Amendment_01_ONSE.pdf

2 | P a g e

PART A: CHANGES TO THE RFP/CONTRACT

COVER PAGE: RFP CLOSING TIME

Delete 5.00 PM EST and Insert 5.00 PM Malawi Time. Closing date remains unchanged.

SECTION C: DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT OFWORK:

The Statement of Work is hereby modified to incorporate the following changes:

1. Section C.7. Geographic Focus: Delete the sentence that reads “the DHMT will take the lead on district planning through stakeholder for a.” and insert the following in lieu thereof:

the DHMT will take the lead on district planning through stakeholder fora.

2. Section C.12. General Management Approach: Delete the sentence that reads “promote informed planning and decision-making involving reading acquisition in Malawi” and insert the following in lieu thereof:

Promote informed planning and decision-making involving reduction of maternal, newborn, and child morbidity and mortality in Malawi.

3. SIR 3.1 page 50-51 - Expectations on results in relation to Contractor’s work with central hospitals.

Contract language is revised as below:

The Contractor must support systems strengthening for central hospitals equivalent to that provided to district hospitals to improve the timeliness and accuracy of central hospital and district data reported into iHRIS system and increase the use of iHRIS data by central hospital and district HR managers to track HR status in the health sector.

SECTION F - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE:

4. Indicator 1.3-1 is revised to read “percent of facilities overstocked with tracer commodities."

Indicator 4.2-2 is revised to read “Percent of communities with functional village health committees including water committees”

Indicator 2-6 “Percent of health facilities that maintain international SPHERE standards for the treatment of severe acute malnutrition” is revised to be indicator “2-7”.

NOTE: The above changes will also be applied to Section B.8.

3 | P a g e

SECTION H - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS:

5. Section H.27 – Source and Nationality Requirements.

“Authorized geographical code”: Delete 937 and insert 935 in lieu thereof.

SECTION I: CONTRACT CLAUSES

6. Add the following contract clauses through incorporation by reference:

NUMBER DEFINITION YEAR

52.203-14 Display of Hotline Poster(s). Oct 2015 52.203-17 Contractor Employee Whistleblower Rights and Requirement To

Inform Employees of Whistleblower Rights Apr 2014

52.204-12 Data Universal Numbering System Number Maintenance Dec 2012 52.204-19 Incorporation by Reference of Representations and Certifications. Dec 2014 52.215-23 Limitations on Pass-Through Charges. Oct 2009 52.219-8 Utilization of Small Business Concerns Oct 2014 52.219-9 Small Business Subcontracting Plan Oct 2015 52.237-9 Waiver of Limitation on Severance Payments to Foreign Nationals May 2014 52.242-15 Stop-Work Order, Alternate I Aug. 1989 52.243-7 Notification of Changes Apr 1984 52.247-63 Preference for U.S.-Flag Air Carriers. June 2003

SECTION K: REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS OF

OFFERORS:

7. Add the following provisions:

K.10 52.203-11 CERTIFICATION AND DISCLOSURE REGARDING PAYMENTS TO INFLUENCE

CERTAIN FEDERAL TRANSACTIONS (SEP 2007)

(a) Definitions. As used in this provision—“Lobbying contact” has the meaning provided at 2 U.S.C. 1602(8).

The terms “agency,” “influencing or attempting to influence,” “officer or employee of an agency,” “person,” “reasonable compensation,” and “regularly employed” are defined in the FAR clause of this solicitation entitled “Limitation on Payments to Influence Certain Federal Transactions” (52.203-12).

(b) Prohibition. The prohibition and exceptions contained in the FAR clause of this solicitation entitled “Limitation on Payments to Influence Certain Federal Transactions” (52.203-12) are hereby incorporated by reference it his provision.

(c) Certification. The offeror, by signing its offer, hereby certifies to the best of its knowledge and belief that no Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to

4 | P a g e influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress on its behalf in connection with the awarding of this contract.

(d) Disclosure. If any registrants under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 have made a lobbying contact on behalf of the offeror with respect to this contract, the offeror shall complete and submit, with its offer, OMB Standard Form LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities, to provide the name of the registrants. The offeror need not report regularly employed officers or employees of the offeror to whom payments of reasonable compensation were made.

(e) Penalty. Submission of this certification and disclosure is a prerequisite for making or entering into this contract imposed by 31 U.S.C. 1352. Any person who makes an expenditure prohibited under this provision or who fails to file or amend the disclosure required to be filed or amended by this provision, shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000, for each such failure.

(End of Provision)

K.11 52.222-25 -- AFFIRMATIVE ACTION COMPLIANCE (APR 1984)

The Offeror represents that --

(a) It * has developed and has on file, * has not developed and does not have on file, at each establishment, affirmative action programs required by the rules and regulations of the Secretary of Labor (41 CFR 60-1 and 60-2); or

(b) It * has not previously had contracts subject to the written affirmative action programs requirement of the rules and regulations of the Secretary of Labor.

(End of Provision)

SECTION L: INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS:

8. Under L.1. NOTICE LISTING SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE – add the following clause through incorporation by reference.

