Amendment_1_to_RFP_SOL-391-13-000005.pdf

Amendment No.1 Request for Proposals (RFP) SOL-391-13-000005

“Sindh Community Mobilization Program”

Issue Date: January 11, 2013 Amendment Number: 01

Amendment Date: February 05, 2013 Revised Closing Date and Time for Proposal Submission: February 28, 2013, 1430 (PST)

Subject: Request for Proposals No. SOL-391-13-000005, Sindh Community Mobilization Program

The United States Agency for International Development mission to Pakistan (USAID/Pakistan) seeks proposals from U.S. and International-Non-Profit Organizations and For-profit Organizations for the Sindh Community Mobilization Program. The estimated overall amount of this activity ranges from $23-24.5 million over a five year period. This project was solicited under the subject Request for Proposals on January 11, 2012.

The purpose of this amendment is to amend the Request for Proposals by incorporating changes, issue an amended Request for Proposals incorporating these changes per Attachment 1 hereto, change the closing date for submission of Proposals, and provide answers to questions submitted by the potential contractors.

Offerors are to submit their proposals as directed under Section L of the Request for Proposals.

The closing date and time for submittal of applications is amended to February 28, 2013 at 1430 (PST). Offerors are to comply with the instructions in the Request for Proposals as well those contained herein.

By this Amendment:

a. Replace the paragraph 2 of Cover Page with following:

USAID anticipates awarding a 5-year Cost-Plus-Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for the implementation of this activity with a total estimated range of approximately $23-24.5 million for the entire five year period. Providing a total estimated cost for the contract does not mean that offerors shall necessarily strive to meet the maximum amount.

Offerors must propose costs that it believes are realistic and reasonable for the work. Cost proposals shall be evaluated as part of a best value determination for contract award, including cost effective approaches to achieving the results.

b. Correct the Serial Numbers on Page-9, B.7. BUDGET in PART I - THE SCHEDULE SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICE/COSTS as under:

1. Replace: B.7. BUDGET with B.9. BUDGET along with subsequent serial numbers as B.9.1, B.9.2, B.9.3 and B.9.4.

2. Section B.7, Budget, is amended in its entirety as Section B.9 by Attachment 2 hereto.

3. Section B.7.3 is amended as Section B.9.3 per Attachment 2 hereto.

c. Questions and Answers

1. Section B 7.3, Price Schedule: Fixed fee is in addition to cost of every line item OR we can opt for one or the other or both?

Answer: Fixed Fee is in addition to the proposed costs for each Contract Line Item (CLIN) prescribed at Section B.7.3 and, if applicable, is to be provided for each CLIN per the format provided in the RFP.

2. The RFP does not include grants under contract authority. Can USAID please confirm that the resulting contract will include grants under contract authority?

Answer: The use of grants under contract (GUC) has been properly approved for use under this solicitation.

3. Section B.2, Contract Type, states that the anticipated contract will be a CPFF completion type contract. However, Section B.7, Payment of Fixed Fee, states that “the payment of fixed fee shall be paid in proportion to the LOE delivered during that month” and that at the expiration of the contract “the fixed fee shall be adjusted proportionately to the LOE delivered.” This fee payment structure is more akin to a CPFF term contract including minimum life of contract LOE requirements. We respectfully request that USAID confirm that the contract awarded will be a CPFF completion type contract.

Answer: It is confirmed that the resultant contract will be a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) completion-type contract. Section B.7 of the solicitation is amended as follows:

B.7. PAYMENT OF FIXED FEE

Monthly payment of fixed fee shall be paid in proportion to the LOE delivered during that month and pursuant to FAR 52.216-8, it shall be made upon receipt of a proper invoice.

In the event the contractor has not delivered the total contract required deliverables at the expiration of the contract period, the fixed fee shall be adjusted proportionately to the contract deliverables delivered provided that the contract performance has been satisfactory.

4. Are hard copies of the proposal due the same day (February 21, 2013, 14:30 Pakistan Standard Time) as the electronic submission, or can they arrive after the electronic submission deadline?

