Sol_72052320R00002_FINAL.pdf

SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD

4. TYPE OF SOLICITATION2. CONTRACT NUMBER 3. SOLICITATION NUMBER

72052320R00002

7. ISSUED BY CODE 8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If other than Item 7)

ORDER UNDER DPAS (15 CFR 700)

6. REQUISITION/PURCHASE NUMBER

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

NEGOTIATED (RFP)

SEALED BID (IFB)

5. DATE ISSUED

1. THIS CONTRACT IS A RATED RATING PAGE OF PAGES

1 126

EXT.NUMBERAREA CODE

B. TELEPHONE (NO COLLECT CALLS)10. FOR

INFORMATION

CALL:

CAUTION: LATE Submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals: See Section L, Provision No. 52.214-7 or 52.215-1. All offers are subject to all terms and conditions contained in this solicitation.

(Date)(Hour) local timeuntildepository located in copies for furnishing the supplies or services in the Schedule will be received at the place specified in Item 8, or if hand carried, in the

SOLICITATION

9. Sealed offers in original and

PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

INSTRS., CONDS., AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

CONTRACT CLAUSES

PART III - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACH.

I

J

K

L

M SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

PACKAGING AND MARKING

DESCRIPTION/SPECS./WORK STATEMENT

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

PART II - CONTRACT CLAUSESPART I - THE SCHEDULE

H

G

F

E

D

C

B

A

SEC. DESCRIPTION PAGE(S) (X) DESCRIPTION SEC. (X)

11. TABLE OF CONTENTS

18. OFFER DATE17. SIGNATURE

SUCH ADDRESS IN SCHEDULE.

IS DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE - ENTER

15C. CHECK IF REMITTANCE ADDRESS

EXT.NUMBERAREA CODE

15B. TELEPHONE NUMBER

(Type or print)AND

ADDRESS

OF

OFFEROR

CODE FACILITY

16. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN OFFER15A. NAME

DATEAMENDMENT NO.DATEAMENDMENT NO.

and related documents numbered and dated):

amendments to the SOLICITATION for offerors

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of

14. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF AMENDMENTS

CALENDAR DAYS (%)30 CALENDAR DAYS (%)20 CALENDAR DAYS (%)10 CALENDAR DAYS (%)

(See Section I, Clause No. 52.232.8)

13. DISCOUNT FOR PROMPT PAYMENT

designated point(s), within the time specified in the schedule.

by the offeror) from the date for receipt of offers specified above, to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item, delivered at the

12. In compliance with the above, the undersigned agrees, if this offer is accepted within ______________ calendar days (60 calendar days unless a different period is inserted

NOTE: Item 12 does not apply if the solicitation includes the provisions at 52.214-16, Minimum Bid Acceptance Period.

OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror)

IMPORTANT - Award will be made on this Form, or on Standard Form 26, or by other authorized official written notice.

28. AWARD DATE

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

27. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

25. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BYCODE 24. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 7)

ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

23. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN

41 U.S.C. 253 (c) ( 10 U.S.C. 2304 (c) (

22. AUTHORITY FOR USING OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION:

21. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION20. AMOUNT19. ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS NUMBERED

AWARD (To be completed by government)

CODE

02/24/2020 X

GUATEMALA

UUSAID/Mexico (US Embassy)

Office of Acquisition and Assistance (OAA)

Paseo de la Reforma 305, Cuauhtemoc, Mexico City, Mexico 06500

2:00 p.m. 03/25/2020

A. NAME

Adam B. Cox

C. E-MAIL ADDRESS

PAGE(S)

26. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

Adam B. Cox

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION

Previous edition is unusable

STANDARD FORM 33 (Rev. 9-97) Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.214(c)

REQ-523-20-000004

dperlman Typewritten Text

SOL 720523R00002

Violence Prevention and Reduction Activity

USAID/Mexico

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION B – SUPPLIES OR SERVICES/PRICES

B.1 PURPOSE

B.2 CONTRACT TYPE

B.3 ESTIMATED COST, FIXED FEE AND OBLIGATED AMOUNT

B.4 CANCELLATION CEILING

B.5 PAYMENT

B.6 INDIRECT COSTS (DEC 1997)

B.7 COST REIMBURSABLE

B.8 FIXED FEE - FAR 52.216-8 (JUN 2011)

B.9 PAYMENT OF FIXED FEE

SECTION C – DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS

C.1 PURPOSE

C.2 BACKGROUND

C.3 SCOPE

C.5 GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS

C.6 OBJECTIVES

C.7 GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND GUIDANCE

SECTION D – PACKAGING AND MARKING

D.1 AIDAR 752.7009 MARKING (JAN 1993)

D.2 BRANDING AND MARKING

D.3 BRANDING STRATEGY FOR THE VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND REDUCTION ACTIVITY ... 21

SECTION E – INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

E.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

E.2 INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

SECTION F – DELIVERABLES AND PERFORMANCE

F.1. NOTICE LISTING FAR SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

F.2 DELIVERABLES

F.3 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE

F.4 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

F.5 752.7005 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT EXPERIENCE DOCUMENTS

(SEPTEMBER 2013)

F.6 752.242-70 PERIODIC PROGRESS REPORTS (OCTOBER 2007)

F.7 KEY PERSONNEL

F.8 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

F.9 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

F.10 752.7034 ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND DISCLAIMER. (DEC 1991)

F.11 52.211-8 Time of Delivery. (JUN 1997)

F.12 52.211-8 Time of Delivery. (JUN 1997) - Alternate I (APR 1984)

