72061123R00001-MOD 1 Q and A.pdf

Number 72061123R00001, MODIFICATION #1

Questions and Answers

Reference Question USAID Response

1 General Is this an unrestricted solicitation? Yes.

2 General Is this a new or existing requirement? If it is existing, who is the incumbent?

This is a new requirement.

3 General The proposal is currently due on Friday, December 2, 2022. Given that this is shortly after the Thanksgiving holiday in the US, when many US employers will be closed for several days, would USAID kindly consider extending the deadline to December 9, 2022, to ensure bidders have sufficient time to develop high-quality and responsive proposals and engage with Zambian partners?

Would USAID consider extending the proposal due date to Friday, December 9, 2022, to accommodate for the Thanksgiving holiday in the United States?

The deadline has been extended to December 7, 2022. The RFP has been updated to reflect this.

4 General There are a few areas in the RFP that discuss personnel:

· In Section F.8 Key Personnel, the RFP mentions the Chief of Party and Operational Learning and Logistics Manager

· Section L.6 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal notes that resumes are required for (1) Chief of Party, (2) Learning, Operations, and Logistics Manager, and (3) a USN Technical Advisor from the list of Advisors in B.4

· The LOE table provided in M.4 Evaluation of Cost indicates that there are three full-time positions (1) Chief of Party, (2) Operational Learning and Logistics Manager), and (3) Finance and Compliance Manager

The correct title is “Operational Learning and Logistics Manager”

There are 2 key personnel: Chief of Party and the Operational Learning and Logistics Manager

The finance and compliance manager is not a key personnel position.

The USN technical advisor positions are not key personnel positions.

One sample resume for a technical advisor must be provided per Section L.6 as part of the technical proposal.

Can USAID please confirm the correct title for the "Operational Learning and Logistics Manager/Learning, Operations, and Logistics Manager" and confirm which three key personnel positions applicants are to put forward in the proposal?

5 p. 6 Section B.4

p. 108 Section M.4

The chart within Section M.4 appears to list the Technical Advisor – Business and Resource Mobilization position six times and with varying LOE amounts:

• Senior USN (50 hrs/yr) and Senior USN (50 hrs/yr)

• Senior CCN (80 hrs/yr) and Senior CCN (40 hrs/yr)

• Mid CCN (40 hrs/yr) and Mid CCN (80 hrs/yr) These six STTA lines are also listed in B.4’s Table of Fixed Burdened Hourly Rates found on pages 6 and 7. Could USAID please clarify the number of STTA positions and corresponding LOEs for the Technical Advisor – Business and Resource Mobilization?

We note the three “Technical Advisor – Business and Resource Mobilization” positions are each listed twice in the two charts provided in the RFP. Can USAID confirm if this is an oversight, or if the charts are correct as they currently stand?

The redundant positions have been removed from the RFP.

The LoE for the positions is:

Senior USN: 50 hours Senior CCN: 40 hours Mid CCN: 80 hours

6 p. 8 Section B.4

Under Section B.4(2), Labor Categories - Level of Qualification, the ‘senior’ level breakdown separates the qualifications for a BS from those of a BA:

• BA + 15 years’ relevant experience

• MS, MA, MBA, BS + 13 years’ relevant experience.

Could USAID please clarify whether the requisite number of relevant years of experience for a BS is 13 years or 15 years?

A BS requires 13 years of experience. A BA requires 15 years of experience.

7 Section B.7 Advance Understanding on Ceiling Indirect Cost Rates and Final Reimbursement for Indirect Costs: Could USAID please confirm that Small Businesses are not required to

Small businesses are required to propose indirect cost rate ceilings.

propose ceiling indirect cost rates?

8 Section B.8 This section references FAR 52.243-2 (Changes-Cost-Reimbursement);

however, per Section B.2, LOCAL is a Time-and-Materials contract. As such, we recommend that USAID replace FAR 52.243-2 with FAR 52.243-3 (Changes- Time-and-Materials).

The clause reference is revised to FAR 52.243-3

9 p. 11 Section C.3

Is USAID able to share the USAID/Zambia Mission’s performance assessment report (pre-award surveys and special award conditions)––conducted in late 2021––of existing local health partners supporting health service delivery, as referenced in Section C.3?

