Amendment_1.pdf

Amendment One (1) to Solicitation 72060519R00004 - USAID Forest and

Biodiversity Support Activity (FABS)

A. Questions and Answers

1. The table in B.6 (page 8) asks for Ceilings on Indirect Cost Rates for FY17-FY21. Please confirm that this should be from FY 20-FY24.

USAID ANSWER: Yes, the ceilings on Indirect Cost Rates are for fiscal years 2020 to

2024.

2. In Section C.6.1, the Results in text boxes for IR1 (p. 20), IR2 (p. 21), and IR3 (p. 25) are listed as “Required.” But at the beginning of each respective IR section is the statement

“Major sub-objectives and illustrative deliverables under this IR include, but are not limited to, those outlined below. Offeror will propose a complete set of objectives and products to support the proposed theory of change.” Are IR results listed within the respective IR sections required or illustrative?

USAID ANSWER: The IRs themselves are required. The offeror must propose a complete set of objectives and deliverables that will achieve each IR, according to the proposed theory of change.

3. On page 25, in the Required Results under IR3 text box, the final requirement is to establish a publicly available data repository. What are USAID’s anticipated plans for the existing

Carpe portals/websites and how do they relate to this new repository?

USAID ANSWER: Existing websites and repositories of CARPE documents are not controlled by USAID or current awardees. These are legacies of past partnerships and should be incorporated into the FABS approach as appropriate to deliver the Result.

4. Section C.6.3. Grants Management (page 26) states that the illustrative budget for GUC under CLIN 1 is $6.5M. Please confirm whether this is illustrative or the actual expected amount to be budgeted for GUCs.

USAID ANSWER: The budget for GUCs under CLIN 1 is $6.5 million.

5. Regarding Section F.7.1(c) on pages 38-39, could USAID please clarify the due dates for the

Activity MEL plan?

USAID ANSWER:

● Draft MEL Plan due: 30-days after contract award

● Final MEL Plan due: 90-days after contract award

6. The deliverable table in Section F.7.2 (page 45), under Small Grants in Place, notes there are

10 anticipated small grants. Please confirm that this number is illustrative and may vary depending on the Theory of Change and programmatic approach to FABS.

USAID ANSWER: Yes, the number is illustrative. The number and timing of GUCs under FABS should match the theory of change and programmatic approaches proposed by the offeror.

7. Section H.5 on page 59 states that salary ranges for ALL the professional positions in this

Contract will be established based on the market value of the position in the country of contract performance. Would USAID confirm Offerors are able to group professional positions and establish salary ranges for each grouping (rather than set a separate salary range for each professional position)?

USAID ANSWER: Yes, the offeror is required to propose salary ranges based on professional categories. Crucial in this section is the requirement not to propose “rank in person” salaries. Proposed salaries must reflect the level of responsibilities to be carried out by the position. USAID will reject salary proposals that are based solely on salary history.

8. Section H.5(a)(2) on page 60 states that Cooperating Country Nationals (CCNs) and Third

Country Nationals (TCNs) must not exceed the Local Compensation Plan (LCP). Would

USAID please provide the LCP to ensure salaries are below the threshold?

USAID ANSWER: The following table reflects the current Local Compensation Plan:

Professional Category Professional

Level

Basic Salary in USD Allowances in USD

Min Max Min Max

Senior Professional 12 60,770 94,192 25,725 34,638

Mid-Level Professional 11 43,983 68,174 20,370 26,821

Senior Office Manager 10 34,857 54,050 17,523 22,641

Mid-Level Office manager 9 26,922 41,712 11,037 14,981

Senior Assistant 7-8 17,150 30,618 8,207 11,799

Junior Assistant 5-6 13306 22509 7,182 9,636

Reproduction Clerk/ Junior

Clerk/Driver 4-3 10,771 18,591 6,308 8,394

Attendant/Runner/Gardener

/Janitor 1-2 9,078 15,322 5,857 7,522

9. Section L.8.2 ([L.7.2] on page 107) states that Biographical Data Sheets should be included in Annex A. Section L.8 CLIN 0001: paragraph 2 on page 112 requests that the Biographical

Data Sheet be included in the cost proposal. Please confirm that Biographical Data Sheets should only be included in the cost proposal.

USAID ANSWER: The requirement for Bio Data sheets is deleted from the solicitation.

