Attachment__1_-_Q_&_A_ON_TRADE_HUB_SOL__72062018R00011.pdf

QUESTIONS RECEIVED ON TRADE & INVESTMENT ACTIVITY HUB

SOLICITATION #72062018R00011

Question No. 1: The RFP Cover Letter states the Small Business Standard is $15 million while on page 128, Section K.4 it states The Small Business Standard size is $7 million. Can

USAID please clarify which figure is accurate for determining small business qualification?

USAID Response: Corrected to $15 million based on NAICS Code 541990 on page 134.

Question No. 2: In the budget tables on p. 3 and p. 161 of the RFP, USAID provides a plug figure of $60 million as Grants under Contracts (GUC). However, throughout the RFP USAID describes the Grants Facility as inclusive of activities to design and administer a grants fund, which suggests that the $60 million is meant to be cumulative of grants administration and grants under contract. This includes the reference on p. 21, where USAID indicates that “grant administration will entail direct outreach to potential partners to explain the program, issuing grant notices of funding opportunities, reviewing and pre-screening applications, awarding grants, monitoring and evaluating recipient performance, and closing out grants” and that

“facility must be cumulative $60 million of the total estimated cost of the Activity.” On p. 30, USAID indicates that the Activity will “establish a grant-making facility to provide funding … as well as manage and administer it,” and the instructions on p. 152 (Section L.5.5) indicates that the technical approach must include a proposed dollar value of the facility. Would USAID provide additional guidance to clarify the scope and composition of the $60 million Grants

Facility for Private Sector Partnerships? Specifically:

a. Would it be permissible to include in the budget for this Facility the salaries and associated costs of personnel aligned to grants management and administration?

Outreach and engagement with potential partners? Development and design of partnerships? Monitoring and evaluation of results associated with grants? Please see page 21 for further clarification.

USAID Response: The $60 million of the total estimated cost of the Activity is to be used solely for grants and should not include the salaries and associated costs of personnel aligned to grants management and administration.

b. For purposes of budgeting, what distinguishes technical assistance provided under

Component II, which p. 21 indicates is “envisioned to support partners in development of grant application materials, in M&E, in supporting access to financial services, in agricultural products processing, and in institutional capacity building to support management of public funds as appropriate” and technical assistance provided under Component I, which USAID indicates on pp. 30-31

“may attribute a small portion of the overall budget toward assessment and capability-development assistance for grantees” and that the Contractor will be responsible for technical assistance-like activities including “supporting partners in development of applications and receiving and logging applications, … working with successful applicants … to develop effective communications products… monitoring and reporting … and providing limited capacity-building support to the Activity’s grantees”?

USAID Response: The information on pages 20-21 is a summary of the technical assistance that is envisioned while the information on pages 32-33 is the detailed information.

c. If it is indeed USAID’s intent that the $60 million be inclusive of costs and activities to administer and support grants under contract, would USAID consider changing or removing the GUC plug figure to reflect that intent?

USAID Response: GUC plug figure remains unchanged as it is not intended to be inclusive of the costs to administer the grants. The $60 million of the total estimated cost of the Activity is to be used solely for grants and should not include the salaries and associated costs of personnel aligned to grants management and administration.

Question No.3: On p. 12, the RFP includes “percentage of … land under improved technology or management practices with USG assistance in Zone of Influence (ZOI)” as a mandatory indicator. Would USAID please provide a definition of the geographies included in the Zone of Influence of the FtF West Africa Trade and Investment Hub Activity? For example, does it include all 15 ECOWAS countries, plus the additional three countries named on p. 34?

USAID Response: Please see updated indicator on RFP page 11. More information is available on the Feed the Future website at https://www.feedthefuture.gov/. Where appropriate, the Zones of Influence of the Feed the Future focus countries will be provided upon award.

Question No. 4: On p. 14 the RFP includes a list of priority states in which the Feed the

Future initiative in Nigeria will work. Given that processing facilities and other downstream elements of supply/value chains are likely to be found elsewhere, will USAID confirm that this may include activities outside these geographies that would benefit producers and other potential stakeholders within them?

USAID Response: USAID encourages Contractors to partner with elements of the supply/value chains that are outside of the focus states, provided that the partnership will benefit producers and other potential stakeholders or actors within the focus states.

Question No.5: On p. 21, and again on p. 24, USAID states that the grant-making facility can fund “non-sovereign entities … to strengthen the competitiveness of West African farms and firms.” Would USAID please clarify whether entities such as the National Investment Promotion

Commission or the Nigerian Export Promotion Council are considered non-sovereign?

USAID Response: The Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission (NIPC) and the Nigerian

Export Promotion Council (NEPC) are Government of Nigeria’s institutions. Therefore, they are not considered non-sovereign entities. However, Contractors can collaborate or coordinate with such government entities to maximize impact of the Activity.

https://www.feedthefuture.gov/

Question No. 6: Would USAID please provide the SOW for the work to be undertaken in

Cote d’Ivoire and Senegal and/or plug figures (inclusive of staffing) for activities in those countries, so as to provide for easier comparability in pricing (and staffing) among bidders?

