Attachment_A_Amendment_1.pdf

Attachment A SOL-267-16-000005, Amendment 1

IRAQ GOVERNANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY (IGPA) PROJECT

REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATIONS

All questions and points of clarification received by the due date and time were considered for inclusion in this amendment. If the exact wording of your question(s) cannot be located it is because it is addressed in another similar question or request for clarification.

# Question Answer

1 Reference: GPA RFP, Section 4 Activity Administration, page 79

In Section 4. Activity Administration, USAID requests that “a results framework/logical framework” be included in the management plan. Would

USAID be open to the framework being provided in the technical volume as a part of the overall technical approach, rather than in the management section? Also, as these are quite different, does USAID have a preference for a results framework versus a logical framework?

Please provide a Logical Framework (Logframe) as a part of the technical approach.

Info on Logical Frameworks can be found in ADS 201.3.12.1 and 201.3.12.2.

2 Reference: GPA RFP, Section L.9, page 86

Section L.9 (page 86) of the RFP indicates that “the offeror, must submit and negotiate a Branding Implementation and Marking Plan (BIMP),” however, the BIMP is not mentioned in the list of acceptable annexes to the technical proposal provided on pages 76-77. Would USAID allow the BIMP to be considered an annex to the technical volume and therefore excluded from the page limitation?

Please review L.9 again. The BIMP need only be submitted at the Competitive

Range stage at the instruction of the CO. Offerors are reminded, however, that they must budget for any Branding and Marking costs in their initial proposal

3 Reference: GPA RFP, Section J.1 Statement of Objectives, page 96

On page 3 of the Statement of Objectives (RFP p. 96), USAID notes that

“Throughout this project, USAID will provide technical expertise, mentoring, and coaching to key Iraqi actors to enable them to apply newly acquired skills, implement strategies, and facilitate behavior change

(institutional and individual) that will lead to sustainable improvements in

Iraq’s governance and service delivery to citizens.” We believe that allowing

No additional annex will be added as an exclusion to the page limit.

Duplicative questions were deleted contractors to provide USAID with highlights of these technical experts would improve USAID’s ability to evaluate this key performance objective.

Therefore, would USAID add an illustrative STTA matrix to the accepted annexes?

We respectfully believe the matrix would deepen insight into how the project will provide sustainable improvement across all components.

4 Reference: GPA RFP, Section J.2 USAID Supplemental Background, page

On page 5 of the USAID Supplemental Background (RFP p. 105), USAID notes in paragraph two, “See table, below, for a list of disaggregated performance targets for public financial management.” Additionally, USAID notes in paragraph three, “See table, below, for a list of disaggregated performance targets for service delivery enhancement.” We respectfully request that USAID send us the two tables listed in these sections.

These references to targets are discussing those targets found for the corresponding objective in the SOO and may be found in that document.

5 Reference: GPA RFP, Cover Page

On the cover page of the proposal, the geographic code for this procurement listed is 937. Given USAID’s desire to access Arabic speaking experts to support sustainable improvements throughout Iraq, would USAID consider making the applicable geographic code 935? If so, contractors could access groups from Jordan, Lebanon, and Tunisia, among others? If not, would

USAID be open to accepting a waiver for individual firms?

The code will remain as 937. Individual waivers (or a waiver with a bundled number of requests) will be considered on a case-by-case basis however these waivers will not be considered until after award. Offerors must take this into account when proposing firms.

6 Section F.4 (pg. 13) of the RFP shows a 5-day standard work week. Would

USAID consider authorizing a 6-day work week for IGPA for long term expat/TCN personnel in line with mission work hours/policy?

No.

7 Section F.7 (pg. 23) states that key personnel requirements for those the contractor would like to name other than COP require an advanced degree plus a minimum of 5 years’ experience. Would USAID consider lowering the degree requirement for those who may have only a Bachelor's degree plus equivalencies in years of experience?

