Amendment_2_SOL-486-15-000008_Asia_Regional_Support_Services_for_Local_Solutions_IDIQ.pdf

AMENDMENT No. 2 to RFP-SOL-486-15-000008 Asia Regional Support Services for Local Solutions

Part A. Specific changes to RFP-SOL-486-15-000008 as stated below:

1. Delete “subcontractors” referenced under Section L.7 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE COST/BUSINESS PROPOSAL; specifically in the following paragraphs:

a. Part 5- Information Concerning Work-Day, Work-Week, and Paid Absences

(3) The work day and work week policies and the method of accounting for paid absences for the Offeror and subcontractors in affect at time of award must remain in force throughout the period of the award.

b. Part 7 - Evidence of Responsibility

The Prime Contractor and subcontractor(s) must submit sufficient evidence of responsibility for the Contracting Officer to make an affirmative determination of responsibility pursuant to the requirements of FAR Subsection 9.104-1. To be determined responsible, a prospective contractor must address FAR 9.104. If the Offeror fails to submit sufficient evidence for the Contracting Officer to make a determination of responsibility, then the Contracting Officer may make a determination of non-responsibility and the Offeror may be precluded from being awarded a contract. However, in the case of a small business Offeror, the Contracting Officer will comply with FAR 19.6.

Part B. Questions Received Pertaining to RFP-SOL-486-15-000008 and Corresponding USAID Answers:

1. Question: In Attachment J.1, the Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix, under A. Labor (1) CDR Labor Subject Matter (pages 80 and 81), offerors are asked to price 33 prime offeror employee person-days of effort for Period 1 at the proposed Ceiling Daily Rate.

a. To confirm our understanding, if offerors assume the CDR to be $1.00 at 33 days and 1 day of paid absences, would the sample below be in alignment with the necessary inputs required to evaluate the Cost/Price evaluation matrix?

A. Labor:

(1) CDR Labor Subject Matter Expert

33 prime offeror employee person-days of effort

Period 1 (labor category) * $1.00 (proposed CDR):

$33.00

Paid Absence not in fringe benefits: (1 day)

$1.00

Answer: There is nothing per se incorrect about what was in the example provided.

2. Question: In amendment 01, #4.2 long-term home office labor, and short-term expatriate consultant labor has been added.

a. Would the government provide a definition of these two terms?

Answer: Long-Term home office labor is considered an Offeror’s employee. Short-term expatriate consultant labor is not considered an Offeror’s employee.

b. Under 4.2.1, would the government change the parenthetical to read: “short-term expatriate consultant labor” rather than “long-term home office labor”?

Answer: No.

c. Will funding for long-term home office labor be established under Task Order 1?

Answer: See C.6 IDIQ MANAGEMENT. Funding for labor and other costs for Task Order implementation will be based on Task Order requirements and will be proposed and negotiated for each TO.

d. Will Task Order 01 provide funding for contractors to open an office in Bangkok?

Answer: See C.6 IDIQ MANAGEMENT. Currently, we do not plan to issue a Task Order to fund an office in Bangkok.

e. Does RDMA anticipate the IDIQ manager living in Bangkok?

Answer: This is best determined by the Offeror.

3. Question: Has RDMA received an indication from USAID Missions in the region, and countries listed in F.3, Place of Performance, of the potential buy in or demand for these services?

Answer: Yes. A survey was conducted to determine preliminary needs for IDIQ services. Please refer to L.4.

These are merely estimates.

4. Question: What is the current number of action plans that are in place?

Answer: It is not clear what is being asked.

5. Question: In how many regional countries are there existing programs/projects that meet many of the required activities under this project? For example, USAID/Islamabad has had a capacity building program for some years. How are these local programs to be integrated or work synergistically with this program?

Answer: Offerors are required to refer to the existing information in the solicitation for proposal preparation and submission. Since this is an optional interest by its very nature, an operating unit may select to use this instrument or not.

6. Question: In section c.5.2.7 and C.7 it appears from the narrative that the proposal seeks to have specific deliverables that include former USDH staff that may not be in the manageable interest of the contractor. Is this a potential problem?

Answer: Both sections refer to coordination and support function by the contractor to the USAID/RDMA and USAID Missions which are required tasks under this solicitation. The Offeror is expected to deliver the tasks as needed.

7. Question: It appears that a 7 year program with a $20 million ceiling has been developed to provide a mechanism for expanding the financing. Is this true?

Answer: The IDIQ ceiling is $20 million and services may deliver from the date of award to seven years from the date of the award.

8. Question: The "New Silk Road" initiative involving many of the listed countries has not only trade and capacity building as part of the program. Is there intent to integrate or support the New Silk Road Initiative with this new activity?

Answer: Task Order requirements may or may not include such activities.

9. Question: Regarding NGOs or others, such as government, that do not adhere to USAID rules and regulations, as has been identified in several other capacity building programs, what actions should the new contractor take, if any action at all?

