QandA - 72062321R00006 - READ - Round 1.docx

72062321R00006 – Reading for East Africa’s Development (READ)

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS – ROUND 1

Dear Potential Offerors, USAID thanks you for your interest in submitting proposals for the referenced RFP Solicitation. We are pleased to share with you the questions that were submitted as well as the responses from USAID for Round 1.

Where applicable, changes indicated below will be highlighted in the amended RFP solicitation document. Should there be any discrepancies between the responses and the RFP, the responses below will take precedence.

USAID has extended the deadline for submission of the second round of questions and the deadline for submission of proposals. Please see the changes made to the RFP document in Amendment 1, which are highlighted in blue for ease of reference.

We look forward to receiving your proposals!

Questions and Answers

1. Could you please tell me if the Combined Synopsis/Solicitation posted as solicitation number 72062321R00006 will be a follow-on requirement to any work performed currently or in the past, or will this be a new requirement? If possible, can you please provide the most recent contract or task order number?

Answer: The question is unclear to USAID, therefore we are unable to provide a response.

2. I’m a small business __________. I’m interested in this opportunity. Is there an award date?

Answer: There is no firm award date, but we hope to have an award made as soon as possible.

3. Section B.5 (c), page 5, states that fee on Grants Under Contract (GUCs) will not be allowed under this contract. Will USAID consider allowing a separate fee to be charged on GUCs under individual Task Orders resulting from this IDIQ contract, to account for the cost of financing and grants management as well as the additional liability associated with managing GUC programs?

Answer: Fee on GUCs will be negotiated at the Task Order level. The RFP has been amended accordingly.

4. Section B.6.2, page 5, states that unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates (CDRs) apply to all labor (i.e., the prime contractor, subcontractor, Third Country Nationals (“TCNs”), Cooperating Country Nationals (“CCNs”), and consultant salaries) on cost-type Task Orders. However, on page 9, the RFP states that “the Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates apply to expatriate labor (the Prime Contractor, subcontractor, TCNs, and consultant salaries). CCN labor is governed by the Local Compensation Plan limitations.” Can USAID please clarify if CDRs apply to all labor, or to expatriate and TCN labor only with CCN labor falling under LCP limitations?

Answer: CDRs apply to US Citizens. CCN, TCN and other Expatriate labor categories are subject to the respective LCP of the USAID Mission awarding a task order. Approval of TCN and Non-US Expatriate labor rates that exceed the LCP require the approval of the Cognizant Mission Director. The RFP has been amended to exclude CCNs as being covered by the CDR.

5. Section B.8 (pg.10) includes a table for negotiated provisional or predetermined indirect cost rates for the Prime Contractor and their major subcontractors. Would USAID provide further details on how major subcontractors are defined under this contract? Are major subcontractors those organizations expected to perform at least 20% or a prominent part of the technical effort?

Answer: USAID will not approve subcontracts at the IDIQ level. All subcontracts will be approved at the Task Order level. USAID is not requesting subcontracts with proposals. The RFP has been amended accordingly.

6. In the list of indicators starting on page 24, the first two indicators for IR 2: Strengthened Basic Education Systems for Improved Instruction, Increased Resilience and Greater Sustainability (ES.1-45 and ES.1-49) are not systems-level indicators and seem to match the activities listed under IR 1 better. Would USAID consider moving indicators ES.1-45 and ES.1-49 under IR 1, with regard to the following activity under IR 1, “Develop materials and teaching and learning approaches appropriate and accessible to children with disabilities”?

Answer: USAID would consider including the indicators under IR 1.

7. In the list of required indicators, SUPP-10, SUPP-17 and SUPP-14 are listed under multiple intermediate results. Could USAID please clarify under which IR each of these 3 indicators should be included in the logical framework section of the case study, or if offerors are supposed to include these indicators under multiple IRs?

Answer: USAID asks that offerors decide where indicators fit best in accordance with their technical proposal.

8. Page 113 states that the cover page is included in the 45-page limit for the technical proposal. Would USAID consider excluding the cover page from the page limit?

Answer: The cover page does not count against the page limit. The RFP has been amended to reflect this change.

9. In Section L.9.(b).6, USAID notes that the Past Performance Factor 2 is included in the 45 page limit for the technical proposal, but also indicates that offerors should provide information on up to five of their most recent and relevant contracts in an annex to the technical proposal using Attachment J.3 – Past Performance Matrix. We have three clarifying questions related to this point:

a. Please confirm that offerors should provide the five recent and relevant contract examples in an annex to the technical proposal that does not count against the overall 45 page limit.

Answer: Past Performance documentation may be included in a separate annex not counting against the 45-page limit.

b. Does USAID intend for offerors to provide information on c) quality awards or certifications and d) performance in using small business concerns in the body of the technical proposal, or in an annex to the technical proposal that does not count against the overall 45 page limit?

Answer: Offerors may provide this information in an annex that will not count toward the 45-page limit. The amended RFP reflects this change.

c. Please confirm what past performance information, if any, should be included in the body of the technical proposal, counting against the 45 page limit.

