Cumulative_Questions_and_Answers_Attachment_to_Amend_3.pdf

USAID BAA-MOSO-SBAR-2019 Amendment 3

Questions and Answers

Out of Scope for this solicitation

1. Can I introduce another problem statement that is not on the list for another country in Africa?

No. This solicitation is limited to the problem areas and geographic regions described.

Please follow the Agency’s directions on how to submit an unsolicited proposal or application. https://www.usaid.gov/work-usaid/get-grant-or-contract/unsolicited-proposals

You may also want to take a look at USAID’s Development Innovation Ventures program and see if your solution aligns with this unique program.

https://www.usaid.gov/div

2. I would like to submit a proposal for Sierra Leone. How may I proceed about doing this -- should I follow the instructions enumerated in the SBAR-2019 or should I follow the instructions in the unsolicited proposals & grants application?

See response to Question #1 above.

Eligibility

3. Section II Eligibility: Is a 501(c)3 small non-profit corporation eligible for consideration for this BAA?

See BAA Section II, Eligibility. A U.S. small business must be organized for profit.

Therefore, a non-profit corporation is ineligible, as it is not organized for profit.

Subcontracting, Partnering, and Teaming

4. Our firm meets the SBA requirements as we are looking to bid, but one of our key partners does not meet this requirement, are we still allow to bid as prime, with a larger partner as a sub-[contractor]?

Since this solicitation is set aside for small business, the prime would need to comply with FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting, which requires that at least 50% of the cost of contract performance be incurred by the prime [small business]. Whether the prime could comply with this clause would depend on the specifics of the proposal and the role envisioned for the subcontractor.

5. Can one local organization join with two or three different US organizations/business for the same or different addendum #1 and #2 and #3?

A local organization can join with different U.S. organizations that are preparing concepts, and can be proposed in response to multiple addenda.

6. Teammates and subcontracting: Are we allowed to include international non-profit organizations (and include them in our budget) as teammates within our proposal?

Such a partnership which results in stronger feasibility for a smooth in-country implementation is encouraged. Since this solicitation is set aside for small business, the prime would need to comply with FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting, which requires that at least 50% of the cost of contract performance be incurred by the prime [small business]. Whether the prime could comply with this clause would depend on the specifics of the proposal and the role envisioned for the subcontractor/partners. The status of an international organization as profit or non-profit is not a factor. At least 50% of the cost of the contract performance must be incurred by the U.S. small business.

7. Teaming Agreements and Subcontracts Proposed in-country partnerships and subcontractors: Can we propose the use of partnerships and subcontractors without having teaming agreements in place for the initial concept papers?

Yes.

8. Section VII: Required Preliminary Concept Paper Content: Could USAID please confirm if PPRs can be included for partners?

See Section IX. Evaluation Methodology and Criteria, Factor 2: Past Experience and Current Capacity (Past Performance). Past performance data is required for the organization submitting a concept paper, along with its teaming partners, if any.

9. Section VII: Required Preliminary Concept Paper Content: Could USAID please confirm if organizations can submit five PPRs per concept, or just five PPRs per organization?

No more than five past performance data submissions are permitted per concept paper.

10. Section VII: Required Preliminary Concept Paper Content: If organizations can submit five PPRs per concept, how would USAID like organizations to designate which PPR is for which concept?

In the “Name of Organization” field, indicate which addendum the past performance information is for. Place it after your business’ name. For example: Acme Inc. - Addendum #7.

11. Section VII: Required Preliminary Concept Paper Content On page 8 of the original solicitation (under Required Preliminary Concept Paper Content”), USAID requests that offerors “Include any information about your organization’s active or prospective partnerships with businesses in the host country that would contribute to feasibility and foster local commitment to success.” Please confirm that USAID will also value “active or prospective partnerships” with NGOs and other organizations that may contribute to feasibility of implementation.

Prospective partnerships can be with NGOs, for-profit businesses, and other organizations. The objective of a narrative is to show how the partnership or subaward/subcontract contributes to the feasibility of the solution and fosters local commitment to success. At least 50% of the cost of the contract performance must be incurred by the U.S. small business.

