72060520R00001 Signed.pdf

Date Issued: …………………………………………...……………………...December 18, 2019

Questions Due date and time: ………….………………January 21, 2020 – 15:00 Kinshasa Time

Closing Date and time: ............................................... February 19, 2020 – 15:00 Kinshasa Time

Subject: Request for Proposals (RFP) No. 72060520R00001 - USAID Conservation through Economic Empowerment in the Republic of the Congo (CEERC).

The United States Agency for International Development in the Democratic Republic of Congo

(USAID/DRC), through the Regional Office of Acquisition and Assistance in Kinshasa is seeking proposals to support USAID’s Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment’s

(CARPE) Development Objective to implement an activity entitled USAID “Conservation through Economic Empowerment in the Republic of the Congo (CEERC)” activity as described in the attached Request for Proposals (RFP).

The Authorized USAID Principal Geographic Code for this solicitation is 937. The NAICS

Code for this solicitation is 813312 – Environment, Conservation and Wildlife Organizations.

USAID anticipates awarding a single Hybrid - Cost plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) Completion -

Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity Contract (IDIQ) contract. The Total Estimated CPFF for services under this contract (CLIN 001 & CLIN 002) is estimated to fall within the range of

$13 million and $15 million for a period of five years. This procurement will be conducted under Full and Open Competition procedures, pursuant to Part 15 of the Federal Acquisition

Regulation (FAR) (48 CFR Chapter 1). Please refer to Section L for information regarding proposal requirements. Offerors should take into account the expected delivery time required by the proposal transmission method they choose and they are responsible for ensuring proposals are received at USAID by the due date and time as specified above. Failure to comply with the submission date and time will make any submission unacceptable and it will not be reviewed or evaluated.

Section L of the RFP sets forth all instructions for the preparation and submission of required proposal contents. Section M states the criteria by which proposals will be evaluated. Oral explanations or instructions given before award of the contract will not be binding and will not constitute a formal amendment of the RFP.

This RFP in no way obligates USAID to award a contract or the task order portion nor does it commit USAID to pay any cost incurred in the preparation and submission of a proposal. Award of a Contract under this RFP is subject to availability of funds and other internal USAID approvals.

USAID expects that offerors will have equal access to all local organizations needed to implement this contract and strongly discourages exclusivity agreements with local organizations.

This RFP can be viewed and downloaded from www.fbo.gov. USAID bears no responsibility for data errors resulting from transmission or conversion processes. Further, be aware that amendments to solicitations are occasionally issued and will be posted on the same website from which you downloaded the solicitation. USAID advises to regularly check www.fbo.gov for amendments.

Interested firms can register and use the Interested Vendor List (IVL) accessible through this solicitation on www.fbo.gov, so that firms can contact one another for consideration of teaming arrangements and/or small business subcontracting opportunities in response to this solicitation.

Sincerely, Andre-Guy Soh

Contracting Officer

Office of Acquisition & Assistance

USAID/DRC

http://www.fbo.gov/ http://www.fbo.gov/

SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD 1. THIS CONTRACT IS A RATED ORDER

UNDER DPAS (15 CFR 7900)

RATING PAGE OF PAGES

2. CONTRACT NUMBER 3. SOLICITATION NUMBER 4. TYPE OF SOLICITATION 5. DATE ISSUED 6. REQUISITION/PURCHASE NUMBER

CODE7. ISSUED BY 8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If other than item 7)

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

SOLICITATION

9. Sealed offers in original and copies for furnishings the supplies or services in the Schedule will be received at the place specified in item 8, or if hand carried, in the depository located in until local time

CAUTION - LATE Submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals: See Section L, Provision No. 52.214-7 or 52.215-1. All offers are subject to all terms and conditions contained in this solicitation.

10. FOR

INFORMATION

CALL:

A. NAME B. TELEPHONE (NO COLLECT CALLS)

AREA CODE NUMBER EXT.

C. E-MAIL ADDRESS

11. TABLE OF CONTENTS

(X) SEC. DESCRIPTION PAGE(S) (X) SEC. PAGE(S)DESCRIPTION

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

INSTRS., CONDS., AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND OTHER

STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS

PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

PART III - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACH.

CONTRACT CLAUSESSOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

DESCRIPTION/SPECS./WORK STATEMENT

PACKAGING AND MARKING

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

NOTE: Item 12 does not apply if the solicitation includes the provisions at 52.214-16, Minimum Bid Acceptance Period.

OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror)

12. In compliance with the above, the undersigned agrees, if this offer is accepted within calendar days (60 calendar days unless a different period is inserted by the offeror) from the date for receipt of offers specified above, to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the set opposite each item, delivered at the designated point(s), within the time specified in the schedule.

13. DISCOUNT FOR PROMPT PAYMENT

(See Section I, Clause No. 52.232-8)

14. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the SOLICITATION for offerors and related documents numbered and dated):

10 CALENDAR DAYS (%) 20 CALENDAR DAYS (%) 30 CALENDAR DAYS (%) CALENDAR DAYS(%)

DATEAMENDMENT NO.AMENDMENT NO. DATE

15A. NAME AND

ADDRESS

OF OFFER-

OR

CODE FACILITY 16. NAME AND THE TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN OFFER

(Type or print)

15B. TELEPHONE NUMBER

AREA CODE NUMBER EXT.

15C. CHECK IF REMITTANCE ADDRESS IS

DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE - ENTER SUCH

ADDRESS IN SCHEDULE.

