Questions and Answers RFP No 72067424R00008 Empower Nigeria.pdf

Amendment 02 – RFP No. 72067424R00008, Empower Nigeria - Questions & Answers

No Offeror Question USAID Response / Answer

General Questions

1 Considering the complexity and significant scope of the project requirements outlined in Section L for this proposal submission, would USAID consider an extension of the proposal deadline by two weeks to June 21st, in-line with other Power Africa submission timelines?

On May 30, 2024, USAID posted Amendment 1 to the RFP on www.sam.gov Amendment 1 extended the proposal submission date to June 21, 2024 at 6:00pm EST.

Here is the link to the amendment:

https://sam.gov/opp/683c2d2682644d7 08fd37f2feb27188f/view

2 Is a MEL and/or CLA section required, and if so, are there any specific requirements? It seems the RFP does not contain any specific requirements for MEL or CLA for the proposal.

If we are to provide indicators, are we intended to limit ourselves to the indicators listed under “minimum results”, for example $ amount mobilized, number of strategic planning documents? Or are we able to propose additional indicators

Under RFP Section C.7., there is a write up of Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning that references CLA.

Instructions for proposal submission are included in RFP SectionL.11.5 Technical Approach. It states, “USAID Guiding Principles must be suitably integrated into the offeror’s technical approach.

3 Other than the incumbent, how many companies have expressed interest in this solicitation?

USAID will not provide this information.

4 How many companies expressing interest are designated as small companies?

USAID will not provide this information.

5 What are the USAID expectations for getting the Closing Date Extended?

On May 30, 2024, USAID posted Amendment 1 to the RFP on www.sam.gov. Amendment 1 extended the proposal submission date to June 21, 2024 at 6:00pm EST.

6 Could you please advise on the eligibility criteria for this RFP and the steps required for registration as a partner with USAID? We are keen to understand the process and ensure compliance with all necessary requirements to participate effectively.

As noted on the cover page of the RFP, “The procurement will be conducted through full and open competition, under which any type of organization (large or small commercial [for profit] firms, educational institutions, and nonprofit organizations) is eligible to compete.”

Please refer to https://www.usaid.gov/partner-with-us/how-to-work-with-usaid For information on how to respond to a solicitation and register for a UEI http://www.sam.gov/ https://sam.gov/opp/683c2d2682644d708fd37f2feb27188f/view https://sam.gov/opp/683c2d2682644d708fd37f2feb27188f/view https://www.usaid.gov/partner-with-us/how-to-work-with-usaid https://www.usaid.gov/partner-with-us/how-to-work-with-usaid number.

7 Does the Foreign Assistance waiver also cover the contract budget? (Illustrative)

RFP Section F describes scenarios for the period of performance. The first scenario is if the successful offeror requires use of the Waiver for Section

889. If this is required, then the format of the Budget in RFP Section B, will change to be allocated by base and option years. If the successful offeror does not require use of the Foreign Assistance Waiver then the RFP Section B budget will remain as currently formatted.

8 Are bidders permitted to bid as a consortium (2 or 3 bidders working together)

Yes, bidders can organize a consortium with one prime and multiple subcontractor consortium members.

See L.11.3. Cover Page on RFP page 92.

See L12 Part 3 (H) Subcontracts on page 97 and see Section M3. Technical Evaluation Factors: Management Approach on RFP page 104.

9 Is this activity different from the Power Africa Nigeria Power Sector Programme (PA-NSP) that is currently ongoing? Is this a new and different activity or a second phase of the ongoing PA-NSP

This solicitation will result in a new contract with new targets. NPSP is scheduled to close September 30, 2024.

10 Would USAID consider extending the proposal submission deadline by two weeks to June 21, 2024?

This extension would allow bidders adequate time to prepare a more informed and competitive proposal.

On May 30, 2024, USAID posted Amendment 1 to the RFP on www.sam.gov. Amendment 1 extended the proposal submission date to June 21, 2024 at 6:00pm EST.

11 Can USAID provide Offerors with the USAID Power Africa Nigeria Power Sector Program (PANPSP)’s latest deliverables, including: a) annual report FY 2023, b) work plan, and c) MEL plan for FY 2024 that includes activities under the budget extension?

Please visit USAID Development Electronic Clearinghouse (DEC) for available plans and reports that meet the requirements of ADS 540 USAID Development Experience Information.

RFP Section B

12 Section B.2 - Does the Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) mean that the offeror (The Contractor) will cover the cost of the contract, and then apply for payment from USAID at the completion of the contracted 5 year period?

The contractor will follow AIDAR

752.7003 Documentation for Payment, AIDAR 52.216-7 Allowance Cost and Payment and FAR 52.232-22 Limitation of Funds. The RFP does not include any provision for advance of funds.

Generally, contractors invoice on a monthly basis to receive reimbursement of expenditures incurred in support of the contract objectives.

