based-development-five-years-better-evaluation-practice-usaid and https://www.gao.gov/assets/80/76108.pdf for more general information.

45. Please clarify in the two Whole-of-Project Evaluations referred to in RFP Section C.5.1.d

(p. 19) are performance evaluations.

Answer: Yes.

46. The RFP includes the following attachments: QASP Sample, Branding Strategy, and Branding Implementation Plan. Should offerors fill these out as part of the proposal, or are these intended to be completed after award?

Answer: Offerors must fill these out as part of the proposal.

47. Since offerors are allowed to provide past performance information for up to 5 projects, and major subcontractors are allowed an additional 3 projects, could USAID extend the page limit for the Matrix in Annex E to 10 pages?

Answer: Yes, please refer to RFP Amendment No. 0001, Section L.6.1.

48. Section C.5.2, Statement of Objectives, Component 2: TA and Training in M&E: Would USAID/Peru kindly clarify if it expects M&E training to be provided only to Mission MEL staff, or if it also anticipates MEL training support to other (non-MEL) technical staff, such as staff on technical teams who serve as AORs or CORs?

Answer: Yes, M&E training and TA may be expected to be provided to other non-MEL USAID staff.

49. Section C.5.2, Statement of Objectives, Component 2: TA and Training in M&E and Section F.7, Deliverables, Delivery, and Fixed Fee Schedule: Would the Mission kindly clarify the intended audience (all IPs or the 8-10 local NGO IPs mentioned on page 22) for the deliverables listed in Section F.7?

Answer: As described in Section C.5.2 Component 2.e, the intended audience for Component 2 Deliverables listed in Section F.7 is as follows:

- Capacity building plan in M&E for IPs: The 8-10 current and new local NGO IPs.

- M&E workshops for partners: Open to all IPs.

- Regional M&E workshops for partners: Open to IPs working in those regions.

They may include staff from host government partners.

- On-line M&E course for implementing partners: Focused on local partners.

- Templates, guides to develop AMELPs, progress, final reports for partners: For all current and new IPs.

- USAID's M&E annual workshop: The USAID MEL team.

50. Section E.3 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan: This section references the potential for an impact evaluation of the MELS activity. Would the Mission kindly confirm if it expects an impact evaluation of the MELS activity? Additionally, does the Mission foresee any external performance evaluations of the MELS activity?

Answer: USAID does not expect to conduct an impact evaluation for the MELS Activity, but it may foresee to conduct an external performance evaluation. See RFP Amendment No. 0001, Section E.3.(e).

51. Would the Mission kindly provide any needs assessments related to M&E training conducted with the Government of Peru, USAID implementing partners, or Mission staff within the last five years, as these are not available on the DEC?

Answer: The First Annual Progress Report of the Evaluations Project https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00SZWG.pdf includes a summary assessment of the M&E capacities of USAID implementing partners as of 2013. Additional detailed information will be provided to the winning Offeror.

52. To better illustrate the experience of key and long-term personnel, could USAID extend the page limit for CVs from 2 pages to 3 pages?

Answer: The number of pages for CVs is hereby increased from 2 to 3 pages, plus one

(01) for the letter of commitment. See RFP Amendment 0001, Section L.6.

53. Would personnel from all countries that are part of MELS (Peru, Paraguay, Brazil, Ecuador, Suriname, Guyana, and…