Number Definition Year

52.215-22 Limitations On Pass-Through Charges—Identification Of Subcontract Effort

(Oct 2009)

9. Section L.9 A.6, sub-section 1 (pg. 164) read along Attachment J.2. Past Performance Information Template: Further instructions are provided as below:

Only the top portion of the Past Performance Reference Checklist must be completed by the Offeror so that USAID can contact the organizations and people identified. The checklist has been revised to include the need for email addresses.

See attached.

5 | P a g e

PART B: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

COVER PAGE: GENERAL

(1) In the cover letter closing time, it states 5:00 PM, EST, did USAID mean 17:00 hrs. US Eastern

Standard time?

Answer: The correct time is 5.00PM Malawi Time. Closing date remains unchanged.

(2) Does the Combined Synopsis/Solicitation under solicitation number RFPSOL61216000001 contain requirements similar to a current contract? If possible, please provide the current contract number. Or, is this a new requirement for the government?

Answer: No, this is a new requirement. There is no contract implementing a similar scope.

(3) Please clarify the preferred program short name for the Organized Network of Services for Everyone’s

(ONSE) Health activity. The activity is referred to as both ONSE and ONSE Athanzi throughout the proposal.

Answer: Either short form is fine.

SECTION B: SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

(4) Section B.2.3(c)1 on page 164 indicates an illustrative breakdown of the overall funding by technical cluster throughout the life of the activity and Section B.1(c) on page 163 indicates that Offerors must add a tab to provide summary budgets by CLIN. Please confirm if USAID expects a cost breakdown by IR, technical cluster or both (i.e., which programmatic element is to be referenced by “CLIN”?)

Answer: USAID requires Offerors to submit its cost proposal using the budget template provided.

However, Offerors are required to add a tab that provides the proposed costs broken down and summarized by CLIN consistent with Section B.4

(5) Section B.4 indicates that USAID would like a CLIN budget, but the template USAID provided does not contain any CLINs. On page 166 USAID writes that, “Offerors must prepare and submit cost proposals using the budget template in Section J.8. Offerors must add a tab in the template to provide a summary budget by Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) consistent with Section B.4.” Provided an Offeror’s budget template provides the level of detail requested in USAID’s budget template and satisfies the needs of the SF-33, would USAID find it acceptable for Offeror’s to use their own budget templates for this submission?

Answer: No. Offerors must use the budget template that is provided. The budget template may be modified as needed so that the Offeror is able to clearly demonstrate how the proposed costs will

6 | P a g e implement the approach identified in the Offeror's technical proposal and achieve the Health- SBCC results. Offerors may include additional rows as needed depending on their technical approach and make adjustments to the formulas included based on their cost structure and accounting practices if the changes are explained clearly in the budget narrative and the changes collectively do not hinder the Government’s ability to analyze the Offeror’s costs effectively.

Further, the budget template is based on the USAID Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE) template. Offerors should note that the IGCE is a tool that USAID uses to conduct its cost analysis of proposals. Offerors should further note that although there are no page restrictions identified in Section L.9.B, that the USAID IGCE is about 20 pages including USAID’s cost assumptions (equivalent to the Offeror’s budget narrative).

(6) Within the provided budget and budget narrative template USAID writes that, “The budget narrative is intended to assist the Offeror. The template may be modified as needed so that the Offeror is able to clearly demonstrate how the proposed costs will implement the approach identified in the Offeror's technical proposal and will achieve the ONSE Athanzi results.” Would USAID allow Offerors to present the budget narrative in a word document?

Answer: No. Budget narratives must be embedded in the Ms. Excel budget template. Narratives must be clear and precise.

(7) Are the figures under B.9 – proposed cancellation amounts in line with the expected total or yearly value of ONSE? Are the figures to be presented as ceilings for cancellation purposes? Do they need to be proposed with the initial cost proposal?

Answer: The cancellation amounts in B.9 are what the government established as reasonable considering the contract scope. However, Offerors are strongly encouraged to propose their own amounts but provide explain how the proposed amounts were determined to be fair and reasonable.

(8) Will USAID consider a base fee plus award fee (deliverables based) form of contact? As it is described in the RFP, 100% of the fee is tied to deliverables, the majority of which will come to fruition after Year 1 by the nature of the work. The cost of funds, however, is considerable, and is front-loaded, tied to project startup. Can USAID address how the current structure is to cover the cost of funds, especially in Year 1?

Answer: Several of the activity deliverables are due soon after contract award.

(9) Regarding the payment of fixed fee in accordance with each of the deliverables in the chart under B.8. – could USAID describe the methodology and data required for verification of results. What is required to verify results and invoice for deliverables, including fixed fee, achieved? Will USAID be contracting for outside verification? Are the costs of independent verification of results to be included in the Offeror’s budget?

7 | P a g e

Answer: Fixed fees will be paid on annual basis based on achievement of contract deliverables.

USAID will carry out the verification through Contracting Officer’ Representative (COR) performance monitoring and oversight.

(10) Regarding Section B.8, can USAID confirm that under FAR 52.216-8, the withholding shall be in accordance with the table proposed (as negotiated and finalized upon award) with the exception of the final 15% or $100,000, whichever is less, pending submission of a 1) final indirect rate proposal (75% of the $100,000 withheld) and then 2) settlement of final indirect rates (90% of the $100,000 withheld).