13 Section B.7. Contract payment of fixed fee states proposed deliverables for payment of fixed fee cannot include more than 30% of fee allocated to progress reporting such as quarterly, annual or other technical reports. We believe the 70% of the fixed fee amount that will be tied to achievement of annual deliverables is high given the overall development context and environment under which CPFF contract type awards are issued and implemented. Given fluid environment, several variables and shifting USG/USAID program priorities, the actual annual Work plan under the contract is approved post award. Work plan/implementation plan modifications occur often due to shifts in stakeholders’ priorities, the underlying security, risk and other evolving situations in Nigeria. These factors place some of the deliverables/results outside of the contractor’s direct control and emphasize the importance of adaptive management. In this environment this fixed fee schedule developed prior to contract execution may reduce USAID’s and the Contractor’s ability to adapt to changing circumstances and priorities.

Accordingly, we respectfully request USAID to either remove the requirement or consider reducing the portion of fixed fee to a level of 50% being linked to annual deliverables. Additionally, this places post award administrative burden both on USAID and contractor to periodically review the Fixed Fee payment structure developed at the RFP /Proposal stage and modify the contract stipulated fixed fee schedule, based upon changes in underlying assumptions, the development context or other extenuating circumstances.

USAID will not consider changes to what is written in Section B.7 of the

RFP.

14 Section B.4 - Does the Foreign Assistance waiver also cover the contract budget? (Illustrative)

See answer provided to Question 7.

15 Section B.7 - Please explain further the statement on the page 5 of 107, that the proposed deliverables for payment cannot include more than 30% of fee allocation to progress reporting as quarterly, annual

70% of the fee allocation in tables within B.7 should be for achievement of milestones or targets and not completion of plans or reports related and technical reports when 60% is allocated to CLIN 2 (supporting DisCos) to contract management. 30% of the fee allocation could be for completion of reports such as quarterly, annual and other reports.

RFP Section C

16 Section C.5.2 states that “Building upon Power Africa’s pipeline of clean energy generation and transmission transactions including, but not limited to those currently supported by Power Africa’s Nigeria Power Sector Program and aligned with the Nigerian Energy Transition Plan or similar national clean energy goals/programs.” A review of publicly available NPSP reporting on the DEC makes it unclear that this pipeline has been published publicly. To ensure that all offeror's have access to the same information regarding the current NPSP pipeline, ensuring a fair competition, may USAID make the current NPSP pipeline either publicly available or available upon request?

When evaluating proposals, USAID will consider what information is publicly available. Offerors will not be downgraded because they have not had access or knowledge of non public sensitive transaction information.

Section C.5- Is the 7,000MW quarterly dispatch result an average hourly generation or the energy received by DISCOs? Considering NERC reporting shows a maximum of 4,500MWh/h for the past 8 quarters, isn't the 7,000MWh/h target by 2024/2025 unrealistic and in need of review?

The “Quarterly peak power dispatch through the transmission grid exceeds 7,000 MW” refers to the average amount of power received by DISCOS on average in one day per the quarter, as reported by NERC. This target does exceed the grid’s performance over the past eight quarters--reflecting Power Africa’s objective that the program contribute to a significant overall increase in the effective capacity of the entire Nigerian grid (from generation through transmission to distribution).

For clarification, this is an Outcome-level target which should be met by the end of the activity in 2029, not in the first year of activity (2024/2025).

Section C.5 - Is the 1,000MW total for the program?

Correct as minimum for MW at FC only.

Relative to other Power Africa procurements, this RFP sets a relatively low target for new generation projects.

This reflects USAID’s understanding that transmission and distribution capacity, rather than generation capacity, represents the current binding constraint for the Nigerian power sector.

The offeror should propose MW from transactions that have been commissioned consistent with Power Africa indicator 4.1.5 which is a separate target (see bullet 2 of Outcome 2 - minimum results for this Outcome).

19 Section C.5 -What is meant by NERC metrics? This refers to standard Generation metrics including Generation capacity utilization, capacity factor, Load factor, available generation capacity, plant availability factor etc. For more information on this, kindly visit the NERC website and recent NERC quarterly reports.

20 Section C.5 - What is meant by grid reliability metrics? This refers to standard grid reliability metrics including grid frequency performance, system collapses, Transmission loss factor, system voltage etc. For more information on this, kindly visit the NERC website and recent NERC quarterly reports

21 Section C.5.2, Outcome 2 - Outcome 2 notes one of the results, “quarterly peak power dispatch” as a custom Empower Nigeria indicator. The highest amount recorded was in 2021 at around 5800MW and has since declined to plus/minus 4000 MW. The proposed target of 7,000MW almost doubles the current baseline. There is no data consistently published by TCN, NERC or other authority on a quarterly basis for peak power dispatch, therefore the method proposed in the RFP for this indicator would be difficult to verify. As grid evacuation capacity (MW) of the transmission system is an indicator for PA-NPSP, would USAID consider using the same method of calculation/verification as used under PA- NPSP for the indicator proposed?

No.

USAID would like to see an increase in the actual peak power flow through the Nigeria grid, not an increase in the grid’s theoretical capacity. We recognize that the target of 7,000 MW is significantly higher than the recent capacity. The aim is to achieve a consistent 7,000 MW quarterly peak power dispatch by the end of the program. This is a key development outcome targeted by this contract.

22 Section C.5.2, Outcome 2-The RFP identifies as a minimum result (x) of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG)…reduced, sequestered or avoided through clean energy as supported by USG assistance. Would

Depending on the activity and support provided in discussion with the program COR and in accordance with Power Africa MEL.

USAID consider the reduction of flare gas to contribute to meeting the GHG minimum result?

