Appendix 1 - STAWI Activity - Questions and Answers.pdf

Postal Address:

U.S. Agency for International Development USAID Kenya P.O. Box 629 Village Market 00621 Nairobi, Kenya

Courier Address:

USAID/Kenya c/o American Embassy United Nations Avenue, Gigiri, Nairobi, Kenya

Pouch Address:

American Embassy 8900 Nairobi Place Department Of State Washington D.C. 20521-

Tel: 254-20-363-2000 Fax: 254-20-363- 2680 / 2682 https://www.usaid.gov/kenya https://www.usaid.gov/east-africa-regional

APPENDIX 1

RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS

Request for Proposal # 72061522R00011 – Sustainable, Transformational, and Accessible

Water Interventions (STAWI) Activity

April 07, 2022

Dear Offerors, We thank you for submitting questions in response to the referenced Request for Proposals (RFP).

We are providing our responses to the questions as follows. The response to each question is in blue font immediately following the question.

1. L.7 PHASE TWO - INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE PHASE TWO

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

(7) Contractor Past Performance Information:

1. Using the Past Performance Information template (Attachment J.7) provide an annex to the technical proposal 5 of the most recent (active or ended no more than 3 years ago) with a cost between $20,000,000 and $30,000,000 relevant contracts/agreements for efforts similar to the work in the SOO for the offeror and 3 for each major subcontractor, if any.

Can USAID revise the past performance requirement since small businesses who wish to take part in the RFP may not have past projects with the stated dollar amount within the last 3 years?

USAID Response: The requirement has been revised as follows: …“5 of the most recent (active or ended no more than 3 years ago) with a cost between $10,000,000 and $60,000,000”.

2. L.6, page 129, the RFP references an illustrative first year implementation plan. Can USAID confirm that the illustrative first year implementation plan, including first year work plan, is required as an Annex to the Phase 1 submission? If so, can USAID provide a page limit for this Annex?

USAID Response: We confirm that the implementation plan is to be an Annex/separate document to the Phase 1 submission/PWS. Please limit the implementation plan to 5 pages.

3. L.6 Can USAID confirm that the QASP is a separate document from the 25 page PWS? Can USAID provide a page limit for this QASP?

USAID Response: We confirm that the QASP is to be an Annex/separate document to the Phase 1 submission/PWS. Please limit QASP to 5 pages.

4. L.6 Given that the PWS allows limited opportunity for offerors to differentiate their approach and experience, would USAID consider allowing offers to submit a 1 -2 page Executive Summary that

Appendix 1 STAWI Activity does not count towards the page limit, that introduces the offer, summarizes the approach, methodology, and strategy for achieving PWS results?

USAID Response: Yes, this is allowable.

5. L.6. Please confirm that standard front matter (cover page, table of contents, acronym list) do not count toward the suggested 25-page limit.

USAID Response: Correct. These do not count toward the page limit. Please also note that 1-2 page Executive Summary is also allowable and does not count toward the page limit.

6. L.6 Can USAID please clarify the type of information they are looking to see in the GUCs chart?

Should the chart of the GUCs component be included in the body of the PWS or as an annex to the proposal?

USAID Response: The GUC chart can be an Annex/separate document to the Phase 1 submission/PWS and does not count toward the page limit. The GUC chart can be paired with a narrative and together should describe how the Offeror proposes to design, manage and administer the GUCs and how this will link to CLA; localization; and sustainability.

7. L.7(2) and (4): Regarding page limits, these two items seem to contradict each other. Would USAID please consider removing or amending the following language to allow for the non-counting front matter and annexes: “the page limitation will be calculated by the total number of pages in the entire

PDF.”

USAID Response: The phrase “and the page limitation will be calculated by the total number of pages in the entire PDF.” has been deleted in its entirety.

8. L.7.1(5) The Biographical Data Sheets required in this section contain cost information. Please confirm that these should be placed in the cost proposal instead of the technical proposal.

