RFP Responses 12.17.2019.pdf

Amendment 1 Issuance Date: December 17, 2019

Closing Date and Time: January 17, 2020, 12:00PM, Harare time

Subject: Request for Proposals (RFP) Number: 72061320R00001

Feed the Future Zimbabwe Fostering Agribusiness for Resilient Markets

Dear Offerors, The purpose of this Amendment is to provide answers to the questions submitted by Offerors by the closing date for questions. In addition, the solicitation is attached with changes highlighted in green.

Please see the attached Question & Answer document.

Sincerely, /s/

Michelle Shirley Contracting Officer

1. Page 47, Section 3. Purpose, Objectives, and Results states, “the FTFZ FARM activity will support the successful commercialization of small-scale crop and livestock farmers begun under the Feed the Future Zimbabwe Crops Development and the Feed the Future Zimbabwe Livestock Development activities.” Would USAID please provide guidance and expectations for determining the specific crop and livestock value chains to be targeted?

USAID Response: The crops and livestock components are to be determined by the contractor.

2. Page 47, Section 3. Purpose, Objectives, and Results, the indicators on page 49, and the Activity Parameters on pages 49-52 do not mention strengthening access to inputs and services.

Does USAID envision FARM activities will focus on facilitating input supply and access for target beneficiaries?

USAID Response: Yes.

3. Pages 49-50, Section 5. Activity Parameters, sub-section a. Geographic Focus states, “The FTFZ FARM activity will focus implementation within the future DFSA activity(ies) Districts and Wards in Manicaland and Masvingo Provinces...the FTF activity will work at the Ward level where DFSA’s are implemented.” Page 69, Section. L.6 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal, sub-section 5 states that, “the staffing plan must demonstrate field presence at county level.” Would USAID please confirm that the staffing plan must demonstrate field presence at the district level, given there are no counties in Zimbabwe?

USAID Response: Yes, the staffing plan must demonstrate field presence at the district level. USAID expects field officers to work at ward and community level. Field officers do not necessarily have to live in each district but should have relatively easy access to those districts they cover and the communities within those districts.

4. Would USAID please confirm whether the Offerors should propose targeted districts in their proposals, or will the districts be determined jointly with USAID and DFSA activity implementers upon award?

USAID Response: Yes, that is correct. USAID expects the FTF implementer(s) to work with the DFSA implementer(s) and will provide final guidance on district and ward-level targeting when both are awarded. Offerors should therefore propose district-level targeting at this time.

5. Page 51, Section 5. Activity Parameters, sub-section d. Youth, states, “Youth must be targeted to increase participation in value chains, agribusinesses, and in the establishment of village savings and lending schemes and as recipients of credit through loan guarantee facilities.”

Would USAID please confirm the age range for youth that Offerors are expected to use in the design of interventions?

USAID Response: For the purpose of this activity, USAID will focus on those aged 18 to 35 years old.

6. Page 51, Section 5. Activity Parameters sub-section e. Integrated Water Resources Management to Increase Water Security states, “The activity must address the binding constraint of access to and wise use of water to improve water resource governance and sustainability. The offeror must coordinate planned activities with USAID/South Africa’s Resilience Waters program to improve natural resources management and build resilience to climate change by enhancing water resources management.” Section 3. Purpose, Objectives, and Results and Section 4. Performance Work Statement Results and Indicators do not have corresponding results, targets, or indicators. Does USAID envision integrated water resources management as a function of Result 1.1: Productivity enhanced under Objective 1?

USAID Response: Yes

7. Does USAID anticipate the FARM Activity will directly fund and implement water activities or coordinate with other programs?

USAID Response: USAID expects the FARM activity to coordinate with the Regional Resilient Waters Program, other donors working on water, and fund integrated water management activities.

8. Does USAID envision Grants under Contract funds for this program to stimulate private sector involvement to assist the small and medium farmers to market their livestock and crops to aggregation centers, and to work with youth and women’s organizations, as stated in the RFI?

USAID Response: Yes, USAID envisions Grants under Contract for this activity.

9. Page 18 Section F.7 Key Personnel states, “The Contractor must include key and support personnel with an appropriate balance and mix of strategic, managerial, administrative, operational, technical, analytical, diplomatic and interpersonal, and communication skills sufficient to achieve its purpose and results.” Page 69, Section L.6, subsection 5.) Section 2:

Management Approach and Staffing Plan states, “The Offeror shall outline and describe all proposed key personnel positions (in addition to those required by USAID in Section F.7).