17. SIGNATURE 18. OFFER DATE

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

19. ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS 20. AMOUNT 21. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION

22. AUTHORITY FOR USING OTHER THAN FULL OPEN COMPETITION:

10 U.S.C. 2304 (c) 41 U.S.C. 253 (c)

24. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 7)

26. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

IMPORTANT - Award will be made on this Form, or on Standard Form 26, or by other authorized official written notice.

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION

Previous edition is unusable

23. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

25. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY

27. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

28. AWARD DATE

CODE

ITEM

STANDARD FORM 33 (REV,. 9-97)

Prescribed by GSA - Far (48 CFR) 53.214 (c)

SEALED BID (IFB)

NEGOTIATED (RFP)

(Hour) (Date)

PART I - THE SCHEDULE PART II - CONTRACT CLAUSES

1 114

REQ-605-19-000003

USAID Dem. Rep Congo

Mobil Building, Avenue Isiro No. 198/ Kinshasa

72060520R00001

VALERY KAMBO vkambo@usaid.gov243 8170746 94

12/18/2019

SF 33

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I – THE SCHEDULE

SECTION B – SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

B.1. PURPOSE

B.2. CONTRACT TYPE AND SERVICES

B.3. ESTIMATED COST, FIXED FEE AND OBLIGATED AMOUNT

B.4. CONTRACT BUDGET AND CEILINGS

B.5. INDIRECT COST

B.6. CEILING ON INDIRECT COST RATES

B.7. COST REIMBURSABLE

SECTION C – DESCRIPTION/ SPECIFICATIONS

C.1. TITLE OF ACTIVITY

C.2. PURPOSE

C.3. BACKGROUND

C.4. USAID CARPE OVERALL FRAMEWORK

C.5. CEERC THEORY OF CHANGE AND RESULT FRAMEWORK

C.6. CLIN 001 – TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

C.7. CLIN 002 – SUPPLEMENTAL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

C.8. CROSS-CUTTING PRINCIPLES

SECTION D – PACKAGING AND MARKING

D.1. AIDAR 752.7009 MARKING (JAN 1993)

D.2. BRANDING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND MARKING PLAN

SECTION E – INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

E.1. NOTICE LISTING CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

E.2. INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

SECTION F - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

F.1. NOTICE LISTING CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

F.2. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

F.3. PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

F.4. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

F.5. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

F.6. AUTHORIZED WORK DAY/WEEK

F.7. REPORTS AND DELIVERABLES

F.8. PERSONNEL

F.9. IDIQ SUPPLEMENTAL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ORDERING PROCEDURES

(APPLICABLE TO CLIN 002 ONLY)

SECTION G– CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

G.1. 752.7003 DOCUMENTATION FOR PAYMENT (NOV 1998)

G.2. CONTRACTING OFFICER – CONTRACTING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIVE

G.3. CONTRACTOR’S PRIMARY POINT OF CONTACT

G.4. PAYING OFFICE

G.5. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

[TBD]

G.7. ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL

G.8. CONTRACTING OFFICER'S AUTHORITY

G.9. TECHNICAL DIRECTION/RELATIONSHIP WITH USAID

SECTION H – SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

H.1. USAID-FINANCED THIRD-PARTY WEB SITES (AUGUST 2013)

H.2. USAID IMPLEMENTING PARTNER NOTICES (IPN) PORTAL FOR ACQUISITION (JULY

2014) 48

H.3. SUBMISSION OF DATASETS TO THE DEVELOPMENT DATA LIBRARY (DDL) (OCTOBER

2014) 49

H.4. USAID DISABILITY POLICY - ACQUISITION (DEC 2004)

H.5. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PERSONNEL COMPENSATION

H.6. AUTHORIZED GEOGRAPHIC CODE

H.7. DEFENSE BASE ACT INSURANCE

H.8. LOGISTIC SUPPORT

H.9. LANGUAGE REQUIREMENTS

H.10. EXECUTIVE ORDER -- CLIMATE-RESILIENT INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

H.11. EXECUTIVE ORDER ON TERRORISM FINANCING

H.12. FOREIGN GOVERNMENT DELEGATIONS TO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES

H.13. PROHIBITION OF ASSISTANCE TO DRUG TRAFFICKERS

H.14. NONEXPENDABLE PROPERTY PURCHASES AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

RESOURCES

H.15. LIMITATION ON ACQUISITION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (APRIL 2018)

H.16. RESTRICTIONS AGAINST DISCLOSURE (MAY 2016)

H.17. CLOUD COMPUTING (MAY 2016)

H.18. ELECTRONIC AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACCESSIBILITY (APRIL 2018)

H.19. SECTION 508 OF THE REHAB. ACT OF 1978 AND FAC 97-27 “ELECTRONIC IT

ACCOUNTABILITY”

H.20. CONTRACTOR’S STAFF SUPPORT AND ADMINISTRATIVE AND LOGISTICAL

ARRANGEMENTS

H.21. ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS SYSTEM

H.22. EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION LIMITATIONS UNDER THE CONTRACT AND

SUBCONTRACTS

H.23. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE

H.24. GOVERNMENT FURNISHED FACILITIES OR PROPERTY

H.25. HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE-12 (HSPD-12) (SEPTEMBER 2006) . 65

H.26. INHERENTLY GOVERNMENTAL AND CLOSELY ASSOCIATED FUNCTIONS

H.27. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM

H.28. PERSONAL IDENTITY VERIFICATION OF CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL (JULY 2007)