Answer: All past performance information should be included in a separate annex. Including a past performance summary in the technical proposal is optional and will count against the 45 page limit. Offerors are encouraged to supply or reference Past Performance information contained in the CPARs system where possible.

10. Please confirm that offerors may include past performance references for major subcontractors among the 5 most recent and relevant past performance contract examples.

Answer: USAID will not approve subcontracts at the IDIQ level. All subcontracts will be approved at the Task Order level. USAID is not requesting subcontracts with proposals. The RFP has been amended accordingly.

11. Please confirm that offerors may include both contracts and cooperative agreements as past performance references.

Answer: Offerors may include both contracts and cooperative agreements as past performance references as long as the references are relevant and recent (ended not more than three years ago).

12. Page 115 of the RFP, where USAID discusses what must be included in the “performance in using small business concerns” section, states “To supplement the narrative summary in (A), provide a list of the recent contracts [CO to establish the number of “recent” contracts and/or the timeframe for “recent” while keeping in mind that the number of reports could be significant over an extended period of time] for which you submitted subcontract reports to eSRS (FAR 52.219-9(d)(10).” Can USAID please clarify the number and timeframe for “recent” contracts, for which offerors should provide a list of subcontract reports submitted to eSRS?

Answer: Offerors are expected to provide no less than three contracts that ended no more than three years ago. USAID has clarified this in the amended RFP.

13. On page 116 of the RFP, USAID states that "Although the Offeror may provide Capabilities Statements for the Offeror, Contractor Teaming arrangement, if any, the Offeror must summarize and highlight these capabilities in this section." Please confirm that offerors may include capabilities statements from consortium partners as an annex to the technical proposal, but that these capabilities must be summarized in Factor 4 - Technical and Capability Expertise.

Answer: Consortium partners capabilities statements should be brief and included in the Technical Application and will count against the 45-page limit.

14. On page 116, USAID requests that offerors describe their experience and capability to “manage small-scale construction sub-contracts.” Does USAID anticipate that task orders under the READ IDIQ may include construction of schools or other small-scale construction work?

Answer: USAID has removed this language in Amendment 1 to the RFP. Task Orders that involve construction will include the appropriate language.

15. On page 116, USAID states that the annexes “includes the past performance matrix and other supplemental information to support a proposal.” Can USAID please clarify what “other supplemental information” offerors are required or permitted to provide as annexes to support our proposals?

Answer: Please disregard the reference to, “other supplemental information”; any annexes should only contain information requested and defined in the RFP and associated amendments (if any). Amendment 1 to the RFP removes this reference.

The following questions pertain to Attachments J.5 and J.6 of the RFP (Case Studies for Large and Small Businesses), and request additional detail regarding the assumptions offerors may make to inform their development of the Factor 3 section of the Technical Proposal:

16. Can offerors assume that the host country for the RFTOP issued by the Mission has implemented a USAID READ early grade reading program for at least five years?

Answer: USAID leaves the choice of assumptions to offerors when responding to the case studies. However, all assumptions used to respond to the case study must clearly be stated.

17. Can offerors assume relevant government agencies in the host country have been actively engaged in READ implementation, and therefore have an existing set of knowledge and skills related to typical READ program concepts and content?

Answer: USAID leaves the choice of assumptions to offerors when responding to the case studies. However, all assumptions used to respond to the case study must clearly be stated.

18. Can offerors assume that policies, curricula and basic resources to support pre-primary and primary program implementation are already in use to some extent?

Answer: USAID leaves the choice of assumptions to offerors when responding to the case studies. However, all assumptions used to respond to the case study must clearly be stated.

19. Can offerors assume that policies and strategies for COVID-19 crisis response exist and have been in use in the host country?

Answer: USAID leaves the choice of assumptions to offerors when responding to the case studies. However, all assumptions used to respond to the case study must clearly be stated.

20. Can offerors assume that English is not the mother tongue of most students? If so, at what level is English introduced as the language of instruction? Or is it an instructional content area throughout the primary level?

Answer: USAID leaves the choice of assumptions to offerors when responding to the case studies. However, all assumptions used to respond to the case study must clearly be stated.

21. Page 5, Section B.5. Fixed-Fee Ceiling (c). Based on the statement that “Fee on GUCs will not be allowed under this contract,” and the fact that GUCs carry significant performance and default risk, making them vulnerable to potential unallowable costs, would USAID reconsider the restriction of applying fee on GUC costs?

Answer: Fee on GUCs will be negotiated at the Task Order level. The RFP has been amended accordingly.

22. Page 5, B.6.2.(ii) Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates (CDR). Would USAID please reconsider the inclusion of consultant and staff rates in a single pool and instead separate consultant CDRs from staff/employee CDRs, to prevent CDRs from being artificially higher than would otherwise be necessary?

