Amendment 0001 to RFP 72066322R00011.pdf

ATTACHMENT 1: Ques�ons received regarding RFP No. 72066322R00011, USAID Urban WASH Ac�vity

1. Sec�on L IV CLIN 001 states; the Offeror must outline how Grants Under Contract will be used to achieve impact. Does USAID/Ethiopia have a list of organiza�ons to which the grants will be channeled? If yes, please provide the list of the organiza�ons.

USAID/Ethiopia Response: USAID does not have a list of organiza�ons to which the grants will be channeled. It is up to the offeror to propose and USAID/Ethiopia to approve.

2. Is there a Guarantee required for this project? If yes, what is the percentage required?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: No Guarantee is required.

3. USAID/Ethiopia an�cipates awarding a hybrid contract with two CLINS; CLIN 0001 - Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) Comple�on type and CLIN 0002 a single Indefinite Delivery and Indefinite Quan�ty (IDIQ) under which Firm Fixed Price (FFP) task order(s) would be issued at a later stage. How many contracts does USAID plan to award?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: USAID/Ethiopia an�cipates awarding one hybrid contract with two CLINs. The number of Task Order (s) to be issued under the CLIN 0002 is not yet known .

4. Does USAID an�cipate adding addi�onal ci�es to the program?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: The poten�al secondary ci�es listed on the SOO were chosen on a cluster basis. However, the final list will be decided post-award based on the type of approaches, ac�vi�es and technologies proposed in consulta�on with USAID/Ethiopia and GoE partners (e.g. MoWE).

5. USAID’s level of interest in pilo�ng “Managed Aquifer Recharge” projects?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: USAID/Ethiopia welcomes all approaches that can demonstrably contribute to the stated objec�ves within the SOO and is fi�ng to the local context.

6. Possibility of extending the due date by 2 weeks?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: No, the due date will not be extended.

7. USAID’s level of interest in looking at “unaccounted for water” in the selected urban water systems?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: USAID/Ethiopia welcomes all approaches that can demonstrably contribute to the stated objec�ves within the SOO and is fi�ng to the local context.

8. The proposed cluster of ci�es from two regions (Hawassa and Shasheme) is a challenge from an administra�ve perspec�ve. Would USAID consider clusters that are in closer proximity?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: The clustering approach is intended to simplify the planned ac�vity implementa�on by tying together two different regions. When it comes to administra�ve issues and coordina�ng learning in a specific region, ci�es under one regional administra�on can be managed accordingly.

9. For planning purposes, is a 611(e) in place for this procurement, or will the contractor have to obtain a 611(e) for each construc�on ac�vity over $1 million? Would USAID please provide more details on what type of new construc�on is envisioned underneath CLIN 0002? For example, is USAID envisioning larger-scale construc�on (like new fecal sludge treatment facili�es) or smaller construc�on interven�ons?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: A 611(e) is already in place, the contractor will not have to obtain a 611(e).

USAID envisions future construc�on that responds to the specific problems of specific ci�es, aligning with the exis�ng guidance and policies. It is not yet determined what type of new construc�on will best fit the needs of the ac�vity.

10. Is USAID requiring offerors to use a plug figure of $12.1 million (with yearly alloca�ons) as outlined in the table under Sec�on B.5 (page 7)? If so, would USAID please clarify the requirement for the grants under contract (GUC) plug figures in Sec�on L (page 122)?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: Yes, the provided $12.1 million (with yearly alloca�ons) plug figure must be used. Sec�on L is sta�ng that those plug figures should be shown in the cost proposal under the “Contractual” direct cost category, as a separate line �tled “Grants Under Contract” for CLIN 0001.

11. Sec�on B.8(g) (page 14) states, “As a condi�on for the payment of the por�on of the total fixed fee associated with a specific goal, target and/or deliverable, the Contractor must complete the goal, target and/or deliverable. When a fee bearing milestone/result is not completed or achieved, the por�on of the total fixed fee allocated to the milestone/result in the fee distribu�on schedule will not be paid.” However, as noted in Sec�on J.1.7 (page 142) of the RFP, goals, targets, and deliverables are likely to be revisited during implementa�on, which may in turn affect changes to annual work plans: “While the repor�ng detailed in the deliverables list in F.6 is rela�vely fixed, Ac�vity level results will be revisited during the incep�on phase and every year during the annual summits. Any changes in an�cipated results will be reflected in annual work plans.” To ensure the fee under CLIN 0001 remains fixed and is only adjusted because of changes in the work to be performed, would USAID consider the addi�on of the following sentence to B(g)? “Any unpaid fee resul�ng from the Contractor not achieving a certain result beyond its manageable control can be reallocated among other or new deliverables in the work plan for the current or upcoming year.” Should USAID wish to �e the fee to results achieved with specified targets, as stated in B.8, a cost-plus-incen�ve-fee (CPIF) with performance incen�ves contract would be more appropriate and likely provide be�er value to USAID. Under a cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF)-type contract with these specifica�ons, the contractor could forfeit the fee associated with a deliverable that was not achieved in a certain �meframe. The possibility of forfeiture could create a disincen�ve to devote addi�onal effort and resources to achieve that deliverable, inadvertently resul�ng in lowered results.

USAID/Ethiopia Response: Sec�on B.8 is revised to state that the fee distribu�on schedule will be reviewed annually and may be adjusted as necessary.