Answer: Correct.

(11) The performance objective table in Section B.8, CLIN 003: Performance of health systems strengthened mentions an “integrated supportive supervision checklist” in indicator 3-2. Is USAID open to the use of another methodology in lieu of a checklist methodology?

Answer: The Contractor must support the Government’s supportive supervision system.

Currently, that system is the Integrated Supportive Supervision system.

SECTION C: DESCRIPTION/SPECS./WORK STATEMENT

(12) Under Section C.11.1 Performance Indicators on page 50 of the RFP USAID states, "Activity-level performance indicators will, at a minimum, include all required and applicable standard indicators as defined by the Department of State and USAID Standard Foreign Assistance Indicators." Does this refer to the indicators marked "Required As Applicable" in the "Standard Foreign Assistance Master Indicator List (MIL)" at http://www.state.gov/f/indicators/?

Answer: Yes. All required and applicable standard indicators as defined by the Department of State and USAID Standard Foreign Assistance Indicators in the "Standard Foreign Assistance Master Indicator List (MIL)

(13) How does USAID anticipate ONSE will collaborate with the upcoming SBCC project in Malawi?

Answer: USAID anticipates that the Contractor will collaborate with SBCC in the ways identified throughout Section C.

(14) Section C.3 Scope states that ONSE will provide “operational support in the GoM’s efforts to reduce maternal, newborn, and child mortality through improved access to MNCH, malaria, WASH, and FP/RH services”. Please provide additional clarity on what is specifically meant by “operational support” to the GoM.

Answer: This refers to facilitating program related invitational travel for GOM staff and other stakeholders to further ONSE objectives and as approved/recommended by the COR. USAID is frequently requested to fund program related invitational travel for various stakeholders including officials of the GOM and NGOs not directly funded by USAID. The travel envisioned is within Malawi, the Africa Region and offshore. Such travel involves payment for airfares, Meals http://www.state.gov/f/indicators/

8 | P a g e and Incidental Expenses, accommodation, registration fees and other costs associated with travel in and outside Malawi.

(15) Section C.5.1 Strategic Principles, Community Engagement and Mobilization states “SBCC activity, One Community, aimed at reaching vulnerable populations in overlapping districts to support synergistic implementation of community health interventions (See C. 9 Integration Opportunities.).”

There appears to be no reference to Integration Opportunities under C.9. Please clarify this reference.

Answer: Please refer to Section C.10.1.2 Integration Opportunities.

(16) Section C.7 Geographic Focus states that the contractor must “build the capacity of the district’s health facilities, including two central hospitals in target districts”. Please confirm that USAID is not expecting the contractor to provide any other support for central level hospitals outside of capacity building.

Answer: Technical programmatic support including systems strengthening is expected in the priority health areas identified in Section C.2.4.

(17) Section C.7. Geographic Focus states “the DHMT will take the lead on district planning through stakeholder for a.” Please clarify the meaning of this sentence.

Answer: This should read “stakeholder fora” not “stakeholder for a.” District Health Stakeholder Fora are the platforms at district level for health sector planning, implementation, and monitoring in order to strengthen coordination for better service delivery. All stakeholders in the sector, including district councils, implementing partners, and CSOs, should participate in this forum.

(18) Related to Section C.9 Results, IR2, SIR 2.2 “Quality Assurance systems at targeted districts improved”, is USAID/Malawi open to switching from the currently applied methodology to a different approach?

Answer: Malawi’s Quality Assurance policy is currently under revision. The Contractor’s approach will need to conform to the policy once available. Until that time, there is no required approach.

(19) Section C.9 Results, IR 3 states that “technical assistance must include a mix of direct secondment to fill critical posts.” Please confirm that these seconded staff are the members of the teams that will be co-located at the District Health Offices.

Answer: All district-level contractor staff are expected to be co-located with District Health Offices. Secondees are Contractor staff that work full-time (or nearly full-time) for the district government while reporting administratively to the contractor.

9 | P a g e

(20) Section C.12 General Management Approach states under the Tell the story subheading that the contractor should “promote informed planning and decision-making involving reading acquisition in Malawi.” Please clarify the role of reading acquisition in this project.

Answer: This statement is revised to state the following: “Promote informed planning and decision-making involving reduction of maternal, newborn, and child morbidity and mortality in Malawi.”

(21) Section C.9 Results, IR1, SIR 1.3 “Availability of priority health commodities and supplies at target districts improved” states that “as needed, the contractor must also support emergency drug orders”. Please clarify the level of funding USAID would like allocated in Offerors’ project budgets for this purpose.

Answer: The Contractor does not need to budget separately for this activity. Rather, the Contractor should take advantage of other visits to facility level to relay information from facility level to the DHO regarding stock outs or impending stock outs and follow up with the DHO to ensure emergency orders are placed with the appropriate source at central level.

(22) Section C, IR3 states, “In its partnership with these GoM structures, the Contractor must i) provide technical assistance to identify and address challenges and ii) cover operational costs where necessary to achieve expected results. In accordance with GoM needs, technical assistance must include a mix of direct secondment to fill critical posts in district structures as well as Contractor long- and short-term technical assistance.” Given that Offerors will be required to provide technical assistance to GoM structures, please clarify how staff seconded to GoM district structures will have their salaries and operational related expenses covered under this project and whether an exception to ADS 200.4.2 will be provided.

