Attachment_J.11_-_Q_&_A.pdf

Request for Quotation (RFQ) No. SOL-391-17-000013 Pakistan Capacity Development Services (PCDS) – Small Business Set-aside

Questions and Answers

1. Can a contractor bid for both RFP Number: SOL-391-17-000013 and RFP Number: SOL-391-17-000012 (PCDS IDIQ)?

Yes

2. How many partner/non-partner agencies to be included for capacity building?

This would be based on the results of the mapping exercise per the

SOW.

3. What is the principle location of the contractor and potential work spread across different geographical regions/provinces?

Activities under this contract are anticipated to be implemented mainly in the federal and provincial capitals of Pakistan.

4. Who will facilitate the Contractor's entrance into entities where US Government funds are not flowing?

USAID can facilitate. However, we expect the contractor to work with the GOP entities independently in consultation with USAID per approved SOW.

5. What are the contract modalities for outsourcing? Depends on offeror technical approach.

6. Is the contractor required to set-up PMUs or is required to give technical advice only?

USAID expects the contractor to set up a project office in Pakistan.

7. On page 99 of the RFP, a major subcontractor is defined as >20% of the total estimated cost for the project, but on page 113 a major subcontractor is defined as >10% of the total estimated cost in any given year. Can USAID please clarify the definition of “major subcontractor”?

Through this amendment of the RFP, Section M.5, Sub Section (Factor 4) is revised to reflect the requirements of major subcontractor.

8. On page 96 Section L.6.1.10 - the RFP says “Offerors shall include the following as an annex,” but on page 98 Section L.7.b the RFP says “No annexes are permitted.” Could you please clarify whether we can submit annexes as part of our technical proposal?

Through this amendment of the RFP, Section L.7.b is revised to allow submission of annexes as part of technical proposal.

9. On page 97 section L.6.1.10.f, the RFP specifies that we should submit Past Performance Information sheets as included in Attachment J.7.

However, on page 98 section L.7.b., the RFP notes that we can submit Contractor Performance Report- Short-Form. Would USAID like us to submit past performance information in two separate formats?

Through this amendment of the RFP, Section L.7.b is revised to replace Contractor Performance Report – Short Form with Past Performance Information Sheet.

10. Since this is a small business setaside, can USAID please confirm that offerors should disregard section 4 b.ii (p 113) regarding “prime offerors who are not small businesses”?

Yes, through this amendment of the RFP, Section M.5, Sub Section (Factor 4) b. ii is deleted.

11. Page 98 of the RFP states, “All required aspects of the technical proposal as noted below must be combined into a single PDF, and the page limitation will be calculated by the total number of pages of the

Offeror can submit items excluded from the page count of 15 page technical proposal as a separate PDF.

entire PDF”. Since some of the required aspects of the technical proposal include elements that are excluded from the page count but required for the technical proposal (e.g. Title page, cover letter, table of contents) the total number of pages in the PDF will be greater than the 15 page limit. Can USAID please clarify if offerors should submit the items that are excluded from the page count as separate PDFs, rather than combined with the 15 page technical PDF?

12. Under Component I at the top of page 12 of the RFP, the text refers to providing technical advice “across all levels and cadre”. Can USAID please provide more specifics on which types of organizations are included in this group: does it refer to the GoP, USAID, NGO community, donor community, or all of the above?

All types of organizations mentioned in the question but not limited to. Please also refer to the illustrative list of G2G partners attached with the RFP.

13. So that we can budget accurately, can USAID please provide a plug figure for the “office equipment and furniture” mentioned under Component I and Component II of the RFP?

US $ 1 Million

14. While Indirect Partners do not receive direct funding from the USD, are they eligible to receive equipment – or only technical assistance?

Yes, based on the requirement per the mapping report and approval by USAID.

15. Can USAID please confirm that the “risk assessment” mentioned under Component II in the first line of page 13 is envisioned to be one type of research described under Component I, which may include other types of research in addition to the risk assessment?

Risk assessment refers to the Public Financial Management Risk Assessment Framework (PFMRAF) Stage 2 Assessment of the GOP entities.

16. We are considering submitting a proposal for the IDIQ companion RFP for this set-aside. Can USAID please confirm that small businesses are permitted to submit proposals for both the set-aside and the full and open IDIQ?

Please refer to the answer of question number 1.

17. The RFP refers to several research-related activities (e.g. the mapping exercise, the risk assessment, PFM/NGO Research Activity). Can USAID please clarify whether it envisions Component I to focus just on these three research-related activities, or whether it envisions Component I to serve a flexible research function that conducts multiple research activities, many of which are still to be determined, across the duration of the project?

Component I would serve as a flexible function to conduct research related activities and does not include risk assessment.

18. p.1 Cover, The date for this RFP is Jul 28, 2017. The open period includes the last days of Ramadan as well as the Eid Al Fitr period.

It is difficult to coordinate with potential subcontractors in Pakistan during Eid.

Would USAID/Pakistan consider an extension for proposal preparation to allow for the Holidays?

Through this RFP amendment, submission date is suitably revised.

19. P.1 Cover and F.2 Period of Performance, Three-year period of performance… No options are included.

Three-year period of performance… No options are included. Neither FAR 52.217-8 not FAR 52.217-9 are included in Section I. Would it make sense to include 52.217-8 at least to minimize administrative effort at the end of the contract in the event an extension of 6 months may be necessary? There is no cost if it is never exercised.

