20181107_PCEP_solicitation_Q&A_Amendment_01_Final.pdf

(x)

72066818R00002 x x copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted ; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT

THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted , such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

x

N/A

Not Applicable

720668

00000 Washington DC 20521-4420 4420 Juba Place USAID/South Sudan

11/07/20180001

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) is not extended.is extended, Items 8 and 15, and returning

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended , by one of the following methods: (a) By completing

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

FACILITY CODE CODE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6)CODE 6. ISSUED BY

PAGE OF PAGES

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.3. EFFECTIVE DATE2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

08/06/2018

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority) appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return __________________ copies to the issuing office.

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

The Purpose of this amendment is to;

1. Extend the Date of Submission to March 01, 2018 and

2. Provide Questions and Answers to the RFP

See attachments for more information.

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 16C. DATE SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

Alan Garceau

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9 A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect .

Embassy of the United States in South Sudan Kololo Road, adjacent to the European Union's compound Juba, South Sudan

Telephone: +211.912.105.107 Website: https://www.usaid.gov/south-sudan

Issuance Date: November 11, 2018

Next round of Questions Due: December 10, 2018

Round two Responses due date: January 08, 2019

SUBJECT: Amendment No.01 to Request for Proposal Number: 720668-18-R- 00002, USAID Promoting Civic Engagement and Peace Activity.

REFERENCE: Request for Proposal Number: 720668-18-R-00002, USAID Promoting Civic Engagement and Peace Activity.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS:

A. GENERAL

1. Does USAID anticipate having a multi-tiered approval process for grants? For example, will up to a certain amount be approved by the COR, and anything above said amount be approved by the CO?

USAID Response: The offeror will be expected to develop implementation guidelines that stress adaptability, flexibility, and collaboration with USAID and local stakeholders.

2. Could USAID/South Sudan provide an illustrative start date for cost purposes?

USAID Response: We anticipated award in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2018/19, however, we urge that offerors monitor FEDBIZ (www.fbo.gov) for potential announcements that could have an impact on the estimated start date.

3. Can USAID confirm that the monitoring and evaluation partner Management Systems International (MSI) (and related subsidiaries/corporate entities) for the USAID/South Sudan Mission is unable to compete in this procurement, per the precedent set by USAID/Vietnam (https://www.fbo.gov/notices/60bbf1d731d3e57aa9f32b26473679f9)?

USAID Response: While we will not comment on an individual company's interest in the procurement at this time, we will identify and evaluate potential organizational conflicts of https://www.fbo.gov/notices/60bbf1d731d3e57aa9f32b26473679f9

RFP No.: 720668-18-R-00002, Promoting Civic Engagement and Peace Activity

Amendment No.01 interest. Evaluation of whether a conflict of interest can be avoided, mitigated, or neutralized will be determined internally and prior to award of the contract.

4. Can USAID provide a copy of all monitoring and evaluation reports conducted by the USAID/South Sudan MESP partner for SUCCESS, VISTAS, RFP, and i- STREAM, in addition to the VISTAS assessment shared with the RFI?

USAID Response: Yes, see below attachments, for additional information, please visit USAID Development Experience Clearance: https://dec.usaid.gov.

● ATTACHMENT J 8 _SUCCESS TPM Report _Yambio CEC;

● ATTACHMENT J 9_ Reconciliation for Peace TPM Report _ Wau;

● ATTACHMENT J 10_ VISTAS TPM Assessment Report;

● ATTACHMENT J 11_ SUCCESS TPM Report _Torit CEC;

● ATTACHMENT J 12_ SUCCESS TPM Report _Rumbek CEC;

● ATTACHMENT J 13 _SUCCESS TPM Report _Aweil CEC; and

● ATTACHMENT J 14_ Reconciliation for Peace Evaluation - Draft SOW.

5. Can USAID provide a copy of the USAID/South Sudan PMP and Mission-level indicators?

USAID Response: Yes, see below attachment:

● ATTACHMENT J 15 _ USAID South Sudan PMP _PPR Indicators Tracking

Table.

6. The RFP is clear that the successful offeror will not work directly with central government officials. However, can USAID please clarify whether the successful offeror would be able to engage with public universities and/or local government officials over the life of project?

USAID Response: USAID adheres to USG policies that determine funding in South Sudan.

As USG regulations on funding change, USAID will adjust accordingly.

7. Referencing page 118, Section 2: Management Structure and Staffing Plan. The RFP states, “Offerors must indicate the dates that each key personnel candidate is available to start work full-time with the project.” Can USAID confirm the anticipated award date of March 15, 2019, as listed on the USAID Business Forecast, for candidates to consider in their response to this requirement?

USAID Response: See USAID Response to Question No. 2, under Section A. GENERAL.

8. Section L.5 (b) (page 114) notes that proposals are due November 17, 2018, whereas the cover page notes that the closing date is November 16, 2018. Could USAID please clarify the deadline to submit the proposal?

USAID Response: Proposals were due on November 16, 2018, at 1500 hours, Juba Local Time. November 17, 2018, at 1500 hours, Juba, Local Time was an oversight. The proposal due date is extended from November 16, 2018, at 1500 hours, Juba Local Time to March 1, 2019, at 15:00 hours, Juba, Local time.