The Mission cannot share these assessments.

10 p. 11 Section C.3

Can USAID estimate the total number of direct award local partners this project will support overall (i.e., in addition to the six local partners USAID lists having invested in during the last four years)?

The number is unknown as it will depend on which partners will receive awards in the future.

11 Is there an expectation that the contractor will work with a cohort of USAID selected local orgs for the duration of 5 years or will there be rolling initiation of CD activities with new partners?

The organizations will be selected by USAID at the outset of the award and through the duration of their individual agreements. New local organizations are expected on a rolling basis.

12 B.4 Labor;

p. 5

Is USAID expecting offerors to add workers’ comp insurance into the hourly labor rates?

What about allowances?

Allowances and insurance should be part of the loaded labor rate.

13 B.4(a)(2) Could USAID please provide further details on what is being requested in Section B.4(a)(2)?

Section B.4(a)(2) Labor Categories - Level of Qualification is not requesting any information from the offerors. It prescribes the required qualifications that the proposed candidates must meet.

14 B.4 Labor;

pp. 6-7

For the positions identified as USN, kindly confirm that applicants may also alternatively

TCNs cannot be engaged to fill these propose and engage a TCN to fill those roles. roles.

15 B.4 Labor;

pp. 6-7

For the positions identified as CCN, kindly confirm that applicants may also alternatively propose and engage a Zambian permanent resident to fill those roles.

Per AIDAR 702.170-1 “Cooperating country national (CCN) means an individual who is a cooperating country citizen or a non-cooperating country citizen lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the cooperating country.”

16 Please clarify if CCN means only Zambian citizens and/or permanent residents of Zambia and if TCNs are allowed in any of the positions in section B.4

See responses to questions #14 and #15.

17 p.12 Section C.3

The RFP states that, “In line with the Mission’s CDCS DO 1, LOCAL will promote fair and transparent enabling environment that demonstrates both the GRZ and its citizens can equitably benefit from the effective use of USG foreign assistance resources for improved service delivery, especially at local level.” Can USAID elaborate how it envisions LOCAL demonstrating this? What kind of outputs or outcomes is USAID looking for to demonstrate this point?

The reference to the CDCS has been removed in the revised

RFP.

18 p. 13 Section C.6

Under Component 1, the RFP states that “Once a year the progress of each organization will be assessed by an external entity, furnished by the Mission.” Could USAID please clarify that the “external entity” is not the LOCAL Activity contractor?

USAID removed the reference to external assessments in the RFP to clarify that it is not the LOCAL Activity Contractor.

19 p. 15 Section C.6

USAID alludes to existing platform(s) for sharing funding opportunities among local organizations (Component #2, bullet #2), and for networking opportunities for local partners to connect with one another and new donors (Component #3, bullet #4). Does USAID have specific existing platforms in mind that it could share with prospective bidders?

USAID/Zambia has no platforms in mind but encourages proposals to prioritize existing platforms over creating new ones.

20 C.6 Technical

Under Component 3, the RFP lists in the first bullet under "Illustrative areas of focus" that

The reference is to the internal policies of the

Assistance, Component 3; p. 15 the contractor will support "the development and roll-out of communications, advocacy and/or networking plans that are clear, budgeted for and include strategies, actions, and tactics to advance policy priorities and goals.” Kindly clarify which policy to which this refers?

local organizations receiving support.

21 C.6 Technical Assistance, Component 1; p. 13

Under this Component, "the contractor must conduct participatory capacity assessments in collaboration with local partners. . . " Please confirm that USAID will identify the local partners to be assessed for implementation of Component 1. How long after the signing of the award does USAID expect to identify partners for capacity assessments under this component?

USAID/Zambia will identify partners during the kick-off of the Contract.

22 C.6 Technical Assistance, Component s 1-3; pp.

13-16

Will all local partners supported under this award through Components 2 or 3 also be required by USAID to undergo a capacity assessment under Component 1?

The capacity assessment is envisioned to assess the selected organizations across all three components and not just component 1. The description of the assessment has been moved to clarify this.

23 Section E.1 This section references FAR 52.246-5 (Inspection of Services—Cost Reimbursement); however, per Section B.2, this is a Time-and-Materials contract. As such, we recommend that USAID replace FAR 52.246-5 with FAR 52.246-6 (Inspection-Time-and-Material and Labor-Hour).