USAID Response: Confirmed

9. L.7.1(7) and (8) Please confirm that the two-page limit for the past performance annex is for two pages for each of the five relevant past performance references. Additionally, please confirm that that annex will include a two-page small business concerns narrative, and 10 non-counting SF-294s, copies of completed CPARS reports, and quality awards information.

USAID Response: Confirmed.

10. L.7(a) Would USAID consider allowing Past Performance Information for larger projects, including those with a cost up to $60,000,000, if these are relevant to the work in this SOO?

USAID Response: See response to Question 1.

11. F.12.1 Key Personnel. Can USAID clarify if Deputy Chief of Party (DCOP) candidates are required to have a degree in engineering or public health only, or if degrees in “related technical fields” can meet this education requirement?

USAID Response: Any related technical field is allowable.

12. Could USAID please share the 2022 Mission Local Compensation Plan (LCP) of the U.S. Embassy Nairobi, for third country nationals (TCNs) and cooperating country nationals (CCNs)?

USAID Response: See Attachment J.8 Kenya LCP Matrix Position Grade and Salary Evaluation.

13. Section H.44 “Grants Under Contract” makes multiple references to USAID/Philippines. Can USAID please confirm this should be USAID/Kenya?

USAID Response: Confirmed. RFP amended accordingly.

14. D.3 states that “The Branding Strategy, Implementation and Marking Plan must be submitted as an annex and as part of the Technical Proposal during Phase II of evaluation.” However, in L.7 “Phase Two – Instructions for the Preparation of the Phase Two Technical Proposal” there is no mention of a Branding Strategy, Implementation and Marking Plan, as an annex or otherwise. May USAID please clarify if this plan is a requirement during Phase II Technical Proposal submission?

USAID Response: Branding and Marking Plan is a requirement under Phase II – Technical Proposal submission.

15. C.5 “Objectives” USAID states that contingency funding and its associated designated budget is “triggered based on pre-set criteria to save development gains during crisis or shocks.” Can USAID please clarify if it is the Contractor or USAID who determines the criteria for triggering use of the contingency fund?

USAID Response: USAID will determine the criteria for triggering use of the contingency fund.

16. F.8 “Reports and Performance Objective or Outputs” lists a Close-Out Plan. Section F.9 “Reports and Deliverables or Outputs” lists a Close-out/Demobilization Plan. Can USAID please confirm which report will be required under this contract?

USAID Response: Close-out/Demobilization Plan will be required. Section F.8 has been revised accordingly.

17. F.8 “Reports and Performance Objective or Outputs” lists a Final Contract Completion report which does not appear in the table of deliverables/outputs in Section F.9. Can USAID please confirm if this report will be required under this contract and clarify the language in the RFP accordingly?

USAID Response: A final Performance Report will be required. Section F.9 has been revised accordingly.

18. Section F.9 “Reports and Deliverables or Outputs” lists a Grants Under Contract Manual. Section F.13.5 states that the contractor will submit a “grants manual and grant project implementation plan” for USAID review. Can USAID please confirm which of these will be required under this contract and update the RFP accordingly?

USAID Response: A Grants Under Contract Manual will be required. Section F.13.5 has been revised accordingly.

19. Section F.13.6 and F.13.7 list due dates for associated reports as “two weeks following the end of each U.S. fiscal” year or quarter. In the table in F.9, these same reports have due dates that are equivalent to 4 weeks following the end of the fiscal year/quarter. Can USAID please confirm that the dates in the table are those that must be followed by this contract and update the language in Section F.13 accordingly?

USAID Response: We confirm that the table provides the correct dates.

20. Section F.13 includes a Procurement Plan (F.13.4) which is not included in either F.8 or F.9. Can USAID please clarify if this is a contractual requirement?

USAID Response: Procurement Plan has been included in Section F.8

21. Please clarify if offerors moving forward to Phase 2 will be able to revise the previously submitted PWS and resubmit with the Phase 2 submission.

USAID Response: No, a previously submitted PWS shall not be revised or resubmitted under phase II.