USAID/Mexico

SECTION G – CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

G.1 CONTRACTING OFFICER'S AUTHORITY

G.2 TECHNICAL DIRECTION

G.3 TECHNICAL DIRECTIONS/RELATIONSHIP WITH USAID

G.4 ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

G.5 CONTRACTING OFFICER

G.6 CONTRACTING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIVE

G.7 CONTRACTOR’S PRIMARY POINT OF CONTACT

G.8 CONTRACTOR’S PAYMENT ADDRESS

G.9 752.7003 DOCUMENTATION FOR PAYMENT. (NOV 1998)

SECTION H – SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

H.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

H.2 FOREIGN GOVERNMENT DELEGATIONS TO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES

H.3 INSURANCE AND SERVICES

H.4 AIDAR 752.228-70 MEDICAL EVACUATION (MEDEVAC) SERVICES (July 2007)

H.5 AUTHORIZED GEOGRAPHIC CODE

H.6 NONEXPENDABLE PROPERTY PURCHASES AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

RESOURCES

H.7 LANGUAGE REQUIREMENTS

H.8 KEY PERSONNEL

H.9 SUBCONTRACTING PLAN AND THE SF 294 – SUBCONTRACTING REPORT FOR INDIVIDUAL

CONTRACTS AND SF 295 – SUMMARY CONTRACTING REPORT

H.10 EXECUTIVE ORDER ON TERRORISM FINANCING

H.11 REPORTING OF FOREIGN TAXES (July 2007)

H.12 PROHIBITION AND ASSISTANCE TO DRUG TRAFFICKING

H.13 GRANTS UNDER USAID CONTRACTS

H.14 AIDAR 752.7007 PERSONNEL COMPENSATION (July 2007)

H.15 CONFIDENTIALITY AND OWNERSHIP OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

H.16 USAID DISABILITY POLICY - ACQUISITION (DECEMBER 2004)

H.17 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PERSONNEL COMPENSATION

H.18 TRAVEL TO MEXICO

H.19 USAID IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 508 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973 AND

FEDERAL ACQUISITION CIRCULAR (FAC) 97-27 ELECTRONIC AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

ACCESSIBILITY

H.20 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND MANAGEMENT

H.21 CONTRACTOR’S STAFF SUPPORT, ADMINISTRATIVE AND LOGISTICS ARRANGEMENTS

AND LEGAL REGISTRATION IN THE COOPERATING COUNTRY

H.22 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED FACILITIES OR PROPERTY

H.23 CONFIDENTIALITY AND OWNERSHIP OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

H.24 ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS

H.25 PURCHASE OF RESTRICTED GOODS

H.26 CONSENT TO SUBCONTRACT

H.27 PRESS RELATIONS

H.28 302.3.5.22 SUBMISSION OF DATASETS TO THE DEVELOPMENT DATA LIBRARY (DDL)

(OCTOBER 2014)

H.29 USAID-FINANCED THIRD-PARTY WEB SITES (NOVEMBER 2017)

H.30 RESTRICTIONS AGAINST DISCLOSURE (MAY 2016)

H.31 LIMITATION ON ACQUISITION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (DEVIATION NOs.

M/OAA-DEV-FAR-18-2c and M/OAA-DEV-AIDAR-18-2c) (APRIL 2018)

H.32 SECURITY CONDITIONS

H.33 SECURITY REPORTING

H.34 AIDAR 752.7032 INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL APPROVAL AND NOTIFICATION

REQUIREMENTS AND AIDAR 752.7027 PERSONNEL

H.35 LIMITATION ON ACQUISITION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (DEVIATION NOs.

M/OAA-DEV-FAR-18-2c AND M/OAA-DEV-AIDAR-18-2c) (APRIL 2018)

H.36 SOFTWARE LICENSE ADDENDUM (MAY 2016)

H.37 CLOUD COMPUTING (APRIL 2018)

H.38 ADS 206.3.12 - COVERED PARTICIPANTS

SECTION I – CONTRACT CLAUSES

I.1. NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES

I.2 752.252-1 AIDAR SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (MAR 2015)

I.3 CLAUSES INCORPORATED IN FULL TEXT

SECTION J – LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

J.1 CLIMATE RISK MANAGEMENT SUMMARY TABLE

SECTION K – REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND OTHER STATEMENTS OF BIDDERS

K.1 NOTICE LISTING SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

K.2 52.204-8 ANNUAL REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS. (JAN 2018)

K.3 52.204-17 OWNERSHIP OR CONTROL OF OFFEROR. (JUL 2016)

K.4 52.204-20 PREDECESSOR OF OFFEROR. (JUL 2016)

K.5 52.209-5 CERTIFICATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS. (OCT 2015)

K.6 52.209-11 REPRESENTATION BY CORPORATIONS REGARDING DELINQUENT TAX

LIABILITY OR A FELONY CONVICTION UNDER ANY FEDERAL LAW. (FEB 2016)

K.7 52.215-6 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE. (OCT 1997)

K.8 52.222-22 PREVIOUS CONTRACTS AND COMPLIANCE REPORTS. (FEB 1999)

K.9 52.230-1 COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS NOTICES AND CERTIFICATION. (OCT 2015)

K.10 52.222-25 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION COMPLIANCE (APR 1984)

K.11 52.230-7 PROPOSAL DISCLOSURE--COST ACCOUNTING PRACTICE CHANGES (APR 2005) 156

K.12 INSURANCE - IMMUNITY FROM TORT LIABILITY

K.13 AGREEMENT ON, OR EXCEPTIONS TO, TERMS AND CONDITIONS

K.14 AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATORS

K.15 SIGNATURE

SECTION L – INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

L.1 52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE. (FEB 1998)

L.2. 52.215-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION (JAN 2017)

L.3. 52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT. (APR 1984)