Would USAID please confirm Offerors are not required to submit key personnel in addition to the three key personnel presented on page 18?

USAID Response: Correct. Offerors are not required to submit key personnel in addition to the three key personnel presented on page 18.

10. Page 70, Section 2 ANNEX A: Resumes of Proposed Key Personnel states, “Each resume must include three past performance references (including their most recent supervisor).” Would USAID please confirm if listing previous but not current supervisors is acceptable to avoid jeopardizing proposed candidates’ standing with their current employers?

USAID Response: USAID will seek proposed candidates’ references from offerors that make it to the competitive range.

11. On page 25, G.6 AIDAR 752.7003 Documentation for Payment (Nov 1998), (b) Local currency payment, the RPF states that “Local currency will be provided to the Contractor in accordance with written instructions provided by the Mission Director.” Due to the current and volatile currency situation in Zimbabwe, it would be helpful to be provided these instructions during the solicitation stage in order to develop a more accurate detailed budget. Question: Can USAID provide these instructions?

USAID Response: IF USAID provides local currency is provided to the Contractor, instructions will be provided at that time. Currently, USAID does not issue contracts in local currency, nor does it provide local currency in Zimbabwe.

12. On page 48, Performance Work Statement and Results, the RFP states “(a) Fully address the problems laid out above.” Question: Should Offerors limit activities proposed in the PWS to interventions that lead to the expected results outlined on page 47 or should Offerors propose additional activities to fully address all the problems outlined in the Problem Statement?

USAID Response: Offerors should propose interventions that lead to the expected results and offerors may choose to propose additional activities if they choose.

13. On page 48, Performance Work Statement and Results, the RFP states “Offerors should develop an activity Results Framework that addresses the two (2) objectives stated above.”

Question: Can the required Results Framework be included in Annex D: Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan (AMELP) rather than incorporating the document into the body of the Performance Work Statement?

USAID Response: No, this must be in the PWS.

14. On page 48, Performance Work Statement and Results, the RFP states “The PWS must demonstrate an understanding of USAID’s FTF priorities, strategies, and targeted value chains”, and on page 52, Private Sector Engagement, the RFP states “Interventions must increase private investment within targeted agricultural value chains by identifying market opportunities and linking producers and suppliers to them.” Question: Has USAID/Zimbabwe identified specific targeted value chains for the FTFZ FARM activity, or may the Offeror propose targeted value chains?

USAID Response: The offer may propose targeted value chains.

15. On page 50, Geographic Focus, the RFP states “It is expected that the FTF activity will work at the Ward level where DFSA’s are implemented in order to have maximum impact.

USAID/Zimbabwe’s preference is for potential bidders to invest deeper in fewer areas”.

Question: Given the preference to invest deeper in fewer areas, does USAID/Zimbabwe anticipate that FTFZ FARM activities will operate in a select subset of the Wards in which the DFSAs are implemented, or does USAID expect that FTFZ FARM will operate in all Wards in which the DFSAs are implemented but only in a select subset of DFSA-targeted communities within those Wards?

USAID Response: USAID expects the FTF FARM activity to implement in a subset of DFSA Districts and communities.

16. On page 50, Geographic focus, the RFP states that “the DFSA’s will operate in Matebeleland North, Manicaland, and Masvingo. The FTFZ FARM activity will focus implementation within the future DFSA activity(ies) Districts and Wards in Manicaland and Masvingo Provinces.” Question: Can USAID/Zimbabwe confirm that FTFZ FARM will not work in Matebeleland North?

USAID Response: This activity will not work in Matebeleland North.

17. On page 67, Submission/Delivery Instructions, USAID does not specify a file size limitation. Question: Can USAID/Zimbabwe confirm that there is no limitation on the size of files attached to emails submitting the technical and cost proposals?

USAID Response: The size limit is 25MB.

18. On page 69, Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal, the RFP indicates that the Technical Understanding and Approach must be written as a Performance Work Statement (PWS). Question: Will USAID/Zimbabwe please confirm that the PWS describes the Offeror’s activities, and is separate from the Offeror’s technical approach?

USAID Response: The PWS will be incorporated into the final contract. The technical approach must be included in the PWS.

19. On page 72, Technical Proposal Instructions, Section 4 ANNEX F: Past Performance Information, the RFP lists Annex F among the annexes that “must accompany the Technical Proposal”. Question: Can USAID/Zimbabwe please confirm that Offerors should submit Annex F with their technical proposal in addition the required submission of Past Performance Information accompanying the Offeror’s clarifying questions?