22. Please clarify if USAID will provide any written feedback, beyond the Advisory Notification, to Offerors moving forward to Phase 2 on their submitted Phase 1 documents.

USAID Response: USAID shall provide an Advisory Notification only.

23. How long does USAID anticipate it will take to review Phase one submissions and share a response with applicants?

USAID Response: It is anticipated that responses, in accordance with the RFP, will be shared before the end of the 2nd quarter of FY22.

24. Could USAID please provide an estimated submission date for Phase two submissions?

USAID Response: Offerors who make it to Phase II will be informed of the submission dates.

25. Can USAID provide the latest Local Compensation Plan for the Kenya mission?

USAID Response: See response to Question 12.

26. In Section L.6 / Factor 1(a): Performance Work Statement, under Grants Under Contract heading

(pg. 129), the RFP states that “Offerors should provide a chart (which will not count towards the page limit).” Can this chart be an annex or should it be included directly in the PWS narrative?

USAID Response: See response to Question 6..

27. In Section L.6 / Factor 1(a): Performance Work Statement (Pg 130) “In general, the PWS should not exceed 25 pages excluding annexes.” Please confirm the page limit for the PWS. Does the 25 pages include the QASP as described in Factor 1(b)? If not, please confirm the page limit for the

QASP.

USAID Response: See response to Question 3. .

28. Please provide a list of accepted annexes to the PWS for Phase One Proposal.

USAID Response: Please be guided by Sections F and L of the RFP.

29. Per description of project objectives (pg. 20): “The interventions include infrastructure that comprises small scale water constructions.”

o Please clarify what level of detail the offeror is required to include in the Phase One PWS regarding the descriptions, locations, and timelines of anticipated infrastructure construction, as these plans need to be co-developed post-award. Please confirm that it would be sufficient for the PWS to describe the offeror’s proposed criteria for prioritization of construction, and illustrative examples.

USAID Response: USAID confirms that the PWS can describe the Offeror’s proposed criteria for prioritization of construction and illustrative examples, as we recognize specific locations and interventions will be determined post-award.

30. Section L.6 notes that “In drafting the PWS, Offerors are required to utilize language of mandatory obligation (“the Contractor must,” instead of “will,” “should,” or “may”). The PWS will be inserted in its entirety into Section C of the contract, so Offerors must not include any language that is proposal specific.” (pg 130). Please clarify what is meant by “Offerors must not include any language that is proposal specific.” Should the PWS language include the name of the offeror and consortium partners who will be conducting each activity? For example, “NAME (of offeror) will conduct training for government authorities.”

USAID Response: Offerors are free to include the name(s) of those who will be conducting each activity.

31. Please provide more detail around the expected structure or required sections of the Performance Work Statement.

USAID Response: Please refer to Section L.6 of the RFP.

32. In Section L.7 (8) (b) it is noted that CVs/Resumes of Key Personnel are not to exceed 3 pages, and letters of commitment and references are not to exceed 2 pages (pg. 134). Please confirm that the 3-page limit for CVs and 2-page limit for letters of commitment and references is per each individual KP position.

33. In Section L.7 (8) (c) it is noted that Contractor Past Performance Information is not to exceed 2 pages (pg. 134). Please clarify if the 2-page limit noted is for all past performance information or if it is for each individual reference provided.

USAID Response: Please see Question 9 and its response.

34. RFP page 16 notes that DiP WASH APS awardees "Would receive administrative support and oversight from the STAWI contract implementing partner(s), and their activities would be co-developed through the APS process."

o Please describe the specific administrative support and oversight roles and responsibilities USAID expects of the STAWI contractor?

USAID Response: This will be based on the needs of the awardees and local context.

o Can USAID provide any more information about the number of anticipated DiP WASH APS awardees, what kinds of organizations will be awarded, and the objectives of those awards? (beyond what is stated in the global DiP WASH APS Statement) USAID Response: USAID anticipates 3-5 awardees, who will be made up of local partners working in one or more of the STAWI target counties towards one or more of the stated STAWI objectives.