L.4. 52.233-2 SERVICE OF PROTEST. (SEP 2006)

L.5. 52.252-5 AUTHORIZED DEVIATIONS IN PROVISIONS. (APR 1984)

L.6. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

L.7 DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS

L.8 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

L.9 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE COST PROPOSAL

L.10 APPLICABLE FACTS & RATIONALE FOR INSTRUMENT SELECTION

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1 GENERAL INFORMATION

M.2 TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

M.3 EVALUATION OF COST PROPOSAL

M.4 SOURCE SELECTION

M.5 DETERMINATION OF THE COMPETITIVE RANGE

M.6 CONTRACTING WITH SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS AND DISADVANTAGED ENTERPRISES

M.7 BEST VALUE

SECTION B – SUPPLIES OR SERVICES/PRICES

B.1 PURPOSE

The purpose of this Contract is to strengthen the capacity of municipal governments and communities to effectively resolve and mitigate local crime and violence by shifting the focus away from punitive justice to preventative and proactive civic justice and policing consistent with the Government of Mexico (GOM)’s Modelo Nacional de Policía y Justicia Cívica (National Policing and Civic Justice Model).

B.2 CONTRACT TYPE

This is a Cost Plus Fixed Fee-Completion form Contract. For the consideration set forth in the Contract, the Contractor will provide the deliverables or outputs described in Sections C and F and comply with all Contract requirements. The Contractor must perform the services set forth in Contract at prices consistent with Section B of this contract.

B.3 ESTIMATED COST, FIXED FEE AND OBLIGATED AMOUNT

CLIN ITEM TOTAL ($)

0001 Technical Assistance

Direct Costs

Indirect Costs

Grants Under Contract (GUC)

3,000,000

Fixed Fee (FF)

Total Estimated Cost Plus Fixed Fee *Direct Costs include: Salaries, including benefits, STTA, Travel, allowances, procurement, equipment, subcontracts, communications and participant training.

(a) The total estimated cost for the performance of the work required hereunder, exclusive of fixed fee, is $[to be inserted by CO at time of award]. The Total Estimated Cost Plus Fixed Fee for the Period is $[to be inserted by CO at time of award].

(b) Within the estimated cost plus fixed fee specified in paragraph (a) above, the amount currently obligated and available for reimbursement of allowable costs incurred by the Contractor for performance hereunder is $[to be inserted by CO at time of award]. The Contractor will not exceed the aforesaid obligated amount unless authorized by the Contracting Officer pursuant to the clause of the contract entitled Limitation of Funds- FAR 52.232-22.

(c) Funds obligated are anticipated to be sufficient through [date to be inserted by CO at time of award].

NOTE: The Contractor will not be paid any sum in excess of the ceiling price. The only person authorized to commit or obligate additional funds is the Contracting Officer. Incurrence of costs in excess of the total amount obligated based on directions received from any individual other than the Contracting Officer and without prior Contracting Officer’s approval, will not be reimbursed to the Contractor.

B.4 CANCELLATION CEILING

This is a multi-year contract as defined in FAR 17.103. Therefore, this contract is subject to the requirements of FAR 17.106. In the event that the Government cancels requirements for services in subsequent program years under this contract, the following conditions will apply: [Amount and dates to be filled in at time of award]

Cancellation Dates:

Contract Year 2: DATE TBD, [Award year + 1 year] Cancellation Ceiling: TBD Contract Year 3: DATE TBD, [Award year + 2 years] Cancellation Ceiling: TBD Contract Year 4: DATE TBD, [Award year + 3 years] Cancellation Ceiling: TBD Contract Year 5: DATE TBD, [Award year + 4 years] Cancellation Ceiling: TBD

The cancellation dates and ceiling amounts will be established at the time of award. The amounts will be based on the nonrecurring costs to be incurred by the awardee, which would be applicable to, and which normally would be amortized over the life of the contract, and the items or services to be furnished under the multi-year requirement. This is a CPFF type contract, pursuant to which all costs for which the contractor seeks reimbursement must be allowable in accordance with FAR 52.216-7, “Allowable Costs and Payment.”

B.5 PAYMENT

The Contractor must submit invoices to the payment office indicated on the cover page of the Contract.

Each invoice must be emailed and submitted on an SF-1034 Public Voucher for Purchases and Services Other Than Personal to the Financial Management Office/USAID/Mexico. One copy of the voucher and the invoice must also be submitted to the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR).

Electronic submission of invoices is strongly encouraged. The SF-1034 must be signed, and it must be submitted along with the invoice and any other documentation in Adobe.

The paying office is:

USAID/El Salvador 3450 San Salvador Place Washington, DC 20521-3450 Email address: sansalvch@usaid.gov

B.6 INDIRECT COSTS (DEC 1997)

For the Prime Contractor:

Pending establishment of revised provisional or final indirect cost rates, allowable indirect costs will be reimbursed on the basis of the following negotiated provisional or predetermined rates and the appropriate bases:

Description Rate Base Type Period

TBD 1/ 1/ 1/

1/Base of Application:

Type of Rate: Predetermined Period:

For Major Subcontractor(s):

Pending establishment of revised provisional or final indirect cost rates, allowable indirect costs will be reimbursed on the basis of the following negotiated provisional or predetermined rates and the appropriate bases:

Description Rate Base Type Period

TBD 1/ 1/ 1/

1/Base of Application:

Type of Rate: Predetermined Period:

A “Major Subcontractor” is a subcontractor that is performing 20% or more of the contract or is deemed critical by the offeror in achieving the objectives and tasks in the contract.