Answer: Each Task Order will contain a discreet statement of work.

10. Question: Section L.6.1 of the RFP states that up to five pages of illustrative charts and graphs may be included in the technical proposal and are not included in the 30-page limitation. The answer to question 40 states that “Offerors may submit Illustrative charts and graphs in an annex, not to exceed 5 pages total.” Please confirm that it is permissible for an offeror to include up to five pages of charts and graphs either on unnumbered pages in the technical volume or in an annex.

Answer: Confirmed.

11. Question: Will USAID consider specifying if it will use profit analysis as part of the evaluation of fixed fee? If so, we respectfully request that section M be amended and include guidance for offerors. Please note that one of the factors mentioned in FAR 15.404-4 (d) (1)(i)(D) states the following: “General Management. This subfactor measures the prospective contractor’s other indirect costs and general and administrative (G&A) expense, their composition, and how much they contribute to contract performance. Considerations include how labor in the overhead pools would be treated if it were direct labor, whether elements within the pools are routine expenses or instead are elements that contribute significantly to the proposed contract, and whether the elements require routine as opposed to unusual managerial effort and attention.” Offerors could include IDIQ management costs to be covered under profit since IDIQ and TO management are not allowable overhead costs, and inclusion of instructions for how profit analysis will be conducted may allow all offerors to provide information that would ease USAID’s evaluation.

Answer: Fee will be evaluated in accordance with section M.4 of the RFP.

12. Question: In the change #4.2 to the solicitation (Attachment J1), USAID inserted labor categories to each Labor Category Groupings as “long-term home office labor” or “short-term expatriate consultant labor”; the designation provided by USAID may not necessarily reflect organization’s standard use of home office and short term consultants. Can USAID please confirm that to develop CDRs in B.7.a), Offerors can propose rates derived from “long-term home office labor” and also “short-term expatriate consultant labor,” depending on the Offeror’s standard use of home office employees and external consultants. If so, please confirm that, for example, if an Offeror derives a CDR for a particular Labor Category from a mix of long-term home office labor and short term consultant labor, the Offeror can apply this CDR to the respective Labor Category in the Cost/Price Evaluation matrix.

Answer: Please note that that reason for specifying labor categories is to facilitate a consistent approach for evaluation purposes. Formulating the proposed CDRs using rates derived from the Offeror’s different labor categories is not inappropriate per se but should be described in the cost proposal [See Section L.7].

13. Question: In the clarifying questions and answers provided by USAID, the response to question #19 states that USAID is not requesting that the Offeror identify subcontractors in their submission.

a. Can you please confirm that when deemed appropriate by the Offeror, the Offeror is allowed to describe in the Technical Proposal how they would engage sub-contractors and other partners in implementation of the IDIQ and Task Orders?

Answer: How Offerors respond to what is requested by the RFP is a strategic decision.

b. Can you please confirm that the Offeror is not required to provide any information and documentation for sub-contractors as part of the Cost Proposal (note that the revised RFP still states that Evidence of Responsibility, Information Concerning Work-Day, Work-Week, and Paid Absences, and registration in SAM are required from sub-contractors)?

Answer: Confirmed. Information on subcontractor is not required for cost proposal. The reference of ‘subcontract’ in section on is deleted. See Part A. Specific changes to RFP-SOL-486-15-000008 above.

14. Question: In question 17 USAID states the current CST is $648.85 per day. The current CST for USAID is $168,700 annually. Our personnel policies dictate that the daily rate for home office staff is calculated by using 250 days out of a year, not 260. This means that our unburdened daily rate is $674.80 (not $648.85) but our annual salary is still at the CST rate of $168,700/year. Please confirm that we should calculate our rates in accordance with our personnel policy.

Answer: Offerors should include rates in the J.1 Cost/Price Evaluation Matrix based on a 260-day work year and 8-hour workday. However, in recognition of the differences in Offerors’ accounting systems, Offerors with other than 260-day work year and 8-hour workday may submit a table in the budget narrative, with their converted CDRs that reflect Offerors’ work-day policies. An explanation about the conversion must be provided.

15. Question: The response to question 74 states the no ceiling rates are required for fringe benefits. If the proposed fringe rate for the Offeror increases in subsequent years, will we be allowed to increase our fringe rate, or are we limited to what we propose now?

Answer: Increases in fringe will be handled as a matter of contract administration in accordance with the applicable terms and conditions.

16. Question: Question 11 and the CDR chart in the RFP uses illustrative years of date of award through 9/30/18, which assumes a start date of 10/1/2015. However, the response to question 58 states the start date is 8/1/15.

Please confirm the start date is 8/1/15 and the dates within the CDR chart are merely illustrative.

Answer: We anticipate the award to be in August 2015. The dates in B.7.(a) are fixed.

- End of Amendment No. 2 -