35. Per the description of project objectives (pg. 20): “The interventions include infrastructure that comprises small scale water constructions.”

o Do these interventions include any training of local craftsmen or community members for building, rehab and O&M?

USAID Response: This is up to the Offeror to propose.

36. Regarding Objective 1, Outcome 1.2 as described on Pages 20-21: Please clarify what is considered by USAID under the term ‘policy’. Specifically, please clarify whether this term refers to county-specific legislation passed by County Assemblies, or policies and regulations intended to operationalize national legislation, or could include both?

USAID Response: This is up to the Offeror to propose.

37. Section C.6 under heading Construction (pg. 26) notes that “the subcontractor who undertakes A/E services … must provide quality assurance and construction oversight services in the construction phase”. Later in this section RFP notes that “The Contractor is also required to engage under the activity an Infrastructure Manager” with appropriate experience and who is a US licensed Professional Engineer.

o Please clarify if the Infrastructure Manager position should be included within the A/E subcontract or if USAID expects the position to sit directly with the contractor. If directly with the contractor, please clarify if the costs associated with the position should be included within the $2M construction set-aside.

USAID Response: Please see key personnel requirements.

o Please confirm that the costs of subcontracts for A/E should be included within the $2M construction set-aside.

o Please confirm whether a single A/E Subcontractor should be identified and presented within the offeror’s proposal, or if A/E Subcontract(s) are to be approved/awarded only post-award?

USAID Response: The number of A/E subcontractors has been left to the offeror to propose.

38. Section C.6 Describes Grants Under Contract on page 27.

o Does USAID anticipate that grants awarded to County Governments should consist solely of in-kind grants, or other types of grants will also be considered by the Contracting Officer (e.g. Cost Reimbursement)?”

USAID Response: In-kind grants are expected. In addition, we are exploring the possibility of direct sub-grants to counties, though this is pending requisite approvals.

o Please clarify if the cost of training or capacity building efforts for county governments or government entities could be considered as in-kind assistance and therefore included in the plug figure for grants to those entities?

USAID Response: This can be considered as in-kind assistance.

o Would DiP-WASH awardees also be eligible to receive grants from the STAWI contractor?

USAID Response: Yes, if deemed necessary.

39. Section F.8.8 describes the Construction Implementation Plan (pg. 41 ff.) and notes: “The CIP should describe the Contractor’s approach to construction activities and include details of all construction activities throughout the contract” o Please confirm that this Construction Implementation Plan does not need to specify each anticipated infrastructure project the contractor will undertake, but rather must establish in detail the operating procedures and other practices the Contractor will follow for all aspects of construction activities throughout the contract.

USAID Response: The Construction Implementation Plan must specify each anticipated infrastructure project the contractor will undertake.

40. F.8 REPORTS AND PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES OR OUTPUTS makes multiple reference to the “PMP” under the descriptions of the M&E plans, quarterly reports, etc on pages 38-40.

o Please confirm whether this acronym refers to ‘performance monitoring plan’?

USAID Response: Performance Monitoring Plan and PMP have been changed to M&E Plan for consistency within the RFP.

o Please provide a description of this PMP and clarify whether this PMP is the same as, or a specific component of, the overall M&E Plan?

USAID Response: The PMP is the same as the M&E Plan. The language has been clarified in the RFP so as to only be referred to as “M&E Plan”.

o The following paragraph appears under Section F.8.7 Gender Considerations: “Where projects or activities are implemented in particular locations the PMP must include a discussion on ways to map and track the type of intervention by project component and fund use. As possible and appropriate, this could be done by county. The Contractor is encouraged to collaborate with relevant stakeholders in monitoring efforts to assure that monitoring and evaluation systems are as cost-effective as possible”. Please clarify if the requirements note for the PMP here are to be applied to the M&E Plan in section 2? Please clarify if this PMP is meant to be focused specifically on ensuring gender considerations?