No.

8 Section L.7.3 (page 77) states: “Pursuant to FAR 37.604, the offeror must submit a quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) as part of the PWS.

This QASP must fulfill the requirements found in FAR Subpart 46.4.” Could

The Activity Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (AMEP), as laid out in F.5.5, will act as the QASP. No other submission is required as long as the offeror’s AMEP contains all information required under FAR Subpart 46.4.

USAID please provide a template for the QASP and additional detail on the contents of the document? Will USAID please confirm that the QASP should be submitted as part of the offeror’s proposal as a non-counting annex?

The AMEP may act as the offeror’s QASP as long as it fulfills the requirements found in FAR Subpart 46.4

9 Section L.7.5 (pg. 79) outlines the instructions for Contractor Past

Performance Information. Could USAID please confirm whether Past

Performance information should be included both as a technical chapter and as a Contractor Past Performance Reference Annex, or just as an annex?

Past Performance need only be included as an annex.

10 Section L.5.g (pg. 75) of the RFP states that any reference to “major subcontractor” in Section L. or Section M., excluding the references under

Past Performance, of this solicitation refers to any subcontractor that is expected to perform $1,000,000 in in work under the contract. For major subcontractors referred to in the Past Performance sections at M.3.c and

L.7.c, major subcontractor is defined as a subcontractor that will perform

15% of the offeror’s total proposed cost. Given the size of IGPA and the additional burden in terms of paperwork, would USAID please confirm that the qualification for a major subcontractor is consistently defined as 15% of the budget, not as those expected to perform $1 million in work?

The requirements are as stated in the RFP. Failure to provide required cost proposal information may result in a determination that the offer is non-responsive to the RFP.

11 1. Attachment J.3 provides labor categories for the IDIQ CLIN.

a. The attachment includes position descriptions rather than precise labor categories (for example, ‘Macroeconomic Policy’ as opposed to macroeconomic policy advisor). Is the offeror responsible for determining specific position categories and titles?

b. Will USAID permit offerors to respond with an average rate for each of the five main labor categories for the IDIQ

(Macroeconomics and Fiscal Management; Governance and

Management; Public Participation Consultants; Technical

Areas/Consultancies; Administrative) for STTA Expats/TCNs rather than list every individual skill (with supporting data) that may fall under each of the main headings/categories?

c. May offerors provide additional technical labor categories under this

IDIQ?

All position descriptions listed must be read as pricing the daily rate for an advisor in that area. These rates will then be applied to individual task order for individuals that will be providing labor in that area. There must be rates for all of these areas.

Failure to provide these rates will be grounds for dismissing a proposal as being non-responsive as this is a major component of the evaluation and would require a major revision to a proposal if not initially included.

The five overarching categories do not need rates associated with them.

No other categories may be added as these are the areas determined to be potentially needed for and requested by USAID.

12 In section F.5.6 (pg. 15) and section F.6.1 (pg. 19), USAID indicates that the baseline PEA “finalized assessment” is due within 30 days of contract

The PEA assessment is due 90 days after the project start date.

award. Attachment J1 indicates that “a baseline PEA will be conducted in the first 90 days of the project” (pg. 3). In order to allow time for thorough front-end collaboration with USAID on the content of the PEA before its launch and final assessment by the offeror, can USAID confirm that the PEA finalized assessment should be due 90 days after contract award?

13 Section F.5.16 (pg. 19) indicates that the contractor must provide technical materials that include “pedagogical materials and other technical inputs developed to support early grade reading outcomes, the provision of equitable access to education in conflict and crisis environments, and other contract deliverables. Examples of technical inputs to be provided to the

COR include scripted lesson plans, supplementary readers, assessment instruments, observation tools, training guides, workshop reports, radio programs, assessment tools, sampling frames, photographs, videos, and other recordings.” These technical materials appear to come from a different solicitation. Could USAID please clarify the technical materials the contractor should provide for IGPA?