Past Performance

12. Past performance information form (referenced in section VII): The Google form for past performance mentioned on page 9 of the solicitation states: " Please complete a separate submission for up to five recently completed (within the last three years) or active projects similar in scope to the solution your organization is proposing." If a company is responding to multiple addenda, is it possible for them to submit up to five past performance forms for each addendum? If so, how should the contractor note which addendum the past perform reference is meant to be associated with?

See the response to question #10.

13. Past performance requirements: Do the past performance descriptions provided in the Past Performance google sheet have to match any past performances referenced in the concept paper?

Yes. Projects described in concept paper must have corresponding contact information entered in the Google form. Choose those most relevant to the proposed solution to describe in the concept and include in the Google form.

14. Past Performance: In terms of relevant experience, we are not an SBIR grant recipient and most of our work is business to business. We are in the construction and manufacturing fields related to Addendum 4,5,6. To be considered “comparable work” can it not be grant funded or entirely R&D (as described in FAR 35)? Our proposed concepts are related to our business.

There is no requirement that organizations applying to SBAR be current or former SBIR recipients. See Section IV of the BAA, as it discusses the requirements for applied research and development. If you believe that your organization’s concept fits the definitions found therein, please feel free to apply. Please note that USAID will make the final determination as to whether or not a concept fits within the scope of applied research and development. The solicitation is designed to conclude with contracts not grants if any awards are made.

Budget Preparation and Funding

15. Funding level

Each addendum that described the problem statement contains information about the budget range for the proposed solution.

16. Funding level: Please clarify how BAA funding works if the awarded Concept for Implementation is three years? Funds would be available based on government funding? For example, Base year, Option Year 1, Option Year 2?

A BAA is merely a method of solicitation. Resulting mechanisms will vary and funds availability is highly dependant upon a variety of factors, such as how mechanisms are structured, the needs of the cognizant USAID mission, the nature of the concept proposed, and so on.

17. Funding Level: Please clarify, if a firm is made an award under this BAA and successfully perform during the Concept for Implementation that other funding could be made available for future phases of the concept?

Funding is not and cannot be guaranteed for future phases of any concept.

18. Funding Level: We have reviewed the Q&A #1 and would like clarification on the following. Each listed Addendum has a budget range of $500,000 to $3,000,000 – does this budget range represent the total funding for the individual Addendum or the budget range for each individual Concept for Implementation under the Addendum?

The budget range is for each individual Addendum for which one or more concepts may be considered for award.

19. Section VII: required concept paper content: The section on the budget mentions a sample budget table provided with this solicitation. Where is this provided?

See the Page 7 Budget Template that is included as an attachment to the BAA (in Package #1).

20. Section VII: Required Preliminary Concept Paper Content: USAID has provided potential offerors with a budget template that details costs broken down by years and activities in the columns. Can USAID provide further clarity on how it envisions budgeting by activity to be broken down? Are there specific activities that USAID would like to see budgeted separately? Or does the template include the activities columns simply to allow offerors to define their own activities and budget for them? Further, will USAID look unfavorably on offerors who budget only for one activity?

The budget must correspond with the concept, but it is the concept that will be evaluated based on the factors and criteria stated.

21. Section VII: The 'Required Preliminary Concept Paper Content' instructs applicants to “…use the sample budget provided with this solicitation or other format as appropriate to the respective Concept.” However, this sample budget is not provided within the announcement. Could USAID direct applicants to the sample budget?

See the response to question #19 above.

22. Pricing: In addition to pricing can we attach a project schedule to the pricing? It will better show the correlation between pricing and how proposed funds are obligated to the concept.

A project schedule with a budget is not required. All information must comply with constraints on page count and content. It is anticipated that succinct narratives aligned with the evaluation criteria will convey the most compelling information. Offerors could consider providing such schedule information to the extent that it helps to convey feasibility and other evaluated information (see Evaluation Factors and criteria in the solicitation).

Pre-Proposal Conference and Concept Due Date

23. On page 1 and on page 12, the date of the pre-proposal conference is listed as January 23, however on the registration link and solicitation web page it is listed as January 22. Kindly confirm the date and time of the pre-proposal conference.