Answer: Yes, the deadline for submission of both hard and soft copies of the proposal is the same i.e. February 28, 2013, 14:30 Pakistan Standard Time.

5. Please confirm that the Security Plan is not counted as part of the 35 page limit for the technical proposal.

Answer: L.9.2 of the RFP describes the page limit for Technical Proposal only which is 35 pages. The Security Plan is not included in the page limitation.

6. Please confirm that letters of commitment from subcontractors and implementing partners are not counted as part of the 35 page limit for the technical proposal.

Answer: Yes, letters of commitment from subcontractors and implementing partners are not counted as part of the 35 page limit for the technical proposal.

7. Please confirm that SF 294 Forms will not be counted as part of the 35 page limit for the technical proposal.

Answer: Yes, SF 294 Forms will not be counted as part of the 35 page limit for the technical proposal.

8. Please confirm that an environmental compliance section is not required as part the proposal submission. The SBEP components evaluated under the IEE have differences with the components defined in the RFP for that program. Is there a modification of the IEE being prepare to reflect the current structure and activities under the SBEP components?

Answer: The modified IEE is attached with RFP as Attachment J-4 (Attachment- 4B_OAPA_13_JAN_PAK_0006-_SBEP.pdf).

9. If an environmental compliance section is required, please confirm that it will not be counted as part of the 35 page limit.

Answer: Yes, the environmental compliance section will not be counted as part of the 35 page limit.

10. The RFP refers to a Past Performance “Listing” on page 123, section L.9.2, which will not be counted as part of the 35 page limit. The RFP does not seem to specify a preferred format or number of Past Performance Reference sheets to be included in the proposal as a supplement to the Past Performance listing. Please clarify whether Past Performance Reference Sheets may be included, and if so, whether they will be counted as part of the 35 page limit.

Answer: Yes, Past Performance sheets shall be included and it will not be counted as part of 35-page limit. Past Performance Form is attached with this Amendment No.1 as Attachment No. 4.

11. Is there a specific paper size required for the proposal, i.e. letter size or A4, or would either be acceptable?

Answer: Letter size paper (8 ½” x 10”) will only be acceptable.

12. Please confirm that SF294 forms required to supplement the narrative summary on the Offeror’s Performance in Using Small Business Concerns can be included as annexes to the Technical Proposal.

Answer: Yes, it can be included as annex.

13. Please clarify whether the submission of Security Plan (included as Attachment J.3) and Security Budget are required at the proposal stage, and, if so, whether the Security Plan should be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal or Cost Proposal.

Answer: The security plan and accompanying budget are required to be submitted as part of the proposal. Security costs will be reflected in the budget. However, the security plan will not be part of the technical proposal.

14. The RFP introduction letter states that the technical and cost proposals need to only be submitted electronically yet page 120 mentions that hard copies should also be delivered to USAID Pakistan US Embassy. Please clarify if electronic submission only is acceptable.

Answer: Applicants are required to submit both an electronic version and hard copies by February 21, 2013, NLT 14:30 PM Pakistan Standard Time (PST).

15. On Page 9 B.8 Security Costs state the contractor must provide USAID/Pakistan a security plan and budget for security. Is this due at the time of proposal submission or upon award? If as part of proposal, will it be considered as part of the 35 page technical page limit or as annex thus not submit to page limitation?

Answer: Security plan and budget is required at the proposal stage as part of the proposal. Security costs will be reflected in the budget. However, Security plan will not be part of the technical proposal. This will not be considered as part of 35 page limit.

16. Section B.7.3 Price Schedule includes identical descriptions for CLINS 003 and

004. Could USAID please confirm that CLIN 004 should include costs related to the EMO pilot activity?

Answer: CLIN 004 is related to Education Management Organization (EMO) Pilot Activity (See Page 1, Paragraph b).

17. Part L.11.2.a references Section B.4.3 as a section that needs to be completed and accompany the proposal yet this section does not appear to exist. Please clarify.