The offeror is instead required to propose salary ranges based on professional categories. Crucial in this section is the requirement not to propose “rank in person” salaries. Proposed salaries must reflect the level of responsibilities to be carried out by the position. USAID will reject salary proposals that are based solely on salary history.

10. The Staffing Strategy and Plan portion of the RFP (Section L.8.2 ([L.7.2] on pages 108-109) requires a staff matrix. May offerors include this matrix in Annex B: Organizational Chart?

Or can USAID further describe what they would like to see in the 5-page Annex B in addition to an Organizational Chart?

USAID ANSWER: Yes, offerors may include the matrix in Annex B or any other information they deem necessary to further clarify their staffing strategy. USAID has corrected the numbering error found under section L.7.

11. Section L.8, Part 1 on page 111 states that the completed Standard Form 33 must include an original signature. Since proposals will be submitted electronically, could USAID please confirm that a scanned or electronic signature would be sufficient?

USAID ANSWER: electronic/pdf signature is acceptable.

12. Section L.8, Part 2, CLIN 0001(2) on page 112 references required Biodata forms for all key personnel. The last sentence in this paragraph states, “Proposed annual salary escalation must be provided.” Would USAID please confirm the escalation is to be provided in the budget and not on the Biodata form itself?

USAID ANSWER: Bio Data sheets are not required, therefore the escalation rates must be provided in the budget and the cost proposal narrative.

13. Regarding Section L.8, Part 2(e) on page 112, could USAID please confirm that Offerors may use their own standard budget template, provided the major cost items are ordered in the same way as USAID’s budget template in Attachment 4?

USAID ANSWER: Yes

14. Section L.8, Part 2(f) on page 112 states that Offerors must submit a detailed budget per component [emphasis added]. Could USAID please confirm that “per component” refers to

CLINs 0001 and 0002?

USAID ANSWER: This requirement is limited to CLIN 001 since the amount for CLIN

002 is set at $4.2 million inclusive of fixed fee.

15. Section L.8 includes requirements related to CLIN 0002 under Parts 2 (pages 115-116) and

12 (page 118). Could USAID please confirm that Offerors should submit their CLIN 0002 budget and narrative only within Part 12 of their cost proposals?

USAID ANSWER: This requirement is limited to CLIN 001 since the amount for CLIN

002 is set at $4.2 million inclusive of fixed fee.

16. Section L.8, Part 2, CLIN 0001(13) on page 115 states, “USAID will not agree to allow the

GUCs to be included in the calculation of fixed fee.” Would USAID consider allowing a reduced grants fee to be applied to GUCs?

USAID ANSWER: Offerors must propose a different grants and subcontracts handling fee structure.

17. Section L.8, CLIN 0002 on pages 115-116 discusses expectations concerning person-days of labor for CLIN 002, estimated at 5,000 days. Would USAID please clarify the following items:

a. Would USAID allow Offerors to propose full-time LOE for the four illustrative labor categories according to their Work-Day, Work-Week certifications to avoid overestimating costs for employees whose paid absences are recovered via fringe benefits?

USAID ANSWER: Yes, offerors must propose full-time LOE for the four illustrative labor categories with the understanding that these rates will be used for future task orders.

b. USAID has stated that they expect an estimated 5,000 working days to be distributed across the four labor categories evenly over the life of the activity. However, even with

260 days per labor category, the total estimated days for four, full-time staff would be

5,200 days (260 days*4 staff*5 years). Will USAID please confirm the expected LOE for

CLIN 0002 is to be for four, full-time staff over the five-year life of the activity (which may result in a different total of LOE days due to the way Offerors recover paid absences)?

USAID ANSWER: The estimated LOE will not be for 260 workdays x 4 staff x 5years simply because USAID will not start issuing task orders on the first day of the resulting contract. Each Task order will include some or all of the illustrative professional categories, local staff and other direct costs in addition to fixed fee.

18. Regarding the CLIN 0002 budget ceiling, there are different totals cited within the solicitation – Section B.3(b) on page 6 states the total estimated cost ceiling is $4.2M exclusive of the associated maximum fee; Section B.4 on page 7, within the table, shows the total ceiling at $4.2M (inclusive of fee), and Section L.8, Part 2, CLIN 0002 on page 116 states that the total amount is $5M including fixed fees. Would USAID please confirm the total ceiling of CLIN 002 and clarify whether this total is inclusive or exclusive of fee?