Answer: Salaries would be for Contractor staff seconded, not government staff. The Contractor will directly pay salaries and operational expenses. No government to government (G2G) is envisioned under this award.

(23) SIR 1.3 (page 50) indicates that contractors must improve the availability of priority health commodities and supplies in the target districts. Will ONSE be expected to procure those commodities, such as rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs), or depend on other mechanisms to procure the commodities?

Answer: No, Contractor is not expected to procure the mentioned commodities. ONSE is expected to collaborate with the supply chain partner on availability of these commodities. Please refer to

SIR3.3.

(24) Will USAID permit applicants to modify the Contractual categories (General Program Activities, Training and Monitoring and Evaluation) if those modifications allow the Offeror to more clearly demonstrate how the proposed costs will support the overall technical proposal?

Answer: Yes, Offerors may modify the contractual categories if the changes are explained clearly in the budget narrative and the changes collectively do not hinder the Government’s ability to analyze the Offeror’s proposed costs effectively.

10 | P a g e

(25) The acronym AMEP has slightly varied definitions throughout the RFP. Under Section C, Item C.11 “Monitoring and Evaluation”, the RFP defines AMEP as an “Activity Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (AMEP). Under Section F, in the “List of Reports and Plans” point 4 the RFP defines AMEP as an “Activity Monitoring and Performance Plan (AMEP)”. And under Section F Part B “"Report/Plan Table," the RFP refers to an “Activity Management and Evaluation Plan (AMEP)”. Could USAID please clarify the term that the Contractor should be using for the required AMEP?

Answer: AMEP refers to the Activity Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. USAID apologizes for the confusion.

(26) For Section C.2.1, the RFP notes that sanitation, water and hygiene issues have been hampered by ambiguity over the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders and lack of a single, cohesive national strategy. Is this noted for informational purposes or does USAID wish for the implementing partner to be involved in advocacy and policy development?

Answer: No, the Contractor is not expected to be involved in advocacy and policy development at the national level. The Contractor can make recommendations for policy change to district level fora.

(27) Could USAID further define the meaning of the term “access conducive” mentioned under IR.1 and

IR.1.3?

Answer: With an aim to remove all structural, social, and personal barriers to services by all who seek to access them.

(28) In IR 1.3, fecal sludge management (FSM) services are included in the list of WASH products and services in the RFP. Does USAID intend for FSM to be conducted in both urban and rural settings? If yes, will USAID explain in more detail and provide further specifics regarding the types of FSM services USAID expects to see in the rural areas?

Answer: USAID intends to contribute to safely managed sanitation services as defined by the UNICEF/WHO Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP). Activities must be targeted in areas selected according to RFP section C.7 Geographic focus that has not limited targeting by rural or urban areas. Fecal Sludge Management (FSM) for the purpose of this RFP should be defined as the management of waste disposed in latrine facilities. In some cases fecal waste can be safely disposed and treated on-site while in others cases it must be removed and transported to designated disposal or treatment site, or, as locally appropriate, is safely re-used at the household or community level.

(29) For Section C.11.4, could USAID clarify the expectations for reporting of spatial data for sanitation activities via GPS?

Answer: Similar to all project activities, sanitation activities must report GPS locations where implementation has occurred such as villages, households, and institutions. This includes but is

11 | P a g e not limited to villages where implementation has occurred, households included in monitoring or studies, locations provided with technical support, or locations of key sanitation services.

(30) The RFP states that “The contractor zonal staff must co-locate within the MOH zonal offices.” Could

USAID confirm that this is a requirement even in zones where for cost-effectiveness reasons an alternative approach might be taken e.g., the South-West Zone, which supports only 1 district (Chikwawa)?

Answer: Offerors may suggest alternative cost- effective approaches especially for the Southwest zone, where only one district is a malaria-only district.

(31) The RFP states “The Contractor must establish district offices collocated within 11 district hospitals

(exclude the malaria only districts) through prefabricated offices within the hospital premises or renovation of space provided,” Why must project district-level staff be located in district hospitals and not district health offices? Not always same location. Districts in general are often short of space. Should it not depend on where space and conditions allow?

Answer: DHOs are located in district hospital in the majority of cases; USAID expects the Offeror to be co-located within DHOs and within the hospital premises.

(32) The acronyms CBO, CSO and FBO seem to be used interchangeably in the RFP, so it’s unclear whether USAID is referring generically to the range of Malawian organizations, from legally recognized and registered national NGOs to more “informal” groups at village level (e.g. Village Health Committees); or whether it has a specific type of organization in mind for each acronym used in the RFP. Given their importance for IR4 and in particular the focus on capacity building, it would be useful if USAID could clarify its understanding.

Answer: Yes, the term has been used to generically refer to a range of Malawian organizations, from legally recognized and registered national NGOs to “formal and informal” groups at village level registered or unregistered. This would also encompass formal and informal groups, professional associations, unions, academic institutions, etc.

Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) are a wide range of organizations or entities: community groups (CBOs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), labor unions, indigenous groups, charitable organizations, faith-based organizations (FBOs), professional associations, and foundations that could be formal (registered with CONGOMA, NGO Board and have legal board of governors or trustees) and/or informal (not registered but known with local authorities) and also accepted by their constituency.

Community Based Organizations (CBOs) are a grouping of non-state actors or individuals mobilized to respond to certain local need(s) normally at village or group village headman level and have a blessing of their local traditional leaders but also registers with Ministry of Social Welfare at district level. (Many of CBOs don't have board of governors and/or trustees. They have a meeting place but not necessarily offices - most members work on a voluntary basis.

Faith Based Organizations (FBOs): These can be examples of CSOs or CBOs whose mobilization or vision is associated with some religious faith. Depending on the size of their organizational

12 | P a g e growth, an FBO can be formal or informal, can be registered or not and their geographical coverage can vary from village to national coverage.

(33) Diagram 1: ONSE Athanzi Results Framework and Linkages to CDCS (page 19 of 199). In the current version, the higher level components of the RF are currently absent from the diagram. Can these diagrams be distributed to interested contractors?

Answer: Yes, the CDCS can be accessed on the link below:

https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1860/malawi-cdcs-2013-2108.pdf

(34) C.7 Geographic Focus (pg. 23 of 199). First paragraph. The fourth sentence is incomplete. It currently reads “The DHMT will take the lead on district planning through stakeholder for a.” Could USAID please provide prospective contractors with the full statement?

Answer: The sentence is revised to read: The DHMT will take the lead on district planning through stakeholder fora.

(35) Regarding “Figure 1: Activity Geographic Focus and Interventions to be implemented in each

District”(pg. 24 of 199), could USAID describe what is anticipated with respect to IR 4 demand interventions in districts that are designated for HSS and malaria only (Mchinji, Chikwawa, Mangochi, Ntcheu, Nkhatabay). Does this mean that FHP related demand generation should not be a component of IR 4 or is the geographic focus of interventions related only to access and quality (IRs 1 & 2)?

Answer: Activities under IR 4 in HSS and malaria only districts should focus on malaria-related demand generation.

(36) Malaria prevention and treatment is a component of MNCH, which is in turn a component of the FHP.

Could USAID describe what is anticipated with respect to all IR interventions in districts that are designated for FHP but not for malaria (Mulanje, Karonga, Dowa, Chitipa, Karonga, Zomba)?

Answer: In this case, malaria would be addressed as a component of MNCH activities.

(37) Regarding IR4 Demand (page 50 of 199), SIR 4.1 and SIR 4.2 include a number of required improvements which are not included in the Outputs Table (e.g., increase the percentage of men/women that believe that women can make decision about healthcare for themselves or their children; increase the percentage of community members reporting positive attitudes towards YFHS; increase the number of certified ODF communities). Can USAID clarify how the Offeror should address these improvements in the Output Table or other indicator/targets, including whether they will be included in the assessment of contract performance?

Answer: The Outputs Table represents higher level outputs/outcomes and is not exclusive of Section C 9, Results. Yes, these improvements will be assessed as part of Contractor performance.

13 | P a g e

(38) Under IR4: We’re seeking some clarity, is it USAID’s intention to see all VHCs covered in all districts? Or can the implementing partners plan to cover a number that time and budget will allow to cover?

Answer: It is USAID’s intention to see all VHCs covered in all districts.

(39) Under Section C, Annex 2 lists a number of Thematic Working Groups with which ONSE is expected to collaborate. TWGs for iCCM and Community Health are missing. Can USAID confirm that ONSE contractors may collaborate with TWGs not listed in the proposal?

Answer: Yes, the list is not exhaustive; the MOH is in process of harmonizing TWGs. The Contractor must collaborate with other relevant TWGs.

(40) For SIR 3.1 page 50-51, could USAID clarify its expectations on results required of Offeror in regards to working with central hospitals?

Answer: The Contractor must support systems strengthening for central hospitals equivalent to that provided to district hospitals. To clarify, bullets 2 and 3 on p. 51 are revised as follows:

Improve the timeliness and accuracy of central hospital and district data reported into iHRIS system;

Increase the use of iHRIS data by central hospital and district HR managers to track HR status in the health sector;

Please also refer to Answer 16.

(41) For SIR 3.1 page 50-51, USAID states that “Support for select operational costs of the NMCP will be defined on an annual basis through close collaboration between the Contractor, PMI team and the NMCP”. Could USAID clarify what is meant by “support for select operational costs for NMCP”?

Answer: Select operational costs for NMCP could include things that are necessary to improve the NMCP’s overall management as well as supervision and implementation at the district level.

Examples of past support include internet access and computers at the central NMCP office and support for supervision visits to focus and non-focus districts.

(42) For SIR 3.1 page 50-199, USAID states that “The Contractor must also maintain, adapt, or scale up and/or expand to additional districts current USAID-supported performance based incentive (PBI) activities in line with USAID and MOH guidance following the results of the PBI evaluation expected in 2016.” Would USAID please clarify when the PBI targets and indicators can be expected?

Answer: In 2016-2017, the Contractor, in consultation with USAID, will determine targets for each facility to be included in the PBI activities, if USAID and the MOH determine that PBI

14 | P a g e should continue. It should be clarified that USAID and the MOH may decide to discontinue PBI should the evaluation suggest that the program’s impact has been limited.

