Amendment 0001-Sol-72062021R00001-SF30- Qs and As .pdf

Amendment 0001 to Solicitation Number: 72062021R00001

- Leveraging Education Assistance Resources in Nigeria (LEARN) to Read Activity

ATTACHMENT 1

Solicitation Number: 72062021R00001 - Leveraging Education Assistance Resources in Nigeria (LEARN) to Read Activity

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

A. GENERAL QUESTIONS

1. I am hoping to find out if there is an incumbent contractor currently performing these services, if similar services have been performed in the past, or if this is a new requirement.

USAID Response: Some of these services are currently being provided by an incumbent contractor and others are new. USAID/Nigeria has supported improved language and literacy outcomes in basic education for a decade through programs like those described in the solicitation. Please see Attachment J.2 for background information.

2. If this is a follow-on requirement, could you please provide the previous contract or task order number?

USAID Response: The Contract Number for the NEI Plus project is AID-620-C-15-00002.

3. Would USAID please provide all NEI+ project deliverables to offerors? The most recent progress report that is available on the DEC is the Project Year 5, Quarter 2 report covering the period of January-March 2020.

USAID Response: USAID will ensure the DEC is updated with all NEI Plus project deliverables. See Attachments referenced in Section J of the RFP.

4. Could USAID provide links to or copies of the latest NEI Plus reports and deliverables, including EGRA results, and other relevant USAID/Nigeria education program documents, particularly those that are not yet publicly available?

USAID Response: All relevant documents will be uploaded to the DEC immediately. The EGRA result report is not expected until the beginning of April 2021. A copy of the report will be provided to all Offerors through amendment number 02 to the solicitation, to be issued o/a April 7, 2021.

5. Could USAID provide a copy of the Nigeria draft national reading framework? Limited access to this document provides undue advantage to those with access to it.

USAID Response: The Nigeria draft National Reading Framework is provided as Attachment J.13 to the amended Solicitation.

6. We respectfully request that USAID provide access to the following:

a) NEI Plus PY5 Quarter 3 Report

b) NEI Plus PY5 Annual Report with AMELP

c) NEI Plus Extension Work Plan

d) Classroom Observation report of Imo and Oyo States

e) most recent State Education Account reports

USAID Response: USAID will ensure the DEC is updated with all NEI Plus project deliverables. See Attachments referenced in Section J of the RFP.

7. What is the anticipated start date of the award?

USAID Response: The anticipated start date of the LEARN to Read award is quarter one of fiscal year 2022.

8. Can USAID please confirm the anticipated date of award for the LEARN to Read Activity?

USAID Response: See answer to Question No.7.

B. RFP SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICE/COSTS

9. Page 6, B.3 Estimated Cost, Fixed Fee, And Obligated Amount: On page 6 of the RFP, Section B.3(b) appears to be missing. Please confirm if there is any additional information to share related to this section.

USAID Response (OAA): This is to confirm that there is no more additional information to share related to this section. Please see Amendment No.1 of the Solicitation for correction on numbering.

10. Page 7, B.4 Budget: Contract Line-Item Numbers (CLIN): Would USAID consider removing the requirement to structure the LEARN to Read budget by CLIN?

USAID Response: The requirement to structure LEARN to Read budget by CLIN remains unchanged.

11. Page 8, B.6 Indirect Costs: The RFP requires Offerors to submit a completed Section B.6 with their proposal, but Section B.6 states that it is to be completed at the time of award. Can USAID please confirm that the submittal of our NICRA documentation is sufficient to satisfy this requirement at this stage?

USAID Response: As stated in Section L.6.2(a)(1), Offeror must submit a completed Section B.6., together with NICRA documentation.

12. Page 9, B.8 Fixed Fee Payment Schedule: In the Fixed Fee Schedule, Deliverable 1 of Performance Objective 4, “Action plan outlining a five-year strategy and costs for institutionalization of the National Reading Framework approved by key partners”, Who are the “key partners” referenced?

USAID Response: USAID considers all federal and state level government agencies with a mandate to plan for and implement reading and literacy instruction to be key partners. At a minimum, this includes NERDC, UBEC, State Ministries of Education, SUBEBs, and government structures engaged in non-formal education. Offerors, however, are expected to propose a range of stakeholders consistent with their technical approach.

13. Page 9, B.8 Fixed Fee Payment Schedule: Would USAID consider allowing the Contractor to propose adjustments to the deliverables, or the timing of the deliverables, which are already identified, and which sum to 40 percent, as currently listed in Section B.8 on page 9 of the

RFP?

USAID Response: Deliverables which make up 40 percent, as currently listed in Section B.8 of the RFP remain unchanged. Please review further guidance contained in Section L.6.2(c) of the RFP.

C. RFP SECTION F - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

14. Page 18, F.5 Key Personnel states that all key personnel “must be…employed by the prime contractor.” Will USAID allow subcontractors to provide up to one (1) of the key personnel positions?

USAID Response: The requirement as stated in Section F.5 of the RFP remains unchanged.

15. Page 20, F.6(g) Reporting and Deliverables or Outputs (Deliverables table). The

Deliverables table indicates that the QASP must be submitted by all offerors as part of the proposal submission. We respectfully request that the QASP only be required of the apparently successful offeror during award negotiations.