Answer: Note that for cost type Task Orders, IDIQ Holders will still have to support the proposed salaries for consultants and staff. The CDRs are ceilings only. Therefore, the ceilings being artificially higher because of consultant rates will not impact the cost of individual Task Orders. For purposes of evaluating proposals received in response to this RFP, please remember that technical factors are significantly more important than cost factors.

23. Page 5, B.6.2 (iii) and (iv) Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates (CDR). Could we kindly request that the restrictions in (iii) and (iv) not be applied to consultants as consultant rates are inclusive of costs in addition to salary?

Answer: Additional costs pertaining to consultants may be included separately in individual Task Orders.

24. Page 7, B.6.2 (v) and (vi) Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates (CDR). Would USAID clarify if the four labor categories at the top of page 7 are illustrative?

Answer: These labor categories are the labor categories that will be included in resulting IDIQs, and Task Orders awarded under the IDIQ. Offerors will be bound by these rates, unless a Task Order Contracting Officer waives the requirements (see Page 9 of the RFP). USAID has added the flexibility to ask for additional positions not covered by the labor categories, but these will be Task Order specific, and all requirements for these positions will be indicated in individual RFTOPs.

25. Page 7, B.6.2 (v) and (vi) Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates (CDR). Would USAID allow the offeror to add positions and levels?

Answer: USAID will not permit this.

26. Page 9, Section B.6.2. Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates (CDR), (vii)Notes, Note 3: Locally Hired National Personnel or Other Non-U.S. Expatriate Rates. The factors noted for consideration in determining salaries for individual locally hired personnel and other non-U.S. expatriates under this Contract and any resulting subcontract notes the inclusion of and recent relevant salary history as a determining factor. Since USAID officially changed its approach to establishing compensation, as of October 2019, to a market-based approach, can USAID clarify the appropriate combination of factors for determining salaries?

Answer: USAID has removed “recent salary history” as a factor to consider and added “organizational policy.”

27. Page 12, C.1. Purpose. The RFP’s notes that the purpose is to “improve student learning outcomes, particularly but not limited to reading outcomes in the primary grades.” Would USAID please specify what other priority learning outcomes are anticipated, in addition to reading?

Answer: Additional priority learning outcomes will be determined by Missions in East Africa based on evolving country needs and opportunities.

28. Page 14, C.3. Objective. Would USAID confirm whether IDIQ holders that bid on a Task Order focused on evaluation/analysis, design or activities leading to the design of a Task Order for project implementation will be precluded from bidding on the project implementation Task Order?

Answer: Conflicts of interest such as these will be Task Order specific, depending on the Task Order Contracting Officer’s review of the circumstances, and in line with ADS 303mbm (https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1868/302mbm.pdf). All conflict of interest information will be clearly indicated in RFTOPs.

29. Page 15, C.4. Statement of Work. Would USAID please specify the “secondary effects” of COVID that USAID would like the IDIQ to address?

Answer: The term “secondary effects of COVID” describes effects beyond those related to health effects. Secondary effects may include but are not limited to COVID’s negative impact on access to education, for example.

30. Page 16, C.5. Results. Could USAID clarify if the four levels identified for simultaneous intervention--(1) teaching and learning in the classroom, (2) effective school management, (3) national policy and structural reforms to support school and classroom level changes, and (4) engagement and accountability by communities and the public at large-- were intended to or if these should be adjusted?

Answer: The question is unclear to USAID; therefore, we are unable to provide a response.

31. Page 19, C.6.1. Partnerships for Sustainability. The RFP references “co-financing” by key country counterparts, would USAID please clarify expectations? If an MOE allocates its routine, annual in-service teacher training budget to support USAID’s reading program, is this considered co-financing? Or is co-financing considered resourcing goods and services over that which is already budgeted and/or provided by the MOE?

Answer: Please provide the rationale to USAID for the type of co-financing that should be considered.

32. Page 20, C.6.1. Partnerships for Sustainability. Where the RFP states “It will also be important to have a broad monitoring system that will ensure the collection, compilation, and dissemination of results from and to all partners in the country,” could USAID clarify whose monitoring system is being referred to—the Mission’s, the MOE’s, the project’s? Does USAID envisage establishing a comprehensive M&E reporting systems for all donors?

Answer: Monitoring systems will be more clearly defined at the Task Order level.

33. Page 22, C.7. Performance Monitoring and Performance and Impact Evaluations. Based on the statement “In instances when performance monitoring data supports performance and impact evaluations, design and measurement issues need to be coordinated with parties undertaking the evaluation,would USAID please clarify the status of external evaluators? Are agreements in place with external evaluators for the anticipated Task Orders?

Answer: There are no agreements currently in place with external evaluators for anticipated task orders or contracts.

34. Pages 28 and 32, F.3. Place of Performance, (c) Request for Task Order Proposal (RFTOP). Would USAID please identify the other countries that may be included in the IDIQ, in addition to the eight countries and Regional Mission listed?

Answer: Only the Missions listed are currently included in the IDIQ.

35. Page 44-67. Are GUCs being considered for Task Order’s under this IDIQ? If they are, does USAID plan on including the standard GUC language under Section H of the RFP?