USAID Response: The PMP is the same as the M&E Plan and is meant to cover the full activity’s scope; not just gender considerations. The language has been clarified in the RFP so as to only be referred to as “M&E Plan”.

41. On Page 27, the RFP describes expectations that the offeror will “allocate a designated budget (minimum 10-15%) that is triggered based on pre-set criteria to save development gains during crisis or shocks”.

o Please clarify whether this should be a designated budget line item, set aside only for the purpose of responding to crises/shocks? Or whether this represents a plan for how the offeror would divert/re-program up to 10-15% of overall funds in response to shocks or crises?

USAID Response: A separate line item should be included in the budget to cater for crises/shocks as described under” Shock Responsive Programming” on page 27.

o Please confirm that the 10-15% refers to 10-15% of the total estimated cost of the contract?

42. The budget template (Attachment J.2)) includes a column for Cost Share in the tabs for Labor, Equipment and Supplies. However, the RFP does not include any reference to relevant FAR clauses regarding Cost Share. Please clarify if USAID anticipates cost share to be provided by offerors? If so, please describe how USAID will consider cost-share commitments from an offeror when making a best-value determination?

USAID Response: Cost share is not a requirement.

43. “Part 3–Proposed Costs/Prices: General: The Offeror must provide a complete budget for the total proposed estimate cost during the period of performance, including the budgets for each major Subcontractor, by cost element utilizing the provided Excel budget template in Attachment 1.” (pg.

134) o Please confirm that the attachment referenced should be “Attachment J.2 - Budget Template” as in Section J of the RFP.

o Please confirm that budgets and budget narratives by cost element are only required for major subcontractors and not for all consultants and subcontractors.

USAID Response: The budget narrative should cover all proposed costs.

o Please confirm that offerors can add or remove columns/rows to the budget template for formatting purposes or use a format which is substantially similar.

USAID Response: Offerors should use the budget template provided but may add or remove columns/rows for formatting purposes.

44. Section L.8 Part 9 – Information Concerning Workday, Workweek, and Paid Absences (page 141):

Please confirm that this documentation is required *only* for the Offeror and “major subcontractors.”

USAID Response: This information is required for the offeror and all subcontractors.

45. Section L.8 Part 15 – Employee Biographical Data Sheets for Key Personnel (pg. 142): Please confirm that the offeror should use Attachment J.3 to the RFP for these bio-data sheets?

USAID Response: The revised Biographical Data Sheet is attached to this Amendment as “Updated Attachment J.3 Contractor Employee Biographical Data Sheet Form 1420”.

46. Section L.7.1(1) notes that ‘major subcontractors’ are those subcontractors whose proposed cost is at least $5 million or have a prominent part of the technical effort” (pg.131). Please clarify what is considered as a prominent part of the technical effort.

USAID Response: If translated into cost, the technical effort should amount to, or exceed $5 million.

47. Section H.41 notes that “’Consultants’, unless they are employees of the contractor, are considered subcontractors and subject to the applicable requirements”. "Can USAID confirm that the use of "consultant" in this clause is in line with the definition provided in FAR 31.205-33?"

o "If USAID confirms the above, we request that consultant costs and scopes of work be reviewed and approved in line with the requirements found in FAR 31.205-33 and not treated as subcontractors."

48. There appears to be a mis-numbering in Section L.8: Part 3 is repeated as follows: Part 3: Proposed Costs/Prices (p.134); Part 3: Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors (p.139). Please clarify.

USAID Response: This has been corrected.

49. Section F.8.1 (page 38) makes reference to collaboration with other USAID programs implemented in “western Kenya”. Please clarify if STAWI will be expected to coordinate with USAID programs in Western or other regions of Kenya outside the nine target counties where STAWI is focused?

USAID Response: STAWI will be expected to coordinate with other USAID activities in the target geographies. In addition, there may be USAID WASH activities in separate geographies that provide opportunities for technical-level coordination outside of a specific geography.

50. In Section F.8.8 (pg. 41) there is a reference to “Government of South Sudan.” Please clarify.

USAID Response: This has been revised to “Government of Kenya”.

