REVISED - MAIF RFQ Questions and Answers - 06.26.2020.pdf

MAIF Procurement Q&A Revised: 06/26/2020 (Changes Highlighted)

Section B Questions

1. While the goal of this activity is to rapidly procure services from a variety of market players, the requirements in RFQ sections B.3 and B.6, that all subcontractors comply with T&M and map to the prime contractors’ GSA labor categories/rates, significantly limit the ability of many firms to participate as subcontractors. This includes many of the existing market leaders and private sector firms who perform solely on a firm-fixed price basis, utilizing pricing methodologies not based on cost element data and who do not have accounting systems that are able to allocate costs per hour, and therefore, do not have pricing based on estimated hours and hourly rates. These companies focus on impact achieved, rather than the time and resources expended, and as such utilize alternative pricing methodologies such as weekly team rates. The requirements also limit new and underutilized businesses who may not have the systems in place to rapidly adapt to a T&M model. Additionally, capping subcontractors at the rates of the prime contractor further limits those who can participate, particularly private sector firms from outside USAID’s typical implementing partner space, whose rates may exceed these caps, but are justified based upon the market-rates within their industry and determined fair and reasonable by Government and non-Government clients.

Although the Offeror may request CO approval to charge labor as an Other Direct Cost (ODC), the time and effort required from both the Offeror and USAID to do so would significantly hamper USAID’s aspiration of creating a rapid mechanism for procuring services. Therefore, to ensure that USAID has the ability to rapidly access a diverse range of potential partners, including new and underutilized businesses, and to maximize competition, will USAID amend the requirements in B.3. and B.6 and allow for subcontractor labor to be charged as an ODC under this contract?

USAID has amended the requirements in B.3 and B.6 to allow the Offeror to propose subcontracts as an Order-Level Material (OLM) provided that the Offeror follow GSA requirements that such OLMs are ancillary to the primary purpose of the task order. In addition to using OLMs, Offerors may also use GSA Schedule Contractor Team Arrangements (CTAs) with other GSA Schedule holders.

2. B.6 Pg. 8: RFQ references that “If anticipated other direct costs are not as described in

Section A.9…” Would USAID clarify what A.9 is in reference to?

The correct reference is to Section B.8 - Other Direct Costs. The solicitation has been revised.

3. B.6 Pg. 8: RFQ states that the Prime contractor’s loaded hourly labor rates shall apply to all labor (prime and subcontract) under this task order. Would USAID confirm that subcontractors that are GSA holders cannot use their labor rates and must align with the prime’s rates?

Proposed subcontractors that are also GSA schedule holders can propose their own labor rates provided that the prime and subcontractor have a GSA Schedule Contractor Team Arrangement (CTA). If proposing as a traditional prime/subcontractor structure with another GSA Schedule contractor, only the prime offeror’s GSA Schedule labor categories and hourly rates may be used in the price proposal.

4. Is there flexibility to create task orders under this mechanism for the subcontractors that are fixed price rather than time and materials?

A time and materials (T&M) contract will be awarded. See the answer to Nos. 1 & 2 regarding subcontractors.

5. How often would the awardee need to report back on time and materials usage? Would it just be for the master contract or all sub-contracts as well?

The contractor will need to use the proposed fixed labor rates in its monthly invoices.

6. Can USAID please clarify the language under B.2. that this mechanism as noted in the last sentence in the paragraph is to support USAID “to employ private-sector and business-minded approaches to speed up progress toward achieving health goals and partner country self-reliance,” but that the acquired services are not included in the $17- 19 million ceiling of this task?

The government’s estimated range stated in the cover letter of the RFQ is for the services defined within the RFQ including Section B.2.

7. Would USAID be amenable to subcontractors being brought on through other mechanisms than T&M, such as a firm-fixed price contract, to ensure that the MAIF activity can rapidly procure support services and technical assistance from a variety of firms, organizations, and/or consultants, many of which may only work under a fixed-price contract?

See the answer to Question No. 1 above.

