Questions and Answers.pdf

Request for Proposal (RFP) No. SOL‐388‐12‐000001 USAID Health Service Delivery Project

Response to Questions (Q&A) Date: February 17, 2012

Q.#1 RFP page 112, Section L.6, (b) indicates “12 characters per inch”. May we assume that Times New Roman 11 point font type meets this requirement? Can the font in graphics and exhibits be smaller font, such as 10 point?

A.#1 The technical proposal (including all annexes, exhibits, graphics and supporting documents) must be written in English in 12 point font Times New Roman or similar font.

Section L.6(b) first paragraph is hereby amended to:

“Offerors are to present detailed information only when required by specific RFP instructions. The technical proposal is limited to 30 pages. The technical proposal (including graphics, annexes and exhibits) shall be written in English and typed on standard 8 1/2" x 11” paper (216 mm by 297 mm paper), single spaced, 12 point font Times New Roman or similar font with each page numbered consecutively. Those pages that exceed the page limitation will not be evaluated

Q.#2 What is the anticipated project start date?

A.#2 The anticipated project start date is October 2012

Q.#3 Under Section C.3.3, the RFP states: “The budgets for the selected NGO partners (up to two) once they have been transitioned to direct USAID awards are not included under the total estimated cost for this activity. The budget for the local NGOs after they have been transitioned to direct awards with USAID will be awarded separately by USAID following a pre-award assessment and hence will not be included in the $36 million set aside for GUC.”

Please confirm that the funding for the two NGO partners that have been transitioned to direct awards does not need to be included in the Contractor’s budget.

A.#3 USAID/Bangladesh confirms its intention to directly award up to two local NGOs.

USAID expects one NGO to be transitioned to direct award at the end of 2nd year of the contract; the remaining one should be transitioned at the end of 3rd year.

Therefore, Offeror’s grants budget shall include both the NGOs’ budget for year 1 and 2, and one NGO’s budget for year 3. Once these two NGOs are transitioned to receive direct award from USAID/Bangladesh after successful pre-award assessment, their budget must not be included in the contractor’s grants under contract (GUC) budget.

Q.#4 Section L.2.b Staffing Plan states: “A summary chart shall be presented showing the estimated Level of Effort (LOE) for each position and each key issue of the professional team and for each of the planned short-term technical positions. This chart should also indicate whether these positions will be staffed by international (US and third country nationals) or Bangladeshi professionals. The level of effort table will be organized by the three IRs as listed in Section C, namely:

a. IR 1: Client Base Expanded, Especially for the Poor, for a Quality ESP, 60% LOE

b. IR 2: Optimal Health Behavior Promoted, 15% LOE

c. IR 3: Institutional capacity of local NGO partners strengthened, 25% LOE

Q. Please confirm whether the LOE for project staff that have a management role (e.g.

finance and administration, grants management, other project management support, etc.) shall be split out across the IRs at the same percentages as are listed above.

A. Correction, it is not Section L.2.b. It is L.6.(b).2.b. All support service positions shall not be splitted out across the IRs.

Q. Please confirm that the “summary chart” requested in Section L.2.b can be included as an annex.

A. Correction, please see L.6.(b).2.b. As mentioned in the page 112-

“Note: A page in the technical proposal, which contains a table, chart, graph, level of effort matrices etc., not otherwise excluded below, is subject to the “page” limitation.”

The following attachments are authorized and will not be counted towards the 30 page limitation:

- Cover Pages;

- Table of Contents;

- Dividers;

- Key Personnel Resumes;

- Table Summarizing Qualifications of Proposed Personnel;

- Draft Implementation plan

- Draft M&E plan

- Analysis supporting tables

- Past Performance Report Short-Forms, and Summary Table; and

- Charts, such as Organizational Chart(s)

On the basis of above explanation, “summary chart” is within page limitation.

Q.#5 Section L.7, points 4 and 5 of the RFP state:

a. A summary budget for (prime and all subs) using attachment J-4

b. A separate summary budget for the prime and each of the subs, using attachment J-4

Can USAID confirm that what is intended here is one summary budget (using attachment J-4) with prime and subs on one page, and also separate pages, each containing the summary budget of one organization only (using attachment J-4)?