9. Section I.7 (a), pg. 88. This section states that “Any tax or duty from which the United States Government is exempt by agreement with the Government of Thailand of other country specified in the place of performance of this contract, or from which the Contractor or any subcontractor under this contract is exempt under the laws of Thailand of other country specified in the place of performance of this contract, shall not constitute an allowable cost under this contract.” Could USAID please confirm the reference to Thailand is an error and provide updated language?

USAID Response: Please DELETE “Thailand” and REPLACE with “South Sudan”.

10. Section L.5 (b and c), pg. 114. Paragraph (b) states that that the proposals are due November 17, 2018, at 1500 Juba Local Time. This conflict with the cover letter of the RFP which states November 16, 2018 is the closing date. Similarly, paragraph (c) states that the deadline for receiving questions is October 20, 2018, while the cover page lists a due date of October 12, 2018. Could USAID please clarify the correct due date for questions and the closing date for proposals?

USAID Response: See USAID Response to Question No. 8, under Section A. GENERAL.

11. Will USAID kindly confirm the proposal submission closing date and time? On page

2, the submission deadline is listed as November 16, 2018, 1500 hours Juba Local Time, but on page 114 the submission deadline is listed as November 17, 2018 at 1500 hours Juba Local Time.

12. USAID South Sudan’s Monitoring and Evaluation Support Project implementing partner has conducted an evaluation of the incumbent of the precursor program to PCEP (VISTAS) as well as provided USAID with evaluation and monitoring services for other programs that PCEP is following on from. This evaluation of the VISTAS program conducted by the MESP contractor contributed directly to the design of the PCEP program. Through its other evaluation and monitoring activities for USAID/South Sudan, the MESP contractor has also had access to a wide range of competitively useful information from VISTAS, SUCCESS, and the other programs that PCEP is follow-on to. In light of this, could USAID kindly clarify how it intends to avoid a potential conflict of interest concerns and/or perceptions of conflicts of interest including bias, unfavorable reviews of potential competitors, and the use of competitively useful information gleaned in the course of its evaluation that may unfairly advantage certain offerors over others?

USAID Response: See USAID Response to Question No. 3, under Section A. GENERAL.

13. Would USAID consider including in the RFP the standard USAID Organizational

Conflicts of Interest: Preclusion from Furnishing Certain Services and Restriction on Use of Information contract provisions (in accordance with FAR Subpart 9.5 and as described in Contract Information Bulletin 99-17) and any other limitations USAID deems necessary to avoid concerns related to actual or perceived conflicts of interest?

USAID Response: Contract Information Bulletin 99-17 does not apply to this solicitation.

14. The Cover letter indicates that proposals are due November 16 at 1500 hours Juba time. In

Section L.5 (page 114) USAID indicates the due date and time is November 17 at 1500 hours, Juba, Local Time. Could USAID clarify the due date?

15. I am hoping to find out if there is an incumbent contractor currently performing these services or if this is a new requirement. If there is an incumbent, could you please provide the contract number?

USAID Response: There is no incumbent Contractor for this solicitation, this is a new requirement.

B. TECHNICAL

1. Section C.6, pages 18 and 19: Objective 2 explicitly refers to transitional justice efforts, however the final three Illustrative Activities found at the top of page 19 relate to the more narrow term of civil liberties. Clarification is requested for how USAID defines civil liberties in the context of transitional justice.

USAID Response: Civil liberties in the context of transitional justice are personal guarantees and freedoms that the government cannot abridge, either by law or by judicial interpretation, without due process. Such civil liberties may include the freedom of expression and equal treatment under the law and judicial process.

2. The RFP is clear that the successful offeror will not work directly with central government officials. However, can USAID please clarify whether the successful offeror would be able to engage with public universities and/or local government officials over the life of project?

USAID Response: While the successful offeror may engage with public universities and local government officials over the life of the project, this engagement may not include any USAID funded assistance. However, the extent to which the Offeror may engage with the public universities and local government officials may depend on the extenuating factors with regards U.S. government appropriations and regulations that pertain to South Sudan.

3. Referencing page 20 of Section C. The RFP notes under Objective 3 that an expected result is “individuals and communities able and willing to participate meaningfully in peacebuilding efforts." Can USAID confirm whether this result is supposed to be under Objective 3 or whether it is meant to fall under Objective 1?

USAID Response: This result is supposed to be under Objective 3.

4. Referencing page 20, Section C. The RFP states: This activity will be flexible enough to complement other possible USG-funded activities working on media-based activities. Can USAID provide additional information about these other possible USG-funded activities working on media-based activities?

USAID Response: The USG through USAID is currently funding the Strengthening Free and Independent Media in South Sudan (i-STREAM) program that supports national and community independent radio stations, provides professional journalism training, offers small grants to local media-oriented partners, and supplies up-to-date humanitarian information to those living in Protection of Civilians. Any additional USG-funded media activities are subject to funds availability.

5. Referencing page 26, Section C. The RFP notes, “USAID is planning to conduct an external final performance evaluation of the activity between six and twelve months before the activity ends.” Given that the structure of the contract is a two (2) year base period with three (3) one-year option periods, can USAID confirm that Offerors should plan for external final performance evaluation in years 2, 3, 4, and 5?

