Attachment_J.14_RFP_72061119R00003_Q&A.pdf

ATTACHMENT J.14 – QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Dear Prospective Offerors, USAID is pleased to provide the following answers to the questions submitted by the various prospective offerors electronically. The questions and answers have been aligned with the solicitation format.

GENERAL QUESTIONS

1. Will the data collected be open and publicly available?

USAID Response: USAID does not understand which “data” is being referred to.

2. Will the bilateral agreement resulting from this RFP exempt a prime local partner from VAT/withholding tax?

USAID Response: USAID program funds expended by the contractor (local prime or international) are exempt from VAT, but not withholding tax.

3. Would a Zambian prime local partner be considered eligible to apply and receive a Letter of Credit for this project, or would the Zambian prime local partner be able to request advance funding? In either case, would the Zambian prime local partner be required to open a US bank account or would a Zambian bank account be sufficient?

USAID Response: A prime local partner can apply for a line of credit from a local bank.

Payment methodology will be negotiated prior to award. A local bank account will be sufficient.

4. To enable bidders to effectively allocate funds within the budget to account for procurement under the contact, could USAID provide an approximate percentage of the overall budget anticipated to be allocated for hardware equipment as well as supporting connectivity and power.

USAID Response: USAID will not provide approximate percentages to be allocated to hardware equipment. The budget/cost proposal is supposed to be reflective of the technical approach/technical proposal. USAID is leaving it to the offerors to decide how they will effectively allocate funds in their budgets based on their technical approach.

QUESTIONS RELATED TO SECTION B

5. Section B.2 of this RFP states that this RFP is for a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) completion-type contract. Our understanding is that under a CPFF completion-type contract, the fee is fixed and can only be adjusted through a contract modification. Might USAID consider removing the fee schedule for delay of deliverable and the fee schedule that applies to

Request for Proposals (RFP) No.: 72061119R00003 Attachment J.14 Questions and Answers deliverable 08 to allow for payment of fixed fee in accordance with the selected contract type?

Further, we ask that USAID consider the fee schedule vis-à-vis the requirement for a local partner to serve as the prime contractor. As local partners in Zambia bring limited experience in large scale USAID contracting, particularly under the CPFF mechanism, this might impede local partners from successful implementation and management of the resultant contract.

USAID Response: For purpose of the RFP the fee schedule remains unchanged. Please note that Section L.6.1 (b) provides offeror’s an opportunity to propose a fee schedule which will be considered prior to award. Also, if the offeror feels that it brings limited experience in large scale USAID contracting, it should reflect on if this opportunity is right for the business.

6. In Section B4 Fixed Fee (page 3), the fee schedule adds up to 99.5% and not 100%. Please advise where the additional .5% should be applied.

USAID Response: This has been adjusted. See amendment.

QUESTIONS RELATED TO SECTION C

7. Section C.4. Objectives (page 7). Should System Enhancements and Technical Assistance also be included in Year 1 activities given that the System Assessment will be approved within 150 days of contract award?

USAID Response: Technical assistance is already included in Yr. 1 i.e. Contractor to ensure TA is provided to existing system. Enhancement can start after the assessment.

8. Section C.4 Objectives, 2. Support procurement, installation, and training for eSCMIS. Please clarify if the offeror will be required to procure only the IT equipment needed to operate the eSCMIS at the installed facilities or if the offeror should budget for networking infrastructure and/or electrical infrastructure at the installed facilities as well.

USAID Response: This should be a complete package. Contractor has to procure IT equipment, install- and network facilities, as needed.

9. Will the project be expected to provide supply chain technical assistance at the facility level in addition to support for the eSCMIS or will this be another entity’s responsibility?

USAID Response: Global Health Supply Chain-Procurement Supply Management (GHSC- PSM) is responsible for supply chain TA but contractor under the eSCMIS activity will have to closely work and coordinate with GHSC-PSM.

10. Section C.10 Climate Risk Management (page 10). The RFP indicates the contractor should produce a CRM Assessment Report but this report does not figure in the list of deliverables in F.5.2. When will it be due?

USAID Response: Contractor not required to produce a report. The language has since been corrected in the RFP. See amendment.

11. Section C.10 Climate Risk Management (page 11) states, the contractor will conduct a “CLM Assessment,” is this meant to be CRM Assessment or is this something different?

USAID Response: It was a typo. Language has been corrected. See amendment.

12. The RFP states: ‘Real-time data is expected to represent daily data, with the understanding that infrastructure does not support network connectivity or 24/7 power for all sites to provide the daily upload, but this must be enabled and embedded in the functionality of the system’ Is it a requirement of this RFP that only systems that operate off line (i.e. without internet connectivity present) will be considered? Alternatively, will web-based solutions also be accepted?