USAID Response: Please carefully review instructions for preparation of Technical Proposal contained in Section L.5.2.5 of the RFP to determine required documents to be submitted with the technical proposal.

16. Page 20, F.6(g) Reporting and Deliverables or Outputs (Deliverables table). The Deliverables table references two items (MEL Plan, QASP), which are “submitted pre-award”. It also references four items (EMMP, BSIP & MP, Grants Manual and Security Operational Plan (SOP)) as “proposed pre-award”, which suggests that these four items are not due at the time of proposal submission but rather during award negotiations. However, page 142, L.5.2 Volume I Technical Proposal lists MEL Plan with embedded QASP, BSIP&MP and SOP as part of the Technical Proposal annexes. Please confirm that the MEL Plan , BSIP & MP and SOP are the only required Section F Deliverables due at the time of proposal submission.

USAID Response: EMMP is required as applicable consistent with the IEE determination for the LEARN Activity. Section F.6(g)(14) is amended to indicate that the Grants Manual will be approved within 90 calendar days after award. Please review Section L for instructions for submission of the BSIP& MP and the Security Operational Plan.

17. Page 20-21, Section F.6(g) Reporting and Deliverables or Outputs: states that the

Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (EMMP) and Grants Manual should be “proposed pre-award.” However, neither appear in the list of Annexes in Section L.5.2. or elsewhere in Section L. Can USAID please confirm that the EMMP and Grants Manual are not required annexes due at this stage of the proposal in accordance with Section L?

USAID Response: The list of illustrative annexes under Section L.5.2 is deleted in its entirety. EMMP is required as applicable consistent with the IEE determination for the LEARN Activity. Section F.6(g)(14) is amended to indicate that the Grants Manual will be approved within 90 calendar days after award.

18. Page 21, F.6(g) Reporting and Deliverables or Outputs (Deliverables table): Section F.6(g)(14) on page 21 of the RFP indicates the grants manual should be proposed pre-award.

Given that activities identified in the workplan and our overall implementation approach will feed into the development of the grant’s manual, would USAID consider requiring the draft grants manual to be due after approval of the first annual work plan? If the grants manual is developed pre-award, it would need to be adjusted again during implementation to be responsive to the conditions on the ground as articulated in the work plan and the approved staffing plan. Additionally, developing a grant manual during the solicitation stage is not in line with the Effective Partnering and Procurement Reform initiative and could create an unfair playing field especially for new offerors.

USAID Response: Section F.6(g)(14) is amended to indicate that the Grants Manual will be approved within 90 days after award.

19. Page 23, F.6(g)(4)(d) MEL Plan. This notes “DQA” or assessments as part of the MEL Plan.

Please clarify with an example of what and how Offerors should address DQA in the MEL Plan.

USAID Response: Offerors must present data quality assurance procedures that are consistent with their proposed MEL Plan.

20. Page 26, F.6.g(12). Initial Environmental Examination (IEE). The Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (EMMP) requires input from the IEE. Would USAID kindly provide the approved IEE?

USAID Response: As stated in RFP Section H.24, a Categorical Exclusion with Negative Determination applies to the proposed LEARN to Read activities. A copy of the IEE is provided as Attachment J.12 to the amended solicitation.

D. RFP SECTION H - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

21. Page 61, Section H.34(a)(2). Grants Under Contract (GUC) states “The total value of all GUCs that provide funds (as opposed to in-kind assistance) to a particular partner government entity (for example, ministry, municipality, district, etc.) must not exceed $300,000 for the duration of the prime Contract.” Is the $300,000 ceiling per entity, or is it a total funding allotment for any and all partner government entities?

USAID Response: The $300,000 ceiling is per entity for the duration of the prime Contract.

22. Page 61, H.34 GRANTS UNDER CONTRACT (GUC): Can USAID please confirm that GUCs can be awarded to multiple unique Federal, State and LG entities and that the $300,000 limit will be applied to each entity?

USAID Response: Yes. See response to Question 21 above.

23. Page 38, H.3(a). Additional Requirements for Personnel Compensation: Can USAID provide a copy of the Local Employee Compensation Plan? This will help ensure compliance with Section H.3(a) on page 38 of the RFP and AIDAR requirements that contractor CCN staff salaries and benefits should not exceed those paid by the USAID Mission to CCN direct hires.

USAID Response: Local Employee Compensation Plan base salary ranges for CCNs under US Mission to Nigeria are provided below:

24. Page 44, H.9(a) AIDAR 752.225-70 SOURCE AND NATIONALITY WAIVER

REQUIREMENTS (FEB 2012): On page 44 of the RFP, Section H.9(a) lists the geographic code as 935; however, Section H.8 on page 44 and Section L.6.2 (f)(6) on page 153 list the code as being 937. Could USAID confirm the geographic code required for this award?

USAID Response: The authorized source for procurement is Geographic Code 937 unless otherwise specified in the schedule of this Contract. The solicitation has been amended accordingly.

25. Page 85, H.46: The RFP references FAR PART 4.21 PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING

FOR CERTAIN COVERED TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND VIDEO SURVEILLANCE

SERVICES OR EQUIPMENT (SECTION 889). Could the USAID Nigeria Mission please provide a list of telecom service providers compliant with 889 which currently operate in Nigeria?