A.#5 L.7 means a summary budget (using attachment J-4) for prime and all subs, and it will be total estimated cost plus fixed fee. L.8 means a summary budget (using attachment J-4) for prime excluding subs and one summary budget (using J-4) for each sub.

Q.#6 RFP page 39-41 provides guidance on the Branding and Marking Plan. Is a plan required at the time of proposal or upon award? If required at the time of proposal, please clarify where the plan should be included and if it is subject to proposal page count.

A.#6 We do not require a Branding and Marking plan now with the proposal. We require Branding and Marking plan once the competitive range has been determined.

Q.#7 Page 110 of the RFP asks for “1 (one) original and 3 (three) copies” of the cost proposal while page 111 of the RFP asks for “one (1) original and two (2) hard copies of their Cost Proposal.” Please clarify the number of cost proposal originals and hard copies to be submitted.

A.#7 Page 111 of the RFP is hereby amended to:

“Offerors must submit one (1) original and three (3) hard copies of their Cost Proposal separately in a sealed envelope indicating that it is in response to this RFP and contains cost information.”

Q.#8 Page 39 of the RFP suggests that USAID contract solicitations must include instructions to Offerors to prepare a Branding Implementation Plan (BIP) and Marking Plan (MP) to implement the branding strategy, however no such instruction or request can be found in the RFP. Please clarify if a BIP and MP is an RFP requirement, and if it should be submitted as an annex to the Technical Proposal.

A.#8 Please see answer# 6.

Q.#9 On page 116 L.7 #7, USAID requests a detailed description of budgets by task that shall “specifically reference the page and paragraph of the technical proposal that these costs are associated with.” While detailed budget notes can be provided, the page and paragraph requirement is extremely onerous and cannot be completed effectively for many costs included. We request that the page and paragraph requirement be removed, while maintaining the provision for providing detailed budget notes on specific costs.

A.#9 USAID/Bangladesh removes the requirement to provide reference the page and paragraph of the technical proposal to associate with costs. However, it is contractor’s responsibility to provide adequate justification and narrative to all costs.

Q.#10 On page 20, USAID states that “up to two local NGOs will be eligible for transition to receive direct service delivery grants from USAID within a timeframe negotiated by the Contractor and USAID,” but also states that the NGOs will be identified within the first six months of the award, after which “USAID will conduct pre-award assessment(s) and will oversee the transition” of the Local NGOs to direct USAID support. For what time frame should support to the local NGOs be budgeted?

A.#10 Please see answer# 3.

Q.#11 What is the name of the project? On page 1 of the RFP, the subject line names it the “USAID NGO Health Service Delivery Project” however page 39 of the RFP states that, “The program's name will be USAID NGO Service Delivery Project.” Which one is correct?

A.#11 The name of the project on page 8, 39 and other places of the RFP is hereby amended to:

“USAID NGO Health Service Delivery Project”

Q.#12 Should the branding implementation plan and marking plan be submitted with the proposal, or upon award of the contract?

A.#12 Please see answer # 6.

Q.#13 On page 44, the Reports and Reporting Schedule shows that the Final Report is due at the end of the contract. Typically, contractors have 30 days after the end of the contract to write the final report. We request that the due date for this deliverable be extended at least 30 days beyond the end of the contract.

A.#13 Please see Amendment # 1.

Q.#14 On page 110 of the RFP, it states that applicants should “send 1 (one) original and 3 (three) paper copies and 1 (one) electronic version in Word on a disk or CD of a technical proposal and 1 (one) original and 3 (three) copies and 1(one) electronic version in Excel with formulas on a disk or CD of a cost proposal.” On page 111, the RFP states “Offerors must submit one (1) original and three (3) hard copies of their

Technical Proposal… Offerors must submit one (1) original and two (2) hard copies of their Cost Proposal…” Could USAID clarify how many copies of the cost proposal it requires?