USAID ANSWER: The correct amount is $4.2 inclusive of fixed fee.

19. Regarding Attachment 4 – Budget Template, could USAID please clarify the following items?

a. The budget narrative tab includes the detailed budget, which leaves limited space to add text and present detailed explanations in an easy-to-read format. Would USAID consider allowing Offerors to provide the budget narrative in an MS Word or Adobe PDF format, provided Offerors include the basis for each cost element as required in the current MS

Excel template?

USAID ANSWER: Offerors must include the narrative for each cost line item in the detailed budget. The narrative must explain the basis for the unit price, why it is considered reasonable and why is the quantity or quality that is affecting the cost is realistic.

b. The summary budget includes cost categories that are not included in the detailed budget template, such as Training and Equipment. Could USAID please confirm that Offerors should add these cost categories to the detailed budget?

USAID ANSWER: The reason for providing a budget template is to ensure that all offerors submit similarly structured cost proposals. But it is acceptable to add cost line items if they do not appear in the shared template.

c. Currently, all tabs in the budget template do not separate CLIN 0001 and CLIN 0002.

Would USAID allow Offerors to include a separate detailed budget for CLIN 0002 to allow for easier discernment of costs for each CLIN?

USAID ANSWER: CLIN 002 is a plug in figure of $4.2 million inclusive of fixed fee.

There is no requirement for details other than the table for the professional categories.

d. Several tabs within the budget template are blank, including fringe benefits, travel, transport and per diem, allowances, and ODCs. Could USAID please confirm that these tabs are not required, provided Offerors itemize these costs in their detailed budget?

USAID ANSWER: The tabs are provided to remind the offerors that they may want to provide details for each cost category. For example, you can include the estimated international and local travel frequency and costs under the travel tab which will be considered approved upon contract award instead of requesting travel approval during implementation.

e. The order in which cost categories are required in Section L.8, Part 2, CLIN 0001, are different than the order in which they appear in the MS Excel budget summary template.

Would USAID please confirm the cost categories, and the order in which they are expected to appear in the budget?

USAID ANSWER: The resultant contract budget will be the one provided in Section B, however a summary budget and a detailed budget following Section L.8 and the detailed budget template will provide us with the cost information needed for the cost evaluation.

f. The tab included in the budget template labeled “Subcontracts” includes a different order of major cost elements and several items are labeled differently than the detailed budget tab for the prime. Could USAID please confirm that Offerors should present subcontractor costs in the same way as their prime costs, i.e., using a similar detailed budget template?

USAID ANSWER: USAID confirms that Offerors should present subcontractor costs in the same way as their prime costs.

20. Regarding Attachments 5 and 14, could USAID please confirm in what section(s) of the cost proposal Offerors should include their Certification Regarding TIP Compliance Plan and SF

LLL, and if all subcontractors should also provide these documents?

USAID ANSWER: Offerors can include both with Section K - Certifications.

Subcontractor compliance is the responsibility of the prime.

21. B.6 has a table that references previous fiscal years. Will the Government update this table to reflect its current requirements?

USAID ANSWER: The table is corrected in Amendment No. 1.

22. Is B.6 intended to force bidders to propose indirect cost rate not to exceed that will cap reimbursement regardless of the results of indirect cost rate decimalization audits?

USAID ANSWER: Yes

23. If the answer to #2 B.6 asks for the “distribution base” for overhead and G&A rates.is yes, FAR 42.707(b) limits the circumstances under which the Government may impose indirect rate caps. If those circumstances do not apply to a particulate offeror, does USAID intend to proceed with forcing the proposal of indirect rate caps?

USAID ANSWER: FAR 42.707(b) only provides examples of situations that may make it prudent to provide a final indirect cost rate ceiling in a contract. This FAR reference doesn’t limit the Government from requesting the ceiling rates.

24. B.6 asks for the “distribution base” for overhead and G&A rates. That term does not appear in USAID ch 302 Best Practices Guide For Indirect Costing. Is this term intended to mean the indirect cost rate allocation base that is referred to in the Guide?

USAID ANSWER: The base of allocation must not deviate from the NICRA determined allocation base.

25. B.6 (a)(1)&(2) refer only to overhead and G&A rates. Does USAID also want the requested information on all other indirect rates, for example subcontract administration and fringe rates?