This reference has been changed in the revised

RFP.

24 p. 31 Section F.8

A Capacity Strengthening Advisor is mentioned within the description of the Operational Learning and Logistics Manager’s responsibilities; it is not referenced elsewhere in the RFP. Could USAID please clarify if there is a Capacity Strengthening Advisor position, as well as its role and LOE?

The reference to the Capacity Strengthening Advisor has been removed.

The RFP mentions that the Operational Learning and Logistics Manager will work with a "Capacity Strengthening Advisor."

However, this position is not included in B.4 in the list of Technical Advisors. Please advise.

On page 30 in Section F.8, the description for the Operational Learning and Logistics Manager describes their work “in support of the Capacity Strengthening Advisor and Chief of Party” but the Capacity Strengthening Advisor is not referenced anywhere else in the RFP. Should it be one of the advisors listed in the table in Section B.4.(a)(1)?

25 H.12 Environme ntal Complianc e Requireme nts; p 43-44

Given that the Scope of Work of this Activity is primarily focused on capacity development- which has low environmental risk -- would USAID consider either: 1) reducing the 3.5% currently earmarked for the environmental compliance and climate risk management, thereby freeing up funds for other capacity development work; or 2) allowing the contractor to use a portion of the 3.5% to carry out capacity development work related to environmental compliance?

The reference has been removed.

26 p. 52 Section H.25

USAID notes in Section H.25 that, “In accordance with FAR 9.506, a written analysis has been made of the potential for organizational conflicts of interest (OCI) related to this procurement. Based on this analysis and consistent with the requirements of 9.507-2, the Contracting Officer has identified potential OCI related to the implementation of the award.” We note that under FAR 9.506(d)(2), the USAID Contracting Officer is required to consider “additional information provided by prospective contractors in response to the solicitation.” Would USAID please provide a copy of the written analysis, so that we may have an opportunity to provide an appropriate response?

USAID has posted the written analysis and will accept any input from potential offerors through close of business (Lusaka time) November 23, 2023.

USAID will review responses and respond by November 30, 2023

27 p. 52 Section H.25

The RFP states that, “the Contractor, its affiliates, subsidiaries, and/or parent companies are precluded from submitting

This clause does not preclude current Contractors with quotes, bids, proposals or responding to any solicitation as a prime or subcontractor for any future solicitation issued by the Office of Acquisition and Assistance in Zambia or that has Zambia or any regional/locale in Zambia as its place of performance.” Would USAID please clarify if the existence of current contracts in Zambia precludes potential Offerors from bidding on this solicitation? If so, would USAID please provide a description of the facts that lead to this preclusion?

USAID/Zambia from submitting a proposal.

28 H.25 Preclusion of Future Work in Zambia, p.

Can USAID confirm that the Preclusion on Future Work in Zambia included in H.25, is intended to apply to real or perceived conflicts for which the contractor cannot propose satisfactory and reasonable means to avoid, mitigate or neutralize the conflict, and is not intended to broadly and unfairly restrict an offeror from future opportunities where a real or perceived conflict could be reasonably mitigated? Can USAID further confirm that future solicitations shall be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine if a real or perceived COI would exist for the contractor based on the work performed to date and USAID shall consider COI mitigation measures such a firewall within the contractor's organization that would prevent sharing of information obtained under the contract with the rest of the organization?

Would USAID kindly consider revising this requirement to allow the contractor to respond to future solicitations in Zambia?

Future solicitations will not be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

See Question #26

29 Section H.25

Could USAID kindly clarify if this preclusion applies solely to the successful prime contractor of the eventual LOCAL Activity, or whether it would apply to the prime contractor and all of its subcontractors for the LOCAL Activity?

Subcontractors would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

30 Sections I.1 and L.7.11

Section I.1 incorporates by reference AIDAR

752.7001 (Biographical data) and Section L.7.11 requires offerors to provide Biographical Data Sheets for

AIDAR 752.7001 has been removed.