Answer: GUCs will need to be authorized under each TO issued as there may be TOs issued by USAID bilateral missions.

36. Page 114, Section L.9. (b).6, Past Performance and page 116, Section L.9., (b).9 Annexes Could USAID please clarify that Past Performance is to be included as a technical annex and does not count against the 45-page limitation of the technical proposal?

Answer: The prime may submit up to five Past Performance references as an annex which will not count against the 45-page limit.

37. Page 114, Section L.9. Past Performance. The RFP states listing in the Past Performance Matrix annex “up to five of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal” – Would USAID clarify whether each partner may include up to 5 contracts or whether five is the total for the consortium?

Answer: Each consortium partner may submit up to five contracts.

38. Page 114, Section L.9. Past Performance. For the Past Performance Matrix annex, would USAID please confirm whether Cooperative Agreements may be included or whether it is reserved only for Contracts?

Answer: Offerors may include both contracts and cooperative agreements as past performance references as long as the references are relevant and recent (ended not more than three years ago).

39. Page 115, Section L. Case study. Can USAID please confirm that if fewer than 25 pages are used for the Technical Case Study, those pages can be applied to other component of the technical proposal with total pages not exceeding 45?

Answer: No, this will not be permitted.

40. Page 115, Section L. Case study. Would USAID please clarify whether the RFP is referring to USAID’s Result Framework when it requests a “logical framework” or could a template or description of the required contents of a logical framework be provided?

Answer: USAID will not provide any templates in relation to the case study response.

41. Page 116, Section L.9. Annexes. The RFP states that Annexes include the past performance matrix and “other supplemental information to support a proposal.” Could USAID please indicate the type of supplemental information would USAID like to see in the annex?

Answer: Please disregard the reference to, “other supplemental information”; any annexes should only contain information requested and defined in the RFP and associated amendments (if any). Amendment 1 to the RFP removes this reference.

42. Page 132, Attachment J.5 – Case Study (Large Businesses). Could USAID specify the learning outcomes to be addressed under the Task Order?

Answer: No, USAID will not provide this information. There is no task order to be awarded at this stage.

43. Page 132, Attachment J.5 – Case Study (Large Businesses). Can additional information be provided to help us better understand the large business case study? Could the government entity with which USAID has an agreement be clarified or does the hypothetical Mission expect the Implementing Partner to negotiate agreements among the various government organizations named on USAID’s behalf?

Answer: Offeror to clearly state assumptions used to develop this aspect of the case study.

44. Page 132, Attachment J.5-Case Study (Large Businesses). Would USAID please confirm whether six million is the total number of students in Grades 1-6 nationally in the subject country for the case study?

Answer: There are 6 million public primary school learners in grades 1-6.

45. Page 132, Attachment J.5 – Case Study (Large Businesses). Could USAID confirm that the official language of instruction in Grades 1-6 is English?

Answer: For the purposes of the case study, English is the official language of instruction.

46. Cost Template. In relation to the questions regarding Section B above, the provided cost template includes both US staff and TCN consultants. Should offerors use the same unburdened ceiling daily rate for both employees, which typically have lower rates plus fringe, and consultants, which typically have higher rates and no fringe?

Answer: Yes.

47. Reference Sections B.2 Contract Type and Services (Page 4) and L.10. Instructions For The Preparation Of The Cost/Business Proposals, Part 2 – Proposed Costs/Prices (2) Cost Template, (page 117). Many potential prime offerors perform solely on a fixed price basis and may be unable to meet the cost requirements for submission as a Prime. Given this RFP is anticipated to result in a multi-award IDIQ, under which task orders may be one of multiple contract types, including FFP, would USAID be amenable to changing the cost requirements to allow firms to forgo submitting cost information at the IDIQ provided that, if selected for award, those firms are either (1) only eligible to submit on FFP task orders, or (2) must submit cost information, in accordance with Section L.10, if bidding on cost-type task orders. Such an approach, which has been successfully utilized by other Federal agencies, would allow USAID to maximize competition and establish a pool of the most qualified vendors for this IDIQ.

Answer: USAID cannot consider this as it is a mandated requirement. Those selected for IDIQ awards will have a fair opportunity to compete on any task orders they choose.

If USAID is amenable to this approach, please confirm that offerors electing to propose in this manner may submit their pricing in a format different from Attachments J.1 and J.2 and may submit alternative information substantiating price reasonableness documentation/justification in lieu of a cost breakdown?

Answer: Please see response to the first part of this question.

48. Reference Section L.10. Instructions For The Preparation Of The Cost/Business Proposals, Part 2 – Proposed Costs/Prices, (c) Indirect Costs (page 118). The RFP states, “The Offeror must include a complete copy of its most current NICRA or other documentation from its cognizant Government Audit Agency, if any…. If the Offeror does not have a cognizant Government Audit Agency, the proposal must include…Audited balance sheets and profit and loss statements.. and…The most recent two fiscal year pool and base cost compositions.” As some offerors perform solely on a firm-fixed-price basis, utilizing pricing methodologies that are not based on a cost buildup; can USAID confirm the requirement to provide NICRA documentation is not applicable to offerors who will perform solely on a firm-fixed-price basis?