B.7 COST REIMBURSABLE

The U.S. dollar costs allowable will be limited to reasonable, allocable and necessary costs determined in accordance with FAR 52.216-7, Allowable Cost and Payment, FAR 52.216-8, Fixed Fee, if applicable, and AIDAR 752.7003, Documentation for Payment.

B.8 FIXED FEE - FAR 52.216-8 (JUN 2011)

USAID paying office ordinarily pays the Contractor a percentage of a fixed fee that directly corresponds to the percentage of allowable costs being paid. Two exceptions to paying fixed fee in this manner apply:

(a) If the CO determines that this method results in paying a disproportionately higher ratio of fixed fee than the percentage of work that the Contractor has completed, then the CO may suspend further payment of any fixed fee until the Contractor has made sufficient progress to justify further payment, up to the agreed percentage.

(b) The clauses entitled "Allowable Cost and Payment" (FAR 52.216-7) and "Fixed Fee" (FAR 52.216-8) are incorporated into this contract. The terms and conditions of these clauses apply after total payments of fixed fee reach eighty-five percent (85%) of the total fixed fee.

B.9 PAYMENT OF FIXED FEE

Payment of fixed fee will be in accordance with FAR 52.216-8. Pursuant to FAR 16.306(d), the fixed fee payable under this contract will be tied to the achievement of results and indicators agreed upon in the negotiated contract, and deliverables listed in F.1subject to inspection and acceptance by USAID and in compliance with the terms of the contract. Upon acceptance by USAID and receipt of approval from the

Contracting Officer, the Contractor must submit an invoice for the amount of the fee associated with the deliverable and approved fee schedule as per the illustrative sample detailed below:

Year /Deliverable Due Date % Fee # Amount of Fee Year One Include the reports that correspond to Year 1 from Section F.2

Technical Reports:

COMPONENT 1

Result 1.XX Result 1.XX

COMPONENT 2

Result 2.XX Result 2.XX

COMPONENT 3

Result 3.XX Result 3.XX Total Fixed Fee Year 1 100% $ Year Two Include the reports that

Result 1.XX Result 1.XX

COMPONENT 2

Result 2.XX Result 2.XX

COMPONENT 3

Result 3.XX Result 3.XX Total Fixed Fee Year 2 100% $ Year Three Include the reports that

Result 1.XX Result 1.XX

COMPONENT 2

Result 2.XX Result 2.XX

COMPONENT 3

Result 3.XX Result 3.XX Total Fixed Fee Year 3 100% $

Year Four Include the reports that

COMPOONENT 1

Result 1.XX Result 1.XX

COMPONENT 2

Result 2.XX Result 2.XX

COMPONENT 3

Result 3.XX Result 3.XX Total Fixed Fee Year 4 100% $ Year Five Include the reports that

Result 1.XX Result 1.XX

COMPONENT 2

Result 2.XX Result 2.XX

COMPONENT 3

Result 3.XX Result 3.XX Total Contract Fixed Fee 100%

(Note: This table is an illustrative table. A fee schedule will be negotiated with the offeror as described in Section L.9.)

[END OF SECTION B]

SECTION C – DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS

C.1 PURPOSE

The Violence Prevention and Reduction (PREVI) Activity will strengthen the capacity of municipal governments and communities to effectively resolve and mitigate local crime and violence by shifting the focus away from punitive justice to preventative and proactive civic justice and policing consistent with the Government of Mexico (GOM)’s Modelo Nacional de Policía y Justicia Cívica (National Policing and Civic Justice Model). Through this approach, local authorities, in particular law enforcement first responders, will build trust with citizens, while generating information that can be shared with state prosecutors to better target and allocate criminal justice system resources. The Activity will also facilitate the replication of evidence-based, youth-targeted crime and violence prevention approaches by GOM and other local stakeholders to reduce the recruiting base for TCOs and their subsidiaries and prevent the escalation of violence.

To achieve this purpose, PREVI has three objectives:

● Objective 1: Municipal authorities, in collaboration with civil society and the private sector, use evidence-based interventions to respond to low-level crimes and community violence that reduce imprisonment and build public confidence in institutions.

● Objective 2: Reduce likelihood of at-risk youth being imprisoned or on probation for crime and violence.

● Objective 3: Improve coordination between civic justice courts, municipal law enforcement, and criminal justice operators through shared information and intelligence cooperation.

C.2 BACKGROUND

Mexico registered 35,588 murders in 2019 according to figures from the National System of Public Security, a 2.7 percent increase over the previous year.1 Meanwhile, in the last semester of 2019, over a third of urban households reported at least one member being victimized by a crime in the past 90 days.2 While high impact crimes such as homicides and kidnappings are a component of this phenomenon, GOM survey data consistently shows that the day-to-day frequency of lower-level criminality including assaults, muggings, public disturbances, and robbery are the primary contributor to citizen perceptions of insecurity3. Not addressing violence and crime within communities esults in a citizenry with low trust in government and a reluctance to cooperate with law enforcement. This dynamic weakens the ability of the justice system to successfully investigate and prosecute crimes. Illustrating this trend, in the last year

93.2 percent of crimes went unreported or were not investigated.4

Violence in Mexico is perpetually evolving according to localized conditions, including personal conflicts, legal and illegal market fluctuations, state response, and criminal group adaptations. Municipal

1 Criminality Statistics, Secretariado Ejecutivo del Sistema Nacional de Seguridad Pública (SESNSP).

2 Encuesta Nacional de Seguridad Urbana (ENSU), Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI) 3 86% de los delitos que afectan a los ciudadanos, como robos y homicidios. Encuesta Nacional de Estándares y Capacitación Profesional Policial (ENECAP), 2017.