USAID Response: USAID Nigeria Mission does not have a list of telecom service providers compliant with Sec 889, currently operating in Nigeria. Offerors must provide detailed information on proposed service providers consistent with guidance and instructions in the

RFP.

E. RFP SECTION K - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

26. Page 116, Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors: USAID provided Section K on page 116 of this RFP. However, instructions in L.6.5, Part 5 - Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors on page 158 do not ask for Section K. Can USAID confirm if the offeror should provide Section K in Part 5 of the cost volume?

USAID Response: Section K entitled “Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors” can be included in Part 5 of the cost volume.

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

27. Page 140, L.4(b) Electronic Submission: The RFP notes there is 10MB limit for email submission. Please clarify whether there is a limit on the number of attachments per email.

USAID Response: There are no limits on the number of attachments per email within the 10MB maximum. As stated in Section L.4(b) of the RFP, “Submissions per e-mail should not exceed 10MB in total file/data size”.

28. Page 141, L.5.1(a)(5) Technical Proposal Page Limitation: The RFP states both that “Contractors will determine the type of information to be submitted as annexes” and that “Additional documentation beyond the 25-page limit and the referenced Annexes will not be read or evaluated by USAID”. Will USAID please clarify whether submitted annexes that are not included in the “(illustrative list, subject to Contractor’s own determination)” in Section L.5.2(8) will be reviewed?

entirety. As stated in Section L.5.8, “All information labelled as Annexes must be appropriately cross-referenced in the technical proposal narrative” in order to be reviewed.

All annexes listed in the Offeror’s Technical Proposal Volume but not referenced anywhere in the Technical Proposal narrative will not be reviewed.

29. Page 142, L.5.2 Format and Presentation of the Technical Proposal: The RFP states that

“The Offeror must structure their technical proposal in the order shown below” and calls the annexes an “illustrative list, subject to Contractor’s own determination.” Later in Section L.5.2, several of those illustrative annexes (e.g., the Monitoring Evaluation and Learning Plan and Key Personnel CVs) are cited using the phrase “must be included as an annex”. Similar language applies in Sections L.7 and L.8 regarding the Branding and Marking Strategy and Implementation Plan and the Security Operational Plan. Could USAID please clarify which annexes presented are required?

USAID Response: The list of illustrative annexes under Section L.5.2 is deleted in its entirety. Offerors will determine the type of information to be submitted as annexes to their respective technical proposals. Please carefully review Section L of the RFP to determine required information and/or annexes in response to (a) instructions for preparation of the Technical Proposal; and (b) instructions for submission of other documents requested as part of the Technical Proposal Volume.

30. Page 142, L.5.2(8) Format and Presentation of the Technical Proposal: In Section L.5.2., Format and Presentation of Technical Proposal, USAID lists an Annual Work Plan as an illustrative Annex. However, in L.5.2.5.(d), in the description of what must be included in the 25 page technical approach, the RFP states that: “The Offeror must include a detailed and specific illustrative plan for key year one activities.” May we include this plan for Year One activities in an Annex? Please clarify if the Annual work plan should cover all 5 years or just the first year.

entirety. Offerors will determine the type of information to be submitted as annexes to their respective technical proposals. As stated in L.5.2.5.(d), “The Offeror must include a detailed and specific illustrative plan for key year one activities.” The Offeror will determine the presentation of information in the technical proposal narrative in response to the instructions under this section. Any additional information anticipated as an annex must be appropriately cross referenced in the narrative contained in this section.

31. Page 144, L.5.2.5: Technical Approach calls for an Annual Work Plan in an annex.

However, on page 146, the Annual Work Plan (for Year 1) is also listed as part of the Technical Approach: “Offeror must include a detailed and specific illustrative plan for key year one activities. Key year one activities must include a list of recommended outputs for each of the four performance objectives described in this RFP.” Please confirm that all aspects of the Annual Work Plan should be included in the annex.

USAID Response: The Offeror will determine the presentation of information in the technical proposal narrative in response to the instructions under this section. Any additional information anticipated as an annex must be appropriately cross referenced in the narrative contained in this section.

32. Page 142, L.5.2(8) Format and Presentation of the Technical Proposal: In Section L.5.2., Format and Presentation of Technical Proposal, USAID lists Sustainability plan as an illustrative Annex. However, in L.5.2.5.(b), in the description of what must be included in the 25-page technical approach, the RFP states that: “Offerors must present a sustainability plan...” May we include this plan in an Annex?

entirety. The Offeror will determine the presentation of information in the technical proposal narrative in response to the instructions under this section. Any additional information anticipated as an annex must be appropriately cross referenced in the narrative contained in this section.

33. Page 142, L.5.2.5 Technical Approach: “The table of contents for the Technical Proposal in L.5.2 (page 142) includes Contractor Performance Information as an item in the technical proposal that precedes the annexes. Section L.5.2.7 also indicates that Contractor Past Performance Information is included in the 25-page limit. However, L5.2.7.and L5.2.7.b indicate that Past Performance Information should be provided in an annex”. Would USAID please clarify whether offerors should include a narrative section on Contractor Past Performance Information as part of the 25-page body of the technical, or is it sufficient to provide all Contractor Past Performance Information in the annex?

entirety. Please review Section L.5.2.7 to determine presentation of information in the technical proposal narrative in response to the instructions under Contractor Performance

Information section. Any additional information anticipated as an annex must be appropriately cross referenced in the narrative contained in this section.