USAID Response: There is only one SOW for this Activity and no separate SOWs for Cote d’Ivoire and Senegal. Please note that Component B under C.4 (c)(I) applies only to Nigeria. In addition, also note that Nigeria, Senegal and Cote D’Ivoire are priority countries under this

Activity.

Question No. 7: On p. 25 the RFP states that the “Contractor shall strategically focus on grant-making activities so they are proportionate to and substantively reflect the categories of funding allowed for the Activity.” It is not clear, however, what categories of funding are allowed for the Activity or what level/proportion of funding each includes. Would USAID please define “categories of funding allowed for the Activity” and provide information on amount or proportion of funding in each?

USAID Response: The Activity will include a mix of Feed the Future funding limited to work in the agriculture sector and Trade funding which can be used for a larger set of sectors. Other sources of funding may be included at a later date in consultation with the contractor. Individual

USAID Missions, such as Nigeria, Cote d’Ivoire and Senegal contributed to the Activity and their funds must only be used in those countries.

Question No. 8: On p. 25 the RFP includes “cost-sharing grants” among the examples of tools that might be used to “unlock credit and investment for promising entrepreneurs,” and, under the description of the strategic focus of grants, it includes a requirement of “at least a 1:1 matching leverage ratio”. Can USAID clarify whether in-kind contributions and other “parallel investment” by grant recipients that do not necessary meet the strict definition and reporting requirements of Cost Share under ADS 303.3.10 will be countable toward the matching leverage ratios expected under the activity?

USAID Response: Please see updated information in Section C on page 24.

Question No. 9: On p. 32, the RFP states that “technical support and accompanying investments must help grantees to meet commercial objectives,” but under the Guiding

Principles on p. 40 USAID indicates that:

Guidance in the ADS is explicit about the prohibition of recipients or sub-recipients of

USAID assistance to generate any profit. If the grants result in generation of profit, those proceeds must be used in accordance with 2 CFR 200.307 and, with the approval of the CO, USAID will consider the best uses of program income. …

Income earned under the Activity shall be added to the Activity.”

The RFP goes on to define Program Income as “gross income earned by the recipient that is directly generated by a supported activity or earned as a result of the award.” Given that grantees commercial objectives will almost certainly include expanding sales and generating income, and that all future income could be included under a strict interpretation of these rules, a requirement to include all income that could be attributed to grant support would be a major deterrent to participation by private enterprises.

Can USAID provide additional guidance on how to interpret the ADS in the context of the

Activity scope of work? For example, would USAID consider including the following?

“Because the assistance awards issued under this facility will include funding provided to grantees to stimulate or otherwise incentivize them to invest their own resources, income resulting from these or subsequent investments by grantees will not be considered Program Income for purposes of this paragraph, and such income will not need to be refunded or applied against the grant value.”

USAID Response: “Assistance awards issued under this facility will include funding provided to grantees to stimulate or otherwise incentivize them to invest their own resources, income resulting from these or subsequent investments by grantees will not be considered Program Income for purposes of this paragraph, and such income will not need to be refunded or applied against the grant value” Section

C.5 (k) Guiding Principles - “Program Income” has been amended to incorporate this language.

Question No. 10: On p. 34 the RFP states that “the grant application process will be open to firms from the 15 ECOWAS countries plus Mauritania, Cameroon, and Chad.” Please clarify that this process will also be open to organizations that are not firms, including, for example, farmer organizations, financial institutions, and other regional or national entities.

USAID Response: The process will also be open to “farmer organizations and other private sector entities”. The solicitation has been amended to incorporate this language..

Question No.11 On p. 175, USAID includes under the evaluation criteria for the Grants

Manual “the soundness of [the] proposal of a sustainable Technical Assistance program [that] creates a roadmap for to self-reliance for the beneficiaries.” Can USAID clarify whether it intends for this approach to be incorporated into the grants manual, or if it refers to the technical approach to be presented in the body of the technical proposal?

USAID Response: USAID intends for this approach to be incorporated into the body of the technical proposal and the Grants Manual is to be updated accordingly.

Question No. 12: Would USAID please provide the most recent local compensation plans

(LCPs) relevant to this procurement, including Nigeria, Senegal, and Cote d’Ivoire?

USAID Response: Mission Local Compensation Plan (LCP) is hereby attached as attachment

J.3 to the solicitation. However, salaries under the LCP apply to USG staff and therefore are to be used only as a guide in preparing your cost proposals to comply with USG staff compensation limitations.

Question No.13: Would USAID clarify whether anticipated funding to be contributed by

USAID | West Africa, USAID | Côte d’Ivoire, USAID | Nigeria, and other USAID Missions is included within the total estimated cost of the Activity, or will additional “buy-ins” be incremental to this figure?

USAID Response: The anticipated funding to be contributed by USAID | West Africa, USAID | Côte d’Ivoire, USAID | Nigeria, and other USAID Missions is included within the total estimated cost of the Activity.

Question No. 14: On p. 46, under F.5(a), the RFP indicates that all key personnel “must be

… employed by the prime Contractor at the time of award.” Please confirm that USAID’s intent is for Contractors to be able hire key personnel upon award, and not that they should already be employed at the time of (i.e. in anticipation of) award.

