Amdt1 Protective Education for Girls in Mali RFP 72068824R00001.pdf

SOL-72068824R00001 Amendment #01

ATTACHMENT A – Responses to Questions

General

1. We believe that a cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) mechanism is best suited for delivering successful outcomes on Protective Education for Girls in Mali and consistent with the application of FAR 16.202-2 and 16.306. We respectfully request that USAID consider changing the contract mechanism to CPFF. The envisioned firm-fixed-price mechanism will greatly reduce the contractor’s ability to remain responsive and agile within Mali’s dynamic operating environment. Instead, it will require the contractor to deliver on specifications defined prior to the start of work, which are highly likely to change within Mali’s dynamic operating and stakeholder environment. This increases the risk to USAID of the project failing to achieve its results, as resources will not be able to be reallocated based on emerging opportunities and risks over the five-year period of performance. Furthermore, the Limited Pricing Information format provided by USAID on page 12 of the solicitation appears to be designed for a CPFF mechanism with costs categorized across budget line items instead of deliverable-based pricing. A CPFF mechanism would allow for the flexibility required to implement the scope of work within Mali’s dynamic operating environment and for the contractor to remain responsive to evolving stakeholder needs. It will also enable budget management in line with the Limited Pricing Table outlined by USAID, based on allocation of resources to different components of the intervention.

Response: USAID will proceed with a firm fixed-price contract per FAR 16.202-1 and 16.202-2.

2. If USAID intends to move forward with a firm fixed price contract, could USAID kindly explain the rationale for the specified contracting mechanism?

Response: The rationale for a firm fixed-price contract is based on FAR 16.202-1 and 16.202-2.

3. Page 1 – Can USAID/Mali confirm that the preferred modality for this award is a Firm Fixed Price Contract?

Response: USAID confirms that this award is a Firm Fixed Price Contract.

4. Per FAR 16.103, “A firm-fixed-price contract… shall be used when the risk involved is minimal or can be predicted with an acceptable degree of certainty. However, when a reasonable basis for firm pricing does not exist, other contract types should be considered....” Mali is a challenging context, with recent changes in government leadership and other significant contextual challenges. Fixing deliverables and pricing and balancing risks and incentives for the government and the contractor over a five-year period would be difficult. Would USAID consider implementing this program as a cost-plus fixed fee contract instead? USAID would be able to use fixed-price fee-bearing deliverables to incentive performance in a similar manner, but a cost mechanism would allow for greater flexibility over the life of the program.

Rehabilitation (Renovation) of Latrine Blocks for Females is a category in the summary budget format required. Can USAID please advise if they have a specific set aside or estimate for this cost?

Page | 2

Response: USAID does NOT consider implementing this program as a cost-plus fixed fee. Regarding the renovation of Latrine Blocks for females, there is not a specific set aside of estimate for this cost.

5. Would USAID consider a cost-reimbursement contract rather than fixed-price? FAR 16.301-2(a) states a cost-reimbursement contract may be used when (1) circumstances do not allow the requirements to be sufficiently defined for a fixed-price contract, or (2) uncertainties involved in contract performance do not permit costs to be estimated with sufficient accuracy. Information provided in the pre-solicitation indicates the successful offeror will need to rely on adaptive management techniques to successfully implement activities given the uncertainties due to security issues in country, required close collaboration with the MOE throughout the life of the contract, lack of specificity around desired interventions (particularly WASH infrastructure improvements), and other circumstances. A fixed-price contract in this situation likely presents an unreasonable level of financial and performance risk for the contractor.

Response: USAID will Not consider a cost-reimbursement contract. USAID has determined this award will be a Firm Fixed Price Contract.

6. The Cover Page of this Pre-Solicitation states that “USAID/Mali anticipates the award of one (1) Firm Fixed Price Contract resulting from this solicitation to be implemented over a 5-year period of performance.” Page 8, Section B.I, second paragraph, further states “Subject to the availability of funds, USAID/Mali anticipates supporting up to one award of $24.9 million over the life of the award.”

Considering the difficulty in establishing fixed prices, with reasonable certainty, for an award of $24.9 million over a five-year period of performance, will USAID consider cost-reimbursement contract instruments, rather than firm-fixed-price?

Response: USAID will Not consider cost-reimbursement contract instruments. USAID has determined this award will be a Firm Fixed Price Contract.

7. The budget template provided by USAID on page 12 of the Pre-Solicitation Notice appears to be structured for a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee contract, despite the cover page indicating that this solicitation will be a Firm Fixed Price contract.

● Given that the scope of work is malleable and that many factors influence the direction of implementation over the project lifecycle (some presenting significant business risks under a firm, fixed-price contract), would USAID consider changing the type of award to a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee contract?

● If the type of award is a Firm Fixed Price contract, could USAID please provide a budget summary template appropriate to that contract type?

Response: USAID will Not consider changing the type of award to a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee contract. The budget summary template will be slightly revised.