51. Section H.44 (pg. 89 ff) contains multiple references to USAID/Philippines. Please clarify.

USAID Response: See response to Question 13.

52. Section F.9 notes that the GUC manual will be due within 90 days of award (pg. 45), but section F.13.5 notes that “The Contractor will submit the Grants Manual… within 60 days from contract award” (pg. 53). Please clarify.

USAID Response: The GUCs manual is due 60 days from contract award.

53. In Section L.9, Part 13 and Part 16 (Disclosure of Lobbying Activities) appear to be duplicate?

Please clarify.

USAID Response: Part 16 under Section L.8, under Part 3 has been deleted.

54. Please confirm that the Biographical Data sheets (1420s) of Key Personnel should be included under Part 15 of the Phase II Cost Proposal (see pg. 142) and should not be included in the Phase II Technical Proposal (see pg. 131: L.7.1(5)).

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 8.

55. If possible, please provide representative examples of the types of construction projects.

USAID Response: This is for the Offeror to propose.

56. Do major subcontractors need to be included at the time of phase one proposal?

USAID Response: See response to Question 30.

57. Will it be allowable for the Contractor to implement small scale water construction systems of its own design?

USAID Response: This is for the Offeror to propose.

58. Can the contractor serve as the Infrastructure Manager for some water intervention projects?

USAID Response: Yes.

59. Section C.1. Introduction states on page 16 that “STAWI shall implement direct grants to county governments and oversee related capacity building efforts” while on page 27, Section C.6.

Additional Considerations, Grants Under Contract refers to “in kind grants.” Could USAID please clarify and/or align the terminology so Offerors can better understand the nature of these grants and the types of work they may support?

USAID Response: See Question 38 and its response.

60. Section C.6. Additional Considerations, Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning on page 24 states that “Change should be measured against a stated baseline or baseline data gathered at the start of the Activity,” although section L.6. Factor 1 (a): Performance Work Statement states on page 128 that Offerors should provide “quantifiable results of those actions that will lead to meeting the objectives in the SOO, including the baseline and supporting data relied upon to establish the

Offeror’s quantifiable results.” Could USAID please confirm that indicator baselines and targets presented in the PWS may require adjustments based on data gathered at Activity start-up?

USAID Response: Yes, confirmed.

61. Section C.6. Additional Considerations, Construction on page 26 states that “The Contractor must utilize a licensed A/E firm (licensed in the U.S.). The cost of any design must not exceed 6% of the associated construction.” Eliminating this requirement would better align STAWI with USAID’s strategic approach toward localization and would likely not pose increased risks to construction management as page 26 also indicates that small-scale infrastructure will be overseen by an Infrastructure Manager that is a U.S.-licensed professional engineer. The Offeror and USAID have extensive experience in Kenya and across East Africa working with high-caliber local engineering firms to undertake water and sanitation infrastructure design and provide construction QA/QC services. We respectfully request that USAID remove the requirement for a U.S-licensed A/E firm and replace it with a requirement to work with firms or consultants registered with the Engineers Board of Kenya.

USAID Response: Confirmed. The RFP has been amended accordingly.

62. Section C.6. Additional Considerations, Shock Responsive Programming on page 27 states, “The Offeror is also expected to build in best practices around contingency funding and allocate a designated budget (minimum 10-15%) that is triggered based on pre-set criteria to save development gains during crisis or shocks.” Would USAID please confirm the base of the contingency funding budget of 10-15% is exclusive of the Construction and GUC plugs, but inclusive of any applicable indirect costs and fee?

USAID Response: 10-15% exclusive of construction and GUC plugs, inclusive of indirect cost and fee.

63. Section F.8 (8) Construction Implementation Plan (CIP) states on page 41 that the CIP must exceed the minimum standards required by “the Government of South Sudan’s regulatory framework.”

Could USAID please revise the text so that it is applicable to the Government of Kenya’s regulations?

USAID Response: See response to Question 50.