Answer: Offerors are not required to provide NICRA documentation if they do not have NICRA documentation. Offerors may provide audited balance sheets and profit & loss statements to support a proposed indirect rate.

49. Section B.5(c) on page 5 of the RFP states that “Fee on GUCs will not be allowed under this contract.” This appears to be inconsistent with FAR 15.404-4 and ADS 302.3.6.9, which state, inter alia, that pre-negotiation fee objectives must be determined according to a structured approach that considers contractor effort, risk, and other special factors. Grants require significant effort to administer and carry risks for the contractor. Additionally, the statutory underpinnings of fixed fee at 10 USC 2306(d) and 41 USC 254(b) discusses fee definitions and limitations in terms of total estimated cost, which would include grants in this case. Given these factors, we respectfully request that USAID reconsider its agency pre-negotiation fee objective of zero percent on grants and allow offerors to charge fee under task orders to be issued under this IDIQ that is reasonable and consistent with federal regulations.

Answer: Fee on GUCs will be negotiated at the Task Order level. The RFP has been amended accordingly.

50. Section B.6.2(vi) on page 7, the RFP states: “For the mid-level Project Officer category, the requirement calls for at least 2 years in senior management position.” Can USAID confirm whether 2 years of project management experience can be substituted for senior level management experience?

Answer: USAID has amended the RFP to change the requirement from “senior-level management experience” to “project management experience.”

51. Section B.6.2, Item (vi) Definition of Labor Categories on pages 7 through 9. The definition of senior-level for the Technical Specialist category includes a provision for a candidate who holds a Bachelor’s degree plus 15 years of experience. Would USAID consider adding a similar provision to the Project Officer and Finance Officer categories, to allow for those senior-level labor categories to encompass individuals who have earned their Bachelor’s degree and also accrued sufficient experience to be considered “senior”?

Answer: USAID will respectfully not consider this request.

52. Section B.8 on page 10 of the RFP states: “Pending establishment of revised provisional or final indirect cost rates, allowable indirect costs must be reimbursed on the basis of the following negotiated provisional or predetermined rates and the appropriate bases for Prime Contractors and their major subcontractors.” Could USAID please provide the definition of “major subcontractor” that should be used for this proposal?

Answer: USAID will not approve subcontracts at the IDIQ level. All subcontracts will be approved at the Task Order level. USAID is not requesting subcontracts with proposals. The RFP has been amended accordingly.

53. Sections D.3; F.6.1(c)B(v); and L.11 on RFP pages 26; 34–35; and 122–123 includes the following references:

D.3: Successful Offerors must submit a Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan for this Contract within five working days of being notified their Offer has been accepted by USAID. The Contractor will follow the approved plan during implementation of the Contract unless a waiver is requested and approved by the Contracting Officer.

F.6.1(c)B(v): Branding and Marking [This is a list of information to be supplied by USAID per task order]

L.11: The Offeror shall develop a BIP that describes how the program will be communicated to and with the host country population… The Offerors will develop a Marking Plan that enumerates the public communications, commodities, and program materials and other items that visibly bear or will be marked with USAID Identity…

Please confirm that the BIP/MP will cover the general branding/marking requirements at the IDIQ-level only? Also confirm that contractors will be expected to submit specific branding/marking documents for eventual task order contracts.

Answer: USAID confirms both points raised. However, USAID has extended the requirement for the successful offeror to submit a plan for the IDIQ Contract within five working days of being notified their Offer has been accepted by USAID

54. Section L.9.a on page 112 of the RFP states: “Visuals, footnotes, and headers/footers may be presented in at least 10-point font size.” Would USAID allow visuals, footnotes and headers/footers to be submitted in 9-point font size?

Answer: No, USAID respectfully will not consider this request.

55. Section L.9.a on page 112 of the RFP states: “All required aspects of the technical proposal as noted below must be combined into a single PDF.” Further, Section L.9(b)6(a)1 on page 114 states: “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five of the most recent and relevant contracts* for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.” Due to the size of the information required for the Past Performance Matrix, would USAID allow offerors to submit J.3 – Past Performance Matrix in MS Excel format as a separate attachment and annex to the technical proposal volume?

Answer: Yes, USAID will allow for this. The RFP has been amended accordingly with instructions to provide past performance information as Annex 1 to proposals, which will not be included in the page limitation.

56. Section L.9(b)5 on pages 113 of the RFP states: “The Offeror’s technical approach must describe how the Offeror intends to integrate principles of gender equality and female empowerment...”. Since this is in the section describing Management, please confirm that this text refers to the Management section and not technical approach.

Answer: This bullet has been removed from the requirements.

57. Section L.9.b.6.a.1 on page 114 of the RFP states: “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five of the most recent and relevant contracts* for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.” Please confirm that the “annex” referenced is the past performance matrix.