8. Can USAID please confirm whether the contract will include a Grants Under Contract (GUC) component and, if so, provide a ceiling for GUCs and clarify where GUCs should be included in the limited pricing information? Given the emphasis on capacity building interventions and desire for

Page | 3 sustainable solutions, it seems GUCs would be particularly effective since they support local organizations to contribute to their own missions when they are in alignment with USAID’s objectives.

Response: Yes, the contract will include an optional Grants Under Contract, which may be discussed during the co-creation to determine the scale and scope of these grants, the profile of the sub-grantees, and the budget that should be set aside for it.

9. Can USAID confirm that Grants Under Contract will be allowed under this activity?

Response: Yes, the contract will include Grants Under Contract, which may be discussed during the co-creation to determine the scale and scope of these grants, the profile of the sub-grantees, and the budget that should be set aside for it.

10. Can USAID please clarify if Grants Under Contracts (GUCs) are allowed under the contract?

Response: Yes, the contract will include Grants Under Contract, which may be discussed during the co-creation to determine the scale and scope of these grants, the profile of the sub-grantees, and the budget that should be set aside for it.

11. How does USAID anticipate that the competitive process will work after co-creation given USAID’s intent to issue a firm fixed price contract as described in FAR 16.202? Does USAID intend to issue an RFP with a Statement of Work that all offerors will be invited to respond to with technical approach and pricing information?

Response: USAID will issue a RFP with a Statement of Work that the offerors selected for the co-creation (based on the concept evaluation criteria) will be invited to respond to with technical proposal and pricing information.

12. Can USAID confirm if it would like Prime offerors to identify sub-contractors within the concept note?

Response: It would be preferable for prime offerors to select their subcontracting partners during the concept note stage and prior to the co-creation event. This will allow the subcontracting partners to participate in the co-creation event, if the concept is selected. However, the non-specification of subcontracting partners will not be taken against the offeror in the evaluation of the concept.

13. (Page 1, Cover Letter) Given USAID’s plan to issue a firm-fixed-price contract, what would be the expected milestones or performance basis for payment so that offerors can fully assess risk? Does USAID plan to permit offerors to propose a payment schedule at the full proposal stage?

Response: The payment schedule, deliverables, and milestones will be specified by USAID/Mali in the RFP after the co-creation process.

14. Page 13 of the solicitation states that “If USAID/Mali decides to continue with the proposed activities following the co-creation phase, USAID/Mali will request a full proposal from the Respondents that pass, inclusive of all modifications, expansions, discussions, etc. resulting from the co-creation.” Will USAID please confirm that this means that a request for proposal will be issued following the

Page | 4 co-creation phase, which outlines the scope with all modifications and expansions resulting from the co-creation workshops, as well as instructions and evaluation criteria applicable to full proposals?

Response: Yes, a request for proposal will be issued following the co-creation phase. The RFP will outline the scope with all modifications and expansions resulting from the co-creation workshops, as well as instructions and evaluation criteria applicable to full proposals.

15. Assuming that USAID plans to issue a request for proposals after co-creation, will USAID please confirm that offerors will be permitted to ask questions regarding that solicitation?

Response: Yes, offerors invited to the co-creation can send questions during the question period after the request for full proposals is issued by USAID/Mali. The Q&A period will be stated in the RFP.

16. Will USAID please confirm that the Phase 1 Limited Pricing Information submitted by offerors is non-binding regarding the future development of full cost proposals? Given that co-creation is likely to result in significant modifications and expansions to the scope of work, it is not possible for offerors at this time to estimate with confidence what each contract line item will require.

Response: Yes, USAID/Mali confirms that pricing information submitted by offerors as part of their concepts is non-binding.

17. (Page 10, Section D, III Proposal Process AND Page 14, Section E, II Evaluation Criteria and Considerations) Our interpretation of FAR 15.202 (b) is that the US Government will advise Respondents of viability based on criteria stated in the notice, but that Respondents are not precluded from participating in any resultant acquisition based on the advisement. Given USAID’s intent to issue pass/fail notices to Respondents based on the criteria included in Section E, part II, of the Presolicitation, can the contracting office clarify that its intention is to exclude Respondents from participating in the resultant acquisition?

Response: Only those respondents who meet at least 4 out of 6 of the evaluation criteria outlined in Section E, Part II, of the Presolicitation will be considered as having "passed" and will be invited to participate in the next co-creation phase. Respondents who do not meet the criteria will not be invited to participate in this phase. Only those who take part in the co-creation phase will be eligible to submit a full proposal for the resultant acquisition.

18. (Page 12-13, Section D, III Proposal Process, Co-Creation Process) Page 12-13 of the Presolicitation references “most highly qualified” offerors and those “considered to be viable competitors”, indicating that such Respondents will be invited to engage in co-creation. However, the final paragraph of this section indicates that full proposals will be requested from Respondents “that pass”.