Is it USAID’s intention to not include options?

There are no options periods anticipated or included in this solicitation.

20. p.11 C.4, Contractor can outsource particular aspects of the work.

Does USAID/Pakistan intend to fully integrate TFP (Training For Pakistan) into PCDS (Pakistan Capacity Development Services)?

Currently, TFP is not envisaged to be integrated with PCDS.

21. p.12 Mapping, It is difficult to prepare a reliable budget estimate prior to completing the mapping exercise, which will inform the types and levels of assistance that would be most beneficial.

Does USAID intend to recognize a two-phased budget and implementation format? Phase one: the mapping, followed by Phase two: targeted implementation.

The offeror can prepare budget based on the technical approach/methodology. However, the budget template attached with the RFP should be used.

22. p.12 Component II.2, If we are to be ready to assume the roles on behalf of GOP entities or NGOs, estimating the level of activity and related costs. Limiting the scope in full consideration of practicality of some of these assumptions is critical.

What is USAID Pakistan’s intention in terms of scope and depth of each activity for the contractor to assume targeted roles for a limited time? I.e.: Financial Management of a select entity (NGO, GOP).

This would be based on the results of the mapping report.

23. p.12 Component II.4 Training, “The contractor may be required to provide …training…if another USAID mechanism does not exist…” This is an area where there is great opportunity to build on USAID’s past successful projects, such as the ASP.

To what extent will USAID/Pakistan provide access to current USAID training and Participant Training programs?

Pakistan may provide access to current USAID training mechanisms and Participant Training programs.

24. p.26 F.6.13, Final Contract Completion Report, “The report (Completion Report) shall be submitted no later than the estimated completion date of this contract.” And “…no later than 30 days past the end-date of the contract.”

Please clarify the submission date for the Final Contract Completion Report

Through this amendment of RFP, Section F.6.13 is revised and “The report shall be submitted no later than estimated completion date of this contract” is replaced with “ The report shall be submitted no later than 30 days past the end-date of the contract.”

25. p.27 F.6.16, L.7.(e) Qualifications and Experience of Proposed Personnel .

This RFP requires support for the “AFGP.”

Does AFGP stand for: Ambassador’s Fund Grant Program?

Through this amendment of the RFP, Section F.6.16 Media Communication Plan is revised and all bullet points deleted.

26. P.98-99, The solicitation states, “The proposed team must include a senior team leader…” “The senior team leader must have Chartered Accountant Certification…” Is this requirement for a senior team leader in addition to the two key personnel required in F.4.(a) on p.18-19? Can one or both key personnel satisfy this requirement?

Through this amendment of RFP, Section L.7.e is revised and the Senior Team Leader is replaced with Chief of Party. Also in section L.7. (e) following sentence “The senior Team Leader must have Chartered Accountants certification (CPA, ACCA)” is deleted.

27. Background:

I. Chief of Party (COP) The COP must have a Master’s degree and a minimum of 10 years of relevant professional experience in such subject areas as business administration, economics, statistics, public policy, international development, or other related social sciences.

II. Capacity Building Specialist (CBS) Capacity Building Specialist must have a Master’s degree, in a field of finance, procurement, administration, HR, or project management including implementation, research and program design.

QUESTION:

Based on USAID’s experience with establishing programs in Pakistan, does USAID prefer Pakistanis, Americans or dual citizens for the

COP/CBS.

Is a Master’s Degree mandatory or can it be replaced by experience

Please refer to the evaluation criteria. Master’s degree is mandatory.

finance, procurement, administration, HR, or project management including implementation, research and program design.

QUESTION:

Based on USAID’s experience with establishing programs in Pakistan, does USAID prefer Pakistanis, Americans or dual citizens for the

COP/CBS.

Is a Master’s Degree mandatory or can it be replaced by experience (experience as a USAID contractor, connections in Pakistan, etc.)?

28. Background:

F.6.1 PAKINFO

USAID/Pakistan utilizes a management information system (MIS), currently called PakInfo, to track activities for all mission-funded projects at the national, provincial, district, and village levels. The purpose of this database is to map the location of project implementation sites to the nearest village or geospatial coordinates, monitor the use of funds at the district and Tehsil level and the performance of projects to meet timely information requirements for USAID/Pakistan and several interested parties. These interested parties are USAID/Washington, Congress, implementing partners, the GoP, other donors, and stakeholders.

QUESTION:

Can USAID provide a copy of the PAKINFO manual and examples of the reports for review?

The required documents and information will be shared with the successful offeror in post award meeting.

29. Background:

Security Reporting As part of the overall security requirements, the Contractor must report any security threats and/or incidents verbally immediately to the following USAID/Pakistan representatives:

● Contracting Officer Representative (COR) or Alternate COR in the COR’s absence;

● Executive Officer (EXO);

● Security & Safety Specialist and any other USAID/Pakistan EXO designated official(s).

QUESTIONS:

Can USAID Provide a security risk assessment for this project so that cost planning can be considered?

Can USAID provide examples and frequency of serious incidents over the last few years on other USAID projects?

Will USAID provide secure housing for Contractors in the event of adverse events?