H.29. PRESS RELATIONS

H.30. REQUESTS FOR CONSENT TO SUBCONTRACT

H.31. SUBCONTRACTING PLAN

H.32. SECURITY CONDITIONS

H.33. LIFE SUPPORT AND SECURITY SERVICES

H.34. TITLE TO AND CARE OF PROPERTY

H.35. USAID LEGAL AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS

H.36. ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST

H.37. USAID/DRC COMMUNICATIONS AND OUTREACH REQUIREMENTS

PART II – CONTRACT CLAUSES

SECTION I – CONTRACT CLAUSES

I.1. NOTICE LISTING CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

I.2. FAR 52.203-99, PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES THAT REQUIRE

CERTAIN INTERNAL CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS (APR 2015) (DEVIATION 2015-02)

I.3. 52.204-1 APPROVAL OF CONTRACT (DEC 1989)

I.4. 52.216-18 ORDERING (OCT 1995) (APPLICABLE TO CLIN 002 ONLY)

I.5. 52.216-22 INDEFINITE QUANTITY (OCT 1995) (APPLICABLE TO CLIN 002 ONLY)

I.6. 52.216-24 LIMITATION OF GOVERNMENT LIABILITY (APR 1984)

I.7. 52.229-8 TAXES – FOREIGN COST-REIMBURSEMENT CONTRACTS (MAR 1990)

I.8. 52.244-2 SUBCONTRACTS (OCT 2010) - ALTERNATE I (JUN 2007)

I.9. 52.247-1 COMMERCIAL BILL OF LADING NOTATIONS. (FEB 2006)

I.10. 52.247-67 SUBMISSION OF TRANSPORTATION DOCUMENTS FOR AUDIT. (FEB 2006)

I.11. 52.252-2 CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

I.12. 752.245-70 GOVERNMENT PROPERTY - USAID REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. (JUL 1997)

I.13. AIDAR 752.204-72 CONTRACTOR ACCESS TO USAID FACILITIES AND USAID'S

INFORMATION SYSTEMS (APRIL 2018)

I.14. 752.252-2 AIDAR CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (MAR 2015)

PART III – DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS, AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

SECTION J – LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

PART IV – REPRESENTATION AND INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION K– REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS OF

OFFERORS

K.1. NOTICE LISTING SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

K.2. 52.203-98 PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES THAT REQUIRE CERTAIN

INTERNAL CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS - REPRESENTATION (APR 2015) (DEVIATION

2015-02)

K.3. 52.204-8 ANNUAL REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS. (OCT2018)

K.4. 52.209-5 CERTIFICATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS. (OCT 2015)

K.5. KEY INDIVIDUAL CERTIFICATION NARCOTICS OFFENSES AND DRUG TRAFFICKING 89

K.6. 52.209-7 INFORMATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS. (OCT2018)

K.7. 52.209-11 REPRESENTATION BY CORPORATIONS REGARDING DELINQUENT TAX

LIABILITY OR A FELONY CONVICTION UNDER ANY FEDERAL LAW (FEB 2016)

K.8. SIGNATURE

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

L.1. NOTICE LISTING CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

L.2. 52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT. (APR 1984)

L.3. 52.233-2 SERVICE OF PROTEST. (SEP 2006)

L.4. 52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE. (FEB 1998)

L.5. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

L.6. DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS 95

L.7. INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

L.8. INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF THE COST/BUSINESS PROPOSAL

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1. GENERAL INFORMATION

M.2. TECHNICAL EVALUATION (SEE SECTION L.8.)

M.2.1. TECHNICAL APPROACH

M.2.2. MANAGEMENT APPROACH AND STAFFING

M.2.3. PAST PERFORMANCE

M.3. COST EVALUATION (SEE SECTION L.9.)

M.4. DETERMINATION OF COMPETITIVE RANGE

M.5. SOURCE SELECTION

M.6. CONTRACTING WITH SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS

PART I – THE SCHEDULE

SECTION B – SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

B.1. PURPOSE

The purpose of this activity is to provide the services described in the Statement of Work (SOW) specified in Section C to implement the Conservation through Economic Empowerment in the

Republic of the Congo (CEERC) Activity in support of USAID’s Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment’s (CARPE) Development Objective.

B.2. CONTRACT TYPE AND SERVICES

This is a FAR 16.102(b) combination award consisting of a Cost-Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF)

Completion type contract (CLIN 001) and a single-award Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity

(IDIQ) type contract (CLIN 002) for the purpose of providing supplemental technical assistance.

Under the CPFF portion of the contract (TBD of the total estimated cost - CLIN 001) the Contractor must furnish all personnel, materials, equipment, supplies, facilities, services (except as expressly set forth in this contract as furnished by the U.S. Government (USG)) and perform all activities necessary for, or incidental to, the performance of work described in Section C and other sections of the contract not specifically identified under CLIN 002 as the IDIQ Supplemental Technical

Assistance.

Under the IDIQ portion of the contract the Contractor must furnish additional supplemental technical assistance arising out of or related to the completion portion of the contract as required by

USG-issued Task Orders. The services will be ordered in accordance with Section F.9 entitled, “IDIQ Supplemental Technical Assistance Ordering Procedures (Applicable to CLIN 002)” and the

IDIQ clauses in Section I. As this CLIN is part of this contract and not a stand-alone award, the

USG is not required to state or order any minimum number of person-days as otherwise provided in the FAR 16.504(a)(1). CLIN 001 contained in this contract provides sufficient consideration to make this a legally binding contract, and the USG has no obligation to fund or place orders under

CLIN 002.

For the consideration set forth below, the Contractor must achieve the performance objectives and deliverables, or outputs described in Sections C and F, and otherwise comply with all contract requirements.

B.3. ESTIMATED COST, FIXED FEE AND OBLIGATED AMOUNT

The Total Estimated Cost (TEC) for CLIN 001 and CLIN 002 is [TBD].