USAID Response: USAID’s intent is for Contractors to propose key personnel who have given commitments (i.e. letters of commitment) (a) to be available to serve in the stated positions; and (b) with the intention to serve for a stated term of the service. The language has been removed from Section F.5 and incorporated into Section L.5.5(b) of the solicitation.

Question No. 15: On p. 49, the RFP indicates that the Lead Grants Manager “must possess a combination of technical expertise and management skills that spans the subject areas covered by the Activity.” This implies a requirement that the candidate’s capabilities and experience must comprehensively cover not only grants management and compliance, but also the wide range of technical areas included in the scope of work. Would USAID consider amending this language to more realistically reflect requirements for the role, which might include a preference for knowledge of the technical areas covered by the Activity?

USAID Response: Language “Must possess management skills that span the subject areas covered by the Activity” for minimum requirements for The Lead Grants Manager has been added within the solicitation.

Question No.16: On p. 64, USAID indicates in H.3(a)(1) that salaries for new individuals under the contract must not exceed the “individual’s current salary or wage received during any full year of the immediately preceding three (3) years” without CO approval. Given that qualified professionals often require an incentive to take on a new role, and that they may be soon be eligible for salary increases in their current roles, would USAID consider allowing for modest salary increases of up to 5% for new hires without requiring CO consent?

USAID Response: Language “...for individual salary increases that exceeds 5 percent…” has been added within Section H.3 of the solicitation.

Question No.17: On p. 94, under H.41(a)(2), USAID indicates that individual partner government agencies could receive up to $300,000 in grants funding over the life of the Activity.

This seems to contradict the guidance that grants should fund “non-sovereign entities” elsewhere in the RFP. Can USAID clarify whether grants to public sector agencies will be permitted under the contract?

USAID Response: Grants are limited to non-sovereign entities only. The referenced information in Section H.41(a)(2) has been deleted.

Question No.18: On p. 95, USAID indicates that Contractors that would “seek reimbursement for … security-related training” will require CO approval to do so. Many

Contractors have existing policies to guide security training for project implementation in elevated risk environments, and the cost of security training would be included in proposal budgets and cost volumes. Can USAID confirm whether inclusion of this estimated cost in the proposal budget, along with a description of the guiding policy and required justification, would be sufficient to gain prior CO approval for these costs?

USAID Response: The cost of security-related training should be included in offerors budget and details for these costs included in budget narrative.

Question No.19: On p. 151 USAID outlines a list of Technical Proposal contents as well as

Annexes. Contractor Performance Information is listed as part of the Technical Proposal. Given the length of these items, we kindly request that USAID consider allowing this as an annex.

USAID Response: Please refer to Section L.5.5(d) that has been amended. The Contractor

Performance Report – Short Form (Attachment J.8) must be utilized to document past performance information. This information is to be submitted for Contractor Performance

Information as an annex.

Question No. 20: On p. 154 of the RFP, USAID places a limit of two (2) pages on the resumes of proposed key personnel, and one (1) page on the resumes of other named personnel.

To provide for a more detailed and nuanced record of experience to support evaluation while maintaining reasonable limits on page length, would USAID consider amending these requirements to three (3) pages for key personnel and two (2) pages for other named personnel?

USAID Response: The number of pages have been revised to 3 pages for key personnel and two pages for other named personnel.

Question No. 21: On p. 164, the RFP indicates that the Offeror and each proposed subcontractor must complete Section K Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of

Offerors. Would USAID consider amending this requirement to include only the Offeror and major subcontractors?

USAID Response: This Section has been revised in the RFP to require Section K

Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors for Offeror and “major” subcontractors.

Question No. 22: On page 167 Section L.11.3 Part 3, USAID requests completed Section K documents for all proposed subcontractors. Section L.12.8 requests Letters of Commitment for all subcontractors. At the same time, RFP Section L.12.2(2) specifies that detailed budgets are only required for the Offeror and major subcontractors. This seems to indicate that USAID will not be providing consent to subcontract for non-major subcontractors prior to award. If this is correct, would USAID consider removing the requirement to submit Section K and LOCs for non-major subcontractors?

USAID Response: This Section has been revised in the RFP to require Section K

Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors for Offeror and include

“major” subcontractors.

Question No.23: On p. 154 under Management Plan (e) USAID asks that Offerors include an organizational chart in the technical proposal, while on p. 151 Organizational Chart(s) is listed as an annex. Can USAID confirm it will accept Organizational Charts as an Annex rather than as part of the 20 page technical proposal?

USAID Response: A summary of the organizational chart should be included in the

Management Plan and more details provided as an Annex.

Question No.24: Could USAID please confirm if hand delivery is required per the cover letter or electronic submission is required per Section L.4.c.

USAID Response: Offerors Proposals are to be submitted electronically as stated in RFP

Section L.4.c.

Question No.25: USAID’s FY19 Q1 Business Forecast Q&A indicated that USAID/Ghana would be included in the WAITH project; however, the RFP does not mention USAID/Ghana as a joint funder under Section C.2. Can USAID kindly confirm that Ghana should be included in the geographic focus?

