Answers_to_Questions_on_SOL-114-14-000008.pdf

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE PROSPECTIVE OFFERORS

1. Is this a follow-on requirement? If so, could you please provide the incumbent contract number for this opportunity? If not, is this a new requirement?

This is a new, fully open and competitive procurement. Management Systems International (MSI) implements USAID’s current Good Governance in Georgia (G3) contract (AID-114-TO- 11-00001) which is set to expire in December 2014.

2. Please confirm that the work plan referred to on page 118 and the performance

a. management plan indicator table can be included as attachments or as unnumbered pages

b. within the technical volume, both of which will be evaluated by USAID.

The illustrative Year 1 work plan must be included within the 30 page limit while the Performance Management Plan (PMP) may be included as an attachment. If included as an attachment, the PMP will still be evaluated. Please see Amendment 000001.

3. The RFP mentions PMCG’s final report on its needs assessment of Parliament (finalized in mid- 2013). Will USAID make it available?

Please see Amendment 000001. The Needs Assessment of Parliament is now available as an Attachment 8 to the RFP.

4. Under Outcome 1.1 (pp. 20-21), the RFP says that the Contractor may identify “a small number of new municipalities” in which to facilitate the SUDP process. Does this refer to the new independent, self-governing cities, or does it also include the newly formed municipalities after the “extraction” of new cities? (From page 19 of the RFP: “Hereafter, self-governing cities and municipalities will be referred to collectively as municipalities.”)

This refers broadly to self-governing cities and municipalities in need of improved urban planning.

5. Although the G3 site contains many helpful documents, no quarterly or annual reports are available, either on the G3 website or on the DEC. Will the G3 implementer kindly make these USAID deliverables available on the DEC for all interested parties?

According to AIDAR 752.7005, time-sensitive materials such as newsletters, brochures, bulletins or periodic reports covering periods of less than a year are not to be submitted to the DEC. The G3 contract does not have any annual reporting requirements. Therefore the requested deliverables are not publicly available.

6. Please confirm that the Year 1 Illustrative Workplan and the Performance Management Plan (PMP) can be included as annexes but will still be considered as part of the evaluation criteria.

The illustrative Year 1 work plan must be included within the 30 page limit while the Performance Management Plan (PMP) may be included as an attachment. If included as an attachment, the PMP will still be evaluated.

7. Please provide an estimated start date as part of the period of performance.

USAID anticipates an estimated start date end of November, 2014. However, this date may be adjusted based on the pace of award negotiations.

8. We understand that an evaluation was performed on the Good Governance in Georgia Project.

We understand that MSI has had an opportunity to review 2 the draft assessment, is it possible to share this assessment with potential bidders?

The final evaluation report was issued on April 30, 2014. Please see the following link:

https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/content/Detail.aspx?ctID=ODVhZjk4NWQtM2YyMi00YjRmL TkxNjktZTcxMjM2NDBmY2Uy&rID=MzQ4NzYx&inr=VHJ1ZQ==&dc=YWRk&bck ToL=

9. Section M.2.1 (p. 119) indicates that the offeror should submit a staffing pattern that accurately reflects the needs of the program, appropriateness of roles and responsibilities, and the offeror’s ability to implement the contract, whereas M.2.2 (lower on the same page) indicates that the offeror should provide position descriptions on the clarity, quality, and appropriateness of the roles and responsibilities of key personnel. Would USAID please clarify the difference between the staffing pattern and position descriptions and how it would prefer this information to be presented?

The staffing pattern must be presented as a comprehensive organizational chart that shows hierarchal relationships between employees, relationships between the home office and the field, and division of management and technical functions. The position descriptions must be presented as a narrative for each position that clearly describes roles and responsibilities. See Amendment 000001.