Can USAID confirm that all Respondents that “pass” as defined by the criteria listed in Section E.II of the Presolicitation will participate in co-creation and be eligible to submit a proposal? Or is the intent to carry out additional technical evaluation to ascertain “most highly qualified” Respondents. If the latter, please provide additional information on the technical evaluation criteria to be used and clarify whether those will be evaluated during the co-creation process.

Response: Only “pass” / “fail” will be used to select participants in this concept phase.

Page | 5

19. Please clarify what level of information USAID will provide to offerors after Phase I has been completed. For example, will USAID hold debriefs for offerors who are advised they are not a viable competitor?

Response: No, USAID may respond to questions from offerors that were not selected for the co-creation, but will not hold debriefs for non selected offerors.

20. (Page 13, Section D, III Proposal Process, Full Proposal) Can USAID confirm that it intends to use co-creation to further shortlist Respondents to apply to any resultant acquisition?

Response: No, all the offerors selected to participate in the co-creation process will be invited to submit their full proposals. The next selection will be based on the full proposals and how well they address the requirements outlined in the RFP.

21. Does USAID anticipate requiring offerors and external parties who are invited to participate in Co-Creation to sign confidentiality agreements to protect confidential information and intellectual property of other offerors that may be shared during the Co-creation process?

Response: Yes. USAID will require that offerors and external parties who are invited to participate in Co-Creation to sign confidentiality agreements to protect confidential information and intellectual property of other offerors that may be shared during the Co-creation process.

22. Can USAID please clarify if the offeror’s subcontractors also need to have a UEI number at the time of concept note submission.

Response: No, the offeror’s subcontractors do not need to have a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) number at the time of the technical concept submission. However, as stated in the presolicitation, on page 9, all interested offerors should start the process to:

● Have their Unique Entity Identifier number.

● Be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) website https://www.sam.gov

● Have an active registration in SAM.

● Collecting information related to implementing partners' official registration and authorization to exercise in Mali.

23. Can USAID please share the local compensation plan?

Response: The offerors should develop their own local compensation plans. The salaries and benefits USAID provides are different from those the implementing partners provide.

24. What is the envisioned start date for this project?

Response: The envisioned start date for this project is August, 2025.

Concept Paper- Technical Questions

Page | 6 https://www.sam.gov

25. Will USAID please provide the final report and final evaluation report for the USAID/Mali Girls Leadership and Empowerment through Education Program? These highly relevant reports do not appear on the DEC.

Response: Requested report is attached.

26. Will USAID please clarify the intended geographic regions for intervention? Page 4 states “a proposed intervention…in Mali mining regions of Kayes and Bougouni,” while Page 14 – evaluation criteria factor 1 – indicates that “the offeror should demonstrate a deep understanding of the educational challenges in Mali, particularly in the Kayes and Sikasso regions.”

Response: The activity will be limited to the region of Kayes and the new region of Bougouni.

27. Page 6 of the solicitation discusses working with teachers under Result 2. Will USAID please confirm that the activity is expected to work with teachers only through the accelerated learning programs?

Response: USAID/Mali will be working with teachers through the accelerated learning programs and through the primary school level. However, the exact extent to which primary school levels are engaged depends on what is decided during the co-creation process.

28. Page 7 of the solicitation references Conditional Cash Transfers, and the Limited Pricing Information table on Page 12 includes a line for “Rehabilitation (Renovation) of Latrine Blocks for Females.” Would USAID consider providing plug figures for these anticipated activities to allow for comparable limited pricing information?

Response: USAID would not provide plug figures, as it has to be determined as part of a whole design, and should be part of what the offerors would propose based on their market research.

29. Please clarify the geographic focus of the proposed project.

● On page 4 of the pre-solicitation document, USAID states that the technical concept should outline a proposed intervention “designed to address the critical barriers faced by vulnerable learners, particularly girls, in Mali mining regions of Kayes and Bougouni.”

● On page 5, USAID notes, as context for Result 1 in the results framework, “data reveals low access and retention rates for girls, particularly in the Kayes and Bougouni regions.”

● On page 14, under Evaluation Criteria and Considerations, USAID states that for “Knowledge of Regional Issues: The offeror should demonstrate a deep understanding of the educational challenges in Mali, particularly in the Kayes and Sikasso regions.”

Response: The activity will be limited to the region of Kayes and the new region of Bougouni.

30. Page 4 of the Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) for this opportunity states: “...this Activity will be implemented in communes that complement, not overlap with, the other investments in education by USAID and other donors.”

● Could USAID indicate which project(s) it considers “current investments”?

Page | 7

Response: USAID Doniya Taabolo (foundational learning) and USAID Shifi ni Tagne (youth development) fact sheets are attached.

● Will this project be permitted to overlap with previous USAID Girls Leadership and Empowerment through Education (GLEE) project regions in Kayes, as that project is now closed?

Response: It is only considered “overlapping” if the activity is still current. GLEE is closed.

31. Does USAID have an approximate target number of communities, schools, or participants that the activity will reach?

Response: This is to be further discussed during the co-creation and determined by the offeror in the full proposal. For budgeting purposes, USAID/Mali considered the notional number of 16,000-18,000 participants.