23 Section C.5.4 - Outcome 4 notes a minimum result to be determined by the offeror is “ATC&C losses reduced/avoided to Nigeria’s Multi-Year Tariff Order (MYTO) allowed levels or the applicable tariff model from NERC from NERC for PA Partnership DISCOs”.

Can USAID please clarify (and/or provide an example calculation) how this indicator will be measured against the ATC&C losses in the MYTO and what information source will be used to verify the ATC&C loss level achieved?

This number would be compared to MYTO allowed levels/Targets for only the Power Africa Partnership Discos.

NERC reports would be used to verify ATC & C losses achieved against the MYTO targets.

24 Section C.5.4 - (Number to be proposed by the offeror) improved metering penetration sector-wide (Empower Nigeria Custom Indicator). Does USAID intend the offeror to propose the number of meters to be installed?

Yes

25 Section C.5.4 - (Number to be proposed by the offeror) of MWh of electricity sold compared to baseline sector-wide (Empower Nigeria custom indicator). Can USAID provide the current baseline number for MWh of electricity sold and the source of information to be used to verify the amount of MWh sold vs. baseline as proposed by the offeror?

Visit the NERC website and recent quarterly reports for the most up to date baseline of MWh of electricity sold.

Please visit https://nerc.gov.ng/resource-category/nerc-reports/

26 Section C -Can the Contractor propose additional minimum results for the contract?

No

27 Section C.6 - indicates all grants issued under the contract “may include nongovernmental organizations…universities, public international organizations, private sector, community organizations and private foundations.” ADS 302 allows contractors to execute solely in-kind grants to government entities. Would USAID confirm that solely in-kind grants to government entities will be allowed under this contract pursuant to ADS 302.3.4.13?

USAID confirms that in kind grants to government entities will be allowed.

28 Section C.6, Bullet 7 (page 25) -Would USAID consider changing the language in Section C.6, Bullet 7 (page 25) to say, “All grants must be completed one month prior to the end of the contract.” This will allow for flexibility in the last year of programming

No.

while still providing time to close out the last remaining grants.

29 Section C - Would USAID confirm that the use of the GUC fund to provide first-loss derisking capital (as described in Sections C and L of the RFP) would not be classified as “bad debt” (per 2 CFR 200.426) when the intent is to attract other investors, mobilize capital, and provide a risk cushion?

No.

USAID will be involved in the decision making process of the recipient of the grant and activities and would make its determination as appropriate.

30 Section C - KPI - What are the internal indicators or value provided for the customers

This question is not clear.

31 Estimated - What are the measures for estimated billing system (This would prevent unwanted usage of power without paying for the bill)

This question is not clear.

32 Section C - Do the minimum results for the expected outcome affect the Contractor's remuneration for the project or it just serves as an aspiration target for the outcome? This is because a number of these targets e.g. 1,000 megawatts from power generation transactions, are contingent on external variables beyond the control of the contractor?

Per FAR 52.216-7 the contractor will be reimbursed for reasonable, allocable and allowable costs.

The contractor will receive fee payments based on the fee tables in Section B.7 of the RFP.

33 Section C.6 - For the Grant Under Contract, do you want the Contractor to act as Grant Administrators for the 5 million Grant? Does this USD 5 million serve as part of the USD 75 to USD 85 million contract?

The contractor will oversee a grants under contract fund of $5 million. This amount is included within the cost range provided on the cover page of the RFP.

34 Section C- In providing technical assistance would the Consultant be expected to provide technological inputs and assistance on actual technical equipment for generation upgrades?

Offerors should propose a technical strategy that can meet requirements of RFP Section C.

35 Section C - The contractor is to provide technical support to 3 - 6 DisCos. What would be your ideal target number of DisCos or this choice left for the Contractor to decide?

USAID will not provide an ideal target number of DisCos.

36 Section C.7 - Is it required that the Contractor must have construction capabilities and certifications or just "Be proficient with all relevant codes and/or regulations related to construction work under USAID funded activities?"

The offeror should provide information as required in the RFP.

37 Section C.1 Introduction, page 8. Does USAID anticipate any overlap between the current PA-NPSP

Any overlap will be dependent upon the speed at which the procurement contract and the new Empower Nigeria contract to occur during the Year 1 Implementation Plan?

process advances.

38 Section C.5.2, Outcome 2, page 15. (Number to be proposed by the offeror) of Kilometers (KM) of transmission and distribution power lines that either reached financial close with USG, Development Partner (DP) or private (PSP) support (consistent with Power Africa MEL plan indicator 4.1.1) or which are new, reconstructed, rehabilitated, or upgraded that have been energized, tested, and commissioned/installed with USG, DP, or PSP support (consistent with Power Africa indicator 4.1.2). Can USAID clarify if the distribution power lines include all voltage levels?

Yes, distribution power lines include all voltages (33 kV, 11 kV and 0.4kV).

39 Section C.5.2,Outcome 2, Intervention 2.3, page 16.

The RFP states that “with COR approval, support can be provided to more traditional generation activities considering the existing energy mix in the power sector”. If COR approval is provided for support to fossil-based generation (likely gas), will the GHG emissions from such plants be deducted from/counted against the GHG emissions reduction results achieved by the project? It is assumed that such plants would have a greater GHG intensity than the so-called “ Build Margin” emission factor for the Nigerian grid.