4 National Survey on Crime and Victimization ENVIPE 2019, by the National Statistics Institute, INEGI).

police, who serve a central role in deterring crime, are often ill-equipped, insufficiently compensated and too few to fulfill their protection function and not be susceptible to influence by malign actors. A lack of reliable data about trends in crime, policy effectiveness, and justice system performance hinders government efforts to develop and implement effective public security strategies, as do deficiencies in coordination and intelligence sharing between justice operators at state level local police.

Data shows that a small percentage of the population, primarily young males between the ages of 15 and 29, is responsible for the majority of the criminal activity in a given geographic area5. These youth are particularly vulnerable to violence and also serve as potential recruits for local gangs, organized crime, and subsidiary organizations6. At the community-level, contributing factors to insecurity include under-funding of government services for at-risk youth and youth who commit low-level crimes. In addition, the inconsistent application of juvenile criminal justice system provisions and lack of funding results in the weak follow-up of cases, which does little to stop the cycle of violence adolescents get caught up in.

President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) has identified citizen security as a top priority for his administration, and thus far, has dedicated around 5 billion USD7 to tackle the problem. The establishment and resourcing of the National Guard reflects this commitment as does the rollout of the National Model of Police and Civic Justice Model represents a comprehensive approach to addressing the weaknesses in the current citizen security system, and is rooted in the principle that crime and violence requires a local response. Building on the successful municipal experiences with civic justice and problem-oriented policing (POP), the GOM has identified a concrete set of mandatory reforms of regulations, operational practices, and oversight mechanisms in order to reduce violence and impunity, improve public perceptions of security, and increase efficiency and effectiveness. These priorities have been incorporated into the Administration’s new National Police Model, and consist of criteria for number of police staff, strengthening of community policing and civic justice, improved criminal investigations, promotion of crime reporting, establishment of monitoring and evaluation systems, staff training and certification and improved labor conditions. The AMLO administration has reached out to USAID/Mexico and the State Department’s Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement (INL) to collaborate in the implementation of the National Model. This presents an opening to advance shared security objectives.

The GOM’s National Police Model heavily draws on the civic justice model developed by USAID under its Juntos para la Prevención de la Violencia (JPV) program (see http://prevenciondelaviolencia.org/ for all research, guides, and other tools related to USAID/Mexico’s approach to civic justice specifically, and crime and violence prevention more generally). The civic justice courts address community-level conflict and misdemeanors (faltas administrativas) through jueces civicos (civic judges), community prosecutors, and mediation-related activities. While still a new concept for most municipalities, civic justice allows for locally-driven resolutions to misdemeanors and other offenses that are most commonly related to quality of life issues at the community level. It does so by establishing a municipally-administered courts system that reviews each case to identify alternative services for the offender, in lieu of punitive sentences, with the aim of encouraging prevention and productive reintegration into the communities. Critical to its success, the courts are part of a larger network of service providers and businesses that is equipped to provide the requisite interventions. Based on past lessons learned, the role of the private sector is particularly important, not only as potential providers of employment opportunities, but as sustained advocates and financiers of the civic justice system that could be vulnerable to political transitions at the municipal level. Additionally, by resolving community-level

5 Piquero, Farrington and Blumstein, 2007 6 Magaloni, Beatriz, “El vínculo entre delincuencia organizada, jóvenes y pandillas” (Oct 2018) Nexos 7 Mexico’s Federal Annual Budget 2020 disputes, this system supports more efficient justice sector processes and free up resources for state institutions to focus on felony and high-impact crimes. The model also includes POP, which promotes active participation of police officers in the identification of actors, situations, and dynamics in the local environment at the neighborhood level as a way to preempt conflict, and forestall conflict escalation. POP incorporates principles of intelligence analysis, active deterrence of antisocial behavior and mediation techniques.

The civic justice model also integrates best practices in crime and violence prevention programming for youth. According to a study commissioned by USAID, What works to prevent violence among youth?

primary interventions such as traditional school programs are the least effective in influencing behavior change among youth. Instead, the evidence points to the need to narrowly target youth with high risk factors for propensity for crime and violence (Secondary interventions) or youth who have already been convicted for a crime (Tertiary interventions). Based on the findings, the initial identification and selection of youth is critical since only 5 percent of the population is responsible for over 60 percent of the crimes. To ensure the interventions target those individuals who exhibit the factors associated with criminal behavior, USAID has developed a Youth Targeting Tool. Following the identification of the youth and a diagnostics of individual needs such as cognitive-behavioral therapy and psychological counseling, family outreach, life skills and vocational training, the civic justice system facilitates the provision of tailored services to the youth in lieu of punitive sentences. In doing so, programming promotes the rehabilitation of perpetrators, and deters them from engaging in future criminal activities or violence. The effectiveness of these interventions is evidenced by historical 3.25 percent recidivism rates among program beneficiaries, compared to national average of 60 percent.

Relationship to USG priorities in Mexico, Other USAID Activities, and other Donor or GOM Funded Programs:

This Activity advances a USG priority of improved security in Mexico. USAID is a key interagency player in this arena, bringing technical expertise, convening authority among local actors, and flexible and adaptable programming that directly complements other USG investments. The contractor must coordinate with the Department of State’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement (INL) police training and certification activities and capacity development for police analytics and tactics, in addition to other ongoing engagement of USG law enforcement targeting high-level offenders and TCO leadership. In addition, the contractor must coordinate with relevant USAID programs as instructed by the mission and elaborated below.

Currently, USAID/Mexico has the following crime and violence prevention activities:

● Together for the Prevention of Violence (JPV) - Chemonics International

● Platform of the Construction of Youth Citizen Security Activity - Universidad Iberoamericana de

Puebla

● Broadening of the Development of Children - Salud y Desarrollo Comunitario, A.C.