Answer: That is correct. The RFP has been amended accordingly with instructions to provide past performance information as Annex 1 to proposals, which will not be included in the page limitation.

58. Section L.9.b.6.a.1 on page 114 of the RFP states: “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five of the most recent and relevant contracts* for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.” The asterisk (*) after the word “contracts” does not appear to have a footnote or reference. Please provide the text, footnote, or reference for this asterisk.

Answer: We apologize for the confusion. The asterisk has been removed.

59. Section L.9.b.6 (a) and L.9.b.6 (a) 1 on page 114 of the RFP states: “ The offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) must provide performance information for itself, the contractor teaming arrangements, if any…” and List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five of the most recent and relevant contracts* for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.”

a. Would USAID allow offerors to include all Factor 2 past performance information required under L.9.b.6, in addition to the Past Performance Matrix, as an annex to the Technical Proposal that is not subject to the page limitation?

Answer: That is correct. The RFP has been amended accordingly with instructions to provide past performance information as Annex 1 to proposals, which will not be included in the page limitation.

b. Please confirm that the information submitted in Factor 2 Past Performance should be for the prime only and not for proposed consortium members.

Answer: Members of a consortium will all be considered prime members. Therefore, past performance information must be submitted for members.

c. If USAID would like to see past performance information for all members of a consortium, to allow offers sufficient room to present all members of a consortium, please confirm that this information may be provided as an annex to the technical without page limitations.

Answer: The RFP has been amended with instructions to provide past performance information as Annex 1 to proposals, which will not be included in the page limitation.

d. If USAID would like to see past performance information for all members of a consortium, please confirm the specific information that is required for consortium members that are subcontractors.

Answer: Please see response to (b) of this question. The RFP has been amended with instructions to provide past performance information as Annex 1 to proposals, which will not be included in the page limitation.

60. In Section L.9.b.6.a on page 114 of the RFP, Item 1 states: “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five of the most recent and relevant contracts* for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.” Item 2 states: “For all contracts listed above that are not in CPARS, provide a list of contact names, job titles, mailing addresses, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, explanation of relevance to the proposed acquisition and a description of the performance to include…”. In addition to contracts, would USAID allow grants and cooperative agreements to be submitted as recent and relevant experience listed in the Past Performance Annex or the listing for those not in CPARs?

Answer: Offerors may include both contracts and cooperative agreements as past performance references as long as the references are relevant and recent (ended not more than three years ago).

61. Section L.9.b.6.d (3) (B) on page 115 states: “To supplement the narrative summary in (A), provide a list of the recent contracts [CO to establish the number of “recent” contracts and/or the timeframe for “recent” while keeping in mind that the number of reports could be significant over an extended period of time] for which you submitted subcontract reports to eSRS (FAR 52.219-9(d)(10) and a copy of any similarly recent subcontracting reports if they were not submitted to eSRS.” Please confirm that offerors should submit up to five recent contracts that were submitted to eSRS and that “recent” means those submitted to eSRS over the past three years.

Answer: Offerors are expected to provide no less than three contracts that ended no more than three years ago. USAID has clarified this in the amended RFP.

62. Section L.10, Part 7 on page of the RFP 121 states: “The Offeror and major subcontractors must provide SF LLL Disclosure of Lobbying Activities. See Attachment J.4.” Please confirm that the SF LLL Disclosure of Lobbying Activities is only required for the prime contractor. If not, would USAID please provide the definition of major subcontractor?

Answer: USAID will not approve subcontracts at the IDIQ level. All subcontracts will be approved at the Task Order level. USAID is not requesting subcontracts with proposals. The RFP has been amended accordingly.

63. The J.2 Cost Template prompts offerors to insert, in Cell E8, a CDR for “Senior-Level” “Administrative Support;” however, Section B.6.2(v) on page 7 of the RFP and the J.1 Labor Categories spreadsheet do not include a Senior Level Administrative Support category – only Mid-Level. Can USAID please confirm that Cell C8 of the J. 2 Cost Template should indicate “Mid-Level” and that offerors should enter the Mid-Level Administrative Support CDR in Cell E8?

Answer: This position was omitted from Section B.6.2(v) and (vi) by design. USAID does not envision the need for senior level administrative support. The cost template has been updated accordingly, to remove the senior level administrative support position.

64. Section 2.(2)(d) Cost Template Instructions on page 120 of the RFP indicates that “Offerors must use their latest provisional indirect cost rate for the cost template,” while Attachment J.2 – Cost Template Instructions on page 131 of the RFP indicates that “The Offeror will complete the Cost Template Excel spreadsheet by including the proposed unburdened ceiling daily rates reflected in the Attachment J.1, ‘Labor Categories.’ The Prime Offeror will also include its indirect and proposed fixed fee percentage ceilings in the Excel spreadsheet.” Can USAID please clarify whether the J.2 Cost Template should be completed using the Offeror’s current provisional indirect rates or their proposed ceiling indirect rates?

Answer: Offerors must use their proposed ceiling indirect rates. The RFP and cost template have been updated accordingly.