34. Page 143, L.5.2.5 Technical Approach “Offerors are encouraged to propose revised or additional yearly expected outcomes that support achievement of the Performance Objectives at all levels.” Please clarify if the annual outcomes listed under Performance Objectives in Attachment J.1-4 are not required outcomes, but rather illustrative.

USAID Response: Expected outcomes listed under Performance Objectives in Attachment J.1-4 are illustrative.

35. Page 143, L.5.2.5 Technical Approach “Performance standards must be clearly aligned with proposed task requirements, indicators, targets, and measurement of proposed results and outcomes over the life of the award." Please confirm that the performance standards mentioned here are the same as those to be defined in the QASP.

USAID Response: Yes, performance standards mentioned here are the same as those to be defined in the QASP.

36. Page 144, L.5.2.5: (b) “Offerors must include clear attention to how they will ensure a sustainable supply of sufficient teaching and learning reading materials--especially books--for all teachers and learners across states in the activity.” Please clarify the extent of the cost burden for teaching and learning reading materials expected of the Activity during the life of project.

USAID Response: USAID does not expect to spend money to purchase teaching and learning materials under LEARN to Read. Instead, the technical assistance is required to assist states in leveraging available resources so that the materials are available in a timely fashion and of sufficient quantity for the states’ needs.

37. Page 144, L.5.2.5: (b): On page 144 of the RFP, Section L.5.2.5(b) on the sustainability strategy states that “Offerors must include clear attention to how they will ensure a sustainable supply of sufficient teaching and learning reading materials — especially books — for all teachers and learners across states in the activity.”

Given that the Statement of Objectives (SOO) requires that teaching and learning materials production must be paid for by funds other than from LEARN to Read Activity, can USAID clarify their expectations of the contractor’s responsibility in relation to the supply of these materials?

USAID Response: The contractor is responsible for providing the technical assistance and guidance to states so that they utilize available non-USG funds for printing and distributing teaching and learning materials.

38. Page 144, L.5.2.5(e) Technical Approach, MEL Plan. This section states that “The Activity MEL Plan must sufficiently address the requirements outlined in Section F [by performance objective], including the following for legacy states, launching states, on-demand states, and the federal government.” Please confirm that a MEL Plan is required only at the Activity level, not per performance objective.

USAID Response: The MEL Plan is required at the Activity level, addressing each Performance Objective as identified in the Offeror’s PWS.

39. Page 144, L.5.2.5(e), Activity Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) Plan: This section requires that “The Offeror must articulate the strategy for monitoring and evaluating the activity theory of change…”. Is the activity theory of change the same as the development hypothesis statement presented in Attachment J-2?

USAID Response: Yes, the activity theory of change is the same.

40. Page 144, L.5.2.5(e), MEL Plan: This section indicates that the Offeror must propose

“performance standards” for each objective. Are these different from the Performance Objective Quality Standards described on pages 14-15 in Annex J-2 or Objective Outcomes presented in Annex J-1?

USAID Response: As stated in Section 4 of Attachment J-1, “Offerors are encouraged to propose revised or additional yearly expected outcomes and performance standards that support achievement of the Performance Objectives at all levels.”

41. Page 144, L.5.2.5(e), MEL Plan: Please confirm that “key activity outcomes” are the same as those named in Annex J-1.

USAID Response: Yes, “key activity outcomes” are the same as those named in Annex J-1.

However, “Offerors are encouraged to propose revised or additional yearly expected outcomes that support achievement of the Performance Objectives at all levels.”

42. Page 145, L.5.2.5(e), MEL Plan: We anticipate that the indicators are likely to numerous due to the multiple outcomes and measurement requirements tied to the four objectives (3 state types and the federal level), as well as other Technical specified in the RFP. We request that the PIRS requirement be eliminated from the MEL Plan.

USAID Response: The bullet entitled “Performance Indicator Reference Sheets” is deleted in its entirety. The solicitation has been amended accordingly.

43. Page 145, L.5.2.5(e), MEL Plan: Would USAID reconsider requiring Performance Indicator Reference Sheets as part of the proposed pre-award MEL Plan described on page 145 of Section L, given that this would place an undue burden on offerors to prepare in limited time, and because indicators will be discussed and finalized with USAID before inclusion in the final Activity MEL Plan?

USAID Response: See response to Question 42 above.

44. Page 145, L.5.2.6(a) Staffing Plan: States that “The Offeror must submit a resume/CV, list of three references (minimum), and a letter of commitment for each key personnel position.”

Can USAID confirm that the list of references goes on a page separate from the 2-page resume/CVs?

USAID Response: The Offeror will determine the presentation of information in response to the instructions under this section. Additional information beyond the stipulated number of pages that is provided elsewhere must be appropriately cross referenced as applicable.

45. Page 145, L.5.2.6(b) U.S. Small Business Utilization: May offerors provide small business utilization as part of an annex, rather than including it in the 25 page proposal?

USAID Response: The Offeror will determine the presentation of information in the technical proposal narrative in response to the instructions under this section. Any additional information anticipated as an annex must be appropriately cross referenced in the narrative under this section in order to be reviewed.

