RFP_Questions_and_Answers.pdf

SOL-263-17-000012 (Amendment 03) Macro-Economic Stabilization and Reform Activity (MESR)

RFP Questions and Answers

1. Section B.4, Page 6, would USAID consider consolidating Travel, Equipment, and Supplies into the ODC cost category to facilitate tracking?

USAID may consider consolidating the Other Direct Costs to include Travel, Equipment, and Supplies; however, for the purpose of evaluating proposed costs USAID requires offerors to distinguish the different cost categories as listed in the budget template.

2. Section B.4, Page 6, please confirm that USAID does not anticipate an Award Fee under this contract as currently included in the cost category table on page 6?

Confirming. USAID does not anticipate an award fee and anticipates awarding a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract.

3. Section C.4, Page 19, does USAID envision that the implementer will purchase IT equipment for counterparts; if so, can USAID provide a plug figure for budgeting purposes?

Yes. The plug figure for the potential information technology requirements referenced in Section C is $1.3 Million. Please refer to section L.10 (4) of the RFP.

4. Section E.3 C , please clarify the following parenthetical reference with regard to the list of mandatory indicators on page 26: “The following standard and custom indicators must be included in the M&EL Plan and the Contractor is responsible for reporting on these indicators using quarterly, semi- annual, and/or annual reports: (will be included after amending the Results Framework of TIPE).”

Please disregard the parenthetical reference. It has been removed.

5. Section L.6 – Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal; Pages 95-96

The instructions indicate that the Technical Proposal body will include four sections: (1) Technical Approach and Performance Work Statement; (2) Personnel and Management Approach; (3) Organizational Capacity and Experience; and (4) Past Performance. The remainder of Section L describes the requirements of these sections, except for the Organizational Capacity and Experience section. Please clarify whether the Organizational Capacity and Experience section is required. If so, please provide a brief description of the information expected in this section.

Organizational Capacity and Experience section is not required and has been removed.

6. Section M.2 – Technical Evaluation Factors; Page 107 This section identifies the following factor in descending order of importance: (1) Technical Approach and Performance Work Statement; (2) Personnel and Management Approach; (3) Organizational Capacity and Experience; and (4) Past Performance. The remainder of Section M describes the evaluation criteria for these factors, except for the Organizational Capacity and Experience factor. Please clarify whether the Organizational Capacity and Experience is an evaluation factor. If so, please provide a brief description of the evaluation criteria for this factor.

The Organizational Capacity and Experience is not an evaluation factor and has been removed.

7. Section L.7 Technical Approach, The Monitoring and Evaluation and Learning Plan (MELP) that the contractor is to produce as per RFP section E.3 A. is extensive and the output will be a comprehensive MELP document. The listed requirements for the Offeror’s Illustrative MELP are more modest, requiring “(1) a clear path to meeting stated results; (2) recommends indicators that are realistic, obtainable and that will be effective as guides to management and reporting; and (3) explains how the M&E will be implemented and applied as a management and evaluative tool.” Please clarify the extent to which offeror’s are to reflect part or all E.3 A. requirements in the MELP.

All offerors are to submit an Illustrative Monitoring, Evaluation and learning Plan in accordance with section L.7. The successful offeror will then develop the illustrative Monitoring and Evaluation Learning Plan into the draft Monitoring, Evaluation and learning Plan in accordance with section E.3.A.

8. Section L.7 Technical Approach, The extent and timing of Ministry and Agency coverages for many activities will be determined at project start as workplans are developed / implemented with USAID and counterpart input. Given this uncertainty, are indicator baselines and annual targets expected as part of the offeror’s MELP?

Baseline numbers are not expected but tentative targets are.

9. Throughout the RFP, does USAID equate values associated with Performance Standards with those associated with Performance Indicators?

USAID does not necessarily equate values associated with Performance Standards with those associated with Performance Indicators, though in some cases they will be closely aligned. Performance standards establish the performance level required to meet the contract requirements in terms of quality, timeliness, quantity and any other relevant measurable aspect. The standards shall be measurable and structured to permit an assessment of the contractor’s performance. Offerors shall propose performance standards in response to the Statement of Objectives (Section C of the RFP) as part of the Performance Work Statement and USAID shall evaluate the proposed standards to determine if the proposed standards meet agency needs.

Performance indicators are the measures USAID uses to detect progress towards the results included in a Results Framework.