● Youth in Conflict with the Law - Consejo Ciudadano de Seguridad y Justicia, A.C.

● Focused Deterrence in Nuevo Leon - Pro Superacion Neolonesa, A.C.

● Focused Deterrence in Chihuahua - Seguridad y Justicia de Ciudad de Juárez, A.C.

● RedSumaRSE Initiative 2.0 - Via Educacion, A.C.

● Youth without Prison - Reinserta un Mexicano, A.C.

Proposed activities must build on past and ongoing crime and prevention programming aimed at reducing the likelihood of criminal activity and violence by targeted youth and expanding the civic justice and problem-oriented policing models. The contractor must also closely coordinate and seek linkages with

USAID/Mexico’s justice and human rights programming to leverage gains in advancing more responsive criminal system and more directly tackle crimes and violence generated by organized crime. Justice Access for Victims and the Accused (JAVA), implemented by Fortis Consulting, launched in July 2019 and looks at access to justice issues. Alliances for Analysis and Communications (AA&C)), implemented by Mexico Evalua, was launched in August 2019 and will undertake a comprehensive evaluation of the Mexican justice system to increase the participation of local actors in its oversight and performance analysis and inform the public about the justice system.

In addition, USAID/Mexico intends to procure two new activities that will be closely linked to this activity. These will focus on improving the effectiveness of state-level justice institutions (see: Notice ID 72052320R00003 / Improving Effectiveness of State-Level Justice Institutions in Mexico) and improving GOM capacity to prevent, investigate, and prosecute human rights abuses while strengthening civil society advocacy efforts [INSERT LINK TO HR SOLICITATION HERE].

C.3 SCOPE

The Activity will strengthen the capacity of municipal governments and communities to effectively resolve and mitigate local crime and violence by shifting the focus away from punitive justice to preventative and proactive civic justice and policing consistent with the Government of Mexico (GOM)’s Modelo Nacional de Policía y Justicia Cívica (National Policing and Civic Justice Model). Through this approach, local authorities, in particular law enforcement first responders, will build trust with citizens, while generating information that can be shared with state prosecutors to better target and allocate criminal justice system resources. It will also curb the escalation of criminal behavior by the primary perpetrators -youth- through systematic identification of high-risk individuals and provision of tailored services, and replication of evidence-based, youth-targeted crime and violence prevention approaches by GOM and other local stakeholders. Dealing with low-level crime and violence expeditiously through municipal civic justice courts will also reduce the number of cases channeled to the overburdened criminal justice system, allowing more time and resources can be dedicated to investigate and prosecute high-impact cases.

This work will directly support GOM efforts to reduce crime and violence in priority municipalities. In the Mexican context, USAID’s funding represents a small percentage of funding, public and private, dedicated to solving the country’s security problems. Instead, USAID’s comparative advantage is its technical expertise and convening authority to develop local networks and methodologies to address community-level crime and violence in a sustainable manner, and subsequently helping the GOM progress in its journey to self-reliance. The Activity will build on past GOM and USAID crime and violence prevention initiatives, particularly the civic justice and problem-oriented policing models, and continue to facilitate multisectoral networks of federal and subnational government authorities, including law enforcement and social service providers, as well as civil society, academia and the private sector to ensure sustainability. PREVI will also mark an important pivot away from direct implementation and service provision, to developing pilots and best practices that can be scaled through peer learning and the mobilization of GOM resources for the replication of proven approaches, including in secondary and tertiary youth-targeted crime and violence prevention interventions.

PREVI will focus on “hot spots,” or areas where there are heightened levels of crime and violence within target municipalities. The Activity will initially prioritize between 16-20 municipalities that meet specific set of criteria including GOM priorities, a baseline level of security, basic capacity of key institutions and commitment by key actors (i.e. the private sector) to address the security challenges in their communities, among others. Interventions will be tailored per the needs of each municipality, leverage peer learning by municipalities that already have developed crime and violence prevention systems from previous USAID assistance, and serve as a flexible response mechanism to address unanticipated openings or needs to advance USG security objectives.

Theory of Change

IF targeted stakeholders (municipal governments, private sector, civil society and academia) have the technical capability and financial resources to improve crime prevention tactics through the effective coordination and replication of evidence-based interventions AND the information generated from these efforts is shared with justice sector counterparts, THEN violence in targeted communities will be reduced.

C4. KEY OUTCOMES WITH INDICATORS AND TARGETS

Purpose/ Outcomes Outcome Indicator

Baseline for Select Municipalities8

End of Activity Target

Purpose: Crime and violence levels reduced in target communities.

(Addressing all three objectives)

Other types of violent crimes (i.e.

robbery and assault with weapon) rates in targeted municipalities or “hot spots”

(Source: SESNSP 2018)

Ensenada: 1,156 Tijuana: 5,170 La Paz: 366 Los Cabos: 455 Chihuahua: 1,383 Juarez: 2,387 Puerto Vallarta: 717 Morelia: 3,429 G. Escobedo: 1,049 Guadalupe: 935 Monterrey: 2048 Cancun: 4,315 Othón P. Blanco: 613 Playa del Carmen: 814 Hermosillo: 1,328

10% decrease from baseline (estimated 2.5% per year).

Percentage of Mexicans that feel their neighborhood is unsafe or very unsafe

(Source:

LAPOP/America’s Barometer 2019)

National level is 55.6%

8% decrease from baseline (estimated 2% per year).

8 The list of municipalities is illustrative. Proposed targets reflect a minimum anticipated magnitude of change.

Offerors should propose specific baselines and targets for each of their proposed municipalities.