USAID ANSWER: Yes

26. Attachment 4 Budget Template has no implementing instructions, is highly incomplete, has formatting gaps and contains data entries that are misidentified by cost type, for example calling for rates when unit prices are appropriate. Will the Government complete the workbook, provide operating instructions for it and correct all errors? If not, and the

Government requires the offeror to complete the workbook, the following questions apply.

USAID ANSWER: The budget template is meant to be illustrative and do not include all cost types and formulas.

27. The Detail Budget and Budget Narrative tabs appear identical. The Detail Budget tab seems fairly self-explanatory. What does the Government want done with the Narrative tab?

Would it be acceptable to delete that tab and submit a cost proposal narrative as a separate document?

USAID ANSWER: Offerors must include the narrative for each cost line item in the detailed budget. The narrative must explain the basis for the unit price, why it is considered reasonable and why is the quantity or quality that is affecting the cost is realistic. A summary of the cost narrative can be provided in MS Word.

28. it acceptable to the Government for the offeror to insert formulas, rows, columns (for example to provide for cost entries in contract year 5 which is missing on some of the tabs), appropriately format, and otherwise modify the workbook tabs to conform to its cost proposal and make the workbook functional?

USAID ANSWER: Yes

29. Training and Equipment are cost categories which have their own tabs but do not have corresponding lines on the Detail Budget tab. Since both these are other direct costs is it acceptable to roll up their costs into the ODC line on the Detail Budget tab?

USAID ANSWER: Training, equipment and travel are left for the Offeror to tabulate.

The intent is to have a list that can be approved with the award to avoid incessant requests for individual approvals after award.

30. The Subcontracting tab as provided has no data entry content for Grants Under Contract

(GUCs), although elsewhere Subcontracts and GUCs are rolled together. Is it acceptable to breakout GUC cost equally across all 5 years on this tab rather than showing it as only one lump sum in one of the years?

USAID ANSWER: Yes

31. There is no labor cost development tab to support the labor costs (direct, indirect, fee) for both direct employees and consultants which presumably would be data that feeds to the appropriate rows on the Detail Budget tab. Is it acceptable for the offeror to insert a labor cost development tab to show and generate the data necessary to complete the Detail Budget tab?

USAID ANSWER: Yes

32. Labor costs on the Detail Budget tab are shown as a daily rate. It is common to hire consultants on a daily rate basis but more common to pay direct employees on an hourly basis. For costing purposes, is it acceptable to cost out employees on an hourly basis, convert that to a daily rate, and use that daily rate in the Detail Budget tab? The tab referenced in #11 above would be used to show those rate developments.

USAID ANSWER: Yes, Offerors may add tabs with details to support their proposed costs.

33. From the contents and layout of the Summary Budget and Detail Budget tabs as well as other references in the RFP it seems that the Government is treating the fringe benefit costs as a direct cost. Is that a correct assumption? If it is, then the following question applies.

USAID ANSWER: Including fringe benefits as a line item or as a rate under the

NICRA depends on the Offeror’s accounting system.

34. In accord with the definitions at FAR 31.202 and .203, DCAA Manual 7641.90, and our

DCAA accounting system approval, fringe is accounted for as an indirect cost, with an indirect fringe cost rate computed in accord with our approved accounting system and application of accounting principles, and applied in accord with our accounting system approval from DCAA. A requirement of maintaining that approval is that the accounting system be consistently applied. Consequently, we must develop wrapped labor rates that include the calculation of fringe benefit costs applied as indirect costs. Will the Government confirm that the accounting for of fringe benefit costs and the development of those costs through the application of our approved fringe benefit rate will be acceptable and result in no disadvantage when evaluating our proposal in accord with the evaluation criteria as articulated in Section M of the RFP?

USAID ANSWER: Including fringe benefits as a line item or as a rate under the

NICRA depends on the Offeror’s accounting system.

35. B.3(b) states that “The Total Estimated Cost Ceiling of this CLIN is $4,200,000.00, exclusive of the associated Maximum Fee of [TBD].” However, per Table 2 of B.4, it appears that the

$4.2 million ceiling for CLIN 2 should be inclusive of both activity costs and maximum fee.

Can USAID please clarify if fee should be budgeted within the $4.2 million ceiling?