USAID Response: Yes, please resubmit with the full proposal.

20. On page 73, L.9 Cost Proposal Instructions, Part 2 – Proposed Costs/Prices, Detailed Budget, the RPF states that “Offerors must use the template provided in Attachment J.2.”

Question: Can USAID please confirm that Offerors should use Attachment J.3. Budget Template and not Attachment J.2 List of Acronyms to develop the Detailed Budget?

USAID Response: This was an error. The budget is under Attachment J.3. This has been corrected.

21. On page 74, Cost Proposal Instructions, the RFP states that the “Offeror must provide information sufficient to determine reasonableness of costs proposed for each year. Detailed information on proposed grant activities must be provided in the budget narrative”. Can USAID/Zimbabwe please clarify that Grants under Contract are authorized for the FTFZ FARM activity? Does USAID/Zimbabwe have a plug figure, range, or maximum amount Offerors should include in their cost proposal for Grants under Contract?

USAID Response: Yes, USAID envisions Grants under Contract for this activity. USAID will budget approximately $800,000.00 for Grants under Contract.

22. In Attachment J.3 Budget Template on the Components Costs (US$) tab, the Budget Summary Spreadsheet: Components Costs (US$) includes a list of five (5) regional offices. Can USAID please confirm that these regional locations were included by mistake?

USAID Response: Please disregard the reference to regional offices.

23. Can USAID please confirm that Attachment J.7. SFLLL: Disclosure of Lobbying Activities listed on page 42 should be included as part of the Cost Proposal?

USAID Response: Yes. The SFLLL should be included as part of the Cost Proposal.

24. Can USAID please provide the current Zimbabwe FSN scale?

USAID Response: A range of FSN salaries is below:

Grade Lowest Highest 1-4 $11,714 $27,573 5-8 $21,234 $52,267 9-12 $43,027 $118,367

25. The RFP states, “The FTFZ FARM activity will focus implementation within the future DFSA activity(ies) Districts and Wards in Manicaland and Masvingo Provinces.” Could USAID please clarify the focus geographic areas for FTFZ FARM? Will proposed activities be considered only for Manicaland and Masvingo provinces? Would USAID/Zimbabwe consider, for example, proposed activities in Matebeleland South?

USAID Response: No. The geographic areas are Manicaland and Masvingo Provinces.

26. Per Sections L.5 and L.6, the Past Performance Information (PPI) sheets (Annex F) are due by the closing date and time of submission of questions. Additionally, the RFP requires PPI sheets to be included in the technical proposal in Annex F. Would USAID please clarify if offerors should resubmit PPI sheets with the full technical proposal on January 17, 2020, or if submission with questions is sufficient?

USAID Response: Please resubmit with the full proposal.

27. Per Section L.6(d)(6), the AMELP is not to exceed 10 pages but must also include a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP). To present a robust QASP that addresses the requirements of the RFP, would USAID consider allowing the offeror to submit the QASP or a

QASP matrix as a separate annex (exclusive of the 10-page limit for Section 3, Annex D), or increase the page limit for the AMELP to accommodate the QASP?

USAID Response: Offerors may submit the QASP as a separate annex.

28. Per Section L.6(d)(6), the AMELP “must include all indicators in the Offeror’s proposed Fixed Fee Schedule (see L.9 below).” Would USAID be able to provide the required Fixed Fee Schedule, or confirm that all indicators in the fee schedule are to be determined by the offeror?

USAID Response: All indicators in the fee schedule are to be determined by the Offeror.

29. Section L.6 mentions that Annex C: Staffing Plan should contain only the organizational chart and an illustration of the relationship between the offeror and other offices/partners.

However, page 72 refers to a Staffing Plan Matrix that should also be included. Could USAID clarify what is to be included in Annex C?

USAID Response: Page 72 has been updated to match L.6, Section 2, ANNEX 2. The Staffing Plan should include the organizational chart that depicts the relationships among team members, as well as other offices or partners.

30. Could USAID kindly provide a description of what should be included in the Staffing Plan Matrix referenced on page 72?

USAID Response: Page 72 has been updated to match L.6, Section 2, ANNEX 2. The Staffing Plan should include the organizational chart that depicts the relationships among team members, as well as other offices or partners.

