Attachment A of amendment 1_RFP 72068821R00003_Q and A.pdf

USAID Mali Anka Jiko Activity RFP No. 72068821R00003

Amendment No. 1

Questions and Answers

1. F.5 Activity Reporting and Other Deliverables (page 37) and F.6 Delivery Schedule for Reports/Deliverables (page 42) request the initial annual work plan within 30 calendar days after the effective date of the contract. Would USAID please extend the initial annual work plan due date to 60 days after the effective date of the contract?

Answer: The initial work plan submission due date shall remain unchanged.

2. F.5 Activity Reporting and Other Deliverables (page 41) says the annual report must be submitted 30 days after the fourth quarter of each fiscal year, but Section F.6 Delivery Schedule for Reports/Deliverables (page 43) says the annual report must be submitted 30 calendar days after the fourth quarter of each implementation year. Can USAID clarify whether the annual report should be submitted after the fiscal year or implementation year?

Answer: Annual reports should be submitted based on fiscal. Section F.6 has been updated with this amendment.

3. Section L.8, page 97 states “The Offeror will submit an organizational chart showing lines of reporting among long-term team members. A second chart will demonstrate the relationship between the Offeror and other offices (e.g., Offeror’s headquarters office, USAID, other partners, etc.). The third chart will be a Staffing Plan showing titles and names that will form part of the activity team.”

o Will USAID please allow Offerors to use 11x17 sized paper for improved readability for all the charts included in Annex 1?

Answer: Yes, that is acceptable. Please note on Page 95 that the annexes are not part of the technical proposal page limit of 32 pages.

4. Section C.5, page 14, the RFP seems to suggest that sanitation-related interventions for this project are to be limited to “rural populations of between 2,000 – 10,000 inhabitants” (page

15) and where “population density and on-site sanitation indicates a need for fecal sludge management” (page 15).

o Is USAID open to this project working with Communes to address the sanitation needs for rural populations that do not meet the apparent USAID criteria for population density?

Answer: No.

5. Section C.1, page 12, the RFP mentions “full cost tariff collection.”

o Can USAID kindly advise if current tariffs allow for capital /investment costs of water infrastructure?

Answer: Currently in Mali, many tariff structures are not sufficient to cover all costs for water infrastructure. As a water governance activity, Anka Jiko will work with communities in the design and operation of water delivery systems that include a full tariff collection system to cover operational and capital expenses of infrastructure.

Amendment No. 1

6. Section C.1, page 13, the RFP mentions “safe … water sources.”

o Can USAID please confirm that the meaning of “safe” used throughout the RFP is as defined in Sustainable Development Goal 6?

Answer: Yes.

7. Section C.3, page 13, Sub-Objective 1.1: The RFP mentions “participating in policy…” o Can USAID kindly clarify what is meant by policy in this context since policy typically is created at the national level?

Answer: In this context, USAID is talking about policy at the level of local government, notably the development and implementation of WASH and water-related components of PDSECs (commune level). As stated in the RFP, USAID expects that all work under Anka Jiko will be consistent with the PDSECs and thus support national policy priorities, but policy advocacy work at the national level is not expected under this award.

8. Section C.6, page 16, the RFP states “mobilization of the community financial contribution for construction, operations and maintenance.”

o Can USAID please advise whether the community contribution includes both cash and in-kind contributions?

Answer: Yes. The Offeror will have to monetize the in-kind contributions provided by communities.

9. Section C.6, page 16, the RFP states, “HL.8.4-1 Value of new funding mobilized to the water and sanitation sectors as a result of USG assistance” o Can USAID please confirm that the elements that contribute to the “value of new funding” be defined as part of work planning? If not, how is it to be determined?

Answer: Please refer to the performance indicator reporting sheet (PIRS) on page 62 of the following document:

https://www.globalwaters.org/sites/default/files/usaid_water_indicator_handbook_508_1.pdf

10. Section C.6.A, page 17, the RFP lists the expected outcomes under Sub-objective 1.1, including “At least 20 communes successfully access public funds (either from technical services, from tax remittance from national government, or from L'Agence Nationale d'Investissement des Collectivités Territoriales - ANICT) for new water or sanitation infrastructure prioritized in their PDSEC.”

o Elsewhere the RFP indicates that rehabilitation of infrastructure is part of the project. Will funds accessed for rehabilitating infrastructures also count as “successfully access[ing] public funds?”