(43) On RFP page 158, USAID states that the AMEP (which will include performance indicator reference sheets (PIRS) for all indicators) must not exceed 20 pages. As there are 38 indicators listed in the RFP and the PIRS for each indicator is usually about 1 page long (using the USAID standard PIRS format, could USAID clarify if Offeror is allowed to have PIRS as a separate annex and not counting towards the 20 page limit.

Answer: These will not be counted as part of the 20 page limit.

SECTION F: DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

(44) Could USAID kindly provide information on the source of data for the ONSE baseline figures provided in Section F.B.2 Performance Objectives/Outputs Table?

Answer: The baselines come from the 2015 HSSP Situational Analysis, the MDG Endline 2014 survey, the 2014 Service Provision Assessment (SPA), the Malaria Indicator Survey (MIS) the health management information system (HMIS), and the logistics management information system (LMIS). In the case of indicators 2-4, 5, and 6, the baselines listed are estimates based on HMIS and available survey data; the HMIS is currently being revised to collect these data. In cases where formal baseline data was unavailable (such as for IR3), USAID provided an estimate based on programmatic experience. Baselines will be updated and finalized at the time of award.

(45) Could USAID kindly provide data source(s) for the baseline data stated for all the indicators in the

Performance Objectives/Output table. For each percentage indicator, please kindly provide the numerator and denominator and the data source for each.

Answer: Please refer to Answer 44 above.

(46) Is the expectation of USAID/Malawi that the Contractor should refine/review the provided baseline figures for the focus districts of the Activity?

Answer: Offerors must not adjust the baselines in submitting their proposals. Baselines will be updated and finalized at the time of award.

(47) We notice that some baseline figures are in bold and some are not. Do the bold numbers denote something of significance?

Answer: No, this does not denote significance.

15 | P a g e

(48) Could USAID/Malawi please clarify if the baselines provided for the indicators listed in the performance objectives/outputs table are nationwide baselines or baselines specific to the ONSE Athanzi project area?

Answer: These are nationwide baselines except for the following MNCH indicators (1-3, 1.1-1, 1.1- 2 and 1.2-1) which are from SSDI-Services Project Data.

(49) Regarding “F.3 Place of Performance” (page 80 of 199), the RFP stipulates “The contractor must establish district offices co-located within 11 district hospitals (exclude the malaria-only districts).”

Could USAID clarify its expectation in terms of the malaria-only districts e.g., whether the contractor can have an office in the district hospital or another location, or should not have a district-based office?

Answer: The Contractor must propose a cost effective management structure that provides for coverage of the malaria-only districts. This would likely require district presence, but could include supporting malaria-only districts from neighboring integrated districts.

(50) In the Section F.B.2 Performance Objectives/Outputs Table, Indicator "4-1. Percent of population reporting unmet need for the priority health services," does not have a baseline value ("TBD"). Is the expectation that the Contractor will conduct a survey in the targeted districts to determine the baseline value and targets for this indicator?

Answer: There is no standard baseline available. Yes, the expectation is that the Contractor will conduct a survey in the targeted districts to determine, with COR approval, the baseline value and targets for this indicator.

(51) Under Section F.5 “Reports and Deliverables” Point “B. Deliverables” in the Performance

Objectives/Outputs Table, indicator 4.2-2 reads as, "Percent of communities with functional community action groups". This is the only reference to Community Action Groups in the RFP. Is it safe to assume that “Community Action Groups” are the same as "Village Health and Water Committees" mentioned elsewhere in the RFP?

Answer: The indicator should read: “Percent of communities with functional village health committees including water committees”.

(52) Under Section F.5 “Reports and Deliverables” Point “B. Deliverables” in the Performance

Objectives/Outputs Table, indicator 4.1 reads as, “Percent of population reporting unmet need for the priority health services.” Can USAID please provide a definition for "unmet need" for each of the priority health services?

Answer: Unmet need means individuals have a desire but are not accessing/receiving priority health services. This includes the population of those who report unmet need in a particular health service or those or those who report to have forgone care in the past 12 months for a needed service. Unmet need can be driven by systemic barriers, which require changes to policy and implementation, or by social and individual barriers which are driven by norms, beliefs, practices, preferences and tastes.

16 | P a g e

(53) Is the Offeror expected to provide its own means of verification of results achieved or is USAID contemplating some outside mechanism for verification or results? If the latter, can USAID verify that an RFP for the verification contract is already prepared and/or released or will be fully in place prior to the end of Year 1 (allowing sufficient time for verification and payment of the applicable fee to take place)?

Answer: Verification will be conducted by USAID. Means of verification will include: Research reports and dissemination meetings; Partner reports and COR Administrative approvals.

(54) For Indicator “1-3 Percent of health facilities with established capacity to manage acute under-nutrition,” The baseline is set at 95%. If the baseline is 95%, is the Offeror expected to reach 100% by the completion of the project and is 100% realistic for the country context?

Answer: This is for the Offeror to propose, but, yes, USAID believes that further progress can be achieved.

(55) For Indicator “1.1.-1 Percent of USG-supported facilities that provide appropriate life-saving maternity care (This will be defined as seven signal functions for BEmONC)”. Is this only referring to facilities that are currently designated to provide BEmONC services?

