Questions_and_Answers_on_the_ME.pdf

SOL 268-15-000001

Answers to Questions Received:

a. Scope of Work-related:

1. Question: Please confirm the number of pass performance reports the offeror and each major subcontractor should submit as part of the proposal.

Answer: There is no specific number of past performance reports that need to be provided. The offeror needs to conform with the past performance instructions stated in section L.6(d)(4) of the

RFP.

2. Question: Can USAID please confirm whether the Engineer (Key Personnel) must have contracting experience to manage the A&E subcontractor? What exactly are this position’s duties and responsibilities?

Answer: The duties and responsibilities of the Engineer are clearly presented in the RFP as overseeing the Architect and Engineering Services Task under the Program Support Component as stated in section F.10 Key Personnel Qualifications, 5- Engineer. The proposed incumbent may have contracting experience (working with or as a contractor) in addition to the other qualifications stated in the RFP including demonstrated experience in oversight, supervision, monitoring, and management of construction activities; as well as demonstrated experience as a client/owner representative.

3. Question: Does USAID foresee major infrastructure projects during the life of the Performance Management and Support Program for Lebanon?

Answer: USAID anticipates implementing small to medium infrastructure activities within the scale and context illustrated under section C, component 3 of the RFP.

4. Question: Considering the proposed role of short-term consultants to provide USAID/Lebanon with the expertise it requests, would USAID accept a roster of STTA experts in a matrix form as an annex?

Answer: Yes, USAID would accept a roster of STTA experts in a matrix form as an annex as proposed candidates for upcoming requests in evaluations, assessments or project design and support. (Section C component 1 tasks 6,7,8,9 and component 3)

5. Evaluations costs are highly variable, with budgets a function of design (IE/PE), duration, number of data collection events, team size/composition, availability of secondary data, sample sizes, and other factors. In order to propose realistic budgets for evaluation support under Task 6, it would be highly beneficial for us to get clarification from USAID with regard to the following key parameters:

Question: Is USAID able to provide an estimate of the total number of evaluations during the

Contract period of performance (and disaggregated by performance evaluations and impact evaluations)?

Answer: USAID anticipates conducting one impact evaluation throughout the period of performance of the contract and up to a maximum of 4 performance evaluations per year. The RFP is amended by adding this information in section C, component 1, task 6.

Question: Does USAID/Lebanon have candidate projects in mind for future impact evaluations?

Answer: At this stage, USAID does not have proposed activities to be evaluated but we anticipate evaluating a maximum of one activity under each office (Education, Democracy, Rights and Governance, Water and Environment and Economic Growth) per year. The RFP is amended accordingly.

Question: For the impact evaluation(s), is USAID/Lebanon in a position to comment on estimated sample sizes to inform data collection costs?

Answer: USAID does not have this information at this stage.

Question: Are impact evaluations intended to be comprised of two data collection events (baseline/endline)?

Answer: Yes, Impact evaluations are intended to be comprised of two data collection events a baseline and an endline. The RFP is amended accordingly in section C.4, task 6, Provide Evaluation Assistance.

6. Can USAID please confirm whether the illustrative work plan, as requested on page 87 of the RFP, should be for the life of the project or cover the first year only?

Answer: The illustrative work plan that is to be submitted with the proposal should be for the life of the project and not for the first year only. The RFP is amended accordingly in section L.6 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal, (d)(1) Technical Approach.

b. Cost Proposal-related:

7. Can USAID please confirm that the total estimated level of effort of 16,385 labor days encompasses technical staff only, as stated in the RFP cover letter? (i.e.

administrative/support/non-professional staff are NOT to be included in this total)

Answer: The total number of labor days is revised to be 20,070 to include both technical and administrative professional staff excluding drivers etc. The following are the general level of effort estimates for each labor category:

-1,900 person-days level of effort of U.S. direct employee (long term and home office staff),

- 17,140 person-days level of effort of professional technical and administrative local long term and short term staff.

-1,030 person-days level of effort for expatriate consultants.

The offeror is free to propose alternative distribution to the level of effort as deemed appropriate for the project.

The RFP is amended accordingly on the cover page and section L.6 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal, (d)(2) Management Approach and Staffing.

8. Question: Will implementation of the A&E plug value draw down overall level of effort?

Answer: The implementation of the A&E plug value will not draw down on the overall level of effort. The proposed engineer key personnel level of effort is included in the total estimated amount of 20,070 labor days.

9. Question: Is there a bilateral agreement between USAID and the Government of Lebanon?

Answer: There is no bilateral agreement between USAID and the Government of Lebanon.

USAID/Lebanon functions in Lebanon on a unilateral basis.

10. Question: Can you please advise about the range of fees (minimum and maximum) for awarded USAID projects based on recent historical data and whether a 10% fee on total costs has been considered and accepted by USAID in any recent regional project?

Answer: Please refer to section M.3 (b) Source Selection of the RFP that states the following:

" In accordance with FAR 52.215-1(f), the Government intends to award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose proposal represents the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors and subfactors as set forth in this solicitation. This procurement also utilizes the tradeoff process set forth in FAR 15.101-1. If the Contracting Officer determines that competing technical proposals are essentially equal, cost/price factors may become the determining factor in source selection. Conversely, if the Contracting Officer determines that competing cost/price proposals are essentially equal, technical factors may become the determining factor in source selection. Further, the Contracting Officer may award to a higher priced Offeror if a determination is made that the higher technical evaluation of that Offeror merits the additional cost/price."