Answer: Section L.11.2.a is amended to read as follows:

L.11.2 Part 2 - Proposed Costs/Prices

(a) Offerors shall complete Section B.9.3 and accompany its proposal with this Section or otherwise be determined non-responsive.

18. Part L.11.2.b references indirect cost ceilings per section B.6 of the RFP, however section B.6 does not mention indirect cost rate ceilings. Please provide guidance on how to propose indirect cost rate ceilings.

Answer: Section L.11.2.b is amended to read as follows:

(b) Offerors shall propose indirect cost rate ceilings per Section B.5 of the RFP.

19. Part L.11.2.c references Section B.4 Contract Line Item Numbers yet section B.4 does not have this information. Please clarify.

Answer: Section L.11.2.c is amended to read as follows:

(c) The Cost Proposal must be provided in two formats: (a) a summary and detailed program budget, broken out by major cost elements, for the contract period of sixty (60) months (five (5) years), from date of award; and (b) a detailed budget for each CLIN listed in Section B.9.3 Contract Line Item Numbers. This is to include a complete breakdown of the cost elements associated with each CLIN and those costs associated with each proposed subcontract. Supporting information is to be provided in sufficient detail to allow a complete analysis of each line item cost. Offerors shall provide this information through the use of detailed spreadsheets, budget narratives and footnotes.

20. Whether technical and financial proposal is to be submitted electronically only, or do we have to submit hard copies also. If a hard copy is to be submitted, we suggest a collecting point outside from diplomatic enclave to ensure that the proposal is submitted in time.

Answer: Both electronic and hard (paper) copies of proposals are required. Hard copies may be submitted by Courier Services. Offerors are cautioned as follows with regard to the submittal of hard (paper) copies.

Note: All incoming mail is required to be checked and scanned for clearance.

Therefore, all Offerors are cautioned to submit their proposals anticipating the time required for this clearance. It is advised that Offerors should plan well and anticipate at least 1 to 2 days for this purpose while submitting hardcopies to provide for timely submission.

The mailing address is:

Dale Lewis Agreement Officer USAID/Pakistan U.S. Embassy Diplomatic Enclave, Ramna 5 Islamabad, Pakistan

21. Do the vendor have to include all the details of sub-contractors and highlighting their involvement in each task or should we give a high level plan indicating the area of their involvement.

Answer: Offerors are to submit an overall plan in accordance with the Program Description.

22. In reference to page 90, I.7 COMMUNICATIONS PRODUCTS (OCT 1994), our understanding is that this provision was discontinued by AAPD/CIB and should no longer apply. Please confirm.

Answer: I.7 COMMUNICATIONS PRODUCTS (OCT 1994) is deleted.

23. In reference to page 104, I.23 AIDAR 752.225-71 LOCAL PROCUREMENT (FEB 1997), our understanding is that the local procurement concept no longer applies. Please confirm.

Answer: This clause is deleted.

24. In reference to page 120, (b), please confirm that hard copy submissions postmarked by the proposal deadline will be considered timely, even if they arrive to USAID/Pakistan after the due date specified in the cover letter.

Answer: Delete L.7.2 in its entirety and replace with following:

L.7.2 DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS

The Offeror shall submit the proposal both in hard copies and electronically, as follows:

(a) Electronically – internet email with attachments compatible with MS WORD, Excel, Adobe Acrobat in MS Windows environment to:

DaLewis@usaid.gov And shumayun@usaid.gov.

(b) Hard Copies – submit one (1) original and six (6) copies of the Technical Proposal and one (1) original and three (3) copies of the cost proposal to:

Office of Acquisition & Assistance USAID/Pakistan U.S. Embassy Diplomatic Enclave, Ramna 5 Islamabad, Pakistan.

Proposals sent via courier service must be received by the due date specified in the Cover Letter and at the address indicated in Section L.7.2. Lost or misdirected courier packages received after the due date will be considered as having been submitted late.

Delivery to the post office or air courier representative does not constitute meeting the statutory requirement that proposals are received timely at the designated office. The issuing office receives regular international mail only once a week. All mail is subject to US Embassy electronic imagery scanning methods and physical inspection.