USAID Response: USAID cannot confirm that the Offerors should plan for external final performance evaluation in years 2, 3, 4, and 5. that determination may be subject to funds availability and the discussion between USAID and the successful Offeror.

6. Referencing page 34, Section F. The descriptions for the Annual Work Plans and Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan deliverables refer to a Performance Management Plan (PMP). However, a PMP is not listed as one of the Reports and Performance Objectives or Outputs under F.4. Can USAID confirm whether the PMP is part of one of the outputs currently listed or if it is a separate output?

USAID Response: The Performance Management Plan (PMP) is not a separate output.

The Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan will be linked to USAID’s overall PMP for South Sudan.

7. Referencing page 34, Section F.4.3 Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan (MEP). The RFP notes that the Contractor must reference the illustrative indicators in the Statement of Objectives section. Can USAID confirm that (1) Offerors may propose their own indicators and (2) whether the illustrative indicators listed are mandatory?

USAID Response: The Offeror may propose their indicators and the illustrative indicators listed are not mandatory.

8. Referencing page 44-45, Section F.8. Key Personnel. The scope of the operational responsibilities assigned to the Finance and Administration Management (FAM) and the financial and administrative requirements of responsibly implementing a large GUC pool in a complex operating environment are significant. Will USAID consider allowing offerors to elevate the FAM position to a DCOP for Operations and Finance position?

USAID Response: Yes.

9. Referencing page 17, Section C. The RFP notes that an illustrative activity for Objective 1 is to “support citizen-led coalitions or CSO umbrella organizations to participate in peace and conflict advocacy, monitor compliance, and/or support the creation of such bodies.” Can

USAID confirm whether this activity belongs under Objective 1 or whether it is meant to fall under Objective 2?

USAID Response: This activity is under Objective 1.

10. Section C.7, pages 23 and 24, PCEP GRANTS UNDER CONTRACT (GUCS)

PROGRAM: Pages 23 and 24 include subsections discussing both CLIN0001B Grants under Contract, and CLIN0001D Rapid Response Mechanism. What language, if any, did USAID intend to include in Section C.7 related to CLIN0001C rehabilitation/Construction?

USAID Response: CLIN0001C is set aside money specifically designated for rehabilitation/construction. However, as described in the illustrative activities section in

Section C.7, rehabilitation/construction should be considered to be part of the GUC program. As appropriate, money set aside for the Rapid Response Mechanism (RRM) could also be spent on rehabilitation/construction; however, this would be out of CLIN 0001D and dependent on events in South Sudan.

11. Section C.8, page 26: Please confirm whether or not the first sentence of the second paragraph on page 26 is intended to—as written—refer to “The Activity MEL Plan,” or perhaps to “The PCEP MEL Plan,” or “The Program MEL Plan.”

USAID Response: The “Activity MEL Plan” refers to “the PCEP MEL Plan” as referenced on page 34.

12. Section C.8, page 26: Keeping in mind the potential volume of activities to be undertaken under PCEP, and their varied durations, please confirm whether or not “USAID is planning to conduct an external final performance evaluation of the activity between six and twelve months before the activity ends,” or perhaps that “USAID is planning to conduct an external final performance evaluation of the program between six and twelve months before PCEP ends.”

USAID Response: The Activity refers to PCEP. Therefore, USAID is planning to conduct an external final performance evaluation of PCEP between six and twelve months when the activity (PCEP) ends, subject to funds availability and the discussion between USAID and the successful Offeror.

13. Section L, page 118: The first paragraph of the explanation of what is desired for ANNEX 2: Organizational Chart and Staffing Plan Matrix refer to a third chart that will be “a Staffing Plan showing titles and names that will form part of the activity team.” Would USAID please provide further clarification as to what is intended by “part of the activity team?”

USAID Response: The "Activity" refers to "PCEP." Therefore, as noted on page 118, "the third chart will be a Staffing Plan showing titles and names that will form the activity team."

14. Section M.2, page 131, MANAGEMENT APPROACH AND STAFFING PLAN: Section 2.b references “avoiding any gap in services.” Would USAID please clarify the nature of the services in which it expects to not experience gaps?

USAID Response: The nature of the service in which USAID expects to not experience gaps in the implementation and management of PCEP.

15. In Section C.7 (page 24), the RFP notes that rehabilitation and construction activities may occur under in-kind grants. As per Automated Directives System 303.3.30, construction and infrastructure are not allowed under grants. Would USAID please clarify whether it envisions that the implementer will obtain a waiver for Automated Directives System

303.3.30 for PCEP or whether the implementer should plan to implement construction and rehabilitation activities outside of PCEP’s GUC mechanism?

USAID Response: The implementer should plan to implement construction and rehabilitation activities out of the PCEP’s GUC mechanism.

16. Section F.8 (page 44) lists “Finance and Administration Manager” as a key personnel role.

Given the extensive range of responsibilities the person who fills this position must assume;

the number of staff and operational aspects this person must oversee — including grants, procurement, construction, logistics, human resources, finance, accounting, and contract management; and the complex, challenging nature of field operations in South Sudan for a program of PCEP’s scale, would USAID be amenable to using “Senior Operations Director,” “Deputy Chief of Party – Operations,” or a similar title to designate this role to ensure that PCEP can recruit and retain individuals with the experience and seniority required for the role?