A.#14 Please see answer 7.

Q.#15 On page 110 under L.5.(a)(ii) the hand delivery instructions appear to be missing language. Is it correct that the number of copies and the requirement for electronic versions on disk or CD are the same for both regular mail and hand delivery methods of submission?

A.#15 On page 110 under L.5(a)(ii) will be changed to:

“hand delivery (including commercial courier) 1 (one) original and 3 (three) paper copies and 1 (one) electronic version in Word on a disk or CD of a technical proposal and 1 (one) original and 3 (three) copies and 1(one) electronic version in Excel with formulas on a disk or CD of a cost proposal to the issuing office.”

Yes, the number of copies required by regular mail and hand delivery are the same.

Q.#16 Could USAID clarify what is meant by poor in Expected Result #3 under Sub IR 1.1; does this only include those that are economically disadvantaged or does it also include those that are vulnerable or those with the worst health outcomes?

A.#16 USAID/Bangladesh requested offerors to define poor in line with the definition used in similar projects. Offerors should justify their definition of poor. Please read the second paragraph of page 24 of the RFP for guidance.

Q.#17 Does Expected Result #9 under Sub IR 1.1 include youth who are 25 years of age or up to 25 years?

A.#17 According to Bangladesh Youth Policy 2003, people between 18-35 age group is considered as youth. Please see the following:

http://www.moysports.gov.bd/policy-youth.html

Expected Results under Sub IR 1.1.9 is hereby amended to:

“25 percent increase in number of youth (18-35 years) accessing reproductive health services”

Q.#18 Could USAID please clarify Expected Result #6, under Sub IR1.2. Does the 80% of "activity-supported clinics' staff" refer to 80% of clinics or 80% of the total staff in the clinics?

A.#18 It refers to 80% of clinics.

Q.#19 On p. 34 of the RFP, the second bullet under Contractor’s responsibilities for 3.2 reads “Identify one to two larger, high performing NGOs….to become eligible for transition from GuC to receive direct service delivery awards from USAID within the life of the activity. However the expected results on p. 35 only state that up to two NGOs must have successfully completed a preaward assessment by the end of the activity. Can USAID please clarify what are the expectations and timeframe with regard to transitioning up to 2 NGOs.

A.#19 Please see the answer # 3.

Q.#20 In Section F.7.on page 48, the LOE estimated for IR:2 is 15 percent. This appears to be low, given the program milestones and in comparison with other IRs.

Could you confirm this percentage?

A.#20 USAID confirms that stated percentage is correct.

Q.#21 On page 110 of the RFP is stated the following: “the issuing office receives regular international mail only once a week”. For purposes of planning the submission on time, please indicate to offerors what day of the week is this sentence referring?

A.#21 Usually it is Tuesday. It is contractor’s responsibility that proposal reaches to the receiving office by 2 PM MARCH 19, 2012.

Q.#22 On page 110 of the RFP is also requested that “… one original and three copies of a cost proposal to the issuing office.” However, on page 111 is indicated that:

“Offerors must submit one (1) original and two (2) hard copies of their Cost Proposal separately…” Please clarify the number of cost proposals to be submitted.

A.#22 Please see answer 7.

Q.#23 On page 112 of the RFP, there is a list of attachments that will not be counted towards the 30 page limitation, please clarify if signed letters of commitment from key personnel and the letters of collaboration from partners are to be part of said attachment.

A.#23 Signed letters of commitment from key personnel and the letters of collaboration from partners will not be considered part of the limitation.

Q.#24 On page 114 of the RFP on section “b) Staffing Plan” a mix of short-term technical advisors is proposed, requesting that offerors shall describe its composition (whether they are international or Bangladeshi). Can offerors include a profile paragraph for the planned STTA as an Appendix? If so, would USAID confirm that the STTA profiles should be excluded from the 30 page limitation?

A.#24 STTA profile is not required. However, Offeror should determine whether STTA profile should be included as an attachment or not. As an attachment, it is considered outside of the page limitation.