46. Page 146, L.5.2.6(b)(ii-iii) U.S. Small Business Utilization: Can USAID please confirm that the information in Sections under US Small Business Utilization can be included in the cost volume?

USAID Response: Information in response to Section L.5.2.6(b) - US Small Business Utilization must be included in the appropriate volume following instructions in the RFP.

47. Page 146, L.5.2.6(b)(i) Small Business Utilization. The section requires “a narrative describing the type of subcontracting work anticipated.” Please confirm that this narrative should refer only to the work anticipated for the U.S. Small Businesses, not for all subcontractors in the consortium.

USAID Response: The narrative must refer to the work anticipated for the U.S. Small Businesses.

48. Page 146, L.5.2.6(b)(ii) Small Business Utilization: This section states that “Prime Offerors must provide copies of any enforceable agreements or teaming agreements with subcontractors.” The RFP further states on page 146, Section L.5.2.7, that the Offeror “must provide…contractor teaming arrangements…” Can USAID please confirm that ‘enforceable agreements or teaming agreements with subcontractors’ are only required for those subcontractors who are certified U.S. Small Businesses?

USAID Response: With reference to Section l.5.6(b)(ii) enforceable agreements or teaming agreements with subcontractors are required for those subcontractors who are certified U.S.

Small Businesses. In response to Section L.5.2.7, the Offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) must provide performance information for itself, the contractor teaming arrangements, if any, and each major subcontractor.

49. Page 146, L.5.2.6(b)(iii) & (iv) Small Business Utilization: Our organization has been part of a consortium pursuing the above-referenced RFP. The solicitation contains helpful small business utilization language, as well as a couple of submission requirements we haven’t seen previously. Specifically, the RFP requests that we provide evidence of “representation” by the SBA and the name and contact information of our representative.

USAID Response: Offerors must provide evidence of proposed small businesses’ self-certification and representation by the Small Business Administration (SBA) to prove their current status. This can be in the form of a print out from the SBA portal with a valid link that can be accessed and verified by USAID.

50. Page 146, L.5.2.6(b)(iii) & (iv) Small Business Utilization: Our Organization has been a self-certified small business for several years, a recipient of SBA support, and longtime USAID contractor, but we’re not aware of a specific SBA representative who’s contact information we can provide to attest to our status. How do you recommend we address this submission requirement?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 49 above. A print out from the SBA portal with a valid link that can be accessed and verified by USAID will suffice.

51. Page 146, L.2.5.6(b)(iii): On page 146 of the RFP, Section L.5.2.6 (b)(iii) states that each large business offeror must provide evidence of proposed small businesses’ self-certification and representation by the Small Business Administration (SBA) to prove their current status.

Can USAID revise the requirement to only require SBA representation from 8(a) and HubZones? The SBA certified 8(a) and HubZones, while other small businesses do self-certification at SAM.gov.

USAID Response: The instruction remains unchanged. Offerors must provide evidence of proposed small businesses’ self-certification and representation by the Small Business Administration (SBA) or any other reliable self-certification Government portal as applicable.

This can be in the form of a print out containing a valid link that can be accessed and verified by USAID.

52. Page 146, L.5.2.7(a)(1) Contractor Performance Information: The RFP states that “For the purposes of the RFP, most recent will mean relevant contracts or grants implemented from o/a 2016 to date” regarding what can be submitted for Past Performance References. Can USAID please confirm that projects which were active at any time in calendar 2016 will meet the requirement of being “implemented from o/a 2016” to date?

USAID Response (EDUC): Yes. Relevant projects which were active at any time in calendar 2016 will meet the requirement of being “implemented from o/a 2016” to date.

53. Page 147, L.5.2.7(c) Contractor Performance Information: states “For any high-risk award, Offerors must provide point of contact information for the Contracting Officer, Contracting Officer’s Representative, or Project Manager of the Offeror’s two largest, most recently awarded Federal contracts, orders or grants.” Could USAID please clarify what the intent of this is and define “high-risk” as well as provide parameters for size and time frame, to better understand what is classified as the “two largest, most recently awarded Federal contracts?”

USAID Response: The intent of the requested information is to determine the level of performance risk to the Government on future awards. Information requested is for projects or contracts of similar size, scope, and complexity active at any time in calendar 2016 will meet the requirement of being “implemented from o/a 2016” to date.

54. Page 146, L.5.2.7(a)(2) Contractor Performance Information: “For all contracts…not in

CPARS…”. Could USAID please clarify if it wants PPR forms (attachment J.8 to the RFP) for past performance purposes for all projects, including contracts that can be found in

CPARS?

USAID Response: The Offeror will determine the presentation of information in the technical proposal narrative in response to the instructions under this section. Details of past performance reports already in CPARS must be clearly presented to facilitate retrieval by USAID. Any additional information anticipated as an annex must be appropriately cross referenced in the narrative.

55. Page 146, L.5.2.7 (a)-(e) Contractor Performance Information is listed as included in the

25-page limitation of the Technical Approach. However, the section also requests the following: “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to three (3) of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.” Please confirm that all aspects of L.5.2.7 (a)-(d) are part of the annex using Attachment J.8.