USAID Response: see USAID Response to Question No. 8 above, under Section B.

TECHNICAL.

17. In Section L.6, Section 3: Monitoring and Evaluation Approach (page 119) states, “The [monitoring, evaluation, and learning] plan will identify core indicators for every result and intermediate result/outcome and provide preliminary five-year performance indicator (separated by 2-year base and the 3 one-year option periods) targets for these core indicators.” Could USAID confirm that it would like the monitoring, evaluation, and learning plan to include a Year 2 target (to be achieved after the two-year base period) as well as Year 3, Year 4, and Year 5 targets (to be achieved after the exercise of each option period)?

USAID Response: The MEL Plan shall include targets for core indicators for Year 1 and Year 2, and additional targets for Year 3, Year 4 and Year 5. These targets should be separated by a 2-year base and the 3 one-year option period.

18. In Section L.6, the instructions under Annex 5: Monitoring Evaluation and Learning Plan limit the page limit for Annex 5 to five pages. Given that the RFP calls for identifying core indicators for every result and intermediate result/outcome as well as indicator targets, data sources, methodologies, and frequency of data collection for each indicator — which will require an indicator table to be included in the plan — would USAID consider increasing the number of pages for Annex 5 or not including the indicator table in Annex 5’s five-page limitation?

USAID Response: Yes, Annex 5: Monitoring Evaluation and Learning Plan (MEP) pages are increased NOT to exceed 10 pages.

19. In Section L.6, the instructions under Annex 8: Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (page

121) state: “Proposal must include a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan that directly corresponds to the performance objectives and standards (quality, quantity, timeliness) specified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).” In addition, Section E.3 (page 32) states: “The Government reserves the right to modify performance standards and/or metrics during the life of this contract.” Could USAID please clarify where offerors can find the performance standards and whether USAID is referring to the standards discussed in Section F.6 (adding in “quantity” as an additional performance standard)? If USAID means to refer to performance standards listed in Section C or if USAID expects the offeror to propose its own performance standards, could USAID confirm as much?

USAID Response: The Offeror shall propose a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP), this will be used to manage contractors’ performance by ensuring that systematic quality assurance methods validate that the contractor’s quality control efforts are timely and effective and are delivering the required results. The QASP is intended to be a “living” document that should be reviewed and modified whenever necessary.

20. Section C.6, pg. 20. Whereas objective 3 is focused on trauma awareness services to communities, one of the expected results under IR 3.1 is "individuals and communities able and willing to participate meaningfully in peacebuilding efforts." Could USAID please confirm that this expected result should be under objective 3?

USAID Response: This activity is under Objective 3. Also see USAID Response to

Question No. 3 above, under Section B. TECHNICAL.

21. Section F.8, pg. 44. The job description for the Finance and Administration Manager includes oversight of all finance and operations functions for PCEP. In order to maximize the pool of qualified candidates to manage this complex program would USAID be open to renaming this position Finance and Operations Director or Deputy Chief of Party – Operations?

USAID Response: See USAID Response to Question No. 8 and 16 above, under Section B.

22. Section L.6, pp. 115 and 121. The RFP references past performance report forms (paragraph b, pg. 115), a past performance matrix as annex 6 (pg. 121), and provides annex J.5 as a template for past performance information request form. In addition, annex J.5 states that the template is not required if the information is available in the government past performance system. Could USAID please clarify the requirements for past performance in annex 6?

a) Are the past performance report forms and annex 6 past performance matrix the same requirement?

b) Should the offeror submit all five required past performance references in a single matrix, using only attachment J.5 for those contracts/agreements not included in the government past performance system? Or should the offeror use attachment J.5 for all five contracts/agreements listed as past performance?

a) USAID Response: Yes.

b) USAID Response: As part of the past performance; USAID will review the

Contractor's Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) if the information is available on CPARS, you do not need to submit it. If the information is not available on CPARS, then use attachment 5 to provide information.

23. Section L.6, pg. 115. Please confirm that the cover page referenced in paragraph b is the same as the cover letter referenced in paragraph d.1.

USAID Response: No, the cover page and the cover letter are not the same. The cover letter is as per Section L.6.

24. Section L.6, pg. 116. Paragraph d.4 lists two sections of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) narrative (Technical Approach; Management Approach and Staffing Plan). However, there are four required proposal sections in addition to the annexes. Please confirm that USAID expects Section 3. Monitoring and Evaluation Approach and Section 4. Past Performance to be included in the PWS narrative.

USAID Response: Yes, please DELETE Section L.6.d.4) in its entirety and REPLACE with:

(4) Performance Work Statement (PWS) (maximum 40 pages – not including annexes) The PWS must be organized as follows:

1. Technical Approach;

2. Management Approach and Staffing Plan;

3. Monitoring and Evaluation Approach; and

4. Past Performance.

25. Section L.6, pg. 116. Please confirm that the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan is

Annex 8.

USAID Response: The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan is Annex 8, and NOT Annex 7.