For purposes of recording the official receipt of proposals, the date/time stamp by the Contracting Office at USAID/Pakistan in Islamabad will govern.

(c) Both electronic and hard (paper) copies of proposals are required. Hard copies may be submitted by Courier Services. Offerors are cautioned as follows with regard to the submittal of hard (paper) copies.

Note: All incoming mail is required to be checked and scanned for clearance.

Therefore, all Offerors are cautioned to submit their proposals anticipating the time required for this clearance. It is advised that Offerors should plan well and anticipate at least 1 to 2 days for this purpose while submitting hardcopies to provide for timely submission.

25. In reference to Page 134 (d), please confirm that the threshold is intended to be $25,000 and not $2,500 as written for awards requiring DUNS numbers?

Answer: Yes, it is $ 25,000. Section L.11.2.(d) is accordingly amended as follows:

(f) FAR Part 4.6, Contract Reporting, requires all successful Offerors to have a DUNS Numbers when the anticipated value of any single award is expected to be over $25,000 or the local currency equivalent. The DUNS Number is the unique identifier that is used to retain information on all companies, organizations and people that have awards with the U.S. Government. All vendors, including foreign businesses and individuals, receiving USAID awards over this monetary threshold must obtain the DUNS Number themselves. In addition, all vendors doing business with the Federal Government must be registered in the CCR http://www.sam.gov/. In order to register in the CCR, a DUNS number is required. The successful Offeror will be required to have completed both DUNS and CCR registration to be eligible for an award.

26. Is there a similar program in place in any other parts of Pakistan?

Answer: USAID is not funding any other similar programs but there may be other donor programs that we are not aware of in Pakistan.

27. Involvement of local education ministry or board or district will be at what level of authority?

Answer: The program will be accountable to Provincial Department of Education and Literacy and district level officers.

28. To mobilize communities, mass media can be used?

Answer: Yes.

29. Does Operating budget of $23-25 million include construction of any school or other educational facility?

Answer: The budget does not include construction of schools as this is not the focus of the program. Construction of schools is being funded under a different component of SBEP (Note: Refer to Page 1, item a, of this Amendment 1).

30. Section L.9.3 (b) d. Performance Management Plan (PMP) on page 124 of the

RFP states that “USAID/Pakistan and SBEP PMPs are currently in draft and is available at www.xyz.com.” Can you please provide the website where the PMPs are available?

Answer: There is no website. The Draft SBEP PMP is provided as Attachment 3.

31. Please provide clarity regarding whether the gender analysis can be annexed or whether it must be included in the Technical Approach and Understanding section.

Answer: Yes, gender analysis can be provided as annex.

32. On page 39, Section C.5.3, Grants under Contract, the RFP states that “Up to

$300,000 will be set aside for up to 200 grants….”; on page 20, Section C.2.1, Access to Education in Sindh it states, “CMP will provide small grants for this purpose with a minimum budget of $300,000”; page 29, Section C.4.2 Small grants to schools not identified for construction includes the following language, “CMP will provide a minimum of $300,000 for up to 200 small grants for this purpose; and pages 130 and 131, Section L.11.2 Part 2 - Proposed Costs/Prices show an amount of $300,000 as plug budget figures under the total budget and CLIN 2, respectively, followed by an explanation on page 133 stating, “In the illustrative budget table for the total program, a plug figure of $300,000 is used.”

Please clarify whether $300,000 for small grants is the minimum amount, the maximum amount, or a plug figure that should not be changed in the proposed budget.

Answer: $300,000 is the plug figure that should be used in budgeting for small grants. Additionally, Delete C.5.3 in its entirety and replace with the following:

C.5.3 PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS AND SMALL GRANTS

Public-Private Partnerships. CMP will harness the possible partnerships and contributions of international or Pakistani private sector companies, and diaspora in North America in order to have a deeper impact on the education system.