Q.#25 On page 116 of the RFP, Section L.7. point 9 is stated that the ‘cost proposal must include a copy of the agreement between the parties to the joint venture/partnership”. Does USAID imply that copies of the Teaming Agreements should be included in this section?

A.#25 Yes, all requirements have been explicitly described in Section L.7.9.

Q.#26 On Section L.7, numeral 10 (personnel polices (sic)), #11 (travel policies) is stated that offerors should provide copy of its travel policies. Does USAID mean that all subcontractors should submit these policies as well?

A.#26 It is prime contractor’s responsibility to check and make sure that sub-contractors have valid, updated and accurate documentation and policies. There is no need to submit sub-contractors’ travel, personnel or other policies.

Q.#27 Do the subcontractors need to provide Contract Performance Reports or Contractor Performance Assessment Reports? Please clarify.

A.#.27 Yes, major subcontractors’ Contract Performance Reports or Contractor Performance Assessment Reports must be provided.

Q.#28 Should all offerors include costs associated with the environmental compliance plan?

A.#28 Contractor should budget reasonably for the environmental compliance plan and provide adequate budget narrative to justify.

Q.#29 ADS 303.3.25.a(7) revised on November 8, 2010, provides a ceiling of $500,000 per year up to a maximum of three years for fixed obligation grants. RFP Section H.15(a), page 63, indicates a limitation of $100,000 for fixed obligation grants. Will USAID consider revising the limitation for fixed obligation grants to reflect the current ceiling per the revised ADS?

A.#29 H.15 is hereby amended to reflect the policy change. Delete the last sentence of the first paragraph of H.15 and replace with:

“For non-US organizations there is no ceiling unless a fixed obligation grant is executed in which case the ceiling is $500,000. The duration of the FOG must not exceed three years.”

Q.#30 RFP page 119, Section L.8.3, requires offerors to submit SF 294 reports for the past three years. Our SF 294 reports for the past three year period exceed 400 hard-copy pages or more than 300 MB electronically. May we instead provide an annex to the technical proposal containing 10 of our most recent and relevant SF 294 reports to substantiate our use of small business concerns?

A.#30 Correction, the referenced Section is not L.8.3, but L.8.2. L.8.2 requires summary copy of all recent contracts for the past three years. Past use of small business entities and SF 294s may be placed in the annex of the technical proposal. Contractor may provide 10-15 SF-294s which are indicative of their work. If document size is an issue, information may be provided in a cd-rom and referenced in the document for hard copy submission and broken into multiple attachments for electronic submission.

Q.#31 RFP Section H.2, page 59 lists 941 as the Geographic Code for this award.

However, effective as of February 6, 2012, USAID revised Section 22 CFR 228 (Procurement of Commodities and Services Financed by USAID Federal Agencies) of the Code of Federal Regulations. It is our understanding that part of this revision was a replacement of code 941 with a new principal geographic code, 937. Given this recent revision, which Geographic Code will be used for the purposes of this award?

A.#31 Please see Amendment #1 of the solicitation.

Q.#32 Can USAID please confirm that a 6-day work week is authorized for short-term consultants.

A.#32 Please see Amendment #1 of the solicitation.

Q.#33 Does USAID have an estimated start date for the new contract?

A.#33 Please see answer # 2.

Q.#34 We understand that SSFP recently conducted external audits of 33 of the SS clinics, and that the audits were focused on clinical operations, quality of services and administration. Can USAID share the results of these audits, even if with clinic names redacted out, so that bidders can get a sense of some of the current issues SS clinics are facing in terms of clinical operations and service delivery?

A.# 34 The audit report is available in the following website:

http://www.smilingsunhealth.com/Download.aspx

Q.#35 Can USAID share with bidders some of the service statistics from the franchise, especially in terms of ESP services in aggregate and/or disaggregated by NGO or clinic?

For example, of the 28 million service contacts annually – what is the breakdown of the top 5 services provided by the network?

A.#.35 Please see the attached file titled “ESP Service Statistics” with the Amendment # 1.