12. Sec�on B.8(h) (page 14) states, “When a fee bearing milestone/result is not completed on �me or requires more cost/effort to complete than projected in the Work Plan and/or MEL Plan, the por�on of the total fixed fee allocated to the milestone/result in the fee distribu�on schedule may be subject to adjustment of the fee by the Contrac�ng Officer.” It is our understanding that, pursuant to FAR 16.306(a), the fee under a CPFF comple�on-type contract does not vary with actual cost but may be adjusted because of changes in the required work under the contract. Further, it is our understanding that, per FAR 16.306(d)(2), the fee under CPFF-type contracts may only be adjusted due to addi�onal effort needed to complete a deliverable. Finally, certain deliverables may not be achieved on �me due to factors beyond the contractor’s control, such as market forces or evolving stakeholder priori�es. This is acknowledged by the RFP in Sec�on J.1.7 (page 142), which states: “While the repor�ng detailed in the deliverables list in F.6 is rela�vely fixed, Ac�vity level results will be revisited during the incep�on phase and every year during the annual summits. Any changes in an�cipated results will be reflected in annual work plans.” To ensure contractors remain eligible to earn the contractual fixed fee upon comple�on of the contract, would USAID please consider revising B.8(h) to read: “When a fee-bearing milestone/result is not completed on �me, the por�on of the total fixed fee allocated to the milestone/result in the fee distribu�on schedule may be subject to adjustment by the contrac�ng officer regarding when and/or how much of the fee is paid. Any unpaid fee resul�ng from the contractor not achieving a certain result beyond its manageable control can be reallocated among other or new deliverables in the work plan for the current or upcoming year.”

USAID/Ethiopia Response: Sec�on B.8 is revised to state that the fee distribu�on schedule will be reviewed annually and may be adjusted as necessary.

13. Sec�on B.8 of the RFP (page 9) states that the fixed fee under CLIN 0001 will be paid according to comple�on of key project deliverables. However, deliverables set as part of the proposal process may change during implementa�on due to evolving technical needs, newly emerged opportuni�es, and stakeholders’ priori�es. The RFP acknowledges this in Sec�on J.1.7 (page 142), which states: “While the repor�ng detailed in the deliverables list in F.6 is rela�vely fixed, Ac�vity level results will be revisited during the incep�on phase and every year during the annual summits. Any changes in an�cipated results will be reflected in annual work plans.” To account for these poten�al shi�s, would USAID consider adding the following language to Sec�on B.8: “The Deliverables and Fee Schedule may be adjusted during annual work planning to reprogram any unpaid fees from par�ally completed or non-accepted deliverables from the past year into other or addi�onal deliverables, as mutually agreed to between the contrac�ng officer’s representa�ve and the contractor, ensuring the fee remains fixed.” Adjus�ng the fee distribu�on plan with each annual work plan will allow the contractor to readjust and reallocate effort and resources as needed to achieve the most results a�ainable within the total es�mated cost.

USAID/Ethiopia Response: Sec�on B.8 is revised to state that the fee distribu�on schedule will be reviewed annually and may be adjusted as necessary.

14. Clause H.8 (Limita�on on Acquisi�on of Informa�on Technology) (page 50) requires approval of informa�on technology under the contract. We consider the informa�on technology included in our proposal to be incidental to this contract because it is neither specifically required in the RFP for the performance of the work under the future award nor to be procured for USAID’s direct use under the future award. Therefore, the work under the Performance Work Statement (PWS) will be incidental to the contract, and there is no apparent need to secure USAID’s approval of informa�on technology under the future award. Would USAID please confirm that the winning contractor is not required to secure approval for informa�on technology, per the terms of this clause?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: The winning contractor is required to secure approval for all IT that is not considered to be “incidental”. “Incidental” is described by USAID IT Authoriza�on to include, but is not limited to, the following examples, “the contractor's corporate �mekeeping system or corporate email system.”

Non-incidental IT would be hardware, so�ware, cloud services used by the contractor in support of the award. For example, if a contractor is standing up a field office and needs to purchase servers, computers, mobile phones, cloud services, etc for use by their team in support of the award, M/CIO would review those requests to ensure that federal prohibi�ons are followed.

15. Sec�on H.11.2 (page 52) references an Umbrella Ini�al Environmental Examina�on that was approved by USAID/Ethiopia. The link for this document appears to be broken. Would USAID please provide func�onal links or an a�achment for this document?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: The Umbrella IEE was not linked in the solicita�on, the link is to a document that analyzes the poten�al environmental and social impacts of water supply and sanita�on. This linked document is provided as A�achment 3 of this amendment for reference.

16. Per Sec�on H.19(2)(b)(3) of the RFP (page 59), “As prescribed in 722.170(b), all Coopera�ng Country Na�onals (CCNs) and Third Country Na�onals (TCNs) salaries must not exceed the Local Compensa�on Plan (LCP). Approval of the budget of the contract does not absolve the Contractor’s duty to request and receive Mission Director’s approval prior to hiring CCN and TCN personnel whose salaries are above the LCP.” Further, Sec�on H.19(2)(b)(2) references AIDAR 731.371(b), which in turn references the limits imposed by AIDAR 722.170 on the compensa�on of TCNs and CCNs. We respec�ully request that USAID remove these salary restric�ons from the RFP, as they appear to be inconsistent with AIDAR 752.7007, Personnel Compensa�on, incorporated under Sec�on H.19(1), which s�pulates that compensa�on of personnel will be in accordance with the contractor’s established policies, procedures, and prac�ces, with reimbursement subject only to the USAID Contractor Salary Threshold. The salary restric�on above may preclude contractors from following their established policies, procedures, and prac�ces, as required by

AIDAR 752.7007.