Pakistan-based organizations such as business councils and chambers of commerce and diaspora groups such as North American Sindhi Association (NASA) have affiliates and members that are already involved with corporate social responsibility projects in education. Public Private Partnerships will be integral to the development of the education management organizations to be piloted under CMP. Such partnerships can vary from one or two corporate partners paired with each of the intervention schools but should justify the value added of each partner and how the participation of each partner contributes to the development objectives and to the program as a whole. The Contractor shall interpret partnerships in a broad sense. Schools, communities, training institutions, government units, NGOs, private sector businesses, other donors and individuals can become partners when they offer support and commitment to a project objective that would not be expected of a beneficiary or stakeholder.

These generic partnerships are activities which can be carried out jointly without necessarily dedicated funding but providing resources such as ICT hardware/software, etc. The GoS recurrent budget for each school, while adequate to support the operations of the school, still leaves space for this “in-kind” support that can be provided through PPPs.

Grants under Contract – Under CMP Component 2, the Contractor will manage a small grants program for engaging partnerships with SMCs or local organizations in schools that are not benefitting from new school construction.

USAIDs intention in including grants under the contract is to support innovation and to give stakeholders greater opportunities to participate in improving the quality of education. A minimum of $300,000 will be set aside for up to 200 grants which shall allow these stakeholders to pursue innovative or pilot approaches to solving problems as identified in school improvement plans.

Illustrative of the types of grants which might be supported:

33. Please clarify whether the First-Year Annual Work Plan and Illustrative Five-

Year Work Plan mentioned on page 124 can be included as annexes to the Technical Proposal.

Answer: Yes.

34. Please clarify whether the submission of Marking Plan is required along with the submission of the Branding Implementation Plan, given the conflicting requirements on page 128 in Sections L.10 and L.10.1.

Answer: Both the BIP and Marking Plan are to be submitted with the proposal.

35. Please clarify the requirements on page 27 under Component 1, Results 1 and 2 that mention up to 200 schools under construction being engaged in a community mobilization process/up to 200 social mobilization plans in place to engage civil society in the school construction process, given that the first sentence under Component 1, page 26, states, “Under SBEP, USAID will be funding the GoS to construct of approximately 120 new schools.” Could you please clarify which agency is funding the construction of the additional up to 80 schools and whether the Contractor will be expected to work with that agency in the achievement of these two results?

Answer: Currently, USAID has agreed to provide the Government of Sindh with funding to construct 120 schools. If the budget is used efficiently, there may be funding to build more than 120 schools which is why the RFP has indicated this by stating “up to 200”. Community efforts will need to be flexible with the target number which could change according to the exact number of schools that will be approved for construction.

36. Please confirm that Result 3 under Component 1 (page 27) relates only to the schools selected for construction.

Answer: Yes, confirmed.

37. Please confirm that Result 1 under Component 2 (page 29) relates only to up to

200 SMCs for schools not identified for construction.

Answer: Yes, confirmed. In some cases, however, SMCs might need to be reactivated for schools that would be under construction.

38. Please clarify whether “target schools” mentioned in Result 3 under Component 2 (page 29) relate to all schools, i.e. those under construction and those not identified for construction, or just the schools under construction. This is unclear given that on page 14 the RFP states, “8,000 community members trained and developing school improvement plans in both target (new construction) and neighboring schools.”, leading us to believe that the term “target schools” relates only to the schools under construction.

Answer: Component 2, Result 3 relates to girls’ enrollment for both categories of schools under construction and those not identified for construction. 8,000 community members trained is another output result that relates to both categories of schools.

39. Please clarify the use of the term “target schools” in Result 3 and Result 4 under

Component 3 (pages 30 and 31), i.e. whether it relates both to schools under construction and those not identified for construction, or just the schools under construction.

Answer: Under this component, for Result 3, the results relate to target schools under construction. For Result 4, the result relates to schools not under construction.

40. Please clarify the requirement in Result 3 under Component 3 (page 30) regarding provision of vouchers to local BHU/dispensaries. Is the Offeror required to budget for the provision of vouchers to all students in target schools or to a select group of students (e.g. most vulnerable, girls, etc.) based on specific criteria?