Also please go to the Annexes A-H which were uploaded along with the RFP in the www.fedbizopps.gov for further information. The title of the file is “Smiling Sun Clinics Information FINAL.”

Q#36 Our understanding is that under NSDP, USAID allowed the grants to cover NGO indirect costs, but that under SSFP this was not allowed. Does USAID have a position as to whether under the new project, NGO indirect costs will be supported?

A.#36 No, USAID/Bangladesh will only support direct costs.

Q#37 IR 2.1 describes behavior change communication campaigns at the national, sub-national and local level. Will USAID please clarify if they believe these campaigns would be included in their definition of direct benefit, and therefore count toward the $36 million along with the GUC?

A.#37 Sub IR 2.1 describes “Develop a systematic communications strategy to support BCC at the national, sub-national and local levels in line with GOB-endorsed BCC messages and strategies” as a responsibility. Cost borne by the Contractor’s effort to support its local NGO partners to oversee implementation of BCC and social mobilization activities as well as outreach to community leaders and health workers will be counted as “Direct Benefit”.

Q.#38 Section C.4.4 of the RFP defines “service contact” as the number of contacts between a client and a service provider for services. Does this mean that if a client goes to Clinic X on a given day and receives more than one service from the provider (e.g. a consultation, an exam, and a prescription) this counts as 1 service contact or 3 service contacts?

A.#38 Services (Consultation, Physical Exam and Prescription) cited in the given example, will be counted as one service contact. However, Laboratory examinations will be counted as separate service contact.

Q.#39 On page 50 of the RFP/F.8 Key Personnel, USAID describes the minimum requirements for Director, Capacity Building/Health Systems Strengthening, as having “a minimum of 7 years direct work experience in developing countries as a senior expert.” Could USAID please define “direct working experience?”

A.#39 The referenced “direct work experience” means time actually spent working in-country as opposed to home-office support or short-term technical experience.

Q.#40 On page 109 of the RFP/L.5 General Instructions to Offerors the submission requirements state that proposals must be submitted by (i) regular mail; (ii) hand delivery. Would USAID accept e-submission of the cost and technical proposals (separately) followed by hard copies after the proposal due date?

A.#40 The closing date of all forms of submission is MARCH 19, 2012.

Q.#41 Will USAID accept a complete cost proposal submission in PDF with a budget in Excel only, due to the number of annexes and signatures required?

A.#41 Submission formatting is up to contractors, but USAID/Bangladesh requires documents with budget or number computations in MS Excel in a format that allows us to see formulas.

Q.#42 On page 112 of the RFP/L.6 Instructions of the Technical Proposal, USAID requests that “the technical proposal be typed on standard 8 ½” x 11” paper, single spaced, 12 characters per inch…” Would USAID accept Times New Roman Font 11?

A.#42 Please see answer # 1.

Q.#43 Would USAID consider a font for tables, text boxes, and any other annexes, that is smaller than 12 characters per inch and if so, which font and font size would be accepted?

A.#43 Please see answer #1.

Q.#44 Page 115 of the RFP/L.6 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal states that offerors submit Past Performance Report Short-Forms, and refers the reader to Annex 3/Contractor/Subcontractor Past Experience Information. Could USAID provide offerors with the actual Past Performance Short-Form template that is being required; or does USAID prefer that we include a Past Performance Long-Form that would instead include both a PPR and CPR section, thereby addressing both requirements in this section? If the latter is the case, could USAID provide the Past Performance Long-Form to offerors?

A.#44 Please see Amendment #1 for changes to Annex 3.

Q#45 Page 119 of the RFP/L.8 Small Business Participation states that offerors are to provide “a copy of the most recent SF 294 Subcontracting Report for Individual Contracts” for each contract against which you were required to report for the last three years. Given the onerous amount of documentation that would be required to submit this via mail or hand delivery, may we instead provide 10 – 15, SF 294s which are indicative of our work?

Please see answer # 30.

Q.#46 Will assets from this project (e.g., equipment, supplies, vehicles) be transferred over and made available to the awardee on this bid for project use? If so, could you provide an inventory of transferrable assets, so that budgets may more accurately reflect cost efficiencies and savings where possible?