Percentage of Unreported Crimes on targeted states (“Cifra negra”)

(Source: ENVIPE 2018)

National level is 93.2%

Baja California: 89.5% Baja California Sur:

87.3% Chihuahua: 91.2% Guanajuato: 94.8% Jalisco: 91.8% Michoacan: 92.8% Nuevo Leon: 91.6% Quintana Roo: 91.3% Sonora: 92.9%

-2% of Baseline per targeted state.

Homicide rates (intentional homicides) in targeted municipalities or “hot spots” (the contractor will measure this indicator as context indicator)

(Source SESNSP 2018)

Ensenada: 227 Tijuana: 2,243 La Paz: 71 Los Cabos: 62 Chihuahua: 270 Juarez: 1,011 Puerto Vallarta: 30 Morelia: 183 G. Escobedo: 50 Guadalupe: 65 Monterrey: 217 Cancun: 537 Othón P. Blanco: 21 Playa del Carmen: 110 Hermosillo: 175

10% decrease from baseline (estimated 2.5% per year).

Outcome 1: Local prevention systems more effectively respond to and deter low-level crimes and community violence, alleviate the criminal justice system, and build public confidence in their institutions.

(Addressing Objective 1)

Recidivism rates for youth beneficiaries in targeted municipalities (disaggregated for offenders processed through civic justice system)

Baseline to be defined during the first six months of the activity.

5%

Percentage increase in the

Number of effective resolutions by civic

50% increase from baseline (estimated number of effective civic justice courts resolutions (defined as: fines, community services, cognitive behavioral therapies and addiction treatment).

justice courts during the six months prior to USAID support. For new courts, a comparison with existing courts will be proposed.

12.5% per year).

Outcome 2: Reduced likelihood of at-risk youth, youth who committed low-level crimes, and youth imprisoned or on probation I think perpetrating crime and violence.

(Addressing Objective 2)

Recidivism rates for youth beneficiaries in targeted municipalities (Disaggregated for parolees/probation ers of violent crimes)

Recidivism rates at the start of the activity.

5%

Outcome 3: Improved coordination of local prevention systems with the justice sector, including through shared information and intelligence cooperation.

(Addressing Objective 3)

Number of new or amended public policies as a result of agreements among key local actors.

(Source: JPV, 2019)

Ensenada: TBD Tijuana: 51% La Paz: TBD Los Cabos: TBD Chihuahua: 61% Juarez: 49% S. M de Allende: TBD Puerto Vallarta: TBD Morelia: 49% G. Escobedo: 43% Guadalupe: 43% Monterrey: 43% Cancun: TBD Othon P. Blanco: TBD Playa del Carmen:TBD Hermosillo: TBD

To be proposed by offerors.

C.5 GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS

Resources available for this activity, combined with GOM equities, require carefully prioritizing municipalities for implementation. Offerors should consider the following criteria to select the initial municipalities but may also propose additional criteria as part of their technical approach:

● USG Strategic Priorities

● Mexican Federal Government priorities

● Local capacity of the municipal government (municipal police,including information systems), justice sector (including civic justice environment)

● Private sector commitment to support crime prevention

● Availability and quality of data

● Crime rates

● Presence of USAID justice portfolio activities

● Coordination with INL programming

In addition, an assessment of the selected municipalities based on the maturity of citizen security and civic justice reform implementation enables a tailored approach to implementation. The Activity will also concentrate municipalities in as few states as possible, to garner synergies from work on roles and relationships at the state level that could benefit multiple municipalities. Finally, the contractor must include a flexible response mechanism to shift and expand programming quickly in response to progress in the municipalities and GOM priorities. The Rapid Response mechanism should be at least 10 percent of the total budget.

Offerors must propose a matrix of target municipalities that considers the criteria above, as well as any other factors proposed and elaborated by the Offeror. The Offeror must propose a corresponding programming approach for varying tiers for municipalities, and the matrix must identify, at a minimum, municipalities that may serve as models and provide peer learning to other municipalities. USAID expects interventions to be tailored to the needs of the specific municipalities and local violence dynamics, however, the matrix and corresponding interventions can be defined by categories or rankings of similar typology of municipalities. Offerors must propose a minimum of 17 municipalities and USAID encourages innovative solutions to increase the activity’s geographic reach.

C.6 OBJECTIVES

The Activity will strengthen the capacity of municipal governments and communities to resolve local crime and violence by shifting the focus away from punitive justice to preventative and proactive civic justice and policing consistent with the Government of Mexico (GOM)’s Modelo Nacional de Policía y Justicia Cívica (National Policing and Civic Justice Model). USAID/Mexico envisions that the resultant contract will be divided into three components:

● Objective 1: Municipal authorities, in collaboration with civil society and the private sector, use evidence-based interventions to respond to low-level crimes and community violence that reduce imprisonment and build public confidence in institutions.

● Objective 2: Reduce likelihood of at-risk youth being imprisoned or on probation for crime and violence.

● Objective 3: Improve coordination between civic justice courts, municipal law enforcement, and criminal justice operators through shared information and intelligence cooperation.

Objective 1: Municipal authorities, in collaboration with civil society and the private sector, use evidence-based interventions to respond to low-level crimes and community violence that reduce imprisonment and build public confidence in institutions. (Estimate 50% Level of Effort)

This component will directly advance the GOM’s crime and prevention policies and priorities at the national and subnational levels through the rollout of the civic justice and policing model. The Activity will support local institutions to establish and/or strengthen municipal civic justice system to efficiently address misdemeanors, other minor misconduct and community disputes, which if left unaddressed, can fuel the perception of ineffective government institutions, further undermining their legitimacy. The civic justice system, administered by the Municipal government, provides short-term solutions to swiftly resolve community conflicts and prevent the escalation of violence. These involve minor offences and misdemeanors such as fights, neighbor quarrels, public intoxication, driving under the influence, graffitiing and so on. The model is effective in promoting mediation resources for residents, by leveraging alternative dispute resolution mechanisms and empowering local actors (civic judges, police, social service providers, and businesses among others) to provide resolve communal conflicts directly, representing an important shift away from punitive interventions to preventative ones.