Is it the responsibility of the Contractor to provide their own security plans when traveling?

Will USAID or other US Government Agencies provide risk assessments for security and travel for contractor?

Does USAID require or recommend security teams in Islamabad or other locations?

Can USAID provide what security services other contractors utilize?

Does USAID require that this contract utilize security companies that are certified through ANSI/ASIS PSC.1 or ISO 18,788 or ICOCA certified or any other certifications that recognize grievance policies, CTIP, ethical hiring of personnel and human rights?

Offeror will have to make their own assessment to identify risks.

The information will be shared with the successful offeror if required.

No

Yes

NO

Offeror will have to determine as per their own policy.

No, Offeror will have to determine as per their own policy.

30. Background:

I.5 52.229-8 TAXES - FOREIGN COST-REIMBURSEMENT

CONTRACTS. (MAR 1990)

(a) Any tax or duty from which the United States Government is exempt by agreement with the Government of Pakistan, or from which the Contractor or any subcontractor under this contract is exempt under the laws of Pakistan, shall not constitute an allowable cost under this contract.

QUESTION:

Will USAID assist contractor in acquiring tax exempt status?

USAID does not assist in providing tax exempt status. USAID provides guidance for acquiring tax exemption on case by case basis.

31. Background:

I 52.244-2 - SUBCONTRACTS (OCT 2010)

QUESTION:

Due to the broad nature of the requirements, does USAID encourage or discourage subcontracting?

Background:

I.5 AIDAR 752.245-70 GOVERNMENT PROPERTY—USAID

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The term “Government furnished property” wherever it may appear in the following clause, shall mean (1) non-expendable personal property owned by or leased to the U.S. Government and furnished to the contractor and (2) personal property furnished either prior to or during the performance of this contract by any U.S. Government accountable officer to the contractor for use in connection with performance of this contract and identified by such officer as accountable. The term "government property", wherever it may appear in the following clause, shall mean government-furnished property and non-expendable personal property title to which vests in the U.S. Government under this contract. Non-expendable property, for

Please refer to Section M.5 Factor 2 (b) purposes of this contract, is defined as property which is complete in itself, does not lose its identity or becomes a component part of another article when put into use; is durable, with an expected service life of two years or more; and which has a unit cost of more than $500.

Is there any Govt. Furnished equipment expected for this contract?

32. Background:

(a) Danger pay allowance.

QUESTION:

Is Islamabad or any part of Pakistan considered a danger pay area?

Each organization should rely on its own HR policies for the determination.

33. Background:

I.6 AIDAR 752.204-71 PARTNER VETTING (FEB 2012)

(a) The contractor must comply with the vetting requirements for key individuals under this contract.

(b) Definitions. As used in this provision— Key individual means:

(i) Principal officers of the organization's governing body (e.g., chairman, vice chairman, treasurer and secretary of the board of directors or board of trustees);

Is the vetting process requirement part of the proposal or is that conducted after award?

Vetting process is not part of the proposal submission; however Vetting is a pre award requirement.

34. Background:

B INDIRECT COSTS

(a) Pending establishment of revised provisional or final indirect cost rates, USAID/Pakistan will reimburse allowable indirect costs on the basis of the following negotiated provisional or predetermined rates and the appropriate bases pursuant to the contractor’s current executed Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA):

The evaluation criteria for Past Performance is standard language in USAID solicitations.

Background:

a. Evaluation Criteria:

Past performance shall be evaluated in accordance with the demonstrated breadth and depth of experience of the Offeror and any proposed major subcontractor (defined as exceeding 10% of the proposed budget for any one contract year) as it relates to the size and complexity of activities described in Section C.

a) Quality of product or service, including consistency in meeting goals and targets;

b) Schedule, including the timeliness against the completion of the contract, milestones, delivery schedules, and administrative requirements (e.g., efforts that contribute to or affect the schedule variance);

c) Business relations, addressing the history of professional behavior and overall business-like concern for the interests of the customer, including the contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior (to include timely identification of issues in controversy), customer satisfaction, timely award and management of subcontracts, cooperative attitude in remedying problems, and timely completion of all administrative requirements;

d) Management of key personnel, including appropriateness of personnel for the job and prompt and satisfactory changes in personnel when problems with clients where identified.

QUESTIONS:

The evaluation criteria for this RFP are very vague. Can USAID clarify its criteria?

35. Is a NICRA required or can that be negotiated after award? Please refer to section L.8.2 (e) 8 of the solicitation.

36. Is this contract subordinate to the full and open Pakistan Capacity Development Services (PCDS) or is it stand alone?

It is stand-alone contract. Please refer to section C.4 (page- 11).

37. B.4. Would budget rates going to be fully loaded? Please refer to Section L.8.2.e.1 of the solicitation.

38. B.7. What timeline going to be for deliverable? The timelines of the first two deliverables will be agreed with USAID once the contract is issued.

39. B.9. Would security cost going to be separate than the project budget? Please refer to section L.8.2.e.7.v of the solicitation.

40. C.2. Is the contractor have to separately focus on different sector essential to Pakistan’s stability and long-term development: energy, economic growth and agriculture, stabilization, education and health.

These are illustrative sectors to give an idea about the nature of the activities and hiring of subject matter experts.