10. Section H.18, page 57, states the following: “the Contractor must also confirm with the

Contracting Officer that Mission Director authorization exists (either specifically or through a general delegation) if it intends to provide compensation, benefits and allowances to cooperating country nationals, and third country nationals that vary from those employed as Direct hires by the USAID Mission as specified in AIDAR 722.170.”

Is there an existing Mission Director authorization to exceed the local compensation plan?

There is no Mission Director authorization to exceed the local compensation plan.

11. Section F.5 Authorized Work Day/Week, page 28, states that prior written approval must be obtained for overtime or premium pay.

Will the CO be amenable to approving a six-day work-week under this contract for STTA in the field, as a cost savings to the project?

Yes, a six-day work week for STTA may be approved when appropriately justified.

12. On page 95, L6. The RFP states that The Technical Proposal in response to this solicitation must address and follow the technical evaluation factors listed in Section M. On page 96, L.6.d.3. under Technical Proposal Body, the RFP states that “this section will include the following sections in the order indicated. i. Technical Approach and Performance Work Statement.” However, Section M.3. refers to this section as “Technical Approach.”

Can USAID confirm that this section should be titled “Technical Approach and Performance Work Statement” as indicated in section L.6?

Section M.3 should be titled “Technical Approach and Performance Work Statement”

13. Does USAID/Egypt have a preferred template for Past Performance References?

Yes. Please see attachment J.11 “Past Performance Information” that has been added.

14. On page 95, under section L.6, the RFP states “The technical proposal annex must contain the documents specified below, including, work plans, organization charts, detailed staffing plans, position descriptions, resumes, letters of commitment from personnel or partners, teaming arrangements, letters of support, experience/performance references, list of recent eSRS/SF 294s and any other supporting documentation requested explicitly by the

RFP.

However, on page 96, under (4) Annex, the RFP lists in i-viii “Draft Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning MEL Plan; Mobilization Plan; Draft First Year Work Plan; Draft Staffing Plan;

Key Personnel statements of qualification with reference; Letter of Commitment of Key Personnel; Draft Sustainability Plan; [and] Past Performance references.”

Please confirm that the offeror may place the required documents listed on page 95 in 5 additional annex sections for a total of 8 annexes.

We have revised the language in L.6 (c) to be more concise. The requirements for the Technical Proposal Annex are listed in section L.6(d)4, and the detailed description of what is to be included in annexes for evaluation is provided in L.7, L.8 and L.9.

15. On page 98, L.9 Past Performance, the RFP states “List in the Annex up to five of the most recent (within the past five years) and relevant contracts, orders, grants, or cooperative agreements for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.”

However, in that same paragraph, the RFP also states “In addition, the offeror shall provide information for five contracts, orders, grants, or cooperative agreements for each major subcontractor.”

Would USAID please confirm that up to five past performance references should be provided for the prime contractor and for each major subcontractor?

Yes, Past Performance information shall be provided for the prime contractor (up to 5) and each major subcontractor (up to 5 each).

16. On page 107, M.2 Technical Evaluation Factors, The RFP states that Organizational

Capacity will be a criterion for evaluation. However, the rest of section M does not provide any description of how Organizational Capacity will be evaluated, and there are no instructions for organizational capacity in section L.

Would USAID please clarify the instructions and evaluation factors for Organizational Capacity?

The Organizational Capacity and Experience is not required in section L and it is not an evaluation factor. The references to the Organizational Capacity and Experience section have been removed from sections L and M of the RFP.

17. On page 31, F.6(f) the RFP states that offerors must submit a draft Branding and

Implementation Plan. However, it does not specify an annex for the Branding and Implementation Plan.

Could USAID please clarify where to include the Branding and Implementation Plan?

Please include the Branding Implementation Plan as annex ix to the technical proposal.

18. On page 98, L.8 Personnel and Management Approach, the RFP states that offerors must submit resumes and letters of commitment. Section L.6 lists Letters of Commitment of Key Personnel as Annex vi. However, it does not list resumes as an annex.

Should resumes be submitted in Annex vi or as another annex?

Please see response to question 14 and revisions in the RFP.

19. Could USAID please provide guidance as to what exchange rate offerors should use to ensure consistency across cost proposals?

For the purpose of consistency in the budget, please use an exchange rate of

$1 = EGP 17.5

20. On page 95, L.6.b. the RFP mentions that acronyms, dividers, and table of contents are not included in the 30-page limit. On page 95, L.6.d. there is no mention of acronyms and table of contents following the cover page.