(a) Estimated Cost and Fixed Fee for CLIN 001.

The Total Estimated Cost for this CLIN is [TBD], exclusive of fixed fee, if any. The Fixed Fee, if any is [TBD]. The estimated CPFF, if any is [TBD].

(b) Estimated Cost and Fixed Fee for CLIN 002

The Total Estimated Cost Ceiling of this CLIN is $3,000,000.00, exclusive of the associated

Maximum Fee of [TBD]. The Total Estimated Cost Ceiling and Maximum Fee is [TBD].

(c) Payment of Fixed Fee

CLIN 001: Payment of fixed fee will be made upon receipt of a proper invoice and must directly correspond to the percentage of allowable costs being paid. In accordance with FAR

52-216-8, Fixed Fee, the CO will withhold 15% of the total fee or $100,000, whichever is less until the required award conditions under the reference clause have been met.

CLIN 002: Payment of the corresponding fixed fee for each Task Order will be negotiated at the task order level upon receipt of a proper invoice and must directly correspond to the percentage of allowable costs being paid and the LOE furnished. In no event, the fixed fee of the Task

Orders under CLIN 002 can exceed the fixed fee under CLIN 001.

(d) Amount Obligated

CLIN 001: Within the estimated CPFF, if any, specified in paragraph (a) above, the amount currently obligated and available for reimbursement of allowable costs incurred by the

Contractor (and payment of fee, if any) for performance hereunder is [TBD] (only applies to

CLIN 001). The Contractor must not exceed the aforesaid obligated amount, nor will the USG be responsible for costs incurred should the Contractor do so.

Funds obligated hereunder are anticipated to be sufficient through [TBD].

(e) Level-of-Effort. In performing Government orders for Supplemental Technical Assistance under CLIN 002, the Contractor is obligated to provide up to a maximum of [TBD] person-days.

B.4. CONTRACT BUDGET AND CEILINGS

CLIN 001

Activity Costs $ TBD

Grants under Contract $2,500,000

Total Costs $ TBD

Fixed Fee $ TBD

Total Estimated Cost-Plus Fixed Fee $ TBD

CLIN 002

Activity Costs $TBD

Maximum Fee $ TBD

Total Ceiling CLIN 002 $3,000,000

Total Estimated Cost Plus Fixed Fee CLIN 1 and CLIN 2 $ TBD

B.5. INDIRECT COST

The contract clause entitled “Allowable Cost and Payment (AUG 2018)”, FAR Subpart 52.216-7, specifies that until final annual indirect cost rates are established for any period, the Government shall reimburse the Contractor at billing rates established by the Contracting Officer or by an authorized representative (the cognizant auditor), subject to adjustment when the final rates are established.

Pending establishment of revised provisional or final indirect cost rates, allowable indirect costs shall be reimbursed on the basis of the following negotiated provisional or predetermined rates and the appropriate bases:

Description Rate Base Type Period

[TBD] [TBD] 1/ 1/ 1/

[TBD] [TBD] 2/ 2/ 2/

[TBD] [TBD] 3/ 3/ 3/

1/ Base of Application: Type of Rate:

Period:

2/ Base of Application: Type of Rate:

Period:

3/ Base of Application: Type of Rate:

Period:

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 .

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

(3) 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).

(b) 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 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY20 FY 21

1. [TBD]

2. [TBD]

3. [TBD]

(c) The government is not obligated to pay any additional amount on account of indirect costs above the ceiling rates established in the contract. This advance understanding will not change any monetary ceiling, cost limitation, or obligation established in the contract.

B.7. COST REIMBURSABLE

Allowable costs shall be limited to reasonable, allocable and necessary costs determined in accordance with FAR 52.216-7, Allowable Cost and Payment, FAR 52.216-8, Fixed Fee, if applicable, and AIDAR 752.7003, Documentation for Payment.

[END OF SECTION B]

SECTION C – DESCRIPTION/ SPECIFICATIONS

C.1. TITLE OF ACTIVITY

USAID funded Conservation through Economic Empowerment in the Republic of the Congo

(CEERC) Activity.

C.2. PURPOSE

The purpose of this activity is to deliver services in the biodiversity and sustainable landscapes sectors in support of USAID’s Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment’s (CARPE)

Development Objective, the ecological integrity of the humid forest ecosystem of the Congo Basin maintained.

C.3. BACKGROUND

C.3.1. The CARPE Program

USAID has been investing in conservation and sustainable management of the Congo Basin for more than two decades. CARPE III began in 2012 under a Regional Development Cooperative

Strategy (RDCS), which runs up to 2020 and builds on the investments, results and lessons learned from the first two phases. In CARPE III, USAID focuses on sustainable management of biodiverse forests in nine carbon rich and biologically diverse landscapes, improving national and regional environmental policies and regulations, and building the capacity of public and private institutions.

USAID-funded activities are currently implemented primarily in two countries, the Republic of

Congo (ROC) and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).

In 2016, USAID commissioned a midterm evaluation of CARPE III to assess progress, uncover gaps and support forward programming. Full findings and recommendations from the evaluation can be found in Attachment 21. Attachment 17 also includes an Assessment of Private Sector approaches to achieving conservation objectives in CARPE.