USAID ANSWER: The plug in amount for CLIN 002 is $4.2 million inclusive of fixed fee.

36. Can USAID please clarify whether the “territories” referred to in C.6.2 correspond to

CARPE landscapes? Are these territories pre-determined or should offerors propose their own selections as part of their approach?

USAID ANSWER: Offerors may propose their own selections as part of their approach.

37. F.8.2 describes Chief of Party, Operations Manager/Deputy Chief of Party, Capacity

Building and Small Grants Lead, and Communications and CLA Lead as the four “key personnel” positions. L.8.2 states, however, that “Offerors must identify up to five “key personnel” one of which must be the Chief of Party” and “the Offeror must provide the minimum qualifications for each key personnel position (relevant experience, education, language).” Can USAID please clarify if offerors should present staff for the four listed key personnel positions or whether they should identify their own key personnel positions and minimum qualifications?

USAID ANSWER: USAID defined the four KP to reflect the objectives of FABS.

Offerors may deviate from this if they can clearly show how their deviation will achieve

FABS results.

38. L.8.2 states that USAID 1420-17 Biographical Data Sheets should be included in the technical proposal. However, L.6 states that “Technical proposals must not make reference to pricing data so that the technical evaluation may be made strictly on basis on technical merit.” In order to comply with L.6, can USAID confirm that biographical sheets should be included only in the cost proposal rather than in the technical proposal?

USAID ANSWER: The requirement for USAID 1420-17 is deleted from the solicitation.

39. Could USAID please confirm if the four labor categories listed in L.8. Part 2 (CLIN 2) are the ones offerors should use when building up the illustrative CLIN 2 budget, or if offerors are able to propose their own labor categories for the proposal budget?

USAID ANSWER: Each Task order will include some or all of the illustrative professional categories, local staff and other direct costs in addition to fixed fee.

40. Could USAID please confirm that offerors only need to proposal one ceiling daily rate per labor category as specified in L.8. Part 2 (CLIN 2)?

USAID ANSWER: Yes

41. Given the weighting of the Technical Approach as compared to the Management Approach and Staffing Strategy and Plan, would USAID consider adding 5 additional pages to the technical approach in order for offerors to comprehensively present their strategy?

USAID ANSWER: No.

42. Under L.8.2., past performance reference information is cited as part of the Technical

Proposal and as an annex (Annex C). However, in the Past Performance subsection in the

Instructions to Offerors (L8.2.), it is unclear which parts of past performance should go in the

Technical Proposal versus an annex. Can USAID please clarify what should be included in the main Technical Proposal body and what should go in Annex C?

USAID ANSWER: Past performance information must be provided in Annex C

B. Amendments to the Solicitation:

I. Under Section B, delete item B.6 in its entirety and insert the following in lieu thereof:

“B.6. CEILING ON INDIRECT COST RATES

a) For each of the Contractor’s accounting periods during the term of this contract, the parties agree as follows:

1) The distribution base for establishment of final overhead rates is TBD.

2) The distribution base for establishment of final G&A rates is TBD.

b) The Contractor will make no change in its established method of classifying or allocating indirect costs without the prior written approval of the Contracting Officer (CO).

c) Reimbursement for indirect costs shall be at final negotiated rates, but not in excess of the following ceiling rates for each Fiscal Year (contractor’s FY):

Indirect Cost

Type

FY 20 FY 21 FY 22 FY23 FY 24

1. [TBD]

2. [TBD]

3. [TBD]

d)

1) The Government will not be obligated to pay any additional amount should the final indirect cost rates exceed the negotiated ceiling rates, and

2) In the event the final indirect cost rates are less than the negotiated ceiling rates, the negotiated rates will be reduced to conform to the lower rates.”

II. Delete Section L.7 in its entirety and insert the following in lieu thereof:

L.7 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

L.7.1. General Instructions

The content of the technical proposal must be organized by the major technical evaluation criteria listed in Section M. The Technical Proposal submitted in response to this solicitation must address how the Offeror intends to carry out the SOW.

The proposal must be prepared in such a manner as to enable the review committee to make a thorough evaluation and arrive at a sound determination of whether the proposal meets all technical requirements and satisfies the SOW requirements.