Biographical Data forms

Key Personnel; however, AIDAR 752.7001 specifies that this “clause is to be inserted in all USAID cost reimbursement contacts.” As LOCAL is a Time-and-Materials contract, we recommend that USAID remove the reference to AIDAR 752.7001 in Section I.1 and the requirement to submit Biographical Data Sheets in Section L.7.11 are required to be submitted per L.7.11.

31 I.2 (e) Definitions;

p. 58

The RFP states that "'Materials' means (D) The following subcontracts for services which are specifically excluded from the hourly rate:

[Insert any subcontracts for services to be excluded from the hourly rates prescribed in the schedule.]" Would you please elaborate on which kinds of subcontracts for services would be excluded from prescribed hourly rates? Would it be related to the nature of the services sought or the expected cost of those services?

USAID does not envision any subcontracts being excluded from the hourly rate under (D), though Offerors may propose to do so if there are exceptional circumstances that warrant it.

32 p. 93 Section L.4

In Section L.4, the RFP states that there is a “potential for unequal access for information, biased ground rules, and impaired objectivity,” but does not provide any further information to determine how these conflicts would arise. In particular, we note that the statement of work does not envision participating in activity design nor activity evaluation. As such, it is not clear how ‘biased ground rules’ or ‘impaired objectivity’ OCI could arise through this contract. In accordance with FAR 9.507, which requires that the solicitation clause state ‘the nature of the potential conflict as seen by the Contracting Officer’, would USAID please provide additional information about the nature of the conflict?

Section L.4 only precludes organizations that are currently providing support to the Zambia/OAA office and this procurement under contract #72067418C00004.

33 p. 93 Section L.4

GAO decisions have identified that, “OCI determinations must be based on ‘hard facts’ that indicate the existence or potential existence of a conflict; mere inference or suspicion of an actual or potential conflict is not enough” Maximus Federal Services, Inc., B-410359 (December 17, 2014). Would USAID please identify for us the specific activities that will create OCI risks and also

As the OCI determination in Section L.4 is limited to only Offerors providing support to the OAA/Zambia office under contract #72067418C00004, the written analysis will not the basis of USAID’s determination that these cannot be mitigated?

be shared more broadly.

34 p. 93 Section L.4

The OCI determination is incredibly broad and will severely limit the number of potential Offerors for this solicitation. Based on our understanding of the RFP, we feel that it is possible to effectively mitigate any risk of OCI on this project. We, as well as other implementers, have done this successfully on past and current projects with a similar scope. As such, we respectfully request that USAID reevaluate and lift the OCI determination, and allow offerors to include an OCI mitigation plan as part of the proposal. This will enable USAID to receive the maximum number of competitive technical and cost proposals to ensure best value.

The OCI determination in Section L.4 is limited to only Offerors providing support to the OAA/Zambia office under contract #72067418C00004.

35 Section L.3 Section L.3 lists an email for Mr. Brian LeCuyer that differs from the email listed for him in Section L.5. Please confirm that the name and email address in L.3 are correct.

Email address in L.3 is revised to provide the correct address -blecuyer@usaid.gov.

36 L.4 General Instructions to Offeror p.94

L.4 (e)(1) states that an offer will be unacceptable if SF-33 is not completed but L.7.1 requires the submission of SF 1449.

Please confirm which standard form is required.

SF 1449 is required.

Section L.4(e)(1) reference is corrected.

37 L.6 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal,

p. 96

Please confirm that 1 inch/25 mm margins are required.

Confirmed. The RFP has been modified to clarify this.

38 Section L.6 For resumes, would USAID kindly consider allowing references to be presented on a third page, thus allowing a full two pages for the content of each resume?

No.

39 p. 96 Section L.6

For tables, graphics, and text boxes, may Offerors use a font size that is smaller than Times New Roman point 12 font size?

No.

Kindly confirm that smaller font than 12-point can be used in tables and charts.

40 L.7.2 (3) Budget Assumption s; p. 98

The paragraph states that “The Offeror must provide a complete budget, including the budgets for each subcontractor for all” but later states that “Offerors must incorporate major subcontractor budgets within their own”. Please confirm that budgets are only required for major subcontractors.

Confirmed. The RFP has been modified to reflect this.

41 Could USAID please confirm that detailed budgets are only required for major subcontractors and that annual budget totals for non-major subcontracts can be included in the Offeror’s detailed budget?