Answer: The Offerer is expected to screen all children in both groups of schools:

under construction and not under construction. Vouchers should be provided to students who are found to be in need of a medical intervention. Therefore, the budget projection needs to be for a portion of the total but not vouchers for the total.

41. Please indicate whether an initial QASP for the program, referenced of page 26, Section E.3, has been developed, and, if so, whether it can be shared with potential Offerors.

Answer: The QASP will be developed by the contractor following award.

42. Please confirm that the budget line item under each CLIN titled Participant Training refers only to in-country training.

Answer: Yes, confirmed.

43. In addition, the RFP provides the numbers of participants for each type of training; however, in order to facilitate a more equitable cost evaluation for this line item, could you provide more details on the expected duration and technical content of trainings given that proposed costs may vary drastically among different Offerors depending on the types of training they propose? The RFP suggest that through lessons learned, 18 months community training is not enough.

Answer: Any further analyses have to be done by the Offeror after having thought through its unique approach to achieving the results desired.

44. Have the schools sites already been identified both for ‘construction’ and

‘improvements’ under SBEP; if yes, can we get a list of the locations? If not yet final, what criteria will be used for site selection of schools?

Answer: School lists are being confirmed and will be provided to the Offeror who receives the award. The list is not now complete but will be by the time the award is made. The criteria for school selection will also be made. Following award but is largely dependent on the Government of Sindh’s new policy (See Attachment 11of the RFP).

45. In description of Component 1 on page 26, only 120 newly constructed schools are mentioned vs. 200 in rest of the document. Please clarify?

Answer: See answer to question number 35.

46. Is the construction of the 200 schools only referring to new schools or could it be the reconstruction of schools that are currently dilapidated and not in use?

Answer: All references to school construction are for new schools.

47. Could USAID provide an expected timeframe for construction of the 200 new schools?

Answer: 3 to 4 years.

48. Does merging of school includes gender i.e. boys and girls attending same school and/or sharing classrooms?

Answer: Not generally but this is being explored.

49. Will the component three tasks of improved child nutrition include boys in addition to girls?

Answer: Yes as neighboring schools to the target schools being constructed can be boys or girls schools.

50. Pages 29 and 30 reference target schools, are the target schools defined as the ones that will be newly constructed, the ones receiving small grants, both or other?

Answer: Target schools are defined as being schools that are newly constructed.

51. Can USAID confirm that CMP would not contract directly with the EMOs, but rather establish and build the capacity of an autonomous body to do so?

Answer: Yes, confirmed.

52. Further, can USAID confirm that the GOS would transfer funds to the autonomous body to disburse to EMOs and that no funds from CMP are expected to be transferred to EMOs for school management? Yes, confirmed.

Answer: CMP will serve as a broker between the Government and the autonomous body and will work with the Government to ensure that the necessary steps for the budget release occur.

53. Does USAID expect it will be possible for the autonomous body to be sustained by retaining a management fee for its services? Would this be deducted from the 10% management fee that EMOs themselves would keep (per Attachment 16), or in addition to it?

Answer: CMP will need to be creative in its approach to sustaining such an operation. So perhaps instead of starting a new organization, the program might want to tap an already existing organization that could survive on a nominal fee that the GoS could deduct from the 10% fee or utilize another budget line.

54. On page 29, the RFP states CMP will provide a minimum of $300,000 for up to 200 small grants yet on page 39, the RFP states CMP will provide up to $300,000 for up to 200 grants. Please advise if the figure of $300,000 is minimum or maximum.

Answer: See answer to question number 7. The figure is the maximum.

55. On page 124 in section d. Performance Management Plan, the website link is not correct. Please advise where the draft SBEP PMP can be found.

Answer: See answer to question number 30.

56. Under the staffing requirements on p. 125, the RFP suggests the Offerer should include (3) references of professional contacts within the last three years. In the annexes you provide a template for a “letter of recommendation”. Are the three references to fill out this form as opposed to being simply listed at the end of the cv with their contact details? If so, 3 references for 5 key personnel (or more) represent 15+ additional pages. Please confirm that these would be included in the annex along with the CV’s.