This would be determined on a case by case basis at the time of COR approval.

Please refer to PA Indicator 2.1.1 for definition of this indicator.

40 Section C.5.2, Outcome 2, Intervention 2.3, page 16.

The RFP states that “When identifying entities that will receive transaction advisory support, the contractor should prioritize working with entities that have an existing Letter of Intent (LOI) or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Power Africa through the Partnerships Office. The immediate interest of this contract is to pursue clean power supply and other services that reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the power sector.” Can USAID provide the details on the LOI or MOU already in place with Power Africa through the Partnerships Office in Nigeria?

This prioritization would occur post award after the successful contractor has received a briefing from the USAID/Power Africa Partnerships Office.

41 Would USAID please modify the language in Section C.6 (page 24), which states “The GUCs are limited to fixed amount awards and cost reimbursable grants” to match the language in ADS 302.3.4.13, which states, “GUCs may be provided as cost-

No reimbursement or fixed amount grants”?

RFP Section F

42 In reference to Section F.4.1, we note that the requirements for the Chief of Party state that previous sub-Saharan Africa work experience is required, but does not make Nigeria experience a requirement. Given the unique, complex nature of the energy sector in Nigeria, the Chief of Party's demonstrated successful management and leadership experience in Nigeria, and deep existing connections to senior policy and industry decision-makers within the Government of Nigeria, State governments, and the private sector, will very likely be critical to Empower Nigeria's success. A Chief of Party without this experience and access to relevant networks may represent a significant risk to the success of the Empower Nigeria program.

May USAID consider revising the requirements of the Chief of Party to make a minimum of 5 years of recent (within the past 10 years) management experience in implementing energy activities on- and/or beyond-the-grid in Nigeria a requirement for this position?

RFP Section F.4.1 Key Personnel Chief of Party minimum requirements have been reduced. Please refer to the yellow highlights in the attached revised RFP.

43 Section F.4.1- In reference to the requirements for Key Personnel #1 under Section F.4.1 for "A minimum of ten (10) years of management experience in implementing programs with a dollar value size and technical scope similar to Empower Nigeria," we wish to call attention to the fact that current and former Chiefs of Party for multiple other USAID Power Africa awards, would not meet these steep requirements.

Additionally, the recent Empower East and Central Africa, Southern Africa, and West Africa all included very similar Chief of Party experience requirements that materially differ from those included for Empower Nigeria. As written, the Empower Nigeria Chief of Party requirements would significantly reduce the available candidate pool to a very small selection of available experts, which will unnecessarily limit competition. This would be particularly true for local candidates, thus severely limiting USAID’s localization policy. Given these considerations:

Alternatively, may USAID consider revising the Chief

RFP Section F.4.1 Key Personnel Chief of Party minimum requirements have been reduced. Please refer to the yellow highlights in the attached revised RFP.

of Party experience requirements to more closely align with USAID's management and technical requirements for other Power Africa Empower RFPs, such as “Minimum of ten (10) years of management experience in implementing energy related programs for on- and beyond-the-grid solutions.”

44 Section F.4.1 - In reference to the requirements for KP #1 under Section F.4.1 for "A minimum of ten (10) years of management experience in implementing programs with a dollar value size and technical scope similar to Empower Nigeria,"" to remove ambiguity, and ensure a consistent evaluation and comparison of proposed key personnel qualifications, may USAID provide a more precise definition of the "program dollar size similar to Empower Nigeria," expressed in terms of average dollar size per program year (i.e.

program dollar size divided by the program period of performance)?

RFP Section F.4.1 Key Personnel Chief of Party minimum requirements have been reduced. Please refer to the yellow highlights in the attached revised RFP.

45 Section F.4.4 - Requirements for Key Personnel #4 under F.4.4, calls for a “Minimum of five (5) years of experience in overseeing operations on a project of similar complexity and dollar value.” Personnel in this position are typically responsible for managing locally incurred costs and expenditures. Therefore, using the dollar value of a project may impact whether a candidate actually has the experience and qualifications to serve in this role. Additionally, this metric does not factor in the duration of a program, e.g. the experience of working in a similar role on a $30m program implemented over 2 years will be different than the experience of working on a $65m program implemented over 8 years.

May USAID therefore consider specifying a dollar value range for locally-incurred direct costs, i.e.

excluding procurements managed by a headquarters team, expatriate salary costs, and indirect costs, expressed as an average dollar amount per year, or alternatively removing the dollar value requirement entirely?

RFP Section F.4.4 minimum requirements have been reduced.

Please refer to the yellow highlights in the attached revised RFP.

46 Section F.4.1 - Relevant RFP Language: "F.4.1. Key Personnel #1: Chief of Party….

The minimum requirements for this position are as follows…A minimum of ten (10) years of management experience in implementing programs with a dollar value size and technical scope similar to Empower Nigeria" Question: Given the small number of donor-funded energy sector projects in the past 10 years with a dollar value size similar to Empower Nigeria ($75 - $85 million), there are very few potential Chief of Party (COP) candidates who will be able to meet the stated minimum requirement of 10 years of management experience in implementing programs with a dollar value size and technical scope similar to Empower Nigeria. To maximize the pool of qualified candidates, would USAID kindly consider revising the minimum requirements as follows?