The evaluation and assessments, as well as pause and reflect sessions carried out with staff and existing partners, identified a number of actions needed to strengthen CARPE:

● Work with a broader range of partners with different skills and experience, including local partners and the private sector

● Ensure community development activities attain the scale and sustainability needed to provide sufficient incentives and pathways to mitigate threats to biodiversity and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions

● Address bushmeat and fisheries overexploitation across sectors (health, agriculture, nutrition)

● Support economic and business models for community forestry to provide needed incentive structures for sustainability

● Develop a stronger link between policy, capacity and landscape activities

● Strengthen efforts to combat wildlife trafficking (CWT) beyond protected areas (PA) http://carpe.umd.edu/Documents/2012/Regional_Dev_Coop_Strategy.pdf http://carpe.umd.edu/Documents/2012/Regional_Dev_Coop_Strategy.pdf https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aI4VZU3Rxgpv38wdnTPrWjs1X2Y-a3Iq0nGimHNV_Zw/edit?usp=sharing

● Clarify and strengthen the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) model for PA management

● Put greater emphasis on institutionalization

● Move away from livelihoods approaches that have unclear links to conservation and climate change objectives

● Redefine climate change priority areas and policy focus where carbon density and risk of deforestation is greatest

● Ensure there is effective collaborating, learning, and adapting (CLA) to better share data, stories and lessons across the program

Based on this information, USAID concluded that new mechanisms were needed to enable CARPE to achieve its objectives. As detailed in this solicitation, CEERC fills identified gaps and builds on opportunities specific to ROC. CEERC will help to steer economic development in ROC on a

“green” path and to develop enterprises that reduce threats to biodiversity and forests. CEERC cannot be expected to address all of the above recommendations, but by focusing on the first four and developing more sustainable models, it will play a key role in ensuring the long-term success of forest and biodiversity conservation in the country.

C.3.2. Economic and environment context in ROC

According to the World Bank, ROC is a lower middle-income country. However, the World Bank forecasts that GDP growth will continue to fall through 2021, following a trend that started in

2016.1 Population density is low in rural areas, with sparse economic opportunity outside of extractive industry and agribusiness. Slowing growth can intensify natural resource extraction when there are fewer opportunities for wage labor. Petroleum has supplanted forestry as the major industry and the country is increasing use of natural gas for electricity. Investments in infrastructure and electrification present both a threat to, and an opportunity for, conservation depending on policy and citizen engagement.

The need to protect the forests and wildlife of ROC is clear. Its unique fauna includes the largest population of endangered Western lowland gorilla. Forest elephants and pangolin are threatened by trafficking, while other species are decimated by the commercial bushmeat trade. A recent study places DRC and ROC as the second and third most important countries in the world for tropical peat carbon stocks.2

The key threats to biodiversity and forests in the ROC are discussed in sections C.3.2.1 and C.3.2.2.

below. In addition, Attachment 18 delineates a range of threats and the political and economic drivers underlying the threats, as well as some strengths and opportunities that CEERC can build on.

C.3.3. Problem Statement

CEERC will reduce threats to biodiversity, carbon-rich forests and peatlands in the ROC by supporting the establishment of sustainable “green industries” that improve the well-being of forests, wildlife and rural dwellers at a scale sufficient to impact large areas and diverse

1 https://data.worldbank.org/country/congo-rep.

2 Nature International Journal of Science, “Age, extent and carbon storage of the central Congo Basin peatland complex,” Greta C. Dargie, Simon L. Lewis, Ian T. Lawson, Edward T. A. Mitchard, Susan E. Page, Yannick E. Bocko

& Suspense A. Ifo (June 11, 2017).

populations. CEERC will need to work at multiple levels to achieve development and conservation objectives.

Efforts to conserve the forests and biodiversity of the ROC struggle to have an impact at a sufficiently large scale to outpace ecosystem and biodiversity declines. In particular, as described in the CARPE midterm evaluation, efforts to improve livelihoods that support conservation and reduce deforestation have been small-scale. The enabling environment, e.g., lack of access to capital for industries such as ecotourism or markets for sustainably produced or harvested products, has not been favorable. While law enforcement within PAs has reduced wildlife loss through the use of technology enabling improved patrolling,3 it is much more difficult to enforce wildlife and forest laws in areas controlled by concessions and communities. And unlike some PAs in other parts of Africa with significant tourism and trophy hunting industries, those in ROC do not generate enough income to cover their operating costs much less to provide economic benefits to local populations. (However, the ecosystem and security benefits of PAs may be considerable.) Benefits to indigenous peoples have been particularly scarce, given their mobility and low status in society.

Mitigating the threats outlined in the sections C.3.2.1 and C.3.2.2 below and Attachment 18 will require engagement of a broad range of partners, a more favorable enabling environment, strategies that seek large-scale solutions and more effective approaches informed by continuous learning.

Green economic development with conservation and sustainable forest management at its heart is an emerging approach in biodiversity-rich countries, based on the need for wider scale economic benefit, diversified livelihoods and private sector engagement. Two examples from conflict-ridden and poverty-stricken areas are Virunga National Park in DRC and Gorongosa National Park in

Mozambique. These PAs are building green economies around their core areas to engage the population and stabilize the territory. Longstanding community-based conservation initiatives, which have diversified from ecotourism, are exemplified by the Conservancies of Namibia and

Kenya, which USAID has supported over many years.4 These latter are home to formerly disenfranchised and impoverished indigenous peoples. This experience shows that wildlife tourism can be a direct and powerful means to benefit communities and conservation actors, depending on the scale and modes of benefit distribution. Other options include developing industries around fair trade sustainably harvested tree crops, sustainable fisheries management, and providing alternatives to bushmeat that create job opportunities as well as protein options.

The major obstacle to the green economy is the short term, and often highly lucrative, gain that can be derived from the allocation of concessions and territories to extractive industry and unsustainable agribusiness in carbon-rich and biologically important areas. The risk for this type of allocation is already high in ROC.5 Raising awareness of the risks in policy dialogues and monitoring land use are important interventions but they need to be complemented with positive investments that favor green economy approaches. For instance, strengthening local land and resource tenure can provide the stability and incentives for local actors to invest long-term.