USAID/Ethiopia Response: The salary restric�on does not preclude contractors from following their established policies, procedures and prac�ces. It only requires contractors to receive the Mission Director’s approval prior to hiring CCN and TCN personnel whose salaries are above the LCP.

17. We note that Sec�on I.1 (page 66) of the RFP does not include the list of FAR construc�on clauses that would be incorporated into task orders (TOs), as appropriate. Will USAID include those clauses under each TO issued under CLIN 0002?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: Yes, the clauses will be included under each Task Order issued under CLIN 0002.

18. Sec�on L.10 (page 109) states, “In addi�on to the en�re Technical Proposal submi�ed in Adobe Acrobat, the Technical Proposal Body must be separately submi�ed in Microso� Word.” Would USAID please confirm that the “Technical Proposal Body” refers to only the technical proposal, excluding annexes?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: Yes, the “technical proposal body” refers to only the technical proposal, excluding annexes.

19. Sec�on L.11.1 (page 111) provides specific page limits for each sec�on of the technical proposal, and these limits exactly total the 25-page overall page limit for the Technical Approach. Would USAID consider variable page ranges for each sec�on as long as the overall 25-page limit is not exceeded?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: We have removed the specific page limits for each sec�on of the technical proposal. However, the overall page limit for the Technical Approach remains at 25-pages.

20. Sec�on L.11.1 (page 111) notes that the technical proposal will have a Technical Approach sec�on in the main body and a PWS in an annex. Sec�on L.11.2 IV(a) (page 113) states that the PWS must include a list of items required under the following heading, “The PWS must include the following components in the PWS/Technical Proposal Body.” Would USAID please confirm that the material under this heading should be included in the annex?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: Yes, the material under this heading should be included in the PWS as an annex.

21. Sec�on L.11.2 (page 113) states, “The PWS must include the following components in the PWS/Technical Proposal Body.” Would USAID please confirm that the referenced “summary chart” should be in the PWS annex, not in the main body of the technical proposal?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: Yes, the summary chart should be included in the PWS as an annex.

22. Per Sec�on L.11.2 (page 116) of the RFP, the offeror is not expected to provide detailed informa�on like price/cost for works under CLIN 0002. Given that work and specific pricing under CLIN 0002 is unknown and will be issued as separate TOs at a later stage, and given the large plug figures for GUC in CLIN 0001, would USAID please consider changing the requirement for major subcontractors to read as follows? “A major subcontractor is one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost for CLIN 0001, less the GUC plug or one that will perform a significant por�on of the scope of work.” If USAID is not open to this change in language, please confirm that the calcula�on of 20% of the proposal value (for major subcontractors) only includes the total value of CLIN 0001.

USAID/Ethiopia Response: Sec�on L.11.2.VIII(a) is changed; a major subcontractor is one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost for CLIN 0001, less the GUC plug number, or a subcontractor that will perform a significant por�on of the work.

23. Sec�on L.11.2 (page 118) of the RFP states, “The offeror is expected to present a human resource management plan that can deliver all the expected results under each CLIN.” However, a human resource management plan is not listed in the criteria for evalua�on of the Key Personnel sec�on in M.2.3 Factor 3

– Key Personnel (pages 134-135). Would USAID please clarify whether there is a requirement for a dedicated human resource management plan or if the details presented in the management and staffing sec�ons will be sufficient?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: Details presented in the management and staffing sec�ons will be sufficient.

24. Sec�on L.11.2 (page 119) of the RFP states, “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five (5) of the most recent and relevant contracts or task orders for the Offeror and major subcontractors for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar size, scope, and complexity over the past five years in sectors similar to those that will be addressed in USAID Urban WASH Statement of Objec�ves, including in managing construc�on ac�vity (CLIN 0002).” As there is also a significant amount of comparable work, including in Ethiopia, being implemented under coopera�ve agreements, would USAID also consider allowing the inclusion of coopera�ve agreements as past performance references?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: Sec�on L.11.2.VIII(a) is changed to include acquisi�on and assistance as acceptable past performance references.

25. Sec�on L.12. V (page 126) states, “The Offeror must address each of the elements in FAR 44.202-2 in order for proposed subcontractors to be considered by the Contrac�ng Officer for consent of sub-contractors to be granted with the ini�al award.” Would USAID please clarify whether this requirement only applies to major subcontractors?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: L.12.V is changed. This requirement applies to all subcontractors.

26. Sec�on L.12. VII (page 127) states, “The Offeror and each proposed sub-offeror (prime contractor sub awardees) will complete all ‘Representa�ons, Cer�fica�ons, and Other Statements of Offeror’ as required in Sec�on K, and sign and date on the last page in the space provided.” Would USAID please confirm that this documenta�on is only a requirement for major subcontractors?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: This requirement applies to all subcontractors.

27. Several links within the RFP appear to be broken. Would USAID please provide func�onal links or a�achments for the following? • L.11.2(a) on page 115: The link en�tled “link” in the following sentence:

“Detailed defini�on for the above proposed indicators and other poten�al indicators for this ac�vity can be found from this link, for considera�on.” • J.1.4.1 on page 138: The link en�tled “IB-NET tracked indicators” in the following sentence: “80% of USAID-supported providers (including water, wastewater and fecal sludge operators) report at least 15% improvement in three relevant IB-NET tracked indicators, aligned to na�onally agreed indicators, in addi�on to percentage of female employees.” • J.2.3 on page 146: The link en�tled “Scoping Report” in the column next to: “Review of Ethiopian Urban WASH Sector.”