32. On page 1 of the Pre-Solicitation Notice, the Introduction section states that the project will focus on girls aged 6-19, while the Theory of Change focuses on “primary school-aged children.” Could USAID confirm the anticipated age range of participants?

Response: USAID is confirming the anticipated age range of girls and young women are 6-19 years old.

33. Given equal or higher levels of mining-related child labor among boys vs girls, findings that conditional cash transfers (CCTs) have equal or greater impact on child labor of boys, and the documented potential for resentment among CCT non-recipients, can the CCTs target both boys and girls (even if there is a greater emphasis on girls)?

Response: Yes, boys may participate. However, priority will be given to girls.

34. Would USAID be open to sharing the table of deliverables to help inform potential contractor’s technical concepts?

Response: This will be provided in the RFP after the co-creation for those offerors who have been selected to participate in the co-creation.

35. Does USAID anticipate including a crisis modifier with the project?

Response: Yes, the contract will include a $1.5 million crisis modifier clause.

36. Organizational Experience: Please clarify whether any information is required for potential sub-awardees during the concept stage, such as proposed roles and responsibilities, capabilities, or past projects.

Response: It would be preferable for the prime to select their subcontracting partners during the concept note stage and prior to the co-creation event. This will allow the subcontracting partners to

Page | 8 participate in the co-creation event, if the concept is selected. However, the non-specification of subcontracting partners will not be taken against the offeror in the evaluation of the concept.

37. Staff Competency: Are prospective offerors required to name key personnel at the technical concept stage? If so, could USAID specify which position(s)?

Response: No, a detailed description of each key team member's profile is not needed for the concept. A general overview of the team’s capacities and relevant experiences will be sufficient.

38. Can USAID please clarify if it is expecting offerors to name key personnel at this stage?

Response: No, a detailed description of each key team member's profile is not needed for the concept. A general overview of the team’s capacities and relevant experiences will be sufficient.

39. Monitoring and Evaluation: On page 15 of the Pre-Solicitation Notice, USAID states: “The proposed technical concept should outline specific, measurable objectives and indicators for assessing the success of the proposed interventions.” Are indicators required at the concept stage?

Response: The full list of indicators is not required. Offerors should include in the technical concept a brief description on how progress and results will be measured. The change will be incorporated in the amended pre solicitation notice.

40. On page 15 of the Pre-Solicitation Notice, USAID states: “The technical concept should include a robust monitoring and evaluation plan to track progress and measure outcomes, disaggregated by sex, region, and displacement status” as part of its evaluation criteria.

● How is USAID defining “robust monitoring and evaluation plan” within the confines of a 4-page technical concept?

Response: Offeror should include in the technical concept a brief description on how progress and results will be measured. The change will be incorporated in the amended pre solicitation notice.

● Would USAID consider permitting bidders to include monitoring and evaluation information in an annex not included within the Technical Concept 4-page limit, to provide enough space?

Response: USAID does NOT consider permitting bidders to include monitoring and evaluation information in an annex not included within the Technical Concept 4-page limit, to provide enough space.

41. Does USAID expect prospective offerors to propose additional objectives outside of those already suggested by USAID?

Response: Yes, offerors may propose additional objectives, as long as they remain within the parameters of the original activity description. If there are additional proposed objectives, they should be limited to the anticipated activities as a means to supplement/complement.

Page | 9

42. (Pages 4-5, Section A, Subsection I AND Page 14, Section E, Subsection 2, “Understanding of Local Context”) Understanding that Bougouni is now a region in Mali, can USAID/Mali please clarify if it intends to target both Bougouni and Sikasso regions in addition to Kayes (a total of three regions)?

The solicitation mentions both Kayes and Bougouni regions (page 5) and Kayes and Sikasso regions (page 14).

Response: The activity will be limited to the region of Kayes and the new region of Bougouni.

43. (Pages 5-6, Subsection VI. Results Framework) Can USAID/Mali specify if the implementer is expected to support and/or work in the schools where the learners will transition?

Response: Yes, based on lessons learned from previous activities, it is expected that the implementing partner(s) support and/or work in schools where learners will transition.

44. Given that Bougouni is a cercle within the region of Sikasso, can USAID specify if program activities would be limited only to Bouguoni or if the expectation is that activities would cover the whole region of Sikasso?

Response: The activity will be limited to the region of Kayes and the new region of Bougouni.

45. (Pages 5-7, Subsection VI. Results Framework) Under Result 1, USAID provided the sample indicator measuring minimum grade level proficiency for accelerated learning centers. Will this be expected of learners enrolled in school as well under Result 3?

Response: Yes, the same indicator will be used for learners enrolled in school under Result 3.

46. (Page 4 AND Pages 5-7, Subsection VI. Results Framework) The Protective Education for Girls in Mali Activity aims to increase access to basic education and foundational learning particularly for girls (age: 6-19) (page 4). Can USAID clarify under which result(s) girls from 13-19 will be targeted given that the ALCs in Mali target overaged learners 8-13 years?