26. Section L.6, pg. 120. In paragraph 4 of Past Performance, there is a requirement for describing quality awards and certifications. Please confirm that this is required and, if so, whether it should be included in annex 6 or the proposal narrative.

USAID Response: The description of any quality awards or certifications should be included in Annex 6. Past Performance Matrix.

27. Section L.6, pp. 116-17. Would USAID be willing to increase the page limit for the grants under contract manual (annex 1) to 20 pages?

USAID Response: Yes, the page limit for Annex 1. PCEP Grants under Contract (GUC) Manual is increased by 10 pages from 10 to NOT exceeding 20 pages.

28. Referencing page 116, Section L.6 (d) 4 – Performance Work Statement. The RFP states the following in this section: The PWS must be organized as follows: 1. Technical Approach;

and 2. Management Approach and Staffing Plan. However, the RFP then states (page 116 under the header “Format for the Technical Proposal Body”): The body must be organized according to the evaluation factors in Section M (i.e. the body of the technical proposal will have four (4) sections) and must address all evaluation factors stated in Section M as well as the aspects described herein. Additionally, on page 119 under the header “Section 3:

Monitoring and Evaluation Approach”, the instructions seem to indicate that all the information required under this section be included as Annex 5. Similarly, on pages 119-120 under the header “Section 4: Past Performance”, the instructions seem to indicate that all the information required under this section be included as Annexes 6, 7, and 8. Can USAID please confirm that the main body of the Technical Approach should only contain two sections (1. Technical Approach and 2. Management Approach and Staffing Plan) and that the information required under Section 3: Monitoring and Evaluation Approach and Section 4: Past Performance should only be included in Annexes 5-8?

USAID Response: see USAID Response to Question No. 24 above, under Section B.

29. Referencing page 117, Section 1: Technical Approach to the Objectives. The RFP states:

The Offeror must develop guidelines for the Rapid Response Mechanism. These guidelines must demonstrate streamlined processes for designing and implementing high-impact projects in a timely response to emerging events in South Sudan. Can USAID confirm that these guidelines are to be included in Annex 1: GUC Program Manual and Rapid Response Mechanism?

USAID Response: These guidelines are to be included in Annex 1: GUC Program Manual and Rapid Response Mechanism.

30. Referencing page 118, Section 2: Management Structure and Staffing Plan. The RFP notes that the offerors should include rapid mobilization (part b) and one candidate for each of the key personnel positions listed in Section F (part c). Can USAID confirm that both items should be address in the Technical Proposal body and NOT as part of Annex 2?

USAID Response: Both items should be addressed in Annex 2.Organizational Chart and Staffing Plan Matrix.

31. Referencing page 118 of Section 2: Management Structure and Staffing Plan. The RFP states: USAID will initially review the bio-data sheets to determine if the proposed key personnel meet the minimum RFP requirements. Can USAID confirm that bio-data sheets should NOT be included as part of the technical proposal and will NOT be evaluated as part of the technical proposal?

USAID Response: The bio-data sheets should be included in Annex 3 and will be used to justify further key personnel in Section F that are highlighted in the PWS narrative.

32. Referencing page 118, Management Structure and Staffing Plan. For Annex 2:

Organizational Chart and Staffing Plan Matrix, will USAID consider allowing offerors submitting organizational charts on 11x17 papers?

33. Referencing page 119, Section 3: Monitoring and Evaluation Approach. Given the extensive requirements of Annex 5: Monitoring Evaluation and Learning Plan (MEP), will USAID consider increasing the page limitation from five (5) to ten (10) pages to ensure offerors may provide a comprehensive response?

USAID Response: see USAID Response to Question No. 18 above, under Section B.

34. Referencing pages 120-121, Section 4: Past Performance. Can USAID confirm that offerors should include (1) performance information and (2) performance in using small business concerns as part of Annex 6 and NOT as part of the main technical proposal document?

USAID Response: This should be included in the PWS narrative.

35. On page 22, Geographic Focus, the solicitation notes that offerors may propose up to five

(5) field office locations. Can USAID please confirm that the headquarters office to be located in Juba may be proposed in addition to the up to five additional office locations outside of Juba?

USAID Response: Yes, offerors may propose up to five field offices in addition to the headquarters office to be located in Juba.

36. Will USAID kindly provide its preferred Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan template to ensure offerors can propose a QASP that meets USAID’s needs?

USAID Response: The Offeror will propose a QASP, this will be used to manage contractors’ performance by ensuring that systematic quality assurance methods validate that the contractor’s quality control efforts are timely and effective and are delivering the required results. The QASP is intended to be a “living” document that should be reviewed and modified whenever necessary.

37. On page 117, USAID states that “The Offeror must develop guidelines for the Rapid Response Mechanism. These guidelines must demonstrate streamlined processes for designing and implementing high-impact projects in a timely response to emerging events in South Sudan.” Will USAID please confirm that the guidelines for the rapid response mechanism mentioned on page 117 should be included in Annex 1: Grants under Contract GUC Program Manual and Rapid Response Mechanism and not within the technical proposal narrative?

USAID Response: These guidelines should be included in Annex 1: PCEP Grants under Contract (GUC) Manual.

