2. MEL-SI RFP No. 72061723R00015 Questions and Responses (Round Two).pdf

USAID MEL-SI RFP No. 72061723R00015 QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES (ROUND TWO)

Note: Changes to the RFP resulting from round two questions are highlighted in Blue.

GENERAL QUESTIONS

1. Will databases or systems developed by the incumbent IP be transitioned as is?

In other words, does USAID have rights to the IPs' systems developed during the project?

USAID Response: Please refer to the RFP scope for details.

2. How does USAID envision engagement of the Ministry of Health in USAID/Uganda MEL-SI activities?

USAID Response: USAID engages with the Ministry of Health (MOH) through technical working groups among other platforms.

3. Can USAID please specify the districts where USAID/Uganda MEL-SI activities will be performed for each objective?

USAID Response: The RFP objectives are not district specific.

4. Can USAID estimate the funding that will be allocated to each objective and/or the size of planned TOs?

USAID Response: USAID cannot determine funding allocation per objective.

5. Can USAID indicate the number of TOs anticipated under this mechanism, at least in the first couple of years?

USAID Response: USAID cannot determine the number of Task Orders that may arise under this IDIQ given the unpredictability of the Mission needs.

6. Does USAID anticipate embedding any IDIQ provider staff into the Mission?

USAID Response: USAID does not anticipate embedding Contractor staff in the Mission.

7. Can USAID please confirm that the technical proposal does not include Technical Approach, Staffing, and Management sections as proposals typically do?

USAID Response: The Technical Proposal constitutes ONLY Corporate/Institutional Capability and Contractor Performance Information.

8. To what extent will Third Party Monitoring be a part of this contract and should offerors write to that? Where would TPM be requested, which part(s) of Uganda?

USAID Response: USAID does not anticipate third party monitoring under this contract.

9. The RFP SOW discusses OGAC, WHO, UNAIDS, and other entities. To what extent will the contractor necessarily be in direct contact with and managing data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or UNAIDS?

USAID Response: Interaction with other entities will be done through USAID’s Task Order Contracting Officer’s Representatives.

10. Does the Mission envision this contract providing support to future revisions of the CDCS?

USAID Response: Yes, to the extent that the contract facilitates evidence-based learning by the Mission as detailed in the RFP.

11. Does the Uganda Mission have a monitoring/evaluation community of practice among its staff? Will this contract support efforts of this kind?

USAID Response: The Mission has a Monitoring Evaluation and Learning team and Contractor’s support to this team will be as per the scope in the RFP.

12. Can the Mission estimate the number or frequency of impact evaluations (impact cited on page 17 of the RFP)?

USAID Response: USAID will determine the frequency of impact evaluations at Task Order working planning level.

13. Would USAID please comment on or describe the expectations of handover (if any) (or overlap or transition) from the existing CLA contract for the Uganda Mission?

USAID Response: USAID plans to have a seamless transition to avoid service interruption.

14. The anticipated SOWs under this IDIQ involve support for ongoing/legacy MIS systems. They were developed and maintained by local software development firms and managed by local institutions. Does USAID anticipate that other qualified local software development firms may be allowed to take over future development and management of these legacy systems?

USAID Response: The Contractor may extract, help clean, mine, and analyze data from the DHIS but will not manage the platform itself.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS OR

RESPONDENTS

15. Page 94, Section L.7.1 (ORGANIZATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL) states:

“Contractor Performance Information - Use Past Performance Matrix form in Attachment J.2 and five (5) page limit for other information.” Can you USAID please explain:

1a) What past performance information should be included in the “5-page limit for other information?”

USAID Response: This is past performance information relevant to IDIQ scope but is neither captured by the past performance form nor is a quality award or certification indicating exceptional capacity to provide the service or product described in the statement of work.

1b) Should the 5 pages for other information be included as an Annex to the proposal or within the narrative of the main proposal?

USAID Response: 5 pages for other information should be included as an Annex to the proposal.

1c) Should the Past Performance matrix be submitted as a separate attachment, or as an Annex to the proposal?

USAID Response: Past Performance matrix should be submitted as an Annex to the proposal.

16. Page 94, Section L.7.1 (ORGANIZATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL) states: “All information from appendices must be referenced in the technical proposal and summarized and included in the annex section.” Can USAID please specify which Annexes are required in the Technical proposal?

USAID Response: Offerors are required to refer to the RFP and provide the annexes required per a section.

17. The solicitation does not specify the page limit for “cover letter, table of contents, and acronym list.” Could USAID kindly clarify whether there is a page limit for these documents or not and if they count against the technical proposal page limit?

USAID Response: Please refer to section L.7.1 of the RFP amendment One.

18. Section L.7. states “All major subcontractors will need approval by the IDIQ CO in accordance with FAR part 52.244-2 and part 44.202-2.” FAR 52.224-2 requires CO’s approval regardless of dollar amount for other than fixed price subcontracts. Could USAID clarify whether CO consent is required for any subcontractor proposed regardless of dollar amount and even if it is not a major subcontractor, if other than firm fixed price basis?

USAID Response: This is required of all “major subcontractors”.

19. Section L8.2(1), states “the subcontractor indirect rates will be provided directly to the contracting officer.” Subcontractors may feel comfortable submitting their indirect rates as part of the prime’s proposal. This will allow a consolidated proposal submission. Could USAID consider removing this requirement and allow the partners to decide how they want to submit their indirect rate information?

USAID Response: Subcontractors may submit them directly to the CO or with the primes submission.