3 https://www.wired.co.uk/article/elephant-rhino-wildlife-poaching-smart-wildlife-conservation-society.

4 https://rmportal.net/library/content/abcg-documents/supporting-communal-conservancies-in-namibia-the-present-and-future 5 https://news.mongabay.com/2016/02/republic-of-congo-awards-two-million-hectares-of-timber-concessions/ https://news.mongabay.com/2017/07/is-norwegian-money-funding-congo-deforestation/ https://news.mongabay.com/2018/03/oil-palm-rubber-could-trigger-storm-of-deforestation-in-the-congo-basin/ https://rmportal.net/library/content/abcg-documents/supporting-communal-conservancies-in-namibia-the-present-and-future https://rmportal.net/library/content/abcg-documents/supporting-communal-conservancies-in-namibia-the-present-and-future https://news.mongabay.com/2016/02/republic-of-congo-awards-two-million-hectares-of-timber-concessions/ https://news.mongabay.com/2017/07/is-norwegian-money-funding-congo-deforestation/ https://news.mongabay.com/2017/07/is-norwegian-money-funding-congo-deforestation/ https://news.mongabay.com/2018/03/oil-palm-rubber-could-trigger-storm-of-deforestation-in-the-congo-basin/ https://news.mongabay.com/2018/03/oil-palm-rubber-could-trigger-storm-of-deforestation-in-the-congo-basin/

Development of infrastructure supporting green options is another important investment. Engaging with key economic actors such as merchants, traders, bankers and consumers is also critical to work across whole value chains. Green economic options cannot be run as charities if they are to compete and survive.

Most importantly, bringing a green economy to fruition requires crafting a shared vision and sustaining a coalition of stakeholders who see clear benefits from such an economic model. To enable conservation and sustainable forest management to become “green engines of development” there must be coordinated efforts by government, the private sector, civil society, and local communities. USAID can draw on its extensive experience to facilitate such coordination and investment. Assets that CEERC will draw from also include CARPE partners supported through other mechanisms, who will in turn benefit from the access to expertise, knowledge management systems, private sector linkages and expanded local capacity that CEERC will bring.

Given the complexities and uncertainties involved in facilitating such a process, CEERC is structured as a Hybrid Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) with an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity

(IDIQ) line item contract with 20% of funding flexible to address new threats and opportunities that arise during implementation.

a. Major biodiversity targets and threats

CEERC will focus on areas of high biological diversity where economic activities can support conservation and/or displace actions that threaten wildlife.

Illegal trade in wildlife and wildlife products, or wildlife trafficking, is one of the largest markets in the world for illicit goods, while poaching to fuel this trade threatens the survival of iconic species and fuels insecurity for nations and regions, harming their economic development. While poachers are the face of the problem, violent criminal networks are behind illicit trade in many species, exploiting humans and nature for profit. This trade is a threat not only to biodiversity but to the security and stability of the human population.

To date, the major focus of CARPE’s approach to trafficking and other wildlife crime has been strengthening the management of a network of PAs in the CARPE landscapes, including building the capacity of eco-guards (rangers) to carry out law enforcement patrols, improving engagement with the surrounding communities, developing the core park management systems, and strengthening watchdog groups and the judiciary to identify, catch and punish criminals. This focus has been most effective where NGO partners have taken over the management of protected areas through PPPs or delegated management agreements with the governments of the countries involved.

In areas where the population derives substantial benefits from wildlife tourism and associated enterprises, poaching is declining.6 These areas provide a contrast to the increased levels of trafficking and poaching across Africa. And they indicate that people will act to protect wildlife, and support protected areas, when it is in their interests to do so. Additional benefits include peace and stability, gender equality through economic diversification and increased private sector investment in enterprises of great interest to local people such as animal husbandry.

6 https://www.savetherhino.org/africa/kenya/kenya-poaching-stats-out/

Overfishing and overhunting are also major threats to biodiversity, not only to the species being exploited but to the complex web of species that interact with the target species. Sound evidence7 shows how loss of species leads to reduced ecosystem services such as seed dispersal, pollination and nutrient cycling that impact agricultural and natural systems upon which the human population depends. Scarcity of quality protein options, especially among indigenous populations, from overexploitation of the preferred foods of bushmeat and fish, is exacerbated by weaknesses in the animal husbandry sector such as lack of veterinary services, fear of theft of valuable animals and importance of domestic animals for savings and ceremonial purposes.

Solutions to these crises must be devised to address the open access nature of these resources and to make protein sources available that are culturally appropriate through economically viable enterprises. As such the transition from bushmeat to sustainable animal husbandry is an important opportunity for green economy investment. The investment will include not only raising animals but sustainable provision of animal feed, marketing of culturally appetizing products and supporting restaurants that promote non-bushmeat protein.

b. Major targets and threats to forests and peatlands

Major targets of CEERC include globally important peatlands and other carbon-rich forests and wetlands that are experiencing or threatened by significant levels of deforestation and degradation.

Globally, habitat destruction and degradation driven by the agricultural sector, together with species overexploitation, are the greatest contributors to biodiversity and forest loss.8 In the Congo Basin, a recent study supported by CARPE finds that “small-scale forest clearing for agriculture is the largest direct driver of forest disturbance in the region, contributing about 84% of the total 2000 to

2014 forest loss area.”9 In ROC, the figure is almost 50% with the remainder of deforestation being attributed to industrial selective logging. Imported food paid for by oil revenue is an important feature of the ROC economy. Declines in the oil sector, however, are likely to drive increased agricultural production.