38. On page 118, USAID has described the requirement for the offeror to include its proposed

“b) Rapid mobilization: The offeror’s proposal must demonstrate effective planning to quickly launch the activity within 60 days of award…” and “c) Offerors must propose one candidate for each of the key personnel positions…” Will USAID please confirm that the offeror should include its response to these requirements in its Technical Approach narrative, not in Annex 2: Organizational Chart and Staffing Plan Matrix?

USAID Response: The proposal should be included in the PWS narrative and not in Annex

2. Organizational Chart and Staffing Plan Matrix.

39. Will USAID please confirm whether Section 4: Past Performance information

(described on page 119-120) should be included only as the Past Performance Matrix in Annex 6, or in addition, offerors can include a narrative description of their past performance within the Technical Approach?

USAID Response: Section 4: Past Performance information (described on page 119-120) narrative excludes Annex 6: Past Performance Matrix.

40. In Section C.8, USAID describes a mission Third Party Monitoring activity as one of three sources that will provide additional feedback in the management cycle. Third party monitoring was included in the RFI as potentially part of the PCEP activity.

a. Does the decision to remove third party monitoring from the PCEP scope mean that USAID anticipates that PCEP and third party monitoring should be implemented by two different organizations?

b. Does USAID already have a third party monitoring contract in place, and if so, could USAID provide details on the implementer, scope of work, and period of performance so that offerors can understand how PCEP will engage with the monitoring?

USAID Response: The current third-party monitor contract that the mission uses will end on September 30, 2019. USAID/South Sudan is in the process of designing a new scope of work that will solicit the services of a third party monitoring. It is expected that a new award will be in place by the time PCEP is awarded.

c. If not already established, could USAID provide additional on when and how it might be contracted out?

USAID Response: USAID South Sudan is in the process of determining how the services of a third party monitoring contract will be acquired.

d. On page 34 in section F.4, USAID indicates it will conduct a third-party evaluation of the contract. Is this evaluation in addition to third-party monitoring already mentioned?

55. In Section L.6, Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal, the RFP states (page 118): "a second chart [in Annex 2] will demonstrate the relationship between the Offeror and other offices (e.g., Offeror's headquarters office, USAID, other partners, etc.)” Can USAID please clarify what is meant by “other partners”, and indicate what information is being requested in this chart?

USAID Response: Other partners include USAID Implementing Partners, subcontractors, subgrantees as well as other partners the Offeror considers critical to the implementation of this Activity.

56. In Section L.6, Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal (page 118), the

RFP requirements for Annex 3 (Resumes of Proposed Key Personnel) states: “USAID will initially review the bio-data sheets to determine if the proposed key personnel meet the minimum RFP requirements.” Given that Biographical Data Sheets contain cost information and are restricted to being included in the Cost Proposal, can USAID please confirm that key personnel resumes—and not bio-data sheets—will be reviewed to determine whether proposed key personnel meet the RFP requirements?

USAID Response: Both the key personnel resume and the bio-data sheets will be will be reviewed to determine whether proposed key personnel meet the RFP requirement.

57. In Section F.8, Key Personnel (page 44), the role of the Finance and Administration

Manager is very broad in scope, defined as follows: “This position will oversee operations for all program offices in South Sudan. This includes oversight of procurement, grants, construction, logistics, human resources, accounting and finance, and contract records. This individual will be responsible for managing the contract budget and preparing financial reports for submission to USAID/South Sudan.” In addition, the large grants pool will require someone with extensive grants management experience, and the ability to implement a fraud-mitigation program. Given the breadth of oversight functions and the seniority of this position, would USAID be willing to allow offerors to change the title to a Director, a DCOP, or comparable title, to ensure that position is properly designated in terms of the expected responsibilities and requirements?

USAID Response: see USAID Response to Question No. 8 and 16 above, under Section B.

58. In Section L.6.1, Format for the Technical Proposal Body, the RFP states: "the body must be organized according to the evaluation factors in Section M (i.e. the body of the technical proposal will have four (4) sections) and must address all evaluation factors stated in Section M as well as the aspects described herein.” However, Section M.2, Technical Evaluation Criteria (page 132) states that the fourth evaluation criteria is Past Performance and that it will be evaluated using the information provided in Annex 6: Past Performance Matrix. We have the following questions:

a) Can USAID please confirm that the technical proposal should have 3 sections, as follows:

(i) Technical Approach to the Objectives;

(ii) Management Approach; and

(iii) Staffing Plan and M&E Approach

USAID Response: see USAID Response to Question No. 18 above, under Section B.

b) If the answer to a) is yes, can USAID also confirm that past performance information should only be provided in Annex 6?

USAID Response: The M&E Approach should only be included in PWS narrative and Annex 6. Past Performance Matrix.

C. COST

1. Would USAID provide offerors the most recent South Sudan local compensation plan

/ FSN scale?

USAID Response: Yes. Please see attachment below:

● ATTACHMENT J 16_ USAID South Sudan Local Compensation Plan

2. Would USAID consider changing the geographic code to 935 to allow offerors to procure equipment from regional hubs including Dubai?