USAID Response: The geographic coverage includes Ghana. However, Nigeria, Senegal and

Cote D’Ivoire are priority countries under this Activity

Question No.26: Page 25, Section C.4(c) states that grant-making activities should be proportionate to and substantially reflect the categories of funding allowed for the activity. Page

11, Section C.2 states that the activity is jointly established and funded by USAID/Nigeria, USAID/West Africa, USAID/Cote d’Ivoire, USAID/Senegal and “other” USAID Missions.

Could USAID please provide a breakdown of the proportional funding by Mission (and clarify which “other” Missions are contributing to this Activity) in order to allow offerors to better prioritize activities and staffing to align with these resources?

USAID Response: The grant-making facility [C.4(c)(I) Design and Administration of the

Private Sector Competitiveness Activity Fund] must be cumulative $60 million of the total estimated cost of the Activity – Nigeria ($27 million, 40% of which is to be used to implement component B), Senegal ($8 million), Cote d'Ivoire ($4 million) and $21 million for West Africa

Region.

Question No. 27: Page 12, Section C.2 lists mandatory USAID standard and custom indicators for this Activity.

a. Can the Offeror adjust or add to the language on any indicators?

USAID Response: Offeror could add more indicators (standard and/or custom) but should not alter the language on any standard indicator.

b. The new Feed the Future handbook does not include this jobs creation indicator. Are

Offerors still expected to include the “creation of new jobs in project assisted firms” indicator in this project?

USAID Response: The Offerors could add more indicators (standard and/or custom).

Question No.28: Page 24, Section C.4 (b) lists the regional private sector alliances (shea, cashew, etc.) as required counterparts. Does USAID anticipate continuing to fund the regional private sector alliances directly, or are these alliances potential grant recipients of this Activity’s

GUC fund?

USAID Response: USAID/West Africa only has a direct award with the Global Shea

Alliance which will continue through Year 2021. Associations and alliances are potential applicants for the Activity’s funding.

Question No.29: Page 27, Section C.4 (c) Can USAID confirm that the intention of the sentence that reads “Contractor shall engage in diversified project financing by working with partners to make bank loans, private equity, or other external financial tools a part of a project’s core financial structure with the matching grant component” is to emphasize that contractors should support grantees in using external funding to meet the matching grant requirement?

USAID Response: USAID expects the Contractor to leverage USAID funding to unlock additional private financing for funding of Activity interventions. These sources of external private funds can be counted toward matching grant requirements.

Question No.30: Page 30, Section C.4 (c) states “The grant-making mechanism may explore administering grants to organizations that have existing grant facilities…or to develop or participate in them”. Can USAID please clarify if the Activity’s GUC Fund is expected to provide grants to other existing grant facilities, and if so, how the required funding leverage of at least a 1:1 ratio shall be measured in such an instance?

USAID Response: Offerors should consider how best to partner with other active grant facilities. This does not require Offerors to provide grants to other existing grant facilities but there may be opportunities for coordinated solicitations, due diligence of applicants and other forms of cost-sharing.

Question No.31: Page 33, Section C.4 (c) states that technical assistance is expected to count for no more than 20% of the TEC.

a. Can USAID please clarify how technical assistance will be defined and calculated when assessing compliance with the 20% cap? For example, does the key personnel labor count towards the technical assistance amount that must not exceed 20% of the

TEC? If so, is this amount calculated using loaded or unloaded rates?

USAID Response: As outlined in the referenced section, USAID intends that the costs of 1) building the capacity of potential grantees, 2) providing specialized technical advice and, 3) supporting specific sector-wide objectives should not exceed 20% of the TEC. These costs should not be part of the $60 million grant facility.

Question No.32: Page 48, Section F.5 (c) states that several key personnel must be bilingual in both English and French. Can USAID confirm that candidates that speak both English and

French fluently (Level IV) would meet the requirement for this position? The implication of the

‘be bilingual’ requirement – that candidates speak both languages as their native language – narrows USAID’s ability to consider candidates who bring exceptional expertise in private sector development in the region and established networks and demonstrated professional expertise working in both languages, but who might not have grown up in bilingual environments.

USAID Response: Sections F.5 (c)(3) and F.5 (c)(4)) have been updated to indicate “fluent in both English and French”. .

Question No. 33: Page 66, Section H.3 (e) (2), TCN and CCN Consultants states that consultants’ compensation must not exceed the maximum rate of the highest senior FSN position authorized under the prevailing Mission Local Compensation Plan. Considering AIDAR 722.170 applies to long-term TCN and CCN staff and the word “employment” infers an ”employer-employee” relationship, which is not applicable to a short-term independent consultants, could

USAID confirm that the LCP and AIDAR 722.170 should not be used as a basis for establishing consultant rates, as these rates must also take into consideration benefits (leave, health insurance, contributions to social funds) that are not included in the LCP’s base rates?

USAID Response: Section H.3(e)(2) has been deleted in its entirety.

Question No.34: Page 71, Section H.9 (a) Considering this is a regional program that will have satellite offices in several countries outside of Nigeria, would USAID please consider revising authorized geographic code from 937 to 935?

USAID Response: The authorized geographic code for this contract is 937.