Answer: Yes.

11. Section C.7, page 20, the RFP states “HL.8.1-3 Number of people receiving improved service quality from an existing basic drinking or safely managed water service as a result of USG assistance.”

https://www.globalwaters.org/sites/default/files/usaid_water_indicator_handbook_508_1.pdf

Amendment No. 1 o Does USAID have an official definition of improved service quality? If so, can USAID kindly provide Offerors with the definition?

Answer: Please refer to the performance indicator reporting sheet (PIRS) on page 43 of the following document:

https://www.globalwaters.org/sites/default/files/usaid_water_indicator_handbook_508_1.pdf

12. Section C.7.A, page 21: A minimum of 50 water systems constructed.

o Can USAID please confirm that this expected outcome also includes rehabilitated systems?

Answer: Yes.

13. Section C.7 (p.19): The life-cycle cost analysis addresses operational expenses and capital expenses. Could USAID kindly confirm that this is the methodology required for the Anka Jiko activity (as described on page 19) or can bidders consider operating costs only?

Answer: By definition, life cycle costs include both operation and capital expenses. Offerors should do their best to include all relevant expenses.

14. Section F.8 (p.44-45) states that the key personnel must have excellent oral and written communication skills in French and English. Would USAID be open to candidates who possess intermediate oral skills in English and excellent French oral and written communication skills?

Answer: No. Key personnel are expected to interface with USAID and USAID implementing partners, as well as other donors and stakeholders which may require communication in English. Key personnel are expected to support the Chief of Party with reports to USAID and other English deliverables.

15. Section L.7, Section 1: Technical Approach (c) Draft Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan (p. 96): Would USAID consider a separate annex for presentation of the activity’s performance indicators and information on data sources, methodologies and frequency of data collection?

Answer: As this is only a draft MEL plan, USAID wants to keep the specifications outlined in the RFP (p.96) and not include a separate annex.

16. Section L.7, Annex 2: Resumes of Proposed Key Personnel (p.98): Offerors may allocate no more than three pages to each key personnel resume (nine pages total), but the RFP allocates 15 pages to Annex 2. Is USAID open to increasing the page limit to five pages per resume for the three key personnel so that offerors may use the full 15 pages allocated to Annex 2? Alternatively, may offerors present the three-page resumes for two non-key personnel?

Answer: Thank you for bringing this to our attention. USAID prefers to limit resumes to three pages. Thus, the page allocation for Annex 2 should be nine pages. Section L.7 has been updated with this amendment.

https://www.globalwaters.org/sites/default/files/usaid_water_indicator_handbook_508_1.pdf

Amendment No. 1

17. L.7. Annex 2 (page 98) says resumes of proposed key personnel are not to exceed 15 pages and that resumes must not exceed three pages in length. Since there are only three

(3) key personnel required per F.8 Key Personnel (page 44), can USAID please confirm the page limit for this annex is nine pages?

Answer: See answer to question no. 16.

18. In Section L.8, page 98, when discussing Annex 2, the RFP states that the Annex must not exceed 15 pages, but also that resumes must not exceed three pages in length.

o Can USAID please clarify if each of the three required resumes should be three pages each or five pages each?

Answer: See answer to question no. 16.

19. L.7. Annex 3 (page 98) Key Personnel Letters of Commitment says the letters should not exceed five pages. Can USAID please confirm that the page limit should be three pages total (one page per key personnel)?

Answer: See answer to question no. 16.

20. We would like to get more clarification on the Mali Anka Jiko Activity. We run WASH program in Mali, and we would like to know if INGOs are eligible to apply?

Answer: An international Non-Governmental Organization is eligible to submit proposal following all the terms and conditions in the RFP.

21. In Section C.7 (pg. 19), it is mentioned that “no building construction permitted.” Although we understand this to mean that all construction will be water systems and fecal-sludge systems, would associated administrative buildings not be permitted?

Answer: Associated administrative building construction will not be permitted. The construction/rehabilitation must be on water systems and fecal-sludge systems. As mentioned in Section C.7, the only exception is for small vegetable storage facilities related to the productive use water systems.