10. Section L.6(b) (page 107) of the technical proposal instructions states, “Annexes may be submitted, but they will not be considered as part of the evaluation criteria.” However:

Section L.6(4) (page 110) states that the required past performance information should be provided in an annex to the technical proposal and past performance is assigned 15 points within the evaluation criteria. Please confirm that the requested past performance information as described in section L.6(4) should be included in an annex and will be evaluated as part of the evaluation criteria for past performance.

https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/content/Detail.aspx?ctID=ODVhZjk4NWQtM2YyMi00YjRmLTkxNjktZTcxMjM2NDBmY2Uy&rID=MzQ4NzYx&inr=VHJ1ZQ==&dc=YWRk&bckToL https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/content/Detail.aspx?ctID=ODVhZjk4NWQtM2YyMi00YjRmLTkxNjktZTcxMjM2NDBmY2Uy&rID=MzQ4NzYx&inr=VHJ1ZQ==&dc=YWRk&bckToL https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/content/Detail.aspx?ctID=ODVhZjk4NWQtM2YyMi00YjRmLTkxNjktZTcxMjM2NDBmY2Uy&rID=MzQ4NzYx&inr=VHJ1ZQ==&dc=YWRk&bckToL

As described in section L.6(4) the offeror must provide “at least three (3) of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal, list of contact names, etc. as specified on page 110-111, as part of the proposal. Any additional information such as past performance reports (from PPIRS or references) for contracts with similar scopes of work, complexity, mix of skills and expertise, etc may be submitted as an attachment, and will be evaluated as part of the evaluation criteria for past performance. See Amendment 000001.

Section L.6(2) (page 109) states that offerors are to provide CVs for key personnel, and Section M.2 Section 2.3 (page 119) indicates that USAID will evaluate “appropriateness of qualifications and experience of proposed personnel.” Please confirm that key personnel CVs should be provided in an annex and will be evaluated according to the stated evaluation criteria.

As noted in L.6 (2) 2.3, offerors must demonstrate the experience, education, additional qualifications and rationale for the proposed individual. The technical proposal must include key personnel positions, position descriptions, description of roles and responsibilities for each proposed Key personnel position and how the proposed position and proposed person fits within the overall organizational structure. USAID will evaluate “the appropriateness of qualifications and experience of proposed personnel” based on the above. CVs for the key personnel must be provided as an attachment to substantiate the statements provided in the technical proposal. Thus, CVs are not evaluated and scored according to the evaluation criteria and are viewed as backup information.

11. Could USAID please clarify whether this project will inherit any equipment from current USAID projects in Georgia?

The project may receive equipment from the Good Governance in Georgia (G3) contract that ends in December, 2014. However, USAID does not currently have a disposition list and therefore applicants should budget for the full cost of equipment. At a later date, USAID may decide to negotiate a lower equipment budget once the G3 inventory has been fully assessed.

12. Throughout the RFP, there are references made to both “attachments” and “annexes.”

Particularly on page 107, Section L.6, Instructions for Preparation of the Technical Proposal, paragraph (b) states:

“The Technical Proposal is limited to 30 pages; any pages over the 30 page limit shall not be evaluated. Items such as graphs, charts, cover pages, dividers, table of contents, end notes and attachments (i.e. key personnel resumes, table summarizing qualifications of proposed personnel, past performance summary table, and past performance report forms) are not included in the 30-page limitation. Attachments may be submitted, but they will not be considered as part of the evaluation criteria.”

Could you please clarify the difference (if any) between “attachments” and “annexes”?

Key personnel CVs, past performance report forms, etc. must be provided in attachments of the proposal. Unless specified in the RFP (as amended), attachments will not be evaluated. Rather they are considered as backup information. Table summarizing qualifications of the proposed personnel, and past performance summary table must be included in the proposal, counted in 30 page limit and evaluated. See answer to question 10.

13. On p. 108 (L.6(b)(2)2.1) of the RFP, it states that “resumes may be submitted in an annex;

however they will not be considered as part of the evaluation criteria.” Then, on p. 119 in Section M.2 Technical Evaluation Criteria, paragraph 2.3 states that “Offerors’ key personnel proposals will be evaluated on: Appropriateness of qualifications and experience of proposed personnel, as well as demonstrated quality of prior technical and managerial leadership as provided by references (15 points).”