● 10 years of project management experience implementing energy activities

● Management experience in implementing programs with a dollar value size similar to Empower Nigeria (with no minimum years of experience)

Separating these two requirements will better align with the requirements for the COP role on the Empowering East and Central Africa (EECA), Empower Southern Africa (ESA), Empower West Africa (EWA) projects. Maintaining equivalent minimum requirements for COPs across all Power Africa contracts with similar scopes of work will ensure equity among Power Africa COPs.

RFP Section F.4.1 Key Personnel Chief of Party minimum requirements have been reduced. Please refer to the yellow highlights in the attached revised RFP.

47 Section F.4 outlines all Key Personnel, including two technical Deputy Chief of Party candidates who could step into the role of Chief of Party. In our experience, an organizational structure with two technical DCOPs can cause inefficiencies and management issues during implementation, which can reduce the overall program effectiveness. This can best be resolved by ensuring that only one technical DCOP is included in the staffing structure to clarify lines of authority. We also note that other Empower RFPs and awards designate only one DCOP.

To ensure clarity within the organizational structure, would USAID consider allowing offerors to designate

Yes, the designation of one position as DCOP and the other DCOP designated as Senior Technical Advisor is allowed.

one position as DCOP and the other as Senior Technical Advisor?

Sections F.4 and F.5- USAID lays out Key Personnel and Contractor Team Composition positions for Empower Nigeria. In an effort to create cost and management efficiencies within the project, and understanding that the DCOP and Outcome Level positions have significant technical and experience overlaps in scope, would USAID consider allowing DCOP candidates (either DCOP CLIN 1 or DCOP CLIN

2) to also serve in one of the Outcome Lead positions outlined in F.5.

The designation of one position as DCOP and the other DCOP designated as Senior Technical Advisor is allowed.

Similarly, Section F.5.a.iv - Distribution Outcome lead. The Senior Technical Advisor or DCOP 2 depending on the offeror staff structure could also serve as the Distribution Outcome Technical lead. Therefore, the requirement for distribution outcome lead in Section F.5.a.iv is therefore removed.

49 Section F.5(b) states that the contractor must place embedded advisors in four (4) organizations.

a. Please clarify USAID’s vision for the roles/responsibilities of these positions.

The embedded advisor roles and responsibilities are based on the needs of the listed organization during program implementation.

50 Section F.4.1 - Relevant RFP Language: "F.4.1. Key Personnel #1: Chief of Party….The minimum requirements for this position are as follows…Previous sub-Saharan Africa work experience" Question: Alternatively, considering that the energy sector context in some North African countries is similar to that in Nigeria and other sub-Saharan African countries, would USAID kindly adjust the third bullet to be "Previous Africa work experience".

RFP Section F.4.1 Key Personnel Chief of Party minimum requirements have been reduced. Please refer to the yellow highlights in the attached revised RFP.

The requirements for Sub saharan africa experience has been eliminated.

51 Section F.4 - Page Number: 34 Relevant RFP Language: “Key Personnel #3: Deputy Chief of Party CLIN 2 (Outcome 4)”,RFP Reference:

F.5.1.a, Page Number: 35 Relevant RFP Language: “The below full-time positions will form part of the contractor team and be based in Abuja…Iv. Distribution Outcome Technical Lead” Question: Given that the Deputy Chief of Party CLIN 2 only oversees Outcome 4 (i.e., distribution), would USAID kindly remove the requirement for an additional full-time Distribution Outcome Technical Lead?

The designation of one position as DCOP and the other DCOP designated as Senior Technical Advisor is allowed.

Similarly, Section F.5.a.iv - Distribution Outcome lead. The senior technical advisor or DCOP 2 depending on the offeror staff structure will also serve as the Distribution Outcome Technical lead. Therefore, the requirement for distribution outcome lead is therefore removed.

52 Section F.5 - Relevant RFP Language: “The contractor must place a full-time embedded advisor in each of the following organizations: I. Nigeria Electricity Regulatory

USAID will not make changes to the RFP as written regarding the embedded advisors.

Commission Ii. Ministry of Power Iii. Office of the Presidency or Vice-president attached to the government energy adviser. Iv. Rural Electrification Agency” Question: The RFP requires that offerors place a full-time embedded advisor in four different Nigerian ministries and organizations. Given the huge cost associated with these positions, would USAID consider allowing these positions to be long-term, part-time rather than full-time positions? Long-term, part-time status would allow these advisors to provide the requisite assistance to the four organizations, but the contractor would be able to engage them as consultants, which would be much more cost-efficient for the US Government.

53 Section F.2 - Can USAID please clarify the period of performance? B.2 indicates that it is 5 years, however, F.2 indicates that there will be a 4-year base period with one option year.

Can USAID also clarify the start date, is it July 2024 or October 2024?

RFP Section F describes scenarios for the period of performance. The first scenario is if the successful offeror requires use of the Waiver for Section

889. If this is required, then the format of the Budget in RFP Section B, will change to be allocated by base and option years. If the successful offeror does not require use of the Foreign Assistance Waiver then the RFP Section B budget will remain as currently formatted. Our intent is to have a 5 year contract.