65. Cell D24 of the Attachment J.2 Cost Template prompts offerors to insert the fringe rate applicable to [CCN] Personnel labor costs, and Cell B20 indicates that a rate should only be included “if approved in NICRA, or supported by other documentation, e.g. audited accounts).” NICRAs typically do not express a fringe rate applicable to [CCN]labor costs, as organizations estimate local fringe costs as direct costs, based on specific information pertaining to the particular country in which the [CCN] personnel are to be employed, such as local labor laws and market data, in addition to organization cost-accounting practices and personnel policies for LN employees and any guidance and limitations provided by the client. Should we then leave Cell D24 blank? Or to ensure consistency across offers, would USAID consider removing Row 24?

Answer: USAID accepts this logic and has removed Row D24 from the cost template.

66. Cell F32 of the Attachment J.2 Cost Template indicates that “Subcontractors” costs total $35,000, but Cell E58 indicates that the applicable Subcontractors cost total for calculating Subcontract Handling is $180,000. Should these amounts be the same?

Answer: Apologies for this inconsistency, the cost template has been updated accordingly. The subcontract amount should be $35,000.

67. Section M.2 for Factor 4(a) on page 128 of the RFP states: “Experience and Ability to Plan Similar Projects: Ability to manage similar education projects involving assembling and supporting teams in the field to work effectively with varied stakeholders toward shared and complementary objectives in the energy sector.” Could USAID please clarify if the reference to the energy sector is an error and not a part of the evaluation criteria for the READ IDIQ? If so, could USAID please correct this language in the evaluation criteria?

Answer: The word “energy” is in error, the correct word should be “education.” The RFP has been amended accordingly.

68. Section M.2 for Factor 4 on page 128 of the RFP states: “USAID will evaluate the Offeror’s demonstrated ability to propose innovative and viable solutions for addressing the multiple challenges faced by countries with varying levels of power sector development and private sector experience, including through use of Grants Under Contract.” Could USAID please clarify if the reference to power sector development is an error and not a part of the evaluation criteria for the READ IDIQ? If so, could USAID please correct this language in the evaluation criteria?

Answer: The word “power” is in error, the correct word should be “education.” The RFP has been amended accordingly.

69. With respect to the case study (Attachments J.5 and J.6), should we assume that anything not mentioned does not exist? Or should we assume that this country (like all target countries for this IDIQ) have had one or two previous USAID programs, and as a result, some relevant aspects of the country’s education system (such as grade-level reading standards or revisions to the language curriculum, for example) may have been supported by previous USAID programs? When USAID says that “investments over the last five years have not improved student learning,” is that meant to indicate that the government has not had USAID (or other donor) support in the recent past?

Answer: USAID leaves the choice of assumptions to offerors when responding to the case studies. However, all assumptions used to respond to the case study must clearly be stated.

70. In Attachment J.5, USAID states: “The new basic education activity will be designed and implemented in collaboration with the host- government through the Ministry of Education (MOE) and other relevant line ministries, parastatal institutions, and development partners.” Should offerors assume that this case study incorporates an inception period (i.e., that offerors will be part of the design process with the government)? Or should we assume that USAID and the government will collaboratively design the activity before the implementer is selected?

Answer: USAID leaves the choice of assumptions to offerors when responding to the case studies. However, all assumptions used to respond to the case study must clearly be stated.

71. With respect to Attachment J.5, could USAID clarify the number of school subjects in which students’ performance should improve? Is USAID looking for a program that improves reading outcomes (in local language and/or English) or one that improves learning outcomes in all subjects in which children attend classes (or something in between)? In the latter case, could USAID indicate the number of subjects included in the Grade 1-6 curriculum of the case study country (and ideally identify the subjects)?

Answer: USAID leaves the choice of assumptions to offerors when responding to the case studies. However, all assumptions used to respond to the case study must clearly be stated.

72. As USAID knows, in many past (or ongoing) education projects in East Africa, these projects have funded the printing and distribution of teaching and learning materials. If, in the question above, USAID’s goal is for offerors to support the government to improve learning outcomes in all subjects in Grades 1-6 (plus pre-primary and accelerated learning programs), will USAID confirm that the project USAID is looking to design will pay for the printing and distribution of any textbooks associated with achieving this goal?

Answer: USAID cannot confirm this.

73. RFP Section B.5 on page 5 states that no fee/profit can be proposed or received for grants under contract. This appears to be inconsistent with FAR 15.404-4 and ADS 302.3.6.9, which state that pre-negotiation fee objectives must be determined according to a structured approach that considers contractor effort, risk, and other special factors. Grants require significant effort to administer and carry risks for the contractor. Additionally, the statutory underpinnings of fixed fee at 10 USC 2306(d) and 41 USC 254(b) discuss fee definitions and limitations in terms of total estimated cost, which would include grants in this case. Given this, we respectfully request that USAID reconsider its agency pre-negotiation fee objective of zero percent on grants and allow offerors to charge a fee that is reasonable and consistent with federal regulations.