Question No.35: Page 96, Section H.41: ADS 302.3.4.13 (c) (1) Grants Under Contracts states that the total value of an individual grant to a U.S. NGO must not exceed $100,000. This contradicts with Section H.41 (a) of the RFP which sets an amount threshold for an individual grant to a U.S. NGO at $150,000.

a. Could USAID confirm that offerors must use $150,000 threshold per individual grant to a U.S. NGO in developing a grants manual?

USAID Response: Section H.41(a) is corrected to “$100,000”.

b. Can USAID please clarify the total maximum value of an individual grant to any U.S.

organization that offeror should use?

USAID Response: The total maximum value of an individual grant to any U.S.

Organization is $100,000.

Question No. 36: Page 94, Section H.41(a)(2) states that the “total value of all GUCs that provide funds…to a particular partner government entity…must not exceed $300,000 for the duration of the prime Contract”. However, page 24, Section C.4(c) states “the Contractor shall establish a grant-making facility that funds non-sovereign entities.” Will USAID please clarify if the Contractor may provide GUCs to partner government entities?

USAID Response: Section H.41(a)(2) has been deleted in its entirety. The grant-making facility is to fund only non-sovereign entities.

Question 37: Page 150, Section L.5(a)1 states that technical proposals must include tabs. If

USAID intends this to be an electronic-only submission, please confirm that tabs are not required.

USAID Response: Tabs are synonymous with dividers. Offerors are to properly label each section of the proposal/submission.

Question No.38: Page 152, Section L.5.5 (a) i. states that the technical approach must provide a detailed discussion of the management and operation of the matching grant fund, including the proposed dollar value of the grants facility. However, Section L.4.c notes that technical proposals should not make reference to pricing. Section B3.(b) includes a figure of

$60,000,000 as the total amount of Grants Under Contracts (GUC).

a) Will USAID/Nigeria please clarify if the proposed dollar value of the grants facility should be included in the technical proposal?

USAID Response: Section L.5.5 (a) i. has been revised to remove the “proposed dollar value of the grants facility.”

b) In order to ensure clear and consistent evaluation of Offerors proposals, will

USAID/Nigeria please confirm that $60,000,000 is the required amount for the GUC budget category?

USAID Response: $60 million is the required amount for the GUC budget category.

Question No. 39: Page 154, Section L.5.5 (b) under the Management Plan, the RFP indicates that CVs for key personnel and long-term staff positions can be submitted in an annex with each CV being accompanied by a signed letter of commitment. Can USAID confirm that letters of commitment are only required for key personnel?

USAID Response: Yes, the letters of commitment are only required for key personnel.

Question No. 40: A holiday period in Nigeria overlaps with a significant portion of the time between the issuance date of this solicitation and the closing time for receipt of proposals, creating significant constraints to Offeror’s ability to reach key organizations, businesses, government entities, and individual proposed staff during this period. Will USAID/Nigeria please consider extending the closing time for receipt of proposals to account for this constraint and allow Offerors the ability to provide USAID/Nigeria with proposals of the highest possible quality?

USAID Response: The closing date for this solicitation has been extended to January 25, Question No. 41: Page 174 states that, Contractor Performance Information will be evaluated based on “Past achievements as evidenced by measurable or verifiable success in implementing programs of similar scope and size”. Will USAID please confirm that “programs of similar scope and size” include both contracts and cooperative agreements?

USAID Response: Yes, “programs of similar scope and size” include both contracts and cooperative agreements.

Question No. 42: Section L.5.5 (b) Key Personnel and Management Plan, under the instructions for the Management Plan provides a list of 5 items that must be included in the Management

Plan. The first item states that “The approach must include a full staffing plan to accompany the narrative…” A full staffing plan for a project of this size will typically take 5-6 pages. Can

USAID please clarify that the full staffing plan be included as an annex?

USAID Response: Key Personnel and Management Plan is to be included as outlined in Section

L.5.5(c) - item #6 of the Technical Proposal. Additional information could be included in the annex.

Question No.43: Section L.5.5 (b) under Key Personnel states “As annexes to the technical proposal, a complete and current resume must be submitted for each key personnel and long-term staff position, detailing the requisite qualifications and experience of the individual.” A project of this size with offices in multiple countries will have 80-100 long-term positions, with some staff starting immediately and others being phased in as needed. Can USAID please clarify for which long-term staff, if any, they want to receive resumes?

USAID Response: USAID expects to receive resumes for long-term staff that will play major role in the implementation of this activity.

Question No. 44: Also, in Section M.2.2 under evaluation sub-factor 2.1 it appears that only the key personnel are being evaluated. Please provide additional details on how the other long-term staff resumes will be evaluated.

USAID Response: Please see page 181, Section M.2.2, sub-factor 2.2 (bullet 6).

Question No.45: Section c.3 (f) Development Hypothesis for Nigeria states: “The development hypothesis assumes: improved resilience and market-readiness of vulnerable households; increased access to financial services; and improvement in the enabling environment for agriculture and agribusinesses. These challenges will be addressed largely through other

Feed the Future activities.” This implies that USAID will have other projects designed to increase access to finance. However, under C.4 (a) Illustrative Indicators, sub-purpose 3 are a series of indicators to measure increased access to finance. Can USAID please clarify the expected results for access to finance by the Trade Hub Activity versus other planned activities?