The anticipated start date will shift depending on how the procurement moves forward. We are tentatively planning for late September-October 2024.

54 Section F.4.4 - For Key Personnel #4: Finance and Compliance Director, would USAID accept 3 years of additional experience in lieu of a graduate degree or a Professional Certification with ACCA or CIMA or other relevant authority for the Finance and Compliance Director candidate?

No

55 Section F.7.1 - No. 10 Communications Plans-due 30 calendar days prior to subsequent year of implementation. Can USAID clarify if this is a one-time reporting requirement for Year 1 only, or if this is to be an annual reporting requirement? If this is an annual

This is an annual requirement and due date will remain as stated in the RFP.

reporting requirement, would USAID be amenable to revising it to: due annually 1 September of each implementation year?

56 Section F.7.1- No. 11 Contractor invoice with corresponding budget variation analysis-due 30 calendar days after the end of the period. Can USAID clarify what “period” refers to? Does this refer to the overall period of performance or is it the USG fiscal year/quarter periods?

Period refers to the amount of time covered in the invoice. For example, the invoice period for April is April 1 to April 30.

57 Section F.7.1- No. 13 Power Africa Information System (PAIS) -due 5 days after the completion of each USAID fiscal quarter. Does this refer to 5 calendar days or 5 business days? Would USAID be amenable to revising the deadline to match the quarterly progress reporting schedule?

Per Section F.7.1 (5) all days are considered to be calendar days.

58 Section F.7.1- No. 6-Annual Report 30 calendar days after the end of the USAID fiscal year. The last annual report of the project will be replaced by the final report that summarizes overall contract accomplishments, annual government property report, and reporting on indicators and milestones as detailed in the MEL Plan. Can USAID clarify if the Annual Report is meant to cover Q4 of each fiscal year of implementation or are offerors expected to supply both a Q4 Report and an Annual report 30 calendar days after the end of the fiscal year/end of the fiscal quarter – i.e. two reports annually due on 30 October?

The Q4 report is covered in the annual report with a section that summarizes the Q4 achievements.

59 Section F.4 - For the COP and Finance Director positions we understand what is meant by, “experience in implementing programs with a dollar value size and technical scope”. Our specific question is how are these qualifying factors scored during the technical proposal review with respect to seeking the best technical proposal at reasonable cost?

Please refer to RFP Section M for information on how key personnel will be evaluated.

60 Section F.2 - The anticipated Contract start date is July 2024 for a solicitation closing date of June 7, 2024. The Option Period suggests the contract start date will be October. Is it reasonable to assume the contract start date will be on or after October 1, 2024?

Yes, although that date could shift depending on how the procurement progresses.

61 Section F - We do not have questions on the Contractor performance will be solicitation in general, however, we observe the contractor does not have direct control for many of the minimum results specified unless solely dealing with private sector that is operating in good faith. Dealing with government and many of the special interest controlled privatized power sector companies is a different matter as history shows they have largely been operating in bad faith since the inception of privatization in 2013. Will USAID penalize a contractor for failing to meet annual goals if it can be shown special interest intrigues have frustrated progress sought?

assessed and rated in accordance with Section E and Section F.6 of the RFP.

62 Section F - We do not have questions on the solicitation in general, however, we observe the contractor does not have direct control for many of the minimum results specified unless solely dealing with private sector that is operating in good faith. Dealing with government and many of the special interest controlled privatized power sector companies is a different matter as history shows they have largely been operating in bad faith since the inception of privatization in 2013. Specifically, will USAID penalize the bidder during the technical evaluation if proposing realistic results for circumstance?

Offerors will be evaluated in accordance with Section M of the RFP.

63 Section F.7.1 (page 37) requires that a draft grants manual be submitted 60 days after the contract effective date. Given the activities identified in the work plan and our overall implementation approach will feed into the development of the grants manual, will USAID consider requiring the draft grants manual to be due 90 days after award?

No.

64 Section F - Q0S - What will be the SLA for energy provision for customers (Would it be 12 hours or 24 hours).

This question is not clear.

65 Section F.5(b) states that the contractor must place embedded advisors in four (4) organizations.

Please confirm that the salaries and benefits for these positions should appear in the Offeror’s cost proposal, as indicated in Section L.12, Item 3(A) (p96).

This is correct. Salaries and benefits for embedded advisors, as for any other costs funded under the contract, must appear in the Offeror’s cost proposal.

66 Section F.2 Period of Performance, page 32. Can USAID confirm the anticipated start date of Empower

Given the stage we are at in the procurement process, the anticipated

Nigeria? The RFP states that the anticipated start date is on or around July 2024, which does not seem feasible since the proposal submission is on June 7, 2024.

date will be revised to on or around October 2024.

67 Section F.4 Key Personnel, page 32. USAID has given Offerors the opportunity to propose a fifth key personnel position, can USAID confirm that this is not compulsory?

The inclusion of a 5th key personnel is compulsory.

68 Section F.4.1 Key Personnel #1: Chief of Party, page 33.

Given the limited pool of professionals that meet the requirement of “management experience in implementing programs with a dollar value ($75-85 million) and technical scope similar to Empower Nigeria,” would USAID consider reducing the threshold to $25 million to give the opportunity to more qualified professionals, including local candidates, to be considered for this role?