31. The RFP references Sections L.7 and L.8, which have been omitted. Should we assume that the contents of L.7 are covered in L.5 and the contents of L.8 are covered in L.6?

USAID Response: That is correct. The RFP has been updated accordingly.

32. Section C of the RFP does not reference a Grants Under Contract (GUC) program.

However, Section L.9 Cost Proposal Instructions, Part 2. (G), page 74, states that “detailed information on proposed grant activities must be provided in the budget narrative. This section is exclusively for the cost of the grant and must not include cost related to management or oversight of the grant.” Would USAID please clarify if offerors may propose a GUC program and include it in the proposal budget?

USAID Response: Yes, Offerors may propose grants under contract. Section C has been updated.

33. Are offerors allowed to propose additional key personnel in addition to the three required by the RFP?

USAID Response: USAID only requires three key personnel positions.

34. If offerors are permitted to propose additional key personnel, can USAID confirm that CVs for additional key personnel may be included in Annex A and Annex B Key Personnel Letters of Commitment as additional pages (exclusive of the 30-page limit)?

USAID Response: USAID does not require additional key personnel.

35. Will the resulting contract include Grants Under Contracts authority pursuant to ADS 302.3.4.13? If so, will the Contract also include minimum or maximum value requirements for grants to non-US NGOs?

USAID Response: USAID Response: Yes, USAID envisions Grants under Contract for this activity. USAID will budget approximately $800,000.00 for Grants under Contract.

36. J1, Section 5.b, page 51: In addition to collaboration with Development Credit Authority (DCA) risk-sharing partnerships, is USAID amenable to other existing types of guarantee and revolving credit facilities on this project?

USAID Response: The Offeror may propose other types of guarantee or revolving credit facilities.

37. It is noted that USAID does not promote the use of weather-based insurance on DFSA programming. Is this also discouraged under FTFZ FARM programming as well?

USAID Response: It is not discouraged by USAID.

38. J1, Section 3, page 48: Could USAID define “self-reinforcing adoption of […] diverse food products”?

USAID Response: Sustainable and self-reinforcing adoption of and utilization of diverse food products is a process whereby individuals control their own behavior by utilizing diverse and nutritious foods.

39. Can the contractor leverage investments and/or collaborate with businesses that are based outside of the target areas if they directly work with targeted households and farmers within the target areas?

USAID Response: Yes.

40. J.7 SFLLL: Disclosure of Lobbying Activities, page 42: Please confirm that submission of OMB Standard Form LLL is only required for Contractors disclosing a lobbying contact as defined by FAR 52.203-11 and required in FAR 52.201-11 and FAR 52.203-12.

USAID Response: USAID requires an initial filing of this document. If there is no lobbying contact to report, please write N/A in the required sections.

41. H.5 Consent to Subcontract, page 28: Do contracts paying a daily rate to consultants who provide short term technical assistance require Contracting Officer consent to subcontract under H.5 and FAR 52.244-2?

USAID Response: The Contracting Officer does not need to approve contracts paying a daily rate to consultants provided it is within the USAID Maximum Daily Rate. However, the COR will provide concurrence on all STTA.

42. Will USAID be separately funding any evaluations, or should midterm and final evaluation be included in the contractor’s budget?

USAID Response: Mid-term and final evaluations should be included in the contractor’s budget.

43. J1, Section 4, page 49: Please find questions on the prepared targets and indicators below:

None of the indicators have baselines, but there are specific values of achievement. Does USAID expect that the target values could change based on the baselines conducted by the contractor?

Or does USAID have baselines they used to set targets, and if so, can you provide the resources?

USAID Response: Target values could change as many of the indicators are based on percentages of figures that could change throughout the life of the activity.

44. In the indicator “Yields of targeted agricultural commodities among program participants with USG assistance”, how is USAID defining the commercial level in the total target?

USAID Response: Defined as the average of medium and large farms producing for markets.

45. For the indicator “Average household net income from agriculture production”, does USAID expect that the target will change each year based on the change in the TCPL, or will it be set by the 2019 value?

USAID Response: Target values could change as many of the indicators are based on percentages of figures that could change throughout the life of the activity. The TCPL changes every month in Zimbabwe but offeror must accomplish 150% of the TCPL by end of project.

46. The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) template included in the RFP is 10 pages. However, page 70 indicates that the QASP needs to be a part of the AMELP in the proposal, which is only 10 pages itself. Can USAID please confirm that the applicant should only include sections 4 and 6 in the AMELP?