64. Section F.12.1 Deputy Chief of Party (DCOP) on page 48 states that the DCOP must have a “Master’s Degree in civil, water, agriculture, geological, or environmental engineering; or public health.” A wider range of graduate degree options, including non-engineering or related fields, would allow Offerors to consider a broader range of high quality and relevant candidates and make the best selection to ensure STAWI’s overall performance and success. Would USAID please broaden the language to include other graduate degrees by allowing “related fields,” or alternatively recognize and accept undergraduate experience in these fields in conjunction with a related graduate degree?

USAID Response: See response to Question 11.

65. Section F.12.1 Learning & Adaptation Advisor states on page 50 that the position requires a “Master’s degree in a relevant discipline, such as mathematics, statistics, informatics, or adult learning.” This requirement precludes the possibility of proposing many highly qualified Learning & Adaptation Advisors, who often have multidisciplinary backgrounds. Would USAID please consider broadening the acceptable graduate degrees so that Offerors can propose the best qualified candidates to support STAWI activities?

USAID Response: Yes, a combination of relevant degree(s) and experience is allowable.

66. Section H.39(b)(1) on page 85 states “That individual’s salary must be negotiated within the established range, based on his or her certified salary history [emphasis added].” As the latest version of the Contractor Biographical Data Sheet – USAID Form 1420-17 does not include salary or rate history as a required element, could USAID please confirm that Offerors should use market data rather than salary/rate history in determining proposed salaries and rates for this activity and remove all language related to using salary/rate history to establish salaries and rates?

67. Section H.39(b)(1)(ii) on page 86 states that Professional and Technical Personnel (non-Key) must be within the Mission Local Compensation Plan (LCP) of the U.S. Embassy Nairobi for TCNs and CCNs. Would USAID please provide the LCP to ensure salaries are below the threshold?

USAID Response: Attached. See response to Question 12.

68. Section J on page 101 lists the Contractor Employee Biographical Data Sheet Form AID 1420-17 as Attachment J.3 and the attached version is not current. Would USAID please confirm Offerors should use the latest version of this form, which does not include salary or rate history as a required element?

USAID Response: Confirmed. Attachment J.3 has been updated accordingly. See response to Question 45.

69. Section L.5(g) on page 127 states that “Phase One proposals must be prepared per L.6.” In Section L.6 (page 130), the RFP notes that the Performance Work Statement “should not exceed 25 pages excluding annexes.” Offerors are also instructed that the Phase One proposal must be “written in English and typed on standard 8 ½ “ x 11” paper, singles spaced, one-sided, Times New Roman point 12 font size with each page number consecutively.” There is no mention of a cover page, table of contents, or acronym list, whereas these are mentioned in L.7(iv) on page 131, and do not count against the page limit.

a. Would USAID confirm that a cover page, table of contents, and acronym list may be used for Phase One proposals, and do not count toward the 25-page limit?

USAID Response: Confirmed

b. Please confirm that any text boxes, charts, tables, and graphics must also be in no less than 9-point font for Phase One proposals.

USAID Response: Confirmed

c. Would USAID confirm which annexes are expected within the PWS that do not count against the 25-page limit; specifically, please clarify if the QASP and MEL Plans (mentioned on page 130), and the “illustrative first year work plan (mentioned on page

129) are part of these annexes?

USAID Response: Confirmed. All are limited to 5 pages each.

d. If the illustrative first year implementation plan is an annex, can USAID confirm that it should be written in the same style as the PWS as articulated on page 129 “In drafting the PWS, Offerors are required to utilize language of mandatory obligation (“the Contractor must,” instead of “will,” “should,” or “may”)?

70. Section L.6. Factor 1(a): Performance Work Statement states on page 129 that “Offerors should demonstrate their capacity to implement construction activities…. (and provide) examples of previous successful construction projects in Kenya or similar operating environments.” This appears consistent with Section L.6. Factor 1 (b): Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP), which states on page 130 that “Offerors must not include any language that is proposal specific.”