USAID/Ethiopia Response: The full links are as follows:

L.11.2(a) on page 115:

h�ps://www.globalwaters.org/sites/default/files/usaid_water_indicator_handbook_508_1.pdf

J.1.4.1 on page 138: h�ps://newibnet.org/performance-indicators/

J.2.3 on page 146: A�achment 4 of this amendment (separate document)

28. The RFP currently does not include any relevant evalua�on for the monitoring, evalua�on, and learning (MEL) plan in Sec�on L or Sec�on M. Would USAID please confirm that the criteria in Sec�on F.8.1 (pages 32-34) will be used to evaluate this annex?

USAID/Ethiopia Response: Yes, the criteria in Sec�on F.8.1 will be used to evaluate this annex.

29. Given that past performance informa�on will be presented in detail in the annex for past performance informa�on, would USAID consider adjus�ng page requirements in the technical proposal so that the Past Performance technical narra�ve sec�on is one page, and the remaining page is instead allocated to Organiza�onal Capacity, making the revised page limit for the Organiza�onal Capacity sec�on three pages instead of two? Addi�onally, would USAID please consider expanding on the evalua�on criteria for Past Performance? Would USAID evaluate offerors in accordance with the following considera�ons: • Quality of product or service, including consistency in mee�ng goals and targets • Cost control, including forecas�ng costs as well as accuracy in financial repor�ng • Schedule, including the �meliness against the comple�on of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules, and administra�ve requirements (e.g., efforts that contribute to or affect the schedule variance) • Business rela�ons, addressing the history of professional behavior and overall businesslike concern for the interests of the customer, including the contractor’s history of reasonable and coopera�ve behavior (to include �mely iden�fica�on of issues in controversy), customer sa�sfac�on, �mely award and management of subcontracts, coopera�ve a�tude in remedying problems, and �mely comple�on of all administra�ve requirements • Customer sa�sfac�on with performance, including end users or beneficiaries, wherever possible • Management of key personnel, including appropriateness of personnel for the job and prompt and sa�sfactory changes in personnel when problems with clients are iden�fied

USAID/Ethiopia Response: USAID/Ethiopia Response: We have removed the specific page limits for each sec�on of the technical proposal. The overall page limit for the Technical Approach should be no more than 25-pages.

Past Performance will be evaluated as stated in M.2.5 of the solicita�on.

30. H.20(o) (page 61) men�ons an ADS 303, Required as Applicable Standard Provision (RAASP), en�tled “Publica�ons and Media Releases.” Please note that there is no RAASP en�tled “Publica�ons and Media https://www.globalwaters.org/sites/default/files/usaid_water_indicator_handbook_508_1.pdf https://newibnet.org/performance-indicators/

Releases,” but there is a mandatory standard provision en�tled “Submissions to the Development Experience Clearinghouse and Data Rights.” Because this standard provision does not require the grantee to obtain approval before submission, we respec�ully request that USAID remove this requirement.

Implementers will ensure the required reports are submi�ed to Development Experience Clearinghouse, per the mandatory standard provision.

USAID/Ethiopia Response: Sec�on H.20 is edited to remove sub-paragraph (o).

31. There is no requirement for the contrac�ng officer’s representa�ve to receive grantee reports in the GUC authorizing language for ADS 302, so we respec�ully request that USAID remove the following sentence from Sec�on H.20(n) (page 61): “Copies of all reports received from grantees will be promptly forwarded to the COR.” We also respec�ully request that USAID remove the following sentence from the same sec�on: “At the conclusion of the contract, the Contractor must consult with the Contrac�ng Officer for direc�on as to which records must be transferred to USAID.” Although USAID retains the rights to visita�on and inspec�on for three years a�er the grant comple�on date, all records under this contract are considered property of the contractor and must be retained in accordance with the contractor’s records reten�on policies that originate from audit requirements.

USAID/Ethiopia Response: Sec�on H.20 is edited to remove the two sentences suggested in the ques�on.

END OF AMENDMENT NO. 0001, ATTACHMENT 1.

ATTACHMENT 2: Changes to the RFP No. No. 72066322R00011

1. B.8 Payment of Fee is changed to add the following sentence in the first paragraph: The “Deliverable and Fee Schedule” will be reviewed and may be edited during the incep�on phase, and annually therea�er, for deliverables that may not be achieved on �me due to factors beyond the contractor’s control. No other changes are made to clause B.8.

B.8 PAYMENT OF FEE

Payment of the fixed fee will be made for CLIN 0001 as listed below. The “Deliverable and Fee Schedule” will be reviewed and may be edited during the incep�on phase, and annually therea�er, for deliverables that may not be achieved on �me due to factors beyond the contractor’s control.

2. Clause H.20, Sub-Paragraph (n) is changed to remove two sentences; “ Copies of all reports received from grantees will be promptly forwarded to the COR. ” and “ At the conclusion of the Contract, the Contractor must consult with the Contrac�ng Officer for direc�on as to which records must be transferred to USAID. ”

(n)The Contractor will act as custodian for USAID of all records rela�ng to grants under the Contract. The Contractor will preserve all records with respect to its grant-making (including with respect to the delibera�ons of all Review Panels) and grant administra�on hereunder. Copies of all reports received from grantees will be promptly forwarded to the COR. USAID and the Comptroller General must have full access to all documents, papers, and other records of the Contractor with respect to its du�es hereunder. At the conclusion of the Contract, the Contractor must consult with the Contrac�ng Officer for direc�on as to which records must be transferred to USAID.