Confirmed. Though please note the requirement from L.4 that “The information in the narrative should be in sufficient detail to allow a complete analysis. This should include a complete breakdown of cost elements associated with each line item and those costs associated with any proposed subcontract.”

42 L.7.2 (1)

On page 92, L.7.2 (1) Proposed Costs/Prices notes that offerors must provide figures for section B.4, B.6, B.7 and where TBD is listed. It appears that B.5 (ODC) has been erroneously omitted. If not, can USAID confirm that offerors can budget for reasonable and allowable ODCs for the implementation of this activity?

B.5 has no elements that require it to be filled in.

Instructions for preparing the material budget can be found in L.7.2(3), which can include reasonable and allowable ODCs

43 L.7.2(1) Section L.7.2(1) instructs offerors to “provide the figures for Sections B.4, B.6, and B.7 and where “TBD” is listed”. Would USAID please confirm both that the entirety of Section B be provided with the proposal submission and that the “TBD” sections must be filled in, as applicable? For example, B.3(b) cannot be completed at the proposal stage.

Confirmed, TBD sections are to be filled in as applicable.

44 p. 98 Section L.7.2 p.

Could USAID please clarify whether there are three or four full time staff on this project?

There is a discrepancy between Section L.7.2 which asks Offerors to assume four for

There are expected to be up to 5 full-time staff:

Chief of Party Operational Learning

Section M.4 budgeting purposes, but the LOE table in M.4 only has three technical staff with full time

LOE.

Budget Assumptions: “Material costs to support 4 full-time staff positions” Can USAID specify the fourth full-time staff position (related to section M.4)?

and Logistics Manager Finance and Compliance Manager and 2 Support Staff.

The RFP has been modified to reflect this.

45 p. 98 Section L.7.2 p.

Section M.4

Could USAID please clarify the budget assumptions around LOE as mentioned in Section L.7.2? Instructions ask Offerors to include budget to support full-time staff positions “and an additional 150 days LOE for technical advisors.” The total LOE for technical advisors according to the table in M.4 is 170 days (comprised of 50 days for USN advisors and 120 days for CCN advisors), excluding the 520 days for CCN support staff.

The budget table in M.4 has been updated with

148.75 days LoE.

46 Section L.7.2(2)

This section requires offerors “to provide rates for the base year and each additional year”; however, Section B does not reference option and base periods. As such, we recommend that USAID revise this section to remove the reference to a base year.

Revised.

47 Section L.7.2, Proposed Costs/Price s, Budget Assumption s

The RFP says “The material budget must cover material costs (e.g. equipment, supplies, travel, ODCs including rent, etc.) to support 4 full-time staff positions and an additional 150 days LOE for technical advisors.” Can USAID please confirm that this is 150 days LOE per year?

Revised to 5 full time staff and 148.75 day of LoE.

48 L.7.2(3) “Budget Assumption s”

Section L.7.2(3) “Budget Assumptions” notes that the material budget must be sufficient to support 4 full-time staff positions and an additional 150 days of LOE for technical advisors.

i. Are Offerors required to propose precisely four full-time staff positions or, as requested above, may Offerors propose a labor budget appropriate to accomplish the proposed technical approach?

ii. If offerors are required to propose four full-time staff positions, would USAID please confirm which four positions these should be since the table in Section M.4 has LOE

i. Offerors do not need to propose staff positions or LoE. Offerors must complete the labor table in B.4.

ii. See question #44.

iii. Offerors do not propose the number of technical advisors or their LoE. Offerors provide loaded hourly rates and USAID will use sufficient for five full-time staff positions (Chief of Party, Operational Learning and Logistics Manager, Finance and Compliance Manager, Support Staff (x2))?

iii. The number of hours listed in the table in Section M.4 equates to 170 days per year, but L.7.3(3) “Budget Assumptions” notes 150 days of LOE for technical advisors. Are Offerors required to propose a certain number of technical advisor hours/days per year? If so, would USAID please confirm the number of hours/days per labor category?

the estimated LoE in M.4 to determine labor costs.

49 There are types of labor that we will need to perform the contract (home office support and gender, in particular) that do not neatly fit into any of the labor categories in Section B.4

(a) (1). Would USAID please confirm that Offerors may propose additional labor categories and fixed hourly rates to account for this labor?