While agriculture is a huge threat it is also the backbone of the rural economy and contributes to stability and security, particularly compared to illegal and extractive activities such as hunting, artisanal mining and logging. The yields of the most common farming system are well below potential. Improving farming practices and expanding production while minimizing the environmental impacts that other regions (e.g., the Amazon, Southeast Asia) have experienced will require a multisectoral long term effort. A regional green economy will incorporate land-use planning to foster connectivity, promote intensive farming of higher value crops and reduce extensification into forestland.

Oil palm agribusiness is a looming threat in ROC. There is also increased potential for an expansion of commercial logging in ROC and this threat is particularly grave in the peatlands.

Reduced impact logging has been a feature of the ROC commercial sector, with some companies

7 https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms13106 8 https://www.nature.com/news/biodiversity-the-ravages-of-guns-nets-and-bulldozers-1.20381 9 http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/11/eaat2993 having achieved Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification but it is unclear if these practices will continue and/or if FSC certification effectively reduces deforestation.

USAID Funding Limitations for Industrial Scale Logging and Industrial Scale Extractive

Activities

Note that any activities and outcomes related to forestry must comply with language in the annual U.S. Appropriations law that prevents the use of Biodiversity Funds “to support or promote the expansion of Industrial Scale Logging or any other Industrial Scale extractive activity into areas that were primary/intact tropical forests as of 12/31/13.” Operating within these Agency policies concerning USAID involvement with the commercial timber sector, it is imperative that CARPE support best practices and address trends that could significantly address deforestation and forest degradation. Many areas remain for productive interventions around community forestry, forest governance, preventing illegal/unsustainable logging and improving forest management, among others.

Addressing the threat of large-scale commercial forestry and oil palm concessions in ROC involves development of alternate economically viable options along with the political will and investment capital to make these happen. Experience from other countries that have faced these challenges will be useful, especially those that have worked within the Tropical Forest Alliance 2020 framework10 and those that have attempted to implement payments for environmental services such as REDD+ schemes in order to enhance the value of standing forests.

The approaches discussed in this program description align closely with the region’s “Blue Fund,” which is targeting an estimated capital of €3 billion to develop the economy of the Congo Basin in the long term through several initiatives, including offering other alternatives to deforestation, strengthening irrigation of farmland in the savannah and supporting ecotourism.11

C.4. USAID CARPE OVERALL FRAMEWORK

Based on the threats to the forests and wildlife of the ROC, the aspirations of its people and the experiences of implementing the CARPE program to date, CEERC is designed to expand conservation-friendly green economy enterprises at the local and national levels and address constraints to the success of these sectors. This approach builds on past investments while expanding the group of stakeholders engaged in achieving biodiversity and SL objectives. The earmark requirements and the CARPE results framework to which CEERC will contribute are outlined below.

C.4.1. Earmark Requirements

Overall, it is envisaged that CEERC will be funded using Congressionally earmarked biodiversity

(approximately 70%) and SL (approximately 30%) funds.12 Specific Task Orders under CLIN 002 may be funded by biodiversity or SL earmarks, or by a combination of the two.

10 https://www.tfa2020.org/en/ 11 http://www.africanews.com/2018/04/29/african-leaders-in-congo-brazzaville-for-blue-fund-for-congo-basin-summit// 12 Activities funded with 100% Congressionally earmarked biodiversity funds will not be required to meet the SL

Healthy ecosystems and the services they provide depend on the maintenance of functioning ecosystem processes and the conservation of their biodiversity. USAID’s biodiversity programming seeks to maintain and manage wild biodiversity in situ, through targeted action addressing threats to biodiversity in forests, grasslands, wetlands, marine and coastal habitats.13

USAID’s Biodiversity Code requires that programs using earmarked biodiversity funds impact on areas of priority biodiversity and that biodiversity programming be based on an analysis of threats to biodiversity and the drivers that underlie these threats. Please refer to the USAID Biodiversity and Development Handbook for further information.14

USAID’s Biodiversity Code Elements:

1. The project must have an explicit biodiversity objective; it is not enough to have biodiversity conservation result as a positive externality from another program.

2. Activities must be identified based on an analysis of threats and drivers to biodiversity and a corresponding theory of change.

3. Site-based projects must have the intent to positively impact biodiversity in biologically significant areas.

4. The project must monitor indicators associated with the stated theory of change for biodiversity conservation results.

USAID’s SL programming seeks to increase carbon sequestration and reduce greenhouse gas

(GHG) emissions from land use and land use change while promoting economic growth and development, and works at national, regional and other jurisdiction-wide scales, for maximum impact. SL funding prioritizes: (1) countries and regions with globally significant forests, peatlands and wetlands to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, such as the Congo

Basin, which contains the second largest area of contiguous rainforest in the world and acts as a globally important carbon sink; and (2) countries in which GHG emissions from land use are a chief source of emissions and unsustainable land management is a key constraint to development. SL programs aim to address the key drivers of deforestation and forest degradation at scale. SL programs that effectively mitigate deforestation and forest degradation as compared to business-as-usual are informed by an analysis of which areas have high (or increasing) rates of deforestation and forest degradation and the causes (drivers) for this deforestation and forest degradation, which tend to be multiple and locally based.

Key to developing approaches to address threats to biodiversity and forest cover is the need to understand how different stakeholders, including men and women, the young and old, use and manage resources. Strategies and actions must be developed to best target threats at the scale at which they occur and with the variety of stakeholders necessary to achieve long-term results. The

CEERC activity will address threats to and monitor associated indicators for biodiversity conservation and SL.

earmark requirements and vice versa. USAID/DRC will work with the successful applicant during the work planning process to ensure all such requirements will be met.