3. Clause H.20, Sub-Paragraph (o) is deleted.

(o) Inten�onally le� blank. With reference to ADS 303 Required as Applicable Standard Provision en�tled “Publica�ons and Media Releases”, the Contractor must obtain wri�en clearance from the COR and then forward one copy of all published reports generated by recipients under the grants program to USAID Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC) at: h�p://dec.usaid.gov .

4. Clause L.11.1 Organiza�on of Technical Proposal is changed to remove specific page limits for each element of the technical proposal but maintains the page limita�on of the overall technical proposal to 25 pages.

L.11.1 ORGANIZATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL The wri�en Technical Proposal is limited to 25 pages and must be wri�en in English. USAID will not evaluate informa�on submi�ed above this page limit. Do not use a type smaller than 11-point font. Offerors must number each page consecu�vely. The technical proposal must include the informa�on set forth below. The text used in tables and charts may be adjusted as appropriate but must be no smaller than 10-point font. Failure to comply with the solicita�on’s instruc�ons, and any devia�on from the RFP’s requirements and prescribed format will be considered a material omission, and could result in a proposal’s exclusion, rejec�on, or determina�on of ineligibility.

http://dec.usaid.gov/

Note: A page in the technical proposal that contains a table, chart, graph, etc., not otherwise excluded below, is subject to the page limita�on. Therefore, Technical Proposals must be organized in the following manner:

- Cover Page (not counted against page limit)

- Table of Contents (not counted against page limit)

- Execu�ve Summary (2-page limit, but not counted against page limit; must describe the basic elements of the offeror’s technical approach and methodology, management and staffing plan, MEL plan)

- Technical Approach (10 page limit).

- Management Approach (6 page limit)

- Key Personnel (5 page limit)

- Organiza�onal Capacity (2 page limit)

- Past Performance (2 page limit)

Annexes will not count against the page limit. All annexes must be referenced in the technical proposal with summarized informa�on and included in the annex sec�on. The following will be included in the annexes:

- Performance Work Statement (PWS)

- Proposed first year implementa�on/work plan

- Dra� MEL plan

- Recommended Posi�on Descrip�ons with requirements for Key Personnel

- Management Structure Organiza�onal Chart(s)

- CVs/Resumes of Key Personnel with three references

- Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

- Past Performance Informa�on (PPI) report references, past performance informa�on in using small business concerns

- Small Disadvantaged Business par�cipa�on program targets informa�on

5. Clause L. 11.VII is revised to replace the descrip�on of a “major subcontractor” to state “ one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost for CLIN 0001, less the GUC plug or a subcontractor that will perform a significant por�on of the work ” and to change “contracts” to “awards” as possible past performance references.

L.11.VII PAST PERFORMANCE [See Sec�on M.2]

a. Past performance informa�on

The offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) must provide performance informa�on for itself, the Contractor teaming arrangements, if any, and each major subcontractor (one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost ( one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the offeror’s total proposed cost for CLIN 0001, less the GUC plug number, or a subcontractor that will perform a significant por�on of the work ) in accordance with the following:

- List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five (5) of the most recent and relevant contracts awards or task orders for the Offeror and major subcontractors for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts awards of similar size, scope, and complexity over the past five years in sectors similar to those that will be addressed in USAID Urban WASH Statement of Objec�ves, including in managing construc�on ac�vity (CLIN 0002).

- For all contracts awards listed in the past performance annex that are not in CPARS, provide a list of contact names, job �tles, mailing addresses, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, explana�on of relevance to the proposed acquisi�on and a descrip�on of the performance to include:

▪ Scope of work or complexity/diversity of tasks,

▪ Primary loca�on(s) of work,

▪ Term of performance,

▪ Dollar value, and

▪ Contract type, i.e., fixed price, cost reimbursement, etc.

- USAID recommends that you alert the contacts that their names have been submi�ed and that they are authorized to provide performance informa�on concerning the listed contracts awards (if and when USAID requests it.)

- If extraordinary problems impact any of the referenced contracts awards , provide a short explana�on and the correc�ve ac�on taken (FAR 15.305(a)(2)).

- Describe any quality awards or cer�fica�ons that indicate excep�onal capacity to achieve the objec�ves described in the Statement of Objec�ves. This informa�on is not included in the page limita�on.

6. L.12.V is amended to remove “major” from the �tle.

L.12.V Part 5 - Informa�on to Support Consent to Major Subcontractors

The Offeror must address each of the elements in FAR 44.202-2 in order for proposed subcontractors to be considered by the Contrac�ng Officer for consent of sub-contractors to be granted with the ini�al award.

END OF AMENDMENT NO. 0001, ATTACHMENT 2.

ATTACHMENT 3: Umbrella Ini�al Environmental Examina�on (IEE)

POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS

WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION

Many debilita�ng or even fatal illnesses are spread by contamina�on of the water supply by human fecal ma�er containing disease-causing viruses, bacteria, and parasites. Good sanita�on and hygiene prac�ces are essen�al to preven�ng contamina�on of water resources. Adverse impacts to ecosystems can arise from water diversion, construc�on or decommissioning ac�vi�es in or near a watercourse, or from fecal contamina�on of water.

Water supply and sanita�on projects and hygiene promo�on should be viewed as interdependent ac�vi�es.

Implemen�ng them at the same �me leads to the greatest health benefit and is considered a best prac�ce in the sector. Water and sanita�on projects are intended to improve environmental health condi�ons for beneficiaries.