A Webinar is being hosted on March 11 in lieu of a pre-proposal conference.

You may also view the pre-recorded Webinar containing information about this solicitation and the SBAR pilot:

https://ac.usaid.gov/p3bz3ur7ieho/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pbMode=normal.

Adobe Connect is required.

Note that dates have changed since the recording and information contained in the most recent solicitation amendment supersedes recorded information.

24. Given that the pre-proposal conference has not yet occurred, are Preliminary

Concept Papers still due February 20, 2019, or does USAID intend to issue an extension?

See BAA Amendment 1, posted January 31, 2019. The revised submission date for concept papers is now March 27, 2019.

25. Section X: Introductory Webinar and Pre-Proposal (Pre-Concept) Conference1.

Does USAID intend to reschedule the pre-proposal conference originally planned for January 23, 2019?

Please see the response to question 23 above.

Concept Evaluation and Award Processing

26. Page 1 Cover Sheet : The Government is requesting a screenshot of SAM registration page to show it’s active. If there isn’t enough space on the cover page can bidders provide this as an attachment and not included in the pages 2-6? (The screen shot may be too small for the Government to get any information.)

The same requirement was in place for the premiere round of SBAR. We received dozens of concept papers and there were no issues with the SAM.gov screenshots being on the cover page. Consider revising your cover page accordingly to ensure that this vital information is visible and readable. Note that screenshots can be “cropped” so that only the essential information is included.

27. Does USAID expect to award only one award in each of the seven Addendum topics or will there possibly be multiple awards in each Addendum topic?

There is the possibility of one, none, or multiple awards for each Addendum topic. The issuance of awards are on a case-by-case basis and depend on multiple factors, including the evaluation results of proposed solutions and the amount of funding available.

28. Section IV Award process: Please confirm that no co-creation activity is required in Stage 1 of the BAA.

Yes. There is no co-creation activity in Stage 1 of the BAA. The co-creation process occurs only if and when an organization is selected for Stage 2.

29. Would USAID provide some insight into the mechanism for the resulting award?

Does USAID anticipate awarding grants similar to those under the SBIR program, allowing for implementer control of the resulting intellectual property?

The solicitation is designed to result in a contract instrument. Note that the type of award is highly dependant upon the outcome of the 1:1 co-creation phase, the solution proposed, the cognizant USAID technical team, the small business, and other relevant factors.

See Section VI of the BAA regarding intellectual property rights and control.

30. In the Feasibility of the Project section, normally we do the Basic Engineering and Financial Analysis. This can not be done in 7 pages. Can this be done as step 1 in case we are awarded a contract?

Please follow the directions for the content of this section, summarizing in narrative the feasibility conclusions that resulted from any analysis. Such analysis should be referenced as being available for review. At a later time and on short notice, the small business may be requested to provide the supporting documentation.

31. In Potential for impact section the statement of the problem elaborated by USAID provides the potential impact. Can we reproduce those with addition and further elaboration?

Please follow the directions for the content of this section. Elaborate on the realistic impacts your solution can deliver aligned with those expected impacts stated by the USAID Mission.

Technical Questions by Addendum (Problem Statement)

32. Addendum Number 1: Has USAID/Cambodia identified specific local organizations that the offeror will work with?

No. That said, USAID is currently working with several local organizations that could benefit from the support, which are either direct recipients of USAID funding or sub-recipients. Many of our partners work with local organizations as a sub-recipient, especially in the rice field fisheries and the natural resource management sectors. In addition our agriculture and health projects work with small businesses that could benefit from technical assistance to run their businesses better.

33. Addendum Number 1: If specific local organizations have been identified, what organizations or types of organizations will be supported?

USAID/Cambodia would like the Offeror to work with local organizations, micro enterprises and small businesses working in the agriculture, child protection, education, environment, and health sectors. Many of these businesses are micro enterprises with fewer than 10 employees.

Please note that the “Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance” (PLGHA) policy applies to all global health assistance funded by USAID. PLGHA prohibits the use of U.S. taxpayer money to support foreign organizations that perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning. For more information, see:

https://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/global-health/cross-cutting-areas/legislative-policy-requirements

34. Addendum Number 1: If specific local organizations have not been identified, is it appropriate for the Offeror propose categories or types of organizations?