8. Page 8 of the RFQ, B.7 Level of Effort references Attachment J.1 (a – c) but Attachment J.1 only contains two tabs or attachments, “a” and “b”. Can USAID provide Attachment J.1.”c” to bidders?

There is no Attachment J.1.c - this has been corrected in the solicitation document.

9. 7. Section B.3 states that the resulting agreement will be a time and materials (T&M)-type task order utilizing our MAS labor rates for labor, “with provision for cost reimbursement of expenses of other materials relating to non-schedule costs for travel and other direct costs…”

a. Can USAID please confirm that, per our MAS schedule, all other direct costs as described in B.8 may be categorized as Order Level Materials (OLM)?

This is correct. All other direct costs may be categorized as Order Level Materials.

b. Can USAID also please confirm that we are to follow GSAR 552.238-115 Special

Ordering Procedures for the Acquisition of Order-Level Materials when proposing OLMs?

Yes, offerors are to follow GSAR 552.238-115 when proposing OLMs.

10. Section B.6 - This section requires the contractor to seek COR approval prior to adjusting the number of hours for each specified functional labor category within the contract. To ease some of the administrative burden, we request USAID remove this requirement and allow flexibility for contractors to adjust functional positions’ workdays as needed as long as this does not cause the contractor to exceed the established ceiling of the contract.

USAID will remove this requirement to allow flexibility to adjust the hours in each functional labor category.

11. Per page 9 of the RFQ, we understand “no profit or fee will be applied to Travel, in accordance with FAR 16.601.” and per page 7, “The Industrial Funding Fee does not apply to travel and per diem charges.” USAID has provided an amount of $239,620 annually as a plug figure for travel. Is this annual plug amount solely for travel or should offerors assume this amount also includes an offeror’s indirect charges related to travel?

The Travel plug should be all inclusive. However, it should be reiterated that the provided plug figure is specifically for evaluation purposes.

12. Can USAID please confirm that we are to submit a quotation using our MAS contract as specified in Section B.3, instead of the legacy PSS contract referenced in Sections B.11, L.1, L.3.b, and L.4?

We hereby confirm that an offeror with either a GSA MAS with the new MAS SIN 541611 or a GSA PSS with a legacy SIN 874-1 (from Legacy Schedule 00CORP) can prime or be a Contractor Team Arrangement (CTA) Member on the planned award.

Section C Questions

1. What role does USAID envision for Human Centered Design (HCD) on this program;

and how will it be distinct from the work implemented under the existing Engage Design contract?

The primary focus of the MAIF is to focus on Market Access and Innovative Finance programs and incorporating HCD where appropriate. The Engage Design contract on the other hand has HCD as the core activity and applying HCD principles across the Bureau for Global Health’s work.

2. C.1 Pg. 11: Can you provide additional information regarding the Next Gen Market-

Based Solutions to Global Health program and the Innovation Support & Digital Health award that MAIF is complementing and how these programs are expected to collaborate and coordinate?

The Next Gen Market-Based Solutions to Global Health program is the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) under which the MAIF activity falls under. The Innovation Support and Digital Health activity will be separate from MAIF and there is no expectation that the two activities will coordinate/collaborate.

3. C.2 Pg. 12: The RFQ states that “the Contractor must have the ability to provide and/or procure specialized expertise for a given activity across a consortium of firms/ subcontractors.” To confirm, USAID expects that some technical activities under this program could and should be led by the prime?

USAID expects a mix of activities, some led by the prime others led by the subcontractor, depending on the proposed approach. The extent to which the prime is leading on technical activities will depend on their capabilities to lead those specific activities.

4. C.3 Pg. 12: The RFQ states that the “Contractor and its network of expertise, including its network of non-US-based expertise, must be able to work in low- and middle-income countries…” The Geocode 937 specifies that this contract can only procure goods and services from US, the recipient country, and those other than advanced developing countries. INVEST program, which is also referenced in the RFQ as an example of sourcing expertise from a wide network of partners with specialized expertise, include partners beyond this Geocode restrictions. Would USAID reconsider this geocode specification?