However, poor design, construc�on or implementa�on or ac�vi�es in this sector can result in environmental failures that eliminate or offset the intended benefits. More details on poten�al impacts of water and sanita�on projects can be found in sector best prac�ces resources guide h�ps://www.usaid.gov/environmental-procedures/sectoral-environmental-social-best-prac�ces/seg-water-supply/ pdf

The impacts include:

● Debilita�ng disease and death. Water supply and sanita�on projects may cause increased incidence of infec�ous water-borne diseases such as cholera, non-infec�ous disease such as arsenic poisoning, and water-enabled diseases such as malaria, schistosomiasis or bilharzia.

● Na�ve plants and animals harmed, and associated land, water, and coastal ecosystems degraded. These impacts most o�en arise from water diversion, construc�on or decommissioning ac�vi�es in or near a watercourse, or from fecal contamina�on of water

● Water-supply projects can also deplete fresh water. Increased consump�on of water can reduce water flows and cause loss of habitat, wetlands and wildlife downstream.

● Water supply projects can erode soil from pipe leakage or poor drainage at taps. Soil erosion may cause sedimenta�on in receiving waters, which may reduce the capacity of ponds and reservoirs, increase flooding, or substan�ally alter aqua�c ecosystems by changing streambed, lakebed and estuary condi�ons.

● Contamina�on of receiving waters with human excreta or animal manure can cause nutrient enrichment, deple�on of dissolved oxygen and other changes that disturb natural ecosystems and reduce the vigor, abundance, and/or diversity of plants and animals that live either in the water or on land. Disease-causing microorganisms from excreta and manure may also contaminate fish or shellfish, crea�ng health hazards

● Increased disease transmission from standing, stagnant water.

Poor design, opera�on and/or maintenance of water supply improvements can lead to pools of stagnant water near water taps, water pipes and storage tanks. Improper or ineffec�ve prac�ces for disposing of excreta and solid waste make this problem worse.

● Arsenic poisoning, Mercury poisoning and Water-related infec�ous diseases

SMALL SCALE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES

The extent of construc�on ac�vi�es to improve infrastructures under this ac�vity is not yet determined. Small-scale construc�on itself has the poten�al for a set of impacts such as: erosion, contamina�on of water supplies, https://www.usaid.gov/environmental-procedures/sectoral-environmental-social-best-practices/seg-water-supply/pdf https://www.usaid.gov/environmental-procedures/sectoral-environmental-social-best-practices/seg-water-supply/pdf deple�on of standing �mber/deforesta�on, damage to protected areas, and crea�on of habitat for disease vectors

Construc�on projects may cause both direct and indirect poten�al adverse environmental impacts. Reconstruc�on needs arise in both urban/peri-urban and rural areas. The size and scope of both indirect and ancillary effects may be magnified over �me, or through the cumula�ve effects of building many small facili�es. Construc�on can also have significant effects on public health—for example, the spread of HIV/AIDS and other communicable diseases is o�en associated with workers and construc�on camps. Standing water in quarries and borrow pits may become sources of contaminated water and disease-bearing insects.

● Disturbance to exis�ng landscape/habitat: Construc�on typically necessitates clearing, grading, trenching and other ac�vi�es that can result in near-complete disturbance to the pre-exis�ng landscape/habitat within the plot. If the plot contains or is adjacent to a permanent or seasonal stream/water body, grading and leveling can disrupt local drainage.

● Sedimenta�on/fouling of surface waters . Runoff from cleared ground or material stockpiles during construc�on can result in sedimenta�on/fouling of surface waters, par�cularly if the site is located in close proximity to a stream or water body. Such risks are par�cularly acute in the case of dam construc�on or rehabilita�on where construc�on is within the stream or riverbed.

● Stagnant water : Construc�on may result in standing water on-site, which readily becomes a breeding habitat for mosquitoes and other disease vectors. This is of par�cular concern as malaria is endemic in Rwanda.

● Adverse impacts of materials sourcing . Construc�on requires a set of materials o�en procured locally:

�mber, fill, sand and gravel, bricks, etc. Unmanaged extrac�on of these materials can have adverse effects on the environment. For example, stream bed mining of sand or gravel can increase sedimenta�on and disturb sensi�ve ecosystems; purchase of �mber from unmanaged or illegal concessions helps drive deforesta�on. Similarly, the opera�on of constructed facili�es has a well-known set of poten�al adverse impacts.

● General/ins�tu�onal facili�es and compounds generate a set of waste streams (e.g., gray water, latrine discharge, solid waste). In general, if improperly managed, such wastes can contaminate ground and surface water, and create a breeding habitat for disease vectors, et cetera. For example, if latrine design or maintenance failure permits insects or other disease vectors free in-and-out access to the pit/tank, pathogens in human waste can be spread within the compound and to the nearby community. Similarly, spilling latrine waste during pump-out releases contained pathogens into the environment. Storing solid waste (usually a mixture of food scraps, packaging, and paper) in open containers creates a breeding habit for and a�racts disease vectors such as rodents. Failure to design or maintain appropriate drainage structures can result in standing water within the compound or on adjacent lands, which is of par�cular concern as malaria is endemic in Rwanda. Local erosion, including damage to adjacent fields, and sedimenta�on of nearby surface waters can also result. In general, the poten�al impacts of small-scale infrastructure construc�on and opera�on are controllable with basic good design and opera�ng prac�ces.

However, the precise nature of the poten�al impacts—and the appropriate design and opera�ng prac�ces to mi�gate them—are highly dependent both on loca�on and the specific characteris�cs of the infrastructure. For these reasons, a sub-project environmental review process that considers specific issues of site and design is an appropriate approach to ensuring environmentally sound design and implementa�on.