Answer: Yes, this refers to facilities that are currently designated to provide BEmONC services.

(56) For Indicator “1.1.-2 Percent of USG-supported facilities that provide appropriate life-saving maternity care (This will be defined as nine signal functions for CEmONC)”. Is this only referring to facilities that are currently designated to provide CEmONC services? The ONSE baseline is listed as 100%. Does this mean that ONSE should maintain this level or is the goal to expand CEmONC services? What is USAID expecting for targeted results for this indicator/sub-indicator? If the baseline is already 100%, what improvement can project intervention actually provide?

Answer: Yes. The expectation is to maintain the gains achieved throughout the period of performance.

(57) For Indicator “3-1 Percent of clients satisfied with availability and quality of services, disaggregated by health facilities and community clinics,” Is the Offeror to provide two sets of targets and two proposed fee amounts, one for health facilities and one for community clinics?

Answer: Yes, the Offeror is to provide two sets of targets one for health facilities and one for community clinics.

(58) Several indicators (1-2, 4-1, 4.1-1, 4.1-2) require population-based surveys in order to be measured.

Given that Offerors are required to provide annual target estimates for each deliverable listed in the outputs, does USAID expect population-based surveys to be carried out annually, or can targets for these indicators be provided for e.g., Y3 and Y5?

17 | P a g e

Answer: The Offeror is expected to conduct population-based surveys to measure results for indicators 1-2, 4.1, 4.1-1, and 4.1-2 over the life project. At a minimum, results for these indicators must be reported at midterm and endline.

(59) In line with the question above on geographic focus, can USAID confirm that the denominator for malaria-specific indicators (1.2-2.d, 1.3-1, 2-4, 2-6) is health facilities in the 10 malaria + HSS districts only, and that the baseline values provided were calculated on this basis? Similarly, is the denominator for FHP-specific indicators (1-3, 1.1-1, 1.1-2, 1.1-3, 1.2-1, 1.2-2 (except d), 2-1, 2-2, 2-6) health facilities in the 11 FHP + HSS districts only?

Answer: Indicators listed in the question apply to the following districts:

All districts: 1.2-2.a,c, d;1.3-1 (revised); 1.3-2; 2-2;

Ten malaria districts: 2-4; 2-6;

Eleven FH districts: 1.1-1; 1.1-2; 1.1-3; 1.2-1; 1.2-2 b; 2.1; 2-6 Regarding baselines, refer to the answer to question 45.

1.3-1. should read “percent of facilities overstocked with tracer commodities." Baseline examples FP commodities 40%; Malaria medicines 20% The full list of tracer commodities will be proposed by the COR in collaboration with MOH and shared with the Contractor post-award.

(60) Both “Percent of confirmed malaria cases receiving first line antimalarial medication” and “Percent of health facilities that maintain international SPHERE standards for the treatment of severe acute malnutrition” are numbered as indicator 2-6. In order to separate both, could the number be revised?

Answer: “Percent of health facilities that maintain international SPHERE standards for the treatment of severe acute malnutrition” should be listed as indicator 2-7.

(61) Indicator 1.1-3 reports a baseline value of 25%. Can USAID confirm that this value does not include non-public health facilities in the 3 ONSE districts not currently supported by USG (Mchinji, NkhataBay, Ntcheu)? If so, given that ONSE will be required to support these additional facilities not currently USG-supported, can USAID confirm that it is acceptable for the targets in Y1 and possibly Y2 to be less than the baseline?

Answer: Please see the answers to questions 45, 49, 51, and 60. Note that 1.1-3 only applies to the 11 FHP districts.

(62) IR 4.2 has as a required deliverable/indicator (page 9, fee schedule and page 80 of 199): “Percent of communities with functional Community Action Groups.” Could USAID please elaborate the definition of Community Action Groups? Is this term being used generically to refer to the range of CSOs, CBOs, FBOs etc., or specifically in reference to SSDI’s current development of these groups through application of the Community Action Cycle (CAC)?

Answer: The indicator should read: “Percent of communities with functional village health committees including water committees”.

(63) Section F Deliveries or Performance, Table 2 “Performance Objectives/Outputs Table” lists baseline data. Please confirm that the ONSE baseline percentages will be adjusted as necessary once the Malawian Demographic Health Survey is released.

18 | P a g e

Answer: Yes, the baseline will be adjusted.

SECTION H: SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

(64) Section H.8 requires that biographical data sheets be provided for “(1) All individuals to be sent outside the United States, or (2) any employees designated as ‘key personnel’.” However, Section L.9.B.(d) Part 3 requires biographical data sheets “for each long term technical person the Offeror proposes.” Additionally, Section L.8.1(a)(ii), lists “Key Personnel and Long-Term Professionals Bio-data sheet” as a requirement of Volume 2: Cost Proposal/Business Management Proposal. Could USAID/Malawi please clarify if biographical data sheets are required for key personnel, long-term technical personnel, or both?

Answer: Biodata sheets must be submitted for all key personnel and long-term professionals proposed.

(65) Section H.27 lists a geographic code of 937, while the cover letter and Section H.3 list a geographic code of 935. Please clarify the geographic code governing this procurement.