The Offeror is free to propose specific organizations, categories or types of organizations working in the sectors specified that could benefit from this support.

35. Addenda 2 and 3: Please elaborate on what is meant by result “Improved public

Tservice delivery and quality for waste and OWSO services.”

Improved waste services could include baseline/outcome measurements for the following kinds of indicators: (1) people in target who have access to improved solid waste services (number); (2) cities with improved livability, sustainability, and management (Number), as well as percentage of solid waste collected (%) and/or properly disposed or recycled (%); number of unsanitary landfills or dumpsites closed or rehabilitated (square meters); number of municipalities with waste management plans (number). Positive change in selected indicators over baseline is the definition of improvement in waste services. Actual indicators used will depend on the proposed intervention and scope.

Improved One Window Service Office services could include baseline/outcome measurements for the following kinds of indicators: (1) reductions in time/effort citizens expend in requesting/obtaining administrative services provided by OWSOs (number);

(2) responsiveness of authorities to services requested by citizens through the OWSOs (e.g., % citizens surveyed). Positive change in selected indicators over baseline is the definition of improvement in OWSO services. The actual indicators used will vary depending on proposed interventions and scope (e.g., which OWSO services are targeted for improvement, etc.).

36. Addendum Number 4: In Addendum #4, is USAID's overarching objective to (i) improve the quality and durability of concrete roadways in Liberia, or (ii) develop high-quality and watertight concrete using local materials that can benefit the Liberian construction industry more generally?

USAID/Liberia’s overarching objective is to develop waterproof concrete using locally sourced materials to improve the quality of housing and road construction.

37. Addendum Number 4: Can USAID confirm whether or not this opportunity is procurement sensitive, and if potential applicants are allowed to direct technical questions to the USAID mission in Liberia?

Yes. This opportunity is procurement sensitive. Please direct all questions through this channel only. Do not contact missions directly with technical questions. If USAID/Liberia accepts a concept for further consideration and moves forward to Stage 2, there will be direct collaboration between the offeror and USAID/Liberia.

38. Addendum Number 5: Because most of the building codes are dictated and enforced by the government, the environmental compliance in Liberia is also similar to the USA for US funded project, will this program include education Liberia government of the need for such a earth based brick technology to make it marketable to Liberian. This questions also ties to the fact that, the cement industry could have a link to politics and as result the will by the government to implement earth based technology might not be supported. Has USAID discussed with government of Liberia and gauge if they support the idea.

USAID/Liberia has had no discussions with the Government of Liberia regarding these potential concepts.

39. Addendum Number 5: Because this program is expected to create a sustainable and replicable source of local raw materials for brick-making, the use of the manual brick fabricating machine is a critical area of need to attain sustainability.

Does this program allows developing a simpler, portable, affordable and viable machine reached to different Liberia region? It is also worth noting, building homes in poor rural areas are a "family based projects" and thus a portable machine used by several poor families could be the only link to expected brick quality production process. Is this program open to such a machine being part of proposed solutions?

USAID is interested in concepts for the manufacturing of quality locally sourced bricks that meet the Pollutant Standards Index and Air Quality Index, and that are consistent with the International Building Code, to develop the brick production value chain. If your concept is to create a machine that can produce the requested product, USAID is open to reviewing your submission.

40. Addendum Number 5: Brick production process requires mitigation of quality control due to negative that could impact the quality of the bricks. Our past experience indicate unless a research on soil is thoroughly carried out, the soil that is available could have much lower clay or other soil contents than that predicted using traditional field testing methods. This will eventually affect bricks quality. Does the USAID allows the concept paper to include cost associated with a thorough studies to determine soil contents in different regions in Liberia or does USAID requires those who respond to depend on soil information produced by others?

The proposed concept should fully capture and reference studies relied on for the solution, and additional steps which the offeror views as necessary.

41. Addendum Number 5: Earth-based bricks are known to have the ability to absorb bullets well. Houses made with earth-based bricks should be fairly safe to live in with respect to resistance to bullets and explosions. Is it possible to obtain funding from agencies such as DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency) to study the safety of this type of house. Most of the buildings in Liberia were destroyed during war, and houses structure integrity currently questionable, lots of houses unoccupied due to destruction and bullet holes.