More impacts include:

● Damage to sensi�ve or valuable ecosystems from construc�on of infrastructure, associated temporary worker dwelling, or construc�on storage units for personnel or equipment

● Removal of vegeta�on and/or compac�on of the soil and grading of the site, altering drainage pa�erns and water tables, changing access to water by animals, people and vegeta�on, or degrading water resources

● Sedimenta�on of surface waters through removal of natural land cover, excava�on, extrac�on of construc�on materials and other construc�on-related ac�vi�es that result in soil erosion

● Contamina�on of groundwater and surface water supplies through improper disposal of human and other biological wastes during the construc�on period

● Contamina�on of ground and surface water supplies through improper disposal or handling of toxic materials used in construc�on (e.g., solvents, paints, vehicle maintenance fluids (oil, coolant), and diesel fuel)

● Adverse social impacts due to displacement of local inhabitants, influx of outside workers, inequitable distribu�on of economic benefits of construc�on, etc.

● Spread of disease through migra�on of construc�on workers from other regions or construc�on of a new road, especially sexually transmi�ed diseases such as HIV/AIDS

● Damage to aesthe�cs of site/area

● Improper extrac�on of construc�on materials such as wood, stone, gravel, or clay that damages terrestrial ecosystems (e.g., wood may come from rela�vely intact or natural forests)

● Use of toxic materials during construc�on e.g. asbestos. If free floa�ng fibers of asbestos are inhaled, they can cause malignant lung cancer, mesothelioma (a terminal cancer of the �ssue that lines the chest cavity), and asbestosis, a debilita�ng and some�mes fatal build-up of fibrous scar �ssue in the lungs.

● Construc�on or rehabilita�on of roads may, in addi�on, contribute to:

● Degrada�on of water quality. Water quality may be damaged by soil erosion and the silta�on of nearby rivers, streams, lakes and wetlands. The chief indirect cause of silta�on is agricultural development.

● Altered hydrology. Roads crossing areas with high water tables or wetlands may act like dams to block surface and sub-surface water flows.

● Adverse impacts on human health and safety including- dust and noise, traffic hazards, road works hazard, and spread of water borne diseases if not properly designed and allows standing water along the roads

END OF AMENDMENT NO. 0001, ATTACHMENT 3.

ATTACHMENT 4: Review of Ethiopian Urban WASH Sector Scoping Report

Ethiopia Urban WASH Sector Scoping Report

Table of Contents

Acronyms 1

1. BACKGROUND 4

2. OBJECTIVES 4

3. FRAMEWORK OF ANALYSIS 4

4. URBAN WASH SECTOR LANDSCAPING 5

4.1 Demographic and Coverage Trends 5

4.2 Key Stakeholders 7

4.3 USAID’S Strategy and WASH Investments 8

4.4 Urban WASH Sector Programs 10

5. SYSTEMS ANALYSIS 16

5.1 Policy and Legislation 16

5.2 Institutions 18

5.3 Planning 20

5.4 Infrastructure 21

5.5 Regulation and Accountability 23

5.6 Finance 23

5.7 Monitoring 25

5.8 Water Resource Management 26

5.9 Learning and Adaptation 27

6. CROSS CUTTING THEMES 28

6.1 Poverty and social inclusion 28

6.2 Gender & Youth 30

6.3 Private sector engagement 31

6.4 Urban Resilience 32

BIBLIOGRAPHY 33

Annex 1: Interview List 35

1world bank

2world bank

Acronyms AACRA Addis Ababa City Roads Authority

AAWSA Addis Ababa Water and Sewerage Authority

AFD Agence Française de Développement

AfDB African Development Bank

Africa RISING Africa Research in Sustainable Intensification for the Next Generation project

AICS Italian Agency for Development Cooperation AICS

BCBT Build-Capacity Build-Transfer

BDFO Design–Build–Finance–Operate

BoFED Bureau of Finance and Economic Development

BOO Build–Own–Operate

BOOT Build–Own–Operate–Transfer

BOT Build–Operate–Transfer

CDWRP Community Dug well with Rope Pump

CR-WSP Climate Resilient -Water Safety Plans

CRGE Climate Resilient Green Economy

CWA Consolidated WASH Account

DBHSS Deep Borehole Spot Supply

DCMF Design–Construct–Maintain–Finance

EDHS Ethiopia demographic and Health Survey

EFDA Ethiopian Food and Drug Administration

EFY Ethiopian Fiscal Year

EIB European Investment Bank

EPA Environmental Protection Authority

ESDP-V Education Sector Development Program-5

ETB Ethiopia Birr

EWRMP Ethiopian Water Resource Management program

EWTI Ethiopian Water Technology Institute

FCDO United Kingdom, Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office – previously DFID

FSM Faecal Sludge Management

GoE Government of Ethiopia

GIS Geographic Information System

GPOBA Global Partnership for Output Based Aid – now GPRBA

GPRBA Global Partnership for Results Based Approaches

GSF Global Sanitation Fund

GTP Growth and Transformation Plan

HEHS Hygiene and Environmental Health Strategy

HEW Health Extension Workers

HHDWRP Household Dug well with Rope Pump

HSDP Health Sector Development Program

HSTP Health Sector Transformation Plan

IDA International Development Association (World Bank)

JMP Joint Monitoring Program

JTR Joint technical review

KCCP Knowledge Co-Creation Program

KOICA Korea International Cooperation Agency

MIS Management Information System

3world bank

MoCT Ministry of Culture and Tourism

MoE Ministry of Education

MoEFCC Ministry of Environment, Forestry and Climate Change

MoF Ministry of Finance

MoH Ministry of Health

MoU Memorandum of Understanding

MoUDC Ministry of Urban Development and Construction’s

MOWIE Ministry of Water Irrigation and Electricity

MSF Multi-Stakeholder Forum

MVS Multi Village Scheme

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NRW Non-Revenue Water

O&M Operation & Maintenance

ODF Open Defecation Free

OWNP One WASH National Program

PASDEP Plan for Accelerated and Sustained Development to End Poverty PSI Population Services International