Answer: Fee on GUCs will be negotiated at the Task Order level. The RFP has been amended accordingly.

74. For the purposes of indirect cost rate application in Attachment J.2, Cost Template, will USAID please confirm whether all U.S. labor in the cost template should be considered short- or long-term personnel?

Answer: All US labor in the template should be considered short-term personnel.

75. Attachment J.2, Cost Template, includes a senior-level administrative support position; however this position is omitted from RFP sections B.6.2(v) and (vi). Will USAID please update Sections B.6.2(v) and (vi) to include this position and its qualifications?

Answer: Offerors must use their proposed ceiling indirect rates. The RFP and cost template have been updated accordingly.

76. Does USAID anticipate inception periods in task orders under the READ IDIQ?

Answer: As this IDIQ may involve USAID Mission specific TOs, any requirement for inception periods will be country/task order specific based on the TO SOW.

77. Does USAID anticipate including crisis modifiers in contracts for task orders issued under the READ IDIQ? Does USAID intend to allow for programmatic pivots and related adjustments to targets in response to instances of school closures or unknown secondary impacts of COVID-19 or environmental or climatic shocks or disasters?

Answer: The need for such provisions will be determined by individual Missions that issue task orders.

78. Does USAID anticipate interventions that include infrastructure given that learning environments may need to be made more bearable, such as structures that provide shade? Or infrastructure that supports multi-channel, multi-modal delivery of instruction for continuation of service despite certain disruptions, shocks, or stressors?

Answer: Any construction/infrastructure will be specific to the respective Scope of Work for individual task orders.

79. Does USAID plan to provide standard guidance for cost effectiveness analyses that ensures methodologies account for contextual variables, such as maturity of national education reform, years of early grade reading program implementation, language ecology, and class sizes?

Answer: USAID cannot provide any guidance on this question at this time.

80. Can a company bid for all countries if it has the capability or do you advise that we major on some that best suit the company?

Answer: Individual Task Orders will be subject to the fair opportunity clauses of the respective IDIQ.

81. Section L.2 (pg 113) states that “Unless other methods (e.g., electronic commerce or facsimile) are permitted in the solicitation, proposals and modifications to proposals shall be submitted in paper media in sealed envelopes or packages (i) addressed to the office specified in the solicitation, and (ii) showing the time and date specified for receipt, the solicitation number, and the name and address of the offeror. Offerors using commercial carriers should ensure that the proposal is marked on the outermost wrapper with the information in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (c)(1)(ii) of this provision” which is contradiction to section L.7 (PG. 117) Proposals must be submitted electronically. The electronic version of proposals must be sent by Internet email, with attachments compatible with Adobe Acrobat (PDF) and Microsoft Office 2010 in a Microsoft Windows environment to the following addresses: PKollars@USAID.Gov, and EMailu@USAID.Gov. Each email must not exceed 20mb in size and all files are to be in PDF except for cost spreadsheets, which are to be provided as Microsoft Excel files with cell formulas intact. All emails containing proposal files should, in the address line, state 72062321R00006 Technical or Cost Proposal, email no. “X of Y.” When sending proposals by multiple emails, please indicate in the subject line whether the email relates to the technical or cost proposal, and the desired sequence of multiple emails, if more than one is sent (e.g. “Technical Proposal, Part 1 of 3”). Email is the only method for submitting proposals. An email submission received before the submission deadline by either contact listed above will be considered received. Zip files are not permitted. Kindly clarify the submission.

Answer: In line with the exception allowed by this mandatory language, “unless other language…” USAID will only accept electronic submission of technical and cost proposals as per the instructions in L.7.

82. In the cover letter for the solicitation, USAID indicates that it “discourages the use of exclusive agreements with international or regional/local organizations or individuals as this limits USAID’s ability to receive the best services.” Could USAID please provide clarity on how it defines “international” organizations?

Answer: International organizations are those that are not headquartered in the East African region that comprises the place of performance of this IDIQ.

83. On page 114, Section L.9.(b).6.(a), the solicitation indicates that Past Performance is included within the page limits, but then requests that offerors should include PPRs in an annex. What does USAID expect to be included within the page limit for this section?

Answer: The RFP has been amended with instructions to provide past performance information as Annex 1 to proposals, which will not be included in the page limitation.

84. On page 114 Section L.9.(b).6.(d)—does USAID wish to include the narrative for small business use within the page limitations or can this also be included in a past performance annex?

Answer: This information may be included in the Past Performance Annex.

85. Would USAID please clarify the “timeframe” for recent contracts for which offerors submitted an eSRS, and the number of contracts? In addition, would USAID allow these reports to be included in a past performance annex?

Answer: Offerors are expected to provide no less than three contracts that ended no more than three years ago. USAID has clarified this in the amended RFP. This information may be included in the Past Performance Annex.

86. Under SOW page 16, the solicitation references that an activity could include: “Provision of appropriate technology to support learning, training, and data collection, with a particular focus on combating the secondary effects of COVID-19.” Does appropriate technology include assistive technology?