Answer: The referees are to complete this letter for key personnel (only) as well the referee’s contact. Information is to be provided as required by this section.

57. Could USAID reveal the institutional author of Attachment 16 “Unapproved Concept Paper Public Private Partnership for Management of Government Schools through EMOs”? Is this a USAID concept or a GOS concept? Also, is there some significance to the fact that it is not approved? By whom?

Answer: The concept was prepared by a government officer based on an executive directive from the President of Pakistan on education in Sindh. The Provincial Government is keen to move this idea forward.

58. Section B.1 of the RFP indicated that the purpose of the CMP program is sustained community mobilization and management through engagement of the private sector. Why then is that aspect of the program considered a pilot rather than a full component?

Answer: There needs to be an incubation period to test and systematize the process before being brought to scale.

59. For the 200 target schools expected to come under EMO management, are these anticipated to be only the newly constructed schools or could they also include other schools in the target districts?

Answer: At a minimum, the newly constructed schools should be included in the scheme. However, through a mutual understanding with the Government, other schools could be added.

60. In our view this opportunity will put a big impact on the outcome of project implementation. Hence a thorough study is required from vendor side. We feel the time given for proposal submission is challenging and request that the submission date be extended by at least 3 weeks from original date i.e. February 21, 2013.

Answer: Please see the revised date for submission of proposal in this amendment.

61. On page 14, C.1, Introduction, USAID writes, “10-15 private sector organizations will be contracted to support over 200 government schools.” On page 33, Results 3, USAID writes “up to 10 NGOs…up to 200 schools.” Could USAID please clarify this discrepancy between both the number of NGOs and the number of target schools?

Answer: Page-14, under C.1, 10-15 private sector organizations contracted to support over 200 government schools shall be amended as under:

“Up to 10 NGOs contracted to support over 200 schools”

62. On pages 14, 26, 29 and 37, USAID refers to “neighboring” schools and communities as part of the CMP; does USAID have a set of criteria that can be shared on how these communities/schools will be selected?

Answer: No, the criteria will need to be co-developed with the Government.

63. On page 26, Component 1, USAID states that it will be funding the construction of “approximately 120 new schools, but on page 27, results 1, USAID states that re result should be “[u]p to 200 schools under construction.” Please clarify.

Answer: See answer to number 30.

64. In reference to page 27, Result 3, please clarify if the 4,000 target for SMC or community members trained is a life of project target or an annual target.

Answer: It is a life of project target.

65. On page 29, Component 2, Task d) USAID states “a minimum of $300,000….” Does USAID intent for this to be an annual small grant budget of $300,000 or a total small grant budget for the life of the project?

Answer: See answer to question number 7. This is a plug figure for the life of the project.

66. In reference to page 29, Result 2, please clarify if USAID expects 100 district officers will be trained each year (300 total) or 100 total over the life of the project.

Answer: This is a life of project total.

67. On page 29, Result 4, USAID states “Up to 10,000 girls (…) enrolled in target schools in all grades.” Is this in reference to the 200 neighboring schools only or all 400 schools?

Answer: See answer to question number 13.

68. In reference to page 30, Task a), does USAID expect baseline data collection in a sample of target schools or in all 400 schools?

Answer: The total number of schools should not be a difficult universe to explore and so a baseline should attempt to address the same although control schools can also be surveyed.

69. In reference to page 33, Task c), does USAID have expectations or guidelines for the honorarium amounts to be budgeted for PAG members?

Answer: No but the amount should be decided with the Government and USAID approval.

70. In reference to page 33, are the 200 target schools for the Pilot Component separate from the 400 target schools in Components 1, 2, and 3?

Answer: No.

71. On page 39, C.5.3 PPP and Small Grants, USAID states “[u]p to $300,000 will be set-aside,” yet on page 29, component 2, Task d), USAID states that “a minimum of $300,000.” Is $300,000 a maximum or a minimum allowed for small grants?