USAID Response: The Offeror will determine the presentation of information in the technical proposal narrative in response to the instructions under this section. Any additional information to be included using the attachment referenced in Section L.5.2.7 must be appropriately cross referenced in the narrative.

56. Page 146, L.5.2.7 Contractor Performance Information: Is listed as a part of the main body of the proposal, subject to the 25-page limit. Could USAID please clarify what is to be included within the 25-page limitation related to contractor performance, if anything?

USAID Response: As stated in Section L.5.2.7(a)(1) “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to three (3) of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.” Any information included as Annex in response to instructions under Section L.5.2.7 must be appropriately cross referenced in the technical narrative.

57. Page 146, L.5.2.7 Contractor Performance Information: Is listed as a part of the main body of the proposal, subject to the 25-page limit. Could USAID please clarify what is to be included within the 25-page limitation related to contractor performance, if anything?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 56 above.

58. Page 146, L.5.2.7 (a)-(e) Contractor Performance Information: Please confirm that only L.5.2.7(e) is included in the Technical Approach.

59. Page 146, L.5.2.7 Contractor Performance Information: The RFP indicates that contractor Past Performance information is part of the 25 page limit, yet (a) 1., states: “List in an annex to the Technical Proposal up to three (3) of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.” Would USAID please clarify if we may include this plan in an Annex?

60. Page 146, L.5.2.7(a)(1) Contractor Performance Information: The RFP states to list “up to (3) of the most recent and relevant contracts” in an annex. Could USAID confirm that PPR forms and all other information required in Section L.5.2.7(a) should go in an annex?

61. Page 147, L.5.3 Optional Oral Presentations. Regarding the potential timeline: Is there an estimated time period following the proposal due date in which USAID would expect to hold oral presentations?

USAID Response: There is no estimated time period. As Stated in Section L.5.3 (b) “If the use of oral presentations is determined to be appropriate in the competitive range stage, the CO will notify all of the Offerors within the competitive range of the date and time they are scheduled to give the oral presentation.”

62. Page 148, L.6(b) Instructions for The Preparation of The Cost/Business Proposal: Per the instructions in the RFP, can USAID please confirm that only the cost proposal budget will be presented in Excel, while the remainder of the cost volume (narrative, signed forms, etc.)

may be presented in PDF format?

USAID Response: As stated in Section L.4(b): Electronic submission must be:

● In “unprotected” excel spreadsheets (software versions 2003 or newer) for the budget to allow USAID to view all formulas and calculations; and,

● In both Adobe Acrobat PDF and MS Word (software versions 2003 or newer) for the technical proposal, budget narrative, and all other required documents that form part of the proposal.

● Pages containing signatures should be submitted in Adobe Acrobat PDF format.

63. Page 148, L.6(b) Instructions for The Preparation of The Cost/Business Proposal: In reference to instructions provided in Section L.6, can USAID please confirm how many detailed budget tabs are expected? The instructions in Section L.6(d) could be read to provide 2 detailed tabs (one by major cost element and one showing the breakout between CLINS);

or 5 detailed tabs (one by major cost element, and a detailed budget for each of the 4 CLINs using the illustrative CLIN structure presented on page 149).

USAID Response: As stated in L.6.2(a)(2), the Offeror must provide a summary and detailed budget for each of the following categories:

● broken out by major cost elements as shown in the template provided in Section L.6.2(e) of the RFP, for the contract period; and,

● broken out by contract line items (CLINS), as proposed by the Offeror or in the illustrative structure presented in section L.5.2(a)(3), for the contract period.

Total number of tabs for the CLIN budget category will be determined by the Offeror, consistent with the composition of CLINs proposed.

64. Page 149, L.6.2(a)(3) Illustrative Structure of CLINS: Can USAID please clarify what

Offerors are expected to do in terms of the table presented in Section if Offerors accept the illustrative CLIN structure?

USAID Response: The information in Section L.6.2(a)(3) acts as a guide to Offerors in relation to instructions contained in Sections L.6.2(a)(1) and L.6.2(a)(2) of the RFP.

65. Page 149, Section L.6.2: Part 2 - Proposed Costs/Prices states “Detailed budgets are only required for the Prime Contractor and proposed major subcontractors.” However, page 154, Section L.6.2: Part 2 - Proposed Costs/Prices states “USAID is expecting detailed budget breakdowns for each proposed grantee identified by entity name, indicating description of activities, estimated unit costs, and total estimated amount for each grant.”

Could USAID please confirm that detailed budgets are only required for “major subcontractors,” which are those whose proposed costs exceed 20% of the total proposed ceiling?

USAID Response: In response to instructions contained on page 149 Section L.6.2: Part 2 - Proposed Costs/Prices, detailed budgets are required for “major subcontractors,” which are those whose proposed costs exceed 20% of the total proposed ceiling. Page 154, Section L.6.2: Part 2 - Proposed Costs/Prices refers to information regarding proposed Grants Under Contracts which are identified by entity name accompanied by description of activities, estimated unit costs, and total estimated amount for each grant.

66. Page 154, L.6.2(a)5, Grants Under Contract (GUC) states “USAID is expecting detailed budget breakdowns for each proposed grantee identified by entity name, indicating description of activities, estimated unit costs, and total estimated amount for each grant.” Can USAID please confirm that identification of and detailed budgets for grantees is not required at the time of proposal submission?