41. F.4. Is there any restriction on the nationality of the key personnel or it either can be Expat’s or Local (Pakistani Nationals)?

There is no restriction on the nationality of key personnel as long as they meet the criteria.

42. F.6.17. Does contractor need to provide a flat rate for any type of report asked by COR?

The percentage of fee will be determined post mapping exercise.

43. Section B.7. Payment of Fixed Fee – Regarding the payment of 75% of the total fee for “deliverables linked with activities post-mapping exercise,” for a small business this is unduly burdensome to not be able to collect 75% of the fixed fee until the end of the project. Is it possible to provide a prorated portion of the 75% of the fixed fee as deliverables are submitted to USAID?

Payment terms for the 75 % of fixed fee will be determined based on the results of the mapping exercise. Please refer to section B.7 (c).

44. Section C.4. and Section F.6.1. – Section C.4. states that after the mapping exercise, then a draft work plan will be submitted to USAID for approval. Yet Section F.6.1. states that within 30 days after award the Contractor must submit its Annual Work Plan for the reminder of the fiscal year. With start-up activities plus the mapping exercise going on simultaneously, and then having to draft the work plan, it will be very difficult to do this within 30 days after award. Additionally, Section F.2. states that the Contractor may only initiate mobilization of staff and resources after the pre-mobilization phase is completed. We respectfully ask that the due date of the initial annual work plan be due 60 days after mobilization begins.

Through this amendment of the RFP, Section F.6.1 is revised to replace “Within thirty (30) days after award” with “Within sixty (60) days after pre-mobilization phase is completed”.

45. Section C.4 – Can you clarify how NGO research fits in with the PFM research and the focus of the project on PFM?

This award includes focus on PFM and NGO both. Please refer to section C.2.

46. Section C.4., Component II, Section #2 and Section #4, there are references to “risk assessments,” “institutional assessments,” and “training needs assessments.” Do you anticipate these assessments being part of the mapping exercise, or will these occur as part of the work plan activities?

Assessments are anticipated to be part of work plan activities.

47. Section F.4. Key Personnel and Section L.7(e) Qualifications and Experience of Proposed Personnel – The requirements for the Chief of Party listed in Section F.4 are different than what is included in Section L.7(e), which discusses a “senior team leader” (not previously mentioned) and its qualifications. As the RFP consistently refers to a Chief of Party, except for in Section L.7(e), can you confirm if the reference to the “senior team leader” is the COP or can it be another staff member? In addition, are the qualifications for COP in Section F.4 are correct?

Please refer to answer of question no 26.

48. Section F.6.11 Additional Reporting Guidelines, Safeguarding Against Double Counting – what does CAP refer to?

Through this amendment of RFP, Section F.6.11 Additional Reporting Guidelines, Safeguarding Against Double Counting is revised and the word “CAP” is deleted.

49. Section F.6.14 Pre-Mobilization Plan and Budget – Is the “Pre-mobilization Plan” the same as the “Inception Plan” that is referred to in Section M. 5 1(a)? If not, what is the “Inception Plan” referring to?

It is the same

50. Section F.6.16 Media Communication Plan – There are references in this clause regarding “grantees,” “grant program” and the “AFGP activities.” There is no previous mention of a grant program or of AFGP activities. Can you please clarify?

Please refer to answer of question no 25.

51. Section H.27a(2) Additional Requirements for Personnel Compensation – This clause refers to “the maximum annual salary rate specified in Section H.2 above,” but Section H.2 is the “Authorized Geographic Code” clause. Can you please clarify?

Through this amendment of the RFP, Section H.27a (2) is revised and “H.2” is replaced with “H.26”.

52. Section H.30 Organizational Conflict of Interest – While this clause refers to “Organizational Conflict of Interest,” the text of this clause refers to the Initial Environmental Examination (IEE). Can you please clarify?

Through this amendment of the RFP, Section H.30 title is revised and “ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTREST” is replaced with

“ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND MANAGEMENT”.

53. Does small business utilization reporting (AIDAR 752.219) apply as stated in I.10?

Through this amendment of the RFP, In Section I, Clause 52.219-8 and I.10 AIDAR 752.219 are deleted.

54. Sections L.6.1 Electronic Submission for this solicitation and Section L.7(b) – Section L.6.1 states the Technical Proposal must be in Microsoft Word, yet Section L.7(b) states that the technical proposal “…must be combined into a single PDF.” Please clarify if the technical proposal should be in Microsoft Word or PDF.

Through this amendment of the RFP, In Section L.6.1 (1) delete “Microsoft Word” and replace with “PDF”.

55. L.7(a) says that the technical shall be organized according to the evaluation factors in Section M. Section L.7(c) then says that the technical proposal shall include the information in L.7(d)-(h). Can you clarify?

Section L.7 (d)-(h) are the additional guidelines.

56. Section L.8.2(d)(3) Travel & Transportation – As the mapping of the entities will not occur until after project mobilization, it is difficult to know the number of trips, origin and destination, duration, and number of individuals traveling. Can USAID provide a plug figure for travel & transportation?

The offeror should use the proposed technical approach and methodology for this purpose.

Questions and Answers

57. Section L.8.2(d)(7)(v) Security Cost – We will provide a detail security plan, but as the mapping of the entities will not occur until after project mobilization, it is difficult to know the number of trips, origin and destination, and duration, which will affect the level of security required. Can USAID provide some parameters around which to cost out the security plan in order to be able to better compare security costs between submitted proposals?