L.7.2. Format, Page Limitation and Content

The proposal must be written in English and typed on standard 8.5” x 11” paper (216mm x

297mm), single spaced, Times New Roman font not less than 12 points in size, with margins no less than one inch of each border. Number each page consecutively. The text in any text boxes included within the technical proposal must not be less than 12 points in size. All graphs and charts must be included in the annexes. Text in graphs, charts and text boxes may be less than 12 points in size but no less than 8 points and must be legible. Proposals which do not include all of the items listed below will be considered incomplete and may be eliminated from further consideration, in accordance with the instructions set forth in Section L.6.

The TECHNICAL PROPOSAL must be structured as follows (page limits are maximums):

1. Cover letter (1 page)

2. Title page (1 page)

3. Table of contents (2 pages)

4. Acronym list (2 pages)

5. Executive Summary (2 pages)

6. Technical Proposal Body (18 pages)

a. Technical Approach (8 pages)

b. Management Approach and staffing (10 pages)

c. Past performance references (no page limit)

The following are to be included in the TECHNICAL PROPOSAL as an annex:

Annex A: CV/Resumes for proposed Key Personnel (up to two pages per KP.

USAID 1420-17 Biographical Data Sheet is not required.

Annex B: Organizational Chart (5 pages)

Annex C: Past Performance Information (not page limited)

Annex D: Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan (2 pages)

Annex E: Summary First Annual Work Plan (AWP) (5 pages)

Annex F: Draft Activity MEL Plan (5 pages)

Annex G: Relevant graphs and charts referenced in Technical Proposal (5 pages)

Annex H: Draft Rapid Mobilization Plan (3-pages)

The technical proposal must be strictly limited to the page limitation listed above. Any pages exceeding this limitation will not be read or evaluated. Only those annexes listed above or specifically required in other parts of this solicitation can be submitted. USAID will not review and consider any additional annexes provided.

Proposals which merely offer to perform in accordance with the requirements, or which merely paraphrase the RFP, or use generic, subjective phrases such as, “standard practices will be employed,” or “well established techniques will be employed,” etc., may be considered non- compliant and ineligible for award.

The Offeror must address crosscutting areas—science and technology, partnerships, GVP equality and empowerment and environmental management—and special considerations— through the entirety of this section. The technical approach must address each task listed in

Section C.

Instructions for the preparation of the Technical proposal:

Technical Approach (8 pages limit)

The offeror must describe how its approach will increase local engagement and private sector engagement, enhance key partnerships and increase advocacy across multiple constituency groups in support of the objectives of FABS as detailed in section C. The offeror must describe how its approach will drive collaboration, learning and adapting between CARPE partners and develop synergies across the key result areas stated in section C. The technical approach must concisely describe the offeror’s approach to implementation of a GUC program that will complement its own activities in achieving the results outlined in the proposal. The offeror must provide its proposed selection criteria for grants to local institutions. In addition to describe the technical approach to implementing CLIN 001, this section must also outline the Offeror’s approach to responding to future task orders issued under CLIN 002.

Management Approach and Staffing Strategy and Plan (10 pages limit)

Management Approach

The Offeror must outline the approach that they will take to managing and administering a large and complex activity in a challenging environment such as central Africa, working with a broad array of partners across multiple countries, including both those involved in the implementation of the activity itself, as well as CARPE’s government and civil society partners more broadly.

The technical proposal must demonstrate a clear organizational structure that supports efficient and collaborative activities across results, and how the actions and activities carried out under one results will interact with the rest of the activity.

The Offeror must describe how the organizational structure will respond to the flexibility and responsiveness the technical approach must have, including the ability to respond to task orders issued under CLIN 0002.

The Offeror must prepare a Gantt chart showing the first year workplan as an annex, outlining how their management approach will be put into practice for this activity, and highlighting key innovative and scalable first year activities that advance the technical approach.

Staffing strategy and plan

The Offeror must propose an appropriate strategy to staffing this activity so as to achieve the results specified in section C. As with the Management Approach, this strategy must also take account of the difficulties of working in a challenging and hard-to-staff location as central

Africa.

The Offeror must demonstrate its technical staffing expertise in a staffing plan that includes an overall staffing matrix/chart that reflects the positions including key personnel positions proposed to implement all program components including cross cutting elements. This matrix must address technical responsibility, defined lines of management, and include key subcontractor and/or consultants if proposed. The matrix must accompanied by a two page narrative.