22. Under C.9.2 (pg. 25), the RFP states that QA/QC will be provided by a separate contract managed by USAID/Mali. For planning activities and to provide a more accurate timeline for deliverables, would USAID provide more details on the responsibility of USAID’s architectural/engineering firm? Will its responsibility be strictly to ensure that the contractor follows the QA/QC plan that the contractor developed for the project?

Answer: The “QA Contractor” referred to in Section C.9 will assist USAID/Mali with the on-site construction oversight and independent verification of the quality of construction and rehabilitation works; the amount, quantities, and value of work completed; and overall compliance with all terms and conditions of all construction conducted as part of the Anka Jiko Activity. In addition to QA/QC construction oversight responsibilities to USAID/Mali, the QA Contractor may also provide other services as needed for the monitoring and inspection of construction activities under Anka Jiko Activity. Please see the updated Section C.9.2.

Amendment No. 1

23. The RFP makes it clear that construction activities are to be conducted using a “design-bid-build” approach. However, under C.9.2, it states that “the contractor must take a design-bid-build approach where engineering designs and pre-construction feasibility studies will be completed by a licensed engineering firm and final design will be bid out to local construction firms.” When USAID states that the final design will be bid out to local construction firms, does USAID mean, following the design-bid-build approach, that the licensed engineering firm that completes the feasibility study will also draft the final design, and that local construction firms will submit proposals in response to the architectural and engineering firm’s final design? Or does USAID intend that the local construction firm will develop the final design based on the A/E firm’s feasibility study and provide its proposal to build based on that design? This would entail a design-build approach rather than a design-bid-build approach.

Answer: The constructions will be conducted through design-bid-build approach. Section C.9.2 has been revised to provide more clarity.

24. L.7. Section 3 Past Performance (a) 1. (page 98) says, “The Offeror must submit a Past

Performance Matrix that lists up to three (3) of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal,” whereas instructions for Annex 4: Past Performance Matrix (page 99) says the matrix must include up to five contracts and/or assistance awards. Would USAID please clarify the number of contracts to be included in the Matrix?

Answer: The requirement has been updated with this amendment to five (5) most recent and relevant contacts. Please see the updated Section L.7.

25. Section L.8, page 98 states that the Past Performance Matrix should list “up to three of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal,” but later in on page 99 the description of Annex 4: Past Performance Matrix states “The matrix must include up to five of the most recent and relevant contracts.”

o Can USAID please confirm that Offerors, inclusive of major subcontractors, may submit up to five recent and relevant contracts in the Past Performance Matrix?

Answer: Please see answer to question no. 24.

26. Section L.7, Section 3: Past Performance (p.98) and Annex 4: Past Performance Matrix (p.

99): Please confirm whether offerors are expected to present up to three or five references in the past performance matrix.

Answer: Please see answer to question no. 24.

27. RFP Section L.7 Section 3 Annex 4, page 99 states “The matrix must include up to five (5) of the most recent and relevant contracts and/or assistance awards of five (5) years for the prime inclusive of major subcontractors” May USAID clarify if Offerors should submit five past performance examples or three, as described in the preceding section on page 98?

Answer: Please see answer to question no. 24.

Amendment No. 1

28. On pg. 98, the RFP states that the offeror “must submit a Past Performance Matrix that lists up to three (3) PPRs,” and on pg. 99, it states: “The matrix must include up to five (5) of the most recent and relevant contracts and/or assistance awards of five (5) years for the prime inclusive of major subcontractors for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.”

Could USAID please clarify how many PPRs must be included in the Past Performance Matrix?

Answer: Please see answer to question no. 24.

29. Section L.7, Section 3: Past Performance (p.98): Please clarify whether all past performance information should be presented in the Annex 4. Should Annex 4 include the Past Performance Matrix, PPR Information Sheets, and quality awards and certification information?

Answer: All past performance information shall be included in the Annex 4. Please see the updated section L.7.

30. RFP Section L.7 Section 3, page 98 states “1. The Offeror must submit a Past Performance Matrix that lists up to three (3) of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. … 3. The Offeror provide a Past Performance Information Sheet” Can USAID confirm if Offerors should include the Past Performance Information Sheet in the Technical Approach narrative, in addition to the Past Performance Matrix included in Annex 4?

Answer: Past performance information shall be included in the Annex 4. Please see the updated section L.7.