USAID Response: While U.S. procurement is to be maximized to the extent practicable, USAID will consider waivers to the authorized geographic code of 937. Waiver applications should explain, in each case of non-U.S. procurement, why U.S. procurement is not practicable (in terms of effect on project or program objectives, suitability, quality, cost, sustainability, or other specific reasons)

3. Section L.7, page 124, part 2(5)(I): Could USAID please clarify the missing text from the first sentence “Grants Under Contract and Rapid Response Mechanism – In budgeting for the grants under contracts line item, the rapid response mechanism and the , Offerors will use…”?

USAID Response: Under Page 124, Please DELETE part 2 (5) (I) and REPLACE with

“Grants Under Contract, Rehabilitation/Construction and Rapid Response Mechanism - In budgeting for the grants under contract line item, the rehabilitation/construction and rapid response fund mechanism, the offeror will use the following budget estimated for the grant to be distributed over the contract period and budgeted under the specified CLIN.”

4. In Section B.4 (pages 9 to 11), the RFP divides the budget into the following categories:

Direct Costs, Grants Under Contract (GUC), Rehabilitation/Construction, Rapid Response Mechanism, Indirect Costs, and Total Fixed Fee. Would USAID please consider merging the Direct Costs and Indirect Costs line items into a single line item in the tables in Section B.4 and specify the total cost exclusive of fee? We request this change in accordance with the nature of a cost-reimbursable contract, in which an overall ceiling is instated that the contractor may not exceed.

USAID Response: No, please provide the information as required.

5. In Section B.4 (pages 9 to 11), the plug figures the RFP provides for each option year are $4.5 million for GUC, $1.5 million for Rehabilitation/Construction, and $1.5 million for the Rapid Response Mechanism. Section C.7 (page 23 to 24), however, provides a GUC ceiling of $30 million, and Section L.7 (pages 124 to 125) provides the following plug figures for each option year: $6 million for GUC, $3 million for Rehabilitation/Construction, and $1.5 million for the Rapid Response Mechanism. Could USAID please clarify the plug figures required under each contract line item number (CLIN)?

USAID Response: Please DELETE Section B.4 BUDGET in its entirety and REPLACE With:

B.4 BUDGET

Table 1: Base Period (Years 1-2)

Contract Line Item Description Total

CLIN 0001 PCEP Program –Base Period (Years 1-2)

CLIN 0001A Direct Cost TBD

CLIN 0001B Grants Under Contract (GUC) $6.0 Million

CLIN 0001C Rehabilitation/Construction $3.0 Million

CLIN 0001D Rapid Response Mechanism $3.0 Million

CLIN 001E Indirect Costs TBD

CLIN 0001F Total Fixed Costs TBD

CLIN 0001 Total (Total of CLIN 001 A-F)

TBD

Table 2: Option Year 1 (Year 3)

CLIN 0002 PCEP Program –Option Year 1 (Year 3)

TBD

CLIN 0002A Direct Cost $3.0 Million

CLIN 0002B Grants Under Contract (GUC) $1.5 Million

CLIN 0002C Rehabilitation/Construction $ 1.5 Million

CLIN 0002D Rapid Response Mechanism TBD

CLIN 0002E Indirect Costs TBD

CLIN 0002F Total Fixed Costs TBD

CLIN 0002 Total (Total of CLIN 0002 A-F)

Table 3: Option Year 2 (Year 4)

CLIN 0003 PCEP Program –Option Year 2 (Year 4)

TBD

CLIN 0003A Direct Cost $3.0 Million

CLIN 0003B Grants Under Contract (GUC) $1.5 Million

CLIN 0003C Rehabilitation/Construction $ 1.5 Million

CLIN 0003D Rapid Response Mechanism TBD

CLIN 0003E Indirect Costs TBD

CLIN 0003F Total Fixed Costs TBD

CLIN 0002 Total (Total of CLIN 0002 A-F)

Table 4: Option Year 3 (Year 5)

CLIN 0004 PCEP Program –Option Year 3 (Year 5)

TBD

CLIN 0004A Direct Cost $3.0 Million

CLIN 0004B Grants Under Contract (GUC) $1.5 Million

CLIN 0004C Rehabilitation/Construction $ 1.5 Million

CLIN 0004D Rapid Response Mechanism TBD

CLIN 0004E Indirect Costs TBD

CLIN 0004F Total Fixed Costs TBD

CLIN 0002 Total (Total of CLIN 0002 A-F)

Total Estimate Cost (Table 1+2+3+4) TBD

6. Section B.3, page 10; and, Section L.7, Part 2-Proposed Costs/Prices, page 124, part

(I)Grants Under Contract and Rapid Response Mechanism: Can USAID please clarify the amounts allocated for each of the Grants under Contracts Program;

Rehabilitation/Construction; and Rapid Response Fund CLINs for each Option

Period?

USAID Response: See USAID Response to Question No. 5 under Section C. COST.

7. Section F.9 (page 45) lists "Approval of salary/daily rate for professional expatriate and professional CCN Long-Term Technical Assistance (LTTA) and Short-Term Technical Assistance (STTA) not named in the prime Contractor's final approved budget." Would USAID please consider removing this bullet point from Section F.9, as it exceeds the salary and rate approval requirements listed in Section H.10? In addition, would USAID consider providing the most recent Local Compensation Plan or Foreign Service National Scale for the South Sudan mission?