USAID Response: If available at the time of proposal submission, Offerors must provide detailed information for each proposed grantee identified by entity name, along with description of proposed technical activities, estimated unit costs, and total estimated amount for each grant.

67. Page 149, Section L.6.2(a)(4): On page 149 of the RFP, Section L.6.2(a)(4) states that the total estimated cost of grants under contract (GUCs) must not exceed 4 percent of total estimated contract cost. However, Section L.6.2(f)(8) states that the total value of all GUCs must not be less than 4 percent of the contract total estimated cost. Can USAID clarify if 4 percent is the minimum or maximum amount for GUCs?

USAID Response: Section L.6.2(a)(4) of the RFP has been amended to state that the “total value of all GUCs must not be less than 4 percent of the contract total estimated cost”.

68. Page 149, L.6.2(a)(4): Indicates GUCs are “not to exceed 4 percent of total estimated contract cost,” while Section L.6.2(f)(8) indicates “the total value of all GUCs must not be less than four percent of the contract total estimated cost.” Can USAID please clarify both the maximum and minimum permissible values for all grants under contract to be awarded under the LEARN to Read Activity?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 67 above.

69. Pages 149 & 154. Grants Under Contract. On page 149, the RFP states, “GUCs total estimated cost must not to exceed 4 percent of total estimated contract cost;”, whereas page 154 indicates, “The total value of all GUCs must not be less than four percent of the contract total estimated cost.” Can USAID please confirm that GUCs should be at least 4% of the total estimated contract cost?

USAID Response:Please see response to Question 67 above.

70. Page 154, L.6.2(a)4, Grants Under Contract (GUC): USAID indicates that “the total value of all GUCs must not be less than four percent of the contract total estimated cost.” However, on page 149, USAID notes that “GUC’s total estimated cost must not to exceed 4 percent of total estimated contract value.” Could USAID please clarify the percentage of the contract value that should be allocated to GUCs?

USAID Response: Please see response to Question 67 above.

71. Page 150, L.6.2(d) Prime Offeror’s Cost or Price Analysis: Prime Offeror’s Cost or Price

Analysis states that “Offerors must submit a copy of the cost/price analysis performed on subcontractor budgets.” Is there a specific format required or will USAID supply one? Please advise.

USAID Response: There is no specific format for this analysis.

72. Page 150, L.6.2(d) Prime Offeror’s Cost or Price Analysis: The prime Offeror must conduct appropriate cost or price analyses to establish the reasonableness of proposed subcontract prices. Offerors must submit a copy of the cost/price analysis performed on subcontractor budgets.” Can USAID please confirm that price analyses and detailed budgets are only required for major subcontractors, as only budgets for major subcontractor are required under the RFP?

USAID Response: Offerors must submit a copy of the cost/price analysis performed on major subcontractor budgets.

73. Page 151-152, L.6.2(e) Illustrative Budget Format: With regards to the budget format included on pages 151 and 152:

(a) “Entitlement Travel” – currently included under the travel section. Typically, we consider this and treat it as an allowance. Is it possible to include in the allowance section instead?

(b) Equipment and supplies Section makes reference to ‘Equipment under $500’ and

‘Equipment over $500’. Please confirm this is meant to read under and over $5,000.

USAID Response:

(a) Offerors may include “Entitlement Travel” under “Allowances” or any other applicable cost category, consistent with their accounting/costing structure.

(b) ‘Equipment under $500’ and ‘Equipment over $500’ is correct.

74. Page 154, L.6.2(f) Training (if any): Items (9) Training and (11) Other Direct Costs reference “training, workshop, conference or similar event” and “Seminars, workshops and conferences,” respectively. Can USAID please distinguish between these two categories of costs?

USAID Response: There is no difference. “Seminars, workshops and conferences,” under Item (11) has been deleted in its entirety. Section L.6.2(f) of the solicitation has been amended accordingly to incorporate the deleted information from item (11).

75. Page 155, L.6.2(f)11 “Monitoring and Evaluation Data Collection. (ADS 203.3.5):“This line item includes the costs of data collection such as the establishment of baseline data, analysis, and reporting as well as any other related costs.” Please confirm whether the offeror will also conduct midline and/or endline data collections.

USAID Response: The offeror must conduct baseline, midline, and endline data collection consistent with the AMELP and the relevant performance indicators specified in the technical approach. Related costs and reporting should be factored as appropriate. Additionally, USAID will use a third party monitoring mechanism to assure performance data and the fidelity of implementation when/as needed.

76. Page 158, L.6.5 (Part 5) Representations, Certifications, and Other statements of

Offerors. The Section K form is not explicitly listed in the requirements. Please confirm that the 3 items listed in L.6.5 (a, b and c) are requirements in addition to the standard Section K form.

USAID Response: Items listed in L.6.5 (a, b and c) are requirements in addition to the standard Section K form.

77. Page 158, L.6.5 Part 5 - Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of

Offerors: Are the Representations and Certifications from major subcontractors required for submission or only the Offeror’s?

USAID Response: Representations and Certifications are required from the Prime Offeror and major subcontractors.