31. L.7. Section 3 Past Performance (a) 1. (page 98) says the Offeror must submit a Past Performance Matrix highlighting similar type of work, scope and size, complexity/diversity of tasks, and how recently they were performed. L.7. Section 3 Past Performance (a) 3. (page

98) also requests that the Offeror submit Past Performance Information Sheets that address scope of work or complexity/diversity of tasks, term of performance, and dollar value. Would USAID clarify what information they would like in the Past Performance Matrix and the Past Performance Information Sheets?

Answer: Please see the updated Section L.7.

32. Section L.7 page 94 includes “past performance report forms” among those not included in page count.

o Can USAID please confirm that the “past performance report forms” are the Past Performance Information Sheets and that they can be submitted with the Past Performance Matrix in Annex 4?

o Should Offerors include a narrative summary of past performance information in the body of the technical proposal as Section 3 included in the 32-page count?

Answer:

● The terminology under section L.7 has been updated from “past performance report forms” to “Past Performance Information”.

Amendment No. 1

● Narrative summary shall be provided in the past performance information as part of the Annex 4.

33. Section L.7, Section 3: Past Performance (p. 98): May offerors develop their own past performance matrices?

Answer: The offerors are required to provide required information to past performance information annex as per the updated section L.7.

34. Page 94, Section L, Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical proposal, Paragraph b. The second paragraph notes, The cover page, table of contents, executive summary, resumes of key personnel, personnel statements of availability, section dividers, past performance report forms, acronym list and annexes are NOT included in the 32-page limitation. However, on p. 98, Section 3: Past Performance (M.2.(c)) notes that the offeror should provide performance information for itself and each major subcontractor.

Does USAID want this information included in Section 3 of the technical (within the 32-page limit) as well as in the past performance matrix in Annex 4? Or just in the Annex?

Answer: The past performance information shall be included in Annex 4. Please check the revised section L.7.

35. Page 99, Section L, Annex 4. The text notes, The matrix must include up to five (5) of the most recent and relevant contracts and/or assistance awards of five (5) years for the prime inclusive of major subcontractors for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.

However, on page 98, Section 3: Past Performance (M.2.(c)), states up to three (3) of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal should be used. Would USAID please confirm if only contracts are permissible or if other mechanisms of assistance can be included as examples of past performance?

Answer: Please see response to question no. 24. As mentioned under Annex 4 of Section L.7, past performance from Assistance programs will be utilized in the evaluation.

36. Referencing RFP Section L.7, Is USAID expecting the Past Performance Matrix in Annex 4 to be submitted as an excel? If so, can USAID provide their preferred template?

Answer: Please see the revised section L.7 for the past performance information. Annex 4 shall be submitted through MS Word (or PDF with Optical Character Recognition). Please follow the instructions provided in Section L.7 to submit the past performance information.

37. Section L.7.1 Cover Page, page 94, states, “The Cover Letter must include the following: (1) the RFP name and number, (2) the name of the Offeror, (3) Name of any consortium members/partnerships (4) Name, title and signature of the authorized representative (5) date of submission and (6) the Offeror’s DUNS number.”

o Can USAID please confirm that Offerors may submit a Cover Page and a Cover Letter, not included in the 32-page limit?

Answer: Offerors should submit only a Cover Page. Please see the updated Section L.7.

38. Section H.7 Consent to Subcontract page 53, the RFP states, " Please note that there is no authorization for issuing Grants Under Contracts (GUCs) under this contract." However, in

Amendment No. 1

Section L on page 102 the RFP states, "USAID may consider allowing GUCs under this solicitation provided that GUCs are an integral part of the successful offeror’s proposal."

o Can USAID please clarify whether Offerors should propose GUCs?

Answer: As mentioned in Section L.8, “USAID does not anticipate any GUC under this solicitation. Hence, the Head of the Contracting Activity (HCA) did not approve the GUCs per ADS 302.3.4.13. USAID may consider allowing GUCs under this solicitation provided that GUCs are an integral part of the successful offeror’s proposal” Hence, the offerors may propose GUC if it is an integral part of the offeror's proposal. USAID may consider HCA approval before the award execution.

39. RFP page 102 states that "(I) Grants Under Contract (GUC)- USAID does not anticipate any

GUC under this solicitation. Hence, the Head of the Contracting Activity (HCA) did not approve the GUCs per ADS 302.3.4.13. USAID may consider allowing GUCs under this solicitation provided that GUCs are an integral part of the successful offeror’s proposal." Will USAID please confirm that offerors are allowed to propose GUCs as part of their proposals?

Answer: Please see answer to question no. 38.

40. In the Cover Letter, USAID indicates the estimated ceiling cost as $35-39.5 million.

o Can USAID please confirm that the estimated range includes the $11,500,000 plug figure for the construction, included in Section B.4, page 8?

o If the ceiling range includes the plug figure, can USAID kindly allow the 20 percent threshold for major subcontractors’ calculation to be based on a ceiling range of $23.5 - 28 million?

Answer:

● The contract amount mentioned in the cover page includes the plug five of $11,500,000 for construction.

● Calculation for major subcontract should be based on the offeror's total proposed which includes the plug figure for construction. Please see section L.7.

41. Section B.4 (e) (p.9) indicates that construction services under CLIN 0002 will be implemented via firm-fixed price subcontract arrangements not to exceed the $11.5 million plug figure provided in this section. Additionally, as noted in Section C.9 (p. 23-27) of the RFP, construction activities are to include provision of professional services for the planning, architectural and engineering (A&E) design, and construction of drinking water, agricultural water and fecal sludge infrastructure, and shall be conducted using a design-bid-build approach. Section L.8, Part 2 (4)(G) also indicates that the $11.5 million construction plug under CLIN 0002 includes the cost of A&E services, surveys, testing, studies, or other services necessary to carry out the construction and construction related tasks. Please confirm that the requirement for fixed price subcontracting under CLIN 0002 specifically applies to construction services; and does not apply to planning, surveys, testing, studies, and other A&E design services. It is our understanding that cost reimbursable subcontracting mechanisms for planning and other A&E services is acceptable.

Amendment No. 1

Answer: Yes, the requirement for the fixed price subcontracting applies for the construction services. For planning, surveys, testing, studies and A&A design services appropriate contract type shall be selected.

42. RFP Section L.7 c), page 96 states that “Baseline information and target for each indicator should be included in the plan (if available).” Does USAID expect the Offeror to provide baseline numbers at the proposal stage?

Answer: No. Only if available. As also stated on page 96, "Otherwise, the collection of baseline data should start at the beginning of project implementation and the plan should include the methodology for that collection”. Also, please see the updated Section F.5 for the post award baseline requirements under the “Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) Plan”

43. Referencing Section L.7 c), Does USAID expect the Offeror to complete the mid-term and end evaluation or will that be covered by a separately-funded Third Party Monitor?

Answer: The contractor must comply with all USAID data reporting requirements. At its discretion, the contractor may complete internal mid-term and end evaluations to monitor progress. Due to the size of this award, USAID will likely be required to conduct one or two external evaluations per the current guidance in ADS 201.

44. Would USAID confirm that all project costs associated with the implementation of Objective 2 should fall under CLIN 0002 “Construction services (objective 2)” per Section B.4 (pg. 8) of the solicitation? Would USAID then revise Section L.8, Part 2(4)(G) (pg. 101) to remove the requirement that this plug figure be part of the subcontracts budget, as the CLIN 0002 budget will include all appropriate line items, including but not limited to subcontracts?

Answer: CLINS are organized based on the activity objectives and CLIN 0002 shall include costs for objective 2. The fixed price construction subcontracts should be part of the subcontract budget. Please see the revised section B.4.

45. Page 8, Section B.7, Contract Budget and Ceiling Price. CLIN 0002 outlines the budget for Construction services at $11,500,000. Is this figure inclusive of all goods and services needed to support the construction defined in the solicitation?

Answer: Please see answer to question no. 44.

46. As the construction component is budgeted at $11.5 million of the total contract value, is there a 611(e) certification in place for this work, or will the contractor have to seek a 611(e) certification for any construction efforts over $1 million?

Answer: USAID currently does not have a 611 (e) for this activity but is responsible for obtaining the certification. At this time, the specifics are not known to pursue the 611(e) and there may be a possibility that the construction could be disaggregated which would nullify a 611 (e) certification requirement. In any case, the contractor will not have to seek 611(e) certification.

47. Considering the volatility in today’s global markets, would USAID please provide an exchange rate to use in the cost proposal?

Amendment No. 1

Answer: Offerors may use an exchange rate based on the average exchange rate for the last six months or one year. Offerors shall provide justification for proposing an exchange rate in their budget narrative.