This paragraph has been deleted from the RFP.

14 Attachment J1 requires that the Contractor will conduct PEAs in 5 regions of

Iraq, but then references the six specific target regions identified by

USAID/Iraq. Will USAID confirm that there are six target regions, but that the offeror is only expected to conduct 5 PEAs?

The offeror is expected to conduct 5 PEAs but the current list of six specific target regions are provisional and subject to change.

15 Given that offeror’s policies and procedures are often lengthy documents, would USAID consider allowing offerors to submit a copy of this document upon award?

Please follow the instructions found in the RFP. These policies and procedures are often required during the analysis phase.

16 Please confirm that USAID wishes all EBDs to include original currency in which the consultant was paid, the USD equivalent, and the exchange rate used to convert the original currency to USD for all entries under the candidate's salary history.

The EBDs should contain the US dollar amount. If the salary was paid in a local currency, the contractor will convert the salary using the currency rate during the payment period. If there were significant salary fluctuations during that period the contractor must indicate this.

17 Section B.6 (b) indicates that "The fee set forth in B.3.f is based upon furnishing the level-of-effort specified in B.6.a." This would imply that the

IQC will be a cost plus fixed fee term type, not completion type, as is the case with the non-IQC portion of the contract. In the other part of the contract, fixed fee payment is based on deliverables. Could USAID please clarify that the payment of fixed fee for the IQC part of the subcontract is tied to LOE, thus making the IQC Task Orders term type completion?

Task Orders will be cost plus fixed fee term. See L.3

18 2. Section L.8.b.8 (pp. 81 - 82) indicates that, in attachment J.3 - Labor

Categories for IDIQ CLIN:

● Local rates apply to any Iraqi citizens.

● Regional TCN apply any personnel with citizenship from the following countries Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia.

● U.S./TCN rates apply to any U.S. citizens or citizen of any country besides Iraq and those listed under the Regional category.

However, section L.8.b.9.i (pg. 22) indicates that "Salaries for long-term and short term CCN and TCN staff must not exceed the comparable threshold as specified in the USAID/Iraq Local Compensation Plan

(LCP)." Please clarify that TCNs should be capped at the proposed rates for labor categories, not at LCP max rates.

Any TCN rates that exceed the LCP would require a waiver by the USAID/Iraq

Mission Director at the time of award of individual task orders. Offerors must keep

TCN rates below the LCP wherever feasible.

As all offerors will be submitting rates, it is in the individual offeror’s best interest to provide the USG with the lowest, realistic rates possible.

19 On page 17, section F.5.13 Final Report, The RFP states: “No later than 45 calendar days prior to the Contract completion date, the contractor must submit electronically a draft Final Report ... Relevant parts of the Final

Report must be translated into Russian, as appropriate, for presentation to the host government partners and other local counterparts.”

Can USAID confirm if reports and presentations will be expected in any language other than English?

The entire report must be written in English. The COR may request parts or all of any deliverable to be translated into Arabic. Any such costs would be reimbursable to the contract through normal salary of an individual on staff or through translation services costs. Offerors must consider the most cost effective means to provide such services.

20 On page 76, Section L.7.a, the RFP states, “The font used in tables and charts may be adjusted as appropriate but must be no smaller than 8 point.”

Can USAID please confirm that the font used in text boxes may be adjusted to no smaller than 8 point font?

Text boxes do not fall within this instruction.

21 Given the complexity of the proposal and the many points needing summary presentation and discussion as required by the Statement of Objectives format, can USAID please allow the executive summary described on page

77, Section L.7.c, of the RFP to be excluded from the page limit?

No. USAID/Iraq encourages comprehensive yet concise language.