Response: USAID/Mali reaffirms that the target age group for the activity is 6-19 years old.

USAID/Mali does not have a specific target for girls in Accelerated Learning Centers and anticipates this will be determined at the co-creation phase.

47. (Pages 5-7, Subsection VI. Results Framework) Does USAID anticipate vocational training for girls in the 13-19 age bracket?

Response: This can be discussed during the co-creation. The funds for this activity are Basic Education Earmarked funds and cannot be used for vocational training. However, the offeror could suggest vocational training activities to be leveraged through other donors or the private sector. Girls that need vocational training can also be referred to the existing USAID-funded Shifin ni Tagne Activity under Objective 4. The fact sheet of this activity is attached to the Q&A responses.

Page | 10

48. (Pages 6, Subsection VI. Results Framework) Under Result 2 USAID indicates "Improvement in foundational skills proficiency in reading and math.” How is this different from the indicator measuring the "minimum level proficiency"? And is this for schools or ACLs?

Response: USAID/Mali’s primary focus for this activity is to improve the foundational skills proficiency in reading and math. USAID/Mali will measure this at both the primary school level as well as in Accelerated Learning Centers.

49. Can USAID confirm that the “clear plan for implementation and sustainability” and the “robust monitoring and evaluation plan” under the Evaluation Criteria on pages 14 and 15 will be defined during co-creation given the limited space in the concept paper?

Response: The “clear plan for implementation and sustainability” and the “robust monitoring and evaluation plan” under the Evaluation Criteria on pages 14 and 15 will be defined during the post co-creation phase.

50. Can USAID please confirm that Evaluation Criteria 5’s bullet on page 15 regarding Staff Competency indicates that offerors should propose the roles for technical positions and accompanying minimum qualifications and experiences necessary for successful program implementation?

Response: A detailed description of each key team member's profile is not needed for the concept. A general overview of the team’s capacities and relevant experiences will be sufficient.

51. Can USAID confirm what regions and académies will be targeted? The solicitation states the Kayes and Bougouni regions, but it also refers to Kayes and Sikasso. Will the Kayes region include both Kayes and Kéniéba or just Kayes?

Response: The activity will be limited to the Region of Kayes and the new Region of Bougouni.

52. Does USAID have guidance for the number of cercles, or which ones, should be targeted within each region?

Response: The activity will be limited to the Region of Kayes and the new Region of Bougouni. The number of cercles will be agreed upon during the co-creation phase.

53. Does USAID expect that other health interventions should be provided besides WASH and menstrual hygiene management? For example, sexual and reproductive health knowledge/awareness?

Response: It is expected that age appropriate sexual and reproductive health learning knowledge and awareness will be delivered to all participants.

54. Does USAID have a target in mind for the percentage of beneficiaries who are girls versus boys?

Page | 11

Response: No, the offeror may suggest the percentage for consideration by USAID. However, girls and adolescent women have the priority for selection and participation. In no case should there be a percentage of boys that is higher than the percentage of girls.

55. Are there other economic support measures besides CCTs that are envisioned or will be required?

Response: The offeror can suggest other economic support measures, if they serve the objectives of the activity.

56. Could USAID please share relevant reports from GLEE and other recent projects that are not currently on the DEC (particularly the final GLEE report, which does not appear to be on the DEC)?

Response: Reports from GLEE are attached to this response.

57. The Introduction states that the project will increase access for learners 6-19, but the Outcome states that the project will increase the number of primary-school-aged children completing accelerated learning centers. Nineteen-year-olds are not usually considered primary-school-aged children, and six-year-olds should ideally be enrolled directly in formal schools. Can USAID clarify what ages it would like to target for accelerated learning?

Response: The correct population to be serviced by this activity is learners from 6-19 years old.

58. Can USAID confirm whether Result 2 is focused on providing support to teachers in formal schools only or does it target both teachers in formal schools as well as accelerated learning centers? Can USAID provide guidance on what formal school grades should be targeted under this result?

Response: Support will be provided to teachers in both formal and informal education settings.

Formal school grades cover the entire basic education spectrum and targets should begin from Grade 1.

59. Can USAID confirm that under Result 2, teachers' socio-emotional competencies should be increased, and teachers should be trained to provide literacy, numeracy and SEL to learners?

Response: Yes, teachers’ socio-emotional competencies should increase and teachers will be trained to provide literacy, numeracy, and SEL to students.

60. Does USAID envision the project working with any private, koranic, and/or “Franco-Arab” schools?

Response: USAID envisions working with public, private, and Franco-Arab (Madresa) schools. USAID does not envision working with koranic schools.

61. Given the page limit of the concept note, can USAID confirm that the MEL section should only include a few key illustrative indicators? Can USAID also please confirm whether indicator targets are expected at this stage?