Our scope is limited to finding a solution to affordable brick production for development purposes. Only USAID funding is involved. However, you are free to pursue funding from DTRA on your own.

42. Addendum Number 5: Earth-based bricks are poor in resisting hygrothermal loads that can be expected in the hot and humid areas like Liberia. Since this is a concept paper, does USAID allow provision to fabricated bricks in a controlled environment as a way of assessing ways of optimizing the bricks’ physio-mechanical properties? This experimental approach will also add value to determining final product properties based on brick contents during production.

Response pending

43. Addendum Number 5: In the concept paper, can a modification to a brick making or firing process be based on an innovation that may be in development stage but can be commercialized while implementing the project?

Yes. USAID welcomes all innovative processes that may result in a possible solution to the problem statement.

44. Addendum Number 5: In the manufacture of bricks, can innovations such as implementing a specific quality management system and environmental, health and safety management system be considered as applied research or development?

USAID welcomes all innovative processes that may result in a possible solution to the problem statement. Please review the definitions provided in the BAA centering around applied research and development. If you believe your concept fits the relevant definition(s), you are free to submit a concept paper in response.

45. Addendum Number 5: Is there estimated durability estimated on this program or

IBC are to be used? The earthen construction as being comparable to concrete or any other conventional material with respect to withstanding the test of time need further research due to environmental conditions.

46. Addendum Number 5: Setting up best practices offering training and education to help people appreciate the value of high quality, a model house goes handy to show case a high quality product. Can concept paper propose training and education be coupled with regulatory through local community colleges? Can participating colleges on these activities be open to this program counting for Continuing Professional Development credits? ( a case at point, our current project involved about 21 stipend paid interns great for project sustainability in building some laboratory in different counties, collaborating with colleges, while this is a contractor initiative, it gives value to a USA funded project). The training can also specifically target local designers, contractors, and builders as well as building inspectors most of whom are not very educated but remain the local experts. Will any of the above deemed acceptable at the concept level.

If further research is needed for this concept, it should be stated in the concept, along with next steps and alternatives.

47. Addendum Number 5: In the Liberia Brick Development can our concept paper describe innovative processes in general terms without giving specific details to protect potential IPR?

Yes. That said, the risk is that the concept paper will be too vague and general, and evaluators will be unable to come to conclusions about feasibility and other criteria.

Please review evaluation factors and criteria and ensure the concept paper is responsive.

48. Addendum Number 5: In implementing the project can we engage operators from brick manufacturers in the USA or abroad?

49. Addendum Number #5: In Background and Context, you list References - the first of which is "Observation from the Field - USAID/Liberia Infrastructure Engineers".

Can you give me the source for this reference to use as guidance on understanding the problem statement?

50. Addendum Number 5: Can you give me guidance on how to obtain the "Pollutant Standard Index" and "Air Quality Standard" that the local bricks are failing to meet? This will also help us understand the problem better so we can formulate a response.

51. Addendum Number 5: Since Thermal Moisture properties of Earth construction has no much information known and more research is needed especially focusing on how these materials can optimized to withstand hygrothermal loads, can this program reconsider the IBC as the ultimate standard since the target will be one level building to supplement current poor structures in rural Liberia.

52. Addendum Number 5: The population of Liberia is about 5 million with about 54 percent of the population of Liberia is living below the poverty line less than $US2.00 and about 1 Million living on Monrovia where non-load bearing brick will not be acceptable. Has the USAID considered the market for the bricks is less than 1 million living in poor rural areas who might be very poor educated and mostly will not afford to redoing their current structures in exchange of technology? Since Liberia also depends mostly on international donors, can USAID consider, this technology to be part on US financed projects in rural areas as an initiative to bring value to the program.

At this stage, USAID is only considering the technology. Further market analysis will be considered when the technology is identified.

53. Addendum Number 5: There is a widespread misconception from the general public and government officials that earth-based bricks are cheap construction materials for poor people. They are therefore avoided as low quality materials.