Can USAID confirm that technical proposals can include acronyms and table of contents following the cover page not counting towards the page limit.

Yes, offerors may include acronyms and a table of contents following the cover page that does not count towards the page limit.

21. On page 97, L.8 the solicitation mentions letters of commitment as part of the body of the technical proposal – Personnel and Management Approach.

Please confirm that LOCs only need to be submitted as part of the annex.

Letters of Commitment of key personnel are only to be submitted as Annex vi.

22. On page 96, the solicitation requests the inclusion of a draft Monitoring, Evaluation and

Learning Plan. On page 97, the solicitation refers to an Illustrative Monitoring, evaluation and Learning Plan.

Can USAID clarify if this annex should be referred to as Illustrative or Draft MEL?

Section L.6 (4), Annex i should be “Illustrative Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan”, instead of “Draft Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan.”

23. On page 96 the solicitation refers to statements of qualifications with references. On page

98, the solicitation refers to Resumes and references information for each key personnel candidate proposed.

Can USAID confirm that as a Technical Proposal Annex v. Offerors should include Key staff resumes with references?

Please see response to question 14 and revisions in the RFP.

24. Can USAID clarify what sections of the Technical Proposal Body and which Technical

Proposal Annexes will be assessed against Evaluation Factor Past Performance described on page 108. M.5.?

See RFP revisions in L.6 and L.9. The Technical Proposal Body only includes a one page summary of Past Performance. The annex includes the more detailed past performance information included in the template provided in J.11.

25. Can USAID please provide more detail on, or a summary of, the IMF program conditionalities of the Government of Egypt agreement with the IMF, as mentioned in Section B.1 of the RFP?

The Contractor should gather all publicly available information regarding Egypt’s IMF program to inform their proposal.

26. Section F.6 (b) of the RFP mentions that the First Year Work plan “must be presented to the AOR for approval for each of the three Results”, but Section C.1 on page 10 only lists two main objectives. Please confirm that there are only two main objectives/results for MESR, as outlined in the Scope of Work in Section C.

USAID confirms that there are only two objectives. The RFP has been revised as follows: The second paragraph of Section F.6(b) Should read, “The First Year Work plan covering anticipated first year activities is due within 60 days after the start date of the contract and must be presented to COR for approval for each of the two Results.”

27. Section L.11 – Please confirm that the Branding Implementation and Marking Plans should be included in the list of annexes to the technical proposal presented at L.6.(d)(4) (page 96 of the RFP).

The Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan is added as annex ix to the technical proposal.

28. Section L.6.(d)(4)iii – Please provide additional instructions as to what the Offeror should include in the chapter titled Organizational Capacity and Experience, and how it will be evaluated as part of the technical proposal.

The Organizational Capacity and Experience is not required in section L and it is not an evaluation factor. The references to the Organizational Capacity and Experience

29. Section L.6.(d)(4)v – Please confirm that the statements of qualifications required in this annex refer to resumes which are previously mentioned in L.6.(c), and which are also mentioned in section L.8. Additionally, please confirm that resumes should be limited to three (3) pages.

See revisions in Section L.6 and L.8 of the RFP.

30. Section L.6(c) – Several of the elements listed in this paragraph—“…position descriptions, resumes, letters of commitment from … partners, teaming arrangements, letters of support, list of recent eSRS/SF 294s…”—are not included in the list of annexes at L.6.(d)(4); while subcontracting plans and eSRS/SF 294s are requested as part of the cost proposal (Section L.10.(d)). Please confirm that the Offeror should include these, as well as information on the Offeror’s use of small businesses, as additional annexes to the technical proposal.

Please see revisions to Section L.6 of the RFP. Subcontracting plans and eSRS/SF 294s are only requested as part of the cost proposal.

31. Section F.6 (o) – The deadline for the final report is 90 days after project end. Would

USAID consider making the final report due within the period of performance of the award?

Allowing 90 days for the final report after the project ends enables the Contractor to provide a more complete report of the project activities.

32. Please confirm that sections H.33 and H.37 contain identical information.

Confirming. Section H.33 and H.37 titled “ Disclosure of Information” contain identical information. This has been corrected in the revised RFP.

33. Section L.10.E.7 (i) – Please confirm that the Offeror must only submit a complete list of all known subcontractors, subawardees, and resource partners that the Offeror anticipates working with under MESR.