In its current form, it appears that USAID is requesting past performance information that is proposal specific and inconsistent with the formatting requirements of the Performance Work Statement. Could USAID clarify the expectations for Construction Risk Management and whether Offerors are only expected to provide their strategic approaches to Construction Risk Management, rather than also including their institutional experience?

USAID Response: Offerors are requested to include both their strategic approaches and institutional experience.

71. Section L.7.1(1)d on page 131 notes Offerors should include their DUNS number. Please confirm that Offerors may include the new SAM.gov Unique Entity ID (UEI) instead.

72. Section L.7.1 (5) on page 131 requires Biographical Data Sheets to be included in the Phase Two of the Technical Proposal. Given the biographical data sheet contains cost information in the form of a proposed rate, would USAID confirm biographical data sheets for key personnel are only required in the cost proposal?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 8.

73. Section L.7.1(7)(a)1 on page 132 states that the Offerors are to “provide an annex to the technical proposal 5 of the most recent (active or ended no more than 3 years ago) with a cost of between $20,000,000 and $30,000,000.” The narrow range in contract value limits the Offerors’ abilities to demonstrate relevant geographic and technical experience on contracts below $20 million or above $30 million. In fact, this requirement would preclude most USAID WASH projects over the last three years from consideration, which often fall outside the stated budget range. Would USAID please allow the inclusion of projects that are below $20 million, or above $30 million, if they are technically relevant and illustrate an ability to implement and manage similar projects?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 1.

74. Section L.7.1(7)d(3)(B) on page 133 states that the Offerors must provide “a copy of no more than 10 relevant, recent SF 294 “Subcontracting Report for Individual Contracts.” May Offerors include a list of no more than 10 relevant, recent SF 294s, rather than copies, if they were submitted to eSRS?

USAID Response: Please include copies.

75. Section L.8, Part 2 – Section B on page 134 requires Offerors to fill in all parts of Section B where “TBD” is listed, including the provisional indirect cost rates; however, Section B.5 on page 11 does not include “TBD” information. Only Section B.6(b) on page 11 with optional indirect cost ceiling rates includes “TBD” information. Could USAID please clarify whether Offerors should modify Section B.5 to include their provisional indirect cost rates?

USAID Response: Section B.5 on page 11 provides general information on Indirect costs.

Section B.6 on page 11 includes TBD for the negotiated final (or predetermined) rates.

76. Section L.8, Part 3 – Proposed Costs/Prices, (A) Labor on page 135 requires Employee Biographical Data Sheets for all proposed personnel. However, Section L.8, Part 15-Employee Biographical Data Sheets for Key Personnel on page 142 only requires them for Key Personnel. Would USAID please confirm biodata sheets are only required for Key Personnel?

USAID Response: Biographical Data Sheets are required for all long-term, short-term expatriates and for all Key Personnel.

77. Section L.8, Part 3, (C) Consultants on page 136 states “Cost element breakdowns should include the same budget items as the prime as applicable, as well as budget narrative for each cost item.”

Would USAID please confirm this is an oversite and remove this language from the description of the Consultant cost category?

USAID Response: Confirmed and deleted.

78. Section L.8, Part 3, (I) Subcontracts on page 137 states “Individual subcontractors proposed as part of the offer must include the same cost element breakdowns in their budget as the prime’s, as applicable.” However, Section L.8 on page 134 Part 3 states that budgets are only required for major subcontractors. Would USAID please confirm detailed budgets are only required for major subcontractors?

USAID Response: Budgets and supporting narratives are required for all subcontractors.

79. Section L.8 Part 3 (K) Construction on page 137 states “The contractor will develop a construction plan detailing all construction activities. This will have relevant designs (drawings) of the various construction activities to be undertaken and will be linked to the budgeted costs.”

d. Would USAID please confirm Offerors may use the plug figure of $2,000,000 within their budgets, and that a detailed construction plan as described will not be required until implementation?

USAID Response: Confirmed.

e. Would USAID also please confirm that the $2,000,000 plug is inclusive of all applicable indirect costs and fee?