A.#46 Please go to the Annexes O-T which were uploaded along with the RFP in the www.fedbizopps.gov . There are several files which contain assets available for this project.

Q.#47 Section B.7 named “Ceiling on Indirect Cost” implies that the bidder is proposing indirect rate ceilings. Can USAID confirm that bidders should include ceilings on our indirect rates?

A.#47 It is not required, but, a contractor may propose “Ceiling on Indirect Cost”. If an Offeror or any subcontractor proposes ceiling indirect cost rates, a ceiling rate agreement must be included as part of its costs proposal.

Q.#48 Will a list of acronyms included in the technical proposal after the cover page be subject to the 30 page count?

A.#48 A list of acronyms included in the technical proposal excluded from 30 page limitation.

Q.#49 The schedule of performance milestones in Section F.5.b of the RFP is very ambitious and appears to provide an unfair advantage to the incumbent. Would USAID consider revising and extending those dates?

A.#49 Please see the Amendment # 1.

Q.#50 Given the ambitious schedule of performance milestones, would USAID confirm that USAID personnel have committed to a rapid turnaround of approvals for the selection of NGO partners?

A.#50 USAID/Bangladesh personnel are committed to the success of this program. USAID will make every effort to turn around approval of NGO partner selection within 10 working days if approval packages are submitted in a complete fashion and do not require clarifications.

Q.#51 Will the contractor be provided with a list of existing grantees and those that USAID expects to continue to engage through the grants program? Will the contractor be required to use existing mechanisms to engage grantees continuing on in new awards under this contract?

A.#51 Please refer to the annexes A-H, titled “Smiling Sun Clinics Information Final” which was uploaded along with the RFP in the www.fedbizopps.gov for information on existing sub-grantees. As expressed in the RFP, page 20, paragraph 4 “…While the majority of NGO partners are likely to be partners who have previously benefited from USAID support for health service delivery, the Contractor has the option of also including some new partners, provided that no more than 20 percent of clinics currently supported by USAID are affected by the change in partners (please refer to C.4.4 Geographic Focus)...”

Q#52 On page 20 of the RFP USAID states that, “While the majority of NGO partners are likely to be partners who have previously benefited from USAID support for health service delivery, the Contractor has the option of also including some new partners.” Considering the requirement that new GUCs are awarded to local NGO partners within two months of award of the contract (p. 45 of the RFP) and the emphasis on “ensuring a smooth transition of support …from SSFP to this new activity for those NGOs and clinics that are being retained,” (p. 20 of the RFP) can USAID please provide the following:

Q. List of NGO partners and clinics currently supported by SSFP A. Please see answer # 51.

Q. Types of agreements/ grants/contracts each received A. These are grants under contract.

Q. Dollar amounts of subagreements/grants/contracts A. A range between 35 to 38 million only for GUC.

Q. Services provided by subrecipients/grantees/contractors A. Please see the attached file titled “ESP Service Statistics” in Amendment #1.

Q. Geographical locations of NGO partners and clinics A. Please refer to annexes of A-H of RFP which contains this information. Specifically files:

a. Smiling Sun Clinics Area

b. Smiling Sun Clinics Information Final.

Q. Duration of agreements/grants/contracts A. 6 (six) to 15 (fifteen) months.

Q.#53 Project name: The subject line of the covering letter calls the project “USAID NGO Health Services Delivery Project”. In Section D.1, Branding and Marking Policy

(p. 39) it says the program’s name will be USAID NGO Service Delivery Project”. Both appear together in Section B.1 on page 8. Please clarify.

A.#53 Please see answer # 11.

Q.#54 Performance Milestones:

Q. Milestones 1, 2 and 18.

Given the very short period of time allowable to reach agreement with government, NGOs and USAID on the clinic sites and the NGOs, and then prepare, gain USAID approval and award the NGO contracts, will details of the current clinic sites, NGOs and their contracts be available to a new contractor at the time of award or before?