13 For more information on USAID’s biodiversity programming see https://rmportal.net/biodiversityconservation-gateway 14.https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00KKWS.pdf https://rmportal.net/biodiversityconservation-gateway https://rmportal.net/biodiversityconservation-gateway

C.4.2. CARPE Regional Development Cooperation Strategy

CEERC activities will support the goal of CARPE’s Regional Development Cooperation Strategy

(RDCS), 2012-2020: Central Africa’s transition to climate-resilient, low emissions development accelerated through sustainable management of biodiverse forests. CARPE’s RDCS Development

Objective (DO) and Intermediate Results (IR) are depicted below:

Implementation of CARPE III involves two distinct but interdependent projects: the Central Africa

Forest Ecosystems Conservation (CAFEC) and the Environmental Monitoring and Policy Support

(EMAPS). CAFEC focuses on sustainable forest management, wildlife conservation and REDD+ activities in CARPE’s nine carbon rich and biologically diverse natural forest landscapes, addressing IR 1 and IR 2. EMAPS improves national and regional environmental policies and regulations, builds capacity of public and private institutions to support conservation of forest and biodiversity, and boosts the quality and scope of conservation management, climate change mitigation efforts, and data collection, addressing IR 3 and IR 4. CEERC will fall under the

EMAPS project, but in doing so will also emphasize strengthening implementation of CAFEC activities focusing on IR 1 and IR 2.

C.5. CEERC OBJECTIVE, THEORY OF CHANGE AND RESULTS FRAMEWORK

C.5.1. CEERC Objective

To address the lessons learned in implementing CARPE III and the challenges specific to ROC outlined above, CEERC’s development objective “reduce threats to biodiversity, carbon-rich forests and peatlands in Republic of Congo” is elaborated in three intermediate results (IRs).

C.5.2. Theory of Change

USAID requires that each activity using biodiversity funds develop an explicit Theory of Change

(TOC) and test and refine this theory through monitoring, evaluation and learning. Many SL-

Funded programs have also adopted this approach. The general TOC below will be refined by the

Offeror and linked to a Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) plan that will test the theory and the approaches used in the program.

Theory of Change: IF local communities and key economic stakeholders derive direct and substantial benefits from sustainable, conservation-friendly enterprises and industries at significant scales AND environmental regulations are enforced THEN threats to ROC’s biodiversity, carbon-rich forests and peatlands will be mitigated.

To elaborate,

1) Key economic stakeholders include private sector investors, financial institutions, donors and politicians backing green ventures

2) Conservation-friendly enterprises are those that either increase the value of wildlife and forests in relation to actions that degrade these resources, and/or provide viable alternatives that reduce actions that threaten these resources

3) This approach must be accompanied by enforcement of laws, strong civil society engagement in identifying and mitigating threats, and robust monitoring

Assumptions underlying this TOC include:

● ROC Government will be willing to collaborate on this program due to its perceived alignment with economic diversification objectives

● Enabling conditions such as access to capital and constraints such as rent-seeking can be addressed to support the promotion of green enterprises

● Private sector actors are willing to explore partnerships in ROC on tourism, community forestry, fisheries, clean energy, bioprospecting and agricultural intensification, among other options

● Local communities are now or can become sufficiently risk tolerant with secure tenure to make investments in green enterprises

● Green economy growth that reduces risks to biodiversity and forest preservation will be prioritized

C.5.3. Results Framework

CEERC’s three activity IRs will contribute primarily to IRs 1, 2 and 3 of CARPE’s RDCS.

CEERC therefore will increase the effectiveness of CARPE and its stakeholders in addressing the drivers of biodiversity and forest loss. Collectively, CEERC’s IRs focus on: identifying sustainable and scalable enterprises, industries and business models that support conservation and reduce deforestation; strengthening the enabling environment for conservation friendly enterprises;

supporting target communities to develop and sustain conservation-friendly enterprises and industries. Each result, in different ways, will help ensure not only that USAID achieves its long term objectives for CARPE, but also that this impact reaches the scale needed to address the drivers of biodiversity loss and deforestation and forest degradation in the Congo Basin, and will be sustainable beyond the life of CARPE itself. These IRs are mutually reinforcing, together providing the “necessary and sufficient” framework to achieve CEERC’s objective and, along with other

CARPE activities, to accelerate progress toward achievement of CARPE’s goal and objectives.

CEERC Results Framework

C.6. CLIN 001 - COST PLUS FIXED FEE

CLIN 001 covers the Cost-Plus Fixed Fee portion of this contract and represents 80% of the total requirement. To achieve the three activities IRs, CEERC will provide a range of support and technical assistance services across the technical areas described above. Each IR is described below, along with a non-exhaustive set of major deliverables under each. Proposals shall explain how the activities under each IR will address the threats in the context of each of the technical areas outlined in section C.3. above.

C.6.1. IRs and illustrative results under CLIN 001

IR 1 Sustainable and scalable enterprises/industries and business models that support conservation and reduce deforestation established

Under this IR, expected activities may include the following:

• Analytic tools developed to gauge economic and environmental value and feasibility of products, value chains and economic models developed

• Promising natural product value chains identified and analyzed.

• Approaches to “greening” industries in sectors such as energy, agribusiness, forestry and mining identified.

• Key private sector actors identified.

• Enterprise incubator created.

Major results under this IR include, but are not limited to, those outlined below. Offerors shall outline sub-IRs and a more complete set of outcomes and deliverables required to achieve…