No

69 Section F.4.1 Key Personnel #1: Chief of Party, page 33.

Would USAID consider expanding the COP requirements to include “management experience of energy portfolios” as comparable experience to the management of programs?

No

70 Section F.4.4 Key Personnel #4: Finance and Compliance Director, page 34. Given the limited pool of professionals that meet the requirement of overseeing operations on projects of similar complexity and dollar value ($75-85 million), would USAID consider reducing the threshold to $25 million to give the opportunity to more qualified professionals, including local candidates, to be considered for this role?

The requirements remain as stated in the RFP.

71 Section F.4.4 Key Personnel #4: Finance and Compliance Director, page 34. Would USAID consider changing the title of the required key personnel position from “Finance and Compliance Director” to “Deputy Chief of Party - Operations” or “Operations and Finance Director”? The most qualified candidates are likely to be interested in a title that reflects the level of management and operations responsibilities they will be overseeing for an activity of this size and scope.

The offeror may choose a title that best suits their team structure and approach, as long as the overall responsibilities are fulfilled by the position.

72 Section F.5 Contractor Team Composition, page 34. The offeror may choose to address the

Can USAID clarify if the Partnerships Coordinator role is expected to be a full-time position?

partnership coordinator role as best suits their team structure and technical approach.

73 Section F.5 Contractor Team Composition, page 35.

Can USAID confirm that the Power Supply Outcome Technical Lead (Outcome 2) should feature an expert with also transmission experience?

Outcome 2 - Power supply combines generation and transmission.

RFP Section G

74 What does the customer want? We can do this through a feasibility study.

This question is not clear.

RFP Section H

75 What is the disbursement plan for the project.

The contractor will follow AIDAR

752.7003 Documentation for Payment, AIDAR 52.216-7 Allowance Cost and Payment and FAR 52.232-22 Limitation of Funds. Generally, contractors invoice on a monthly basis to receive reimbursement of expenditures incurred in support of the contract objectives.

RFP Section J

Attachment J.1.22 - US Mission LCP only references local currency. Due to the recent and current local currency instability, can USAID please confirm that the US mission approves local salaries can be denominated in USD while maintaining payment in local currency.

Correct. Salaries denominated in USD must not exceed the Mission Nigeria LCP when translated to local currency.

Attachment J.2.1- To efficiently allocate costs across the CLINs can USAID confirm that offerors can submit their own budget templates that conforms to the requirements of Attachment J.2.1.

Yes, Offerors can submit their own budget templates if it follows the overall format of the attachment J.2.1.

Attachment J.2.1 contains a "Budget Narrative" worksheet. However, there do not appear to be instructions in the RFP regarding the use of this worksheet. Additionally, the instructions to J.2.1 state that the budget narrative worksheet is "intended to

Yes, Offerors can submit their own budget templates if it follows the overall format of the attachment J.2.1 assist the preparer, and should be modified, edited, or deleted as needed."

Would USAID allow Offerors to insert worksheets in their own format and templates into the Cost Volume budget workbook, provided that all cost items and corresponding calculations are shown in the "Detail" and "Travel" worksheets, and summarized in the "BUDGET Summary" worksheet?

Attachment J.2.1 RFP Reference: Budget Template

Page Number: Attachment J.2.1: Budget Template

Question: The budget template was set up as a single CLIN template, however, Offerors must present a two-CLIN budget. May Offerors use their own multi- CLIN templates as long as they follow the set up and order of USAID’s template? If not, can USAID please provide guidance on how offerors are to present the two CLINs in given format?

Yes, Offerors can submit their own budget templates if it follows the overall format of the attachment J.2.1

80 Attachment J.1.22 - Thank you for providing a Local Compensation Plan for Nigeria. Would USAID please provide a currency conversion rate that Offerors may use?

When drafting the budget, USAID used an exchange rate of $1 =1000 Naira.

Currently, the USD trades at $1 = 1500 Naira on average.

81 Attachment J.2.1 - Can USAID remove the requirement to fill out the “Narrative” tab as this information will be part of the detail budget narrative?

Offerors may remove the narrative tab from the budget template due to the fact that this information must be part of the detailed budget narrative.

82 Attachment J.2.1 - Budget template -Can Offeror amend the detailed budget template while still keeping the budget structure, to conform with their estimating and accounting practices? In addition, can the detailed budget which is currently in a cost-plus format be adjusted for subcontractors that are Time and Material and Firm Fixed Price?

Offerors may use their own multi-CLIN templates as long as they follow the structure and order of USAID’s template.

83 Attachment J.2.1. The Excel budget template provided has a tab indicating budget narrative information can be provided within that tab. Can USAID confirm that this tab does not need to be used and that the budget narrative can be provided in PDF format only within the cost proposal?

Offerors may remove the narrative tab from the budget template. The budget narrative can be provided in PDF format only.

84 Attachment J.1.22. The Local Compensation Plan attachment included is in Nigerian Naira (NGN) and

When drafting the budget, USAID used an exchange rate of $1 =1000 Naira.

dated July 2, 2023. The NGN to USD exchange rate has tripled over the last year, and at the current exchange rate to USD of 1476 NGN to 1 USD (from oanda.com on May 15, 2024), the LCP maximum annual salary in USD would be $34,659. Given such a salary can be considered unreasonable or unrealistic for a senior position, can USAID provide the LCP in USD?