At this time, USAID will not request a waiver from Geographic Code 937 to utilize 935.

However, upon award, should a need be presented by the successful quote, USAID will consider seeking waivers on a project-wide or specific subcontract basis.

5. Is USAID GH’s primary goal under this mechanism to have a mechanism to compete service providers against each other (i.e., compete awards for strategy and market shaping to multiple providers) or to create a set of core and complementary partners that can provide all of the services listed in the RFQ, but do not compete against each other?

Ideally, USAID would like to create a set of core and complementary partners. In the event that the partners do not have the expertise required to carry out a requested service, we expect the prime will look for this expertise outside of its core partners, either through competition or sole sourcing.

6. On Page 11 USAID mentions the Innovation Support & Digital Health award. Will this be issued separately from the Market Access and Innovative Finance award?

As noted on page 11, the requirements of this solicitation are exclusive to the MAIF activity.

7. Page 13 Section C.3. Statement of Work (b) Illustrative Tasks states that “Whether incorporating user research into a compelling target product, executing a coordinated global clinical trial, developing an effective demand generation campaign, or convincing busy country level advocates and regulators of the value of a new approach, there is no shortage of potential activities that must be considered, prioritized, and addressed.” What would the contractor role involve re: “executing a coordinated global clinical trial.”

We expect that executing a coordinated global clinical trial will be unlikely under the MAIF contract. It’s inclusion is meant to illustrate the different types of activities that global health engages with as well as the use of the facilitation partner approach.

8. Section C.2 - Given the importance of the Partner Facilitation Approach in the Scope of

Work, please provide an estimate of the total budget that USAID expects will be devoted to partner organizations.

This will depend on the Offeror’s technical approach.

9. Section C.3 - Implementation of the illustrative list of activities presented in Section C.3 would require significantly different levels of effort for each activity. Since the exact activities to be implemented under MAIF are not defined at the time of the proposal, it is customary for USAID to determine a LOE plug, to allow offerors to price, and USAID to evaluate similar proposals and allow for “apples to apples” comparisons across proposals.

Consequently, we request that USAID provide a plug for total LOE that offerors can allocate across the different labor categories.

It is up to the Offeror to propose the appropriate labor categories and LOE based on their technical approach for implementation of MAIF.

10. Can USAID please clarify the distinction between partners and subcontractor organizations?

Partners are firms that would apply as a GSA Schedule CTA, provided that all CTA members hold a GSA MAS with either the new MAS SIN 541611 or a GSA PSS with a legacy SIN 874-1 (from Legacy Schedule 00CORP). Subcontractors do not have such a requirement.

11. What countries does USAID anticipate covering through this procurement?

USAID focus countries.

12. In Section F.6.a Step 1 on page 21, USAID outlines the illustrative timeline that contractors must follow to respond to various written activity requests to the Contractor.

Can USAID provide clarification about if the contractor is expected to and should plan to support USAID in developing activities or specific requirements of activities?

If the contractor has the appropriate expertise for a given activity USAID would expect support in developing activities or specific requirements of activities

13. The steps outlined in this section specifically call out subcontracting as the vehicle to engage new partners. In the interest of attracting a broader range of potential partner organizations, would USAID consider other vehicles of partner engagement, e.g.

Incentive Funds, Innovation prizes, Grant programs, etc., - and should offerors plan to use a variety of partner engagement methods in their technical approach? Should you decide, for example, to do such activities, could USAID provide provisions for them?

USAID would consider other vehicles of partner engagement including incentive funds, innovation prizes, grant programs etc. and offerors should include them as they see fit. Any provision would depend on the individual project.

14. Would USAID consider allowing an additional 10 years of experience to replace the

Master’s Degree requirement for the Project Director and the Deputy Project Director?

Offerors may substitute education with experience if allowed within the Offeror’s GSA Schedule contract.

15. Page 20 of the RFQ (Section F.5) notes that the Deputy Project Director is required to have a "Master's degree in international affairs, business, global health, or related subject." Would USAID consider candidates with a bachelor’s degree plus equivalent years of relevant experience in lieu of an advanced degree?