The contractor must develop and/or strengthen civic justice systems in target municipalities based on local stakeholder analysis and must demonstrate a solid understanding of local criminal dynamics and responding resources, systems and political commitment. Capacity-building must be tailored to the needs of the civic justice operators (including municipal police, civic judges, social service providers) in order for them to have specialized skills to effectively administer civic justice courts and problem-oriented and hot spot policing. Effective coordination across the civic justice institutions (police, courts and social service provides) will enable communities to identify youth in need of additional services and facilitate access to those services. The contractor must seek to mobilize private sector resources and political support for the civic justice system to promote sustainable results.

Expected Results:

● Civic justice established in at least 16-20 municipalities.

● At least four municipalities effectively advise others to develop or strengthen civic justice systems.

● At least 20 percent of all resources for the civic justice program is mobilized by the private sector.

● GOM replicates the civic justice model in at least 15 other non-target municipalities with non-

USG resources (public or private).

Objective 2: Reduce likelihood of at-risk youth being imprisoned or on probation for crime and violence. (Estimate 25% Level of Effort)

This component will support the provision of specialized and evidence-based interventions for targeted youth by local actors to reduce the likelihood of future criminal activity and decrease recidivism rates.

The contractor must focus less on direct implementation and more on fostering the replication of proven interventions by the GOM and/or other Mexican stakeholders. The contractor will facilitate the transfer of skills and tested methodologies such as USAID’s Youth Targeting Tool to local stakeholders to identify a subset of youth who are the most likely to engage in more egregious crimes and violence and/or be recruited by TCOs and subsidiary groups to curb that criminal trajectory. This subset will include youth at risk of committing crimes (Secondary intervention), and youth imprisoned or on probation, or who have committed low-level crimes (Tertiary intervention). Success rates will depend on the precise identification of needs, environmental factors and service needs for at-risk youth. It will also require available services to match those needs. This will call for the adoption of specific skills, tools and institutional processes to deal with a demographic group with very specific needs. Incorporation of these priorities also implies the involvement of a variety of state and municipal agencies, including education, health, labor, social services and law enforcement.

Tailored rehabilitation and reintegration services for targeted youth should be facilitated through individual needs assessments and coordination with local justice operators and service providers, including the private sector. Joint planning and coordination between government authorities and relevant institutions conducted will be critical to ensure access to services for targeted youth. Analysis of opportunities, and potential constraints for replication of these interventions should inform strategies on how to engage national and subnational government authorities, civil society, the private sector, and other community-based stakeholders for scaling up the interventions, and increase the number of youth served.

Expected Results:

● Mexican stakeholders replicate evidence-based at-risk youth crime and violence prevention interventions justice established in at least 15 municipalities.

● At least 10,000 youth served through replication of secondary and tertiary crime and violence prevention programs.

● Recidivism rates reduced in at least 15 municipalities.

Objective 3: Improve coordination between civic justice courts, municipal law enforcement, and criminal justice operators through shared information and intelligence cooperation. (Estimate 25% Level of Effort)

A major obstacle to addressing impunity and increasing levels of crime and violence in Mexico is the limited capacity of the justice system to effectively and efficiently identify, investigate and convict serious cases. One reason for the ineffectiveness is the lack of communication and coordination between state-level justice operators and local-level law enforcement who are closest to the criminal elements and often have detailed understanding of the local context. This collaboration is vital to achieve sustainable results in reducing violence and avoiding recidivism in the target population, however, it has been challenging to date. The contractor must address this challenge and bridge the gap between municipal authorities and the state prosecutors offices. The contractor will ensure state criminal prosecution policies and priorities inform decisions at the municipal level, as reflected in funding mechanisms, new legislation and inter-agency agreements. The contractor must also propose solutions to facilitate the flow of information from municipal police and government to the state actors by establishing information sharing arrangements and joint participation in policy development, such as working groups, executive or legislative committees (Note: the provision of IT solutions or equipment by the contractor is not envisioned).

Interventions must be based on robust analysis of the local structures, opportunities and constraints within and across the relevant local and state-level institutions (i.e. municipal police, civic justice courts, and state attorneys general offices) and strategies tailored to each municipality and state. Innovative models for information exchange, coordination, and intelligence sharing between police, civic justice courts, prosecutors, and criminal investigators may be developed and tested for broader replication and utilization. The contractor must promote the development and adoption of formal mechanisms that improve and enhance communication flows among justice and law enforcement officials, in order to streamline implementation of the civic justice model. This component must be closely coordinated with USAID/Mexico’s justice program and may leverage investments being made in strengthening the criminal justice system.

Expected Results:

● Intelligence sharing mechanism(s) between state-level prosecutors office and municipal law enforcement institutionalized in at least 5 municipalities.

● At least 15 municipalities collect and share reliable, local crime data with state criminal justice operators on a regular basis.

● At least 15 municipalities will develop and/or institute new legislation, regulations, or policies.

Grants under Contracts

The Offeror must describe a proposed Grants under Contracts component aimed at facilitating locally driven solutions and sustainable results. This component must be utilized to strategically advance the expected results of the Activity and be closely coordinated with other USAID (and other donor) programming that strengthens the capacity of local organizations, such as the Civil Society Strengthening Activity. The Offeror must also identify the portion of its budget that will be set aside for Grants under Contracts to local or other partners, with a minimum amount of 15%.