Can efforts be made to educate the general public about the capability and quality of this material, so that it could be effectively utilized to reap its full potential benefits. Can this be proposed in the concept paper. Most of the general public might not consider the earth based bricks as an upgrade and thus will decline the people willing to venture into the project.

Yes, you are free to incorporate your ideas into your concept.

54. Addendum Number 5: We are a small business implementing a design-build construction project across Liberia using block (sand-cement-gravel) type for a USAID project. We have noted massive knowledge gap particular in rural areas.

Does this program allow training local academic institution to make it sustainable?

55. Addendum Number 5: Will the brick production require results on compressive strength, Shear strength, Porosity/texture, Tensile strength, Durability, finish, adhesion, Permeability, water absorption, swelling among others to meet IBC or local building code?

Yes, the brick production requires results on the indicated tests as needed to meet the IBC and local building code.

56. Addendum Number 7: Is the intervention meant to work in any particular sector?

Can the research focus on a single sector?

The intervention is meant to work across sectors, in particular basic education (early-grade reading), nutrition, and primary health care, especially for maternal and child health.

57. Addendum Number 7: Is USAID committed to the internet hub solution as the means of crowding in at the ward level?

The solution must include expansion of broadband internet access as a means of crowding in citizen populations at the ward (sub-district) level. This need not be the entirety of the solution; however, creative approaches that build off of this connectivity are welcome.

58. Addendum Number 7: Is USAID looking for options that provide increased internet access or ones that avoid reliance on the limited connectivity?

USAID seeks increased internet access that connects citizens and government for improved service delivery. A more informed citizenry will be more capable of constructive engagement with the government to address priority development issues.

This will lead to increased efficiency in services and stronger results in linked USAID health, education, and nutrition programs.

59. Addendum Number 7: Our experience in a similar rural area showed that a lot of people preferred and trusted local publication and local languages as opposed to technology and use of similar gadget due to lack of trust. Carried out regular visit and exchange of documents and publications on economic, health benefits, documentary, local radio etc. Will such suggestion with greater impact be acceptable?

There is a learning curve. Developing trust in the internet and related digital applications takes time, especially in areas unaccustomed to robust information flows. Solutions that enable wider and easier access to local-language content via the broadband internet connection are welcome. Note, however, that the solution we are seeking does not envision the creation or distribution of original content, although communities may generate such content on their own. Our focus is on internet access and information immersion at a hub in the community.

60. Addendum Number 7: The problem statement mentions several problems – the need to “crowd in” citizens at a central gathering point, the need increase access to the internet, and the need to increase citizen input on development interventions. Which of these problems is the highest priority?

Increased citizen input is the priority outcome.

61. Addendum Number 7: We have worked in similar local government for better coordination, more and efficient implementations of their respective common economic activities among poor rural people. While we noted, mobile communication by the government was available, there was a need to have local leaders communicate the message in schools, churches and cooperatives. Would the concept paper using other methods outside "crown in"-Mobile based used elsewhere acceptable?

Yes. We are open to low-cost approaches that help to drive citizen uptake of this intervention, including approaches that leverage community influencers.

62. Addendum Number 7: Would USAID be able to provide any additional information on the connectivity initiative currently being developed for schools in Zambia, referenced on page 27 of the request?

Zayo Hub and iSchool Zambia have teamed up to provide solar power, telecom, and internet connectivity, along with digital content for schools, health and community interests. The partnership also will reach out to support the uptake of entrepreneurship, primary education, rural livelihoods, and women’s inclusion.

63. Addendum Number 7: On page 28, USAID references the FACT Zambia activity, implemented by Counterpart International. We have not been able to find much information about the FACT project on the USAID website, the DEC or Counterpart’s website. Would USAID provide recent reports or project updates re FACT? This will help potential applicants better understand USAID’s current work at the district level.

Fostering Accountability and Transparency in Zambia (FACT Zambia) works in selected districts of Eastern, Central, Copperbelt, Lusaka, and North Western provinces. FACT Zambia is entering its final year of implementation, ending in March 2020. While this connectivity intervention will not be linked to FACT Zambia, lessons from FACT may be of value. The FACT Zambia program report for the year ending September 30, 2018 is attached.