Could USAID please clarify how it will evaluate key personnel if key personnel resumes are not to be considered part of the evaluation criteria?

Key personnel resumes must be provided in the attachment, will not be evaluated and will not be counted in page limit. However, list of positions, which are considered to be key for this activity, description of roles and responsibilities for each proposed key personnel position and discussion on how the proposed position and individual best meets the needs of this program, alongside the detailed position descriptions for each position, and proposed individuals for these positions must be included in the technical proposal, will be evaluated and counted in the 30 page limit. See answers to questions 10 and 12.

14. On p. 107 (L.6(b)) of the RFP, it states that “Items such as graphs, charts, cover pages, dividers, table of contents, end notes and attachments (i.e. key personnel resumes, table summarizing qualifications of proposed personnel, past performance summary table, and past performance report forms) are not included in the 30-page limitation.”

Could USAID please confirm that the Consultant/Sub-Award Matrix for Year 1 of the Contract (see p. 109 (L.6(b)(2)2.1) and p. 122 ATTACHMENT 1 of the RFP) is also exempt from the 30-page limit and is an attachment that will be considered part of the evaluation criteria?

The Consultant/Sub-Award Matrix for Year 1 of the Contract filled out by the offeror is part of the technical proposal and will be counted in the page limit. The information provided in the Matrix will be evaluated, as provided in section M.2.2.1.

15. On p. 111 (L.6(b)(4)D.) of the RFP, it is states that “all offerors who are not SB concerns must…provide a narrative summary of the organization’s use of SB concerns…provide a list of three (3) recent contracts for which the offeror submitted subcontract reports to eSRS over the past three (3) years…[and] Provide the names and addresses of three (3) SB concerns for USAID to contact in its assessment of the offeror’s performance in using SB concerns.”

Can you please confirm that the required SB Past Performance information can be included as an attachment (exempt from the 30-page limit) along with the other part performance information, and will be considered part of the evaluation criteria?

Small Business Past Performance information must be submitted as an Attachment and will not count in the page limit. In accordance with section M.3 of the RFP, USAID encourages the participation of small business concerns and disadvantaged enterprises in this project, in accordance with FAR Part 19 (48 CFR Chapter 1), and AIDAR Part 726 (48 CFR Chapter 7).

Accordingly, every reasonable effort will be made to identify and make use of such organizations.

All evaluation criteria being found equal, the participation of such organizations may become a determining factor for selection

16. On p. 108 (L.6(b)(1)1.2) of the RFP, it states that “an illustrative detailed work plan for Year 1 of the Contract that describes activities, milestones, and an implementation schedule” shall be included in the proposal.

Given that this will need to be several pages in length in order to provide the level of detail requested, including activities, milestones, and implementation schedule, would USAID consider allowing this required work plan for Year 1 to be exempt from the 30-page limit and included as an attachment that will be considered part of the evaluation criteria?

An illustrative Year 1 Workplan must be submitted as part of the technical proposal covered by evaluation criteria and will be counted in the 30 page limit. If the offeror provides in additional a summary table, or chart summarizing the information on activities and timeline, can be submitted as an attachment, will not be evaluated, rather be viewed as a backup information and not included in the 30 page limit.

17. On p. 108-109 (L.6(b)(2)2.1) of the RFP, it is stated that “the offeror must describe and/or illustrate...[a] Performance Management Plan (PMP) with indicators, initial targets, and methods of data collection.”

Given that the PMP must include a significant level of detail to be responsive; would USAID consider allowing the PMP to be exempt from the 30-page limit and included as an attachment that will be considered part of the evaluation criteria?

Please see answer to question 2. PMP may be included as an attachment, and will be evaluated, as provided in section M.2.2.1. See also answers to question 2, 6, 16.