Page | 12

Response: The full list of indicators is not required, but we need to have a sense on how offerors will measure success and what success would look like.

62. The Activity aims to “increase access to basic education and foundational learning particularly for girls (age: 6-19).” Mali’s education policy promotes basic education accelerated learning for students aged 9-13. Can USAID please clarify if it is looking to support enrollment in formal pre-primary or primary schools for younger learners or transition older adolescents into vocational or community learning centers under this opportunity?

Response: USAID is seeking to support enrollment in formal schools for young learners in primary schools. USAID is not seeking to support pre-primary learners under this activity. USAID will support adolescents to transition into vocational and/or community learning centers, but will not be supporting the vocational or community learning centers.

63. Can USAID please clarify if all “school-based” activities are exclusively in accelerated learning centers?

For example, are WASH facilities and cash transfers expected to be exclusively for students in accelerated learning centers (or other educational facilities)?

Response: All options are open. It is up to the offeror to suggest their vision.

64. Can USAID please clarify if this Activity is exclusively targeting a 9-month on-site accelerated learning center approach, or can applicants propose and test other alternative or accelerated learning models?

Response: Offerors can propose and test other alternative or accelerated learning models as long as they fit within the key objectives of the activity.

65. Can USAID please clarify if it expects indicators and targets to be provided in the four pages technical concept?

Response: The full list of indicators is not required, but we need to have a sense on how offerors will measure success and what success would look like.

66. In 2023, the government of Mali introduced a new map of regions in Mali, with Bougouni identified as its own region. On page 14 of the pre-solicitation notice, under evaluation criteria, USAID writes, “The offeror should demonstrate a deep understanding of the educational challenges in Mali, particularly in the Kayes and Sikasso regions.” Could USAID please clarify if for this opportunity, Bougouni is identified solely as Bougouni cercle or the new Bougouni region?

Response: The activity will be limited to the Region of Kayes and the new region of Bougouni. The number of cercles will be agreed upon during the co-creation and will be outlined in the RFP.

67. Page 4 – I. Introduction: can USAID/Mali the age groups targeted by this activity: 6-19 years old vs primary school-aged children (II. Theory of Change)?

Page | 13

Response: This will be corrected for consistency. Girls aged 6-19 will be retained.

68. Page 4 - Introduction: can USAID/Mali indicate whether there are specific indicators or frameworks they recommend for assessing Social-Emotional Learning (SEL) outcomes?

Response: The list of standards indicators is attached, including SEL indicators. It is up to the offeror to decide which indicators will be appropriate for the intervention.

69. Page 4 - Introduction: can USAID/Mali indicate the total number of girls and learners expected to be reached with this activity?

Response: This is to be further discussed during the co-creation and determined by the offeror in the full proposal. For budgeting purposes, USAID/Mali considered the notional number of 16,000-18,000 participants.

70. Page 4 – I. Introduction: can USAID/Mali provide details about the points of service (either schools or Accelerated Learning Centers - ALCs, or vocational training centers) in Kayes and Bougouni regions that will be supported by this activity: number, capacity, location, existing WASH infrastructures and their current condition etc.?

Response: The activity will be limited to the Region of Kayes and the new Region of Bougouni. The number of cercles will be agreed upon during the co-creation. Offerors should do their own research to identify the points of service.

71. Page 4 – Introduction: can USAID/Mali clarify the cercles in Kayes and Bougouni regions targeted by this activity?

Response: The activity will be limited to the Region of Kayes and the new Region of Bougouni. The number of cercles will be agreed upon during the co-creation.

72. Page 4 – Problem statement: can USAID/Mali be more specific about the possible activities related to reproductive health to lift barriers faced by girls to access and be retained in schools?

Response: No, USAID/Mali kept the problem statement broad to allow offerors flexibility in designing innovative solutions. This approach encourages diverse, context-specific interventions that address the various barriers girls face in accessing and staying in school, including those related to reproductive health. By not prescribing specific activities, USAID/Mali invites offerors to propose tailored, effective solutions.

73. Page 6 – Example of possible activities: can USAID/Mali clarify what ’resource support for families’ and ‘household economic strengthening’ (page 7) will include? Does this differ from the Conditional Cash Transfers - CCTs aimed at girls (page 7)?

Response: Resource support for families generally includes services to improve overall well-being, such as access to education, healthcare, and nutrition, while household economic strengthening

Page | 14

(HES) focuses on enhancing financial security through activities like small business support, savings programs, and financial training. Conditional Cash Transfers (CCTs) aimed at girls, on the other hand, provide financial incentives to families contingent on specific behaviors, such as sending girls to school or attending health services. The main difference is that HES is broader, aiming at overall economic stability, whereas CCTs are targeted specifically to promote girls' education and positive health outcomes.

74. Page 7 – Example of possible activities: can USAID/Mali provide a list of schools where WASH infrastructure needs improvement?

Response: The list of schools has not been established. This is part of the elements that will be defined through the co-creation process, and the information will be put in the

RFP.