The offeror have to come up with their own security plan.

58. Sections L.8.3 and L.8.8 are both “Evidence of Responsibility.” Which is correct?

Through this amendment of RFP duplicative section L.8.8 is deleted.

59. How should the relationships between the project and the GOP entities be completed? Should we utilize MOUs, subcontracts, grants, etc.?

Post-mapping exercise, the specific activities will be initiated based on the approved Capacity Building Plans (CBP) of the selected entities. MOU's approved by USAID would be the prime modalities for relationships with the GOP entities.

60. Can you please provide the Local Compensation Plan for Pakistan. The complete Local Compensation Plan cannot be shared however basic salary ranges based on the local compensation plan, exclusive of benefits, are listed as under:

Custodians/Office boys/Gardeners

Minimum Maximum

FSN 1 272,230 517,240

FSN 2 337,501 641,251

Drivers/Telephone

Operators/Warehouseman/Electricians/Clerks

FSN 3 427,586 812,411

FSN 4 498,008 946,208

FSN 5 576,071 1,094,531

Clerks/Secretaries/Admin Assistants/Program Assistants

FSN 6 714,173 1,356,923

FSN 7 932,778 1,772,293

FSN 8 1,228,745 2,334,620

FSN 9 1,557,376 2,959,021

Project Managers/Specialist

FSN 10 2,216,683 4,211,698

FSN 11 2,866,740 5,446,800

Senior Managers/Deputy Officers/Section Chief

FSN 12 3,904,374 7,418,304

61. (Section H.3.a): If an offeror already has a DBA insurance policy in place, do they need to purchase additional coverage through AON? (If current DBA policy is through another DOS approved carrier)?

There is no need for additional coverage through AON.

62. (Attachment J.7, Past Performance Information Sheet): Is it acceptable to create our own PP Information Sheet format as long as the required fields are captured?

Offerors can create their own performance sheet as long as there is no change (addition –deletion) in the required fields.

63. (Section G.5.b): What is the cost of bonding personnel responsible for local currency?

There is no requirement for cost of bonding personnel responsible for local currency in section G.5.b.

64. (Section L.8.2.2, p102): What are the local fringe benefits? See answer to the question no 60.

65. (SectionL.8.2.8.v, Indirect costs): If offeror does not have a Cognizant Audit Agency will Reviewed financial statements and balance sheets be acceptable in lieu of Audited financial statements?

No. Please refer to section L. 8. 2. 8 (v) (1).

66. (Section L.8.2.8.v, Indirect costs): If an offeror does not have rates certified by an independent certified audit, are they ineligible from bidding?

Please refer to RFP section L.8.2.8 (v) (2).

67. Chief of Party (COP) Requirements: Is it required that the Chief of Party COP have the Certified Public Accountant (CPA) credential?

While we do have a candidate with a CPA credential who can serve as COP, if required, we do not see the overall capacity building and oversight requirements of the RFP as being related primarily to accounting functions, but rather to general organization and systems strengthening. There are of course aspects where a CPA background would be relevant-- internal audit controls and the like. However, we see the principal needs of the RFP as not being related to accounting and audit in particular. For example, the RFP in C.2 talks about the need for 'risk management and capacity development' and again in C.4, the consultant services are to include 'performing fiduciary and capacity assessments, providing consulting and technical assistance, performing gap analysis, establishing PMUs, reviewing and developing policies and procedures, performing training, holding workshops, and organizing and hosting conferences. Accordingly, and as an

Please refer to answer of question no 26.

alternative, we would like to use as our COP a highly experienced corporate manager and attorney with senior management, governance/board, and financial management experience, which we believe would be a better fit. Under that person's leadership, we would then propose to have a senior CPA, whether as deputy or other senior position. It also seems to us that requiring a CPA as the COP/Team Leader may unnecessarily prejudice the evaluation and selection process to favor accounting firms in this competition.

68. (Section F.3, Place of Performance): What percentage of the work is anticipated to be allowed to be performed at contractor's home offices?

It is up to the offeror to propose the labor mix considering that the contractor will be fully responsible for the work performed under this contract. All full time staff must perform services under the contract at the place of performance specified in Section F.3. Home office staff may provide support to field offices based on the nature of the activity under contract subject to budget implications.

69. Target audience of capacity building. Can you provide a list of which PK govt agencies or institutions will be the target of this work?

Please refer to Attachment J.8.

70. ABC is registered in the US as small business and is looking to participate in both RFPs as a prime or as a major sub-contractor (i-e SOL-391-17-000012 and the SOL-391-17-000013.). Our parent company XYZ is also currently assessing the possibility of priming on SOL 391-17-000013 and assuming a major sub-contractor role on the SOL 391-17-000012. Please advise if this is permissible?

Yes

71. The RFP package includes an indicative list of direct and indirect G2G partners that the awardee may be required to work with. However Section C.4 suggest that the potential recipients of assistance under this contract would be organizations that do not receive direct assistance from USAID but still benefit from institutional strengthening measures that would contribute to the efficiency of USG and other donor disbursements in Pakistan. Based on the qualification in section C-4 the longer list of potential G2G partners may not valid. Please clarify this.