This short timeline greatly favors the incumbent.

A. Please see Amendment # 1. Please see annexes of the RFP for the available information of current clinic sites and NGOs.

Q.#55 Other Performance Milestones:

Assuming that the Schedule (F5b.) over-rides other information, please confirm or clarify the following:

Q. Milestones 8 and 9 should be met within 2 years and not 3 years (cf. page 28) A. Milestones 8 and 9 should be met within 2 years. Expected Results under Sub IR 1.1.8

(p. 28) is hereby amended to-

“At least 90 percent of clinics have women-centered services as confirmed by quality assurance checklist by the end of the activity by the end of Year Two”

Q. Milestones 36-40 for IR2 are required to be met by end of year 3. However, they are to be validated by the Mid-term Survey. That report is due at 2.5 years, so the verification field survey will presumably represent the situation closer to 2 years.

A. USAID/Bangladesh will review the progress of Milestones 36-40 after receipt of Mid-term Survey findings.

Q.#56 Evaluation Criteria: For the Project Management Documents of the Management Plan, 10 points are awarded. Should we assume that they are equally apportioned to the Implementation Plan and the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan?

A.#56 Yes, if points are not assigned to sub-criteria then points will be apportioned equally to all of them.

Q.#57 The RFP refers consistently to grants to local NGOs…. Since there may be circumstances in which subcontract to a local service partner would be more empowering and induce stronger accountability, is it permissible to consider both grants and subcontracts in mobilizing the $36M in the budget format under “Grants under Contract” on page 130?

A.#57 No, GUC (36 million) should be separate item, and will only be used to provide grants to local NGOs. Contractors may put sub-contractors line item under other direct cost on page 130.

Q.#58 RFP p. 29: Does USAID wish to have reporting from clinics only on immunization, as this result suggests:

Sub-IR 1.2, #7: “At least 90 percent of all activity-supported clinics submit timely, complete immunization reports to MOHFW authorities on a quarterly basis by the end of Contract Year One”?

A.#58 No, USAID does not wish to have reporting only on immunization. Result of Sub-IR

1.2 7 will be a part of the quarterly report submitted to USAID by the contractor.

Q.#59 RFP p. 30: Does the statement that “The Contractor shall develop in-house expertise in communications,” refer to developing the in-house expertise of the network NGOs in communications?

A.#59 Yes

Q.#60 In the reporting schedule on page 44:

Line 1- The Initial Contractor Workplan is to be submitted to USAID within 1 month or award. Since the post-award process requires formal introduction of the implementer before stakeholder consultation meetings can be scheduled, can USAID confirm that this initial work plan is not intended to be based on full stakeholder consultation?

A.#60 Please see Amendment # 1.

Q.#61 In the Schedule of Reporting Milestones beginning on page 46:

Line 18 (Sub IR 1.2) – Requires a list of all clinics to be supported in the program to be agreed to by GOB authorities, the contractor, NGOs, and USAID within 30 days of award. Is this an adequate time allowance to accommodate the consultation and agreement process?

A.#61 Please see Amendment # 1.

Q.#62 On page 48 under Section F.7 Level of Effort the RFP states:

“The number of person-hours for any labor category may be used in any other labor category, subject to the prior written approval or direction of the COR. Once the level of effort has been fully expended, this contract is complete.” There are no labor categories in the Instructions for the Preparation of the Cost Proposal, was section F.7 included in error, as this seems more applicable to an IQC than a CPFF Contract? If not, can USAID please provide the Labor Categories that the contractor should budget?

A.#62 Labor category means technical and administrative. LOE chart should include technical and administrative category separately. As this is a LOE type of contract, LOE table will be incorporated in Section F.7.

Q.#63 RFP pp. 49 and 122: Section F.8 states that “The five key personnel shall consist of both expatriate and local staff,” whereas the evaluation criteria (Section M.2) state that “Out of five key personnel maximum two of the Key Personnel can be expatriates.”

Would USAID consider proposals in which all five key personnel are Bangladeshi? We noted that Bangla is considered an asset for four of the five key personnel.