75. Would USAID please share recent data on the costs associated with enrolling girls in an AEP?

Response: This is part of what the evidence that offerors need to gather pre and post concept.

76. Does the solicitation envision reaching the entire age ranges within each outcome?

Response: Yes, the solicitation envision reaching the entire age ranges within each outcome.

77. Please clarify the intent of Objective 2. It seems to focus both on teachers’ improved teaching of foundational skills and on teachers’ and students’ well-being. Is this accurate?

Response: Objective 2 focuses on improving the social-emotional competencies of teachers, enabling them to deliver quality instruction that not only enhances foundational skills, such as reading and math, but also supports the well-being of both teachers and students. The goal is to integrate social-emotional learning (SEL) into the teaching process, fostering a positive learning environment that promotes both academic and emotional development.

78. Can USAID clarify the primary target group? The pre-solicitation document references girls aged 6-19 and also mentions primary school-aged children.

Response: This will be corrected for consistency. Girls aged 6-19 will be retained.

79. Does the program specifically target children attending or eligible to participate in the accelerated learning centers, or will it also directly target children in the formal schooling system?

Response: It will target all children, especially girls, who need support to stay in school or access education services through accelerated programs.

80. Regarding the submission of key personnel information, to what extent does USAID expect a detailed description of each key team member's profile versus a general overview of their capacities and relevant experience.

Page | 15

Response: No, a detailed description of each key team member's profile is not needed for the concept. A general overview of the team’s capacities and relevant experiences will be sufficient.

81. Is USAID expecting offerors to identify and recommend specific regions and communities within Mali for the intervention, or will the selection of these areas be determined as part of the co-creation process?

Response: The activity will be limited to the Region of Kayes and the new region of Bougouni. The number of cercles will be agreed on during the co-creation. This is part of the elements that will be defined through the co-creation process, and this information will be put in the RFP.

82. Page 14 – Knowledge of regional issues: Kayes and Sikasso regions are mentioned here as targeted regions when Kayes and Bougouni are mentioned elsewhere in the solicitation. Can USAID/Mali confirm the targeted regions?

Response: The activity will be limited to the Region of Kayes and the new Region of Bougouni. The number of cercles will be agreed on during the co-creation. This is part of the elements that will be defined through the co-creation process, and this information will be put in the RFP.

83. Page 15 - Risk Management: does USAID/Mali have specific expectations regarding security protocols for protecting staff and students in targeted areas, or are offerors expected to define a risk mitigation approach?

Response: Offerors are expected to define a risk mitigation approach.

Cost Components

84. Page 13 of the solicitation states that “If USAID/Mali decides to continue with the proposed activities following the co-creation phase, USAID/Mali will request a full proposal from the Respondents that pass, inclusive of all modifications, expansions, discussions, etc. resulting from the co-creation.” Given the extent to which the scope may change following co-creation, we respectfully request that USAID remove the Phase 1 requirement for offerors to submit Limited Pricing Information and the associated Budget Review as it will only be possible to accurately estimate such cost information after co-creation.

Response: Pricing information submitted by offerors as part of their concepts is only notional and is non-binding.

85. On page 11 of the Pre-Solicitation Notice, USAID states: “Offerors must submit the nominal budget in the format below, and briefly explain the allocation of resources to different components of the intervention.”

● Should the allocation of costs across project components be presented as a narrative, separate from the cost format provided?

● Could USAID clarify whether “different components” refers to the result areas?

Page | 16

Response: The allocation of costs across project components should not be presented as a narrative, separate from the cost format provided. Offerors should provide a brief explanation of the allocation of resources based on their understanding of the different components of the intervention and the contract line items in the template.

86. Could you please confirm whether Mali is VAT exempt or if the project is eligible for VAT refunds per the law on VAT in Mali?

Response: USAID funded projects are eligible for VAT refunds per the law in Mali.

87. Can USAID please confirm that offerors should provide the explanation of allocation of resources mentioned on page 11 across the contract line items in the template on page 12?

Response: Offerors should provide a brief explanation of the allocation of resources based on their understanding of the different components of the intervention and the contract line items in the template.

88. Please confirm that the nominal budget submitted with the initial concept paper by offerors who pass the pre-solicitation phase will be subject to adjustments to reflect the outcome of the co-creation process.

Response: Pricing information submitted by offerors as part of their concepts is only notional and is non-binding.

89. The limited pricing information table includes a specific line item for “Rehabilitation (Renovation) of Latrine Blocks for Females.” Can USAID please clarify if any other rehabilitation activities may be proposed?

Response: The activity will be limited to the “Rehabilitation (Renovation) of Latrine Blocks for Females.” The activity will not involve any extensive constructions.

90. Page 12 - Limited pricing information: does USAID/Mali require that cost categories in the high-level nominal budget strictly adhere to those listed in the solicitation (e.g., Salaries and Wages, Fringe Benefits, etc.), or is there flexibility for the offeror to suggest additional or modified categories?