22 The RFP asks the respondents to develop a comprehensive approach to decentralization efforts, coupled with cross cutting issues related to vulnerable populations, gender and youth and a political economy assessment. In addition to the complexity of the activities requiring

No. USAID/Iraq encourages comprehensive yet concise language.

explanation, the Statement of Objectives format requires a very detailed review of methodology as related to activities. The current page limit only allows, for example, two to three pages for major components, each dealing with tens of millions of dollars in program funds. Would USAID please consider extending the page limit listed on page 76, section L.7.a, of the RFP from 25 to 35 pages, to allow offerors sufficient space to respond to the requirements?

23 Section L.7.6.c.3 asks for a performance work statement rather than a technical approach. Can you please confirm that offers may write the PWS in the first person tense (e.g. we will do x)?

As the PWS will be used for Section C of the contract, the first person perspective will not be used.

24 On page 77, section L.7.b, the RFP requires a Year One Annual Work Plan

(including the initial list of commodities in F.5.1).

Section F.5.1 states, “The annual work plan will include a list of clearly defined Tasks, Activities, Deliverables, Benchmarks and

Indicator Targets. The contractor may not include activities in the work plan that fall outside the parameters of the statement of work.

The contractor’s annual work plan will describe how the contractor intends to organize responsibilities among its staff to ensure accomplishment of the tas

ks. The work plan, at a minimum, will include:

a) A systematic presentation (i.e., Gantt chart) of activities to be a ccomplished under the different results and sub-results, on monthly basis;

b) The proposed location of the activity;

c) The anticipated outputs and outcomes from each tasks conducted;

d) The anticipated level of effort required from program technical staff and financial resources required to complete the tasks;

e) The identification of any assumptions used in preparation of th e work plan, as well as suggested alternatives, if necessary;

f) The anticipated risks with regard to achieving the anticipated objectives of the contract and how they will be mitigated;

g) Any specific award terms or conditions that interfere with maxi

a) The work plan must be sufficient length to provide all requested information and no longer. Offerors may use any format that provides all required information in a clear and succinct manner.

b) As the focus of the contract is on results (outputs and outcomes) as well as yearly targets, this information must be clearly linked to the activities outlined in the work plan.

c) Confirmed. F.5.1(d)’s discussion of resources will be included after award by amending the approved work plan.

mizing the developmental impact of the award.

Each year the contractor will submit for approval a list of commodities that will be purchased during the fiscal year as part of the Annual Work plan process. The annual commodities procurem ent list may be revised as necessary inconsultation with the COR and by approval of the Contracting

Officer.” Initial list of commodities due with technical proposal updated and finalized within 45 days after the contract award date.

We have the following question about the Year 1 and 2 Annual Work Plan to be submitted with the proposal:

a) In our experience, USAID missions have requested very different version of work plans ranging from 60-page documents to

3-page Gantt charts. Could USAID please provide additional guidance on the length and format that would be preferred for the

Year One and Draft Year Two work plans?

b) Given that the benchmarks and targets, as well as outputs and outcomes, appear to be addressed in the Activity Monitoring and

Evaluation Plan, can they be omitted from the work plan in order to avoid duplication?

c) Given that the Technical Proposal is prohibited from making reference to pricing information, can USAID please confirm that specifics regarding financial resources required to complete the task should not be included at this time?

25 In section F.7 on page 23, the RFP lists the key personnel as: Chief of Party;

TBD 1; TBD 2; and TBD 3 for a total of four (4) key personnel. On page

79, section L.7.C.4, it states, “Offerors must propose three additional key personnel.” Given that ADS 302.3.5.4 limits the number of key personnel to

5, can you please confirm that these additional key personnel are TBD 1-3, Confirmed.

for a total of 4 key personnel as required in section F.7?

26 Page 3, section 3.1, of the Statement of Objectives states that “Objective

Four activities – on-demand technical services – will be the resource base for the baseline, semi-annual, and ad hoc PEAs, survey work, and other sector assessments referenced in this section.” The SOO also indicates that activities under Objective Four are to be funded through the IDIQ mechanism defined by CLIN5. In parallel, the RFP lists the same analytic products as specific deliverables in the Fixed Fee Payment Schedule (F.6.1), which is applicable to CLIN 0001.

