NOFO_ SFOP0009424_Q&A FINAL.docx

SFOP0009424

Enhancing Border Security Cooperation in Kenya and Somalia Department of State Bureau of Counterterrorism

Q&A (March 1, 2023):

· Question 1: Can a for-profit foreign entity respond to this NOFO?

Response: As per the NOFO on Page 4, “C. Eligibility Information,” foreign entities can respond to this proposal as long as they qualify as any of the five organization types listed. CT does not distinguish between domestic and foreign; eligibility is based on the type of partner entity (not their location).

· Question 2: Is the proposal in Calibri or Times New Roman? Do the tables also need to be 12-font minimum?

Response: The Department of State has recently updated its font requirements for proposals to require submission in 12-point Calibri font. As stated in the NOFO, the proposal application and all attachments must be submitted in 12-point font.

· Question 3: Does the Logic Framework count as part of the 10-page limit? Could it be an attachment?

Response As stated in the NOFO on page 4, attachments are excluded from the 10-page limit of the proposal. The logical framework is considered an attachment.

· Question 4: Does the Gender Analysis count as part of the 10-page limit? Could it be an attachment?

Response: As stated in the NOFO on page 4, the Gender Analysis section does not count towards the 10-page limitation of the proposal narrative and does not have a page limitation.

· Question 5: The comprehensive assessment under Objective 1 can be quite lengthy. May we request that it is excluded from the page limit and included as an attachment? Does this requirement refer to the proposal or the assessment?

Please clarify whether potential grantees must include a completed assessment with the proposal or that the grantee should describe how they will complete the assessment as an activity during implementation?

Response: Conducting the comprehensive assessment under Objective 1 would be a component of the program and plans to conduct the assessment should be included as part of the proposal. We do not require an assessment be completed in advance of the proposal or be submitted as part of the application package.

· Question 6: In the NOFO, page 4 , it states that the “Length of performance period: 24-36 months.” However, the NOFO also states on page 4 that “Program Performance Period: Proposed programs should be completed in 24 months or less.” Please clarify the length of performance and pricing period under the grant award

Response: Applicants should put forth proposals to be completed in 36 months or less, however the award has an option to extend.

· Question 7: Given that this is a cooperative agreement award, can the USG please confirm that the comprehensive assessment included in proposal will be treated as proprietary and not shared with other offerors or awardee(s) other than for the purpose of USG award evaluation?

Response: CT confirms that the comprehensive assessment included in proposal will be treated as proprietary and not shared with other offerors or awardee(s).

· Question 8: To demonstrate a potential grantee’s ability to deliver comprehensive assessments, can applicants include sample and representative engagement and assessment materials as attachments that are excluded from the page count.

Response: Yes, sample assessments are acceptable to include as attachments and will not be factored into the page count.

· Question 8: When does the USG anticipate awarding this grant?

Response: CT Bureau anticipates awarding this grant by September 30, 2023.

· Question 8: On page 4 of the NOFO, under “B. Federal Award Information,” please confirm whether the USG will make a single or multiple awards for this funding opportunity?

Response: CT will issue one (1) award for this funding opportunity.

· Question 8: On page 3 of the NOFO, under Objective 3: "The proposal must reserve a portion of the budget to executive high yield rapid interventions…." For parity in evaluating potential grantees, will the USG set a minimum reserve funding threshold for Objective 3?

Response: There is no minimum reserve funding threshold as the comprehensive assessment and dialogues are paramount to any follow-on interventions. In order of priority, costs should be allocated appropriately to (1) ensure the assessment is robust and provides the implementer and USG a good understanding of the problem sets/baseline capabilities along the border; and (2) that the Government of Kenya and Somalia (both at the national and local levels) are bought into the program and regularly collaborate on developing a joint action plan(s). While there is no formal threshold or funding requirement for the intervention component, reserving 25% or more of the budget can serve as a general guideline.

· Question 9: Under “1.03.1 Budget Guidance for New Awards (Oct 2020)” of the NOFO, given that the reserve spending could fall into any budget category, where should we include the reserve funding for Objective 3 in the spreadsheet?

Response: We defer to the applicant on how they would like to preliminarily allocate the reserve funding, as CT acknowledges that a majority of the interventions will not be solidified until after the assessment and initial dialogues are complete. As an example, it can be spread across to-be-identified equipment procurement, technical assistance, small-scale infrastructure projects, etc.

· Question 10: On page 10, the NOFO states, “Each application will be evaluated and rated on the basis of the evaluation criteria outlined below. Criteria are listed in the order of importance.” To give potential grantees more specific direction in how to approach our application, will the USG please weight the criteria numerically.

Response: As stated in the NOFO, on page 10, the criteria are listed in order of importance. We cannot provide numerical criteria.

· Question 11: For “Objective 1” as written in the NOFO, could you please clarify whether you expect bidders to present a plan for the comprehensive assessment, or whether you expect a comprehensive assessment to already be presented in the proposal?

Could you please confirm whether you will provide suppliers with relevant documents from previous or ongoing activities/studies in this area at the start of the project?

Response: Please refer to Question 5’s response. To the extent possible, CT will provide the implementer with relevant documents and contacts to facilitate the assessment as we intend for the assessment design to be a collaborative process.

· Question 12: For “Objective 2” as written in the NOFO, could you please confirm that you will facilitate and support the stakeholder mapping and engagement, and development of workshops, coordination mechanisms, and dialogues?

Response: CT will facilitate stakeholder engagement, workshops, and dialogues to the extent possible but the onus will be on the implementer to conduct these efforts.

· Question 13: For “Objective 3,” as written in the NOFO, could you please confirm that you will support necessary clearances for the procurement of equipment?

Could you please confirm whether the budget submission should include a proposed breakdown of the allocation intended across technical assistance/advisory support, training, equipment procurement, and infrastructure augmentation?

Response: Please refer to Question 9’s response. CT will support necessary clearances for equipment procurement.

· Question 14: Could you please confirm what (if any) level of security clearance is expected for project personnel?

Response: There is no security clearance expectation for project personnel.

· Question 15: Could you please confirm what the expectation is for budget allocation across the 3 objectives?

Response: Please refer to Question 8’s response.

· Question 16: Could you please confirm your expectations for the level of political engagement at national vs sub-national level, or are bidders open to proposing approaches based on experience and technical expertise?

Response: We expect some degree of political engagement at both levels to ensure proper buy-in and participation from key stakeholders, particularly those operating along the border, but defer to the applicant on frequency of national vs sub-national engagements.