The list of direct G2G partners is provided to give an idea about the illustrative sectors and the nature of activities to the offerors.

72. The SOW under C-4 also suggests that the selected contractor would carry out a “mapping exercise” to identify selected organizations followed by the design of various interventions for “institutional strengthening along with USAID and GOP officials. Please clarify how many organizations are expected to be mapped in total? And based on this what is the indicative number that we should budget for Institutional support? The names and number of the targeted federal/provincial or other non-governmental players (NGOs if applicable) would be an important input to determine the overall scope of assignment and designing a responsive technical and financial proposal.

It is up to the offeror to propose the identified target entities.

However, USAID will approve the specific interventions. Please refer to attachment J.8.

73. Further clarity is also needed on the average scope of “institutional strengthening” measures that may be required for each institution.

Based on the mapping exercise a wide array of inputs may be needed.

Page 12 and 13 of the RFP provides a large illustrative list of measures with potentially significant budget implications from one to the next organization. We currently assume that the mapping and delivery of institutional strengthening measures will be costed on a rolling basis and submitted to USAID for review and approvals during implementation. For purposes of financial proposal an average unit cost for mapping and Capacity building could be provided and further amended on actual basis in consultations with USAID. Please clarify if this approach is acceptable.

It is up to the offeror to propose the methodology.

74.

Also please clarify the suggested “hardware/furniture” budget provisioning for each institution.(i-e Component 1, part II). This can vary significantly and impact the overall budget.

Please refer to answer of question no 13.

75. Further clarity is also needed on the role of the USAID in pursuing and finalizing partnership agreement with each targeted institutional player. This can be a time consuming process and involve extensive back and forth before any “mapping” or delivery of institutional strengthening measures can be initiated.

USAID will ensure adequate commitment by the public sector/private/NGO entity before the start of the specific intervention.

However, the contractor is expected to manage the day to day relationship independently.

76. What is the financial size of contract under the RFP Number: SOL-391- 17-000013? This is currently not listed anywhere.

Please refer to the Pakistan Capacity Development Services – SB listing on the USAID Business Forecast.

77. Referencing Component 1 of Scope of Work on Page 11 and 12 specifies ‘Researching pertinent PFM and NGOs related issues to disseminate information or provide technical advice to key stakeholders across all levels and cadre to especially map the needs of “women employees”.’ This needs further clarity. The phrasing of this statement gives the impression that the research will be aimed only at identification of the needs of women employees. However, the overall RFP gives the sense that the awardee will be required to perform gap analysis and provide technical assistance to support a wide range of institutional strengthening needs.

Component I.I(1) refers to the overall gender considerations.

Please read in conjunction with section C.5.

78. Referencing heading ‘Public Financial Management (PFM) and NGO Research’ under Component 1 of Scope of Work on Page 11 and 12 of RFP, it is unclear as to why PFM and NGOs have been lumped, while the entire description of Component 1 is excessively PFM focused. This description does not provide any specifics about what exactly needs to be mapped with regard to NGOs. USAID is requested to clarify the scope of work under this component with regards to NGIOs. It is also advisable that separate sub components focusing on PFM and NGOs are created with details.

Please refer to answer to question number 45.

79. Please clarify the payment of fixed fees and the specific items/outputs that would be included in this category. Section B.7 refers to the “fixed fees” and provides a table with three deliverables which are not listed in section F (i-e deliverables).

Please refer to answer to question number 43.

80. Also clarify if the all of the deliverables listed in section F will be paid on production of the referenced outputs and thus distinct “deliverables” that need to be budgeted under “fixed fees”?

Please refer to answer to question number 43.

81. In view of the RFP timing which fell during the last few days of Ramazan followed by Eid break we request a 2 week extension to the submission date to enable an effective response. Please advise if the submission date can be suitably revised.

Please refer to answer of question no 18.

82. Re section F.2 …..Please note that technical assistance provided through Pakistani firms in non-FATA locations typically does not require formal NOCs from federal or provincial governments. Please clarify if major subcontractors (such as XYZ ) will need to wait for formal issuance of NOCs to the US small business which may or may not immediately mobilize its designated staff for in-country activities.

Please refer to section F.2. (a)

83. Under section F.4 (i-e key personnel) please clarify if Pakistani nationals would qualify for both positions.

Yes, please refer to evaluation criteria.

84. We envision specifying the major sub-contractors in the proposal however please clarify the specific requirements. Based on the mapping and actual needs we currently envision that some sub-contractors may be best identified at a later date. Based on the RFP provisions for sub-contracting detailed in section I.7 necessary details and USAID approvals can be sought during implementation. Please clarify if this approach is acceptable. Also clarify what is meant by …..

consent to sub-contract is required on “un-priced contract actions” ?

(re: Page 58, 1st paragraph).

The major sub-contractors should be identified in the proposal.

However, those not identified at this stage, will be approved by USAID during implementation.

The offerors should include Letter of Commitment from the subcontractors.

85. The Environmental annex (IEE) to the RFP suggests 3 as opposed to 2 program components listed in C.4. We understand this is applicable to the 2nd RFP. However, please clarify.

IEE for PCDS-IDIQ RFP and PCDS Small Business activity RFP is the same.