Would USAID confirm that the funding for specifically enumerated analytic products should be included under CLIN 0005, and should be deleted from the deliverables in the Fixed Fee Payment Schedule (F.6.1).

The IDIQ portion (CLIN 0005) is only for supplemental technical assistance requested by USAID. The PEA’s, survey’s and all other deliverables listed in F.6.1 must be budgeted under the other CLINS but may include information regarding

CLIN 0005 (for example annual reports, final reports, etc.)

27 On page 8 of the Statement of Objectives, it lists a required indicator for objective 4, “development and implementation of a system for data capture, analysis and public reporting on relevant changes in national decentralization laws and policies”. There is no text related to this topic as part of Objective 4 in the Statement of Objectives or elsewhere in the RFP.

Given that Objective 4 focuses on on-demand technical assistance, could you please provide clarification regarding this indicator?

This indicator has been deleted in this amendment.

28 Section L.8.b.8, specifies that the distribution the LOE for CLIN 0005 labor categories for the 35,000 person-days being requested in Attachment J.3, be allocated equally across all labor categories and the type of personnel (USN, TCN/Regional, and CCN), and either as Specialist or Senior Specialist. Can

USAID confirm that all LOE be equally divided across all 66 labor categories and type of personnel, even if certain ones, for example USN

Drivers, are not likely to be requested or utilized due to mismatched qualifications?

Confirmed. This equal division will be used for evaluation purposes only and are straight-lined across all positions to ensure the evaluations of all offerors are done consistently. Actual amounts of labor will be dependent on task order issued after award but the rates accepted at time of award will be used for the corresponding positions ordered under CLIN 0005.

29 Section B.6.c indicates that Other Direct Costs for CLIN 0005 cannot exceed

20% of CLIN 0005 total costs. Can USAID confirm that Travel, Allowances (such as Post Allowance and Danger Pay), Equipment, and

Grants are excluded from being counted as Other Direct Costs?

See L.8.b.9.ix. and B.6.c

30 Please clarify whether the Year 1 Work Plan submitted with the Technical

Proposal may be preliminary versions with less detail than the final draft that

The Year One Work Plan will be finalized at the time of award however later modifications may be made in coordination with the COR.

will be updated before USAID approval after mobilization.

31 One of the stated goals of the ongoing Governance Strengthening Project /

Taqadum, as referenced in the “Service Delivery Improvement Plan, rev.

May 2015” is “that Provincial governments will adopt and make the SDIP process an integral and continuous part of its services delivery planning and implementation process.” Could USAID provide a document that describes the progress against this goal, or otherwise summarize the current status and expected status by the time IGPA is awarded?

Up to date, GSP/Taqadum has been working with 12 targeted provinces on developing and implementing SERVICE DELIVERY IMPROVEMENT

PLANNING PROCESS, namely: Baghdad, Diyala, Kirkuk, Babil, Karbala, Najaf, Wasit, Dywania, Maysan, Di-Qar, Basrah, and Muthannah, and 6 line ministries, namely: Health, Education, Construction and Municipalities, Sport and Youth, Agriculture, Labor and Social Affairs.

Taqadum has completed Service Delivery Improvement Plans (SDIPs) for the seven initial provinces that it targeted (i.e., Babil, Baghdad, Diwanya, Diyala, Kirkuk, Najaf, and Wasit) in the sectors of primary education, primary health, water, sewer, and municipal services, which vary and include services like trash collection and street repair. These SDIPs consist of short-term and long-term improvements.

Short-term improvements can be done with existing staff and operational budget;

long-term improvements require capital investment budget. Provinces have not received capital investment budgets so only five percent of the long-term improvements have been done. The 28 long-term improvements that were carried out in Baghdad, Diwanya, Kirkuk and Najaf were done by accessing other financing.