Offerors may substitute education with experience if allowed within the Offeror’s GSA Schedule contract.

Section L and M Questions

1. Since the activity scenarios are illustrative in nature, and offerors are not certain of the

Other Direct Costs (ODCs) which they might incur during implementation, can USAID provide plug figures for ODCs similar to the travel and per diem plug figures as stated on page 68 of the RFQ? If not, should offerors make their best estimation of incurred ODCs for each illustrative project activity?

Offerors should make their best estimation of ODCs.

2. Page 67, the last sentence of Number 1 in the RFQ states, “Please denote the labor category, as well as brief descriptions of the qualifications, work experience, and educational background for each labor category as well as the potential role on the project.” This information is described in our GSS PSS Schedule. If an offeror has this information readily available can we attach our GSS PSS Schedule as an attachment to our Cost Quote and would this meet the requirement as stated in the RFQ?

This sentence has been removed from the RFQ. Note that the minimum education and minimum years of experience have been added to Attachment J.1.b.

3. L.3 Pg. 62-66: Please reconfirm the page count for various sections of the technical proposal. Section L.3.a. states that the technical proposal will be 20 pages total excluding the 1-page cover page. Notably, the Technical Approach section is listed as 13 pages and Personnel section as 2 pages. However, Section L.3.b. states in bold that it should be a total of 26 pages maximum. Yet, the following sections outlining the required components of the technical proposal adds up to 25 pages total excluding the 1-page cover page that was specified to not be included in page limitation. Specifically, the Technical Approach section on Pg. 63 is listed as 16 pages and Personnel section on Pg.

64 is listed as 4 pages.

The required page numbers have been corrected and updated for consistency.

4. L.3. Pg. 62: There is no reference to abbreviations/acronyms. Can we assume that this page is also excluded from total page limit?

A list of abbreviations and acronyms will be excluded from total page limit.

5. L.3. Pg. 62: In which section should the resumes of key personnel be included?

Typically, it would be in included in the Appendix, however there is a 5-page limit to that section. Should the resumes be included in the Appendix, but not count towards this page limit?

Resumes for key personnel should be included in the Personnel section and are not included in the page count.

6. L.3.b Pg. 64-65: The RFQ instructions states that the Management and Institutional

Capacity section of the technical proposal should be 3 pages maximum, and the Personnel section to be 4 pages maximum, not including the resumes. The technical evaluation factors listed in Section M.2 (Pg. 70) notes that Management and Institutional Capacity is more important than Personnel. Would USAID consider modifying the page allotment to provide a higher page limit for the Management and Institutional Capacity section?

Page number requirements have been updated, please review updated solicitation.

7. L.4 Pg. 67: The RFQ requests the three-year budget to include a “brief description of the qualifications, work experience, and educational background for each labor category as well as the potential role on the project.” However, there does not seem to be a specific space in the budget template to include this information. Would USAID confirm this information should be included in the detailed price narrative?

See answer to question 2 above.

8. L.3.a – Please clarify what is meant by Acknowledgement Letter in the list of items that do not count against the page limit.

An acknowledgement letter by the proposed key personnel is not required and the solicitation will be updated to reflect this.

9. L.1 – Can USAID confirm that organizations holding MAS SIN 541611 are eligible given that the GSA migration replaced SIN 871-4 with MAS SIN 541611?

An offeror with either a GSA MAS with either a new SIN 541611 or a GSA PSS with a legacy SIN 874-1 [from Legacy Schedule 00CORP] can prime on the planned award.

10. Can USAID provide the maximum file size for e-mail submission of quotes?

Maximum file size for e-mail submission of quote has been included in the updated solicitation.

11. Is it acceptable for an offeror to adjust ‘Attachment J.1a- Price Schedule’ to reflect an offeror’s price structure for a T&M Contract?

Offerors may adjust Attachment J.1a to reflect the Offeror’s price structure of their GSA MAS/PSS contract.