Alternatively, can USAID provide an exchange rate that bidders should use when converting the LCP to USD?

Currently, the USD trades at $1 = 1500 Naira on average.

USAID will not provide an exchange rate for offerors to utilize. Rely on publicly available websites for currency exchange rates.

RFP Section L

85 With due respect to the proposal on Empower Nigeria, I wish to learn the contents of Section L of the RFP which sets forth all instructions for the preparation and submission of Empower Nigeria proposal content, including critical dates/times for the submission of questions, and the proposal submission closing date and time. Also on Section M which states the criteria by which proposals will be evaluated.

Refer to the RFP for contents of Section L: Instruction to offerors and Section M for Evaluation criteria for award.

86 Since proposals will be submitted electronically, please confirm that signatures applied by electronic means will be accepted – including where the RFP refers to an “original” signature (such as on the SF 33 within the Business/Cost volume).

Signatures applied by electronic means will be accepted

Section L.10 states that proposals must have sequentially numbered pages. Given that the Business/Cost volume will be assembled from many different component documents, such as the signed Section K, Letter of Commitment from each subcontractor, past performance, please confirm that this requirement does not apply to the full Cost Volume, just the Budget Narrative.

The requirement for page numbers does not apply to the full Cost Volume, just the Budget Narrative.

88 Under Section L.12, it states that, “CLIN 2, which will consist of a minimum of 40 percent of the Total Estimated Cost (TEC), will exclusively support Outcome 4, which focuses on supporting the DISCOs.”

To ensure comparability between Offeror proposals, may USAID confirm that the $1m construction plug, $5m grants plug, and associated indirect costs should be excluded from the calculation of the amount allocated to CLIN 4?

Offerors may allocate the grants plug and construction in accordance with their technical approach / strategy. This includes allocating grant plug and construction plug to only one CLIN or across both CLINs.

89 Section L.11.6.3, states that Key Personnel resumes Offerors must follow the page limits are limited to 3 pages each, including 3 professional references. So that Offerors may use the full 3 pages to demonstrate candidates’ relevant experience and expertise, please confirm that references may be submitted on a separate page.

described in the RFP. References should be included within the 3 page limit.

Section L.12.2(3) states, “Provide for each of the contracts the information that is required per Attachment J.2.2 “Past Performance Information Sheet.” USAID recommends that you alert the contacts that their names have been submitted and that they are authorized to provide performance information concerning the listed contracts if and when USAID requests it.” Please confirm that:

b. Offerors are *not* expected to request that clients complete Attachment J.2.2. prior to the proposal closing date.

We uploaded the wrong past performance sheet. The erroneous one has been removed and replaced by the correct form.

Offerors are not required to complete Attachment J.2.2 for contracts that are in CPARs

Offerors are not expected to request clients to complete the sheet that was erroneously uploaded.

The RFP states under L.12 that “The GUC provision in this award could be used to purchase commodities, demonstrate or pilot initiatives, and as a catalytic, first-loss or similar transaction derisking capital to unlock transactions.” The RFP also states, at C.5.3 (p.

18) that “This contract includes Grants Under Contract (GUC) which are intended to provide catalytic, first-loss or similar transaction derisking capital while ensuring that these grants should not distort the effective business case for investments.” However, USAID’s “Liquidity Toolkit” (October 2020) states that “at the time of writing, first-loss was being reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget, which may present additional hurdles.” Additionally, multiple implementing partners implementing flagship USAID trade, investment, and climate programs have been denied approval by USAID operating units to use assistance mechanisms under GUCs to provide first-loss capital. Given the significance of the use of GUCs to provide first-loss capital to Offeror technical approaches, may USAID confirm that all necessary authorizations have been obtained to approve the use of GUCs to provide first-loss capital under the Empower Nigeria program?

Offerors should assume all necessary approvals have been received.

92 Section L.11.1 Relevant RFP Language: “Acronym List (maximum 1 page)” Question: For ease of reading, would USAID kindly increase the page limit for the Acronym List to 2 pages?

The RFP Section L.11.1 has been modified to increase the page limit to 2 for the acronym list.

93 Section L.11.5.2 Relevant RFP Language: “Draft First Year- GANTT Chart (2 pages maximum)” Question: In Section C.5, the Empower Nigeria Statement of Work contains 4 Outcomes with a total of 17 Interventions. To allow offerors enough space to depict Year 1 activities for all Interventions in the Gantt chart, would USAID kindly increase the limit to 3 pages?

The RFP Section L.11.5.2 has been modified to increase the page limit to 3 for the GANTT chart.

94 Section L.11.6.3 Relevant RFP Language: “Resumes must include e-mail, names, and title of 3 professional references for the COP, DCOP CLIN 1, DCOP CLIN 2 and Finance and Compliance Director.”

Question: Would USAID allow offerors to place the 3 professional references on a separate page that does not count against the 3-page limit for each resume?

No

95 Section L.12, Part 2 Relevant RFP Language: “The offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) must provide performance information for itself, the contractor teaming arrangements, if any, and each major subcontractor (one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost) in accordance with the following:

(1) Offerors must include a list/table of up to 5 of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal” Question: Could USAID confirm that…