USAID Response: The contractor must demonstrate how it will address issues of real time data visibility.

13. Do Prospective Offerors need to factor in internet costs for this RFP? Alternatively, will the Government of Zambia cover internet costs?

USAID Response: Offers should submit costs that will be required to complete the deliverables and representative of their proposed solution to operate their approach. This may include internet costs covered by the activity, or any other partner, or costs transitioned to

GRZ.

14. What version of OpenLMIS is installed? Will this version change in the future?

USAID Response: The current is OpenLMISv2. Any version change of OpenLMIS in the future will depend on the direction of the activity.

15. OpenLMIS is a data aggregation system that relies on facilities filling out paper forms. Do you want new facilities to use the same system, or would they prefer a transactional system that provides real-time visibility of stock levels at sites, rather than monthly or quarterly snapshots that the current system provides?

USAID Response: The contractor must demonstrate how it will address issue of real time data visibility.

16. Would USAID and the Government of Zambia consider a mobile solution for low-volume sites?

USAID Response: Addressed by response in question 15

17. Is there list of system specification available for the current system? Does this differ by site/users?

USAID Response: Yes, system specifications are available for the current system. The specs are the same in all sites what is different is user rights. However this is not public information as such it cannot be shared until the award is made.

18. Is there list of system specification available for the future system? Does this differ by site/users?

USAID Response: This will depend on outcome of the system assessment.

19. Is there a site list available for current and future sites? Are there information regarding the daily or monthly transaction volumes, and the number of users at each site?

USAID Response: Yes a list of current sites is available; however, not for public distribution.

Further, future site will depend on outcome of the need assessment. USAID does not have information regarding the daily or monthly transaction volumes and number of users.

20. Section C.6.1 of this RFP, page 8, states that facility edition deployment will be determined based on PEPFAR priority and high-volume facilities; electricity and network capabilities at the sites; and MOH, national and provincial priorities. Could USAID kindly provide a selection methodology or list of sites to be prioritized for rollout in years 2 and 3 to enable an accurate assessment of hardware requirements for these facilities? Additionally, can USAID provide an estimated percentage of the overall budget to be allocated to hardware procurement?

USAID Response: Results of system and site need assessment will inform facility selection methodology. For the second part of the question refer to response to question 4.

QUESTIONS RELATED TO SECTION F.

21. What is the full list of key personnel required for the project (F.9)?

USAID Response: Contractor to provide full list of personnel needed to execute the activity based on their technical approach. Please review section F/L for full details and instructions.

Also note that the number of key personnel cannot exceed five (5).

22. Under F.7, how do we reconcile the requirement to submit data to the data development library against data sovereignty for Zambia?

USAID Response: USAID does not understand this question. All data produced using USAID resources is applicable to the clauses in the contract, including DDL.

23. Section F.5.2 List of Reports and Plans, page 19. In the first paragraph of this section, there is a requirement to prepare and submit semi-annual reports. Will USAID confirm that these semi-annual reports are the same as No 18, Portfolio Review Presentations in the reporting requirements table?

USAID Response: These are two different reporting requirements.

24. Section F.5.2 List of Reports and Plans (page 19), No. 9 PPP Executed with the MOH. The Date Due is Ongoing for Life of Project. While the process will be ongoing, should the execution of the PPP be due by the end of the project?

USAID Response: There is no need to specify PPP completion date. Execution of PPP will depend on the need for the partnership. Moreover, it is the MOH to execute the PPP. The Contractor is to support the MOH develop the PPP strategy and implementation plan.

QUESTIONS RELATED TO SECTION H.

25. Section H.2 stipulates that personnel compensation be in accordance with the contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, with reimbursement subject only to the USAID Contractor Salary Threshold. However, B.7 (a) and H.3 (e) (2) state otherwise that labor costs for TCNs and CCNs should not exceed the thresholds in the US Embassy’s local compensation plan table in attachment J.11. Can USAID confirm contractors may follow their established policies, procedures, and practices?

USAID Response: Confirmed. However, if compensation for personnel exceed the thresholds in attachment J.11, the Contractor would be required to seek approval as indicated in Section H.3(e) and not solely rely on their policies and procedures.

26. Section H.2 stipulates that personnel compensation be in accordance with the contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, with reimbursement subject only to the USAID Contractor Salary Threshold. However, H.3 (d) states otherwise that annual salary increases may not exceed 3% for U.S. Staff and 5% for TCN and CCN Staff. Can USAID confirm contractors may follow their established policies, procedures, and practices?