Offerors must identify up to five “key personnel” one of which must be the Chief of Party.

Resumes must be provided for each key personnel proposed. Resumes are not included in the page limit but must be limited to two pages for each individual. The Offeror must provide the minimum qualifications for each key personnel position (relevant experience, education, language)

Past performance

1. Instructions to Offeror:

a) 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 $1,000,000) in accordance with the following:

1) List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar size, scope, and complexity. Relevant contracts must be of similar contract types, type of work, scope of work, complexity/diversity of tasks, magnitude of effort; skills/ expertise required, location of work to be performed, required levels of technology; nature of the business area(s) involved, performed in the past ten years.

2) For all contracts listed above that are not in CPARS, provide a list of contact names, job titles, mailing addresses, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, explanation of relevance to the proposed acquisition and a description of the performance to include:

- Scope of work or complexity/diversity of tasks,

- Primary location(s) of work,

- Term of performance,

- Dollar value, and

- Contract type, i.e., fixed-price, cost reimbursement, etc.

- Point of contact information for the CO, COR, or Project Manager of the offeror’s two largest, most recently awarded Federal contracts or orders.

USAID recommends that you alert the contacts that their names have been submitted and that they are authorized to provide performance information concerning the listed contracts if and when USAID requests it.

b) If extraordinary problems impacted any of the referenced contracts, provide a short explanation and the corrective action taken (FAR 15.305(a)(2)).

c) Describe any quality awards or certifications that indicate exceptional capacity to provide the service or product described in the statement of work. This information is not included in the page limitation.

d) Performance in Using Small Business (SB) Concerns (as defined in FAR 19.001).

This section (d) is not applicable to offers from small business concerns.

2. As part of the evaluation of performance in Section M.2 of this solicitation, USAID will evaluate the extent you used and promoted the use of small business concerns under current and prior contracts. The evaluation will assess the extent small business concerns participated in these contracts relative to the size/value of the contracts, the complexity and variety of the work small business concerns performed, and compliance with your SB subcontracting plan or other similar small business incentive programs set out in your contract(s).

3. In order for USAID to fully and fairly evaluate performance in this area, all offerors who are not small business concerns must do the following:

a) Provide a narrative summary of your organization's use of small business concerns over the past three years. Describe how you actually use small businesses--as subcontractors, as joint venture partners, through other teaming arrangements, etc. Explain the nature of the work small businesses performed--substantive technical professional services, administrative support, logistics support, etc. Describe the extent of your compliance with your SB subcontracting plan(s) or other similar SB incentive programs set out in your contract(s) and explain any mitigating circumstances if goals were not achieved.

b) To supplement the narrative summary in (A), provide a list of the recent contracts, performed in the past 10 years, for which you submitted subcontract reports to eSRS (FAR

52.219-9(d)(10) and a copy of any similarly recent subcontracting reports if they were not submitted to eSRS.

c) Provide the names and addresses of three SB concerns for us to contact for their assessment of your performance in using SB concerns. Provide a brief summary of the type of work each SB concern provided to your organization, and the name of a contact person, his/her title, phone number, and e-mail address for each.

L.7.3. Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan

(Required but not evaluated)

In Annex D, the Offeror must include a Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan with their technical proposal in line with the Branding Strategy included in Attachment 2. (Refer to www.usaid.gov/branding for additional guidance.) The plans from the successful offeror will be reviewed and be subject to CO approval prior to contract award.”

III. Under Section L.8. INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF THE COST/BUSINESS

PROPOSAL, delete paragraph (2) under CLIN 001 in its entirety and insert the following in lieu thereof:

“(2) Form AID 1420-17 is not required. Offeror is required to propose salary ranges based on professional categories. Crucial in this section is the requirement not to propose “rank in person” salaries. Proposed salaries must reflect the level of responsibilities to be carried out by the position. USAID will reject salary proposals that are based solely on salary history. “

IV. Under Section B.3.ESTIMATED COST, FIXED FEE AND OBLIGATED AMOUNT, delete item (b) in its entirety and insert the following in lieu thereof:

http://www.usaid.gov/branding http://www.usaid.gov/branding http://www.usaid.gov/branding

“(b) Estimated Cost and Fixed Fee for CLIN 002

The Total Estimated Cost Ceiling of this CLIN is $4,200,000.00, inclusive of the associated Maximum Fee of [TBD]”