12. The 3rd Column in ‘Attachment J.1b - Proposed GSA PSS Rate Discounts’ is entitled

LOE (Hours). Should offerors provide year 1 hours or total hours for all three years of the project in this column?

There is no need to provide hours. Attachment J.1b has been revised with this column removed.

However, also note that two columns have been added to include minimum education and minimum years of relevant experience for each proposed labor category.

13. The GSA Advantage e-Buy notice states, “Please do not include open market items with your offer.” Due to the illustrative nature of this bid and the Other Direct Costs (ODCs) that might arise in project implementation, would USAID consider including open market items as billable line items? Please confirm that USAID will allow offerors to budget for reasonable and allowable ODCs for the implementation of this program.

The Offeror may propose ODCs as Order-Level Materials (OLM) provided that the Offeror follow GSA requirements that such OLMs are ancillary to the primary purpose of the task order.

14. Section L.1 states that the applicable SIN is 874-1. Can USAID please confirm that this work is being issued under the entirety of MAS category 541611, which is a combination of legacy SIN 874-1 (MOBIS) and SIN 520-13 (FABS), and not only the labor categories under the SIN 874-1 (MOBIS)?

See answer to No. 41 below (an offeror with either a GSA MAS with a new MAS SIN of 541611 or a PSS with a legacy SIN 874-1 [from Legacy Schedule 00CORP] can prime on the planned award). Labor categories proposed must align with the published List Price for whichever SIN (MAS or PSS) the Offeror is using for its quotation.

15. Section L.4 - Since the six activities per year are not defined in the RFQ, it is not possible to develop an accurate estimate of Other Direct Costs for the period of performance of the task order. Consequently, we request that USAID provide an annual plug for Other Direct Costs, in addition to the plug for Travel, Transportation, and Per Diem.

The Offeror will need to propose ODCs as Order-Level Materials (OLM) based on their proposed technical approach (see also L/M 2 B1 above).

16. Section L.3 - Can USAID clarify if the Management Plan is to be included in the Management and Institutional Capacity section or if it is separate, and therefore not subject to page limitations?

Management plan should be included in the Management and Institutional Capacity Section. However, as noted on page 63 of the solicitation “A page in the technical proposal that contains a table, chart, graph, etc., not otherwise excluded below, is subject to the page minimum” and “Management Plan” is excluded. As a result, the Management Plan is not subject to the page limitations of this section.

17. Section L.3 - Can the Government please confirm if offerors may use fonts in the Arial font family for any tables, charts, graphics, illustrations to improve legibility and readability?

Offerors may use as small as size 10 font and may utilize Arial font family only for tables/charts/graphics/illustrations. Time New Roman requirements apply in the body.

18. Section L.3 - Can the Government clarify the intent of the Small Business Subcontracting

Reports and References and any instructions that are required for this appendix?

This has been moved out of Section L3.Section L.4 has been updated to include instructions with regards to Small Business Subcontracting.

19. RFQ, Section L.1, pg 61: The eligibility instruction specifies that "Eligible prime

Contractors must be schedule holders of a current GSA Schedule contract offering services under SIN 874-1". Yet in section B, pg 7, the instructions specify that "The Contractor is bound by the terms and conditions of their GSA Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) contract" which seems to refer to the MAS 541611 GSA Schedule. Can the government confirm that contractor with either a NAICS code 541611 or 00CORP/874-1 can prime on this effort?

We confirm that an offeror with either a GSA MAS with a new SIN of 541611 or a GSA PSS with a legacy SIN 874-1 (from Legacy Schedule 00CORP) can prime on the planned award.

20. Section M.2., Factor 2, Subfactor 1 reads: “The extent to which the offeror demonstrates the institutional capacity of the prospective prime contractor to (i) manage a diverse consortium of partners and subcontractor organizations (if any) and/or Contractor Teaming Arrangement partners, as described in Section L.3.4(a).”

a. We do not see Section L.3.4(a) in the RFQ – can USAID please clarify which section this is referring to?

b. Can USAID please clarify the distinction between partners and subcontractor organizations?