USAID Response: The QASP can be submitted as an annex to the AMELP.

47. Annex J5, page 4: The QASP template indicates: “The Performance Requirements Summary Matrix, paragraph <enter number> in the Performance Work Statement includes performance standards. The Government shall use these standards to determine contractor performance and shall compare contractor performance to the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL)”.

Please provide an example or a template for the Performance Requirement Summary Matrix?

USAID Response: The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition & Sustainment lists the following:

https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/ccap/cc/corhb/Files/Surveillance/Performance%20Requirem ents%20Summary%20template.doc

48. What is the anticipated start date of the FTFZ FARM project?

USAID Response: The anticipated start date is on or about June 2020.

49. Regarding Attachment J1. Statement of Objective. On page 47 to 48, under Objective 2: Nutrition outcomes improved, the RFP states: “Result 2.1: Household dietary diversity improved. Sustainable and self-reinforcing adoption of and utilization of diverse food products. Result 2.2: Adequacy of diet improved.” Question: Can USAID please provide clarification for the difference between Result 2.1 and Result 2.2. For 2.1, Household diet diversity, if represented by the Household Diet Diversity Score (HDDS), is a proxy for access;

however, the bullet under it references adoption and utilization. For 2.2, adequacy could refer to individual diet diversity as is found with the minimum diet diversity score for women (MDDS- W) or children’ diet diversity. On page 45 of the RFP, diet diversity and adequacy are both referenced, and adequacy seems to instead refer to the Food Consumption Score. In order to best design interventions to address 2.1 and 2.2, differentiating the results under Objective 2 would be appreciated.

USAID Response: 2.1 refers to the quality of the diverse foods and 2.2 refers to the quantity (availability and accessibility) of the diverse foods.

50. Regarding Attachment J1. Statement of Objective. On page 49 to 50, under Geographic Focus, the RFP states “The FTFZ FARM activity will be implemented in Districts and Wards where USAID/Zimbabwe’s Food for Peace Development Food Security Activities (DFSA’s) will be working with their new award(s), estimated to begin in 2020…it is clear the DFSA’s will operate in Matebeleland North, Manicaland and Masvingo. The FTFZ FARM activity will focus implementation within the future DFSA activity(ies) Districts and Wards in Manicaland and Masvingo Provinces.” Question: Can USAID please clarify whether this activity is expected to work in Matebeleland North? The RFP states Manicaland and Masvingo though mentions working with DFSAs, which includes Matebeleland North. Further clarification will be appreciated on the extent this activity expects to work with the DFSAs in Matebeleland North.

USAID Response: The activity will not work in Matebeleland North.

51. Regarding Attachment J1. Statement of Objective. On page 50 to 51, under Coordination with Food for Peace, Regional Platform, and other Donor Programs, the RFP states “The offeror should collaborate where possible with USAID Development Credit Authority (DCA) risk-sharing partnerships with commercial lending institutions to increase access to finance for micro and small enterprises.” Question: Can USAID please describe any pre-existing DCA guarantees in place that could benefit from this project? Given that the DCA has since transitioned over to the new United States International Development Finance Corporation as of September 2019, how soon can we anticipate USAID to have access to the new facility and can USAID provide any details on how the process will change?

USAID Response: As for the transition to DFC, the current DCAs and how they will function in Zimbabwe - this will not change during the transition to DFC. The Mission does not have any additional insight on the DFC transition and what other financing tools for development might be available in the future. Please refer to the following links for general detail:

https://www.opic.gov/build-act/faqs-build-act-implementation https://www.usaid.gov/work-usaid/private-sector-engagement/build-act

52. Regarding Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal, on page 69, under Section 2: Management Approach and Staffing Plan. In the second paragraph, the RFP states, “The staffing plan must demonstrate field presence at county level.” Question: Considering Zimbabwe is constituted of provinces, districts and wards, can USAID please clarify if the reference to county level presence is an error?

USAID Response: USAID anticipates field offices but where and how many depend on the offeror. The reference to counties has been removed.

53. Regarding Grants under Contract (GUC). Question: Can USAID please confirm if Grants under Contract are included as part of this activity? This was emphasized at the RFI stage but omitted in the RFP.

USAID Response: Yes, USAID envisions Grants under Contract for this activity.

https://www.opic.gov/build-act/faqs-build-act-implementation https://www.usaid.gov/work-usaid/private-sector-engagement/build-act