48. Regarding B.4 Contract Budget and Ceiling Price (page 8), would USAID confirm the

$11,500,000 plug for CLIN 0002, Construction services (objective 2), is exclusive of the Offeror’s applicable indirect costs and fee?

Answer: The CLIN 0002 does not include indirect cost. We added a CLIN for indirect costs through this amendment. Please see the updated section B.4 and updated attachment J.5.

49. K.1. Notice Listing Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference (page 75) cites FAR

52.237-8 Restriction on Severance Payments to Foreign Nationals. Would USAID please add FAR 52.237-9 Waiver of Limitation on Severance Payments to Foreign Nationals or remove 52.237-8 since severance payments are legally required for Malian nationals?

Answer: FAR 52.237-8 has been deleted and FAR 52.237-9 has been added with this amendment per CIB 96-15. Please see the updated section K.1 and I.1. The offeror must propose reasonable costs based on the Malian Labor Law regarding the indemnity/severance.

50. Regarding FAR 52.237-8, “Restrictions on Severance Payments to Foreign Nationals.” on

pg. 75 of the RFP, we respectfully request that USAID include FAR 52.237-9, “Waiver of Limitation on Severance Payments to Foreign Nationals,” to prevent conflict with applicable local employment laws and to maintain consistency with the guidance in FAR 37.113-1, considering that the anticipated contract will be performed entirely overseas.

Answer: Please see answer to question no. 49.

51. Section K.1, page 75, FAR 52.237.8 Restriction on Severance Payments to Foreign

Nationals (AUG 2003) o Consistent with the guidance in FAR 37.113-1 and that the anticipated contract will be performed overseas, we respectfully request that USAID include FAR 52.237-8 and FAR 52.237.9 Waiver of Limitation on Severance Payments to Foreign Nationals to prevent conflict with applicable local employment laws in the cooperating country.

Answer: Please see answer to question no. 49.

52. L.7. Section 3 Past Performance (b) 2. (page 99) says “The Offeror must propose a small business utilization plan and goal that is adequate and realistic for the work proposed.”

Small business utilization plans are not typically included in past performance information.

Would USAID please remove this requirement from the past performance evaluation criteria?

Answer: The requirement has been updated. Please see the updated Section L.7. Please note that as mentioned in the section L.8, Part 4, 4(h), the apparently successful offeror or

Amendment No. 1 offerors included in the competitive range will be required to submit a small business subcontracting plan in accordance with FAR Part 19.

53. L.8 Instructions Content for Preparation of the Cost Proposal Part 2 – Proposed Costs/Prices (page 100) asks the Offeror to prepare a summary budget and detailed budget.

Given Attachment J.5 – Budget Template is mostly blank and unformatted, would USAID please confirm that Offerors may use their own standard budget template, provided the major cost items are ordered the same as USAID’s budget template in Attachment J.5?

Answer: The budget template was provided to ensure the offeror's proposed standard budget line items for USAID’s comparative analysis. Provided that the offerors incorporate the line items and structures mentioned in the template, the offerors can use their own template to provide the requested information per Section L.8.

54. Section L.9 includes the instructions for the preparation of the Branding Implementation Plan (BIP) and Marking Plan.

o Can USAID kindly confirm that the Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan should be submitted as Part 10 to the cost proposal?

Answer: Per Section L.9, “Branding Implementation Plan and Marking plans will be requested from the apparently successful offeror or offerors in the competitive range”.

Please see the updated section L.9.

55. Section L.8 Part 3 Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors, page

103, the RFP states, “The offeror and each proposed subcontractor must complete all "Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offeror" as required in Section K, and sign and date on the last page in the space provided and submit as an Annex to the cost proposal Biodatas” and Section L. 8 Part 7 Letters of Commitment (Subcontractors), the RFP states “The Cost Proposal must include a letter, on subcontractor letterhead, and signed by an authorized representative of each subcontractor, which specifically indicates the subcontractor's agreement to be included in the offeror’s proposed teaming arrangement.”

o Can USAID please confirm that these requirements are limited to major subcontractors only?

Answer: Section L.8 Part 3 has been updated with this amendment, but the letters of commitment requirements remain unchanged. Please check the revised section L.8.