Answer: The authorized geographical code for this contract is 935.

(66) Could USAID please explain the language found on page 106 about duration of appointments? Is this guidance internal to USAID? Are Offerors expected to make appointments in contradiction to their normal policies of hiring employees at will?

Answer: Offerors should follow its human resources policies.

SECTION I: CONTRACT CLAUSES

(67) Section I.1 includes FAR 52.237-8, Restriction on Severance Payments to Foreign Nationals.

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

Answer: FAR Clause 52.237-9 is now incorporated into the RFP.

(68) The USAID small business subcontracting plan template was included as an attachment to the RFP;

however the 52.219-9 Small Business Subcontracting Plan clause was not included in the list of incorporated clauses in the RFP. Please clarify if 52.219-9 will be incorporated into the RFP/award.

Answer: FAR Clause 52.219.9 is now incorporated into the RFP.

19 | P a g e

SECTION L: INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

(69) Could USAID please confirm that the executive summary is included in the 30 page limit?

Answer: Yes – the executive summary is included in the 30 page limit.

(70) Under section L.7 “Proposal Submission Instructions” USAID states that, “the subject line for every such e-mail [submission e-mail] must include the following;” however, there is no text describing what the submission subject lines should include. Could USAID please clarify what the subject line of each email submission should include?

Answer: The proposal submission e-mail should include “Technical Proposal”, Activity Name, and RFP Number. The technical proposal must be submitted separately from the cost/business proposal. If submitting in via several emails, please indicate, for example “1 of 5,” “2 of 5” etc.

(71) Section L.8.3.e states the Activity Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (AMEP) should include performance indicator reference sheets. Could USAID/Malawi please clarify if bidders are required to submit performance indicator reference sheets as part of the proposal submission for every indicator listed in the illustrative AMEP?

Answer: All Department of State and USAID Standard Foreign Assistance Indicators have predefined Performance Indicator Reference Sheets; for these indicators, the Offeror may simply make reference to the Standard Foreign Assistance Master Indicator List at http://www.state.gov/f/indicators/. The Offeror must provide PIRS for all indicators not included in the standard foreign assistance master indicator list.

(72) The list of contents of the proposal (i.e. items counted towards the 30 page limit) provided in Section

L.8.1 includes past performance; however past performance is also listed as Item H under the list of authorized attachments in Section L.8.3, which will not be counted towards the 30 page limit. Could USAID please confirm that past performance should fall under the authorized attachments and therefore not count toward the 30 page limit?

Answer: Confirmed, past performance is part of the authorized attachments.

(73) On section L.8.3 Proposal Content (pg. 160 of 199). The heading for Sub-point C. indicates “resumes and non-exclusive letters of commitment for all proposed key [our emphasis] long term technical personnel”, while subsequent instructions in this paragraph refer to “long term technical personnel.”

Could USAID please confirm that “Resumes and Non-exclusive Letters of Commitment should only be submitted for Key Personnel?

Answer: No, this submission requirement applies to both key personnel and long term technical personnel. It does not include long term administrative professionals.

(74) We respectfully request that USAID allow both contracts and cooperative agreements of relevant size, scope and complexity to be used as past performance references.

20 | P a g e

Answer: Yes, relevant completed contracts are strongly preferred. Completed cooperative agreements/grants, and substantially completed current contracts are acceptable if five completed contract references are unavailable.

(75) In Section L.9.A.6 of the RFP, USAID requires contractor to provide five (5) past performance references in an annex. USAID also requires that we submit PPRs for teaming members whose cost exceeds 5% of the Offeror’s total budget. Does the total of five (5) past performance references include those of the teaming members or does each teaming member submit five (5) past performance references?

Answer: The latter, up to five (5) references for the Offeror and up to five (5) references for each proposed major subcontractor.

(76) In section L.9.C.E of the RFP, it is stated: "(3) Offeror must provide the status of all Offeror and major subcontract business systems. If Offeror business systems are approved or determined to be adequate by the Government, Offeror must provide copies of approval letters from the cognizant Government approving authority. At a minimum, Offeror must provide status on the following business systems: (i) Accounting system, (ii) Estimating system, and (iii) Purchasing system." Could USAID confirm that a self-certification of the status of these business systems is acceptable?

Answer: Confirmed, if approval letters from the Offeror’s cognizant Government approving authority are unavailable.

(77) We understand the LCP included under Section L.9/Preparation of the Business/Cost Proposal

(Budget) is from 2012. Given the inflation in Malawi, which has fluctuated between 20% and 30% since 2012, is there an updated version of this plan that USAID can share? Additionally, is there a plan available in local currency?

Answer: Offerors must base their proposed salaries for local staff on the ceiling established in the tables provided in section L.9 of the RFP.

(78) Regarding Section L.9.A.6(c), please confirm there is no page limit for the quality awards and certifications submission.

Answer: Confirmed, however, please be succinct by describing the most relevant and recent.

(79) In reference to Section L.9.A.6(d)(B) requirements regarding “a copy of any similarly recent subcontracting reports if they were not submitted to eSRS,” our hardcopy subcontracting reports, SF- 294s, for the past three years total more than 800 pages and 40 MB.