To summarize answers to all questions related to attachments: Cover Page, Title page, list of Acronyms, are not included in page limit. Additionally resumes/CVs, PMP, past performance reports, commitment letters, charts and graphs, Performance Management Plan (PMP), Branding Implementation and Marking Plan are excluded from the technical proposal 30 page limit.

Except where otherwise provided attachments will not be considered as part of the evaluation criteria.

On page 112, Section L.7 (a) requires submission of the SF 33 with blocks 12 through 18 completed. Could you please provide a copy of the SF 33?

SF 33 in included in the amendment 000001 to RFP SOL-114-14-00008..

18. According to L.7.c Part 3, Representations and Certifications (p. 114), requires that each subcontractor must submit all “Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offeror.”

Would USAID please clarify whether all subcontractors must submit these, or only major subcontractors?

Representations and Certifications (p. 114), requires that each subcontractor must submit all Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offeror.” This concerns all subcontractors.

19. Section H.10 (p. 57) lists 937 and 110 as the authorized geo codes, but Section H.7 (p. 56) mentions only 937. Would USAID please confirm that the approved geo codes for this activity are 937 and 110?

The authorized Geographic Code for this procurement is 110 and 937 as specified in section H.10.

H.7 AIDAR 752.225-70 SOURCE AND NATIONALITY REQUIREMENTS (FEB 2012) is a standard clause that appears in contracts issued in various recipient countries. In paragraph 1 its noted that “The authorized source for procurement is Geographic Code 937 unless otherwise specified in the schedule of this contract. Guidance on eligibility of specific goods or services may be obtained from the Contracting Officer.” The additional Geographic Code authorized by the Contracting Officer is 110.

L.7.a (p. 112) requires the submission of the SF 33 form, but this form is not provided in the RFP.

Would USAID please provide the form, so that Offerors may complete it before submission?

See answer to question 17.

20. The link to Attachment 5 is not functioning. Would USAID please confirm that Attachment 5 is the correct subcontracting plan or provide the plan if different than outlined?

Please see Amendment 000001 with updated link for USAID SMALL BUSINESS

SUBCONTRACTING PLAN TEMPLATE:

http://www.usaid.gov/business/small_business/subcontracting-program .

21. In L.6 (4), pp. 110-111 (the instructions for the “Past Performance Information” section), would USAID please confirm that all of the past performance information discussed in under this heading may be placed in an attachment?

See answer to question 10.

22. Section L.6(b) Instruction for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal stated “ Items such as graphs, charts, cover pages, dividers, table of contents, end notes and attachments (i.e. key personnel resumes, table summarizing qualifications of proposed personnel, past performance summary table, and past performance report forms) are not included in the 30-page limitation.

Annexes may be submitted, but they will not be considered as part of the evaluation criteria”.

Also Sections L.6 (2) – Management Approach and Key Personnel stated “resumes may be submitted in an annex; however they will not be considered as part of the evaluation criteria”. Yet Offerors are advised on page 109 section 2.3 to provide CVs for the key personnel. The section also provided the required information to be provided on CVs.

Please explain why annexes contain CVs and past performance report are excluded from evaluation criteria although they are required by the RFP to support items listed on the evaluation criteria.

Please see above answers to questions 2, 6, 10,12,13,14,15,16,17.

23. Section C.2 on page 13 outlines the percentage distribution of costs based on the four project results, but Sections L and M do not discuss how the distribution should be presented in the overall budget. Does USAID require that this distribution be reflected in the budget, and if so, how would USAID prefer to see the budget structured to represent the set distribution?

http://www.usaid.gov/business/small_business/subcontracting-program

The summary and detailed budgets must be submitted as per instructions provided in section L.7.

In addition, the offerors shall include a separate worksheet in the budget, where estimated costs are segregated by four project results on the budget summary level that will show the percentage distribution of costs based on the four project results annually for all 5 years.