56. Section L.8 (K), page 104, states, “USAID may withhold a negotiated amount of fee if the

Contractor does not meet the completion of the of results.”

o Since the Anka Jiko Activity RFP is a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) type contract structured to motivate the Contractor to meet certain milestones while also maintaining flexibility to adapt the implementation to achieve these milestones, we ask USAID to remove this language from Section L as this language is more in line with a Cost-Plus-Award-Fee contract in which the fee is adjusted based on the Contractor’s achievements of results.

Amendment No. 1 o We also respectfully request USAID to add the following language in Section B.9 Payment of Fixed Fee: “The Contractor and USAID have the option to renegotiate targets and the fee distribution plan if there are mitigating external circumstances during the contract implementation. Adjusting the fee distribution plan with each annual work plan allows the Contractor to readjust and reallocate effort and resources as needed to achieve the results attainable within the total estimated cost. Any unpaid fee due to the Contractor not achieving a particular result beyond the Contractors’ manageable control can be reallocated amongst other or new deliverables in the work plan of the upcoming year.”

Answer:

● FAR 52.216-8 allow withholding fees.

● The section B.9 shall remain unchanged. Recognizing that priorities and circumstances may chance, changes may be pursued post award through a modification, as needed.

57. Section F.7 b. (p. 44) includes a reference to USAID/Benin. Please confirm this is USAID/Mali.

Answer: Section F.7.b has been updated.

58. We appreciate USAID’s provision of the budget template in Attachment J.5. Can USAID kindly confirm whether offerors may modify the template as needed to incorporate additional details and reflect our cost accounting standards?

Answer: Yes, please see the answer to question no. 53.

59. Section L.8 (p.100): The RFP specifies that the cost proposal should be exclusive of value added tax (VAT). Can USAID please confirm whether implementing partners are eligible for VAT exemption in country under the bilateral agreement between the U.S. Government and the Government of Mali?

Answer: Yes, USAID implementing partners are eligible for VAT exemption through a bilateral agreement between the United States Government and Government of Mali.

60. Section L.8, Part 2 (4)(F) (p. 101): The RFP indicates that seminars and conferences budgeted under Other Direct Costs must include the venue where the event is to be held.

Given that specific venue locations will be determined based on a competitive procurement process during implementation, and will also be impacted by security conditions on the ground at the time of the event, would USAID kindly consider removing the requirement to include the specific venue for proposed seminars and conferences at the proposal stage?

Answer: A tentative venue shall be used for the estimation purposes.

61. Referencing RFP Section L.8 Part 6 – Evidence of Responsibility on page 105, are subcontractors required to submit Evidence of Responsibility along with the prime?

Answer: Only the offeror's evidence of responsibility was requested.

62. Referencing RFP Section L.8 Part 4 – Policies and Procedures on page 104, can USAID confirm that Offerors should not submit their full policies and procedures with their proposals, rather only by specific request of the Contracting Officer?

Amendment No. 1

Answer: Offerors shall submit policies and procedures upon the request from the Contracting Officer.

63. RFP Section L.9, page 106 states “The Offeror must submit and negotiate a Branding

Implementation Plan (BIP) and a Marking Plan (MP). … The BIP and MP will not be part of the technical evaluation. BIP and MP will be requested from the apparently successful offeror or offerors in the competitive range.” For the Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan, can USAID clarify that that Offerors are not supposed to submit the BIP/MP as an Annex until specifically requested to do?

Answer: Please see answer to question no. 53. Also, see the updated section L.9.

64. In attachment J.3, USAID provides the letter for deviation from the NICRA. If an offeror wants to propose a discount to a NICRA rate, please clarify the additional documents in which the offeror should show the discounted indirect rate. Does the offeror need to propose the discounted indirect rate as the ceiling rate in Section B.7?

Answer: Proposing an advanced ceiling on indirect cost rates is not mandatory under this solicitation. However, if an offeror proposes advanced indirect cost rate ceiling, section B.7 will be included in the contract. Otherwise, this section will be deleted.

65. Page 94, Attachment J.4 - U.S. MISSION MALI LOCAL COMPENSATION PLAN RANGES.

Would USAID please provide the USAID/Mali Mission Local Compensation Plan?

Answer: The Mission Compensation Plan is a proprietary (sensitive) information belonging to the Department of State and it cannot be shared.

[Questions and Answers]