F. RFP SECTION J - ATTACHMENTS

Attachment J.1: STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES

78. Page J-1-1: We respectfully request that USAID provide access to the EGRA datasets used to calculate changes in children’s reading performance between baseline and midterm on NEI+, including the school-level identifiers which will allow the datasets to be merged across the two measurements.

USAID Response: The EGRA result report is not expected until the beginning of April 2021. A copy of the report will be provided to all Offerors through amendment number 02 to the solicitation, to be issued o/a April 7, 2021.

79. Page J.1- 1, Purpose: The section notes the BSDA and SPE program and investments.

(a) Please confirm that USAID has negotiated and reached agreement with the World Bank and GPE for complementary United States Government (USG) Basic Education (BE) activities.

(b) Please provide any parameters for this collaboration that may affect LEARN to Read planning.

USAID Response: The World Bank-funded, Universal Basic Education Commission-implemented Better Education Service Delivery for All (BESDA) activity is keen to complement the LEARN to Read activities. The anticipated new Global Partnership for Education activities are more limited to Adamawa, Katsina, and Oyo states and may or may not overlap at the onset of LEARN to Read. However, there is support at the Ministry of Education and GPE for coordination wherever practicable, including on activities at the federal level.

80. Page J.1- 1, Performance Objectives and Expected Outcomes: This section suggests heavy use of technical assistance across all four objectives.

(a) Please clarify how USAID is defining "technical assistance."

(b) Does this exclude financial support for service delivery activities, materials and training?

(c) Does this include international, local, short and long-term assistance?

(d) Is the project expected to finance master trainer or trainer of trainer training?

USAID Response:(EDU) Offerors are to propose how they see the technical assistance taking shape, which may include international, local, short or long term assistance. However, USAID does not expect to pay for teaching and learning materials under this award. A sustainable training approach should be proposed by the offeror, demonstrating the principles of fostering a journey to self-reliance and reflecting the best mix of assistance appropriate for the context at each level. As a contingency for states with the most underdeveloped early grade reading delivery systems, the offeror can submit a revised budget with justification to USAID after award substantiating why direct investment in discrete service delivery inputs related to teaching and learning materials may be necessary to achieve activity objectives and represents that greatest value for money to USAID. Such requests will be reviewed on a case by case basis.

81. Page J.1- 1, Performance Objective and Expected Outcomes: This section references “all pupils”.

(a) Please clarify what is meant by "all pupils" in grades 1-3.

(b) Does this include G1-3 pupils in government schools, non-government schools, formal schools and/or non-formal schools/center.

(c) If non-formal schools/centers are included, does this refer to students in G1-3 equivalent?

USAID Responses:.

a) “All pupils” includes all students enrolled in grades one to three in the formal school systems in the graduating and in the launching states.. It does not include students enrolled in private schools, non-formal learning centers, madrassas, almajiri, or other forms of Islamic education.

b) The focus of LEARN to Read is on the systems that improve basic education for children in formal schools

c) Non-government schools and non-formal learning centers are not included under the scope of LEARN to Read.

82. Page J.1- 2, 3.1 PO1. With regards to “legacy states”: Has USAID established with the legacy states an agreement that each be prepared to fund the mandatory components?

USAID Response: No, a written agreement does not yet exist. However, USAID is confident that long-existing relationships with Bauchi and Sokoto states and the states’ requests for ongoing assistance to the basic education sector will enable strong continued partnership, commitment and political will to scale early grade reading gains across both states

83. Page J.1- 2, 3.1(a) PO1 “The exact mix of reforms or components in each partner state will be determined in discussions between each legacy state government, USAID, the Contractor and other relevant stakeholders. Nonetheless, the Contractor must be prepared to offer to Bauchi and Sokoto states all of the following mandatory components…”

(a) Is USAID’s expectation that the Activity budget for component activities in the event that state governments are unable to leverage sufficient funding to fulfill these requirements?

(b) Is USAID entering into an MoU with federal and state governments that specifies government resource commitments?

(a) USAID does not expect Offerors to budget for component activities in the event that state governments are unable to leverage desired funds. At the solicitation stage, the Offeror is expected to propose a budget consistent with its approach to provide technical assistance.

(b) Offerors should propose an approach that utilizes available funding from various sources. After award, offerors are expected to negotiate current MoUs with Bauchi and Sokoto states, aligned with each state’s prioritization of available offerings under LEARN to Read. The MOUs will be signed with USAID and outline government resource commitments.

84. Page J.1- 2, 3.1(a) PO1. With regards to funding expectations and priorities: Please clarify which is the expectation of the Activity: 1) to provide the technical assistance to achieve the mandatory components or 2) to fund component activities.

USAID Response:This depends on the status of the states as legacy or otherwise. The focus should be on transitioning the states to long-term independent sustainability. In launching states, USAID anticipates a greater need for the Offeror to fund activities. In the legacy states, to the maximum degree possible, USAID anticipates technical assistance and reading program oversight to represent larger budgetary commitments than funding component activities.

85. Page J.1- 2, Component 1.1: Is the project or the state expected to finance software, hardware and equipment requirements, product/manual development and production and/or piloting activities to strengthen the local data systems?

USAID Response: We look forward to the Offeror’s proposals based on the systems the states have in place.

86. Page J.1- 2, Performance Objective 1: On page J.1 - 2, under Performance Objective 1 the

SOO…