USAID Response: All indicators in the RFP are illustrative and offerors can propose other indicators in their proposals. However, Activity indicators will be finalized after award.

Question No. 46: Attachment J.5 Proposal Preparation checklist appears to be for a different proposal. It includes references to attachments that are not part of the proposal and lists requirements that are not included in section L. Can USAID please clarify what information from Attachment J.5 should be included in the proposal?

USAID Response: The Proposal Preparation Checklist is only a guide/sample.

Question No. 47: J.10 provides a Sample Key Personnel Matrix, but there are no instructions in Section L about how offerors should include the matrix in their proposals. Can

USAID please provide instructions on how and where offerors should include this matrix in the proposal?

USAID Response: Attachment J.10 is provided as an example to assist the offeror in meeting the requirement at Section L.5.5 (b)

Question No. 48: Section C.4 (c) I. Design and Administration of the Private Sector

Competitiveness Activity Fund under Design, states: “The Contractor shall strategically focus on grant-making activities so they are proportionate to and substantively reflect the categories of funding allowed for the Activity.” Can USAID please provide details on the categories of funding in order for us to meet this objective?

USAID Responses: The Activity will include a mix of Feed the Future funding limited to work in the agriculture sector and Trade funding which can be used for a larger set of sectors. Other sources of funding may be included at a later date in consultation with the contractor. Individual

USAID Missions, such as Nigeria, Cote d’Ivoire and Senegal contributed to the Activity and their funds must only be used in those countries.

Question No.49: Can you USAID please clarify if references are needed for key personnel?”

USAID Response: Yes. The Offeror is to provide references with contact information for all proposed key personnel.

Question No. 50: Can USAID provide all offerors with a uniform exchange rate for the

Nigerian Naira, and XOF for Senegal and Cote D’Ivoire to allow for an apple to apple comparison across offerors?

USAID Response: Offerors cost proposals are to be in U.S. dollars.

Question No. 51: Can USAID provide a list of government owned properties?

USAID Response: There is no government owned property to be furnished for this activity.

Question No. 52: Are there VAT exemptions in Nigeria, Cote D’Ivoire and Senegal?

USAID Response: Yes. Successful Offeror will be issued Mission’s standard tax exemption letter post award.

Question No.53: To be clear on terminology, could USAID confirm that this program will administer a $60 million grant-making facility under which there are several funds, as described in RFP Section C.4(c) Components A and B?

USAID Response: The $60 million grant will be used to implement Component 1 – Design and Administration of the Private Sector Competitiveness Activity Fund – Nigeria ($27 million, 40% of which is to be used to implement component B), Senegal ($8 million), Cote d'Ivoire ($4 million) and $21 million for West Africa Region.

Question No. 54: Could USAID confirm the name of the grant-making facility, as it appears to be referred to interchangeably as the “Private Sector Competitiveness Activity Fund” and the

“Trade and Investment Hub Fund”?

USAID Response: The name of the grant-making facility is Private Sector Competitiveness

Activity Fund, while the name of the Activity is Feed-the-Future West Africa Trade and

Investment Hub activity.

Question 55: Section C.4(c), on page 29, states “The selection of grant awardees must be based on criteria including…” and then states nine criteria. Are these nine illustrative, or must offerors use them? For example, one criteria is “opportunities to partner with American companies or companies that source from American companies.” Does USAID expect that to be true of all grantees? Further, may offerors suggest additional or alternative selection criteria in their proposals?

USAID Response: The criteria in the referenced section are not illustrative. Therefore, the

Section remains unchanged.

Question No. 56: Section F.5a) on page 46 states “All key personnel must be full-time, located in Nigeria, and employed by the prime contractor at the time of award,” while L.5.5 (b) on page 153 states “USAID believes that the COP will be vital in determining the prospects for success of the Activity and thus must be an employee of the contracting firm and not a subcontractor.” Could USAID please confirm that key personnel other than the chief of party may be subcontractor employees if that would align with the offeror's approach and partner roles and responsibilities? And would USAID reconsider the requirement that all key personnel must be located in Nigeria to allow greater flexibility in aligning offerors’ management structures with their technical strategies?

USAID Response: Section F.5 a) has been updated. Please refer to this updated section.

Question No. 57: Section F.6 (page 55) states that an Integration Plan for Gender and other

Vulnerable Groups is to be proposed pre-award and approved by USAID within six months after award. Given that Section L does not require the development of an Integration Plan for Gender and other Vulnerable Groups, and USAID wants to approve the plan within six months of award rather than upon award, please confirm that that plan may be developed within the first six months of award rather than in the pre-award stage.

USAID Response: As stated in Section F.6, Integration Plan for Gender is required within six months of award.

Question No. 58: In Section L.5(a) 1, the technical proposal is limited to 20 pages. Given the technically complex, multi-county nature of the activity, would USAID consider increasing the page limit to ensure offerors may provide a comprehensive response?

USAID Response: This Section/requirement remains unchanged.