Confirmed.

34. Is there an incumbent contractor currently performing these services or is this a new requirement. If there is an incumbent, could you please provide the contract number?

This is a new requirement; however refer to section C.3 and Annex 2 for details regarding the prior and current activities.

35. Under Result 2.3, can USAID please clarify the extent and nature of the data the GOE has already compiled in a complete database to enable the development of a complete revenue forecasting system, the quality of this data and its commitment to obtaining in a timely manner additional data?

Please see Attachment J.13 “An Assessment of Revenue Forecasting and Estimation Capacity at the Ministry of Finance of Egypt”

36. Under Result 2.4 for IT technical assistance, can USAID please clarify its understanding of the contractors responsibility for "b) support full implementation of the GFMIS, linking it to government procurement, e-payroll, and warehousing."?

The relevant paragraph in Section C, Result 2.4 has been revised.

37. Under Section L, can USAID please provide guidance on the level of detail it is expecting for the section "Organizational Capacity and Experience" and also how this section will be evaluated under section M?

The Organizational Capacity and Experience is not required in section L and it is not an evaluation factor. The references to the Organizational Capacity and Experience

38. In section L, 9, Past Performance, component 2 USAID is very explicit in its requirement for "The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar size that are performed in the Middle East North Africa and/or are similar in terms of the technical areas identified in the Statement of Work (Section C)." While we appreciate the importance of bringing in regional experience, we perceive this requirement as limiting competition to only those USAID contractors that have already performed similar work in the region and not aligning with the intent of conducting a full and open competition. We therefore suggest USAID remove this regional limitation and align section L with the requirements outlined in Section M.

Relevant past performance is not limited to regional experience. USAID will evaluate all relevant past performance as described in section L.9. If the offeror does not have relevant past performance it is assigned a neutral rating as described in M.5 (e):

(e) An Offeror’s performance will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably when:

(1) The Offeror lacks relevant performance history;

(2) Information on performance is not available; or

(3) The Offeror is a member of a class of offerors where there is provision not to rate the class against a sub-factor.

When this occurs, an offeror lacking relevant performance history is assigned a “neutral” rating. Prior to assigning a “neutral” past performance rating, the Contracting Officer may take into account a broad range of information related to an offeror’s performance.

39. USAID is respectfully requested to grant extension to the proposal submission due date to November 9 to enable offerors efficiently incorporate any responses to questions and amendments (if any).

The proposal submission due date is extended to November 7, 2017 3:00pm Local Time in Egypt.

40. B.4.b; Could USAID please revise the Cost Category table reference to “award fee” to read “fixed fee”?

This is a typographical error that has been corrected.

41. B.5.a; The requirements for a fixed fee schedule tied to performance objectives seems to be in conflict with a cost plus fixed fee contract type. Would USAID please confirm that the successful bidder will be able to invoice fee as specified in FAR 52.216-8 Fixed Fee and will ultimately receive the full fixed fee regardless of the performance objectives met?

Additionally, since fee shall be fixed, would USAID please remove the first sentence in Section B.5.a?“The Contractor’s fixed fee is tied to the accomplishment of the performance objective and deliverables or outputs described in Sections C, D and F, as well as complying with all contract requirements.

Please see revision to section B.5 of the RFP.

42. L.10.B.2.A.2; USAID has specified allowances be included under the “fringe” category of costs. Our accounting and invoicing practices allow staff fringe costs to be invoiced as an indirect cost while other related costs enumerated within this section are accrued and invoiced as other direct costs. If bidders are required to strictly follow these guidelines, will USAID allow us to manage funding buckets in accordance with our accounting and invoicing practices? Would USAID instead allow bidders to allocate costs in the specified budget format in accordance with bidders’ standard practices?

For the purpose of evaluating proposed costs USAID requires offerors to distinguish the different cost categories as listed in the budget template.

43. L.10.B.7; USAID has specified that NICRAs are required for all Offerors and subpartners.

Can USAID please confirm our understanding that if the offeror or any subcontractor does not have an approved NICRA, then additional supporting documentation can be provided.

Confirming that if the offeror or any subcontractor does not have an approved NICRA, then they will be asked to provide additional supporting documentation.

44. For budgeting purposes can USAID provide an anticipated start date.

The exact date will depend on USAID’s internal processes, but for budgeting purposes please use a start date of April 1, 2018.