A.#63 USAID supports the utilization for local labor (Bangladeshi). It is up to contractor to propose its staffing mix. The maximum number of key personnel will be five (local and expatriates), and out of the five key personnel maximum two may be expatriates. As stated in the RFP, Bangla is an asset but not required.

Q.#64 On page 63 under Section H.15 GRANTS UNDER CONTRACT APPROVAL

FORMAT

The Head of the Contracting Activity (HCA) for the Mission must provide written approval to allow a USAID direct contractor to execute grants up to $100,000 (unless a deviation is obtained to have this threshold increased) with US organizations (not-for-profits or for-profits), providing conditions in ADS 302.3.4.8 are met. For non-US organizations there is no ceiling unless a fixed obligation grant is executed in which case the ceiling is $100,000.” The regulations list $250,000 as the ceiling for Fixed Obligation Grants. Was it USAID’s intention to limit ceiling for this contract?

A.#64 We have not found any regulation list $250,000 as the ceiling for Fixed Obligation Grants. If there is any change in regulation, we will implement that. Fixed Obligation Grants are governed by ADS 303.3.25. USAID will utilize the threshold outlined in ADS.

Q.#65 On page 63 under Section H.15 GRANTS UNDER CONTRACT APPROVAL FORMAT the RFP states:

· “If the grants formats and field guide are not provided before award to the Contracting Officer, the contractor shall obtain approval from the Contracting Officer within 60 days after the Team leader/COP’s commencement of work in the Country”

· “All sub-grants documents must be submitted to the USAID COR and CO for approval and written approval must be obtained prior to actual award, regardless of amount” Given the substantial level of involvement of USAID is expected to play in approvals of grants program criteria, grants documentation, and approvals of each award the requirement to have all Grants Under Contract signed within two months of startup seems ambitious. It also seems to favor the current contractor. Will USAID accept pre award agreements, in lieu of formal grants, to meet Milestone Number 2 on page 45?

A.#65 Please see Amendment # 1. Contractor may engage pre-award arrangement with sub-grantees, but USAID/Bangladesh cannot guarantee or provide authorization of pre-award costs.

Q.#66 RFP p. 112: The note about materials to be included in the 30-page limitation refers to charts and graphs, but the list of materials that will not be counted in the page limit contains “charts, such as Organizational Chart(s).” Are specific charts/graphs/figures (such as the LOE chart and the project conceptual framework) or all charts/graphs/figures included in or excluded from the page limit?

A.#66 The RFP states “… a page in the technical proposal, which contains a table, chart, graph, level of effort matrices etc., not otherwise excluded below, is subject to the “page” limitation.

The following attachments are authorized and will not be counted towards the 30 page limitation:

- Cover Pages;

- Table of Contents;

- Dividers;

- Key Personnel Resumes;

- Table Summarizing Qualifications of Proposed Personnel;

- Draft Implementation plan

- Draft M&E plan

- Analysis supporting tables

- Past Performance Report Short-Forms, and Summary Table; and

- Charts, such as Organizational Chart(s)

LOE matrices and project conceptual framework are part of technical application and thus included in the page limitation.

Q.#67 RFP p. 115: For recent contracts who (sic) goals are similar to those requested in the NGO Service Delivery Program, may we submit past performance information for Cooperative Agreements in addition to Contract Performance Reports (CPRs) or Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPARS) in the USAID/Bangladesh format in Section J?

A.#67 Additional past performance may be provided, but is not required as the requirement is for contract only not cooperative agreement.

Q.#68 RFP p. 116: We noted the requirement in section L.7.7 to reference page and paragraph numbers from the technical proposal in the cost proposal. Would section and paragraph numbers be acceptable instead?

A.#68 Please see answer # 9.

Q.#69 RFP p. 124: For evaluation criterion 4b, “Demonstrated utilization for the services of small business concerns (in the past), is there a specific timeframe to be covered? P. 119 (Section L.8) refers to the “past three years.”

A.#69 Yes, it is only for the past three years.