Question No. 59: Section L.5(c) states that “offerors will determine the type of information to be submitted as annexes to their technical proposal in response to the instructions provided in the RFP. The list provided above is not all-inclusive.” However, Section L.5(a)5 states

“additional information beyond the 20-page limit and the referenced annexes will not be read or evaluated by USAID.” Could USAID please clarify whether offerors may include additional annexes and whether that information will be evaluated?

USAID Response: No, offerors may not include additional annexes. This “NOTE: Offerors will determine the type of information.” has been removed from Section L.5(c).

Question No.60: RFP Section L.5.5(a)i states that an offeror must describe its approach to

“scaling R&D in West Africa, and specifically in Nigeria…” Would USAID please confirm that

Component B: Research and Development grants are intended to deliver results only for Nigeria, per RFP Section C.4(c) on page 31?

USAID Response: Component B is restricted to Nigeria.

Question No. 61: Since the Small Business Participation Plan (L.9) includes cost information, please clarify whether the plan should be submitted as part of the cost proposal or of the technical as is currently stated.

USAID Response: The Small Business Participation Plan (Attachment J.3) requirement has been removed.

Question No. 62: Section L.12.e of the RFP details how the cost proposal must be structured and includes “Other Relevant Information” as Part 10. However, Section L.12.10 says that Part

10 of the cost proposal is “Information Concerning Work-Day, Work-Week, and Paid

Absences.” Can USAID confirm that Part 10 of the cost volume should be 3 “Information

Concerning Work-Day, Work-Week, and Paid Absences” and that a Part 11 “Other Relevant

Information” should be added?

USAID Response: Part 10 may include “Other Relevant Information” that may consist of

“Information Concerning Work-Day, Work-Week, and Paid Absences”

Question No. 63: Section L.12.2 of the RFP states that offerors must provide “…a summary and detailed budget for each Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) listed in Section B.3.” Section

B.3 does not include CLINs. Could USAID please update B.3 or otherwise clarify how partners are to track funding from bilateral missions to ensure that “funding prioritization…[is] given to countries where USAID bilateral Missions provide co-financing” as stated in section C.5(a) on page 34?

USAID Response: Section L.12.2 has been updated to “(ii) a summary and detailed budget for each Budget Item listed in Section B.3.”.

Question No. 64: L.12.2.1 asks that offerors fill out sections B.3, B.4, B.5, and B.6. Please confirm that offerors should also fill out section B.8 (fee schedule).

USAID Response: Yes, offerors are also to complete Section B.8.

Question No. 65: Section L.12.4 of the RFP requires offerors to submit a copy of their most recent personnel policies. Given that an offeror’s personnel policies can be lengthy documents, can USAID confirm that offerors with prior federal contracting experience do not need to submit organizational policies (but that they will remain available upon request)?

USAID Response: The Organizational Policies and Procedures have been removed from this solicitation.

Question No. 66: Section L.12.8 of the RFP requests subcontractor letters of commitment in

Part 8 of the cost volume. Section L.12.9.a requests letters of commitment for subcontractors in

Part 9. Could USAID please explain which part of the cost volume the subcontractor letters of commitment should be in, and whether the letters of commitment are requested for all subcontractors or just major subcontractors?

USAID Response: Letters of commitment are required for major subcontractors.

Question No. 67: Section M.2.2 on page 175 states, "The grant manual will be evaluated on the extent to which the offeror demonstrates how they will successfully administer the grant program with effectiveness and efficiency; and the soundness of their proposal of a sustainable

Technical Assistance program which creates a roadmap to self-reliance for the beneficiaries."

The part of the sentence after the semicolon is not something that would typically be included in the grants manual; instead it sounds like something that would be part of the technical approach.

We request that USAID remove this part of the sentence from the evaluation of the grants manual.

USAID Response: Section M.2.2 has been revised to remove this sentence from GRANTS

MANUAL.

Question No. 68: The cover letter indicates that offerors should take into account expected delivery time required to submit proposal packages in person. However, Section L does not include delivery instructions for hard copy delivery. Please confirm that proposals are to be submitted electronically only.

USAID Response: Offerors Proposals are to be submitted electronically as stated in RFP Section

L.4.c. Reference to hardcopy delivery has been deleted from the solicitation cover letter.

Question No. 69: The cover letter states that offers remain valid for 180 calendar days from the RFP closing date. However, Block 12 of the included Standard Form 33 indicates “0 calendar days.” Would USAID please confirm that offers should, in fact, remain valid for 180 calendar days from the RFP closing date and a revised SF 33?

USAID Response: The RFP cover form (SF 33) has been revised to include 180 calendar days in Block 12, for offerors proposal validity duration.

Question No. 70: Pages 25-29, Section C.4.(c)1 Detailed Work Requirements) Could

USAID kindly provide a definition for “leverage” for the purposes of this RFP? ADS 303 defines “leveraging” as representing all non-USAID resources (excluding cost sharing) that are expected to be applied to a program. The RFP, however, refers to a “1:1 matching leverage ratio from the grantee” (page 25) and a “1:1 matching grant ratio” (page 28).

USAID Response: For the purpose of this RFP, leverage is as defined by ADS 303.