The correct reference is L.3.b.4 (Management and Institutional Capacity. The solicitation has been updated.

21. Section M page 71 says that "Key personnel (the Project Director) will be evaluated…" but there is no mention of the Deputy Project Director. Please confirm the Deputy Project Director will also be evaluated as one of the key personnel.

All listed key personnel will be evaluated. Solicitation has been updated.

22. In the evaluation, does USAID GH anticipate placing more emphasis on partner management experience or technical skill sets of consortium members?

As noted in Section M.2, the evaluation factors for award are noted in order of descending importance.

Other Sections/General Questions

1. Could you formalize the process by which the Missions will buy into this award? For example, will core activities cover any LOE related to scoping activities for Missions?

Yes, core activities would cover LOE related to scoping activities for Missions, however, if activities are to be subcontracted they should be primarily scoped by those firms/organizations.

2. Section H.18 - Given the fact that not all information used, gathered, disclosed, or developed under this contract would be subject to protection under the Privacy Act and the fact that the inclusion of the H.19 Privacy Act clause ensures protection for data that would be subject to the Privacy Act, would the Government consider deleting the reference to the Privacy Act in H.18? Such reference could imply that the Privacy Act is to be applied to all information related to this contract which could impose an undue burden during performance of the contract.

The protections afforded by the Privacy Act is legally required for applicable information and does not imply all information related to the contract requires such protection. Section H.18 refers to protection of information on a broad basis, including the Privacy Act -- H.19 reiterates the Privacy Act specifically.

3. Would the government confirm that offerors are empowered to propose a Fixed Price

(FP) subcontractor using the Other Labor Materials (OLM) line item per FAR 8.40 (B) and GSAR 552.538-155?

See answer to Section B Question 1 above.

4. USAID’s cover letter states that is RFQ is being issued under the Professional Services

Schedule (PSS). However, as of October 2019, GSA consolidated various GSA schedules including PSS into a new schedule, the Multiple Award Schedule (MAS). However, at the top of Section B on, it states, “The Contractor is bound by the terms and conditions of their GSA Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) contract in addition to any terms outlined in this section.”

An offeror with either a GSA MAS with a new MAS SIN of 541611 or PSS with a legacy SIN 874-1 (from Legacy Schedule 00CORP) can prime on the planned award.

5. Can USAID please confirm that the $17-19M ceiling is exclusive of the acquisition of services and tasks procured from a variety of firms, organizations, and/or consultants on a range of diverse market access activities?

The $19M ceiling would be inclusive of the services and tasks procured by firms, organizations, and/or consultants.

6. If the MAIF T&M task order ceiling price is meant to include the value of subawards for specific, discrete tasks procured via the Partner Facilitation Approach, what is the estimated budget for these subawards?

The value of subawards is dependent upon the Offeror’s technical and subcontracting approach.

7. Attachment J.1.a states, “Propose a loaded labor rate including fringe, indirect costs, profit, G&A, office space. List other direct costs by item/cost/year.” If a contractor were to establish office space or already has office space overseas (ie-Ghana) please confirm “office space” costs associated with establishing such an office would be listed as an ODC and would not be part of labor.

Proposed loaded labor rates only include office space to the extent the costs for such space are normally part of the organization’s indirect (overhead or G&A) rates. If such costs are not included in the organization’s indirect rates, they may be included as an ODC.

8. In order to bid as the prime, does the entity need to have submitted for the original

Request for Information (RFI with date of issue 03/11/2020 and date of submission 3/23/2020)?

No, in order to bid the entity does not need to have submitted a response to the RFI

9. Please confirm that USAID is anticipating buy-ins in addition to the proposed ceiling.

At this time, the anticipated buy-ins are included in the proposed ceiling.

10. Does USAID envision project staff co-locating within the Agency or should we budget for office costs?

USAID does not envision project staff co-locating within the Agency.

11. Will USAID provide office and IT equipment (i.e. desks, chairs, laptops) or should those costs be included within the budget?

Such costs should be included within the budget.