More progress has been made in the seven initial Taqadum provinces on implementing short-term improvements.

A total of 411 out of the 624 short-term improvements have been implemented so far in the seven initial provinces. By February 2017, we expect to have implemented 511 short-term solutions in the targeted five sectors above in twelve provinces (i.e., the provinces outside Kurdistan, excluding the Da’esh occupied provinces of Anbar, Ninewa, and Salah Ad Din.)

Additionally, by February we expect to complete SDIPs for the 12 provinces referenced above for the new sectors that cover decentralized services from the

Ministries of Agriculture, Construction and Housing, Labor and Social Affairs, and

Youth and Sport. The Ministry of Finance likely will not be included in Taqadum’s activities between now and February 2017.

32 Who will be the Government of Iraqi (GOI) counterpart for the IGPA project?

As this RFP has a SOO, the offeror must have their own analysis on appropriate counterparts.

33 Page 16, Section F.5.11 refers to an “Operational Plan (OP)” that does not appear to be referenced elsewhere in the RFP or SOO. Please clarify the nature of the Operational Plan.

An Operational Plan provides details on the use of foreign assistance funding for a specific fiscal year. It identifies where, and on what, programs funds will be spent, which USG agencies will manage the funds, and who will implement the programs.

A primary objective of the Operational Plan is to ensure coordinated, efficient, and effective use of all USG foreign assistance resources in support of the transformational diplomacy goal and related foreign policy priorities (USAID ADS -

Chapters 200-203).

34 Page 79, Section L.7.c Item 5. Past Performance, states that the offeror must provide performance information for itself and each major subcontractor.

However, section L.7.c.5.1 instructs offerors to “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to three of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal for the prime contractor.”

Please confirm that past performance information should be provided for the prime and major subcontractors over the 15% threshold.

Confirmed that the past performance information will be included for both the prime and major subcontractors.

35 Page 81, Section L.8b.8 states that the total estimated cost, inclusive of fixed fee, for CLIN 0005 cannot exceed 20% of the overall total estimated cost, inclusive of fixed fee, of the entire contract. Attachment J.7 refers to 20% of total effort (which we assume to mean labor). Please clarify whether the base for the 20% ceiling on CLIN 0005 is the total effort or the total estimated cost.

20% of the total estimated cost. There was no J.7 attachment.

36 Would USAID please provide any information on the preferred breakdown in the budget table among the amounts in the Cost Element rows?

USAID prefers a breakdown of columns by unit price, number of units, and total amounts (price x units) per line item per CLIN.

37 For budgeting purposes, will USAID provide an exchange rate from Iraqi

Dinar to USD to ensure equity across bidders?

For budgeting purposes for the cost evaluation, offerors will use 1162 dinars to 1

USD. For reimbursement purposes during implementation, the contractor will either use the actual rate on the day of the cost incurrence or use their established financial procedures if applicable.

38 Would USAID provide the guidance that typically accompanies the LCP that No, this is information that cannot to be shared outside the Embassy. All other explains allowances to staff?

allowances must follow the contractor’s internal policies, be consistent with local labor laws, and be fair and reasonable.

39 Is there a government property list available which details non-expendable items anticipated to be transferred to the program?

Any such list will be included after award. Currently any items that would be transferred to the project would have minimal effect on a submitted budget.

40 Would USAID please confirm that the LCP dated 9/10/2010 is the most up-to-date version?

The information provided is current.

41 Objective 4 in the SOO reads “Under this objective, the Contractor is expected to specify a technical approach for a rapid, flexible response mechanism that provides technical specialists and limited material support to

Iraqi officials…” Would USAID please clarify what is meant by the term

“limited material support to Iraqi officials”?

Items such as minor IT equipment, software, printing books/reports, support organizing presentations/lectures (e.g. renting room for a presentation) and similar may be required to be provided directly to the relevant government entity rather than to an individual.