112-12-000006 Questions and Answers.doc

Questions and Answers Request for Proposal (RFP) Number: SOL-112-12-000006

July 6, 2012

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

FOR

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) NUMBER: SOL-112-12-000006

TITLE: BUILDING LOCAL CAPACITY FOR DEVELOPMENT (BLCD) PROJECT

Please find list of questions submitted by prospective Offerors and USAID’s answers to the questions, which are as follows:

Question Number 1:

On page 92, under section L.10 Instructions for the Preparation of The Technical Proposal, under bullet 4 it lists a Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan - not to exceed two pages as an attachment to the Technical Proposal. However, on page 110 under section L.12 Instructions for the Preparation of The Branding and Marking Plans, it states: In accordance with Section D of this RFP, Offeror(s) must submit a preliminary Branding Implementation Plan (BIP) and a Marking Plan (MP), not to exceed two pages as an attachment to the Cost Proposal.

Can you please clarify if the Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan should be included as an annex to the Technical or the Cost Proposal?

Answer Number 1:

The Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan - not to exceed two pages must be submitted as an attachment to the Technical Proposal.

Please see Amendment No. 1.

Question Number 2:

On page 124, Attachment 4 Specific Technical Requirements (STR)/Tasks, under section Program Vision And Approach, it states, “The CSOs expected to be selected for BLCD Project support are anticipated to be working in democracy and good governance activity areas critical to Azerbaijan’s long-term development: specifically, in the spheres of anti-corruption/transparency, rights advocacy and legal information and legal assistance. Two of these activities are anticipated to begin in FY 2012 and an additional two in 2013.”

Can you please clarify what activities are being referred to here?

Answer Number 2:

This is revised to read as follows:

“Two of these activities are anticipated to begin in FY 2013 and an additional two in 2014. For FY 2013, general institutional capacity building support will be provided to selected members of the new USAID Azerbaijan Rights Consortium (ARC) Project, which in addition to rights advocacy includes legal information and assistance. In 2013, assistance will also extend to Azerbaijani health and medical associations, which have identified specific needs in grant writing, fund raising and monitoring and evaluation skills. For FY 2014, the BLCD beneficiary focus will broaden to include selected NGOs engaged in Transparency and Anti-Corruption activities. Also in FY 2014, selected Economic Growth focused partners will receive institutional capacity assistance with an emphasis on acquiring methodologies for more rigorous Economic Growth sector assessments and policy analysis. Selected NGOs should hone advocacy skills with new social marketing and information communication technologies that engage and appeal to broader audiences.”

Please see Amendment No. 1.

Question Number 3:

Further on pg. 128, Attachment 4 Specific Technical Requirements (STR)/Tasks, under section General Organizing Principles And Approaches, Selection of Implementing CSO Partners, it states, “Target organizations will be identified by USAID in coordination and consultation with the Contractor, within 15 days effective of the Contract. Twelve to 14 of the 18-20 local organizations assisted will be USAID implementing partners working as either lead recipients, or members of consortia implementing other USAID DG projects/programs. The other six organizations will be USAID recipients or sub-recipients working in health or economic growth projects/programs. For most of the target organizations, this will be their first experience as a direct USAID Recipient. More than fifty percent of the target CSOs will be identified in the first year of the Contract, and the remaining CSOs will be identified in year 2.”

Can you please clarify if target CSOs will be selected within 15 days or in years 1 and 2?

Answer Number 3:

All major target CSOs, for year one will be identified to the Contractor, by USAID, within 15 days of the Award; except that in the case of ARC associated organizations, the final list will be developed in a USAID led consultative process with the ARC Awardee and the Contractor. A preliminary list of Year two target CSOs will be developed within the first trimester of year one of the BLCD Project.

Question Number 4:

In order to ensure compliance with AIDAR requirements that Contractor CCN staff salaries and benefits should not exceed those paid by the USAID Mission to CCN direct hires, could you please provide a copy of the Local Employee Compensation Plan?

Answer Number 4:

The Local Employee Compensation Plan is attached.

Question Number 5:

Please confirm that the Capacity-Building Fund described under C.4.2.3 (page 16) may be used to engage CSOs to perform activities under all components.

Answer Number 5:

The assumption is correct. As C.4.2.3 states – “Local CSO working in all three sectors targeted by USAID/Azerbaijan (Democracy and Governance, Health/Social Services and Economic Growth) must be eligible to compete for the grants.”

The Capacity-Building Fund described under C.4.2.3 (page 16) may be used to engage CSOs to perform activities under all components.

Question Number 6:

Section C.4.2.4, Expected Results, (page 18) refers to CSO Resource Centers. Would USAID please clarify whether the selected CSO Resource Center(s) will be expected to award and manage sub-grants to other local CSOs through the Capacity-Building Fund under this Contract?