PSNP Productive Safety Net Program

RHB Regional Health Bureau

RWB Regional Water Bureau

SBCC Social and Behaviour Change Communication

SME Small and Micro Enterprises

SNNPR Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples' Region

SWAP Sector Wide Approach

SWS Sustainable WASH Systems Learning Partnership

TWBP Town WSS Business Plans

TWSSE Town Water Supply and Sewerage Enterprises

TWU Town Water Utility

UAP Universal Access Plan

UHEP Urban Health Extension Program

UIIDP Urban Institutional and Infrastructure Development Program

ULGDP Urban Local Government Development Program

ULGs Urban Local Governments

UPSNP Urban Productive Safety Net Program

USWM Urban Sanitation and Waste Management Program UWASH-TC Urban Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Technical Committee

UWSS-II Second Urban Water and Sanitation project (World Bank)

WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene

WASHCO Water Sanitation and Hygiene Committee

WDC Water Development Commission

WIF WASH Implementation Framework

WRDF Water Resource Development Fund

WRM Water Resource Management

WSP Water Safety Plan

WSS Water Supply and Sanitation

4world bank

1. BACKGROUND

Ethiopia is experiencing a high rate of urban population growth, estimated in 2018 to be 4.8 percent annually, currently the highest among its neighbouring countries including Kenya (4.1), Somalia (4.1) and South Sudan (2.0). Due in part to the rapid population growth, Ethiopian cities have been struggling to reach and maintain a basic level of water, sanitation, and hygiene services. Therefore, cities are becoming increasingly polluted, affecting quality of life, and jeopardizing economic growth and stability. According to the World Bank in 2017, “more than 60 percent of households in urban areas use traditional pit latrines, and about 6 percent of urban residents are still practicing open defecation. Faecal sludge is often accumulated in poorly designed and built pits, and then discharged directly into storm drains, open water bodies or the ground, or manually removed and dumped into the neighbourhood or the wider environment. The effect of all this is exposing urban residents to health hazards, as seen for example with a cholera outbreak in 2016.”

While urbanization is a challenge, it can also be an important catalyst to promote growth, create jobs, and help the country achieve middle-income country status by 2025. This requires putting in place policies, institutions, and investments to equip and manage towns and cities to be attractive places to live and work. This would include having adequate housing, infrastructure to provide basic services, and comprehensive poverty eradication mechanisms. Currently, 25.7 percent of Ethiopia’s urban population lives on the equivalent of US$ 1.24 per day or less, that is, the national poverty line. This percentage is far higher than Ethiopia’s peers, and unusually, is almost as high as the rural poverty rate (World Bank, 2016).

USAID Ethiopia is in the process of formulating the direction for its activities and investment in Ethiopia’s Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) sector over the next five years (2020-2025). As part of that process, USAID is commissioning this scoping study to better understand the current context within Ethiopia’s urban WASH sector, particularly with regards to sanitation. The scoping study will also identify potential entry points where USAID’s value-added investment would lead to a stronger more self-reliant sector.

2. OBJECTIVES

The objective of this report is to set out the current context within Ethiopia’s urban WASH sector, including current trends, actors, policies, projects, and identify potential entry points where USAID could provide value added investment towards strengthening the urban WASH sector.

This inception document sets out the landscaping element of the assignment based on a desk review of available and relevant sector documents. It also includes the framework of analysis and the proposed interviews that will be conducted in the second phase of the assignment to gain a deeper understanding of the context and identify the areas of intervention for USAID. The final report will build on this initial scoping with further analysis and address the question of where USAID should invest in the urban WASH Sector.

3. FRAMEWORK OF ANALYSIS

The framework of analysis for the initial scoping will include three components:

i. Review of the Urban WASH sector – this will look at demographic and coverage figures, key stakeholders, and ongoing projects in the sector

ii. System Analysis – this will review the status of nine building blocks of a systems approach across the urban WASH sector: policy and legislation, planning, institutions, infrastructure, regulation and accountability, finance, monitoring, water resource and learning & adaption (Figure 1)

iii. Cross Cutting Themes – this will look at the connection between the urban WASH sector and cross cutting themes, including poverty and social inclusion, gender, youth, private sector engagement and resilience (Figure 2).

5world bank

Figure 1: Systems Analysis Figure 2: Cross Cutting Themes

4. URBAN WASH SECTOR LANDSCAPING

4.1 Demographic and Coverage Trends

Ethiopia’s Central Statistical Agency (CSA) projects the urban population will triple from 15.2 million in 2012 to 42.3 million in 2037. The World Bank projects an even faster rate of urbanization, which would mean that by 2030 there could be 40 million urban dwellers, equivalent to 30 percent of the population (World Bank Group/Cities Alliance, 2015). Over 70 percent of the urban population lives in slums or mixed settlements, as known in Ethiopia. Figure 3 provides recent and projected population growth in Addis Ababa, as an illustration of wider urban growth.

Figure 3: Population of Addis Ababa from 1965 to 2013 and projection up to 2030

Source: CSA, 2012

The CSA defines Urban areas either by the number of inhabitants, whereby settlements with more than 2,000 people are deemed urban or by their administrative status, whereby only…