Question No. 71: (Page 31, Section C.4(c)I Component B) The RFP stipulates that only

USAID/Nigeria funding must be utilized for Research and Development (R&D) grants. Does this mean that R&D grants can only be awarded to grantees in Nigeria, or can this funding be used in other countries in West Africa as well? In addition, how much money is USAID/Nigeria providing for R&D grants?

USAID Response: Component B is restricted to Nigeria. The grant-making facility [C.4(c)(I)

Design and Administration of the Private Sector Competitiveness Activity Fund] must be cumulative $60 million of the total estimated cost of the Activity – Nigeria ($27 million, 40% of which is to be used to implement component B), Senegal ($8 million), Cote d'Ivoire ($4 million) and $21 million for West Africa Region.

Question No. 72: (Pages 31-32, Section C.4(c)I Component B) Can U.S. universities and other non-West African entities receive R&D grants?

USAID Response: Component B is restricted to Nigeria.

Question No. 73: (Page 32, Section C.4(c)II Technical Assistance to Strengthen the

Effectiveness of the Trade and Investment Hub) The title of Objective 2 is “Technical Assistance to Strengthen the Effectiveness of the Trade and Investment Hub.” Can USAID please confirm that the Trade and Investment Hub is the same as the Private Sector Competitiveness Activity

Fund in Objective 1?

USAID Response: The name of the grant-making facility for implementing C.4(c)(I) is Private

Sector Competitiveness Activity Fund, while the name of the Activity is Feed the Future West

Africa Trade and Investment Hub activity.

Question No. 74: Page 33, Section C.4(c)II Technical Assistance to Strengthen the

Effectiveness of the Trade and Investment Hub) The RFP states that technical assistance is expected to account for no more than 20 percent of the total estimated cost. Could USAID kindly clarify whether this 20 percent for technical assistance is included in the $60 million grants facility?

USAID Response: The 20 percent for technical assistance is not included in the $60 million grant facility. However, the budget ceiling for technical assistance should not exceed 20 percent of the overall TEC.

Question No. 75: Section C.4(c) on page 33 states that a specific area of technical assistance must include training for exporters across the region on requirements to export to the United

States, including taking advantage of duty-free opportunities provided under the African Growth and Opportunity Act. Is this training included in the $60 million grants facility?

USAID Response: The training is not included in the $60 million grants facility but is a part of II. Technical Assistance to Strengthen the Effectiveness of the Trade and Investment Hub

Fund.

Question No. 76: Page 73, H.13 AIDAR 752.7032 International Travel Approval and

Notification Requirements) The RFP stipulates that for all international travel directly and identifiably funded by USAID under this Contract, at least one week prior to commencement of approved international travel, the Contractor shall notify the Cognizant Mission, with a copy to the CO or COR, of planned travel, identifying the travelers and the dates and times of arrival.

Would USAID kindly replace this requirement with a requirement that the Contractor notify the

Cognizant Mission, with a copy to the CO or COR, of planned travel no less than three days before departure?

USAID Response: This section remains unchanged.

Question No. 77. Section H.41(a)1 Grants Under Contract - Does USAID anticipate grants being awarded to U.S. NGOs? If yes, would USAID kindly consider increasing the $150,000 threshold for grants to U.S. NGOs? On page 29, the RFP states that “individual grants are expected to average about $250,000 – $2.0 million USD.”

USAID Response: USAID anticipates that grants will be awarded to U.S. NGOs. Please see updated section. The $100,000 threshold applies only to U.S. NGO.

Question No. 78: Page 158, Section L.7 Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan)

The RFP requires an Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (EMMP) as part of the technical proposal. Would USAID consider requiring Contractors to submit an EMMP at the award stage and not as a proposal requirement?

USAID Response: No. EMMP is to be submitted with the Technical Proposal.

Question No. 79: Page 160, Section L.12.2(1) Proposed Costs/Prices/Budget) The RFP stipulates that Offerors must complete Sections B.3, B.4, B.5 and B.6 of the RFP, and accompany its proposal with this Section or otherwise be determined non-responsive. However, in section B.6 on page 6, USAID states that this information will be completed on award. Please confirm if prime and major subcontractors are required to provide the indirect ceilings as part of section B.6. at the time of the proposal.

USAID Response: Sections B.3, B.4, B.5 and B.6 are to be completed and submitted with your cost proposal. These sections will become part of the award after successful negotiations.

Yes, prime and major subcontractors are required to provide the indirect ceilings as part of section B.6 at time of proposal.

Question No. 80: Page 160, Section L.12.2(2) Proposed Costs/Prices/Budget) The RFP states that “the Cost Proposal must be provided in two formats: (i) a summary and detailed budget, broken out by major cost elements, for the contract period of or five (5) years, from date of award; and (ii) a summary and detailed budget for each Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) listed in Section B.3.mentions submitting budget in two formats.” The RFP, however, does not give instructions regarding CLINs. Can USAID please confirm that this is an oversight?

USAID Response: This Section L.12.2(2) has been updated. Offerors are to submit their proposals following the RFP instructions.

Question No. 81: Page 164, Section L.12.2(4)(f) Budget Line Item Definitions and

Illustrations – Equipment and Supplies) The RFP states the proposal must include a detailed procurement plan. However, there is no further information about this requirement. Would

USAID consider removing this requirement? If required, please provide additional detail…