86. The interim guidance on obtaining exceptions from “taxation” needs further clarity. Please advise if major Pakistani sub-contractors would be exempt from various taxes ON “SERVICES” including the recently introduced “general sales taxes”? Section IV, page 3 of the interim guidance suggests that a sub-awardee will need to obtain a tax exception certificate through its prime awardee. This process may take longer time while the outcome may or may not be favorable. Given this prospect we will need to build all taxes (such as the 16 % GST into all personnel costs). Please clarify how taxes on key personnel and other sub-contractors services should be treated in the budgets.

Should these be separately shown?

Please refer to section I.5 of the solicitation and Interim Tax Guidance attached as J.

87. We are requesting clarification regarding bullet point b.(ii) on Page # 113 under ‘FACTOR 4’ under Section M.5. of ‘Section M – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD’. The said bullet point states: “Offerors who are not small business concerns will be evaluated on their performance in using small business concerns as subcontractors, joint ventures, and in other teaming arrangements.”

Please refer to answer of question no 10.

88. B.3. TOTAL ESTIMATED COST AND OBLIGATED AMOUNT

Please advise how soon can we expect the decision on Estimated Cost and Obligated Amount?

The successful offeror will have estimated cost and obligated amount data into their contract before signing.

89. B.7. PAYMENT OF FIXED FEE

The payment table shows the breakdown of payments in percentages for each core deliverable. Grateful if you can please provide further breakdown for deliverable 3 i.e. “Deliverables linked with activities post-mapping exercise”.

Please refer to answer of question number 43.

90. C.4 SCOPE OF WORK: (Page 10 …. services are being requested to assist USAID in providing a wide range of services for USAID direct and indirect partners and key institutions in Pakistan .…) and (Page 11 The successful offeror will conduct a mapping exercise to identify key GOP partners that do not receive direct funding from USAID ....)

Can you please clarify whether this solicitation is targeting only indirect partners or both?

Through this amendment of RFP, Section C.2 (page-10) is revised and “direct and” deleted.

91. C.4 SCOPE OF WORK: (Page 11 .... where USAID/Pakistan needs support to assess and manage the fiduciary risk ....)

In addition to the target sectors and geographic coverage under current USAID initiatives, is the contractor expected to provide services in other sectors and geographical areas as directed by the

COR?

These are illustrative sectors and might change in the future.

92. C.4 SCOPE OF WORK

It seems the numbering and placement of information for components 1 and 2 has to be corrected. Can you please review and guide us?

Through this amendment of RFP the numbering of component I and II is revised.

93. C.4 SCOPE OF WORK: COMPONENT I: PUBLIC FINANCIAL

MANAGEMENT (PFM) AND NGO RESEARCH (Page 12 .... Provision of limited scale office furniture and equipment to entities ....)

Is there an amount and number of target beneficiaries envisaged for this activity or it is for the contractor to decide that will be based on Mapping exercise?

This would be based on the results of the mapping exercise.

94. The Scope of Work indicates that this will be a demand-driven contract covering a wide variety of potential services, with built in flexibility to respond to changing priorities. In order to propose a reasonable budget and staffing plan, it is important for Offerors to understand what resources USAID intends to devote to this activity. It is also important that USAID be in a position to evaluate one Offeror’s cost proposal to another’s. Please provide either an estimate of LOE or a total cost range in order to allow Offerors to submit cost proposals that can be fairly evaluated.

Please refer to answer of question no 76.

95. In section B.7 on page 9, USAID has provided a table with payment percentages tied to deliverables. This would be suitable for a fixed-price contract. In section B.2 on page 7, USAID notes that this will be a CPFF contract. If USAID intends to pay the entire 75% of fee when all such deliverables have been approved, we suggest that it would be necessary for USAID to specify exactly what deliverables will be required. It would be exceedingly risky for an Offeror to commit to delivering an undefined set of deliverables in order to be paid this portion of the fee.

To simplify, we suggest that USAID delete the table in B.7, and the language in sections B.7(b) and B.7(c), and instead use a straight-forward CPFF mechanism.

OR

Clarify how USAID plans to calculate what part of the 75% of Total Fee will be paid for discreet tasks that are part of “Deliverables linked with activities post-mapping Exercise” AND Remove Section B.7(c). This paragraph has the following language, “The Contracting Officer shall release 75% of all fee withholds under this contract after receipt of an adequate certified final indirect cost rate proposal covering the year of physical completion of this contract…” We note that this paragraph contradicts the table in Section B.7(a). Additionally, “receipt of an adequate certified final indirect cost rate proposal” is a time consuming endeavor largely out of the Contractor’s control.

Retaining “75% of all fee withholds” until this time would put a significant financial burden on any (especially a Small Business) Contractor.

Please refer to answer of question no 43.

Questions and Answers

96. Under C.4 Scope of Work on page 11, the third paragraph states that the contractor shall closely collaborate with the PCDS-IDIQ for possible synergies. Can USAID please expand upon the expectation of these working relationships and the type of collaboration between the four IDIQ holders and the Small Business contractor?

The working relationship and coordination activities between PCDS- IDIQ holders and PCDS-SB shall be defined after the award and agreed by all the relevant stakeholders including USAID.