USAID Response: See USAID Response to Question No. 1 under Section C. COST.

8. Section H.28 (pages 74 to 76) lists equipment that will be provided to the contractor at the time of award. Would USAID provide the location of the equipment (vehicles and generators) as well as the generators’ manufacture year so that Offerors can budget appropriately should some equipment need replacing over the life of the project?

USAID Response: The equipment to be provided to the offeror is considered to be in "excellent" condition. Nonetheless, offerors are encouraged to budget for proper maintenance of such equipment.

9. Section J.2 (page 93) provides the Budget Template. Would USAID please consider removing the “unit cost” and “number of units” columns from the Summary page of the Budget Template, as the unit cost and number of units will vary within each section? Additionally, could USAID please confirm that the instruction in the Budget Template on the Summary page stating that "if more subawardees are proposed, please insert additional worksheets as needed" refers to the Budget Detail page only?

USAID Response: USAID will not remove the unit cost or the number of units in the budget summary spreadsheet. Please follow the instructions provided on L.7 cost proposal instructions.

10. Section L.7 (I) (page 124) states: “In budgeting for the grants under contracts line item, the rapid response mechanism and the Offerors will use the following budget estimates for the grants to be distributed over the contract period and budgeted under the specified CLIN."

There is a separate CLIN for Rehabilitation/Construction. Would USAID please confirm that the CLIN for Rehabilitation/Construction will not be budgeted under GUC?

USAID Response: CLIN0001C is set aside money specifically designated for rehabilitation/construction. However, as described in the illustrative activities section in Section C.7, rehabilitation/construction should be considered to be part of the GUC program. As appropriate, money set aside for the RRM could also be spent on rehabilitation/construction. However, this would be out of CLIN 0001D and dependent on events in South Sudan.

11. Section H provides no authoritative conditions for GUCs as outlined in ADS 302.3.4.13(c).

Should offerors assume strict adherence to these parameters for purposes of the Grants under Contract Manual development or will they be adapted to meet the needs of this program?

USAID Response: The Grants under contract program of the solicitation adheres to regulation under ADS 302.3.4 13.

12. Section L.7, pp. 122-123. Please confirm that the budget templates provided in Attachments J.4 & J.2 are illustrative and the offeror can use their template if it includes all categories listed in the RFP.

USAID Response: No, please use the required Attachments J.4 and J.2.

13. Section L.7, pp. 122-127. Part 2 - Proposed Costs/Prices does not include a consultant category. Please confirm offerors can add a consultant category in their budget template.

USAID Response: Yes, offerors can include a consultant category.

14. Section L.7, pg. 124. Under Part 2 – Proposed Costs/Prices, paragraph 5(I), it appears there is an incomplete sentence: "In budgeting for the grants under contracts line item, the rapid response mechanism and the Offerors will use the following budget estimates for the grants to be distributed over the contract period and budgeted under the specified CLIN.” Could USAID please clarify this sentence?

USAID Response: See USAID Response to Question No. 3 under Section C. COST

15. Section L.7, pg. 124. Can the costs associated with implementing the rapid response fund and rehabilitation/construction (e.g., associated labor costs) be allocated as a part of the rapid response fund and rehabilitation/construction pools?

USAID Response: No, the cost associated with the implementation of the rapid response and the rehabilitation/construction should be allocated in labor cost.

16. On page 23, PCEP Grants under Contract (GUCS) Program, can USAID please confirm that the highlighted portion of “Grants Under Contract ($30 million over 5 years (base plus options years)” should read $22.5 million over 5 years to align with the Grants Under Contract (GUC) amounts included on page 9-10, B.4 Budget Contract Line Item table?

17. Will USAID kindly revise the Grants Under Contract and Rapid Response Mechanism budget estimates included on pages 124-125 to reflect the same line-item totals included on page 9-10, B4. Budget Contract Line Item table?

18. Will USAID please consider removing the Rehabilitation/Construction CLIN estimates included on page 124 under Grants under Contract and Rapid Response mechanism as these line items costs will be included under the Construction budget category, not under the Grants under Contract and Rapid Response Mechanism category?

19. Given the broad nature of the work to be performed under PCEP, the potential benefit of utilizing grants to access highly competent but niche organizations (and potentially US-based) to support narrow aspects of the SOW, and the substantial portion of the budget allocated to Grants Under Contract, would USAID consider increasing the ceiling for GUCs to US-based organizations under PCEP? USAID has recently taken this approach on procurements with similarly broad scopes, for example under the recent Active Communities Effective States (ACES) solicitation, in which USAID increased the ceiling for Grants under Contract with US-based implementing partner organizations to $500,000.

USAID Response: See USAID Response to Question No. 11 under Section C. COST.

20. Attachment J.2, Budget Template, Summary Tab includes columns for Unit Costs and for Number of Units. Can USAID please confirm that Unit Costs and Number of Units columns are not required in the Summary Budget template and should be only used in the Budget Detail template?

USAID Response: See USAID Response to Question No. 9 under Section C. COST.

21. The RFP Cover Letter and Section H.4 indicate that the authorized…