Offerors cannot add additional labor categories. Other types of labor (including indirect labor needed to support the activity) will need to be recovered via the loaded hourly rate proposed B.4.

50 L.7.2(3) and M.4

Section L.7.2(3) states “The material budget must cover material costs … to support 4 full-time staff positions and an additional 150 days LOE for technical advisors”; however, the chart in Section M.4 lists 3 full-time staff positions, 6,800 days of LOE for technical advisors, and 20,800 days of LOE for support staff. We request that USAID reconcile the instructions in these sections so the assumptions for the materials budget match the assumptions for the time/labor budget.

Please refer to questions #44-48.

51 Section L.7.7(1) Past Performanc e Information

The RFTOP states “For contracts not in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), offerors (including all partners of a joint venture) and major subcontractors (those subcontractors valued at 20% or more of the contract value) must use the “Past Performance Information Sheet” (included as Attachment 3) to list past performance information for itself with a cost between $10,000,000 and $25,000,000, with a period of performance falling within the last three years, and involving similar work as in Section C.” Given that work similar to that envisioned in this scope of work is performed on both contracts and cooperative

USAID will not accept past performance for assistance mechanisms.

USAID has revised the RFP to remove the range of costs for past performance.

agreements, would USAID remove the language about contracts and allow bidders to submit PPRs for cooperative agreements as well? Further, given that this procurement has an estimated ceiling cost of $10 million, would USAID consider removing the lower limit of the threshold above, as it would disqualify many relevant programs that were below $10 million?

52 L.7.8 Letters of Commitme nt; p. 102

Please confirm that Letters of Commitment need to be provided for Major Subcontractors only (those valued at 20% or more of the contract value)

Letters of commitment are to be provided for all proposed subcontractors.

53 p. 105 Section M.2

There is a reference to ‘Phase One’ in the evaluation criteria: “The evaluation criteria specified in this section identify the significant criteria that Offerors must address in their technical proposal and serve as the standard against which all proposals will be evaluated., including the factor from Phase One.” Could USAID please clarify this reference?

On page 105 in section M.2 Technical Evaluation Factors, what does the phrase “including the factor from Phase One” refer to?

This reference has been removed.

54 p. 107 Section M.4

May Offerors reallocate the STTA LOE between personnel lines so long as the total per year does not change from the original?

May Offerors reallocate the LOE to make LTTA positions in addition to the three already listed?

Offerors may not reallocate LoE. M.4 is an estimate of LoE solely for the purpose of evaluating the costs/price equally from all Offerors. The actual LoE will vary significantly during implementation.

55 M.4 Evaluation of Cost; pp.

107-109

Please confirm whether adjustments can be made for estimated number of days in each category or if these are fixed over the duration of the contract.

See answer #54.

56 M.4 Evaluation of Cost

Is USAID’s intention that Offeror’s budgets utilize the precise hours listed in the table in M.4 and the corresponding proposed fixed hourly rates? If so, would USAID please reconsider this and allow Offeror’s to propose

See answer #54.

In addition, USAID has removed the phrase “accomplish the contract a labor budget appropriate to accomplish the proposed technical approach?

results and objectives” from Section L.6 to reflect that this is a time-and-material contract with no defined completion.

57 M.4 Evaluation of Cost; pp.

107-109

Please confirm if there are only three FTE positions allowable for technical staff under the contract as reflected in the table in M.4 or four full time staff as note in the L.7.2 budget assumption.

See question #44.

58 M.4 Evaluation of Cost; pp.

The Technical Advisor - Business and Resource Mobilization positions are listed twice in the table (Senior (USN), Senior (CCN), Mid-Level (CCN)) and have different estimated LOE allocated to each of the two sets. Kindly advise.

The redundant positions have been removed from the revised RFP.

59 p. 107 Section M.4

Section M.4 states, “The estimated number of days to be ordered for each category is listed in the below table” whereas section B.4. Labor (a) instructs the Contractor to “utilize the category fixed hourly rates.”

Please confirm that the table in M.4 represents LOE in hours, not days.

The LoE is in hours not days. The RFP has been revised to reflect this.