97. Section C.4.I(1) on page 12 lists one Activity as “Researching pertinent PFM and NGOs related issues to disseminate information or provide technical advice to key stakeholders across all levels and cadre to especially map the needs of women employees.” We find this sentence unclear and would appreciate clarification.

Please refer to answer to question number 77.

98. Section C.4 Component 1, Subsection II – Systems Strengthening and Technical Support on page 12 seems to fit under Component 2. We suggest moving it to Component 2 and provide a plug cost figure for “Provision of limited scale office furniture and equipment to entities in relation to the needs of the identified Government entities” so that cost proposals will not vary on this expense item.

Please refer to answer to question number 74.

99. In Section C.4 Component II, 5. HR Support (2) on page 13 reads as “HR support to fill critical positions in the offices of the identified government agencies.” Please provide a plug cost figure or anticipated LOE to provide such support.

It depends upon the results of the mapping exercise.

100. Section L.6.1.(10)(b) on page 97 says that CVs for “staff who are not proposed as Key Personnel and short term technical staff integral to the implementation of the Activity will not be evaluated and should not be submitted.” Please confirm that USAID does not want Offerors to submit the CVs of anyone except the two Key Personnel. to submit the CVs of anyone except the two Key Personnel.

Yes

Questions and Answers

101. Section L.7(b) on page 98 says that “No annexes are permitted.” We suggest deleting this sentence because other instructions note that information will be submitted in annexes. For instance the RFP asks Offerors to summarize information from appendices in the technical proposal, submit CVs of proposed personnel, and submit past performance information using Attachment J7.

Please refer to answer of question no 8.

102. Section L.7(d) Organizational Experience on page 98 includes two references to the requirement that the Offeror demonstrate knowledge and capacity to conduct financial audits. In addition, Section L.7(e) on page 99 says that the proposed team must include a senior team leader with experience managing audits and that the team leader must have Chartered Accountant Certification. The only mention of “audit” related requirements in the scope of work is to possibly provide training on internal audit functions. We therefore request that the instructions in L.7(d) and L.7(e) be revised to remove reference to performing audits.

Please refer to answer of question no 26.

103. The bulleted list in Section L.7(b) on page 98 includes “Past Performance information in using small business concerns.” This is not applicable to small business prime Offerors and we suggest it be removed.

Through this amendment of the RFP, Section L.7 (b) is revised and bullet point “Past Performance information in using small business concerns” is deleted.

104. The bulleted list in Section L.7(b) on page 98 includes “Contractor Performance Report – Short Forms.” Is the Offeror expected to submit Contractor Performance Report – Short Forms in addition to the J.7 Past Performance information? If not can USAID please remove the reference to “Contractor Performance Report – Short Forms”?

Please refer to answer of question no 9.

105. The bulleted list in Section L.7(b) on page 98 includes “Management Structure Organization Chart” Can USAID confirm they are requesting this chart as an Annex document and this will not count toward the 15 page limit?

Yes

106. The bulleted list in Section L.7(b) on page 98 contains a bullet for “Labor Distribution Chart.” We find no other reference to this chart and request that this bullet be removed or further explained.

Through this amendment of the RFP section L.7 (b) is revised and “Labor Distribution chart” is deleted.

Questions and Answers

107. The last sentence of Section L.7(e) on page 99 says that “Offeror shall attach CVs for all proposed personnel at the end of the technical proposal.” We suggest this be rewritten to refer to the two key personnel positions so that it is consistent with instructions on pag 97.

Please refer to answer of question 100.

108. Please clarify how the Offeror should submit the Technical Proposal; in Microsoft Word or PDF. Page 95 Section L.6.1 gives specific instructions but Section L.7(b) pages 96-97 also gives instructions.

Please refer to the answer of question no 54.

109. Section L on page 97 point 9 lists a Draft Activity Monitoring & Evaluation Plan (AMEP) as an Annex but this is not referred to anywhere else in the RFP. Can USAID clarify what is expected for the referenced AMEP and how it will be evaluated in the proposal?

Through this amendment of the RFP, In section L.6.1. 10. g “Draft Activity Monitoring and Evaluation Plan” is deleted.

110. Would USAID consider deferring submission of the Draft Activity Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (AMEP) to a TBD date after award?

Please refer to answer of question no 109.

111. Please clarify the definition of a major subcontractor.

• In Section L.7(h) on page 99 it states “For major subcontractors (those representing more than 20% of the total estimated cost).”

• In Section L.8.2 on page 105 it states, “NOTE: In the following proposal preparation instructions “major subcontractors” are those subcontractors expected to perform at least 20% of the technical effort under the contract under this RFP.”

• In Section M.5 4(a) on page 113 it states “any proposed major subcontractor (defined as exceeding 10% of the proposed budget for any one contract year)”

Please refer to answer of question no 07.

112. Section C. 4 “Scope of work” states that services including training, hosting workshops, organizing and hosting conferences will be implemented on the national level to support all geographical areas.

The breadth of this requirement without a TEC makes it very difficult to budget. Additionally the scope of these activities will be better identified after completion of the mapping exercise. For cost evaluation purposes, we request that USAID please provide a plug cost

Based on the result of mapping exercise, US $ 100,000 to US $ 200,000 to be used as plug cost figure for activities of training/ workshops/conferences.

Questions and Answers figure for the “Program Activities” line item which would include…