USAID Response: See response to question 25 above.

27. Section X [H.30] states, “The Contractor must disclose the data server locations where the Agency data will be stored as well as the redundant server locations. The Contractor must have prior Agency approval to store Agency data in locations outside of the United States.”

Can USAID confirm that given the preference for local prime partners, would prior Agency approval be needed should Zambia be the location of the data server? Will USAID will bear the cost/contribute to the recovery of costs for server hosting and bandwidth - and depending on the origin of these expenses would these costs be direct project expense or recovered indirectly?

USAID Response: Prior approval would be required as indicated in the provision. The second part of this question would depend if the offeror is using the bandwidth and server solely for USAID or is it with multiple projects. That would determine the ability for the offeror to direct vs. indirect charge. USAID would cover costs that are allowable, allocable, and reasonable for the works to be completed.

QUESTIONS RELATED TO SECTION J.

28. Attachment J.5 Small Business Sub Contracting Plan was included with this RFP, but was not listed as a component of either the cost or technical volumes. Is the offeror expected to submit the plan at this time? If so, where should it be included?

USAID Response: No. Per FAR 52.219-19, It will be upon request by the contracting officer should it be considered necessary.

QUESTIONS RELATED TO SECTION L.

29. Section L.5.3.d requests information on Performance in Using Small Business (SB) Concerns. Can USAID confirm that in addition to small business concerns themselves, this section (d) is also not applicable to Local Partners? Conversely, might the performance in using small business concerns be evaluated based on the consortium at large, rather than solely on the prime contractor?

USAID Response: This is on historical performance using Small Business (SB) concerns. This may not be applicable if the offeror has never fulfilled this requirement.

30. Section L.5.3.a, Local Partner (page 114) states that the offeror must self-certify that it meets the PEPFAR definition of a local partner as described in the RFP, and allocates no more than two pages for this section of the technical proposal. Additionally, Section L.5.4, Annexes (page 120) requests offerors to provide necessary documentation to support their self-certification as an annex. Would USAID clarify what information should be provided in the two-page technical proposal section, as opposed to the annex? Further, if a consortium brings more than one local partner, can USAID provide guidance on where the supporting information for the additional local partners should be captured within the proposal?

USAID Response: Refer to the solicitation, Section L.5.3.a requires the offeror to certify that they are a local partner/meet the local partner definition outlined in the solicitation, whereas Section L.5.4.(a) is requiring supporting documentation (e.g. certificate of incorporation for an entity etc). Kindly note: The prime/lead in the consortia must be a local partner.

31. On page 118 under "self-certification", do you require all individuals, entities and government/parastatals to complete the table on described on page 120 (duplicated below) or is this only for government/parastatal?

Solicitation No. ___________________________________________ Offer/Proposal No. ______________________ Date of Offer _____________________________________________ Name of Offeror___________________________________________ Typed Name and Title _______________________________________ Signature______________________ Date_______________________

USAID Response: First, the offeror must delineate which part of the definition it meets (i.e.

individual/government/organization). USAID’s assumption is that all will only meet the third definition of “organization.” All those meeting the definition of a Local Partner are required to certify either as individuals or entity or government/parastatal.

32. Can we include letters of support from MOH, MSL, etc. as an annex in the technical proposal?

USAID Response: Only if it adds to the technical approach. A generic letter will not be viewed favorably as USAID will conduct an independent due diligence review. The most pertinent section would be listing any previous work(s) completed in the past performance section with POC’s.

33. Please confirm that the cost proposal should include the employee and employer contribution to the Government of Zambia’s National Health Insurance Scheme that is expected to roll-out in March 2019.

USAID Response: Offerors are expected to provide detailed cost elements they anticipate to incur in implementing the project and provide supporting information in the budget narrative to allow for complete analysis of cost.

34. Please confirm that the cost proposal should exclude skills levy that is a legal requirement in Zambia and that USAID will provide documentation of this exemption upon award of the contract.

USAID Response: This is a correct assumption. Please note that USAID is still working through this issue and this assumption may change based on further information provided. Any adjustments will be made to the contract.

35. May we use smaller that 12 point font in graphics or tables?

USAID Response: Yes. See amendment.

QUESTIONS RELATED TO SECTION M.

36. Section M.2.1 Rating Methodology and Evaluation Criteria (page 135). The sub-factors under Factor 3 appear to be misnumbered. Please confirm that they relate to factor three.

USAID Response: Confirmed. Table has been updated