Response: Yes, USAID/Mali requires that cost categories the highly-level nominal budget strictly adhere to those listed in the pre-solicitation notice.

Submission-Formatting and Structure

91. Please confirm whether 10 pt font is allowable for text boxes.

Response: Yes, as long as there is a limited amount of text boxes.

92. Please confirm whether the French translation of the 4-page English technical concept can go over 4 pages as needed.

Page | 17

Response: The English version is the version that will be evaluated. The number of pages in the French translation can only be 5 pages maximum.

93. Please confirm whether prospective offerors may include an acronym list and/or a Table of Contents that would not count towards the 4-page limit.

Response: A list of acronyms may be included and would not count towards the 4-page limit.

94. (Page 11, Technical Concept Submission) Can USAID please confirm that the Limited Pricing Information is subject to the same font requirements as the Technical Concept (Calibri 12 points font for main text, and no smaller than 10 points for graphics, content of tables, and footnotes)?

Response: Tables and graphics can be 10 points

95. (Page 11) Can USAID please confirm that a PDF file type for both the Technical Concept and Limited Pricing Information are acceptable?

Response: Yes, USAID confirms that a PDF file type for both the Technical Concept and Limited Pricing Information are acceptable in addition to the Word version and Excel version.

96. Can USAID please clarify if the 1-page summary budget must have an identical cover to the technical concept?

Response: Yes, the 1-page summary budget must have an identical cover to the technical concept. It is not included in the page limitation the title/cover page with the signature of the responsible authorized party for the organization.

97. Can USAID please clarify if a 1-page budget in French is also required?

Response: No, the 1-page budget in French is not required.

98. (Page 11) Given the likelihood of word count expansion due to translation from English to French in order to retain meaning, can USAID please confirm that the requested French language versions of the Technical Concept document will be exempt from the 4-page, as the text on page 11 of the pre-solicitation document states that “In the event of inconsistency between any terms of the Technical Concept and its translation into French, the English language meaning shall control”?

Response: The English version is the version that will be evaluated. The number of pages in the French translation can only be 5 pages maximum.

99. Can USAID please confirm the French language version described on page 11 does not have to adhere to the 4-page limit given that English to French translation adds on average one half to one full page more text?

Page | 18

Response: The English version is the version that will be evaluated. The number of pages in the French translation can only be 5 pages maximum.

100. Can USAID confirm if any annexes are requested or will be accepted for the concept note?

Response: No annexes are requested or accepted to be included in the concept note.

101. Can USAID confirm whether the high-level nominal budget should be submitted as an Excel file following the format provided in the solicitation, plus a separate 1-page Word document providing a brief allocation of resources to different components of the intervention?

Response: USAID confirms that the high-level nominal budget should be submitted as an Excel file following the format provided in the presolicitation. A separate 1-page Word document providing a brief allocation of resources to different components of the intervention is not required and is not needed.

102. Can USAID please clarify if the French version of the technical concept also has a 4-page maximum?

Response: The English version is the version that will be evaluated. The number of pages in the French translation can only be 5 pages maximum.

103. Can USAID please clarify if the French version is required to have a French-language cover?

Response: The French version should have a French-language cover. The English version is the version that will be evaluated. The number of pages in the French translation can only be 5 pages maximum.

104. Can USAID please clarify if it has a preferred format for the technical concept?

Response: The format for the technical concept is Word document, 12 points Calibri. Smaller font for legends to graphs, content of tables, and footnotes can be used but no smaller than 10 points.

105. On p.11 of the pre-solicitation, under “Limited Pricing Information”, USAID indicates that “Offerors must submit the nominal budget in the format below, and briefly explain the allocation of resources to different components of the intervention.” Could USAID please confirm what level of detail should be provided in the brief explanation of allocation of resources, and if these details must be included in the 1-page limitation for pricing information?

Response: USAID confirms that a brief explanation of the allocation of resources should be provided, and these explanations must be included in the 1-page limitation for pricing information.

106. Page 11 – Technical concept submission: does the 4-page limit apply to the French version of the concept note, or only the English one?

Page | 19

Response: The English submission (4 pages) is the version that will be evaluated. The number of pages in the French translation can only be 5 pages maximum.

107. Page 11 – Technical concept submission: can USAID/Mali detail the format offerors are requested to use to present technical approach and demonstrate capacities with regards to the six evaluation criteria listed pages 14 and 15?

Response: The format for the technical concept is a simple Word document, 12 points Calibri.

Smaller font for legends to graphs, content of tables, and footnotes can be used but no smaller than 10 points.

108. Page 11 – Limited pricing information: does USAID/Mali request a French version of the high-level nominal budget?

Response: USAID/Mali does not request a French version of the highly-level nominal budget.

109. Page 11 - Limited pricing information: does USAID/Mali request the high-level nominal budget to be a Word or an Excel document?

Response: Yes, USAID requests the highly-level nominal to be an Excel document.

110. Can USAID please clarify if the 1-page summary budget must have an identical cover to the technical…