20. Section L.8.2(C) requires submission of NICRA for the prime and each subcontractor that the prime requests to be approved by the CO. This section contradicts the information included in Section L.8.2(a)(1), which only requires submission of indirect rate information from major subcontractors. Could USAID please clarify which instruction offerors should follow?

USAID Response: Section L.8.2(C) has been revised RFP amendment two to align with L.8.2(a)(1).

21. Section L.8.4 states that offerors and proposed subcontractors must ensure they are registered with www.sam.gov. However, FAR part 4.1102 states “(a) offerors and quotes are required to be registered in SAM at the time of an offer or quotation is submitted in order to comply with the annual representation and certification requirements except for…” In accordance with FAR part 2, Offeror means “offeror or bidder,” which does not include the subcontractor. Could USAID please delete the requirements for subcontractors to be registered in

SAM?

USAID Response: Your understanding is correct. As per ADS 302.3.6.11 In order to receive an award, all contractors and subcontractors are required to have a unique entity identifier in accordance with FAR Part 4.6, Contract Reporting, and

4.11 System for Award Management regardless of whether they are required to be registered in the SAM database. The Prime will need to be registered in Sam.gov.

23. Section L.8.4, also states that the offeror and all proposed subcontractors must complete section K representation and certification. Could USAID confirm that this is not required for non-major subcontractors?

USAID Response: The Offeror and each proposed subcontractor must complete Section K, "Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors.

24. Section L.8.6 requires submission of workday, workweek, and paid absence information for all proposed subcontractors. However, Section B.7.(b) requires submission of workday, workweek, and paid absence only for major http://www.sam.gov/ subcontractors. Could USAID please clarify which instructions offerors should follow?

USAID Response: The Offeror and all subcontractors must describe their workday and work week policies for Workday, Workweek, and Paid Absence.

SECTION J - LIST OF ATTACHMENTS INCLUDED AND REFERENCED BY LINK

25. How should the draft Task Orders (attachments J.9 - Strategic Information Task Order; J.10 - MEL Task Order) be considered in the proposal response to the IDIQ? To enable adequate preparation time, does USAID plan on releasing those TOs in their final forms in the near future?

USAID Response: Upon award of the IDIQ/s, USAID will release Task Order RFPs.

26. In attachment J.1, Note 4, there is a discussion about plug numbers, including fringe benefits. However, in attachment J.1.1, only the plug figure for local hire fringe benefits is supplied. We interpret this as requiring offerors to utilize their approved fringe rate for labor beyond locally hired personnel. Could you please validate this understanding?

USAID Response: Yes.

27. The Level of Effort (LOE) specified for Category 1 in the cost matrix is 260, and the instructions additionally indicate that paid absences not included in the Fringe Benefit category to be added. We are concerned that this might lead to a duplication of paid absence calculation, as the value of 260 already accounts for a full year of workdays. Furthermore, the cost matrix lacks a dedicated line for this particular expense. Could you please provide clarification regarding the treatment of Paid Absence in this context?

USAID Response: Offerors who recover their paid absences through their fringe benefits rate may reduce the number of days from 260 according to their accounting standards so that there is no double counting. The Offeror and all subcontractors must describe their workday and work week policies for Workday, Workweek, and Paid Absence.

28. In the cost matrix attachment J.1.1, there is no cost escalation applied on costs beyond the second year. Could USAID kindly verify whether offerors are permitted to apply their anticipated cost escalation rate from the second year onward, excluding any predetermined plug numbers if they are confirmed as such?

USAID Response: Yes, Offerors can put escalation rates on their proposed rates.

The RFP Plug figures remain as is.

SECTION C -DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT OF WORK

29. The Mission cites support to district level health information systems on page 18, and that these are systems of the government. To what extent will this contract directly manage either the platform or incoming data or the datasets of the

DHIS?

USAID Response: The Contractor may extract, help clean, mine, and analyze data from the DHIS but will not manage the platform itself.

30. Will the Mission permit exclusive teaming agreements with local organizations/institutions or restrict this? We understand that there are two MIS softwares which are owned by certain local partners. If USAID does not restrict exclusive partnership/teaming agreements with these local partners, it directly results in limiting the competition to those prime offerors who have already exclusively partnered with these local firms. Would USAID consider and amend the solicitation to state that “teaming arrangements with local partners must be on a non-exclusive basis”? This will allow more potential prime offerors to partner with the local partners on a non-exclusive basis and result in full and open competition in line with FAR part 5.

USAID Response: Teaming arrangements with local partners must be on a non-exclusive basis, this has been included in RFP amendment two.

31. Would the Mission consider restricting exclusive teaming agreements with the Makerere School of Public Health, an institution that controls the PEPFAR MIS reporting tool?

USAID Response: Refer to response to question 30 above.

32. Are the PEPFAR Site Improvement through Monitoring System and the Orphans and Vulnerable Children (OVC) Management Information System open source or are they proprietary systems whose licenses and source codes are owned and/or controlled by the software firms that initially developed them?

USAID Response: These are not software systems. Please refer to the PEPFAR website for more information.

SECTION H - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

33. Section H.10 states that activities under this contract fall under a categorical exclusion covering Ethiopia. Could USAID confirm that the Uganda Mission is also covered under the IEE? Also, the link provided in this section is broken. Could USAID update the link and/ or provide a copy of the IEE to offerors?

USAID Response: Section H.10(b) has been revised.

34. Section H.31, Partner Vetting in Indefinite Delivery Contracts. Could USAID please confirm whether offerors are required to submit PIF for named individuals at the IDIQ proposal stage or post award and when contractor employees start billing under individual task order?

USAID Response: The contractor must comply with the vetting requirements for key individuals proposed at Task Order level.