Answer Number 6:

We believe you are inferring a linkage of language in C.4.2.3 to one of the illustrative activities listed in C.4.2.4. – Specifically:

Facilitate a multi-stakeholder participatory effort for Azerbaijan CSO leaders to draft generic CSO Resource Center policies, guides and sub-grant procedures.

The ability to draft sub-grant procedures does not impose an absolute requirement to use the USAID funding for Resource Centers to make such grants. But neither USAID would object, if all other qualifications and certification standards is met by the Resource Center and validated by USAID.

Question Number 7:

A Branding and Marking Plan is listed as a requirement under the Instructions for Preparation of the Technical Proposal (page 92) and also for the Cost Proposal (page 110). Would USAID please confirm that Offerors should include the Branding and Marking Plan in the cost volume only?

Answer Number 7:

Please refer to Answer Number: 1.

Question Number 8:

Sub-factor 4.1, Review and Evaluation of Past Performance Information (page 97) defines a major subcontractor as one whose proposed cost exceeds 25 percent of the Offeror’s total proposed cost. However, “Central Contractor Registration (CCR)/Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA)” (page 106) defines major subcontractors those whose total cost exceeds 15 percent of the offer’s bottom line total cost. Would USAID please clarify which definition Offerors should use in responding to the RFP?

Answer Number 8:

Major subcontractors those whose total cost exceeds 15 percent of the offer’s bottom line total cost.

Please see Amendment No. 1.

Question Number 9:

A Draft Monitoring and Evaluation Plan is listed as a requirement in Section L (page 97) but is not mentioned in Section M. Would USAID please confirm that Offerors may place the Draft Monitoring and Evaluation Plan in an annex?

Answer Number 9:

The Draft Monitoring and Evaluation Plan must be submitted as an attachment. The Draft Monitoring and Evaluation Plan is a go/no go requirement.

Question Number 10:

For the draft grants management guide, would it be sufficient for Offerors to provide a general overview of grants management procedures and systems?

Answer Number 10:

Yes, but please indicate how many draft management guides have been developed and any case to be made for their success.

Question Number 11:

Could a local CSO apply to this RFP?

Answer Number 11:

This is a full and open competition, and local CSOs may compete, when they fully qualify according to selection criteria and all pertinent US Contract requirements.

Question Number 12:

Could a local CSO apply jointly with an international partner, while the local CSO acts as a main applicant?

Answer Number 12:

Yes, when the Prime Contractor and international partner meet all other contracting terms and conditions.

Question Number 13:

Could the project address a few of suggested project areas, not all of them?

Answer Number 13:

Please refer to Answer Number: 2.

The Statement of Work and its narrative focus (capacity building) and its intent.

Question Number 14:

Please confirm that the plug figure provided for ‘Grants’ on Page 4 is referencing grants-under-contracts (as noted on Page 3) and not sub-grants (as referenced on Page 16).

Answer Number 14:

The assumption is correct that the total amount of $400,000 is for grants-under-contract (GUC). However use of a portion of these funds by a GUC recipient, to be made available for sub-grants, would be allowed, when there is clear demarcation of funds for accounting purposes i.e., no co-mingling of funds and all pertinent US laws and regulations are met.

Question Number 15:

Regarding the reporting as reflected in Section F.5.3 beginning on Page 29, would USAID consider having the reporting schedule to be more consistent with 22 CFR 226 in which:

a.

Quarterly Narrative Reports are due 30 days after the end of a quarter b.

Quarterly Financial Reports are due 30 days after the end of a quarter c.

Annual and Final Reports are due 90 days after the end of the calendar year and expiration date of the award

Answer Number 15:

Based on USAID/Azerbaijan experience, the timeframes required in Section F.5.3 are reasonable. However, the due date for the Final Report is revised to read as follows: “60 days after the end of the Contract.” Please see Amendment No. 1.

For all other reports and financial voucher submissions, the Offerors must adhere to the original Section F schedule of the RFP.

Question Number 16:

Page 29 states that Quarterly Financial Reports should include a monthly breakdown. As Financial Reporting is per SF 1034, it is requested that this requirement for disaggregated monthly reporting is eliminated.

Answer Number 16:

There will be no changes now. USAID will revisit this prior to the Award.

Question Number 17:

Page 67 under Section I. Contract Clauses – One of the provisions incorporated by reference includes 52.215-2 Audit & Records. Would USAID consider incorporating Alternate 2 so that the A-133 applies?

Answer Number 17:

No, because USAID does not anticipate a Contract with the entities described in FAR 15.209B(3). If that changes, USAID will ensure Alternate II is in the final Award.

Question Number 18:

Page 106 requires DUNS numbers for any entity receiving more than $2,500. Please confirm whether this requirement extends to those CSOs receiving grants-under-contract mentioned on Page 3 (and referenced in Question 1 above).

Answer Number 18:

Yes. This requirement extends to those CSOs receiving Grants-under-Contract (GUC).

- END OF QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS -